Feb 04, 2020 City Council on 2020-02-04 1:00 PM

Welcome everybody to this meeting of the Denton City Council on Tuesday, February the 4th, 2020. It is 1.02 p.m. I will move through our agenda items. First item on the work session is agenda item one, citizen comments on consent agenda items. I do not see any blue cards for citizen comments on the consent agenda item, so we'll move to request for clarification of agenda items listed on the agenda. I have one I think that was requested by staff, and that is for agenda item five, B, will be pulled. It's not ready to be heard, I don't believe yet. So that one will be pulled. That's item for individual consideration. So Councilmember Briggs. A few questions on the consent agenda item A about the lease agreement. So I just want to kind of understand that I'm seeing this correctly, that we're going to amend the lease agreement, but if they do not find someone to lease that space, then we continue to pay the current rent that we're paying? Oh, if you could, yes, thank you very much. Okay, so I wanted to confirm that as well, and are we also, are we searching for a replacement for that, or is that something strictly that that they're doing on their own? The landlord is searching, they've engaged someone to find a replacement tenant for the city's lease. Okay, and are the utilities off, are we still going to be paying for utilities? Everything will remain the same. So yes, we will continue paying for the utilities until the lease is terminated. Can you explain why we would do the utilities if the building is empty? We're obligated under the lease to pay for the utilities. We have to keep them on. Okay. One of the things that they had requested when we approached them about terminating the lease was to maintain utilities, at least during inclement weather like cold spells to not have frozen pipes, etc. So that was one of those requests that they had made. Okay, well, that makes sense. I assume they will not be as much though with the building. Correct, that's not occupied, but they just need to keep it at a certain temperature to just keep things from freezing. So once I'm understanding once they get a new tenant, then everything gets shut off and it gets put in the tenant's name. Okay, the next item is E. Oh, I've got to follow up on that if I may. So the lease started in November of 2015. So if we didn't have the early termination option, it expires when I'm trying to find a tenant in November of this year. Okay, so it's a thing. So we've got 11 months, eight months, and they're, I think, required at least try to help find somebody. And they are. They actually asked for our consent to find a replacement tenant. And we obviously were good with them doing that. Fantastic. All right. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Go ahead. So item E about the scoreboards. So I just have a quick question, because they're extremely needed. And I'm very glad to see this item on here. And it's for all the sport parks that need the scoreboards. Yes, ma'am. Drew Huffman, Superintendent of Parks. Okay. And I was reading through the contract and there was some red line, but I did see that these do contain LED bulbs. Yes. And so is this an upgrade from the current? It's a tremendous upgrade from the current ones that we do have now. Okay. Thank you. All right. Councilman Bobbitt. I have a question about that. Will there be a little carve-out space or little or big carve-out space there for sponsoring NTCs? Yes, there is a space on there for future sponsoring. Okay. Thanks. Thank you. Yes, Councilmember Breach. Just one more. Not for you. Sorry. Thanks. No, I don't think it is, anyway, it's item F, item F, water. So on the contract, I was looking through and the bid and everything looked -- it was great, but there was a -- on the last page -- Councilmember Riggs, are you talking about consent item F? Yes. Okay. That's the Declaration of Disaster? Oh, is it? No, it's not. It's the water treatment. Oh, well, okay. I'm looking at mine -- that's item for individual consideration. Okay. Never mind. I apologize. My mistake. Sorry about that. So on the last page of it, it has field service, and so there's two items for field service, one for almost $4,000 and one for almost $7,000. Can you explain? Because the other items I understood, but what is the field service? Is that for the company to come out? Yes. Ken Banks, General Manager of Utilities. It is for the company to come out, and actually this whole section on the last part of this particular contract is just for the inspection services for Brentwood, which involves them coming out and being on site to do all those inspection activities. Okay. So it's the company that we're contracting with to do that? That's correct. Yeah. Okay. And they are a sole source provider of this particular equipment, and so in order for us to get all of the warranty and everything of that nature, they have to come out and final inspect all the installs. And the parts? Okay. Yes. Thank you. Any others? Okay, we'll move on through our, and I've received a message from Council Member Davis. He'll be here shortly. We'll move on to then our work session reports, work session 3A. Receive report, hold discussion, give staff direction on the following with respect to Green Tree Estates. Chair and Council, Ryan Adams, Public Affairs. We are translating this work session item. So just a reminder, since we don't do this too often, for everyone to just speak clearly into their microphone, make sure that your microphone is on to the extent that you can, one person speaking at a time, and that will allow our Spanish-speaking residents to understand the flow of the discussion a little bit more easily. And also Ryan, if someone has a problem, either with the equipment or the space and translation, just let people know that they need to get our attention somehow to do that so we can address it. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Yep. So today's discussion, we had some more people come in, so we're going to set them up with headsets. Today's discussion is going to be a review of the December 10th work session and subsequent resident meetings since that work session. We'll also go through a status update. Since the Council last discussed Green Tree Estates, we'll also review actions beginning February 13th, which was the scheduled end date of the first declaration disaster. We'll walk through at a high level the steps for Green Tree Estates residents to connect to the city water system and we'll also illustrate some issues for Council to consider as they continue to discuss Green Tree Estates water provision. So as you recall, the Council discussed Green Tree Estates on December 10th at a work session. During that discussion, Council gave staff direction that they would extend the declaration of disaster by 100 days. This extends it through May 22nd and during that time, the city would continue to provide potable and non-potable water, so drinkable and non-drinkable water through May 22nd. Council did request that beginning February 13th that the residents would be billed for this water, not for the services to actually provide the water, but for the water itself. They also directed staff to offer voluntary courtesy inspections of dwellings and to provide co-compliance information, and then also to address any life, safety, and health issues with non-occupied structures or attractive nuisances that might be on the Green Tree Estates and in the Green Tree Estates neighborhood. Real quick question. Yes, sir. I see that we've got continued provision of potable water and non-potable water through May 22nd, but we also have a action item on our agenda for the extension of the emergency declaration. Is that correct? Yes, that is contingent on that extension, yes, sir. Okay. That seemed more like a... Okay. Never mind. Thank you. When I see summary of December work session, I thought that was something we did then, but I didn't recall that. So go ahead. I'm sorry. My apologies. No, no. Yes, sir. That is contingent on council accepting or approving the extension of the declaration disaster at the evening meeting tonight. Council also had items that they requested of the Green Tree Estates residents and property owners. One was to confirm ownership of all Green Tree Estates roads and easements. I'll let the council know that during last night's meeting with resident representatives, they stated to city staff that they would be relying on a deed document that had been previously provided to city staff as their basis of ownership, and they felt that that was sufficient. Council also requested that the Green Tree Estates property owners confirm ownership of all the lots, that there is confirmation of which lots are owner-occupied, and that they also confirm which property owners are interested in connecting to water meters at the Green Tree Estates boundary. Councilman Boehme? Yes. We have a question about those first two points. Absolutely. Ownership of roads and easements and confirm ownership of lots. Is this okay for the translation? My question is, so as I understand it, it has been difficult for the city to confirm exactly who owns the roads and easements and lots, other than apparently it's been established that the city doesn't own it, so can you speak to what kinds of documents that we would like to see and where they could find them if we haven't been able, we the city haven't been able to find that confirmation of that? So I believe, and I'll try to provide our interpretation of council's direction, was to that council requested staff, pardon me, council requested the residents use that deed as a basis and make any and all further confirmation that they could. Staff's perspective is that if the deed that exists is sufficient for the residents of Green Tree Estates, it is private property, the city does not require to see any deed records or any confirmation of ownership for anything related to the connection. So this would be simply confirmation for their own benefit of where those boundaries lie and where the ownership of the roads and easements lie. Okay thank you. So we received a copy of that deed, is that correct? Well, the city did, yes sir. So I'm looking at the copy of the deed and it certainly says that all the roads are private, it mentions something in the deed about utility easements but then it doesn't give anything else as it says as demonstrated on the plat, when you look at the plat, there is no utility easement, there's easements for traffic. So just wanted to make that clear. Yes sir, those are understanding that there were no public rides away easements for utility lines. So in addition to those, council also requested that Green Tree residents schedule with city staff courtesy inspections to identify any life, safety and health issues. Now they have not requested any dwelling inspections, staff has inspected one empty lot but also I'll note that they reported to staff yesterday that they have elected to perform inspections with a third party to let them know of whatever life, safety and health issues there might be with those dwellings. The city, if we ever had to go in and inspect say for connection of water services, we would not be able to accept those results, we would have to go in and do our own independent inspection for connection to the city system. So question, and back to, I was trying to pull up the deed so I apologize, on the question of confirming ownership, because you can look on DCAD to see quote unquote who's the owner as represented by DCAD, I think part of what we're trying to do, and it's my understanding we haven't gotten that information yet, is of the people requesting water, how many of them are owner occupants, they own the real property, and how many of them rent the property? Was that the request? >> That was our request. >> And we received nothing from them in that regard? >> We have not. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> The best city staff can do at this point is approximate that. >> Well, we can see who's on record of owning it. But we have to rely upon if the people are asking, I'm surely the people who are asking for the access to water, however it may be provided, I would think, understand, if they own the property, if they're renting it, but nobody's come forward to say we're renting it, we actually own it. >> We have not received a list from Green Tree Estates that, states explicitly that, no, sir. >> Okay. All right. So the last request from council and the last direction really from council was that residents begin paying for water on February 13th. Of course, we're not there yet. So once that comes around, residents have been made aware that this is an obligation that they will have to bear to continue receiving non-potable water delivered to them three times per week. >> Councilmember Briggs. >> The third party inspections, would they, are they familiar with our codes and standards? Is that? >> Possibly. >> Okay. >> This, and I've not spoken with them on who they have hired to do this work, but generally they would likely have an awareness of code issues, but they may or may not be familiar with our specific city codes. Codes is very dependent on just who has been hired. >> Okay. >> And that is why the city will, we will go and do our own inspection to connect to water. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So I just have a couple of questions about that. >> Yes, sir. >> Is there, was there discussion about once those inspections are done, what are to be done with those inspections? Are those to be given to the city? Are they just there for their own private use? What exactly would be done with that? >> Those inspections and the courtesy inspections were there simply for that, a courtesy for the benefit of the knowledge of the property owners and residents. So they were aware and they could make decisions with eyes wide open on what types of improvements might need to be made to their dwellings in order to connect to the city water system. The city offered that as a free courtesy so that they would know if they wanted to connect they would have an idea of what that would entail and what it cost. The hope is with a third party that they would proceed that same information. However, if the third party gives them slightly different information and the city comes in to do an inspection to connect, they may receive notice that they have to make an improvement they didn't already know about from that third party inspection. >> So I want to read part of an email that we received today regarding some of these points that were to be delivered. >> Sure. >> And it addressed each one of these four points. And regarding the inspections, I'm just going to read it. It says point three residents inquired with fair housing experts and sought legal advice about the courtesy inspections offered by city staff. Given the city's previous discussions and communications regarding shelter options and the possibilities of condemnation and displacement slash relocation, residents were advised not to allow city staff into their homes for courtesy inspections. Instead, they were advised to request as an alternative a courtesy Q&A group meeting with city staff about inspection requirements. Was that part of the meeting last night? Was that discussion part of the meeting last night? >> So what we had offered the residents is when we met, we met with the residents I believe either December 13th or 14th, which was just after your December 10th work session, just to go over all the items that you all covered and gave direction for staff and for the residents. We attempted to put a frequently asked questions list of just items so they would have it kind of one place where they can find all these various things that had come up to date. So Scott McDonald had also put together a memo that outlined what a courtesy inspection, what it entailed, also the customer service inspection, what it entailed that was provided in English and in Spanish. It was also provided at that time. So there was some discussion last night about this process and where the residents were going was, as Ryan mentioned, during the third party to identify those items first and then try to address those ahead of time and then have the city come in and do a follow up or do the actual official inspection to get, move the process along. So we covered that and we certainly, you know, we want to be as upfront and as much as possible. So we offered to go ahead and amend or add to the frequently asked questions list because it is a growing document and include that information about the various inspections that the city would do, but that's what was offered, it's just to add to the frequently asked questions. I mean, we've met twice last night and then back in mid-December with the residents of what was being offered and we were just waiting. We handed out business cards, phone numbers, and we're just waiting for the call to be made to go ahead and line up the inspections. We've got Spanish speaking employees ready to take the calls and so we're just ready, we're ready to do whatever we need to do to move the process along. I guess what I'm reading in here, at least what's reported here, now whether, I mean this is just, I'm just going by what the words are on the email, is that they've been told they've been given legal advice not to allow the city in. So I guess my question becomes, I mean, so you get a third party inspection, at what point do we, my understanding was the courtesy inspections were not for inspections of enforcement, at least if I recall that correctly. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. I just, I was a little surprised to see that, but nevertheless, that's the situation. And we did mention last night that those third party inspections would not be recognized by the city. That's correct. But again, if it's an opportunity for the residents to identify those areas of concern that are brought forward and just in that arena, or what was being considered as far as cross connections, some of those issues with water lines, backflow preventers, those kinds of items, fine, but at the end of the day, those third party inspections would not be recognized by the city. Okay. Council Member Armitage. Yeah, so a couple of points before we move on to the next slide. So first, I attended the meeting with staff last night and it was my understanding from that meeting and also from having heard from residents previously that the idea was that, or they were told that if an inspector with the city saw certain things and they didn't quite know what those certain things were, then they might have to report it. And I remember there had been discussions of that, you know, even in a courtesy inspection, by being, just simply by virtue of being an inspector. So that was why they wanted, it was my understanding why they were told and why they wanted to go with a third party, not because they didn't trust the city or anticipated any problems, but just not to, you know, put the city or themselves in that kind of position. But my question about the third point that confirm which slots are owner-occupied, it could be that maybe one reason why you haven't heard, and I myself might have been confused about what we were looking for with that third point, is there might be the impression that documents are needed to confirm which are owner-occupied versus rented, but it sounds like what you're saying is that just simply a list of here are the people who are renters and here's who own without documentation would suffice, is that correct? That was our understanding of council's direction, and I think, yeah. So anyway, so now people have heard that and maybe people already knew that, but so that's good to know. So just a list would count as confirmation. Yeah, and let me follow up, you know, with the meetings that we've had, certainly some of the folks that have been in attendance at those meetings are residents, I mean there are owners of those lots, but some folks are renters, they're leasing their home, and so, you know, there's no question that all the residents that live there want water, but we have to work with the property owner to make those connections, and so the tenant may, you know, may want those provisions, but we need to get the contacts and confirmation of those owners just so that we know who we're talking to. Go ahead, Council Member Meltzer. I hadn't actually indicated desire to speak, but I certainly do have questions in my mind. Oh, somebody said that you, yeah, okay. Yeah, I mean, when I look at this list, and some of this is addressed by the email to mayor references, it suggests that either there's a very intentional, you know, purpose in not doing the things that we agreed to, or a terrible breakdown of communication where it seems very evident from our point of view that we've been clear about what needs to happen and who needs to do it and how the communication needs to happen, but, you know, it does make me wonder if it's not so clear on the part of the other parties, just how exactly these things are to happen, we think it is, but maybe it isn't, or, you know, how extensive is this advice, I'd probably say unfortunate advice, not to help us be of help. So I guess that's a comment more than a question, but it's partly a question, do we think there's a possibility that there is a terrible breakdown of communication, so that it's just not obvious how to comply with what we're asking, is that possible? Council Member, it's always a possibility. We met with residents on December 19th to follow up with this, relayed this information from the Council, that was followed up with several letters through the mail, it is always possible that what we were saying was not being interpreted the way we intended, it was at no point, I believe, did we ever believe that it was misinterpreted through that whole process, but it is possible, you are correct, that it could happen. And I appreciate that, I guess I don't get a sense that it's been such a large breakdown in communication, because number one, a deed was delivered to us, I think people, I think it's pretty clear back in December that who's renting and who owns, and if there was some uncertainty about that, if there was some confusion, I don't think that any questions came forth about that confusion, and then lastly, when I see that they engaged, and I don't know to what degree, a legal opinion, but they obviously obtained some type of information that they relied upon regarding the inspections, so I think they delivered at least half or so of the information that we had asked, and I don't hear that there were a lot of questions of clarification, we didn't understand what you were asking for, but I could be wrong. The way it's represented here is X, nothing, which your characterization is a little different. Sure. Okay. Go ahead. So just to recap the meetings that we did have, after the December 10th meeting we called a meeting with residents on December 19th to review the council requests from that council meeting and discuss the courtesy inspection in pretty significant detail. We also met with residents in a meeting yesterday where we again reviewed today's discussion points with council, reviewed how we would approach the billing of the prepayment for water that they would be liable for beginning on February 13th, subsequent to the extension of the disaster declaration, and then answered questions that they have, and to Mario's point earlier, there are a couple questions that we feel we need to get some better description for, place that in the FAQ document, which is meant to be an evolving document, and send that back out to the residents so they can have a very clear and descriptive response to some of the questions that they brought up. The current status of Green Tree Estates and our water provision is that as of yesterday, the city had expended $31,823, and this is well short of the $100,000 cap that was granted with the first declaration of disaster, the declaration that is on tonight's agenda. Residents will begin to receive water bills for service actually this week. This service is prepayment. We are also addressing non-occupied attractive nuisances, so any buildings that don't have anyone living in them, they are clearly substandard. We are approaching those first. The city has not received all the requested information, although we have gotten clarifications on some of it, as you have discussed, and we did not receive any voluntary inspection requests. Of course, they went to a third party, although we did perform a site inspection of a vacant lot. So beginning February 13th, residents will be charged for water under an extended declaration of disaster. It will be pre-billed. They must pay the due date or we will not provide that water to their residents. If they pay late, they will receive water at the next scheduled distribution day, and again we do those three times per week. They will be billed monthly, but to keep it simple, the cost per week will be $9.43 if you have two of those large containers, and $5.15 if you have one of those large containers. We will also fill up the 75-gallon containers that we initially bought for the residents. The fee that we are seeing here, the $9.43 and the $5.15, is that equivalent to, say, someone with a regular home who has a bathroom or pipes or clean running water pays, or is that discounted? This is the cost of water, just the water that any resident would pay. So this is our retail cost more or less. Okay. I'll hold my question. Sure. My question really goes back a slide. Regarding the FAQs that are provided, let me give a little more preface. The whole issue of the inspections, in my understanding, is to address the fact that we wouldn't be able to authorize connection if there were life, health, safety perils present. And it's just the purpose is to determine, as I understand it, to determine if there are problems like that that exist, to identify for those residents what would need to be addressed so that then we could move forward with what seemed to be a palatable possible way forward. So my question is, since we're having trouble gaining the necessary level of trust to be helpful to each other, does the FAQ address what are the kinds of things, with some specificity, that might be an issue so that even without an inspection, someone could determine for themselves, wow, I've got three of these seven issues present that I would have to address? Well, at the time when we met back in December the 19th, that was not included as part of the FAQ document. We discussed that we would add it to it from last night. What had been provided, though, was a memo, a piece of correspondence from building inspections, Scott MacDonald was present, that described what the courtesy inspection or the customer service inspection, the courtesy inspection is what you described, just to identify those issues as you described it. So did it enumerate what the things are so that residents could make a determination? That's correct. So it was provided both in English and in Spanish. Go ahead, you had a response? Well, I'm just happy to try to help address that statement or question. We provided a written documentation, and I think for most all of the things that we're talking about here today, to confirm that the residents understood both in English and in Spanish. And if I read the first paragraph of that letter, it's that the City of Denton Building Safety Division provides courtesy inspections as a service to the citizens of Denton. You might slow down just a little bit, because they're translating, yes, thank you. The City of Denton Building Safety Division provides courtesy inspections as a service to the citizens of Denton. This type of inspection is not intended for enforcement, rather it is intended to assist homeowners with the understanding of safety concerns and helping to offer options to correct. So the intent was clearly communicated, and I ultimately have had the same conversation each time that we've met with the residents. I understood last night they were concerned that if the city were to come in that we would potentially condemn their home. So that's why they opted for a third party, and that's well and good they can do that. We just have some legal requirements through TCEQ of making those connections and why it is that we would have to go into the structures. Sure, and then we got Council Member Briggs is queued up. So would we have a problem with a sequence of events like a resident through this third party identifies what risk areas they might have, they address those issues, and then prior to making connection someone from the city comes in and says, I see what's been done, it's acceptable, if it is, and then we proceed with the next step. Is there any problem with that? Absolutely not. I would only preface it with if the work that they're going to perform requires a permit that they would obtain the permit like anyone else, but absolutely not. Okay, that's important, so permits would be required. Potentially. Council Member Briggs. I just wanted to give you a chance to address the concern that we heard from Council Member Armator that if someone were to come in and they did see something that they would be legal and bound to report it to someone. Is that, is that, is there truth to that? I mean, if that was some of the hesitation and fear of letting someone from the city come into their home, is there any, I guess, is there any reason to have that fear? I think that that's a very, that's a very challenging question. I will go back to the intent, and the intent was not to create any problems but to offer solutions, but if in fact anyone were to witness something that was an eminent hazard, meaning someone could immediately die. I don't know how it is as a city employee, any of our staff wouldn't do the right thing by notifying, but I would say that I am that authority as far as reporting. They would be reporting to me, so it wouldn't necessarily be going elsewhere. So like a gas leak or something like that. Absolutely. If there's just bare wires that are live, they're hanging out. But again, the goal of that is if we can disconnect that wire while we're there, meaning turn a breaker off, prevent that from being a hazard, we would take the necessary steps to help them. Thank you. Council Member Armator. Yeah, the second to the last bullet point about cities not received all requested information. To go back to kind of what the Mayor was saying before in Council Member Meltzer, it was kind of my understanding too that they had just supplied the information of who owns each of these, which are owner occupied, and which are rented, and who's living there, and that we're just waiting on documentation. But regardless, if I think one thing that has come out of this misunderstanding, whatever, the lack of clarity is if there could be a list of here are the things we need from you, instead of just simply confirmation, say we would like a list of who owns what, or we would like confirmation in the form of such and such, to be as clear as possible kind of a checklist. That I think would be helpful. Was that not, I mean? So we can pass out a letter that was delivered to all the residences. Shortly after this meeting we drafted a letter, they were handed out at the December 19th meeting and then mailed to all the property owners and residents. It did specify and we'll pass this out what Council's requirements were. We did not give them a specific to the ownership, we didn't say it had to be in a certain format or a certain way. We just wanted from the residents confirmation of the lot ownership, and which was owner occupied, and to date we have not received, that I'm aware of, or at least we received a little supplementary information last night, but we've not received what I would consider a complete this is who owns which of these occupied lots. Yeah, and so I've seen the letter and I understand that it says that. I think for today, coming out of today, just a list of here's what we have not yet received, you know, outside of what's already in this letter, as of today's date, here's what we have not yet received and to try to be kind of more specific about what is meant or not meant by confirmation. Let me say this, and I appreciate that, but what I've seen in the email was two references to legal opinions or legal advice about either the inspections or that they looked at, they sent the deed to somebody to look at it legally to determine. So if there were any, obviously, there's enough understanding that they needed to get some type of information or some type of advice. So if we need to give them again the list, I appreciate that, but I'm having a hard time believing that somehow there was a misunderstanding when there was enough understanding to say, we need to seek legal advice to get some information on these two issues and anybody that reads the letter, whether you're renting, I thought it was very clear, whether you're renting or owning, we didn't say you have to give us a warranty deed, we didn't say you had to give us a lease, we just said, are you leasing the property or do you own it? And we were very clear about why we need that because of we can only deal with the property owner. So I'm all for giving people another letter that says this is what we need, you know, three months later than what we all decided, that's fine. But I'm really going to struggle with because of the answers to some of the other questions that they had -- there's been at least resources available to help with some things that might not have been as clear. So we'll certainly provide them with another similar letter that says this is what we've received, this is what was asked for, this is what we received, this is what we have not yet received. And just for, I think, maybe some informational purposes, just prior to the meeting, staff had reviewed DCAD and tried to evaluate what we could understand from an owner occupied component of this and that of the 14 parcels that we believe to be individually owned, five of those parcels are owner occupied. So we're not entirely certain beyond that, but I think we're working off the premise that we have five people that own the lots that are in question. >> And if I recall correctly, in the December meeting, we were given a chart with all the lots, sort of color coded. And we said we've tried in an attempt to figure out who is owner occupied and who's renting. And the point is, nobody has said I'm renting. Nobody has said I own. We've had to derive that from the DCAD records and some other information that we're sort of cobbling together ourselves instead of just getting that direct confirmation from those who occupy each one of those 14 residents. We have had one or two or maybe a handful of residents volunteer that information at some of these meetings that we've been, but no comprehensive list has been delivered to the city stating that. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Go ahead. >> I don't really understand that comment. I mean, is there an entity that would represent the group that would be responsible for delivering a comprehensive list or is each resident responsible for responding with their own status? Right? There's no -- who is it that would be providing a comprehensive list? >> So the -- based on our direction from council from that December 10th meeting, there was no specific person designated. The request from council was just for the members of the Green Tree Estates community to provide that information to the city of Denton. There have been several entities who have acted as representatives, but they were not identified specifically. But I believe and I don't want to assume too much of the will of the council at that time, but that would kind of indicate a little bit of the coordination that is going to be needed by the neighborhood to do a lot of the things that would be necessary to connect to the city system efficiently. >> Well, I want to make sure, you know, I understand kind of what's envisioned correctly. Does it require, you know, a coordinated effort or can an individual say I gave you my information, here it is, and I'm prepared to, you know, do -- to make the connection, can an individual go forward? >> Individuals can come approach the city as themselves, yes. >> We'll take it either way. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So it's not an obstacle then. The idea that we haven't received a comprehensive list isn't an obstacle to an individual moving forward. >> Let me address that. >> It's one thing I thought might be an issue. >> We've been working with LULAC to get the information out to the residents as a coordinated effort. So either we get it individually or we go through LULAC. And there are some folks that aren't associated with LULAC that are individual homeowners or property owners out there, and we've been working directly with them. That's why we've been mailing letters in addition to emailing letters, too. So we're really trying to cover as many of our bases as we possibly can. So whether it's individual or through a group effort, it really matters not. We just need the information. >> Part of where I'm coming from with that is maybe if there are some who are ready to move forward and the ball gets rolling, others will kind of see how to do it. >> Mayor Pro Tem, then Councilmember Davis, then Councilmember Amacher. >> No, I just wanted to, I've asked that very same question that Councilmember Meltzer alluded to, and obviously it's in the letter, so there's a coordinate. Who is the representative, right? I mean, I think that's, I mean, I don't know that we're going to get an answer to that, but obviously there's enough coordination to seek an attorney. And so I don't know why we can't be, as a city, privy to who, if there's some sort of organization or hierarchy, leadership, communication, I just would wish we had that information. So I guess, let me just ask, in the form of question, who is our point of contact at LULAC? Who have we been talking to? >> So we've been talking to the Chair of LULAC, and our most frequent point of contact has been Lillian Prado. So Lillian has not been our only point of contact. >> Okay. I guess that's my request then, and I may stand alone, maybe we need consensus. I would like to see that refined to one. The residents and one outside entity to kind of close the airspace, right? There's a lot of wiggle room, and I think that consistency and that kind of predictability would be beneficial at this point. >> Council Member Davis. >> So my request at this point is if we could hold questions until the end of the slides. Here's the reason why, at our last meeting, we announced our intention. We announced our consensus on that intention. We said here's the playbook going forward. My understanding of today's meeting was the work session, we're going to hear updates, how are we doing on the playbook, not piece-by-piece, page-by-page, rewriting it on the fly. There are slides that answer almost every question I've heard so far. So if we could just get through the slides and then confirm that we are in fact following the playbook, talk about whether we're going to do what we said we were going to do with the disaster declaration, and then let the residents go on their way. >> I agree with that. Real quick, Council Member Armitage, and then we're going to save questions for the end of staff presentation. >> Okay, okay, the non-occupied attractive nuisances, are those primarily entirely owned by Mr. Roddy, the well owner, does that understand you? >> I might defer to Scott McDonald on the ownership of those. Do you have that information at your fingertips, Scott? >> The vast majority of those properties are owned by Mr. Roddy. There are two, maybe three other owners, one being a trust, so just haven't gone through the process. That's one of our next steps as we get into the presentation. >> Okay, thank you, and then just to point out, people have mentioned that it's not clear why people are seeking out legal help and advocacy from LULAC, why they can't understand exactly what's being required. I think the answer is simply because only the people who are asking for this information know exactly what's wanted, even the greatest legal expert in the world can't read the minds of us or staff. So I think it's just a matter of communication and get there. >> All right, let's proceed. >> I think we covered this slide. Would you like me to move on? >> Yeah. We're going to finish the presentation. >> Yes, sir. So just to give a very high level description, at any point in time, residents can choose to connect to the city system. We have an outline plan that was presented back on December 10th of how that is possible. And what they would do would be to request and pass an initial inspection to determine if it is safe for them to connect to the system, contact the city, request a water meter, pay all the associated costs and fees, receive a permit necessary to connect to the meter. And again, those meters would be set at the property line, and each individual resident would have to run their own service line to their home, however long that might be. Any plumbing work that is required to be performed by a licensed plumber must be performed by a licensed plumber. Any inspections that are required by our code would need to be performed by the city. And then once they have connected to the city system, we would cease billing the prepay and we would do a normal billing where they would provide their valid identification of the city to facilitate the credit check so that we can bill them in arrears. Should the tonight's disaster declaration extension be approved by council, that would then expire at the last day, would be May 22nd. And on May 23rd, obviously the declaration expires, water services would cease and the city would lose its ability to access the property to deliver water. So several issues to consider that staff are opening up for council discussion. So what happens if residents do not pay for water? And again, we told you what happens if they pay late, but we don't have direction on what happens if they do not pay for water. And these are still questions that we're gathering information on. What happens if property owners do not receive the courtesy inspections? What happens if they do not make code improvements as required to connect to the city system? Of course, this is after the 23rd when we can no longer provide water. What if they don't initiate private connection to the city water system or desire to receive water in some other method that is not connecting to our system? And what happens if less than all 14 property owners initiate a private connection to the city water system? Staff developed this chart to show what happens at least for that last point if you have less than 14 residences connecting to our system. When we provided numbers at the December 10th, those were averages based on 14 connections. So the tap meter and impact fee is the same regardless of if you have 14 meters set for all 14 dwellings or if you have one meter set for one dwelling. The line tap, valve, and main cost, we have to extend our main line to the property line. It's a distance of about 20 feet. And that cost is the same no matter if 14 residents or one resident request a meter. So however many residents request a meter, they would then share in that cost. Obviously for one, it is much higher than for 14. Staff is looking into right now trying to develop feasibility of whether residents could enter in some sort of pro rata agreement with the city so that they would only bear the minimum cost at which point each individual dwelling would pay if and when they wanted to connect to the meter. We're still looking into that and hope to provide more information to council at a later time. This is just a map showing the residents is one last time that we serve water to currently. Of course the ROTI residents is not highlighted on this. We do not provide them water. Ryan, on that map, where would the water meter be or the line where they tap into, where would it be? It would be just off here, off of evening wind. So you would have a bank of meters on this property line and they would all connect. So residences in this area would have a shorter connection, less cost, and then less cost on the private side, and then of course a longer connection, longer service line here. So that might mean more costs to connect to that meter. That is the end of my presentation. Happy to answer questions. Questions? Could we go back to the list of questions, the issues to consider? Sure. I think some are easier to resolve than others. What happens if property owners do not receive courtesy inspections? It's courtesy. You don't have to accept the courtesy. What really matters is if you come to make a connection and they don't meet the code requirements on those critical issues, then those consequences are more clear, can't connect. But I'm a little more concerned about understanding the last one, because this is what I was probing previously, can one person decide to do it? I see there's a risk of sort of unintended consequence, maybe, if only one does, and then it's shared out, and then we've paid a bigger bill than we expected. I don't know if we would have an enforcement way to ensure that that couldn't happen. But I guess I really do want to understand, do we require collective action or not? At this point, we do not require collective action. Right now, we're looking at ways to the attorney's office to structure the acquisition of the payments for a meter so that one person possibly would not need to bear that entire cost, if at all possible. We're looking at our options. On the flip side of that coin is, if less than 14, you may have then occupied dwellings that do not have running water. And so that is something that staff is still gathering information on, and what our code says to those issues, and what the city would be obligated to do under our code and under state law. At this point in time, we don't have definite information for the council, although we are still looking into that and hope to provide that soon. Council Member Archer? Yeah, so I agree with Council Member Meltzer that courtesy inspection is a courtesy, so you just say no thanks and that's that. As for what if residents do not pay for water, I would say the same thing. What I would want is the same thing if any other utilities customer doesn't pay for water. As I understand it, you don't get your water shut off automatically, but you work with customer service and there's flexibility and customer service handles it, that's my understanding. So I would be happy just kind of just trying to make sure, even though this is a different situation, at least the way that they're treated as utilities customers, as far as payment goes, that it follows the same process. I'm not sure about if you're late a day, then you don't get water until the next cycle. To me, that doesn't seem to be equitable compared to the way we handle other customers, but that said, I don't anticipate it being a problem since it was the residents' idea. They were the ones who said, "We will gladly pay for water," as I understand it. They just want to be regular paying utilities customers even in this unusual situation. I was wondering if you could elaborate a little more on what you were saying about what the code says about what would happen if less than 14 property owners, because for me, that was my question. I was kind of wondering why is council ... I appreciate the question, but I was wondering why are we being asked since, as I understand it, that's worked out in the codes, or is this really such a unique situation that it's not? You could speak to that. Sure. If I veer off into ... Scott's going to stop me if I start to get out of my league with some of the code issues, but with any property, if there's a situation where you have an occupied dwelling that does not have a connection to a water system, the question that we are trying to understand and really be specific and be able to relay a clear answer to is, what does our code say? Is that against the code, and do we have to take some sort of action if we have a number of occupied residences with zero connection to potable water, really water of any kind? We're trying to answer that question or at least gather some information so council can know what their own code says and what the state code says on that. We don't, I believe, at this time, have a firm answer, but I'll let Scott talk. I think there are two pieces to that. Clearly in our code, it speaks to the fact that people have to have safe and habitable structures. That would mean water, sewage, electricity, et cetera. We have those provisions within our code. I think another portion of the question you were asking is whether one person connected or 14 connected, and I think that's an important question because we have to, all of the numbers were on the basis of 14 homes being connected, and I think that Dr. Banks will be able to speak more clearly to any differences that we may have of whether or not we're connecting all 14 simultaneously or, and that was part of the provisions of what we were asking, how many occupants were looking to connect, if we have five owner-occupied that are looking to do this. We started with the original 14, but we don't have any confirmation of who actually intends to connect, if that helps. Yeah, that does, and as I understand it from last night and previous conversation with residents, they're still deciding, and a lot will depend on what is yielded in the third-party inspection that they get, what they're told, what they might need to do for improvements and the cost of that, and then what they end up doing, and what the city inspection eventually yields. That's my understanding that this is how most residents are going to handle that decision. That's certainly how I would handle it myself, just kind of one step at a time, seeing what the inspection yields. Is there a timeline, are these time-sensitive questions? Because for me, I would rather wait on this, since the people who wrote the code are still trying to figure out, and since it's such a sensitive issue, I'm comfortable waiting and just knowing that this is still being thought out, while residents are getting these third-party inspections, and as we give them more time, that would be my preference anyway, just not to answer these questions today, if they don't really need to be answered today. I think I agree with Council Member Armitage in part, and I disagree in part. The mayor put in place an emergency declaration on November 13th last year. I expect tonight are going to vote to extend that by 100 days to May the 22nd of this year. We've already said that we expect folks to start paying for their water on the 13th. We've made that clear from the beginning, but the purpose of the disaster declaration has been to help these folks either decide to stay and regularize their situation, to come in under our code, to follow our regulations, and to be able to have potable water plumbed into their homes, or to decide to do something else, whether they're a renter or an owner. We have given them now the time, and if we extend to May, we have given them the time to do that. We have heard from these residents. They are smart, articulate people. They have advocated well for themselves. They have hooked themselves up with further community advocates. They may not always have the answers to every question, but I've been very impressed with their ability to represent their own interests, and their ability to connect with others who have the information that they need. It's been made clear to them what they need to do to hook in with City Water. I think we did that very early on, and we've made it more clear today. We made it more clear at our last meeting. The simple fact is this property developed in the Wild West outside of city code, outside of city jurisdiction. It annexed in, and through the annexation agreement, the Wild West was allowed to continue under Mr. Roddy's supervision, and I'll go this far. I'll say in a predatory way, it was developed and allowed to exist. However, we have given them now a total, when this runs out in May, a total of 192 days to regularize the situation. Either get together and come up with the money to run a city water line, and to fix up your homes to where they're safe to live in. Otherwise, they're subject to the exact same rules as everybody else. You can't live in an unsafe structure in the city of Denton. We're not going to hook up water to an unsafe structure in the city of Denton. We're not going to hook up water to a structure that doesn't have adequate sewer or septic in the city of Denton, and we're not going to perpetuate code violations in the city of Denton. We cannot do business that way. My direction is exactly the same as it was in December. Continue the disaster declaration until May, and then we're done. We're out of the business of propping up green tree estates. They need to find something else to do, either on their own or living somewhere else. My question is about the lines on the private property to run. You said if somebody is right there next to it, it'll be a little bit less expensive. The tap is all the same, right, for everyone to pay for. But to get the lines from the house to the meter is different, or is that all included here? So these are the fees just to the city. So the tap, meter, and impact fees are all the same for each residence, no matter where they are. The line tap and valve fee, that is for us to connect our main city line, or to get it extended to the green tree estate's neighborhood boundary. So that has to happen for us to even set the meter, and the connection between their home and the meter throughout the neighborhood, that is a cost that they incur themselves. So they do not pay that to the city. Because we're asking them that this is what they need to do to get the water. And I know that this is, with even some of the earlier questions, there was talk of maybe some miscommunication. And this is pretty complicated, I mean, it can be. So I just want to make sure that the residents know exactly what is expected of them for the city, and then what is expected of them on their own. And so would they need to hire a plumber to do their own private, from their dwelling to the city meter? So they would need to hire a plumber for any work that our code requires a licensed plumber to do. It would have to be permitted and inspected. With the caveat that if a person lives on their property, they can do the work just on their property, if you own it and you live there. But in all of the cases, it would have to be a plumber doing that work, as required by the code. And so from this chart, I can see that, I only counted 13 houses colored, but for some reason, there's four. One of them is two houses on one. Oh, okay. Okay. So the less individuals who decide to do this, the more expensive for the ones who do it, it will be. Say that one more time. So the less individuals who choose to hook up to a city meter, the more expensive it will be for those who do. That's one of the questions he's asking. That's the question in the line, tap, valve, main line question. That's one of the questions that is a policy question here. For us? Okay. And we're trying to create a situation through, say, a Pareto agreement or some other mechanism to where either each person pays the minimum and each person, whenever they connect in some future date or a property owner connects in some future date, they then pay their share or some other agreement where a person has to shoulder that load in the beginning. It would then, any future payments that someone pays in and pays their share would revert back to that person. So we have not really delved that deeply into the concept, so we're still discussing that with our city attorney. So that's not something we are to consider today to talk about. Staff is going to provide more information on that for council to consider at a future date. Okay. Well, my request, because I do feel like the time that's left is a very important amount of time and the information that we're seeing and the information that needs to be transferred to the homeowners and the landowners is very vital to make sure that they know exactly what's expected of them. Because say if, you know, only ten people do it and then the furthest away has to be responsible for theirs, how do they get that estimate? How are they going to know what all they're in for, because if you're talking well, you know, $78.59 for one homeowner to pay and then it's going to be another $6,000. And if I can, council, there was a request from the representatives last night that I went through the slide, I neglected to mention to council, we were requested and that we would convey this to the council. They have requested the representatives that attended last night were all in unison and their desire to see this disaster declaration extended beyond May 23rd for another full year to May, May 2021. They specifically requested that we convey that to the council, I simply forgot to do it. I apologize. If you could go back to the questions, please. Yes, sir. Thank you. Residents do not pay for water, we treat them like we do anybody else. Now we also have a different process if you're prepay, or if you're on, I believe, a rear. So it's whatever the policies that are in place, you get a late notice, you get, I mean, so we're just going to treat it just like we do any of our other billings. And if you don't pay after a certain amount of time, your water gets cut off, if you do, you don't. Property owners do not receive courteous inspections, it's clear that if they're courtesy only, they're not required. So that's off the table. Property owners do not make code improvements as required, and I'm assuming that means for the plumbing connections. To connect. You can't connect the water. I mean, it's, it's pretty self evident question. If the, if the code is not there, if the code is not met, you don't connect the water just like you wouldn't connect the water on my house or anybody's house sitting at this table. If that plumbing wasn't up to city code, it's not going to get connected. You'll have an opportunity. You'll be told what it is, and you'll have an opportunity to fix it. Property owners do not initiate private connections to the city water system, which means that they don't want to have any water. All right. And so we have code that says, you got to have an inhabitable structure. If you don't, we have taken action or sent notices and done some kind of action for houses that are inhabitable. Some of them have had all the utilities, but they still been inhabitable. So we have a code that deals with that less than all 14 property owners initiate private connection to the city water system. We do have a pro rata share when, when developers come in and they'll put in a whole long water line, there is agreement. There are agreements where they can say, okay, we'll put in this line, but as people tap in off of it, we'll pay the full amount as people tap in off of it, we're going to get reimbursed. The city could say, we're going to do that and we're going to be the pro rata share. If that is a policy, if that is a legal question, we need to have answered. We've heard about that. The time is of the essence here. I really would like an answer to that question by the city council meeting next week posted for a work session so that we can determine what the answer to that question is. We don't need to, you know, uh, take any more time about this. We need to figure it out. So that's to me, the only question that is really left outstanding is what do you do if they don't all, because I don't have any issue. And if this is a policy decision that the council can make, I have no issue with saying, we'll just split it between 14 because I'll tell you there's 50 other, I don't know how many other lots there are out there, but several. And so if somebody doesn't want the water, somebody may come in and buy one of those lots and say, I'll take the water. I'll run my own line, be a licensed plumber up to my yard and then I'll do it myself. And I'll hook up to that, that meter and I'll pay my fee. Um, I had a constituent, uh, eight months ago who called me because they had a well system that was, uh, number one, it was a conflict. Number two was an issue and, and the well was almost going to not be available to them. They decided to tap into the city water that, that was in front of their house. They paid the $9,000 that it took for the tapping for the impact fee and they had to have it plumbed from the meter to their home. So if that last question is the one that, I mean, I, I really don't know what the previous four, those are self-explanatory. I mean, if you don't pay, you go by the city code, no courtesy inspections. They just take that question out. You don't build it to the code, we can't hook you up. So those, there's no question about those first four. It's the last one. And that's the one we need to know the answer to by next week, if at all possible. And I really encourage the city attorney's office to get that work through. Mayor, I think we can provide that. I just want to add one caveat to that, that you mentioned that an individual, it may be another individual that has a lot or purchases a lot and wishes to expand. We have a concern with septic systems there. So keep in mind that we're under the premise that each of these have a functioning septic system. So we need to understand if they do in fact have the ability to deal with the sewage. So a new person buying a lot, it is not likely that they'd be able to put a septic system on the lot because it would be too small. There are some provisions in state law that they could appeal to, but I don't know how likely it is an individual could put a septic system. Fair enough. And it's important on the existing lots, if their system fails, that we may provide water today and that system fails tomorrow, they may not have a sewage system. Okay. You need to make sure that next week we have all that lined out and I would even communicate that to I'm really confused because I'm hearing residents, I'm hearing representatives, residents just communicated to whoever you've been communicating it to that here are the situations. Here are the situations because we don't want any of those kinds of questions popping up later on down the line. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem. Yeah. I'll start where the mayor left off and that's my key component in this. Who articulated that request? Who was the speaker that said I as a representative of the residents or however they prefaced it, who said one year? It was a resident who mentioned it and all the other residents at yesterday's meeting were also supportive of that. Okay. And so that to me is critical going forward that we understand, at least for me to make decisions or at least have all the input I really would like to know almost kind of someone keeping the minutes or at least a list of speakers and key items because I think as the mayor left off, I mean you get into a situation where Council Member Meltzer touched on it. Is it one or is it all? And then it kind of just seems to vacillate depending on the topic. One can opt in but one kind of a representative can speak for the group. I mean so it's just a little ambiguous for me to understand the communication or hierarchy if you will. So that's just going forward. I think I'm okay with what the mayor laid out. I agree, the codes cover a lot of that and those that pay via the kind of upfront payment system, there's a policy in place for that that's well thought out so and I appreciate that and I trust the customer service department to handle one-offs as they come. I think on the latter part that's coming back to further complicate things for legal, it would have to, anything that comes back would have to apply to everyone. So if we open a new door for some methodology for payment of running water to a site, it would have to apply to every developer that would come to the city. I can't support a carve out for a one-off because I just think it opens up too many more issues. It needs to be, if we're going to create a new policy or procedure, if it's a policy procedure already in place that we're just bringing to the forefront, then great. But whatever it is that would come back, I can't support it. I think that's where I'm going and I hope the council's going is where we're getting back to applying things evenly and I'll just share a story of mine I've said a couple of times. I had a person that had a leak and I had to tell them, "Resident, no, we can't subsidize your water bill." Customer service worked with them and made it as smooth as possible and it was a significant amount but they worked with them as best they could but ultimately we couldn't waive that fee. Here we've waived the fees for a number of months and we're getting back on path and that's going to be critical for all the residents of Denton to be treated the same. Then a couple of things, question. One question I have is when I was there last, I talked to the city employees and talked to them as they were filling the water but there was a sprinkler system activated and I'm curious about that. I don't know how that works but I just want to understand that better. I don't know that we're going to get answers but I'll give you the information I have, I'll give you the pictures I have and just to kind of ... Well and depending on what type of septic system they have, if it's an anaerobic septic system which is what I have, which is required by code, you sprinkle off the water in those holding tanks once the water has been treated so if that's the case, that would explain that because I've got two heads that pop on any time it gets too full and it sprinkles the art so it may be that. We do know of one system like that out there so it might have been that system. I'll give you the location and just to confirm, if a resident says hey, I have an answer and so that's key. That'd be great. Thank you. And then I think that covers it. Thank you. Council Member Marger, then Council Member Briggs. So I look forward to seeing that information regarding the last question and you might have said this already but it might have been applied, I would add to that, to see what the various options are because I imagine there are a number of options and I wouldn't necessarily expect them to all be listed but to let us see some sort of range of options would be good. I wanted to also to say again that I agree with what has been said and as I myself said that as far as not paying for water, they should be treated the same as anybody else, the way customer service treats anybody else but with that in mind that we should revisit this dimension a couple slides back about how if you're a day late then you get pushed off to the next cycle. Again, I don't necessarily anticipate that will even be a problem, it's reasonable and I think people can pay it but I just think if we just leave that to, oh here's our wonderful customer service person, that would be great. Anyway, there were two more things if you don't mind, I wanted to speak to something that somebody had mentioned about the purpose or Councilmember Davis mentioned about the purpose of the emergency declaration being to provide the water and so people could decide whether to stay and work out a connection or to go and I went back to the ordinance itself of the emergency declaration and as I remembered, it really is only addressing the water issue. I just wanted to be clear, you probably realize that but just for the public that it's really about that they have no water and it's to provide them with water, that the emergency declaration is really just addressing the water issue and as far as the 192 days, like I mentioned before, people need to find out what the results of the inspection are before they can make a decision for certain on whether they're going to make that connection, that's when they'll really be able to weigh the expenses and then decide. So then once they decide, if they decide that they want to make that connection, then coming up with the money will be an issue but because people aren't rich, people are hard working people, taxpayers, they've got families, they're paying rent or paying on their homes or their car and their car. So anyway, we all know how all that adds up so I really think time, more time is needed for people to do what they have to do and that we just kind of try to put ourselves in their shoes and see how they would be taking it just one step at a time. So anyway, thank you, Krista, for waiting, I wanted to make sure and then I had a question about the plat but you waited long enough. Krista Foster, customer service, I just wanted to make sure that I could address concerns about the billing. What we are doing for the residents at Green Tree Estates is we are billing a month in advance so they will have, but this time because of the shorter notice, it was about three weeks but we will be giving residents a month to be able to get those payments in in advance. Part of the reason we have to do this is related to the fact that we wanted to get these set up as quickly and the most cost efficient manner as possible for the residents. So we were able to set up the accounts as a prepaid because the amounts are set and we do not require any kind of credit check or any kind of identifications or anything like that to be able to do it, but in order for us to be able to do that and still not be in violation of the FTC's red flag rules, we cannot issue any form of credit to them without having gone through all of the identification process, but any customer who has water service there is welcome to contact us to switch that account if they were to choose to do so. Thank you so much. And now as I understand it, effective as of January 24th, we are now taking matricula consular. That is correct. And the foreign or universal driver's license. Correct. And passport. So that and the combination of ID required for an I-9 form including but not limited to I-10. As a secondary form. Yes. Yes. So I'm not worried that people will under our new policy, which thanks to you has been updated. I don't think that will be a problem. On the prepaid set up that we have now, they would have to have the payment in prior to this first delivery for the month that we're pre-billing. Yeah. Okay. So thank you for clarifying that. Thank you very much. Absolutely. And so just finally my question, if someone could speak to the property owned by Mr. Roddy, has that been permitted or plotted for anything and any news of any development that can be publicly shared? I haven't heard anything. I was just wondering. No. We're not aware of any changes to the development status of that property. So far it is not changed since we last met with you on December 10th. Okay. And no permits have been requested or? No. Is she? Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So last question, and it's because of the timing, because this will, we're going tonight, there's an item to extend until May, which is a few months. And so we've heard that sufficient time. And then we've heard that the residents are asking for a year. So I have two questions. One is a process question. What happens if it comes to May and then that declaration ends? Are we stuck? Is there anything else we can do if they're halfway through the process but not all the way complete? And my other question is to someone like you, Mayor, who may have gone through the process before, is that enough time to do the inspection, make all the necessary changes, and then have the line hooked up? So what's a normal, typical time period for something like that to get complete, like all of that, the work? If you're talking three months, I mean, if you're talking, if I'm one of those homeowners, now they've got to line up the people to do the work that's off their property, and then if they can do the work on their property, they can do that. But time frame, if you get your contractors in place, I mean, to actually do the work on the private side, trenching, you're talking maybe a week at the most, depending on weather. So it's not the actual work if you have the weather cooperating and you have all your things in place that you need. You know where you're going to go. You know how you're going to come across the road, you know, all these kinds of things. Then to do that, it doesn't, I mean, a week should be sufficient. Okay. I mean, if you do it with a, whether you're doing it, some people, some plumbers dig it by hand, some use a ditch witch, so, but that doesn't really change it that much. And inspections, of course, you can call an inspection in for the next day. So the city's side of that won't necessarily be time-limiting. From the first request of a meter, all the work to set that meter and then to extend that main line to the property line, the city could accomplish in two, maybe three weeks tops. So it would be a matter of just a couple weeks. Okay, so the first couple months would give them time to get the inspections and do the upgrades they needed to their homes and then the, so what I'm hearing is that it's enough time. So my question is, what if it's not? What if there's several good faith situations happening in the, and it comes May 23rd, right, and it's expired. What happens at that process? What happens during then? Is there a way for us to continue doing the water without the declaration if they're like maybe three more weeks away from completion? Right now, the only way to lawfully provide them water is to have that declaration in place. So when the declaration expires, we cannot provide them water like we are now. And so would it be possible? I'm sorry. No, yeah, go ahead. I know what you're going to ask. If, say, two days ahead of time of that expiration, can staff come back and give us an update and say we're almost there, can we extend it for a couple of weeks, is that okay to do? Right. It's entirely within the discretion of the council to extend it after that May 27th date. So just by voting and extending tonight, it does not necessarily mean that that May 22nd is a hard end date. Right. Okay, I just wanted to make sure that everyone knew that. And then I'm going to comment then. I appreciate Council Member Briggs bringing that up, that we do have the discretion and ability to extend again. I just really want to caution my personal direction as 107 is, you know, if somebody has been working hard to get it done, they've been scrimping and saving, they've got the ditch going, they've got a plumber lined up and they're in the process, I wouldn't have a problem extending for just a little bit to get that done. But if somebody has not complied with the code, they've not asked for inspections, at the 11th hour they decide that they want to try to run a water line, I'm not interested in having that conversation in another 100 days. I've spoken to some of the same constituents the Mayor has. I've spoken to other constituents who are on well systems that are failing. Our water table is dropping. Our older well systems are failing. We have many other people in our city who are close to this same predicament. I've been a person on a well who had to pay the city $6,000 plus dollars for an impact fee, run 300 feet of water line. For the record, my uncle and I did that in about a day. So it can be done with a ditch which and had to tie into the city. It can be done. It can be done very expeditiously. These folks have to decide, whether it is today or tomorrow or the 99th day, they have to decide if they can become compliant with city code, if they have the ability to do that and are willing to do that, or if they need to go somewhere else. It really is as simple as that. Okay. I just want to make clear what we heard from our customer service representative. So that there's no misunderstanding on that pre-billed residents must pay by due date or will not receive service. So what I heard is they're paid in advance so that if payment has not been received by the end of that billing period that payment was made, and then the water does not -- is that not how we deal with our regular prepays in the city? If they don't pay their electric bill or the water by a certain date when the service is scheduled to continue, it's cut off. Correct. Okay. So that's the same as anybody else in the city? Correct. Fantastic. All right. Thank you. Also, I would say to give staff encouragement to -- I think we need to set a time. I would say 30 days before the 23rd, April 23rd, and I'm sort of asking council for this direction to communicate to the residents today that on April 23rd, there's going to be an assessment of where everybody is. That's 30 days. You're going to talk with each resident. Forget the representative. We've got to talk to each resident on this because we're getting too confusing here. I mean, because I don't want people to hide behind, well, my representative said this and I didn't have a voice. We've got to make sure we talk to each resident about each question that needs to be answered. To get an idea of where are you, have you applied, have you started? And so that you can bring back to council long before two days an update on here's where we are, here's who started, here's the estimated time of completion, here's who's not even begun so that when it does come back to council, the people who have not begun, you know, within 30 days from when this expires, I think we need to have a timeline that says we need a commitment. I mean, the city's committed to two extensions to help facilitate some kind of transition, some kind of permanent solution. And I would just encourage the residents as we answer the question next week, together with the whole septic issue, to if they're going to stay, to move forward. So the only question of clarification I have is, Scott, you said it and I just need to make sure that I understand it. Because you're saying that because I know when we're dealing with and this is the policy citywide that if somebody wants to come across my private property for a water line, let's say, or this is what the whole property is private property, the roads, everything. So you're saying, for clarification, that the connection from the city meter that runs along, let's say it runs along the side of the road, somehow they they're able to put it inside the road, then it goes under the road to go down the road for each individual home. So that does, by our code, require a licensed plumber even though it's on private property. That is an accurate statement. And if you do not own and reside within the dwelling, you must have a licensed plumber. Okay, so you're saying that people who are leasing the property, even though they might could do the work from the property line that they're leasing to the water line in the street, that they have to have a licensed plumber because they do not own, legally own the property. Is that right? They do not own and occupy. Correct. Okay. It's both. So in the in the status report next week for legal, if if you guys could just provide those code references, just give us sort of a little memo of that just sort of a little white paper memo and distribute that to the residents as well. So obviously they have people who are advocating for them that have either access to legal representation and that they can look that over so that they'll fully understand it. But I'd like to get that in a very concise white paper form that's that's summarized or that's just that specific issue. Does that make sense? Absolutely does. Okay. Absolutely does. Okay. These better be quick because we're getting out of this real quick. Councilmember Armitage. Yes. Two things. So number one, I would encourage people to think of when we think about a timeline instead of thinking about how such and such many days before the emergency declaration runs out that we think about it as after an inspection, after city inspection, how much time should people have to make the decision whether or not they want to go ahead and make the connection. That is because if you think just think about it, people won't really know until that inspection has been done what it will take for their individual household and they won't be and those are who are renters will have to have conversations with their landlord then and those who are owners will need to assess their family finances. So it's a family decision for each family but I think that tying it to the water declaration date doesn't make sense and to me is not fair. Okay. Second point. Go ahead. My second is a question. So we're requiring a licensed plumber and I know that as you know the Texas State Legislature has changed the plumbing license requirements. I don't know exactly when that becomes effective but you know to what extent does that affect the plumber licensing, what that means for the city. I genuinely don't know. The city manager has some information on that. Okay. Thank you. I believe Governor Abbott issued an executive order and you can correct me if I'm wrong Scott about foregoing that piece of legislation. There is there has been no change in the law for licensure of plumber or plumbing inspectors. Okay. Okay. Mayor Pro Tem. So future direction for me and I want to try to get council's consensus on this. I'd like to authorize our city attorney's office to respond to this. I would call it a threat from North Texas Fair Housing Center this letter. I would like to authorize or give direction for Aaron to respond to this and this is about the third one they've sent threatening a lawsuit and I just don't respond well to threats and my question also is I would like to understand from staff if they could reach out to North Texas Fair Housing Center and get an accounting of all they've done to help the residents at Green Creek be that man hours be that dollar spent exhaustive list of what they've done on the ground for these residents besides send these letters threatening us for doing the right thing. And finally I'm going to disagree with the timetable tied to inspections. We've just said courtesy inspections are just that courtesy. All right. We also know that there's been an opportunity to get inspections and third party inspection a third party inspection does not take very long at all. It takes a half a day especially if you're only looking at plumbing so I do not agree with that. I think if we give them a date certain within it saying have your inspection done have that information by this date. I don't want to give it an open ended time frame anymore. I think we've had enough of that and I think it's it's it's easier when you have reliability and a specific date from now which is 60 days to call up the inspector of your choice that what I saw in the email inspector of your choice to look at your plumbing to see exactly what you need to do and that's not in lieu of the city's inspection to hook up the water. That's just that's that's the date that I meant from the data the city inspection. Okay. The city inspection comes after they've already put in all the infrastructure. So the city inspectors are not going to come out and inspect until they say we've pulled a permit. We've completed the work. We are now asking for an inspection of the work. That's when the city comes out and inspects. So the works already done. So if that's what you're talking about then that date is immaterial because that's not how the process works. So that's my that's my direction on the April 23rd staff can do it if they want. As far as threatening letters look if people are going to sue us they're going to sue us. And if that's if that's what people feel compelled to do then the city will respond as we always do when those things occur you have any more things to say because then we're going to wrap this up and take a break. No I agree with I agree with the statements at the point the inspections are to take place. I will repeat the fact that the courtesy inspection is not intended for enforcement activities it is to provide them the knowledge they need on the front side of the model it's the same message we've been communicating for 60 days right. And so we will we will perform those okay all right okay thank you all very much appreciate it. I believe staff has yes go ahead mayor do you mind if I can just summarize make sure we know exactly what we need to be doing so my understanding is thank you staff is to create another letter to reiterate again the requirements the needs that the residents of Preen tree need to provide ownership information etc. we can reiterate what was been it was been communicated before and also indicate what's been received or what has not been received just as a point of clarification. We'll also indicate in that same letter that by April 23rd we will also reach out again to the to the residents and property owners there to to gauge and see the status of where they are in the process so they'll be all contained in that letter that we'll be working on and send it out next week. The other component is work with continue working with the residents on the point person to make sure we're communicating effectively to to the right individuals and lastly working either next week or soon thereafter working with city attorney's office to work through the pro rata share agreement along with indicating information related to set the systems that they're at their functioning that they're applicable to all all folks within the community not just not just this this neighborhood and then you also requested some summarized format of code references that were covered today for the for the action item for the yeah the what was I asking to summarize the white paper for I've already forgot for that was for installation of oh the license number yes yeah and then as regarding kind of the issues to consider I mean we're covering the the information related to the pro rata share but but in regards to non-payment and the other items that were listed in the previous slide we're just going to follow our typical normalcy processes okay and I need direction as well the comment from councilmember house with the mayor is the council's direction for the city to respond to the letter from the fair housing group or what what is the direction I didn't get cloud authority on that are you wanting staff to give us a legal memorandum about the merits of such a claim or are you wanting an absolute an actual letter sent back to that group I I want an actual letter sent back to them saying the this is the third one you've sent and if you're gonna if you do what you have to do to to capture your words but these idle threats that you keep sending aren't really necessary you file your case if you think you have one is what that I'm a little more direct than most but I just it rubs me the wrong way when we're trying to do the right thing and we've we've we've broken a lot of our own rules to help out and and the response is this and it just it just rubs me the wrong way could your comments today serve as that letter serve as that because I think it's probably been very clear how you feel about it I don't necessarily have a need to send a letter stating what you just said number one you said it and number two it doesn't really matter what we say it all I care about is if somebody serves the city secretary saying you've been sued and then we'll deal with it I mean just looks like we do everything is that is that okay that's fair okay all right okay thank you all very much let's take a break about a five-minute break thank you welcome back to this meeting of the Dent City Council on Tuesday February the fourth 2020 it is 2 52 p.m. we're now on our work session report 3b receive report hold discussion give staff direction regarding the pay-as-you-go prepaid metering program good afternoon Krista Foster customer service mayor council I am coming in just to give you guys an overview and an update on how our prepaid metering program is working and the successes that we're seeing with that first just to give you a brief overview if you're not familiar with the program it is for electric metered service that if they have more than just electric metered service that's fine but as long as they have AMI metered service than any customer is eligible it does require a 50 dollar prepayment the 50 dollars is simply placed on the account as a going forward credit for a customer to begin services some of the things that we can offer our customers with the program is they have no deposits they are never assessed late fees they are not charged any form of interest interruption fees or reconnect if we have a customer who has an outstanding balance either on their current postpaid account or if they're returning to the city and have an outstanding balance that was left due we do have the opportunity to take those funds receive a partial payment and place the rest into a debt recovery program which allows that customer to pay that balance out over time and the way that would work is that when that customer makes a hundred dollar payment 25 or 25 percent of that whatever payment they make would go to pay off that outstanding debt additionally every single day our customers are able to see what the balance is on their account as well as what their charges were for the previous day once a month we do have to do what's called reconciliation so that way if a customer used a little more or less water because we're having to physically read that monthly or if the billing cycle was 28 days or 32 days we have to rectify those flat rate charges or the excess or decrease of water usage that was there and also customers can choose to sign up for daily usage and balance alerts as they would like to receive them personally i receive every morning at 10 a.m a push notification on my cell phone that tells me what my prepaid balance is if i have a question about it i can immediately launch the program and be able to dig in a little bit deeper to see what my costs were for that day you'll see and you'll see throughout the presentation that there are some images these are images like what your customers are seeing each day or your residents each day that they go into the system so again some of the benefits are we're not charging a deposit but more importantly if a customer already has an existing deposit we're putting that money back on that customer's account and putting it to use on their actual charges it helps them to manage debt accrual if a customer is having difficulty paying a bill by the time they're interrupted on a standard account they have a past due balance another bill that's come out and another month of service that's about to be billed so even when they get their services back on they're still already behind on things that have been used this allows customers to be paying up in advance so they're not having that looming debt accrual over them it is the easiest way to set up us or restore restore services for a low payment and it also helps us to provide customers with a great solution to decrease financial burden as well as to help customers get out of debt so we have two primary customer bases the first are customers who are looking for financial flexibility maybe they have inconsistent pay dates maybe they're having some income troubles if they're on a fixed income maybe they have an outstanding debt that they're needing to get under control so that they can have the services they need to survive the second is consumption conscious customers people who are looking at their daily usage and what happens if i make a change in my home today how does that actually affect me tomorrow they're conservation minded and so those are the two primary groups who we're seeing on this program so just as an example we had a customer that actual customer that if at the time they were interrupted in order for them to restore their services it was almost 700 they already had current charges that were going to be due and they had those new charges that were getting ready to build we were able to work with that customer to move their past due balances into debt recovery apply their deposit that was on file to help cover those balances and work with them to take the minimum 50 pre-payment so they can get services restored immediately so 50 pre-payment for most customers is about three or four days but when you are in a financial stress sometimes three or four days is all you need to get to a little bit more so we can offer our customers that ability we're going to finish the presentation before we have questions as far as consumption conscious customers they can see every single day their actual electrical cost in dollars with the high and low temperature for that day so it allows them to better conserve it allows them to better plan if i know i'm going to be making it just until next payday and i know it's going to be really warm next week i can get an idea of how much do i need to budget in order to get there without any problems or interruptions so it allows them to be able to properly forecast and see the costs and effects of changes just as an overview we are very proud of this program and the things that it's been able to do so as of january 1st we had 563 customers we had placed a hundred and seventeen thousand dollars into debt recovery on behalf of customers and have received back in seventy seven thousand dollars of that outstanding balance so it's a 66 percent recovery we find that the average customer at 70 percent of our customers are debt free within 60 days so they no longer have that fear that stress or that worry in terms of deposits we have refunded eighty four thousand dollars in customer deposits and put that money to work for them additionally we've had a hundred and forty seven thousand dollars in deposits that would have been required had the customer gone into a traditional account that we were able to completely waive by helping them get into the prepaid program so what we're finding is that this system allows us to best serve our customers while also helping to contain the outstanding debt growth so a couple of things that are in store we have actually launched the post-paid electric usage monitoring so a customer who is not on the prepaid program can go to our website at cityofdenton.com if they click on that pay my bill they can look in our documents section on the side and there's a step-by-step walkthrough for how they can sign up to see that screen that you saw with the daily highs and lows because they're not billing in the system they're not going to see that with a dollar amount they will see that with a kilowatt hours amount but it will still allow those customers access to better conserve their electricity we currently have a hundred and one customers who have signed up for that program and have gotten no complaints the pay near me is another system that we're putting into place we have it in testing what that will do is allow customers on either pre or post-paid to be able to go into the app identify a location they would like to make a cash payment a 7-eleven a cds in denton or nationwide they can take that code scan it and they'll be able to make a cash payment for prepaid customers that cash payment will post live to their account as a real-time balance post and then the final thing is we're working with public information to start working on some public information library videos to help customers better understand how to get the most out of their prepaid currently we haven't gotten videos up because they're under some revamps on the website but we have gotten some step-by-step walkthroughs that are available on our website for customers and with that i'll take any questions first of all i love this uh and it's no secret that i hate it's a pretty strong word but i really hate those credit-based deposits and what the the burden they place on people and this is a great solution both for the our customers who are the the owners of our utilities and for the city because the deposits function to you know to me the deposits in this system is functioning more like an actual deposit which is it goes to it goes to their bill and there is no deposit exactly exactly exactly that's exactly so anyway so i love this um so several kind of questions related to this you know have you found that um most of these uh new customers the uh the 563 customers do they end up uh finding out about prepay and how it'll help them through dealing with customer service in a situation like the one that you cited or is it a mix does some of them it's a mix um the majority of customers at this point are probably learning through contact customer service however um our billing team rita and kim they went out and visited 80 some odd apartment complexes and property management companies that deal with multi-family that got us in contact with something into the tune of 450 different apartment or multi-family complexes and we provide them materials we've gotten requests for additional materials from some of those locations as well that is wonderful that's wonderful um and i know that our uh city colleges that uh you know have a lot of uh students who rent maybe you've already pursued um either the uh pay near me option at at the colleges or or uh pay near me is spreading the word through them yeah but we will pursue the possibility of yep so i figured you were five steps ahead so um and and then uh i was wondering is it uh would it be possible to since this is so much better for the customer in the city what would be the the downside to just phasing out doing away with credit-based deposits and switching entirely well to this i think there are still customers who prefer a traditional account however i think that this is absolutely what we would want to to be able to move toward as an alternative for customers who either can't or don't want to place a deposit if it were necessary because it takes care of the tax dollars that were entrusted to us in terms of covering that outstanding debt as well as meeting the needs that the community has for being able to better manage the cost that they're putting into their electrical service exactly and and just like you said or implied it's multi-family that you know comprises that is a big percentage or you didn't say that but i know i've seen the statistics before that a big percentage of that uncollected debt uh and and so this is a great way to to get that so thank you for your efforts and this information council member breaks thank you for this i'm really glad that this is an option now for for those who need it um you answered some of my questions it was um when councilmember armator asked um how we initiate the conversation um i did a quick little survey on denton moms um just for some information as i came in here um and the good news is nobody has this program and doesn't like it the people the people that have it love it and there's people who know about it who don't want it who like their old-fashioned accounts who like to keep the regular accounts the way that they are um so i i think option is always good um but there were several people who still had no idea about it so i think the dtv is fantastic i think that the paper being here is really good um so that you know people can become aware of this of this program that we're offering to our rate payers it is something that we have our intention is to do some greater pushes of that over the next year yeah well thank you so much you're so very welcome yeah bravo clearly uh is is this a homegrown app or is this a licensed uh this is one that we partner through a company called acceleron so so uh and if they deploy this in other another there are other yes there are other municipalities and other electricity companies that utilize this service so could they give us any idea of kind of how high is up you know how high could the adoption be and what uh tactics have been most successful we've begun working with them on that um again since we had just done the formal launch just under a year ago or just at a year ago um and i don't remember right off the top of my head what the adoption rate is so i can certainly provide that back but i would hate to mislead you and quote that wrong yeah no i'm not uh asking what our adoption rate is i mean i know we just started and it's amazing they've got it as far but just how high is the adoption rate and that's what i mean i have that i have that number gotcha yeah i have that number back at the office we're on same page we're good thanks yeah i can get that thank you so much for updating us on this and i think it just goes to show the creativity of our staff and also the flexibility to provide different options to different customer bases i think that's what's important about this is we give a different option for those who want it and for those who don't want it we're not taking something away the question i have is on the debt portion um if you could go back to that would you like me to go into something that's a little more clear on the debt no no no just the slide that you had i just wanted to ask a couple questions on at least that slide and it may lead to a different that's okay oh it's the one that showed how much you converted to debt and how much percentage you've collected the 66 yeah sure yeah there okay so um the placed in debt recovery that's just of the customers who have converted from sort of the uh current billing system yes it also includes customers who may have come back to denton and had an outstanding balance so it may be they forgot to pay their final bill or didn't forget just were unable to take care of it if there was an outstanding balance we can't um can't forgive those right but we can allow partial payment and get them into debt recovery all right and debt recovery is that because i know that when we've talked about this in the past that we have this uncollected debt that after so many months or days of the staff with the me trying to collect that debt it has then moved on to a debt collection agency is that correct is that is we're talking about this kind of debt not entirely okay we may have a customer who is in risk of moving into that or who has moved into that that we're helping them to get that paid off but the majority of this is going to be from customers who either have an outstanding balance when they switch or maybe a small balance that hasn't billed yet or a customer who's been interrupted and we're trying to help them be able to get their services back on rather than having to come up with a large one-time payment all right then as far as those that are in this form of debt recovery that have prepaid billing correct at what point or is there a point where if they quit paying on that debt recovery as long as they continue to pay their prepaid bill their service stays on is that correct you can't do one without the other the debt recovery program is set up so that every time you make a payment 25 percent of that amount goes toward your outstanding balance so it allows you instead of having to make a one-time large payment you're making very small payments over an extended period of time as long as that customer has active service then that debt will still continue to be paid if the customer were to terminate their account and leave the balance then it's the same as any other account where they would terminate and leave the balance so just for this example the prepaid bill is a hundred dollars and they have an outstanding they're in some debt recovery so the prepaid actual invoice for the electricity uses or whatever is a hundred dollars so does that mean they would have to pay 125 they don't receive an invoice okay they see each day what we saw here right which is so they know that they see that they have a balance it an account balance right here of a hundred and twenty two dollars and that they have forty four dollars in debt recovery and that at the rate they use it this should still get them about 13 days of service so at any time between now and the time their account goes to zero they can put any amount of payment that they wish to contribute toward their electric service on there if that customer makes a ten dollar payment two dollars and fifty cents okay so it's whatever it's not so much whatever is owed it's whatever they pay correct 25 percent of that goes to the debt reduction correct and all right so that's how you get down to zero okay gotcha right perfect all right okay any other questions comments council member ryan uh you mentioned that you talked with several property managers and going out in the community have you looked at using this or can property managers use this um we have so many apartments here in town that turn on a regular basis because of our high student population right that a lot of property managers have to have that power turned on for a two to five day period while they're doing the make ready on it i know from personal experience that by the time that billing you you turn it back off by the time you get the billing you're actually late before the bill even gets to you and you get charged a 35 dollar late fee and then you gotta call in and it always gets taken off but it's if this avoids that late fee it would be a good thing to be able for property managers to be able to put 20 on the account and then be able to transfer to another account as time goes on it's something that we can look into i'm not exactly sure what it might entail but it is something that we can look into as we're expanding councilman bob jr um quick question can can you remind me how many uh customers we have paying those those credit-based deposits trying to compare that five i was gonna say you know i did not bring that number with me and i can't provide it back if i can i can look at or actually you know what i would like because i i know we got that i don't know at some point last year but yeah i would i would love the latest number and uh yeah because i'd be curious to know also how many of those uh those 560 odd are in that category of credit-based deposit versus how many uh do not have to pay the credit-based deposit and just decided to do this anyway yeah are you talking about residential accounts are you talking about all accounts residential multi-family it's in the thousands no i know i know i just want to see exactly what the number is now okay any other questions thank you very much you are so very welcome now understand that agenda item 3c was not originally going to be on here but it's sort of a placeholder posting um for council members who you know having reviewed the dent municipal electric energy risk management policy wanted to have an open discussion uh or or presentation that would be of the material that could be presented in open session so uh does anybody have any questions or comments or a need for a presentation on that okay all right all right then having said that then we will move into executive session closed session at 3 12 pm to consider uh work session items under the following chapter 551 texas government code it will be chapter uh 551.072 consultation with attorneys oh no i'm sorry that's uh real property 551.072 consultation with attorneys under texas government code section 551.071 we've got a placeholder for the dme risk management policy for closed session does anybody need to have any questions for the dme risk management policy for closed session just to clean this up don't see any okay so uh then agenda item 1b we will not be doing uh so i will now read the uh closed session caption agenda item 1a receive information from staff discuss deliberate and provide staff with direction pertaining to the potential acquisition of real property interest located at 909 north loop 288 welcome everybody to this meeting of the dent city council february the fourth 2020 it is 6 30 uh we'll move through our agenda we do have a quorum so i'll call this meeting to order our first item on the agenda is a pledge of allegiance to the u.s and texas flag please stand if you're able i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all honor the texas flag i pledge allegiance to the texas one state under god one and indivisible okay we don't have any proclamations or presentations so we'll move to agenda item three which is presentation from members of the public if we could review the procedures for addressing the city council please the denton city council has adopted rules of procedure including a code of conduct that applies to citizens as well as council members these rules were enacted to promote an orderly process and to preserve decorum here is a brief review of the rules that apply to citizen reports citizens will have four minutes to give a scheduled citizen report and four minutes to give an open mic report there will be an electronic bell when time has expired if the remarks are not concluded by that time the citizen will be asked to stop speaking if the citizen does not cease and a second request is made the mayor will request to have the citizen removed from the council chamber citizens are asked not to approach the dais if a citizen has papers or other materials to hand out to the council please let the city secretary know in advance for scheduled citizen reports the council may initiate discussion or questions following each citizen report for non-scheduled open mic citizen reports the council may listen to citizens speak however because no notice of the subject of the open mic report has been provided to the public in advance the texas open meetings act limits any deliberation or decision by the council to a proposal to place the item on a future agenda a statement of factual policy or a recitation of existing policy citizens are asked to direct all remarks and questions to the council as a whole and not to any individual member please refrain from making abusive personal impertinent profane or slanderous remarks anyone who violates this council rule of procedure may be immediately removed from the council chamber thank you in advance copies of the rules of procedure are available from the city secretary okay we'll move on to our 3b which is reports for members of the public these are our pre-registration we have two speakers the first speaker is susie roemer regarding crossing safety on arterial roadways good evening my name is susie rumor 1700 crescent street tonight will be a two-part presentation with me presenting the first half and dan crutka presenting the second half last month melissa rodriguez age 51 became the first person in denton this year to be hit and killed by someone driving a motor vehicle i don't have access to the full crash details and i'm not here to analyze who's at fault my purpose tonight is to take a closer look at where melissa was killed picture for a moment that you're walking along johnson street near where melissa was killed let's assume that you always follow the law no matter what and you always have your utmost safety in mind let's see where your options are for crossing dallas drive to continue along johnson street to avenue r to the north the closest crossing with a pedestrian button is prairie street according to google this is a detour of just under a mile and at least 16 minutes there and back of course you won't have a sidewalk along bell on the return trip and will need to have good enough balance to walk back under the railroad bridge without falling into the road perhaps you can cling to the tree branches you see ahead of you in order to stay out of the road where you could get hit and killed by a passing driver to the south the closest crossing with a pedestrian button is teasley lane according to google this detour is a trip of about 1.4 miles and 28 minutes there's not a sidewalk for part of that trip these detours don't look terribly far do they so what's the big deal let's see what a 16 minute and a 28 minute detour would look like for someone driving a car let's say you're driving along redwood place and you need to cross university drive to get to a friend's house the crossing is wide open you can see where redwood continues on the other side of the road unfortunately you're not legally permitted to drive across here in this case and must take a detour to continue let's see what a 15 minute detour would look like let's see what a 29 minute detour would look like these detours still seem acceptable in october 2019 gentry watson age 62 was attempting to cross loop 288 by bicycle between audre and prominence parkway when he was hit and killed by someone driving a motor vehicle shouldn't you have used the infrastructure that was available to him instead of crossing where he did let's see what gentry's options were to the north of where he was trying to cross there is no pedestrian crossing of loop 288 that includes a pedestrian button or a marked crosswalk to the south the closest crossing with a pedestrian button is mckinney street assuming gentry was ultimately headed north detouring down mckinney street and back would have added about two miles and 12 to 20 minutes to his trip depending on how quickly he could ride without having a sidewalk let's recall what a 15 minute detour would look like in a car in 2017 tamara brewer age 48 was attempting to walk across loop 288 at the light on king's row when she was hit and killed by someone driving a motor vehicle legally she was deemed to be at fault when she had that because she had the red light however there was no way for her to get a green light because there are no crosswalks or pedestrian buttons at that intersection or in the intersection along to loop 288 north of mckinney street the detour to the closest pedestrian button mckinney street would have been about five miles and at least 110 minutes assuming she safely crosses university 380 which also has no pedestrian button or crosswalk using our example from earlier this detour is the equivalent of you having to get in your car drive to marietta oklahoma and back just across university drive along redwood place even though you could see the rest of redwood right there in front of you we have dan next okay if we have a question i think from councilmember armature yes oh yeah sure that was actually going to be my question okay since it's a two-part presentation sure and this is uh daniel krutka if you'll state your name and address your time will begin that's it dan krutka i'm at 321 west hickory street just up the road here so to continue the presentation not everyone in ditton owns a car i don't and not everyone wants to drive a car all the time and often a 15-minute walk can take 30 minutes by bus is it fair and equitable to expect our neighbors to go through lengthy detours that most of us would find completely unacceptable in cars is it fair and equitable that if someone cannot afford a car chooses not to drive or cannot drive their only way to avoid these lengthy detours is to risk their life by walking or rolling across wide roads with people driving at lethal speeds can we blame them for crossing at locations that are unsafe or illegal wouldn't most of us do the same both of the roads mentioned tonight are currently owned by tech stop but there are also city-owned arterial roadways with few opportunities for safe crossing outside of a car city council received a presentation last year about the future widening of 428 from two lanes to six lanes in it no pedestrian crossing was provided between the water park and the incoming housing development across the road meaning the residents would have two options one attempt to walk to the water park and risk losing their life two hop in a car just across the road we thank the members of this council who asked repeatedly about safe pedestrian accommodations across this road please continue to ask you are in charge of our roadway design priorities as we move forward with updating the dentin mobility plan i hope we are looking for ways to address the current roadway crossings that present significant detours and dangers to our neighbors and i hope that we are looking for ways to prevent future roadways from being designed with these barriers and dangers in the first place what we presented today is the bare minimum the people of dentin should be able to travel car-free without lengthy detours or risking their lives we hope dentin is not about doing the bare minimum we want a dentin where citizens can travel reasonably and safely without a car we have only highlighted streets where citizens have been killed there are several other streets with similar dangers and future projects like 428 and hickory creek road where these detours and dangers are built into the design will this council take actions to prevent future deaths by design older adults people of color and people walking in low income communities are disproportionately represented in fatal crashes involving people walking if we're not sure where to start let's start by prioritizing safer walking and biking conditions for these populations thank you for your time and attention a couple of councilmembers wishing to speak um councilmember marmotry you were first up so i'm going to go ahead and call on you i'm not sure how that got switched around but yeah uh yeah i i want first of all i want to say uh we can do so much better as a city i agree with everything that you both said and i wanted to just thank you both and those of you who came out here just to see this presentation and support safety in the city of dentin i thank you so much for your activism you all have taught me so much you make it easier for me to do my job as an advocate for public safety so i just can't thank you enough for your activism thank you thank you i agree councilmember melzer yeah for staff i know we're looking forward to seeing the recommendations uh toward a target zero policy of targeting zero uh traffic deaths but can i also ask that uh our bike and pedestrian coordinator review this presentation and respond in a staff report you know and if as obviously uh you want to incorporate as necessary in the mobility plan thank you councilmember breaks just to piggyback off for that i was going to ask the same thing but to um to implement the crossings that you speak of in some of the um heavier used pedestrian bike areas so that when we do that does come back to us we can see his suggestions as we work on our plan okay thank you all very much appreciate it thank you all right that concludes our agenda item three we'll move on to agenda item four which is consent agenda chair would uh oh i didn't see any blue cards no no um councilmember melzer i move approval of the consent agenda councilmember ryan second we have a motion and a second for the agenda item four which is a consent agenda let's vote please oh motion i didn't show up on my screen sorry motion carries uh seven zero we'll move on to agenda items for consideration items for individual consideration 5a is considered adoption of an ordinance of the city of denton a texas home rule municipal corporation authorizing the city manager to execute a contract with range line pipeline services llc good evening mayor and council my name is rebecca deviney i'm the deputy director of water and wastewater utilities here for the city i thank you for allowing us to come and speak on this item today with me i have daniel crimer who is the deputy director of streets and drainage so what are you and wastewater utilities has um gone forward with range line pipe services they provide a number of services to the city and as you see there's several of them listed on here including water line construction concrete cylinder pipe repair they provide all of our emergency repair services for our reinforced concrete cylinder pipeline these services are typical services that are made to concrete piping that city staff cannot do and these are usually for our larger diameter distribution and transmission lines mainly lines that are 12 inch in diameter and larger the bid includes items for pipelines that are 14 inch diameter to 54 inch diameter with three different classes of concrete pipe and this also allows for us to have emergency repair services and welding services in the eight months that i've been here we've had to declare two declarations of emergency to repair two different of our concrete pipelines and during that time it was recommended that with the fifty thousand dollars if we were spending over fifty thousand dollars on individual items that we move forward with looking at during a contract and if that's over a number of years so this will allow us to be able to use their services in order to make these types of repairs they're a very good 24 hour 365 day a year resource for us to allow us to do these types of repairs and i'm going to turn it over to daniel so he can talk about the drainage mayor council daniel kramer deputy director of operations for drainage this is actually a two contracts in one rfp so this is for for terra and they actually supply all the drainage pipe that we use throughout the city for repairs and everything else so this part of the contract is actually for 17 different pipe sizes with two different classifications and then also on boxes 56 different boxes on two different classifications we use these in emergency repairs as they come up we can also use them in our capital projects as we go forward to save money as we're looking at different options so with the two proposals one for range line pipe services and also for the for terra pipe for precast for the drainage pipe staff recommends the approval of the contract and what this is is they do not exceed to allow us to actually spend this over the course of the contract as needed when we need the pipes okay council member breaks so both of the contracts together are around 18 million yes ma'am correct and so does this come out is this bond is this emergency is this rate is this built into our rate operation where does this come from in the budget so what this is is it's a excuse me it's a do not exceed contract so this is just basically covering a line item so that on the drainage side and also for the water and wastewater there are multiple different sizes of pipes throughout the city so at any time depending on you know where the pipe is located where it's at it calls for different sizes so what this is is just to be able to allow us to spend it when needed if there's a certain size or classification now these are built in historical spend that we've had on these contracts in the past is nowhere near this total but it also is for so that we have the ability to get them when needed and actually have a price form so we can lock it in for economy scales so it's built into our rate it's in our operating in our operating budget okay and may i follow up and so the rfp i only saw one there were two names but only one person did the bid one company is there a reason do you want to speak to that why the other company didn't put a bid in sure so the type of services that range line provides is for the welding services but they're going to be contracting and providing and supplying the actual pipe that would be needed to be made any kind of repair that we make for terra is only a pipe manufacturer so that's the reason why you see only for terra for some and only range line for some so range line has a more of a cafeteria style plan that we can pick and choose from whether we need the welding services whether we need the additional pieces of pipe they can actually make different portions of pipe fittings etc to allow us to get back in service were they the only ones that responded yes ma'am and i believe it was sent to 344 different respondents okay thank you yes ma'am i thought i saw someone else council member barmiter yes so first of all very important need obviously i'm going to ask some questions about just about the the the pricing and how that was determined what was it the the individual companies who came up with those caps no ma'am what we did is went through and estimated if we were to replace roughly how many pieces of pipe of each size we would need and it's based on you know what they what they would put as a individual bid price for each size of that pipe so then the total is added up for the overall cost and that's what the contract total is on those and and and it's but it's cheaper to do it this way by contract regardless of how many pipes end up being needed then correct then just one at a time so we are we are only spending what we need when we go through for the repairs but then the costs are locked in so that we can have a standard and so the price per pipe when y'all estimated it was it based on a kind of discounted figure that these companies had said it indicated that if if they were in contract with us they would be able to offer us this this lower price or was that just going by you know whatever price the the retail price or whatever you call it whatever they would sell it to us for individually if the city manager could address some of these i can't speak to whether or not these are discounted the thing that we're what we're caring what we're counting on is availability and delivery so in an emergency when there's situations that occur that are certainly unplanned so from an administrative perspective our our administrative spending authority is fifty thousand and so fifty thousand dollars so if it exceeds that it has to come to council the city manager has signature authority up to a hundred thousand but if it exceeds 50 we prefer to go to council if it goes over a hundred certainly has required by law to go to council by our policies and so by having these contracts in place it allows us to have the ability during an emergency a situation unforeseen that when we need the the material to supply the pipe etc they we place the order it's delivered they have those guarantees and then we can move forward with that really having to delay way declare emergencies those kinds of things we can move forward faster and be responsive thank you thank you so there is no there's no discounted price but it's a time saving measure i don't think we can actually speak with a discounted price rod i mean that's that's their price sheet so again and it's all based on the full gamut of what's available based on what might break so we have no guarantee whether a certain pipe or a certain piece of fitting is going to break we're just trying to capture as much as a of a possible the range of possibilities so more than likely there won't be a discount what we're guaranteeing is availability and delivery yeah okay thank you thanks for clarifying on that council member breaks did you have another question just to follow up okay and so on the availability we said emergency a couple of times i've heard availability so this is someone we can call on 24 hours seven days a week yes ma'am range line 24 7 365 we call them on saturday sunday our goal is to not disrupt service and so that's why it's very critical and these larger pipe diameters we just flat out don't have the capability to make these types of repairs we're not equipped for that okay so it's a wonderful service for us to be able to have thank you okay mayor pro tem approval council member ryan second let's vote please for agenda item 5a motion carries seven zero agenda item 5b has been pulled by staff agenda item 5c considered adoption of an ordinance of the city of denton texas a home rule municipal corporation authorized the city manager to execute a contract with a nextor inc for supply of electric utility pad mounted switchgear uh good evening mayor council my name is jerry filter i am the engineering manager for denton municipal electric and i'm here to visit with you about rfp 7126 which is for the supply of our pad mounted switchgears that we use on the electric distribution system switchgears are strategic to dmv um their underground infrastructure major infrastructure that allows us to do load switching between feeders allows us to isolate um whenever we need to if we have an outage or a piece of equipment out there in the field that we need to separate from the entire system they do come in multiple configurations they come in a manual configuration automated automatic configuration and supervisory control is all we are used to maximize the efficiency of the distribution system just to kind of give you a little map here this is a four-year installation map of where we've installed switch gears over the past four years they pretty much go throughout the entire service territory and i talked a little bit about configurations this is the standard configurations these are the manual type ones and what that means is the linemen have to go out there physically and operate these pieces of equipment themselves versus the switchgear configurations which are called automatic throw over these are the ones that have the intelligence in them that if they see a loss of power they're automatically throw over to another feeder to restore power quicker and again they come in different configurations from a pme 6 to a pme 11 you say h but we use pme 8 but we use pme gears kind of go a little bit over the history we have a five-year historical spend on switch gears of 2.9 million dollars this 2.9 million dollars does not include the 200 amp switch gears that we also use and are also included as a part of this bid they're required to provide potential purchase values for all configurations so whenever we put together the rfp for this there's 14 different configurations that we could possibly use on the system so the rfp went out to try to get all 14 configurations doesn't mean i'm going to use all 14 configurations but we have those available now to us at the time we do plan anticipate that there's going to be an increased use of the supervisory switch gears in the future and just kind of give you an idea with some of the reasons for that is that you know we we're planning for hunter ranch co-ranch if it comes online western business park if it starts to get more large development out there heartley field ranch and didn't high school all of these will require switch gears so rfp 7162 was had 186 potential suppliers four proposals met all of the specifications this is a request for a four-year contract based on eight million dollars and not to exceed to annex their power solutions and staff recommends approval for rp center 162 for the supply of the pma switch gears counter questions yeah how much of the total purchases contingent on scale that's provided by the you know expectation of hundred coal which hasn't been you know technically that was just because when we look at the when we look at the future of what it is we think that we're going to probably have to buy some more i'm i can't tell you that that we've actually purchased or this is clues exactly what we're going to have for hunter ranch co-ranch i don't think it's really included in it it's just the way that we have to purchase them we have to give them the list of all 14 and how many we're going to purchase one 10 or whatever it is and that's where it's kind of taking it up to the eight million dollars i'm not sure if that's making sense well no i i i think i get it but i guess what i'm asking is um if for some reason that didn't happen would you do anything different if you we will only buy switch gears that we need so it's really just in the contract amount and we're not going to go out and buy eight million dollars with the switch gears i mean to be honest with you i think the anticipated value over the four-year term of the contract is probably going to be about the same of four to five million dollar purchase over those years okay so and if it comes in then we will have to buy the switch for that we don't buy switch gears in anticipation of our large development coming in i appreciate the explanation thank you sure mayor pro tem move approval council member davis second let's vote please agenda item 5c motion carries seven zero thank you agenda item five d which is considered opposite of an ordinance ordering election to be held in the city of denton texas on may 2nd 2020 and if a runoff election is required on june 13th 2020 do we have a presentation for that sorry both of them okay are you councillor melts are you recusing yes okay all right let's record for council member recused i'm not sure for which one but agenda item e is considered option of an ordinance ordering a special election to be held in the city of denton texas on may 2nd 2020 and if a runoff election is required on june 13th 2020 we'll hear a combined presentation with a separate vote and council member davis recused as well thank you so my name is rosa rios and i am your city secretary i'm here to present both of the items that were read into the record which involve our upcoming elections to be held may 2nd 2020 as you can see here for may 2nd 2020 we're going to have two elections the first will be the general election for city council places five six and seven for the full term ending may 2022 and then the special election will be to elect city council members to districts one and two for the unexpired term ending may 2021 we will have a contract that we will bring later in the future with denton county to administrate the election at this time this item has no cost however when the contract comes up and the cost is yet to be determined we will present that for consideration the early voting begins monday saturday a monday through saturday april 20th through 25th and then monday and tuesday april 27th through 28th and the canvas is scheduled for tuesday may 12 and we will at that time order a runoff for june 13 if needed the runoff date was identified by denton county as the proposed runoff date if anything changes we'll certainly let you know so you can see here the polling locations for election day we did hold a discussion at an earlier briefing to get city council input on the locations these are the locations that were the result of the discussion the one difference was of course we were able to work with denton isd to get some of their locations as well ropes and ratchet confirmed today that we would go ahead and be able to use their location the creative arts building specifically for use for the election day on may 2nd so for the early voting you can see here what the hours are for the pretty much for the full early voting period we will have the denton civic center texas women's university denton county elections administration and the university of texas gateway center the robeson ranch does have limited early voting hours available and you can see here what will be april 20th through the 23rd and then again april 27th through 28th and these will be in the medina room and that's that is your item that's the university of north texas university yes thank you people might get a little upset okay all right and we'll so you have the second presentation for item e no actually it's the same location the whole thing same schedule okay all right okay so we will we will take a vote on these separately were there any questions for city secretary don't see any thank you very much all right so agenda item uh six or five d excuse me council member briggs i move approval mayor pro tem second let's vote for agenda item five d motion carries five to zero with two recusals uh we'll now consider agenda item five e council member briggs i move approval okay okay mayor pro tem second all right we have a motion to second for agenda item five e let's vote please yeah do we need to read okay yeah all right motion carries five zero if we could ask the council members to return council member melzer and council member davis they're probably watching back there yeah they can hear me yeah i say that all right we'll move on to agenda item five f consider an ordinance of the city of denton texas a home rural municipal corporation extending the effective period of the declaration of disaster concerning concerning excuse me green tree estates a subdivision located within the limits of the city to may 22nd 2020 mayor council ryan adams public affairs uh you received a presentation on this earlier today in your work session i'm happy to answer any questions on this item any questions for staff we do have some public uh some cards wishing to speak no questions for staff all right we'll go ahead and take public council member armature i'll go ahead and recognize you before we take public comment oh yeah uh i am moving to approve okay all right we'll hear public comment and then we'll take a second after that uh the first speaker is dewey marshall if you'll come down state your name and address your time will begin it's four minutes yes sir i believe isn't it yes card says four minutes yes um hi my name is dewey marshall i live at 1700 willowwood street um i'm here today to talk about solutions um we've tried to talk before about different types of solutions that we can try to work with the city in order to resolve green tree estates and i want to start by thanking council and staff for its decision in its direction during the last meeting to decide to extend the state of emergency uh and make that decision um and i i expect to vote tonight to go in that direction as well um the federal fair housing affirmative affirmatively further fair housing obligation is a federal standard set by obviously the federal government for cities that receive federal funds to go out of its way to affirmatively further fair housing now this rules changed throughout the years but most recently in 2015 the obama administration set that rule to uh make sure that the cities have to actually make uh an obligation um to affirmatively further fair housing and that's really important in this case of green tree estates which is a predominantly non-white community now there are several different ways that the city can uphold its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing in this case there's not necessarily one type of solution that will uphold that obligation um and so there are several different solutions for the city to actually take a proactive role to find that long-term solution one of those solutions could be the city could like consider using city funds to lower the impact fees or cost of connecting to water meter i understand from work group today that legal might be looking into that or something similar which is helpful another solution has been offered by my friends from cosecha denton and denton lulac to extend the state of emergency for another year all of these would help avoid homelessness now or displacement of residents now the reason why i've been advocating and pushing this is because i've as many of you know i've been homeless for a substantial amount of time in denton i've worked in homelessness and in work with homeless populations in denton and i still work with people experiencing housing crisis in denton and i can see disasters situations whenever i can tell that there might be a risk that somebody might end up homeless i mean i just see it professionally and personally all the time every day i promise and in this case there are lots of kids at risk of homelessness like the kids could end up homeless and we've been trying to communicate and i really appreciate the direction the last vote took but since then you know we've sent a letter trying to ask for an opportunity to explain the affirmatively fair housing obligation to this city i'm not here today to threaten anything i'm here today to say that we're trying to work with the city to explain what that obligation might be in fact you know we've already tried to start that communication with the city attorneys last week as well so this isn't a surprise this isn't anything new but i'm here today just to make clear that we're trying to work with the city now there we've been advocating that there's not only like legal or legal justification but actually legal obligation for the city to step out of its way and not just treat everybody the same but to actually go out of its way to have a long-term solution and to plan with the residents and and to work with the residents even more so there's a moral obligation because there are kids at risk of being homeless and that's a real risk i mean i'm telling you from a professional lens and i believe that all of you also care about that individually as well i've heard those comments and the last one is that there's also obviously economic incentive i can tell you that whatever the costs it would take for residents to stay in their homes that the city would have to spend to prevent residents from being displaced is far less than the amount that the city would end up paying in social services for people that end up experiencing homelessness and once it happens once it can actually end up in a cycle so again we've laid out all of these reasons for the city to continue to work i'm here asking again for the city to work with us in response that we can find a solution let's work together let's just make sure that nobody ends up homeless that's literally like all that we're really asking um like within these conversations so thank you for your time councilman barometer uh yeah i was wondering since our um our fair housing our city for housing coordinator uh danny shaw is here if she might be willing to speak to some of these issues raised including the affirmatively further fair housing mandate and to speak to why it's so important under the fair housing act to avoid displacement okay i'm gonna if you'll hold on just a second we've received letters threatening litigation on this particular issue and i think i'm gonna have to ask the city attorney first for ruling on that because uh we take those very seriously you can stand there and say that you're not meaning to threat but and i understand that there's some issue with that rule in general at the at the national level so i'm real hesitant to have staff come down and comment on things that we may be in litigation over so how about how about instead of speaking about this particular case just about since since we haven't had uh fair housing training maybe if you could just speak to more generally the affirmatively further fair housing mandate and i think that's going to be off topic avoiding this place i i think it's directly on topic i regret that we haven't had fair housing training well i'm not so sure that i believe that's off topic i'll ask the city attorney to get into a general conversation again about an issue that we've been threatened litigation over a specific issue i would ask a a sort of a comment on that you drew the straw tonight thank you mayor yes there's a like you say there's been letters sent to the city with different levels of potential threatening type of language towards the city as far as litigation goes so it's entirely up to you but as your council i'd recommend that these communications don't happen at this time in this forum related to the fair housing i think it's a conversation if we want to have we can have an enclosed session with council and the city attorney but not in this forum at this time okay thank you i look forward to the day where we can have a conversation about fair housing in public because i think it's so important thank you mayor pro tem i just want to just want to reiterate what we talked about uh in in in work session but mainly the questions of the speaker so you you talk about ending and monitoring and working against homelessness right but you would you would understand that that applies universally across the city irrespective of neighborhood all right what are you asking applies that homelessness the fight against homelessness is a city-wide issue not a particular segment of denton is that correct right correct okay yeah just as we talked i mean that's a fairly general topic if you could if you got a question that's more directed to this particular specific topic in the posting that'd be great yes sir no and i and i think that was important to to have that your your guidance because there was a broad statement made yeah and so uh i guess and then you talked on lowering fees that was for all the citizens of denton because i'm sorry so wait wait let me finish the question so you talked about lowering fees my question is is that for the entire city because it's a rate payer funded system or you're saying for a particular uh body of people yeah uh so i understood your first question to be like is homelessness a city-wide front uh that has to be combated obviously yes um is the obligation for this city to prevent homelessness equal for everybody around the city no a federal fair housing is very clear that affirmatively furthering fair housing uh is more than just like necessarily something general that has to be applied to everybody uh and that's what affirmatively further fair housing is so it's can be concentrated specifically to areas covered by classes that are protected by housing discrimination such as race color national origin um so whenever i talk about lowering impact fees i'm talking about that might be like i said there's not one individual uh like silver bullet but that might be a way that the city can prevent displacement of populations that are predominantly non-white which is like that in general is the obligation under affirmatively further fair housing does that make sense yeah yeah again we're i can't control what the speakers say they're not subject to the the uh on topic or on point for the the posting so uh if you have because the posting is specifically for the extension of the declaration of emergency to may 22nd 2020 that's really what the posting is for is the discussion on that so if you could limit your no i think that covers i just wanted to add perspective okay all right and so i need to announce too so we might need to get some work on this uh in the meantime but if there's going to be um thank you so much i don't see any other unless council member armature you're still requested to speak all right thank you thank you appreciate it um it's my understanding i've been told that if someone's going to require translation tonight during this particular agenda item or any agenda item um if if we could know that because i don't think we have one uh currently so we'll need to make that accommodation so uh if someone could could let staff know then we'll make sure that we make an accommodation for that uh council member armature yeah there are uh some people here who need translation sorry i thought we had the headphones yeah well yeah we're gonna get it we're gonna get it worked out but uh i just want to make that announcement ahead of time so staff could sort of help with uh assessing that need and then and then what we can do with that council member melzer yeah so i'll uh move the table until we you know have the translators uh in place so that we can review the okay sure it does okay we got a motion to is that would be the correct motion to table for the evening or not for the evening but for later on and you can bring it back off the table later okay all right uh got a motion to does that take precedence over the motion that was made um with council member armature yes i believe it does all right so we have a motion to table do i have a second for a motion to table this is for later on in the evening yes yes yeah all right okay all right uh council member armature second all right so we have a motion and a second to to table you need to ask um yes there's a representative from lulac here who'd be willing to translate on behalf of the residents there is or is that a question she is here okay willing to translate for the residents okay is that with the uh is that just sort of a side-by-side translation is that with the headphones just side-by-side translation so so uh do you want to withdraw your motion so yes i'll join the motion all right okay fantastic can i ask uh was did something happen come up with the translator that that was ordered for the evening i don't i don't know i just found that out just here recently we did not have one scheduled for this evening we had one scheduled for this afternoon's work session okay thank you all right but we've got it taken care of it seems like all right so we're going to move on continue with the uh the cards uh john montoya if you'll come down state your name and address your time will begin yeah uh well we can we can uh that's a good question council member melts will raise the issue of do we need to translate what we've done so far so i need to ask um let's take a five-minute break we're going to get this squared away let's take a five-minute break yep welcome back to this meeting of the denton city council on uh what is today february 4th 2020 at 725 we are on agenda item 5f uh we've got i think all the translation worked out i appreciate everybody's patience and accommodation that and i apologize for any miscommunication or confusion in that regard so thank you so much for that so the next speaker was john montoya and since this is going to be translated i just ask that each speaker uh be mindful of that and give enough time between sentences and and thoughts to provide the translator opportunity to translate oh and also because it's being translated there's eight minutes available so uh i will use every second no just kidding so john montoya and my address is three one one three briary trace court denton texas so first of all um just like to thank council for extending the declaration of emergency uh and uh in the recognition first of all that this is an emergency as um as the ceo of a major non-profit here habitat for humanity of denton county it's incumbent upon us to advocate for those who are living in substandard housing and that's kind of my role here is to advocate for these families and for anyone who is living in or struggling with substandard housing uh and this is a definitely a substandard housing type of condition and i'm not going to get into anything regarding fair housing any legalities with that is just the basic common conception of substandard housing is all i'm talking about so um what what we have is a declaration of an emergency i'll slow down i think i'm talking too fast i'm sorry no no i just want to is he going at okay pace okay thank you all right yes so the recognition that there is an emergency now uh kind of behooves the question is what are we going to do to resolve this emergency what steps what plan do we have in place to resolve this emergency so that on may 23rd it's no longer an emergency and i think we're essentially at a conundrum here it seems like and uh it really begs then the question as okay how are we going to begin development of this plan what are the steps that are that we're going to take and i say we it's all of us right we're all in this together and uh and what can we do and and that's really where we're at we really need to sit down and start looking at some realistic plans um moving forward um what does that involve what resources do we need we really do have to kind of do the the basics of of strategizing here what needs to be accomplished between now and may 23rd well these folks need access to drinkable water how we get there is is the question so you have you have non-profits in the community that are willing to work with the city uh not just habitat for humanity but others as well and what we just what we need to do is come together and really kind of work on some some workable solutions here and i believe everyone is in support of that including the families including i believe um well i can't speak for everyone i all i can do is speak for those that i i believe do support which i believe majority of council do support a resolution to this in some way that is going to end up with a non-emergency situation i mean that's really what it's all about right we have an emergency now we want to not have an emergency later um so the band-aid steps right now are water being delivered which is kind of expensive uh in the meantime what are we doing as far as planning and really working toward that solution and i would just like to propose one that again habitat for humanity is going to is going to advocate but also wants to be part of the solution to help these families and others not struggle with substandard housing in denton and in denton county as a whole so just my question is what are our next steps okay so can i ask you a question yes did you watch the work session today or the ones before have you watched those i had i was in a training today and i missed it so if i missed a lot of great stuff i just curious because we've had a lot of conversation on that uh we do have a couple people wishing to speak i mean council members wishing to ask a question but you still have time left so if you have further comments you certainly can i will i will look at those work sessions and if there are next steps in there then i greatly appreciate that um but please yeah if you have questions for me sure council member melzer well yeah i was actually kind of going down the same path uh i guess first of all i'd want to say you know mr wentai if there is an opportunity for habitat to play a role and i certainly hope that city staff engages in dialogue and there may well be but i but i your comments also make me think that maybe others also probably others also listening or or you know with us here or at home don't know kind of what the plan is that's that's in place right now that's kind of been under you know in the works for a couple of months really uh so you know we we all know so we were just acting on the specific kind of legal action necessary for tonight but but i you know just to put broad strokes around it there is water delivery now the state of emergency allows that potable and non-potable water but it's uh to extend a period of time where homeowners can assess what what steps they would need to take to get to the basic level of code compliance that will enable us to connect water to them because we can't connect to something that is that that has sort of life health safety perils involved and that the the general ideas have that assessed either through courtesy inspection by the city or or some other means take take those necessary steps and then and then connect at the edge of the estate and there's a fee that to be paid for that just as you know well you know impact fees so that that's the general path it's it's the tent the emergency action allows delivery of water to allow time for assessment of safety health you know and kind of peril situations to be addressed so that then if if if residents choose to if all the landowners choose to you know they can pay to connect to the city that at the edge of the property that's the kind of overall plan i don't know if i welcome anyone to correct me if i did the broad strokes wrong yeah and i think there was really good information in the work session this morning council member armature has a question yeah actually it's more of a um an announcement request i'm just in the process now of requesting a staff report uh from community development to have have someone from community development meet with mr montoya and to come up with a staff report on you know what kinds of possibilities might an organization like habitat be able to offer uh in a situation like this and even leaving it open to um other mobile home communities just kind of what possibilities are out there which is related because it's mobile home communities and it's been brought up there other it's not i mean if you're talking about this specific mobile home community i understand but other ones are not part of this topic well it's been brought out there are you have you concluded your comments i suppose thank you mayor pro tem yeah thank you thank you john and and i appreciate your your your words and succinctly to answer your question regarding this disaster the help we could use is one um provide names and addresses of those affected by the emergency we don't have that you could also help by um speaking on behalf of the city favorably so that people can take advantage of the free home inspections that's been refused that those representatives have advised them to reject so those two things opens the door for communication and if you can do that it'd be greatly appreciated we can't help if we're not invited in okay uh i just have one question of clarification john if you don't mind because you mentioned substandard housing several times um and i guess outside of the lack of water is there something else that you're aware of that is a that is substandard about these housing i mean the city hasn't been able to inspect but are you just saying substandard because we're having to deliver water in this fashion yes sir okay i appreciate that thank you very much okay all right i see no more questions thank you may i respond to his question uh sure well was briefly where was that a question or a comment did you have a question it was a comment but i mean yeah it can be a question i'd love to hear okay all right um well we're actively right now trying to liaise between uh the city and uh the families we're working with the families uh and primarily with lulac to um organize a kind of a pre-inspection of the homes to to help the families really feel comfortable with the city coming in and allow them to experience it with our uh skilled volunteers our engineers that um that really are are familiar with everything that needs to be done and so uh we're actively working right now with with lulac to do that now as far as uh time frames go you know that we're not sure how long that's going to take but i just wanted to assure you that we are we are working uh to to hopefully bring to the point where the city can come in and do those inspections those um those voluntary inspections so okay all right right councilmember melzer yeah i just want to express appreciation that's i know habitat knows city code well and you've been through the drill and i think uh your ability to provide expertise in a way that'll be received uh is super helpful at this time i appreciate that i just do want to thank you all for all that you're doing thank you appreciate you very much appreciate you thank you so much sir uh the next speaker will be elva hernandez and again thank you for your uh volunteering for the translation thank you just name and address good evening my name is elva hernandez i'm from green tree estates and i live in 6509 willow lane denton texas 76208 i want to thank you for all that you're doing uh for my community until now i want to tell you that we have tried to cooperate with what they have asked us there are many requirements that they are asking us that for now we have been able to give a lot of information to the city but we are working to get what we need there have been lots um there have been lots of things uh that that you have done and we have appreciated um the cooperation there's also been a lot of requirements that you have asked for us and i wanted to let you know that we're working towards addressing those requirements and definitely we do not want to leave our houses because we have made a secure and safe community for our families we ask that you please extend the emergency declaration uh from may 2020 until may 2021 because the time that you have given us is very inhumane for us to be able to accomplish all of the things that you are asking of us and also to be able to pay for all of the fees that the staff have told us and share with us to be able to connect to the water meter [Spanish] in the previous meetings with the city um you had given us a rate [Spanish] yesterday we were given a new rate that is much much higher and almost doubles our cost and makes it even much more difficult for us to be able to afford it [Spanish] if you're worried about our security and health [Spanish] then why are you trying to extend the denton landfill [Spanish] and because um an extension of the landfill would also affect all of denton residents including my own community [Spanish] so where is your worry about us and about our safety [Spanish] we don't want to leave our homes [Spanish] and we're working very hard to be able to comply with all of the requirements that you have presented to us [Spanish] thank you a couple of questions uh council member council member armature [Spanish] thank you elva [Spanish] so you you were in the work session so you heard [Spanish] there was some uncertainty as i heard it about uh you know what exactly [Spanish] that residents have given and what has been requested [Spanish] so i hope that uh can get sorted out uh i know i i have the list of all of the the residences and i i passed it on to staff um and asking what else is needed in addition to that [Spanish] my question for you is if if it were up to you [Spanish] to to determine how long you get how much time you get [Spanish] can you take us through kind of step by step [Spanish] what kinds of decisions you think you will be making uh before the inspection after the inspection or do you know now uh whether or not you're going to hook hook your home up to city water [Spanish] so first of all i really need you to support us [Spanish] you're asking us to investigate um who the owners of the roads are and i think you know and i don't understand why um you're asking for that information and making it um so difficult for us [Spanish] and we will continue just working to be able to afford the prices to connect to the water or oh she's still talking [Spanish] because we definitely don't want to go anywhere and she's shown you this sheet um i believe that was she didn't say this but i believe just so that you know that is the first um one of the first flyers of or items of information that was provided to the residents with list of homeless shelters so she's saying that they are not homeless and they intend to stay in their homes thank you so much for for answering my question [Spanish] it sounds to me like you are are trying to figure out what the city wants [Spanish] while trying to stay in your home and saving up the money that you will be [Spanish] thank you thank you for answering councilmembers so i have two questions one i want a little slower sorry two questions um one i would like um a little more information about the rate change um that was the first time that i heard that it was different and where that came from and where the first rate came from [Spanish] so the first rate that she's talking about was given to her on december 10th [Spanish] and the the amount was seven thousand five hundred and ninety six for each of the water meter per household [Spanish] yeah and so yesterday when we had the the meeting with city staff then we were given this rate which i believe was the rate the table that was shown in the powerpoint presentation today which was much much higher than what was given in december councilmember briggs if the city manager could address that i think there's an explanation why there might be an interpretation right well i i also wanted to make sure that it wasn't the water for for the water the rate was different [Spanish] but the city man you can address that for her yeah what what we showed the residents is the same slide that we showed council this the slide that we showed last yesterday evening in the community meeting [Spanish] is the same slide we showed this earlier this afternoon with council can i can address that so if i can clarify please i think where the confusion lies is in the handout that was passed out in council today [Spanish] it's where the per family yeah yeah it's where council is still deciding on how to split out that line and tap which was the eight thousand dollars [Spanish] so if you look at the slide handed out today [Spanish] if you look at the slide and it shows that if 14 people sign up [Spanish] then it would be that i think i'm doing this by memory the 6900 plus that 600 or some odd dollars which is probably going to be real close to what the first letter said [Spanish] yeah because i'm looking at the slide that or the letter that was handed out [Spanish] which i believe matches close to the amount that was on that original letter [Spanish] i'm sorry council member riggs for interrupting you no thank you i just wanted to make sure that that clarification was was out there yes thank you yeah council member council member melzer thank you for taking time again to come and speak with us [Spanish] i'd like to understand do you feel that so much more time would be needed than you know what is being proposed because you feel it would take that much time to identify what needs to be done and to do that work or is it that it would take that much time to save up the money to pay for that work to be done [Spanish] but right now everything worries me okay or i'm worried about all of the above i understand worry we have to you know identify how to move how to move to actions you know that can get to a better place [Spanish] if if it's if it's time to save up the money i wonder if it would make a difference if uh some entity i'm just thinking out loud were to provide financing maybe a maybe a housing oriented charitable organization could provide house uh financing for the cost so that the work could be done sooner that the payments take place over time it's just a thought council member davis excuse me hi uh just a couple quick questions um you said you live on willow lane is that correct yes okay do you rent or own your home [Spanish] okay and do you know which of your neighbors rent or own have you all been talking about that in the neighborhood [Spanish] [Spanish] i don't know exactly who owns or who rents that's all is it okay thank you okay thank you very much thank you thank you all right i do have a question uh not for y'all i'm sorry for but i'll wait till you get back there so you can translate my question so council member armature you had stated that you had given staff a list of addresses name and etc is that correct i i forwarded uh to them what lulac had uh i believe given us at some earlier point i thought and i asked yeah okay no that's fine i thought you had some other information that we didn't already have uh okay are you requesting to speak at this time we have a couple more speakers oh i can wait till the next speaker okay i just put myself in the queue okay uh our next speaker will be alfredo contreras oh mayor protem did you have something before the speaker comes up yes while he's coming down could could we get a clear record or get a copy of the the origin of the email council member um council member armature sent again the broad terms lulac being used i'm trying to nail that down with some specificity so if you can forward me a copy or just kind of for the record state who that individual was yeah and if we could because we're still trying to translate some of this as well so sorry yeah yeah okay yeah she's just going to summarize for you hello my name is alfredo contreras and i live in 4055 ash lane denton texas 76208 i'm the owner of the property he said it in english oh okay okay all right yeah all right sorry got you yeah my head is yeah sorry i apologize i apologize yes um basically what i wanted to say what i wanted to share with you i think i think he needs to get a little closer to the mic or oh oh the translator not hearing the translation okay in this occasion in the meeting um last night salimos un poco confundidos we were a bit confused por la situación del costo del medidor because of the cost um that was shared with with us uh about the water meter uh just like my neighbor said that the cost was in the upper 7 000 that was the price that was given to us on the 10th of december y ayer en la noche y y ayer en la noche and yesterday night cuando nos presentaron el el folleto donde había diferentes precios dependiendo del de la cantidad de personas que se conectaron and and yesterday when they presented to us the flyer or the slide with the where the amount depended on the number of people that would connect uh that was a situation that was not shared with us um on the 10th of december so yo pienso que en cada reunión so i think that in each meeting nos están poniendo cada vez más bloqueos para que nosotros no podamos avanzar ni recibir la ayuda del agua so that in each meeting you're putting more barriers or more challenges um so that we cannot receive any more help related to our water quiero que ustedes hagan conciencia y que sean sensibles we want you to have um a conscience and be sensitive or sensible too que nosotros no somos familias ricas que somos familias pobres that we are not wealthy families we are poor families so it is hard for us to save money uh especially an amount that keeps changing every single time we meet he tenido la oportunidad de platicar con algunos compañeros i have had the opportunity to talk to some of my neighbors la respuesta que ellos me han dado y ellos no están dispuestos a conectarse al agua de la ciudad por causa del costo alto and what they've shared with me is that they're not willing to connect to the city meter because of the high cost la única solución que que se pudieran conectar es solamente que nos den facilidades de pago pienso que de esa manera todos se pueden conectar the the only solution that i can see to be able to have anyone connected to the water meters is that you provide some kind of way to make payments and that i want you to be conscious and to be sensible and aware of the fact that we don't have the money that's being passed over us i i would have agreed to pay the amount that was shared with us and that we were told on december 10th but it's very difficult for me to pay the amount that is now being presented to us unless there is some form of options for payment and when it comes to the inspections i don't have a problem that you come into my house unless you tell me when you're coming and scott was wandering around the neighborhood and i gave him information about my property and until today i have not received an answer i asked them what the requirements were so that i can put a put a mobile home and until now i have not received a response about the requirements i don't i don't know if they're doing their job or not but i have not received a response yes thank you all this is all that i have to say and i do want to thank you for the help that you have provided to solve the temporary problem related to our water access and we are looking for some kind of permanent solution thank you i have a question just of clarification i thought i heard you say that you were able to pay the amounts that were listed in the letter of december the 10th did i hear that okay yes that's correct okay um okay that's what i need to know thank you very much appreciate that a couple of questions council member armature thank you for for speaking and i also wanted to thank you for welcoming me into your home which is very warm and cozy with lots of food and love and and a wonderful kiddo over there so you you and and beatrice you you own your home and you also own land elsewhere at green tree uh and would you say that your situation is unique i'll say it seems to me that everybody's situation is unique in some way i was wondering if you could reflect on that yes and on the difficulty of being asked to uh i'm just going to speak collectively for the group and also for yourselves as individuals i think that and this is why all the requirements that are being asked for us are difficult for everybody because in part not everybody has the same the exact same situation and that you all understand that we all don't share the exact same situation and we don't all share the exact same resources or ways to be able to get money to play to pay for the water meters okay can i ask a follow-up question to that yes real quick yeah so yeah would uh would you prefer moving forward would would you prefer just just speaking for yourself a more individualized approach where each individual family or household had to answer questions and could ask questions to the city individually much as i i've never been asked to coordinate any effort like this for my neighborhood that we've never been asked uh yeah that's something that's never been asked of us and we need much more communication between green tree and city council but communication that's also directed individually gracias councilman melzer thank you for coming don't go away first i have a question for staff no no i'm saying don't go away okay so could could you uh can i get some clarification on the cost difference from december 10th to last night well i i explained that that the only the only cost difference is the the paradigm of do you split out that total cost by 14 or do you make it a pro rata share to the number of people that that sign up yeah so that that's the difference i mean if you split it out by 14 it's the same it's the same price that was presented on the 10th okay so is that stuff has that been translated yes well yes i think so yeah okay um yeah okay um i would just be i'm reiterating the question i think i know the answer that because the speaker has been clear that if if some element of the community in the sort of housing area were to step up and provide financing that might address the issue thank you okay i see no more questions for the speaker guys thank you thank you our last last speaker is mariela junes sorry i didn't want to i wanted to get the translation in but i apologize for that and i believe her time will be eight minutes as well because she'll be translating for herself it's my understanding sure uh good evening buenas noches my name is mariela nuñez james i live in 3449 lake country drive here in denton 7620 i'm just going to read an email that you've all read already but i want to share it with the public that was a collaboration between movimiento cosecha denton which i represent and also lulac the league of united latin american citizens here in denton so following a december 10th 29 work session and december 19th meeting between city staff and the residents of green tree there were several things that were agreed upon as steps forward one to give an extension of the emergency declaration for 100 days through may 20th an assurance of the continuing provision of non-potable water with billing to begin on february 13 the offering of voluntary courtesy inspections and the residents were asked for confirmation of roads and easements in response residents that are here present with the assistance of lulac and movimiento cosecha denton have taken the following steps in an attempt to create accounts for water billing residents were informed that the required documents to open an account were being reviewed in response to a request from council member them our mentor customer service staff research and updated the city's 11 year old customer service id requirement policy to conform to tml's more inclusive recommendations of 2009 to include a matricula consular foreign or universal driver's license passport or any acceptable combination of id as outlined in the i-9 form this policy change effective january 24th 2020 was published in the final january 2020 staff report and announced by council member our mentor shortly thereafter since then the residents began to process the process of creating these accounts and i want to just underscore here that this is a change that was not preempted by the situation in green tree it's something it's a request that came from somebody else but that the changes also are changes that affect everybody in denton whether they reside in green tree or not and it's a step forward especially for those who don't have access to a driver's license for whatever reason residents obtain a document called a dedication that confirms the annexation of green tree to the county of denton in 1970 this document was shared with a legal expert along with the annexation documents and residents were told that a preliminary reading of the document indicated that there should be no impediments to the city to provide water however residents were advised to seek out the expertise of lawyers specializing in zoning and city development a very niche field and we are in the process of seeking that help which is hard to find in the meantime during the december 19th meeting residents sought answers about the kind of documentation required by the city to offer confirmation of roads and easements and no clear indication was given as to exactly what documents and what type of information would provide confirmation of road ownership and easements and no clearing of indication was also given as to the requirement to provide a list with names of residents and whether they were owners or renters residents also inquired with fair housing experts and sought legal advice about the courtesy inspections offered by city staff and given the city's previous discussions and communications regarding shelter options and the possibilities of condemnation or displacement residents were advised not to allow city staff into their homes for courtesy inspections instead they were advised to request as an alternative a courtesy q a group meeting with city staff about the inspection requirements from day one the residents of green tree have been proactively taking every step possible to collaborate with the city and also to stay in their homes and you heard those testimonies tonight and you've heard them at every single work session residents are preparing for the the inspections you heard that tonight from habitat for humanity and need time to decide what to do next to raise money to cover repairs and to cover the cost of connecting to a water meter so we're asking council to extend the emergency declaration until a year and to consider following that up with a 12 months extension as agreed previously so that the residents then have the ability to coordinate all this effort to communicate with advocates to look at possible alternatives to be able to finance some of the requirements that are being asked of them and i just want to to stress what the residents have said tonight to really think about the proactive steps that they have made those those far the fact that you know in spanish le han dado bastante ganas you know they have put their hearts and their souls into collaborating with you into learning a process that is completely alien to them for some of them this is the very first time that they've come to council that they've spoken in a microphone that takes a lot and they're doing that they're taking those kinds of risks they're willing to learn new things to do new things because they want to stay in their homes and because they want to provide a safe environment for for their kids i have it written in spanish so i'll find the the spanish version of the email okay so you i mean we got about a little less than two minutes so you'd get that in in that time i'll try if i find it um but the residents have seen it um okay and they have a copy on their phones okay this question is foreign foreign but you're saying they do have a copy of that in spanish okay all right i think believe council member melzer has a question or comment you know actually i remembered what i had intended to ask the previous speaker if you'll forgive me um i wanted to confirm that uh you know my understanding which was that he was uh quite open to having the city come and provide a courtesy inspection it's only a matter of arranging the time and if that's the case i would i would ask that staff communicate uh with the previous speaker tonight captures information and agree on a time okay would you mind maybe passing that along and if staff could get with them to to get that uh time sort of coordinator at least a contact way to contact appreciate that um okay see no one else wishing to speak thank you very much so we'll wait till she gets back to her seat to um and so we still have a motion i don't know what the motion is um but there is a motion on the board um so i'm gonna let me wait till she gets seated okay uh council member armature i want to get your motion stated so we can either get a second and or discussion so i want to make a motion to extend the effective period of the declaration of emergency disaster to may 22nd 2021 or unless everybody if if people with with the condition that if people have if all the residents there have have found a solution for themselves before then then obviously it would need to go that long but to set some some nice padding to give them some time okay all right uh we have a second before i open up for questions or discussion i have a motion i'm sorry uh chair looks for a second on that particular motion that was made and then we'll have a discussion council member breaks um i will second so we can have discussion okay mayor pro tem is yours about the motion or do you want to hold that i'll hold it all right any other uh discussion on the motion and the second so for anyone who saw earlier the conversation was slow down just they're translating yeah no no go ahead go ahead no yeah go ahead i usually don't have that problem um okay so earlier we discussed um coming back april 22nd which was a month before and that this council would then look at the extension that's being requested to see who has started an initiating the process and for those who have started initiating and have started um doing the work those extensions or that extension would likely be considered at that time okay council member melzer um i want to be very clear that we always have the option to extend so um you know i i'd like to see if there are other comments i'll probably be offering a motion to amend actually i see this is being oh this is well i'll be offering a motion to amend um because i would like to see what progress is made and how things look at that time and there's nothing that prevents us from taking longer if we need to but i don't think it necessarily helps um focus action to say nothing needs to happen until a year okay council member armater yeah i just wanted to thank my colleagues for those comments and yeah it's up it's absolutely true that uh this could be extended at after may 22nd um and i actually came into uh this meeting tonight just planning to move to approve uh the extension to may may 22nd of this year um and if my motion fails i'll still approve it but i was thinking about uh you know earlier this evening when you know we we voted and i voted yes to uh two uh contracts for actually three um where we said uh with with money not with time but uh we're gonna you know need pipes and uh we're getting permission to get up to 18 million dollars in pipes but we're probably not going to need nearly anything near that much so uh and then we had a another kind of similar vote on another issue and i voted yes to that too and uh so the way i feel about this is we're kind of doing the same thing with time we're saying might not need all that time but why not put some extra padding in it's it's it's just time after all it's not it's not a taxpayer's dollars okay all right uh any more comments councillor melzer so yeah again uh underscoring my uh for everyone here that there's nothing taking the the ops attack of of council member armature there's nothing that prevents us from extending but i i would amend i offer to amend back to the in the original uh time of may 22nd 2020 council member davis i second the motion to amend okay mayor pro tem discussion right on that amendment yes okay uh back to the timeline that uh posted uh my piggybacking on council member melzer's request for staff to speak with mr can teres contraries i think i'm close yes uh i i would i would ask staff the opposite too if staff touches base with him and he does not want to schedule a time i would like to know that okay so um yeah yeah you got okay thank you all right just so everybody understands what the procedural posture is right now which sometimes i wonder why we make amendments to an underlying motion instead of voting on it because then it gets all confusing so this is this is the the posture an original motion was made to extend the disaster to may 22nd of 2021 and was seconded that is the underlying that's the the main motion on the floor there was an amendment made to change that date from 2021 to 2020 that motion was seconded so now we're going to vote on the amendment if the amendment passes in essence what it does is it substitutes in that motion the date 2020 instead of 2021 so what we'd be voting on essentially is a motion to um extend the emergency declaration to may the 20 22nd 2020 can i speak first uh well uh yes but you i mean are you still are is the motion still on the table i'm i'm going to express my support of this amendment in uh in this new motion but i want to explain just explain why to the public well it's not a new motion we haven't got back yeah it's not a new motion so so you're not withdrawing your motion yeah so i that's what i mean i will i will withdraw the motion because i see right so so let me understand so if i withdraw this motion then we go back to the original or no if you withdraw the motion we start all over and somebody can make a motion for a different time okay so but can i so i would like to speak first um so i am i am going to be uh pulling this motion and supporting the original motion because i'm i'm counting and i see uh don't have the number of votes to make this decision right now um but i don't see this as a split on council on this issue uh i feel like we're all agreed that this can be extended um yeah at uh at a further date closer to that time um so i i just i wanted to make that clear uh and that that that's why i'm going to be removing this but i wanted to just note that uh in my motion i hadn't asked to increase the amount of money i still wanted to keep it at that a hundred thousand dollars uh so i i didn't i only wanted to add more time not more money still a hundred thousand dollars cap and by the way only what thirty thousand ish has been spent so far um so i i want to applaud uh the city and city staff and residents of you know green tree on coming out with a pretty thrifty plan we you know set a high cap and uh i don't think that it's going to hit that by may at this pace so i i will remove my motion and i will be supporting this next one okay so you're you've removed your motion so that motion is no longer active and i want to say for clarification we've heard a lot of talk here about extensions beyond may 22nd 2020 totally understand that but there's no guarantee of that i mean if we're here if people are saying that that's going to happen it very well may happen but there's no guarantee of that so i don't want people to walk out of here thinking that uh that's an automatic uh but i don't want people walking out here thinking that that can happen i just want there to be a balanced understanding of the process because it seems like we've had a there's been questions or comments about a miscommunication so i want to make sure that that's very clear all right uh mayor pro tem did you withdraw your request to speak yes sir i was going to call the question to get to the vote all right all right so help me understand pardon the underlying motion has been withdrawn therefore the amendment does that drop down to a motion or does the amendment fade because there's no motion for it to attach to and then when we start over with a new motion yeah let's say we start with a new vote okay all right council member melzer okay so um i'll i'll move the uh uh the may 22nd 2020 extension uh and uh underscore uh the mayor's point that it means we can revisit it but there's no certainty about the outcome and you know part of my uh standing for the time that's expressed is i think council others can speak for themselves but i think council would like to see progress on the ground okay council member davis i'll second the motion we have a motion to second for agenda item 5f let's vote please motion carries seven zero we're going to take a five minute break welcome everybody back to this meeting of the dent city council on february the fourth 2020 we're in our items for individual and items for individual consideration agenda five and we'll move on to 5g it is 8 38 pm we'll call this caption agenda item 5g is considered adoption of an ordinance of the city of dent texas a home rule municipal corporation authorizing the city manager to execute a contract with wordzilla north america inc and understanding as council member briggs and council member armator have recused themselves all right good evening mayor uh council terry nalte assistant general manager dme we talked to you tonight about uh some capital expenses capital maintenance expenses that we are requesting your authority for at the denton energy center we operate the the deck to achieve the highest possible availability on each engine this is important because anytime that the engines are not available to operate in the marketplace when market prices are high it means that customers are exposed to those high market prices and so consequently all of our units our goal is to have them available every hour of the summer and winter when prices are very high we call it summer readiness for the summer outages these are mechanical pieces of equipment much like the engine in your car and consequently they are subject to breakdowns occasionally despite our efforts to maintain them and to keep them in top shape so having spare parts that are available on the shelf at the site enable us to minimize the amount of downtime that we might have in the event of an outage it avoids shipping delays and enables us to put parts in onto the machines immediately we're seeking your approval to make this expenditure this year we have 3.9 million dollars of remaining bond funds from the original denton energy center bond issuance we intend to use that money to purchase these capital spare parts and the purchase of these and the storage of them at the site would be considered uh industry best practices to maintain the highest level of availability and with that i'm going to turn it over to jason brown our plant manager who will give you the details on the specifics oh okay we got more slides of what i'm hearing unless you're ready no go ahead go ahead good evening council jason brown plant manager of the denton energy center so as terry stated we are trying to achieve the highest possible availability and the way to achieve that is through preventative maintenance and spare parts we're requesting the approval of additional spare parts as the best solution of reducing our downtime during routine maintenance and premature failures that cause force outages and the next few slides i'll briefly be discussing routine maintenance schedules parts and the benefit of these parts to help you understand why this proposed purchase of an additional two million dollars is the long-term solution to achieve our objective as we go through please feel free to ask any questions at any time so the denton energy center is much like your your car just like terry said it must be maintained routinely as recommended by the manufacturer to operate correctly this is called preventative maintenance program where preventative corrective and predictive maintenance activities occur many components require routine maintenance to proactively inspect for wear premature failure and critical components must be repaired repaired or replaced the preventative maintenance activities are performed consistent with manufacturers guidelines based on operating hours this this chart depicts our current estimate of when these major maintenance activities will occur major maintenance activities require a shutdown of individual engines or units but we want to minimize the length of time that they're unavailable for generation the first major maintenance outage takes place when the units reach 12 000 hours we currently estimate that to occur in 2024 however since the units are dispatched against the ericott market 12 000 hours could be either earlier or later dependent on on projections in actual runtime this slide lists the parts that were that are currently installed on the units and what we're requesting as swing sets the term swing set recognizes that as the first set of parts are installed the removed parts are sent out for rebuild or recondition the reconditioned parts return to the deck they're placed back in the warehouse until the next unit comes up for its maintenance interval when when the cycle starts all over again they're removed out of the warehouse the parts are taken off of the the current engine and then the parts that are removed get sent back out for reconditioning and then returned again and get put back in the warehouse this this swapping of parts is where the term swing set comes from when we receive these parts they'll be inspected and placed into a warehouse that's constructed at the dent energy center the swing set parts will be warranted for 12 months upon install or 18 months after arrival whichever occurs earlier while it's likely that the swing set will no longer be under warranty when they're installed as soon as the rebuilt parts come back from the shop under our master service agreement they will have a warranty from the service aspect and then shortly installed on the next unit so they will they will have some some aspect of a warranty on it once and once installed and just to be clear that the warranty period has ended um it ended in april of 2019 so the warranty that would be on these parts are solely from the master service agreement that we put in place a couple months ago so as terry stated our objective is to make the units available as often as possible to generate the most revenue from the market the swing set enables us to reduce the downtime because uh because we have the parts on hand and to schedule the major maintenance during times when the market prices are the lowest so fall early spring also having parts on hand will minimize downtime in the event of forced outages so the other benefit to purchasing the swing sets now are that we'll be paying 2019 parts prices instead of an escalated uh five percent or or an estimated five percent increase uh with later purchases parts on hand in the event that we have unforeseen forced outages due to premature component failure and most importantly having swing sets on site will reduce the major overhauls by up to 20 days as compared to 45 to 65 days without swing sets so in in summary we're proactively preparing for the future outages that we're projecting to start in 2024 these parts are intended to reduce the outage durations to help maximize revenue potential and we are requesting approval of a sole source purchase of major overhaul swing sets and they may out in the amount of two million 28 thousand nine hundred and seventy dollars to wardzilla to be funded from the three point nine million that remains from the original revenue bond and also this slide here we have uh some turbos down at the bottom we were planning on bringing it to to council today for approval as well but we didn't make it okay any questions council member davis so every time we talk about the deck we're talking in millions of dollars sometimes it's millions of dollars that we've made millions of dollars to the black because we've sold a lot of power and sometimes it's millions of dollars because we need to buy lubricating oils or parts or maintenance or whatever the only thing that really concerns me about this item is something i think i read earlier in the presentation and that we didn't account for this in the original capital outlay we didn't make a this sounds like a great maintenance plan it sounds like exactly the way we ought to do it but you're saying that we didn't account for that in the first capital plan for funding the deck not that i know of no sir okay it would be helpful to me and meaning no criticism one way or the other would be very helpful to me if we could get some kind of projection i know we see the pro forma's every budget year for the deck and how much we expect to spend on maintenance and capital outlay but if we could see that broken down in one form or another to know when the next million dollar agenda item is coming along um it'd be helpful to us to i think for me personally be able to answer some questions constituent have when these items hit the agenda councilman davis as you know i was not here when the deck originally was approved there were a number of things that were in the original pro forma for the deck two of those items were this set of spare parts and the warehouse which will we bring back to you um those were not approved in the in the final authorization of the bond funds so i think from a operations perspective we knew that these prices or these these components would be required but there was a conscious decision i don't know whether it was by the council or by city management but those costs were excluded we do provide and we will as part of our our annual budget a 10-year forecast on both revenues and costs operating and capital spares capital costs um as part of our budget submission and in fact it's in the current budget that we're operating under today can i ask a follow-up sure i i really appreciate that and i and i do understand that um maintenance is built into the operating costs if we could get just a little bit more granular um what we expect some of those particular operating particular maintenance items to be it just seems like every few agendas we've got a work solo sole source item um and i need to have good answers for people will provide that to you and you know unfortunately many of these parts are only manufactured by warzilla jason mentioned the turbos turbos are we actually found competitors for that and that's why it's separated from this it's actually part of the swing set but we were able to get competitive bids on the turbos and we do look each time we go out to procure to see if there's a competitor to warzilla for these parts okay chair would entertain uh action on this item council member ryan with approval council member davis second the motion all right we have a motion and a second for agenda item 5g let's vote please motion carries five zero with two recusals if someone could invite the council members back in we'll carry forward we're now moving towards our public portion public hearing portion of the agenda agenda items eight 8a is hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of denton texas approving a specific use permit to allow for multi-family dwelling use on an approximately 15.34 acres of land generally located on the northwest corner of duchess drive in loop 288 i will now open the public hearing we'll hear staff presentation take any questions from council for staff and then we'll take public comment good evening i'm julie wyatt senior planner with the city of denton excuse me uh presenting s 1912 d to you tonight denton grove apartments the request before you is for a specific use permit for a multi-family development dwelling development on approximately 15 acres the subject property is at the the northwest intersection of loop 288 and duchess drive this was submitted prior to october 1 so they are following the 2002 denton development code for the development regulations and this may look familiar to you there was a resolution that you saw in august of this year providing a no objection to the application for affordable and market road housing so just a comparison of the 2002 zoning map to the 2019 the subject property and under the 2002 uh zoning map has a zoning designation of cmg that's community mixed use general that transitioned in 2019 to suburban corridor multi-family developments are permitted in both zoning districts with a specific use permit which is why we're here tonight the sup for criteria the criteria for approval for an sup under the 2002 denton development code is in sub chapter six i won't read all of these it is in your backup but we will be touching on these as we discuss the project so first of all we look at zoning does it comply with the zoning under as i said under the 2002 it had the community mixed use general zoning the proposal does meet all of the dimensional parking and landscape requirements there are two site design deviations that they're requesting that if it's approved tonight it would go forward to the planning and zoning commission tomorrow night for an alternative development plan that's for the design of the interior private street system as well as the the percentage of building frontage along the the front property line under the 2019 uh zoning the the suburban corridor it does meet all the requirements except for tree preservation um it also uh when it when it went forward to pnz let me let me make sure i understand i thought you i heard you say that it's going for an adp tomorrow to pnz for a couple things could you go back over those you bet so um for sub chapter 13 and the 2002 denton development code requires a specific design for the internal street system for multifamily over three acres um and and so they are asking a request or requesting a deviation from that design specifically to move the the um kind of the sidewalk the internal sidewalk adjacent to the parking spaces removing that parkway and moving that behind the um the sidewalk so it would be parking space curb landing pad sidewalk and then landscape area and then buildings so that is one request that they're proposing the other request is the the 2002 ddc required um that 50 percent of the frontage along the front property line had to have buildings within 20 feet of that front property line they are proposing a little less than that and to to move the buildings back a little further from loop 288 so those two deviations is what they would move forward with thank you appreciate it uh they are uh so the only 2019 ddc requirement they aren't meeting is that tree preservation they they um they were originally just going to meet the 2002 street tree requirements however during pnz they offer to to meet the 2019 street tree requirements so your landscape plan in the backup does show the compliance with the 2019 street trees the future land use designated designation of the subject property is community mixed use this is intended to provide a mix of uses where commercial uses are the primary use however residential uses are as a complementary use are appropriate it's to encourage diverse uses that are located close to each other to to create dynamic places that are vibrant that have a wide variety of the different types of uses that the code would permit multifamily is consistent with the future land use map as it does provide that complementary residential use to support the commercial uses in the area and specifically for this site it does provide a physical buffer so if you'll look at the subject property and where it is in relationship to the um to loop 288 the mckinney corridor and then the moderate density residential future land use adjacent where this property sits provides that transition area allowing more compatible residential uses near that moderate residential so it does provide that transition area compatibility with surrounding uses the surrounding uses are primarily commercial we've got some undeveloped commercial property adjacent as well as multifamily and some moderate residential the proposed use is consistent with these surrounding uses and we don't anticipate any any negative impacts or nuisances with these uses being adjacent to each other so it does it is compatible with the surrounding uses we also look at the infrastructure with an sup so they did do a tia in in uh conjunction with this request the trip generation for the use would uh would create about 2000 trips within a 24-hour weekday 125 morning peak and then the evening peak is about 146 there were recommendations associated with that tia tia kind of near near-term recommendations and the long-term recommendations the first near-term would be to restripe the lanes on duchess drive to allow for uh for a dedicated left turn onto the loop as well as a dedicated right turn onto the loop that would help that intersection move more smoothly and then eventually that traffic signal there it does meet those warrants with the with the proposal and so as as the area develops that we anticipate a light at duchess in loop 288 did you say it meets warrants now yes it does meet warrants now so what uh eventually we're probably going to talk about the process of if it meets warrants now how do we go about getting approval uh from text dot to put a signal light in there either contemporaneously with this or even before this actually gets on the ground if it gets approved because that's going to add sure um so i talked to engineering about this and and right now as developments are coming into the area they are paying into it as far as impact fees and toward that warrant so so really that's how that that um that signal would get built constructed as as developments come in and paying into to the the fund to construct that that signal at that intersection do you know do you know how much is in the fund now and how much the signal costs i do not know that information yeah if if there's a way we could maybe get that information during this presentation if it's possible if not okay but not to understand that thank you so um access to the site is going to be off of both loop 288 as well as duchess drive the loop 288 access will not be full access it will allow for a a left into the site and a right into the site but it will not allow for a left out of the site due to the way that that median is constructed so if you can kind of see this this um diagram right here this median right here prevents that left turn lane out of the out of the development so instead the full the full access will be from duchess drive so you'll see that the full access um from duchess drive provides both left and right as well as the entrance in there will be pedestrian facilities constructed as a result of the development they would have to extend sidewalks on both duchess drive and on loop 288 and there is transit near the the subject property it is on didn't connect route four um there are some some gaps in the sidewalk along loop 288 and as the properties along loop 288 develop we anticipate that that sidewalk network will be completed as it's constructed concurrently with development there's water and sewer available at the site there will be some extensions for water other infrastructure we look at there is city-owned parkland across the street it hasn't it's for future development it it hasn't been developed yet um so uh so it does not meet that 10 minute to a walk park standard that that parks likes to use however they are providing some on-site recreational amenities that will fill in those gaps so they're proposing a a pool a couple of of play areas as well as some passive open recreation space and an enclosed dog park the site would generate 34 elementary students 14 middle school students and 17 high school students and there is a fire station within half a mile of the site here's the proposed site plan they are proposing 12 residential buildings plus a a club house it would would amount to 276 dwelling units and 568 parking spaces they are proposing bicycle parking as well as i mentioned there are the two access points here's the loop 288 and duchess drive perimeter fencing as well as controlled access gates as i said active recreation including the pool and the playgrounds and those passive recreation areas we've got some grills and seating area here open spaces to the south the dot the enclosed dog park is proposed for for this location and then playgrounds in this location and here they also have provided a proposed landscape plan as i said the street trees as proposed would conform to the 2019 requirements which is one street tree every 30 linear feet they're also proposing internal landscape islands islands with trees throughout and there is the type c buffer that's required adjacent to the commercial here's a sample of the building elevations this elevation here shows what is proposed along loop 288 and then these would be the internal buildings notification was sent out the there is an addition to the notification map i just want to point out to you we do have a response a favorable response from the property owner here so the the responses in favor come to 16 percent 16.32 percent and then opposition is the 29.24 percent they did hold a neighborhood meeting in december and then here's just to show you the that additional response we received in favor of the of the request so so this item did go before the planning and zoning commission in december they recommended denial so therefore in order for the specific use permit to become effective three fourths of the members of city council quality qualified to vote must vote to approve the request staff did analyze the project and against the criteria for approval and so we recommend approval we feel it meets that criteria for approval we do have some conditions that we're recommending first that they do need to seek that alternative development plan with the planning and zoning commission that the landscaping in the attached landscape plan would reflect that intent to comply with the ddc however that we there could be minor alterations particularly things like plant selection depending on what is available at the time would be able to be approved by by city staff parking area light fixtures would be determinant building permit but they would need to comply with all dentin development code requirements the zoning map should reflect that sup on the the property consistent with the 2019 ddc and then notwithstanding the limited approvals and in conditions one two and three the city does reserve the right to require approval by ordinance of any amendments to that sup the next section really kind of lays out just what's in the site plan and in the landscape plan when these ordinances go forward sometimes when they're reproduced they those site plans and landscape plans get a little difficult to read so we kind of just lay out in text what those general parameters are so so really this is just laying out with what the site plan and landscape plan reflect i did want to point out that as part of this recommendation staff does recommend that we would at the staff level would be able to approve a reduction in lot coverage increase in landscape area or a decrease in the number of dwelling units and associated parking by any amount and that staff would have the ability to improve small increases up to and including five percent of those amounts specified in in requirements two through four things like the dwelling units and number of parking spaces with that i will stand for any questions and the applicant is here councilmember armature yeah can you go back to the slide with the the opposition sure the two and the two so looking at that can you speak to are these two in the two owners of commercial properties or empty lots uh just raw land i mean there's that there aren't residences right there in those areas right no ma'am there there is just um one uh office development in this location the rest is is undeveloped property okay yeah so it's so there so that's who is expressing the opposition the property owners of those yeah of the raw land okay thanks okay councilmember melzer maybe it's just me but i don't see that we have this presentation in our backup yeah so and and uh i i would find it helpful i don't know if there's a way to do it to just have before me the criteria you know for the scp that kind of went by quick i mean i don't need you to leave it i don't know if there's a way to do it where you don't have to leave it up on the screen forever for everyone i don't know if i get on a piece of paper i imagine others might want it as well are you able to email the presentation to us yeah that'd be great yeah oh yeah and also uh you uh on the point about the proximity of green space in the undeveloped land uh the second bullet uh you said something about actually if you wouldn't mind finding that so i don't have to guess yeah park dedication development fees required for residential development so you're saying that uh are there park dedication and development fees that would be coming from this project that would then be used for development of that particular parcel or you're saying something different so with any residential development within the city within the city of denton they are required to pay park dedication fees at platting and that is is a function of of the property value and then and then a formula applied to that and then a they're also required to pay development fees with the building permit so so yes they would have to pay those two fees both with platting and the permit and then um the the on-site recreation wouldn't offset that if that's no that's not not really asking about the on-site recreation i'm kind of probing uh how close is the city to the threshold level of developing that that park area and would this project in and of itself you know lead to the development of that park plan so there would in fact ultimately meet the 10-minute walk requirement i'm not sure if that if this would take it over the edge for that for that side i know parks is updating their master plan and so as part of that they'll look at all of those parks as well as those those gaps and where they have that 10-minute to a walk park 10-minute walk to a park threshold and therefore um you know it could go to to development of that park but i'm not i'm not aware of this money being earmarked for that park councilman breaks um so right there when it's the schools have those three schools um been checked with um disd usually we have some kind of note that says they have room for the students um that will be attending we did check with dent and isd um there will be that the high school students will add pressure to ryan high school um and and we've had several of these come forward recently where there's there's there's been the pressure to those schools with those students that are generated they their response was they're always looking at those attendance boundaries and as these areas develop they would have to potentially modify those attendance boundaries to ensure that they have um they have adequate resources at all of the schools and can you tell me the distance between this property and ryan high or any of these schools i'm trying i want to make sure that i know there's a certain um mileage within the schools where the bus system does not come and so the students would be forced to walk to school so that would be pretty important to have um information as far as um that i can measure that okay my next question or statement is about the light there at duchess um from what i heard you say earlier is that it's basically already been warranted um but that's a text dot road it is and so it's not only the we get the money to pay for the light we also have to get the design and send it to text dot dallas office which we're going through right now at sherman in the loop and that takes four months because it's one person looking at the design so i also want to know if that design has been sent to text dot yet or not um for that light at that area i don't believe so i believe it is not really move forward as far as any design or any any um beginning of the process to get that light there because it would be very helpful and it would it would help me to have a timeline on that um that light as well thank you uh julie um first on the the loop on the access the no left out that that median currently would have to be reworked is that right because currently you can cross from duchess and turn left well the the median that would restrict that left turn movement is really um kind of in the center of the property so so yes you could turn left from duchess to go north on loop 288 uh but but the the left turning movement is restricted will be restricted um kind of in the middle of the site to not allow cars to to turn left onto the loop yeah thank you for the correction and i'm looking at that but have you driven in just a statement if you've if you've driven loop 28 north across the street from uh the dps you'll see that they've had to add barrels to prevent people so that got it and then the other thing is um you talked about the signal light and it being warranted and future development kind of paying in you know to to to pay for that but what's the what's the area of that future development and i'm just asking because if i look at the facts on the ground the entire property to the to the south is in opposition and so how far does that radius go that would end up paying into that fund to feel pay for that signal i don't know how engineering creates that radius as projects do come forward they do have to do that traffic impact analysis and i i would anticipate that that if if they have an impact in that on that intersection it could potentially be in part in that radius but right so is there someone that can answer just because if i assume that the party to the south doesn't develop if we move forward where else is that development going to come from that what how far out do we have to go to get development to then pay into this or what is the what is the restriction on that right i mean because that that really is it's it's not fair to us for me i just don't want to assume that that that property to the south is going to develop if this moves forward so i want to understand what the range is that we can pull from to draw that in and then i asked a question via email and so i just want to kind of get an answer from you my understanding staff says the highest you can go with that property is is 55 feet under i was giving via email yes under the um and the spreadsheet will show it up here so under the 2002 development code cmg permitted 65 feet of height the 2019 suburban corridor transition zoning district would permit 55 feet of height right and and that's basically four stories google google maps you correct me where i'm wrong nope i would agree with you okay thank you okay any other questions for staff we hear from public comment thank you and just to uh i believe correct me if i'm wrong that the uh we passed i believe it was last week the new council rules of procedures regarding public hearings rebuttal and the like is that correct mr city attorney that is correct all right could you just summarize that for the audience here tonight because since it is a new procedure and also to remind the councils and quite honestly remind myself of what uh what the rules the new rules are yes mayor um the most significant change is allowing for rebuttals for the public but i'll go through the process so the applicant will present their case which allows for them potential questions for the applicant from the city council um the council then receives input from the public again with questions of the speakers coming from the council the applicant then has an opportunity to give a rebuttal to those comments what's new is after that applicant rebuttal members of the public who previously provided input on that item will have an opportunity to make a single final rebuttal after that the city staff and or the applicant will answer any final questions of the city council and upon the conclusion of that the mayor will close the public hearing so question clarification on the citizen rebuttal is it limited just to the new information that is presented by the applicant in in their rebuttal or is it any information i thought we limited that but but well from what i'm seeing here it doesn't have that's okay that limitation of language sure um but as far as process nor that okay thank you all right okay so i've already opened the public hearing i believe the applicant is here uh and ready to make a presentation it's my understanding that the applicant gets is it 10 minutes it's in minutes okay oh i was told 20 oh oh 20 oh well i'm okay um i do have a presentation down here i'm not sure how to get to it julie thanks and i know it's late um but i'll and i'll try to be quick i did time this for less than 20 okay just for clarification is 20 20 minutes total for the applicant 10 minutes so are you going to be are you the only representative speaking um i can be i i would rather have it be 20 if that takes two people then i'll say is that how is that how it's read yeah that's how it's read yeah yeah okay so that means 10 and 10 is that right mr attorney okay all right how do i get is it here slideshow sorry no this one there we go all right my name is gene latch i'm with pedcor investments and we are here to ask for approval of a specific use permit for denton grove apartment apartments i did not include a history of our company in this presentation since i want to get straight to the land use issue but briefly i will say that we've been in business for over 30 years and have developed over 21 000 units across 19 states we are an experienced bunch and i'm very proud to work for pedcor and to bring this product here to my home state of texas this is a rendering of a similar development we just built down in georgetown the pick really doesn't do it justice it's quite beautiful in person and has been very successful here's the site plan for denton grove overlaid on a google earth image you'll see a large amount of green space there and i will say the credit union is not shown here but it's just south on duchess drive there it's right here i point that out because the bank along with any other future development on duchess drive which i know is owned by the opposition will still be visible to folks driving down loop 288 even after this community is built this is a site plan zoomed in just a little which is essentially what we are asking for you to approve it's the same as what julie presented just with a little bit more color to give you a better idea of what this will actually look like as you know the current zoning cmg which does allow for multifamily use but it does require the specific use permit of building only multifamily without the commercial component this is not an entirely new zoning designation we just the sup is all that we're asking for here tonight one thing that does do is it gives the council the ability to have a detailed plan and ensure that we stick to that since it will be part of the zoning ordinance for instance like julie pointed out we were asked to add some additional trees so we did just that as you know we need a super majority also for this sup since a few of the adjacent owners but not all you noticed that there were some that were in support but a few of them do oppose this development this development and i would like to address their concerns that were raised at the pnz meeting in december mainly the desire for commercial development a traffic flow and then the concentration of affordable housing so first we'll talk about the easement issue which is a huge issue with respect to developing anything other than multifamily at this site our civil engineer john cornelson with evolving texas is here and he can answer some more detailed questions about this as well as the adp that julie brought up it has a lot to do with these easements as well first there's a 20 foot utility easement along the loop 288 frontage then we have another 75 foot easement for the transmission lines that run through the center of the property that leaves only 157 to about 164 feet of depth to build any commercial development and that's simply just not enough to do it here is a real world example of just that that 163 feet line that you see that is the widest part of our development that is in between the easements the 195 feet right over there on mckinney is a typical strip retail center so clearly not enough room to build that where we are here um let me find my place here this slide is a graphic of what i was just explaining the easements are shown in red and the site plan overlaid with only parking and drives in that 75 foot easement this is just about the only type of development that is feasible here it's either multifamily like we are proposing or fast food which is why that's what you see up and down loop 288 in between this easement you see sonic dairy queen taco rico jack in the box that and the only other things that you see are multifamily with a similar site plan to us with only drives in that very large red strip that is a 75 foot easement i'd like to point out another challenge for commercial development you'll see here this blue area is a very large detention pond it would need to be even larger with commercial development that would not have near the amount of green space that we have another thing the new credit union right there there's a reason they built on the other side of that that huge 75 foot easement they couldn't build it on the frontage that and i would argue that nobody else could build anything on that frontage either and this shows what we already know well here we go what we already know denton crossing and the golden triangle are just a mile away so even if it were feasible to build commercial property most of the potential users are already nearby and the ones that are not here are the restaurants that i mentioned that are just north of mckinney that brings us to what will what will work here which is this this is what it will actually look like from the street this rendering is based on the very site plan that we are submitting for approval today so this picture is realistic unlike this in contrast that commercial development that i was talking about that needs 195 feet from the road i'm not saying this looks terrible but i would say that this looks better again this is realistic from the number of trees to that light nice big 12 foot sidewalk i mentioned earlier that we added trees here and we also heard the comments that walkability is important to this council and to pnz and so we committed to this large walk even though it is not required by code so let's get back to the adjacent landowners complaints we've addressed the desire for commercial development let's go to traffic first loop 288 like julie said has that hooded left into this property no you cannot make a left out of there you would have to pop the curb and i i don't know who would risk that that is actually fine for us as multifamily developers and owners but that is not ideal for commercial development and if there were this were all pad sites only one would have the left turn into it the one south would be only right in and only right out in addition we like we said we've already talked about whether tech dot and the city would approve a full median access and they won't so a commercial developer would be stuck with this hooded left turn which we're perfectly fine with not only that but the traffic that's generated by a 276 apartment unit is three it's well what would be generated from any other commercial development would be three six times as much as we would generate these are the same numbers that julie presented as well apart from the fact that we will generate less traffic than a commercial development we still do want to address the fact that we will generate some traffic so first we did that signal warrant allow us analysis and determined that that signal is justified as of today that is good news our estimated cost contribution to that is about a hundred and thirteen thousand dollars that signal we estimate to cost about four hundred thousand dollars we are willing to put in additional funds to make sure that that signal gets built more quickly no i can't guarantee what date that would be but i can tell you that we will contribute more than that one hundred and thirteen thousand dollars so that this can get built also there is time to work this out since we will not have first units available until 2022 and will not be fully leased until 2023 also i would say that this development would make it more likely for some more development along duchess drive which could also contribute to that signal we will also commit to working with the city to determine if a connection to mckinney street makes sense our initial thought is that that would work best as an egress only and possibly only as a temporary drive maybe after maybe it goes away after the traffic signal is installed or duchess or mockingbird is extended or some other infrastructure upgrade happens but whether it's temporary or permanent whatever the city decides that they would like to see from us we have researched it as a possibility and found that the cross-access easements are in place on the land to the north and we do not expect any problems being able to connect to mckinney street so we'll give a lot more traffic flow this shows those traffic mitigation efforts both the drive connection to mckinney street and the new traffic signal at duchess and like i said we do believe that those would encourage additional development along duchess drive which i understand is what the adjacent landowners really want and here just another depiction of what this will actually look like this shows how there would be plenty of room for stacking for those turning left into the development but again that would not be the case for any commercial development that might generate at least three times as much traffic if not more so back to our comments we have addressed commercial development and traffic flow and if we move on this map shows all of the tax credit developments there in district one and also within a two mile radius of the proposed denton grove there are seven properties shown here in blue it might be a little bit hard to see but the ones that are in that light blue color and one of them is two phases so we can call it eight that might seem like a lot and it might not seem like a lot depending on your perspective but let's look at what's about to happen there's one i have here on yellow this is mckinney park apartments it was built in 1998 and financed with housing tax credits just like we're proposing but it is no longer rent restricted as of last year the affordability period is over the owners immediately reinvested in the property to improve it and charge higher rents this is not necessarily a bad thing since it means the property is not falling into disrepair but it does mean a loss of affordable housing to the city and this is happening all over texas is actually a huge concern for those advocating for affordable housing across the nation owners of these older developments don't keep them affordable they do just what mckinney park is doing they invest more capital and improve the property and transition to market rate rents i drove by this property the other day and also talked with management about the upgrades which are extensive outside of the renovation of the units they are also building a new fitness room upgrading their business center adding luxury style community space and as a result they are able to capture those market rents which are significantly higher than what we will be we will be spending this shows you all of the developments in detton that will transition to market rate just like mckinney park by 2038 on top of the 250 that were just lost in mckinney park the city will lose another 144 in 2025 that's just two years after released up and i know i did this i have a few more points if you'd like i could take questions to continue but well we've got well and i know you've got another speaker that's going to come up to to continue on so we've got questions do y'all want to wait till the whole presentation to ask the questions or this question specifically for some information that she covered well if she could come back up after then i'll wait absolutely okay yep all right okay thank you yeah and maybe my questions will be addressed so i'm willing to wait all right yep okay okay so who's up next for if i need to fill out a card no no no you're good yeah you're the applicant so yeah just would need your name and address once you once you begin then your time will begin okay well you can start right here that's the map pretty good good evening my name is craig litner and i am also with pet war investments and work with jean latchaw and i appreciate your time tonight just just because i understand that y'all wanted one speaker so we do have the opportunity to suspend the rule that it's requiring to i would need somebody to proffer that from council and is that how you would do that it would be a vote with four members required so is there anybody on council that wants to to do that and they would allow jean to speak for the next 20 minutes because that was the plan then i get that council member ryan i move we suspend the rules okay okay i'll second all right all in favor of suspension the rules to allow one speaker for the full 20 minutes of the application uh right hand that's your left hand right hand all right motion carries unanimously i appreciate that i'm sorry for my misunderstanding too you're good but i won't be another 10 minutes um we're almost through this um oh he's talking to me uh all right so um i'll pick up where i left off this map shows what this would look like in 2038 with only renaissance courts the veranda half of providence place and denton grove that's less than a thousand units all combined we know that the other tax credit developments in denton have been very successful and that they have very high occupancies that fact coupled with the pending loss of affordable units makes it no surprise that our third-party analyst indicates demand for 1,200 affordable units in denton right now today i believe this council recognized that tremendous need for affordability this past summer which is why we endured the unanimous support of all of you when you pass two support resolutions in order for us to be eligible for our financing and we thank you again for that speaking of that financing i did not include in here my entire presentation about how tax credit developments work that's a lengthy one but i'm happy to take questions on it um but oh sorry i was asked to include the rents here and also mentioned that we are allowed now very recently some flexibility by the tax credit program to serve a slightly broader mix of income levels our current proposal is for 100 percent of the units to serve those earning up to 60 percent of a area median income but we are willing to discuss some alternatives to that if it pleases council our current rents would be in the 830 to 870 range for a one-bedroom 995 to 1045 for a two-bedroom 1140 to 1200 for a three-bedroom that's all based on that 60 percent ami level but like i said we could make that a little bit more flexible once we get to the point where we're actually applying for tax credits um i did want to just basically talk about our development itself i know we've talked about the overall site plan but i do want to mention some of those development features including the swimming pool dark park tube playgrounds fitness center food pantry among others and julie mentioned this as well we do think this does mitigate traffic as well there's little things that we can do like provide washer dryer hookups but also provide a laundry room that way if you don't have that washer dryer or if you have one and it breaks it still doesn't send you down the street to the laundromat so those on-site amenities really can help mitigate that traffic i did want to address a few other comments that were made at p&z and point out a few facts while this is not necessarily luxury product this is not class c or d construction either which was stated because pedcor is a long-term owner and because we manage our own properties it is in our best interest to build them to high standards which is exactly what we do across our portfolio of over over 175 properties we have never devalted on a loan payment and that's not luck that is being extremely good at what we do also although this property will be financed with tax credits it will not be exempt from property taxes i will add that the ability to finance affordable housing and still pay property taxes is very much site specific we do this when we can and we're able to do it here but there are many factors that go into each of these developments and often we do need a property tax exemption to make them work financially so if we are not successful here today and i'm not sure that we could i'm not sure that we could do that at another site in denton we would love to be in denton we would love to be here for a long time we would love to provide affordable housing for the citizens here and still pay taxes those taxes by the way would be estimated at over 300 thousand dollars annually this is a 57 million dollar investment in denton overall we are asking for approval of this this sup and just an sup and hope this council continues its support of this proposal we believe we have demonstrated that the site is infeasible for commercial development and that the city is definitely in need of this product and we are excited to be a part of denton community for years to come i'll just say one last thing i appreciate that you want to give credence to the comments of a few of your constituents and let them know that you're responding to them when they oppose this development but the people that will be served by this development are simply not empowered to comment and stand here and tell you how much it will benefit them i appreciate that those opposing us have a different opinion about what should be built here but we're professionals too and this is our professional opinion the fact is they don't own that land and they have not made any attempts to acquire or develop it if you do approve this sup the adjacent landowners might be a little upset tonight but ultimately they will not be negatively impacted to the contrary they might have some very marketable property along duchess drive and in three years when you're at the grand opening for denton grove apartments and you shake hands with a family who can finally afford a safe decent place to live this vote will feel really really good it'll feel great and i promise to invite you to that grand opening and i hope that those are the people to whom you respond today okay i think we got some questions for you uh questions yes yes yes so i have a few questions one you answered um you said that you manage the properties that you don't do that out for a third party so um it's your company and you're responsible for that okay that's correct that's really good okay um so i've driven by the property and i know that um there's trees there they're small but they're oak i think i mean there they could be really nice big trees one day and complying with the current tree ordinance was was marked off is there can you explain that or is there not a way to save any of those trees that are there um in the design maybe as some of the the trees in the um in the parking area and i would actually like to defer to our civil engineer uh to answer those questions specifically but i can keep asking and you can come up in just a minute so um and then also when you talked about passing through mckinney because i know next to um that site used to be all really really nice trees and it was just cleared off and it hadn't been developed in a long time um but there is a really nice stand of trees behind jack in the box and so um i'm not sure when you said that you're willing to go back to mckinney if that route takes out any of those trees because i would be really hesitant uh to approve anything that did that um then the next thing uh married can i keep going okay um that the timing of the the length of the um units so is this for 15 years or 30 years 35 oh 35 30 30 years they would be at the the rents that you're that's correct that's good okay and the building material so um some of the the images that we saw earlier it looked like a mix of stone are those what you're saying that the building units are going to to look like not this one but one of the other ones you showed you had a little bit more detail um on the appearance i had i had one of of one that we actually built but it was also still a rendering and not a picture but um i i think i have well i thought i had a picture in here somewhere these are mostly just renderings um but i can say that that's a fair representation of our building materials yes okay so like a mix of stone and yes and the iron okay more than fair okay and i will listen when if anyone else has questions i just want to ask about the the trees and and i'm not exactly sure i would have to look at an aerial to see where because the only part of the connection that we would have to build would be but um by the lot that is exactly adjacent to us because the drive that's behind jack and box is already there so we would just be connecting right to that okay yeah here's one more i said the um on the light you mentioned that you would pay more than what you um have said earlier do you have a an estimate on that we were ballparking 150 grand but um you know uh whatever it would if it made a difference to make that a little bit more and suddenly the lights being built then um we could consider more than that because that and that's on top of our 113 that we are already responsible for anyway oh okay so 113 plus the right to get you to around 400 okay all right thank you i think you can see here this is the area we're talking about connecting where we do not have i need to stand a little bit closer to the mic yeah okay hi i'm john cornellson by the way uh evolving texas 420 throckmorton in fort worth and um working with the applicant and i'm mentioning the off-site drive connection which you see here we will not be taking out any trees as far as um the rest of the site what we've been dealing with there i mean it looks pretty harmless when you drive by but in reality um this site has about 12 feet of fall across it from one corner to the other and we talked about even how that impacts development at this corner because all of the water ends up here and so that's what makes it challenging because it isn't like we have um quality trees throughout the site where we can try to preserve pockets because we are actually i think our our landscaping is 39 open space compared to 20 percent which is required so we're we're doubling the requirement increasing the landscaping adding trees we would love to have more trees we want more trees absolutely and so um we're willing to do all we can to protect those but in this particular case it's if we if we had a a fantastic tree that we could at all say we absolutely would i mean we've done that on many sites what types of trees are you adding back in um i don't we've actually just honoring the code i think it's for street trees are all per your ordinance um i think it's varies throughout the site there's quite a few trees it's actually spelled out on the landscape plan if you can go back in the presentation of staff i think we have that now so i'll take a look thank you okay uh council member melzer yeah who to direct this question to i might really be more appropriate for staff i just you know i was curious to hear the the rental grid and the income you know demographics that are being targeted and i anticipate we're going to looking at the sup criteria that we're going to be hearing about what impacts future property values so this is all to say given the targeted um income categories it's called affordable housing would you characterize this more as workforce housing than low-income housing that's a planning term to have the workforce housing yep that workforce housing hasn't has a meaning in planning terms and and it would be consistent with that so this is really workforce housing you would say well and danny might be able to answer there is a question for the applicant yeah yeah that puts staff in i mean oh staff sorry right out thanks danny are you going to answer that sure okay try generally we're just saying put staff in a position to try to define the difference between workforce and affordable housing right there's no official definition but it generally is understood to be between 60 and 120 percent so say that one more time 60 and 120 percent is of amis consider is workforce yes depending on the project okay okay okay um any more questions for well i guess no mayor protein question for the applicant again thank you so just to orient me so the sup is to your i'm paraphrasing what you said it's to eliminate the commercial requirement that's right okay i i would probably defer to julie there but that's how i understand the code yeah sure okay and then is it physically possible at four stories given the if you want to go back to the slides you had you talk about the easement and you show that other property but just pure physics is it possible to put a commercial front and either go up what real with um apartments if you want or parking to meet that requirement my question is just physically is that are you telling me that's not possible um you know and again i would probably defer to john a little bit here but i am not creative enough to come up with anything that that you could do you you've got to have um you know at least 10 feet of sidewalk we have 12 and then you have to have a 30-foot service drive somewhere in there and you've got to have some parking in there that might take up eat up another 120 feet so you're left with like a 47-foot building like deep building it's really um i i couldn't think of a way to do it and and i i think we've got some other folks here that they could speak to the history of this property they've had several developers that have tried to do something like that and it hasn't worked well i just and really it's i mean and if he wants to come up it's a succinct answer so if the answer is no i couldn't think of anything no would suffice so go ahead do you want to you want to yeah and i'll say this there's a couple of schools of thought on that because wait let me let me yes so just in the essence of time yes and i understand you don't that's not your preference i understand that that's not ideal in your world 100 get it succinctly is it possible what there are two things that are possible commercial development at this location one is to put really small buildings either oriented left and right or like you see a jack in the box like something small like a really small building where the drives are in the back and in the easement but but a strip retail is not possible unless you were to flip it and put the building on the street with the dumpsters and the service drive and then have parking the other option that is possible is to have large enough commercial on the other side of the easement that it draws and it can therefore pave all the way to 288 and that's what triggers the need for not a hooded left but a fully functioning median opening and and that's when your parking goes way up and your and your traffic counts and what about the elevations though you i've not heard you speak to the elevation yet so you have in theory four stories that you could activate and you're saying that doesn't help no because well what you're talking about there is it's it's a parking issue and it's it's the distance and if you get the longer slide i think the one right before this this this easement actually gets closer as it goes all the way down and in front of us it goes from like 160 to one down to 157 feet it's been getting smaller all the whole way to the point that by the time you get to this corner where we have an attention pond there's nothing left i mean you have landscaping requirements y'all require a 20-foot easement that's that pink line at the top that's right off of the right away of 288 so after that and then you have 150 feet left for landscaping parking and some sort of a building it doesn't work got it okay thank you and then uh you did touch on the apartments and we talked about that and those that roll off but i just want to be clear my understanding that that's not a necessity right they could they could those property owners could sell that property and then the new owners could reapply and keep it affordable that's my understanding correct me if i'm wrong yes but they would also have to come to you for those same resolutions that we got in the summer right but it's it's not they have options to keep them affordable yes yes if they if they choose to refinance them and and make them affordable yes okay and then yeah and then that i understand i was trying to track with uh the answer for council member briggs which trees so you none of those existing trees would remain for let's go some of them okay got it okay if we could just have the answers from the microphone because this is being televised and we can't people can't hear absolutely and we can see if maybe we can see it on one of these early ones this one uh it's tough because it covers up the it's um i mean you could see the landscaping that's inside the property that we're going to add as you know we'll have to take some trees out but we're adding more than than is required sure okay thank you council member armature yeah i'm curious to know about the the food pantry and and where that would go or you know maybe there are just a number of options for it um you probably you know as you mentioned a lot of fast food around there um and uh we've got like many cities we've got food desert issues i like knowing there would be food there so if you could kind of speak to where that would be in the property and what kind of you don't have to describe the whole invent sample inventory of a pantry but what well what might that consist sure that that actually came from a conversation i was having with councilman heads with about this and and we both expressed that same concern about how well you might even if you have some walkability you're only walking to sonic and jack in the box right um and this is something that's important to us um as a culture in our company i would say um fitness is um and it's something that we very recently started doing um at one actually that property in georgetown that i showed you up there i would say maybe that was a pilot for it um also um luckily for us and possibly part of what spurred that on was that tdhca included that in their um kind of cafeteria list of items um that we we um can choose from to get points on our application to be eligible for credits so it was kind of all of those things coming together um tdhca putting it on their list um us having a conversation about that as a really good idea and then also knowing that our property management had already started doing this in one of our newer properties so um they it's it's pretty new there in georgetown um i was just chatting with them a little bit about it casually and um you know they there are property management staff we have a um a dedicated resident services coordinator as well and so they manage those kinds of resident services and so she takes care of making sure that it's there and the inventory and everything and i'm afraid i couldn't give you that kind of detail either but no no that's just something that we recently started yeah well that sounds great thanks couple questions i want to make sure i understood what i thought i heard you say on the traffic signal yes because i thought i heard you say that you know we all were looking at 150 000 and i thought your response to council member briggs was that's in addition to the 113 were required to pay that's right all right so in essence you're saying you'll pay for the traffic signal if it's 400 000 i mean it's close to it i mean sure a couple in essence yes we we feel it's an important part of this department also um and my understanding is from the information i got is that a traffic signal from the from the from the design to the permit to the construction mr city manager i think you said that it's seven six or seven months process correct by the time if this again goes forward uh staff can begin working with text dot uh certainly with the developer on the design uh get that in the queue and then work with text dot staff to to get it go through the perm the permitting and approval process and so we would theoretically be ready to go to construction within six to seven months okay and on um you talked about that your property would be 30-year affordability but my understanding is so correct me if i'm wrong is that there's a certain amount of years that are required as a deed restriction that runs with the land is that the 30 years or is it less than that is the 30 years that's the land use restriction agreement all right yes so then you mentioned the apartment that's rolling off that's not 30 years it's not so interestingly enough and this will get way in the weeds on the type we don't need to get we don't need to get in the way so what you're saying pre-2002 there was a way to get out of it early okay all right um if you could if you could put your slide back up that talks about what the affordability is i mean first of all you said that i believe you characterized the new rents at the old place that's not um that's not going to be affordable their one bedrooms were 9.49 that's right so you wouldn't consider that affordable oh no um i mean i would consider that much closer to market rent um what we're proposing to charge is a hundred dollars less than that right i just i just asked that question from my a whole different reason but but so when we if you if you could go to the slide where you said this is what we're doing 60 percent and this is what it equates to on the salaries ranges and or 50 percent and 70 percent and things such as that all right so what you're proposing is it says up to 60 percent but you're really saying we need everybody at about 60 percent for this really i mean to get the rents to get those rents that's right right now there's an income band that we serve it's folks that fit into this band of we make enough to afford the rent but not so much that we don't qualify to live here that band's actually relatively large right which is part of where we get this demand analysis that says that we that there's demand for 1200 units in this market area our market analyst takes those income bands and the number of renters in the area and a number of other factors and kind of spits out that number so so yes it's a band well then what i'm hearing you say is on the 60 percent earning up to that means even in your proposal somehow you've got built in some may be at 50 percent median income some may be at 70 or some combination or am i am i misunderstanding that so um what the the program very recently some new legislation was passed that allows us to instead of saying we're going to be at 100 at 60 percent that we can say we're going to average that out so if i have five units over here that i'm going to only charge up to a 50 percent rent i can have five units over here that i can charge up to a 70 percent rent but also capture those higher income levels too right um and so i can even out the entire property at 60 that's a relatively new law okay that y'all are subject to yeah and it's a choice we can just just make our lives easy and you know do the 60 percent i say easy just because the compliance issues with it are complicated when you get into averaging it out but there's some benefit to that as well so there is there is a reporting mechanism if you choose that route it's sort of the ban route right it's it's just more it's more compliance on the management side of things because for me um i mean affordable housing workforce housing low-income housing we we use i say we meaning lots of people use those terms really interchangeably and my understanding is it's the feds that really do define that as far as the income brackets and the area median income and if i remember correctly from what danny said it's 60 and above is referred to as is it workforce or affordable yeah come on down i'm sorry i'm just my memory it's it's almost 10 o'clock and uh i'm i'm not fading fast but i'm doing something fast okay danny shaw community services again the um the workforce housing is not a legal term or any sort of defined term so just generally in the industry anything 60 to 120 percent is considered workforce okay and then is there a distinction between 50 to 60 percent i mean under hud guidelines is there a distinction like at 50 is that low income and 30 or 40 percent yes there's different there's different criteria between extremely low very low low income modern income okay based on hud definitions okay all right so for me and i'm not sure whether we memorialize it in the sup or not but my concern is if you can get some units that are a little bit closer to market rate that means you're able to lease to people in a brand new complex with some really good amenities most likely who would not be able to afford that otherwise it may be a 40 or 50 or 50 percent or something like that so that's really my thoughts on that but what i'm hearing you say is that's already built into the the program in the sense of but y'all control that you can say well we'll release some at 50 but then we might release some at 70 or 75 to average out the 60 yes but we do need to make that decision when we apply for tax credits so we can't change that down the road okay so you so if that's something that this council would like to see you would need to know that so that you would be able to do that in six months yes well but you might need to see it now because this is the only authority we have is right now yeah i i just want to be clear we probably aren't going to actually apply for those tax credits for another six months i understand and that brings up another question and you've already because i asked you this question before this isn't something you've got to apply for and you may or may not get it you're saying that you that's right so we already know that we are eligible for housing tax credits the rules have been set for 2020 we know that we we submit these applications all the time as long as we submit a decent application we already know that we meet all the requirements so it's not a question of whether or not we will get the award but when you get the award it starts a clock and you have to close on all of your financing by a certain amount of time so we don't want our award yet um we won't close on all of our financing for about a year so we want our award in about six months okay all right um okay so do you know if let's say someone at 50 ami what the rents would be for them on a one and two bedroom oh you might have stumped me there um but i know what 30 is thank you i can't give you the figure right now but we do have a calculation that tdhda puts out that would allow you to calculate that average oh so this is something this isn't discretionary no this is yeah tha would firm that up okay yes um all right is there any way that you're able to get that off of a website or something and send it to us tonight or available on the tdhda website if you could just have that later on in the presentation that'd be great if that's possible today yeah yes yeah i think my colleague is pulling it up right now i just don't know those in my head okay all right um trying to think of how you think oh there was a slide in there that said that you're not in compliance with the tree ordinance will somebody explain that to me oh has he got has he got the numbers up or oh okay if you could just we'll just take one one question yeah what are those what are those numbers okay so the 50 rents are right um would be seven eleven for a one bedroom these are the maximum that we could charge okay 858 for a two bedroom and 986 for a three bedroom okay and then for at 40 it goes down that's right yeah okay all right okay that's helpful thank you very much um you know what i was really deferring to to john on the tree preservation because i thought that we were well i thought i saw a slide that said you know we saw something about street trees but i saw something that said not in compliance with the tree or and so that may i may have misread it uh so if it may be a line through it that i've missed um but yeah could you help so due to this submittal timing uh they this does fall under that 2002 dent development code it does meet the 2002 dent development code for for tree preservation but we also look at these projects in terms of the 2019 dent development code so that that was that portion of the slide it doesn't it doesn't quite meet the uh the the new tree code requirements for that generally 30 percent uh preservation of quality or heritage trees i believe they're preserving 27 percent of the quality trees on site so it doesn't quite hit that 2019 threshold so but it's been reviewed under 2002 and it does meet that okay so i know that there that under development you can choose there was a time frame where you could choose one or the other but then there's going to come a point where you can't do that so this fell within that yes sir but you can't choose one or the other for different things you've got to make an election of we're going to go through the 2019 or we're going to go through the 2002 is that correct that is correct you couldn't have 2002 meet here but we want to meet the 2019 here correct and the election has been 2019 no 2002 2002 2002 okay staff just does that extra analysis for the 2019 just to see how it compares okay all right okay um and and i would add too that we would be willing if we're just a couple of percentages points off there and if it means transplanting some trees we would be willing to commit to uh to that other tree preservation code to meeting it and also and for i can wrap it up for now for my question wrought iron fence around the entire property or front sides what's what gets the wrought iron fence everything gets the wrought iron fence um there's just a few there's more uh closer spacing of the columns like at the entry okay all right thank you council member melzer yes you mentioned that there were deed restrictions that required the 30-year affordability period that's right so would those deed restrictions prevent commercial on that property anyway because what what are the deed restrictions so it's a it's a land use restriction agreement that we execute with the texas department of housing and community affairs that's what allows us to take advantage of that those tax credits so it wouldn't be until we get the award that that would happen so it's specific to this project yes thank you yes sir okay any more questions for staff not staff the presenter sorry all right okay thank you appreciate it all right we've got some cards wishing to speak and then of course our new rules of procedure are in we've got bill patterson and he has filled out a green card which means that he's representing several people and i'll call out those names and i believe you get 10 minutes to speak is that correct on a group african uh john rainy sharon rainy tony clark and bill patterson and they're all they're all present so all right you can state your name and address your time will begin mr mayor city council bill patterson 3608 falcon cork excuse me falcon court and representing the people that uh the mayor just mentioned uh we do we are the ones in the opposition owning the 29.4 percent of the over the acres we have a combined over 200 years of living owning volunteering giving and developing business in denton i want to start by saying we're not opposed to low income housing that's not anything that we're in opposition for because we understand it's needed and we're not opposed to pedcor that was a great presentation they gave and i know they do great work and we've seen that so that's not the issue quite frankly it comes down to two or three issues that i would just like to point out really quickly and i don't know how does this yeah if you'll set it there and then we'll get the overhead there you go one of the things it was discussed about density we discussed it in the past it was discussed again today whether these apartments are um affordable housing or market rate housing or whatever the fact is currently they're affordable housing and there's about a thousand units that are there with with the four red dots going down mckinney street and then there's a proposed uh project that they have the grove in blue which puts about 1200 units there and then if you drop down to the other two units right below that which is in about that whole that whole circumference would be about a mile and a half that comes out to about 1700 apartment units that are in that geographic area right now that are low income housing affordable housing i want to bring that up the traffic that's it that's an issue i'm the publisher owner of the dent record chronicle we're on duchess drive right now traffic is bad enough going in and out of of duchess drive right now especially for those taking a left-hand turn onto loop 288 to head north i don't know that a traffic light is going to solve anything to be really honest because if we put a traffic light there while it could help in some respects it's going to continue to back up traffic out of all of the development that's in that that property kent key our development partner that we have that unfortunately couldn't be here tonight because he's out of town back out of state has several interested parties on some of the development to the south as that continues to grow the reality is is that somebody's got to really take a look and figure out a way to get duchess to cut through to the west because that's going to be the only way that's really going to solve the problem i think that's a real issue that needs to be considered we also do believe that there's other available uses for that property commercial uses for that property quite frankly i can't answer those right now but i know mr keegan and i know he has some ideas for that property i certainly wouldn't tell mr cope what what to do with his property but we do feel like there's some other uses for that that may not be apartments we're concerned about putting a pad of apartments on that particular site and and taking up that portion of loop 288 and then as we talk about what the future is going to hold with potentially more affordable housing and the fact that that's coming where are those going to go and are those going to continue to take up some of the population up and down loop 288 which is one of our primary corridors and we believe that that's prime property to look at other developments and other opportunities where you can also maybe get some sales tax out of some of that property along with property taxes so it's real simple that that's where we are that's our opposition they make some great points i'm not at all doubtful that that it wouldn't be a great project we just don't believe that's where that project should be we believe that there's too many low-income housing units in that area right now we're concerned about the future and what that might be it relates to those i know mr rainy even talked to a crime analyst here at the police department in denton about what happens when there's density in housing like that and whether it's low-income housing that doesn't matter just departments in general universities wherever that creates different levels of crime possibilities and i believe that she would be more than willing to address the folks at pedcor or the city council on some of the findings that she has we were going to get a report from her but i guess the crime map for the city of denton is something's going on with it on the website or something like that so it would have taken too much time for her to put that together but that might be something to check into that's really that's really my presentation i mean that's where i am all right well we got a couple questions council member armature yeah uh so you mentioned that you feel like commercial would be a better use for that property and you're concerned about the traffic i was wondering how you would answer the applicant's argument uh that commercial at least the kind of commercial that we see along the loop would yield more more traffic than than residential you know i don't know that i have a great answer for that but i think traffic's going to be a problem in anything that happens right now on duchess drive especially anything of significance right now until the western side of duchess drive can be opened at some point and it's not dead ended anymore thank you councilman briggs so one question for you and then one for staff i wanted to know if you heard anything new in the presentation tonight regarding like incomes and percentages so that it could be some market rate in the as well mixed in with the units was that something that you were already aware of or was that something you learned tonight personally i think that was something that i learned tonight well i mean they could be different levels varying levels of of income okay and the next question um i wanted to ask staff because as we're doing our mobility and an update um is there is duchess a through street if you could check on that i don't i'm not sure um okay uh richard and i were just looking at that on the mobility plan duchess is is intended to connect all the way to woodrow as a collector street okay thank you and then just the last one last comment um if if the light is going in i would assume that there would be some sort of pedestrian there would have to be something there for for crossing that's part of it right okay thank you a couple questions bill uh is the opposition just strictly apartments or is it just what your understanding was before tonight and that is maybe just the uh affordable housing component or i'm not trying to add i think it's no i think it's just it's just having a apartments only i mean we would love to see more of a mixed use we'd love to see a mix of some living as well as some uh office some retail restaurant something and we just believe there's a way that that can be done and you know yeah that property sat there vacant for a long time and we all understand that and we're all looking for uses for property but we also realize that dentin is continuing to grow faster and faster i think there's opportunity out there that hasn't been explored um and hasn't had the chance to come to that uh piece of property that i think can present itself in the near future sure and you mentioned something about the traffic light are are you saying that even with the traffic light that that wouldn't provide some mitigation well it might provide some mitigation but i think part of the problem that's going to provide is people getting out of apartments getting up and down the other apartments behind us getting out of the office complexes i mean the real issue quite frankly on duchess is is getting the street cut through because while it would it would help you know it would help people be able to turn left it's going to just cause more and more backup with people based on volumes of cars that are going to be coming in and out of either the apartment complex other parts of the development office buildings whatever it's going to be so it would be helpful there's no doubt but it but it could also cause backup to with people trying to wait to get out turn to get out sure block streets can people come in the other way trying to get into duchess okay all right uh council mayor melthor yeah uh not a question for for uh mr paterson but i guess it's a process question if if council would uh ultimately prefer to see to not grant an sup for residential only but to have the same structure in terms of affordability but with the commercial element would you know with the time frames make that impossible or you know what are the other kind of requirements around the project i'm not sure i don't try to answer i'd need to be asking you mr just look in your direction well well i think if i'm so let me try to rephrase what i thought i heard you ask or your comment or observation is if there is a way to inject a commercial component into this project yeah um would they have an opportunity to come back or is this kind of you know one and done you know like oh if you're saying are we going to ask the applicant to to if we said no right the sqp is basically to allow them to not have a commercial office component right uh so if we said no to that is that it's at the end i think if they i mean obviously there's a the rule where you can't come back within a year of something that's not substantially different or materially different but if there's a commercial component to this i would think that that would qualify for something that could be different it's substantially different because there was no commercial in it to begin with so there's some opportunity to you don't have that waiting period okay so i guess i'll be interested to hear later in the rebuttal period right okay all right okay mayor pro tem now for you bill i'm sorry let me let me just do anybody have any more questions for mr patterson so all right all right thank you very much appreciate it thank you all right um julie if i could borrow you now we do have some more public speakers oh so do you yes yeah i want to ask because i want i want people to to speak to it all right okay if they know yes all right if you could pull up i guess just use uh that q is a point of reference in google maps to to pull up the street view thank you sorry and i don't know there their address is 3600 duchess if that's easier but you're doing good well no no no no no that that overview is perfect oh okay sorry thank you you just got the fast one i anticipated and shrink it a bit i want i would like to see their intersection for mckinney in the in the in the frame perfect so my question is and my concern and the future speakers can speak to it so if we put a signal light at duchess and you're at mckinney and you're like me and you take off and go zero to 40 then you hit the brakes at duchess right that's and you have a turnout in the middle of that right so someone the the timing of the lights you'd leave mckinney you're driving down and then there's turnout potentially from an apartment mid-block and then another drop down the block you'll have a signal another signal light yeah that that's a lot in in a block and a half and then also the staff have a statement because i think the previous speakers that spoke tonight now i just want to understand if staff has a position my understanding is there's sidewalk so obviously this new development would would have sidewalk in front there's sidewalk i do believe enough to get you to the corner of mckinney correct i think i believe there's a gap yeah towards the end there there's okay and then but if you go the other way i don't think there's any sidewalk toward toward the south correct correct okay and so and then when the the the speakers that spoke at the public hearing tonight spoke about pedestrian crosses that's just down the street that's loop 288 further to the north where they had that problem where the the cyclist was crossing mid-block and unfortunately was struck in so so loop 288 and people crossing it is an issue and we have no pedestrian kind of infrastructure south of this project not south of it there there is that pedestrian crossing there at mckinney and loop 288 but you're right there is a gap in the sidewalk as well yes okay yeah i just want to get to the yes yes sorry i just wanted i just want to frame that so future speakers understanding when you talk about signal light it's it's uh complex thanks okay the next speaker will be is lim miller if you'll come down state your name and address your time will begin you you need to zoom out or zoom in any mayor members of the council my name is lim miller i live at 133 meadow creek road capel texas i've been a commercial real estate broker for 37 years my company san dia commercial real estate specialize in commercial properties few of my notable clients are wills fargo bank i sold the building here downtown mcdonald's corporation discount tire i've done thousands of deals in the last 37 years so with that please accept my experience on these matters i'm going to explain why this property shouldn't be commercial i've been marketing this subject property for over four years and the owner mr dennis cope has allowed me to work on this and target potential commercial retail prospects and what we do in my business we use what's called void analysis software basically i can run a software program at any intersection and get a print out of how many retailers are in and within the trade area and who's missing with that there's two trade areas in denton razor ranch and golden triangle okay the end result after i ran my void analysis is most of the stores are already in the market and they don't want to put a third store the other issue no one lives here look at the era you got hundreds and hundreds of acres of vacant raw land and no one lives there to establish a trade area you need people the feedback we got from co-calling mr koops mr koops track is we had a lot a lack of population density as a visual testament to that just look at the area and fundamental to marketing a large parcel property is to solve the problem of what to do with the back of the property we've heard yeah just you can sell it off commercials great we can do all this stuff that's not true i've been on the ground working on this for four years i've co-called hundreds of people it's not there they're they're already down the street or or there's not enough people to to populate you can't just fill it up with fast foods we we worked on big box retail we we've had uh you know we've called on all these various big box retailers to take the back because you gotta you gotta solve the problem on the back before you strip off the front and so after hundreds of co-calls all the they said they were interested they tried to do a layout they we couldn't work our way around the 75 foot easement guess what they went down the street not only that uh didn't didn't uh teachers credit unit they must decide plan our site six to eight times if you look at the aerial their building and their drive-throughs extend another 75 feet beyond what we we have to work with so you got to really understand it and do this like i do every day to realize you cannot lay out on this site so anyway they went across the street kent keys sold on their side and i lost two deals so anyway shortly after that the martino family contacted me put this whole thing under contract we laid it out they were going to move their office which is just down the street put apartments in the back and put their office in the front guess what we couldn't lay out because of the easement and all the encumbering other easements that make it almost impossible to do so martino's dropped the contract due to the power lines so i've given you two reasons why you can't do commercial real tail retail on this side and that's the third one as you know online sales are killing the retailers wal-mart kroger no grocery stores in years anywhere in the country nowhere and it's a problem and it's going to get worse before it's over look at golden triangle mall you've not seen that much vacancy in golden triangle in years and it's going to get worse before it gets better it's a fourth problem retailers are not expanding like they were that that was that was your time that bell was your time oh okay but we do have a sorry i'm sorry to be the bear band anyway yeah well we got a couple questions for you all right council member armature so so apologies if i didn't if there's something that i didn't understand and so it could be my question is just is based on a misunderstanding please don't hesitate to correct me but so i i'm hearing that it sounds like what i'm hearing is that there's no you're saying that that there's no residential multifamily in this area for a reason and so so i'm trying to reconcile that with and i'm wondering if you share the opinion of a previous speaker that there's too much uh residential multifamily affordable in in this general area can you do you do you share that view or is this is this an opposite view you need a blend it can't be all of one thing okay but um um i came to the conclusion that from my standpoint this couldn't this property couldn't be anything but multifamily from years of frustrating work um i'm all over dallas fort worth um there's hardly any multifamily in this area compared to what's going on in plain o and some of the other cities drive around and look i mean it's quite a bit now um it may not be tax credit deals but um at least you have a company that can control it you can't you know i don't know about the other ones but you have someone that controls who's in there and who they are and all that so so you support the trying to figure out so you support this development absolutely okay i mean the retail component commercial opponent is is a lot more complicated than it seems most people don't understand it i mean every day i mean my company does all of mcdonald's real estate in north texas i do all of wills fargo's real estate north texas i do all of discount tires real estate all i do is find sites i know what i'm talking about that's not commercial and thank you so much for explaining for some reason i was thinking you were opposed at first but now now i understand and if anyone wants to talk to me about it i'm available okay thank you thank you very much i understand now we've got a couple more people that want to talk to you about it because we have a couple more questions so if you'll if you'll stay here that'd be great uh council member moutzer i hear you on retail what do you think about office within mixed with you know the the predominant housing concept um you you need a demand for office where's the demand so you don't believe this is officer you don't believe there's a demand for office space and then absolutely not interesting they can't lease what they have you got a nine thousand square foot vacancy across the street asking 12 dollars a foot you can't build office and lease for 12 bucks a foot doesn't make sense the economics don't work and there's too many other options office is moving around people are sharing office space millennials don't i mean it's the rules are are being changed every day you know i was here that the uh lack of office space is an impediment to economic development and then we don't share that view there's a lack of office space yeah you seem to be seeing the opposite if there's an you know an abundance going ignored maybe it's just i mean i can get statistics to blow that away i mean you know it's well yeah do you have any uh okay um i just don't want us to sort of get into yeah i mean minutia so we do still have available all right well we there's still people wanting to talk to you so uh mayor pro tem yeah no and give me your name again i'm sorry i didn't know that it's lim miller lim thank you mr miller so but but what you didn't touch on is this the change in the neighborhood is the denton county courthouse is now two minute drive 11 minute so it's a 10 two minute drive 11 minute walk away now you're telling me that doesn't change the demographics of that area at all in your expert opinion that that that there's no one that wants to office two minutes away drive an 11 minute walk away from the county courthouse the brand new county courthouse depends on who you talk to what i mean i'm asking you me i work out of my house i'm not driving anywhere i'm just okay i asked you a sincere question and i accept people uber i mean i appreciate it i just it's it's a question that there is not an answer to okay what but you said you gave your statistics and i accepted those well you gave you cited who you pitched the property to and i accepted that and you asked and then i i i pointed out a change in the neighborhood that you have not cited and i asked you for your input and you gave it and i appreciate it well let me ask let me ask question to you you were touching base about the uh the traffic issues um you have any customers go to an average mcdonald's each day 2000 you have any people go into a grocery store each week 25 000 you don't think there's going to be more traffic for retail and commercial there is an apartment complex where people go to work and come home well i'm sorry i didn't ask you a question no no it's it's fine but it's the same it's the same approach if you said a signal light fixes the problem i could tell you it it exacerbated a problem outside of buckies so it doesn't you know there's not absolutes but it was office that we were talking about not retail and so i i get it you you cited the retail and and i accept your answers okay all right council member davis this is spectacular we've no we got a couple more i'll invoke the specter of buckies already um so i i appreciate you being here and bringing your expertise too many years of expertise i also appreciate council member melzer's question on office space the investors i know in town are building four and eight unit class a office space it's flying off the shelves and they're investing more projects doing the same so i'll leave that where it is we've addressed that question i'm looking at your map though with all the green space on it where you're talking about a lack of population density you'll concede for me though if you reorient this to the middle of the map there's many many more rooftops in a radius around this property than you've represented here on this map i'm just well the population density is not quite accurately reflected on this map this map does a good job of showing as retail and where all the retail locations are but not necessarily the population density on a radius around this point i talked to the grocery stores there's not enough density okay i can run the demographics and be happy to email them to you i'm pretty familiar with the grocery stores i'm just asking let's run the demographics i just did that as a visual but if you run the demographics it'll show you without question there's not enough density i mean that's what the map is okay i i appreciate everybody's conversation and dialogue but let's let's really try to get a little bit more pointed in the direction that we're talking about here and what we're here today to talk about are you is your question for the speaker yes all right if you could make it uh quick then we we might take a break after this thank you very much no no we got one more question oh oh yeah well yeah i i just wanted to say um uh that i uh agree with your point about um office space i know that you know we we have seen here in in the case of of stoke um it's really been a concerted effort uh to try to get this really well located hip um office space to make a profit and be independent they're working on it i will say you know is it your impression that kind of when we talk about pop this this area being population dense and you talk about this many units you know a thousand units or whatever i mean that sounds like a lot but do you feel that driving by i know for me when i drive along 288 i don't feel like i'm driving down a um the mixed use kind of zoning that i would like to see it be i feel like i'm driving by all this fast food um do you feel like there's tons of density hidden away or is are these numbers do they really sound like more more density than it really is because i'm not i'm not feeling that there's just tons of multi-family affordable residential out here and we're and we're drowning in it so if you could answer that question briefly because we're just we're basically people are debating you on your perspective no no i'm i'm i'm agreeing i'm agreeing with him but i'm wondering if i'm wondering if you could speak to you there's something i'm missing yeah you brought up a good point and if you look at this 75 foot utility easement nothing has really developed around that going all the way out to 380 it's it it cumbers all of that real estate on most of the developments occurred across the street because there's no easement and so it looks haphazard it looks like it's ill planned it looks like it's disjointed and so it's piece milled and it's all because of that easement y'all just moved it down by the tractor supply or what's that pad sell like that that pad will sell now i brought so many deals that i tried to put back to there they turned it down because anyway i know i appreciate it thank you we're going to go ahead and listen call the next speaker which is the last blue card i have but this is a public hearing so those who have not spoken who have not allocated their time to speak to someone else is certainly welcome to speak so the last card i have is dennis is a coop if you'll come down state your name and address your time will begin this graph was probably passed out earlier i hope everyone has a copy uh my name is uh mr mayor and members of council my name is dennis cope spelled coop i apologize that's okay i live at 720 country club road in fairview texas 30 years ago at a family reunion the late frank martino asked me to come to denton and buy some land on loop 288 a few years after that i purchased the land for the project that we're discussing tonight i started the planning process for this property beginning in 2002 and wanted duchess drive to come across my land so i dedicated the land and money to build duchess uh no wood apartments they've changed their name uh but they were the ones originally that built the street across kent keys property duchess drive was supposed to be a collector street that connected to mckinney street and extended all the way to woodrow lane those connections never happened and duchess is now a dead-end street after years of trying commercial development on my property i realized it didn't make sense without more rooftops nearby and people in that immediate area there's a lot of traffic and but there's just not enough people uh in that area i think the one mile radiuses are about 6 000 people if you look at one mile radiuses around other commercial development it's substantially higher than that okay uh all the commercial user candidates that we've tried to locate have gone down to target or they've gone to walmart or they've gone to other locations so mr miller's worked hard trying to get commercial users however it's become obvious that this property was best suited for apartments in 2014 an apartment developer and i had a meeting with the city of denton's uh planning director and he gave us a green light on our property that allowed multifamily this sup that we're talking about tonight is about a detailed site plan this is not a zoning change so we've worked with several other apartment developers and now feel very comfortable with denton grover pro project uh and we i believe that it's the best economic fit for the city pet core has done a great job of laying out the property and i'll grant access to mckinney street if they need it this project has three buildings on loop 288 with open space between them and has the double amount of landscapes that you would expect on a apartment project as you can see the buildings are not crowded together please look at the open space on duchess and especially at the intersection and next to the adjacent properties so let's look at the graph the dollar value of this project is greater than any other commercial development that we could put on our on our property this project will pay property taxes that is double the dollar value of buckies let me say that again this project will pay property taxes that is double the dollar value of buckies don't forget to sell tax pardon me nothing oh i'm sorry and also has a dollar value greater than the office building for the sally beauty headquarters that's a huge building and this has has more impact than that uh in these numbers i'm uh quoting or coming from the denton county appraisal district okay you may be surprised that the dollar value commercial is substantially less than the value to the city for tax purposes than the multifamily housing please look at the chart the commercial is the red squares and the multifamily is the blue squares now i didn't know how much money pedcor was going to invest in this property so i estimated on in this graph it was over 30 million if you could maybe get behind the mic to you i just i'm sorry okay so i thought i put in here 32 million i heard a number tonight it was substantially higher than that but at least it's double what you would normally expect for commercial development so the veranda project and that was your time so if you have a one sentence wrap up that'd be great uh well pedcor is ready to build the uh the project now with double the tax dollars that the city would expect from a commercial development okay thank you uh council member armature you had a question for the speaker yeah so anyway um i like this this graph and uh i'm wondering you know uh how you would explain that that that difference and how how ubiquitous it is is it unique to dentin i'll say to me um it makes a lot of sense because uh people will always need a place to live you know whereas bucky's nuggets or lipstick you know these are not um not necessities and uh but you know there's will always be a need for housing is the reason as simple as that or is it more more specific to location less broad what some people are under the impression that if there's a great big building like an office building that that has a lot higher value than these apartments but there's a lot more building materials in these apartment complexes and some of these office buildings and and so i mean when you think like on this project there's 276 units that are going to be there and you multiply the number of people that are going to be there you know there's just quite a few people so when you add up all the the dollars involved it you know it it's amazing i'll be honest with you i i didn't know what the answer was going to be when i started doing this graph it surprised me and uh you know i thought that the that the commercial would be higher than the apartments but when you look at the numbers that's what it shows so i thought well it might be something that would have an impact on some of the some of the thinking of of what's really the best use for some properties okay all right we would invest more in housing thank you great this is a i appreciate i don't see any more request to for questions thank you very much appreciate it thank you this is a public hearing so anybody else who has not spoken or had somebody speak for them you're certainly welcome to come down state your name and address and your time will begin anybody else wishing to speak one more time all right we will close the public hearing is oh oh you want to rebuttal sure yes come on yeah sorry so the public hearing is still open everybody's so tall um i don't know where my presentation went but i would like to pull up so what i heard were really the same three issues that that i i spoke to before um i i know that there is a desire for commercial development or perhaps office space and and what i heard lem saying and what i know that he has said to me over and over again is that these things have been tried um we've had professionals commercial developers office space developers um come and try to lay out this site and they were absolutely unable to do it for years um i i don't know that there's a lot more to say about that um but i i will say this um the other thing that i heard when there was a talk about density and i said this in my presentation you know when you look at this and and you see seven or eight properties some people think that's a lot some people think that's not a lot this is a two-mile radius right around the site i do see a lot of vacant land there i see some commercial land there i do see some rooftops if i was a commercial developer would that be enough rooftops for me for that particular site i've heard that it's not um you know there's a big difference in the development world between you know a site here and a site a thousand feet down the road and that might feel like the same spot to us when we look at this map but it's not this is very very site specific and and this is a great great site for our product and it just simply has not worked for other products um that that's that's just the truth of the matter um and i want to go back to this too because we didn't really get to it because it was when we got a little bit interrupted but these are those units that are are going to be lost very very soon the 250 that were already lost and i know i am talking about affordable units and not units in general but this is important um 144 in 2025 we will be leased up in 2023 that's only two years after us so we're not even covering what's being lost in affordability between now and 2025 and then another over 500 that's i mean the numbers are staggering over 1300 units of affordable affordable housing being lost and and that's 15 years so that sometimes feels a little far out there but 2025 does not feel very far out there for me um and and so i again just when you go back you can take that map for what it's worth some people might think that's too dense and some people think it's not um i don't think it is i think that there is demand i know that there is demand for multifamily housing right here and i have heard from other experts that i trust in this field um lem and dennis who have been trying to market this property for a different use for years and years that it's not appropriate for another use um that doesn't mean that 500 feet down the road maybe it works maybe there is room for office space right across the street from the denton county courthouse that does make sense to me but for this very particular site it it just doesn't um and and we could talk about traffic all day long um but once again we are committed to making sure that that signal goes in we really we we will contribute additional funds to that um we do believe that that's going to help that traffic situation traffic is traffic um we're going to generate less than most other uses would and i really really hope i can get your support tonight thank you thank you uh and so it's mon do you have a question for the speaker council member it might be for the speaker or for staff just so i just so i know what we're actually discussing here because uh i um i think the requirement is not that it be 100 commercial or industrial or office whatever it's that it'd be mixed use in order to completely avoid an sup right but what is the requirement how much how much would you have to have to completely not even have to come before us for an sup i recall looking it up and it was quite a bit of commercial and i think the commercial actually had to go in before the multifamily too isn't that right yeah just really completely infeasible um but i'd like a more quantified answer yeah um well let staff is there any uh so let me that's okay uh y'all looking up we'll go ahead so the new procedures allow for anyone who's spoken uh after the applicant to provide a rebuttal so i guess a rebuttal would mean those that are in opposition i think those that are in support did it say that or members of the public okay all right so if there's somebody who wants to come up um and speak to the applicant's response in rebuttal you're certainly welcome to come down uh and speak to that and i think the time is two minutes two minutes yeah so while staff is answering that question uh y'all can begin to think about if that's what you'd like to do all right there's several areas in the code that i'm gonna reference so it's gonna be a little bit flipping so cmg permitted multifamily as part of the mixed use development with that that as that l4 restriction so there was that that limitation on the use in cmg in 2002 that said it could either be a multifamily could either be approved with the specific use permit or as part of a mixed use development uh that was in sub chapter five of the of the dent development code there were additional mixed use restrictions in sub chapter five that uh laid out how that was to to progress and it included a development agreement that would have to be approved by council um and it provided for that um the commercial piece had a certain percentage of the commercial piece had to come prior to that that multifamily development and then finally in the definitions what percentage is is that in the definition um it's it's actually in the um those additional mixed use restrictions let me take a look at that 50 50 of the square footage of the multifamily has to be you have to have 50 of that in commercial according seems like an awful lot according to this the development regret agreement that's required uh does have to have a phasing plan stipulating that non-residential development will be constructed first and multifamily residential constructed last or only after 50 or more of the non-residential component has been developed okay so it's not 50 percent of the actual it's 50 percent of whatever is proposed for the commercial it can't be built until that 50 percent so i guess though the question was how much is required as far as commercial footprint um or office yeah or something non-residential so cmg actually doesn't have a minimum percentage of of that secondary or tertiary use um for that mixed use development so some of the zoning districts did like like the nrmu or um the the regional commercial zoning districts did provide or require a certain percentage um or a maximum percentage of the land area could be dedicated toward the multifamily for example um and multifamily is a single use cannot exceed 40 percent of the acreage in nrmu or nrmu 12 but cmg did not have that restriction so the point is in cmg there's not a minimum if somebody were to put 2 000 square feet of commercial technically in cmg with multifamily they could avoid the sqp requirement is that correct as long as half of the 1000 feet was developed prior to and there was this that there was that development agreement approved yes okay all right does that help help you counsel so literally like a unit could be an office literally i mean just i'm trying to understand yeah i mean it's yeah there's pretty big pretty big hole there okay depending how you look at it i wanted to add one other thing it would require three or more uses so something like retail office three or more uses so it would require multifamily retail and restaurant something that's good that's good information thank you coffee shop office yeah yeah okay anybody from the public want to speak again uh for the two minutes all right one more time anybody else want to speak for the two minute rebuttal okay that's uh i'm gonna close the public hearing it's 10 47 let's take about a five to seven minute break and we'll come back for discussion welcome everybody back to this meeting of the dent city council it's february the fourth 2020 it's a 10 54 it is still tuesday um we are moving we're reconvening our work session or excuse me agenda item six or eight a we still are on eight a so we have closed the public hearing uh we council member armature recognize you yes i i move to approve with the recommendations staff recommendations okay council member briggs i will second and i have uh things that i want to say are we gonna have discussion now yeah you can have the floor and then i'll call on council member davis okay so um i understand the opposition um fully but i also understand that we need housing we need a lot of it um we have approved several housing developments and and we need um we need variation and we need to make sure that the people that are coming into our city can afford to live here um we're incentivizing manufacturing jobs distribution jobs and some of these incomes are what they make 53 000 57 000 i mean that's teacher so we're just guaranteeing that someone has a safe affordable place to live and they can pay their rent and then they have enough money to spend it in our community in other ways um for for what on the paper on food on things like that so um we've heard different things that this can't nothing will go here um commercial wise i'm just i'm i'm an approval of this because of the project that it is um you said you would meet the 30 preservation and this is an amendment i would not add these things um to the sup um pay for the light and then the um yeah so those are the only two things so the 30 and then the money to help with the payment for the for the light because i think that will help make it go quicker um the other thing is that this has a tax credits property and it has a higher compliance requirement for the way that it looks so there are apartment complexes now that we have that people pay extreme amounts of money for but they're horrible inside there's you know um mold things like that so this this property is not going to be allowed for 30 years to degrade like that so um these are really great things about why i'm in support of this of this property um the one concern i have is that we did see a um a presentation earlier about people trying to crossing the street here and so if there is a light there needs to be some sort of safe pedestrian access for crossing because if there's a light there and there's kids that need to cross over to get to the other side to get to ryan they may not want to go all the way down to mckinney even though it's the safe route so this has got to be addressed by the apartments or the city and text dot so that's that's all i have to say okay um well you you proposed a couple of additions to the original motion which was 30% tree something preservation and you said pay for the light are you saying that they provide they advance the funds to pay for the full cost of the light with them i'm just asking you to clarify what you mean by pay for the light right well if the the two um up to i think it would be four hundred thousand dollars for the light if it is more than that that we need to pay for to have pedestrian access to have upgraded special um i i don't want them to have to be responsible for that if it's getting to the other side that would be something that we need to do but for the amount that she mentioned that they would commit i would like to have that in there all right just because we need to be specific so you're saying for them to contribute four thousand dollars four four thousand four hundred thousand dollars towards the uh funding of the signal light yes is that correct yes all right um and council member armature are you okay with that friendly amendment posed by council member rigs the seconder i accept that amendment and i agree with with all of the statements she made so that now the underlying motion is approval with staff recommendations with the two added conditions of the applicant to pay or to to achieve a 30 percent tree preservation and also that the applicant will pay four hundred thousand dollars towards the signal light at duchess and loop 288 all right we got a full request of speakers here so this will be a we'll get going council member davis it's late so i'm going to try to be brief i first want to thank pedcor for making the application for the sup i really appreciate the work that y'all do it's amazing that you're able to make a for-profit business out of a need a humanitarian need in our community that you've been creatively for some time now creatively using federal grants and federal tax incentives to be able to to build an investment business at the end of the day however you are an investor you're you're here before us as an investor and the irony of this entire situation is that the people we've heard from are entirely business owners investors the people who own surrounding land available for development and the people who are selling the land for development including the person who is not only selling the land we're talking about but owns the two adjacent parcels to the north and has for some time mr cope and mr key are in the same position they've been camping on these lots for some time now and they're they're trying to do what they can with them we don't have a neighborhood here in front of us we don't have a p and z denial because there's a great outpouring of of uh community opposition to this we had a p and z denial because our local developers are telling us one thing and our out of town developers are telling us another the way that i look at this is kind of the culmination of ditton's love hate relationship with multifamily over the last many decades uh your your slides a little off we actually just approved another uh housing is it forest something just a little bit further down mckinney we actually have another multifamily if you look at that map that we saw in terms of plano or far north dallas or carolton then the density of multifamily is not very great if you look at it in terms of denton it is entirely clustered in one portion of town we have some multifamily around the universities that's very expensive we have some multifamily that's not as expensive that is in this part of town so for me before we even get to the low income or affordable housing however you define that for me it starts at apartment density and multifamily density when i think mixed use i don't think a lot of apartments in a jack-in-the-box and a discount tire i think of my neighborhood where i can walk to two different grocery stores i can walk to a driver uh a doctor's office i can walk to a paint store i can walk to several different sit-down restaurants that is mixed use a sea of apartments like we have in far north dallas and carolton plano is not mixed use so for me another apartment complex right up on top of loop 288 and oh by the way underneath some power lines and the only thing we can possibly fit in this lot under some power lines apparently is the places poor people live that's not acceptable to me that's uh to me the apartment density is the first question and then i get to the question of the affordable housing and i know my friends in district one are not interested in yet another affordable housing project in district one i would i've been in favor of affordable housing projects before from the dais i've been in favor of multifamily projects before on many occasions i would welcome this project over on my side of town in district three i don't think it's appropriate right on top of the loop i'm not all that excited about another light on the loop at duchess i just don't see this particular development appropriate in this particular spot we have an sup because they are not allowed by right because when we look at mixed use we get to decide what that mixed use is that's our responsibility to do and this is not the mixed use i want to see in this area at this intersection on this lot council member ryan thank you mayor as i look at it and i look at that that 75 foot uh basement through there it is very difficult i've dealt in real estate myself for for many years and i can understand the challenges office space when it's not near something that's going to make use of that office space is not what's what's moving on the market right now it's office space that was being built on the north side of mckinney near uh the current courthouse those are the types of office spaces that are in high demand not kind of spaced out here in nowhere unless it's a large office space so i do believe that this is probably one of the few things that really would work in here i i'm glad that the uh that the developer is is willing to put in towards the light i think that the the 113 that they're required and the 150 that they additionally offered uh is where i would prefer the maximum would be considering that some of the other developers that have already built in there and future development will also be paying so they're they're paying a premium of 150 and to me that that was plenty but i would like to see that connection going back to the jack-in-the-box parking lot i think just in the interim that i think that that would be something that would would help out it'll also help is that the rest of that corner finishes developing i've seen that corner sitting there for so many years without anything going on the the additional item that i would like to see involved in this and this can doesn't necessarily need to be part of the sqp but the variable of rates to not have everything at the 60 percent to allow some 40s and 50s and in some 70s and 75s in there would be an added bonus and generally speaking i'm in support of this so council member ryan you had a a request for the connection to mckinney um are you i mean because right now the motion does not contain that are you wanting to yes i would like to ask for a friendly amendment on that i would like to ask for a friendly amendment to add the connection to the jack-in-the-box parking lot which gets you to mckinney connection is that is that the connection we're talking about okay all right um okay and i accept and were those other items friendly amendments too yes yeah so i accept all of that entire okay amendment package so the amendments were the additional drive what were the other ones the the not being totally level at 60 60 percent uh yes the variable rates okay uh schedule and uh again i felt like the 150 in addition to what they're required to pay was was enough on the on the light as opposed to the full 400 000 okay so that's different than what the current motion was so council member armature you're saying you want to decrease it from 400 000 to 300 000 i mean i should say i'm i'm fine with that is uh i'd be curious to know what uh council member briggs well we're going to ask i would also possibly put it in such a way that they would do as we do with some of our our water and wastewater projects or if they did put in the additional money that as other development came in they would get reimbursed for it if that makes okay if that makes sense no i understand what you're saying um okay uh so again council member armature the variable rate for the rents the drive through jack in the box from dutch or from the apartment building to jack in the box to get them to mckinney and then you have reducing the light of uh contribution from 400 to 150 plus something maybe can you put a sort of a total number on that council member 263 263 okay with a reimbursement if if development works out correct all right council member armature is that acceptable yes council member briggs so i would just like to confirm with staff that the 200 000 is something that we can get to match that so that we're not holding that process back anymore based on information i'm getting from my city engineer as we were texting uh during the meeting my understanding is that intersection is about 500 000 okay so so with the 200 000 or what from them then that would still be adequate for us to do the improvements we need to do well i think what i heard him say is that the cost for the signal line of that intersection would be half a million dollars oh okay yeah and so if there's 250 or 260 being contributed that 240 has to be made up somewhere and i mean that's a either council decision or some other decision but you're 240 000 short so so um we've got so let me ask you do you accept council member ryan's amendment with the drive from the apartments through to mckinney street i'm asking you council member breaks um i'll accept for the the amount of the light because i'm i'm pretty concerned and i know that's a concern for okay for the other um the individuals there that that needs to be there before the development comes online um all right so council member armator that sounds reasonable to me okay so then the underlying motion as far as all the accepted friendly amendments i'm just going to summarize because we're going to get lost here if i don't 30 tree mitigation uh payment for the light for 400 000 by the applicant the driveway will be extended from the uh project to the jack-in-the-box parking lot therefore also to mckinney and then there'll be a variable rate of the rental rates instead of just a straight 60 percent there'll be some higher than that and then some lower than that as far as percentage of average median income so that's what everybody's agreed to so so council member ryan you can certainly make an amendment if somebody seconds and vote on it to get your light contribution memorialized or you can just let it ride with what's already here it's up to you would uh a friendly amendment of a reimbursement contract for them to be able to be be reimbursed in the future as we do with water and wastewater from other developers that they might have to put it up front but that they i'm not understand when you say water and wastewater because you're well right now if if someone oversizes oh you're talking about the example i thought yeah yeah i'm using that as an example that that they could get reimbursed for what they're so you're asking is there a friendly amendment that there could be built into the development agreement of the 400 000 that if other developers come on that contribute to the traffic light fund that they would be reimbursed according to what they would have only had to pay if that comes about in other words there's going to be a pro rata share that could be possibly reimbursed correct all right so that's the friendly amendment that sounds reasonable to me because of my breaks okay all right all right okay um i hope somebody's to keep not writing these down because i'm trying to but i can't read my writing uh mayor pro tem i just want to let me clarify because i'm i'm tracking with you so far but you you said 400 000 this assistant manager assistant city manager said 500 000 are we 500 or 400 what on the light in in in in the underlying motion well the underlying motion is 400 000 but the cost of the light is 500 okay is what i'm hearing from this assistant city manager in the 100 000 we have or no go ahead it could be made up through impact fees collections of impact fees okay in that service area got it okay just wanted to make sure i was let's try again bless you all right uh thank you mayor so i'll try i too will be trying to be quick i've been uh i've met with pedcor a number of times been uh consistent i want to hit the highlights and then i have a list here try to be succinct to succinct as possible but i want to have a clear record um the first thing noticeably missing for those watching this video in in the future we heard pedestrian issues raised tonight on this very road we have a map every presenter for the developer listed a map of retail that pointed out retail to the south be it aldi be aldi be it uh golden triangle mall be it panda express at out everything to the south and there's no pedestrian uh walkway to the south so we heard a presentation tonight that raised significant issues and this body would put forward um to pass this development with no consideration of that and it's not baked into sup i find that noteworthy and i i leave that to those watching this to to evaluate that also missing is the fact that there's a park across the street planned so directly to the south across loop 288 is a park and there's no plan for pedestrian crossing there uh there's a there's a plan for a signal light but there's no stipulation that that's in one have a pedestrian crossing i find that not noteworthy another noteworthy thing not in the sup is a percentage of the makeup it says a variable rate so there's no percentage to say 40 50 uh it was mentioned but not stipulated in in the notes in the sup to require them to adhere to that so that's noteworthy to me and then my other points i think this is short-term thinking i think we have to apply the highest and best use for this piece of property on a major thoroughfare in our city and how we want to progress and how we want to proceed especially understanding staffs note that there's there's no minimum requirement for the amount of commercial so what we have here is is just a blatant i don't want to do it and and i talked to pedcor in advance and they knew this was coming on the commercial side of things this is not new news i think it's also noteworthy for someone watching this to say that all the stats they provided i asked one question about the county seat moving two minutes away from this development and there's no significant speak to talk talk to that point or understanding what that does to shift the economics every example was used from a time before that happened and i think that's noteworthy and and it guides my decision also i i think it's it's important to point out for those watching the entire session that no new developments were factored in so the the figures are given to you that all these things roll off one don't factor in the fact that new new developments come in our our city all the time and we meet with developers regularly that are bringing programming those so that's not a static number and then it doesn't account for the fact when they touch on it that those that roll off don't have to those can stay um um they can reapply and so that's noteworthy so those numbers are a little skewed my opinion i factor in the fact that that disd we asked staff to talk to them and they came back and said yes it puts pressure on ryan high school okay then we should factor that in uh and and so and i touched on the commercial aspect of it that there's no minimum requirement there's no maximum just saying hey work with us that's what i that's all i've asked the entire time and and there's been no attempt to do so and that's noted and then and i think my my my peer here council member davis hit it spot on and i absolutely give habitat for humanity a hard time and multifamily is the same boat every every low income apartment complex in the city of denton is in district one every one of them that is that is unacceptable uh well okay well you can during your three minutes you can uh disagree with me but i i believe that to be uh noteworthy and then i i look at the the guiding principle uh the uh sup i'll direct you to 2b will it's it's it's the opposite but i'll read it it will impede uh normal and orderly development and improvements and and i'm i get i get there because the property to the south disputes it being there uh and so the property to the south disputes it being there i pointed out a new development in the area that would potentially add cause a reshuffle and there was no response to that and so with the pedestrian aspect being top on my list my other things falling underneath that and thirdly the pressure on ryan high school and disd is concerned uh that that's going to guide my decision mayor pro tem did you want to make any amendments for those issues that you found no i i i i i i just i put that out there and if they want to adjust accordingly if they want to stand by their decision by all means i i'll stand by my checking all right council member armature so i want to respond to uh some of those concerns just expressed and and then when i'm done i'd like to hear from from staff about where about what other districts are we have affordable housing in besides district one so this is zoned multi-use and when you drive down or up the loop either direction you see fast food joints targets wal-mart's all you see all you see all the places in this in this graph we have here that are on the bottom this chain retail places and it it doesn't feel like what it is zoned for and i think the zoning is really good it's the kind of it's what i like about zoning it it sees the potential for this area to be a place where you can have people living who can use these these businesses and and yes uh quote to you know put pressure on the on the high school i mean to me that just i would just call it going to the high school um my i i have a kid at ryan and uh you know it's i mean this is what our public schools do it's why they're awesome and uh so it right now the loop it doesn't feel like a neighborhood space to me it just it feels like a kind of a endless strip mall and i'm i want to see more people live there now uh that said you know the the pedestrian safety concerns are are real um and uh it and i feel like the the traffic light issue is is addressing that and when we have some more sidewalk connectivity um that will help address that but you know i also think having more of a residential feel to the area you know if we can get some traffic calming i mean it's so fast people drive so fast along the the loop because they can so more more traffic calming signs saying and i'm not putting this into the ordinance but i can picture those signs that say drive like your kid lives here if you put that out now in front of the wal-mart or panda express you know it it wouldn't make any sense but when we've got more more residential that is more visible from the street then then that'll make sense so uh anyway i i'm very very happy uh to have made the motion for this i i i really hope we can get a full super majority support people who will consider council member melzer how would we incorporate a requirement for there to be a pedestrian crosswalk that's not that's not something that the applicant could do these assistant city managers inform me that if there's a signal light there it will include a pedestrian crosswalk across loop 288 great that's correct i'm glad to hear that yeah with sufficient timing you're going to do with sufficient timing or insufficient time i'm going to do with the timing that's the standard that we do timing with okay um you know personally just my my belief about what would work better there would be actual mixed use but do i see a reason for denial of the scp i can't honestly say that i feel it's not i i can honestly say i feel it's injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property i don't i'm not actually convinced that it would impede the normal and orderly development improvement of surrounding vacant property so i don't see reason to deny and and i do believe that the need for housing is compelling and also the particular structure is compelling and i very much much support council member ryan's you know amendment i think that first of all it is primarily workforce housing but the fact that you can mix low income in with kind of closer to market rate i think is better than ghettoizing low-income housing i think it's just healthier so since you've told me since i've heard what i have about the crosswalk the only thing i would add is i'm not i'm not going to make this a requirement because i'll be accused of holding you up from the dais but especially if you get a break on the traffic light an extra contribution to make that park work would would uh sure be great not making a requirement okay council member bridge did you have a request to speak right just yeah just a follow-up so i did want to um address because it was it was mentioned that there no one really addressed the um the crosswalk or the pedestrian access to the other side and i think that's been fully vetted tonight and we've talked about that um many times but i also wanted to ask because i know that um miss hensley's here um for parks and it's my understanding that a future park is also going to be down the street um possibly at audra in the loop as well um at some point and so that would make it another another area where they wouldn't have to cross on the other side of the street is that still sarah hensley assistant city manager that's still something that's up in the air it does it's not uh completely confirmed but it's something we're looking at okay all right thank you okay um well i've seen this is an interesting discussion here tonight well first off i will tell you whether it's this project or any other project to talk about traffic calming devices on loop 288 and these kind loop 288 is one of the major loops around our city uh and we're not about filling that up with stop signs and stop lights um because then we have a whole another issue that we have to deal with so and typically it's been my understanding as well and in planning that um when you have highways such as that or corridors such as that you'd like to have a kind of layering effect from the land you've got some commercial i understand everything that's been said about the commercial then you might have the multi-family and then you might have residential somewhere that creates these kind of buff areas you don't have enough of necessarily of that land space i know when i and i spoke with the developer as well and um identified we talked about that yes you've got those three buildings on the front but is there a way that you could reconfigure that to where if there was some land that you could move those swap that out with and leave that frontage for commercial would that would that be effective the the amendments are good to me i'm just really struggling with how to balance the interest of the developer together with the interest of the owner together with the interest of the surrounding landowners the clustering of the the apartments i don't know if i really i don't know if that is as concerning to me i mean when i think of clustering i think of close and the ones behind it are fixed to be released but um still eight hundred seventy dollars nine hundred dollars a month for one bedroom i don't know if i can really classify that as you know affordable i mean that's you're still going to need to make uh if you're making thirty thousand dollars a year because i think the ratio is thirty percent of your income can only go to housing to qualify for some of these projects so that's a lot i mean especially if you're making thirty thousand dollars a year so honestly i'm still not exactly quite sure where i am on this i can't say that i'm for it i can't say i'm against it uh there's pros and cons both ways and we're just going to have to see where the vote is in that regard council member armature yeah um can i get a an answer from staff about that question of the district district distribution yes and i also want to give the applicant an opportunity we've added several amendments and um wanted to get an opportunity for them to respond to those amendments and why she's doing that if staff has an answer uh which on i guess that's i can think of two off the top of my head that are not in district one um at palladium denton and the rockston um both of which i believe are in district two okay um so the amendments but to the amendments um we are happy to contribute the four hundred thousand um towards the light i do think that that is going to address the pedestrian issue that we have been talking about all night tonight um and you know there's uh i think there's only going to be a gap of sidewalk um for the one lot that's north that's adjacent to us to the north now that discount tires there you go from discount tire to jack box jack in the box to that piece to us we can happily connect that sidewalk too and and make all of that connectivity as well um what were the other as far as um the other amendment um with respect to the mixed incomes it's called income averaging and i was making sure that julie had that correct term in there um i without having numbers in front of me um i think something like a five percent at fifty percent and another five percent at seventy percent is a good place for us to start and we can certainly commit to that um it it does serve you know a wider income band of folks um and i i think and hopefully addresses that issue as well i can't but i can't remember what else did you repeat what you said about the income band about the fifty percent seventy percent so um if if you're wanting to put a number to it um a suggestion might be five percent of the units at fifty percent ami five percent of the units at seventy percent ami and then ninety percent of the units at sixty percent ami as a minimum we might wind up you know doing something more than that but i think that would be a nice way to be able to phrase it and the technical term for it is income averaging in the tax credit world and another amendment was the the thirty percent tree preservation that's not a problem at all if that means us spading trees and and uh and preserving them and having to move them we'll even do that not a problem and the other is the linking of the drive to mckinney absolutely and like i said in my presentation we had already researched those cross-access easements are in place um and i i the other point i wanted to make too and it is true that there are not neighborhood groups out here there's not 200 people out here that are opposing this but there would be neighborhood groups that would really benefit a lot from this i think that was the only other kind of response i wanted to make that it's and i think you addressed the uh the 400 000 for the light yes together with the reimbursement but which i appreciate thank you yeah councilman and so you sort of mentioned another one which isn't a part of this and that was the connectivity of the sidewalk from your parcel to uh that space between jack and the box yes i guess my only question there is is that within the right of way in other words do you have the authority that you can is that within the right of way to do that and can that be done but there's not any right of way that needs to be acquired or anything like that that's my only question is just to make sure that we that can be done with it's dennis's land so oh it's dennis's land next door okay all right okay well that might make it a little bit easier um and uh because is it go ahead i i think the the only the thing that's still out there is is the concept of adding a commercial component and um and i think that we did address um you know maybe it was a little bit later than after your question but you know like i said i think when you go a little bit further south you just might be able to lem said that he had interest in that um those sites now that they've moved that power line and so i do agree that i think that there's a lot of land there that's developable for office or commercial space i just don't think this 15 acres that that i don't think that that is going to help this site um even if we could and and unfortunately we can't it's not that we didn't explore it but we don't have this would not be a financially feasible development if we added that small commercial component to it it just wouldn't be and even if we could somehow convince ourselves that we could do it i think you'd have an empty office space and then 270 units and it's not a better development okay so the so the amendment you're okay with and we haven't added one that the movement and the second are going to have to make that adjustment as far as the placing the sidewalk between your property yes sir making that connectivity to whatever that building is or their jack-in-the-box or something like that yes to make that connectivity all the way to the mckinney intersection that's correct okay all right uh so is that something that yes yeah i accept with the sidewalk connectivity and the five five ninety that distribution council member briggs yes and i just want to go on record that there are more affordable housing units other than in district one i know that we have some in district two okay all right um i want to make sure that staff has all the amendments that we've listed so you don't you don't necessarily have to summarize but and i'll summarize them at the end before we take the vote so i understand them okay uh council member armature thank thank you very much jean is that an old request to speak because i i mean oh i'm sorry yes that's okay council member melzer i just want to ask the applicant does the nearby park have value to you absolutely um i don't know that we can do a lot more than the 400 000 but um yes i just you answered my question okay all right uh so to summarize the motion uh we've got a motion to approve agenda item five g no six man i'm lost now six six a we're still on six a eight a eight a it's almost midnight um with the following pursuant to staff recommendations as presented and then with the following amendments uh the applicant will provide a 30% tree camp tree preservation the applicant will provide a total of four hundred thousand dollars to be placed in the normal fund for the traffic signal at duchess and luke 28 with the possibility of a reimbursement should development occur that would meet that requirement and lower their ultimate contribution they would create connectivity from their property to mckinney avenue they would have a variable rate of rent do you want that specifically in the sup the five and is that what y'all are wanting the five and the five okay you are but council member briggs didn't necessarily saying that is that is that specificity do y'all want that specificity um is that is it if it's helpful yes if it's not just the variable i mean because that's what council member ryan said if the specificity does applicant need that specificity okay all right but without that specificity you're not necessarily i mean you could not do the five percent at 50 percent i mean you could you could choose you have the ability to choose how you want that mix and match that's true so perhaps it could be a minimum 10 percent that are not at 60 percent and using income averaging yeah yes so do y'all just want to leave it at income averaging okay we'll put those terms in there income averaging and then the additional amendment is the connectivity of the sidewalk from the north end of the project to the closest near sidewalk jack in the box or y'all figure out how to say that i'm not sure what's over there did i miss one did i miss any of the amendments you don't tell me i missed one no but just some some additional clarification please um on the on the uh variable rate just want to make sure that it's not for the life of the project are we just talking for the life of the the affordability affordability yeah that's just wanted to make sure that that was yeah yeah yep okay all right um council member melzer are you requesting to speak well i was going to reopen if if that was just all uh if in fact the four hundred thousand dollars is palatable to the applicant but there's a provision in there where that might be reduced because of other contributions um you know i would like to offer an amendment that any contributions that might offset that would go toward park dedication so in other words it'd still be 400 000 if other money comes in that would go instead of it going toward the light that could go toward light it would go toward park dedication i accept that council member briggs yeah i'll accept that as long as the the amount stays the same is that acceptable to the applicant okay okay all right uh so staff city attorney has that properly and so this is my this is my struggle we're going to pass something without seeing this thing in writing we've got about eight amendments to this thing so that that really troubles me um because i just i don't like to i don't like to do that um so i don't know what that means but how can we is there is there a remedy to that thinking through it long term i mean one is to continue and do it at another meeting so you can actually see it one would be to approve it tonight but the count the staff bring it back to it another meeting to show you that the actual language i mean it's just process wise otherwise you know my preference has always to be to have verbatim language that would go in there and that takes more time by staff right now to to go figure that out before you all voted yeah yeah um and i know i mean i wouldn't think that we'd have to go through all this all over again if we decided to at least be able to move it to a place where we're able to see the ordinance in its entirety with all these different amendments memorialized in the exact verbiage so um yeah okay all right um well then i'm going to be true to my to my conviction because i i do not want to to have to vote on this and leave all this uncertainty even though from what i'm hearing and understanding i don't i don't know exactly where this is going to go on the final vote um so i'll i don't think it's gonna pass my motion so i'm going to make a motion to postpone till next week so that staff will have an opportunity to put forth the ordinance as what we've been what we've memorialized or what has been provided for here and then take a motion on that so that that motion takes president over the motion on the floor however that motion requires a second and then a vote so uh councilmember briggs i'll second okay i didn't expect that uh so we have a motion and a second um anybody okay i need i need everybody to whoever is not requesting to speak i need you to remove your name from the from the list all right councilmember melzer yeah i just want to understand the alternatives if we were to go ahead and vote based on you know the notes that have been taken so far and subsequently saw the sort of rendered you know the rendered ruling and had an issue with it what would our recourse be most likely motion to reconsider oh i mean that's the best way that's the only way i know of to to revisit a vote a prior vote yeah yeah and that and that really is tricky because you wouldn't really see it and we'd have to get it before the next posting agenda because you have to make the motion reconsider by the time of the next council that's true yeah all right so is that is that does that timing even conceivably work would we see it in time to motion to reconsider if necessary yeah my only concern with that is by the time you do a motion reconsider then you're pushing it out another couple weeks because then you got a vote on the motion reconsider then you put the motion back on the table um whereas if this passes we could have this on next week with the uh and that way we're not necessarily wasting everybody's time is we are but hopefully to provide more certainty to the applicant i mean i if i were having a 57 million dollar project i would want to make sure that whatever the council votes on they're good with and that there's nobody going to pop up and say hey this isn't going to work but that's my motion we've had a second so any council member armature yeah i'd just be curious what the applicant thinks about that oh billy we okay okay well yeah that's because your head hit that button back there when it bobbed off i guess i would just say that um as the applicant we are crystal clear on what we're being asked to do and and we absolutely will be able to do all of it and i have a lot of confidence in your staff that they would be able to write that up and and memorialize what what we're talking about here i i know i am very clear on what it is that you want from us in order to approve this sup um i i certainly understand your desire for the certainty sure but but i'm i'm very certain yep all right uh councilman breaks you're queued up did you have anything to say i had a question about the process since it is a super majority and we've already had a couple of council members um speak to to um not really being in favor um so that one that's one of the reasons why i seconded um just so that we can see it all in writing and give a chance for this council to review all the things that you are willing to do for this community to make this project work okay we have a is the motion screen not working um oh mine's just got some blue thing i don't know what this means but okay all right we've got i don't know what it means my name is not showing up on mine is the mover but that's okay all right so we have a motion uh to postpone to a date certain which is i believe next week which is the uh 11th we have a second uh let's vote on the board please motion carries five to two all right so we'll have that on the next agenda with the proper ordinance in that regard all right okay thank you all very much all right we're going to go to agenda item eight b which is hold up uh that's not it yeah it is is this it is this the sign section no eight b yep okay uh hold the public hearing specifically okay that's it yeah eight b which is hold a public hearing consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of dent texas amending the dent development code specifically amending section five point three point six e using specific standards for low impact manufacturing thank you mayor members of council ramangita development services principal planner for your consideration is a code amendment regarding low impact manufacturing as you all know back in april last year the city adopted a new development code 2019 development code as part of that update there were some uses that were consolidated for simplicity some were introduced for clarity and then some were just renamed can i can i interrupt you just for a second yes sir i'm going to do this just because this gentleman's been waiting here a long time i haven't opened the public hearing i'm going to i'm going to move an agenda item up that's fine if that's all right so i apologize for that i've just gotten a little my head's gotten a little spaced out on me so uh and is that the right way to do that just say we're going to we're going to at least postpone agenda item 8b here just for a moment we're going to move agenda item 8d up front uh so i'm going to go ahead and call that hold a public hearing consider approval of an ordinance of the city of denton texas amending an overlay district approving an amendment to the first united church special sign district for 4.141 acres sorry about that wrong thank you cindy jackson development services department for the record i am here tonight to bring before you sd 19001 it is a request to amend the special sign district for the first united methodist church to permit wall signs as provided in the sign code the sign district was was originally approved in january of 2010 the 4.17 acre site is located at south locust street between mulberry and sycamore the special sign district as it was approved in 2010 permits banner signs along locust street frontage year-round seven parking lot banners in the east parking lot year-round wall signage as permitted in specified locations a banner sign at the east sycamore entrance year-round and an led display monument sign at the corner of south locust and east mulberry which has not been put in place yet i want to point out that a special sign district while it's an overlay district it is different from a zoning overlay when a zoning overlay is silent on any provisions for development it automatically refers back to the dentin development code however with a special sign district if it is silent it means it's not allowed so what we um the while the request was for uh wall signs staff is recommending that we permit all signs as permitted in the sub chapter 33 plus the special sign provisions that way anytime the church wants to add a sign they don't have to come back and amend the ordinance we have criteria for approval in section 3318 of the sign code which i went into in detail in your backup and the request complies with all of these criteria there's several of them we did advertise the request we sent out mailed notices at within 200 and 500 feet we received no responses in opposition and two in favor representing three percent of the property within the 200 foot boundary the planning and zoning commission recommends approval of the request with the vote of seven to zero and staff recommends approval of this request to amend the special sign district for the first united methodist church to prevent permit any provision of the sign code that is not addressed by the special sign district to be governed by chapter 33 as amended and that concludes my presentation councilmember briggs do you have questions for staff i do just a clarifying question um because i know that we recently approved the downtown standards and um someone had approached me and said that um for to paint a mural that the the fees now the permit fees are insane i mean they're they're they're increased significantly um so i i guess my one question is will this church be subject to permitting fees if they want to change um like some of this is paint right which would be is it a mural or is it a sign actually no they're not painted all the signs that i have in my um in my backup those are actually vinyl oh i'm looking at the one that's the mosaic worship yep it's all they're all vinyl they're all vinyl and and they look like it's painted you can see the texture of the brick underneath them they're they're pretty interesting i really like the look of them personally but um no they're vinyl okay i just wanted to make sure that they weren't going to be subject to every time they wanted to change a sign or anything to those those permitting fees well we do require permitting fees for a sign permit it's uh the sign the um the permit fees did go up recently and that was to reflect the actual cost of service that um were were providing for them is to pay for the cost of service okay so it still applies even though there's going to be a signed district yes for every time they want to change a sign whenever they want to put up a sign well yeah it would be changing a sign too um people who have signs and they want to change the gel in it they have to get a permit to change the gel in the sign so it would be the same kind of thing can you remind me what it was and what the fee is now for something like that um i can look that up for oh richard's here if you check the i will i think i think part of the confusion with with the downtown there was a sign permit or the change of face or sign permit fee in addition there was the certificate of design uh certificate of appropriateness right and when we really looked at that it did not make we did two of them were really one we did refund the fees associated with the first one because it essentially was the same it was the same review for signs was a lot different than uh painting a building or or or changing windows um so in in in the context of reviewing a sign we were already doing that that zone sort of the zoning review with the sign permit and so we weren't getting we are no longer charging that fee for the for the design consistency okay so that part has been that's been right right it's basically correct okay thank you and so this would just be the the one the one fee for this they wouldn't have to do the certificate of appropriateness and that correct okay and that's that's for the for the sign fee i don't believe we have a fee for for wall signs um because it's not a change of face but i'll let cindy confirm that in the i just wanted to make sure that there wasn't going to be an added expense um to the church um with anything that we're doing no okay thank you yes member robert yeah so i'll just say real briefly so i i totally approve this um and i i look forward to you know revisit i'm glad to hear the answers to those questions because i had heard similar complaint maybe the same uh complaint uh about uh sign fees so i i look forward to your opportunity to revisit um the sign sign policy policy and the codes um and i'm very happy to approve this anybody else for staff yeah with this public hearing uh so i've got to open the public hearing um oh mayor pro tem yeah i just have a question for staff if the ordinances change i just want to make sure they're grandfathered in so if they're does this supersede those changes in the ordinance yes okay thank you open the public hearing anybody wishing to speak on this item come down state your name and address from time to begin okay yes okay all right okay anybody wishing to speak okay we'll close the public hearing council member melzer i'm fine with this i'm going to be voting yes i solicited some opinion just to help me think about it i'll just pass it along got to make sure you use a uv laminate with it or else that's going to fade and the lettering is too small okay mayor pro tem i move approval council member davis second we have a motion and a second for agenda item 8d let's vote on the board please motion carries seven zero thank you sir appreciate your patience here thank you very much all right we'll move on back to agenda item 8b hold a public hearing consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of denton texas amending the detent and development code specifically amending section 5.3.6e so you can just pick up where you left off yes let me just i think you're at the end of your presentation it's going to be it's pretty close so as uh to introduce myself again romney gator development services principal planner this consideration is for a code amendment related to low impact manufacturing as i was saying earlier the development code was adopted in 2019 as part of that update we consolidated some uses we created some uses and we renamed some uses and one of those uses that we renamed was light manufacturing we renamed that to low impact manufacturing and we also have a definition for low impact manufacturing i'm not going to read the whole definition but i just want to emphasize that part of the definition of the use it includes distribution manufacturing and wholesaling as well as some warehousing components as part of the the use so just want to clear that um make that point the next slide here illustrates where low impact manufacturing is permitted um in the several zoning districts uh specifically a specific use permit with um in the md zoning district permitted with you specific standards in the mr sc hc go li and hi so what we're here today is um is the first of three city initiate code amendments really to correct the the use specific standards related to low impact manufacturing which is section 536e the current section or the current use specific standard prohibits distribution warehousing and wholesaling but as we read earlier it is included in the definition so we're going to correct that uh the also the other part of the use specific standard is the limitation of the maximum square footage of low impact manufacturing and in here the current requirement is that it does not exceed 5000 square feet and you can imagine that is a very small area for a low impact manufacturing uh use so this is the proposed code amendment we are proposing to remove the the prohibition of low impact uh manufacturing where it discusses distribution warehousing and wholesaling activities we are proposing that the md zoning district have a maximum square footage of 10,000 which is an increase from 5000 in the mr sc and hc the maximum square footage would increase to 10,000 however if there were requests to be more than 10,000 they can with a specific use permit the remaining zoning district the go the li and the hi will not have a maximum square footage so that concludes my presentation the planning zoning commission considered this application or this recommended this code amendment and recommended approval seven zero councilman breaks can you give me um a list of some low impact manufacturing some types of businesses that we currently have that would fit into this yeah just so that we could wrap our head around i was just thinking some of them um armadillo ale in downtown would be a low impact they're they're they're using pre-manufactured or you know raw materials that that's already been processed they're fabricating they're they're manufacturing they're distributing you know they're creating a new product and that would be something that would be considered low manufacturing it's in an enclosed area it doesn't create you know the noise the the sound the the sound the air quality and then that sort of thing is a very low impacted manufacturing use that would be an example okay just fabricating manufacturing companies that would not pose an impact outside of you know their normal so anything it would be contained within within their wall correct okay and that's that's actually one of the use specific standards that that you see here number three all activity shall occur entirely within the enclosed structure okay thank you yes all right uh this is a public hearing i'll open the public hearing anybody wishing to speak please come down and state your name and address your town begin anybody wish to speak i'll close the public hearing uh mayor pro tem move approval council member melzer yeah actually a question first what drove the i'm fine with it but what drove the request or the desire to move from 5,000 to 10,000 well the uh the drive is um we have a number of existing buildings in the city and when we're ready between five and ten or less yeah or higher than 5,000 actually and um just for for your information uh you know in the gl there were 87 buildings existing that were already considered non-conformed because they were more than 5,000 in the li loan was 186 so we're trying to correct uh the non-conformity and really be more realistic as far as what size uh the sample use can be okay i appreciate that thank you i'll second motion and second let's vote please agenda item six eight d or eight b excuse me motion carries seven zero eight e hold a public hearing considered option an ordinance of the city of denton texas amending the dent development code subchapter five use regulations is there our last two two slides be quick richard canoni development services uh if you recall sort of introduced this item uh back on um well a different topic but we did briefly discuss it uh in relation to the entire ddc when we discussed the hunter and coal mbc and one of the proposed changes that they had with respect to temporary batch plants again this is a a staff initiated amendment uh what you see in front of you is essentially the the definition of what a concrete and asphalt batching plant how it's defined in the ddc when we when we i think made this change in the 2019 ddc we were looking at um batch plants related i think to much larger scale product projects what this amendment does is essentially uh almost reverts back to the 2002 uh standards uh that allowed um allowed temporary batch plants by right this just clarifies that it be associated with a development project and so essentially what what this would do or what this could cure what we're starting to see is all of the new residential subdivisions that are going in by right if they wanted to do a batch plan on site for 30 days or however long it would be to even a small commercial project it would require an sgp so they'd have to go through the noticing and dual public hearing process for a project that's already approved for just the temporary use or they could line up quite a bit of cement trucks every day to do those pours and so when really looking at at comparing the the good versus the bad we think this is a much better option and probably one that would be much more beneficial we think in the long run than having to go for an sgp in addition what we're also proposing to add is this item six which would require a sgp again for all temporary batch plants that would not be on site so if it were to be uh someone wanting to set up a temporary batch plant that that would not be exempt under tceq it would have to go through the through the sgp process planning and zoning recommended approval five zero uh staff did find that it met the criteria for approval and i'll be happy to answer any questions on the wind so it would just be allowed by right if the bat if it was on the site for development correct okay so um what about so it would the roads aren't necessarily on site it would only be if it would only be for those roads let's say a residential subdivision that's going to on on raw land that's going to um put in a number of obviously streets to serve that that subdivision it would only be for those streets within that subdivision um another example um the mcdonald's that just went in on on on fort worth they had a very very small um batch plant for their for the concrete work that they had out there but it would be that that type of uh that type of instance and so you don't recommend um in the right proposed regulations putting a size or a time limit on something that should just be allowed by right and those are already incorporated into this into the standards so there there's um essentially 30 day um permits if you will um that could be renewed for three times so it's up to 180 days total i think that's consistent where where tcq is with with respect to their their permitting and then in addition there's distance requirements that are still within the standard that it's to be 300 feet essentially from any structure but like a small one for mcdonald's is different than say a really large one for um mayhill correct but it would still have to be if it's if it's one of those really large ones i forget what the threshold is it's a per hour and a and a per day amount um those typically then have to go through the full tcq permitting which then essentially are exempt from our permitting permitting requirements so there are thresholds set within that yes ma'am okay thank you yes councilmember amater yeah so um having recently um you know advocated for someone and i forget if you were in the loop on this but but i know there were a number of staff involved and were really great in helping her neighborhood deal with a concrete batch plant that was in the lot right behind their home so it was a text dot batch plant um is there anything in here that uh would place any any local restrictions on even an on-site concrete batch plant on kind of raw land to be developed that is close to existing residential neighborhoods yes i think i think the tcq requires a 50 foot separation distance from the property line that's their minimum our our current standards require a 300 foot distance separation the way it's where it's essentially from from any structure yeah okay yeah i was gonna say 50 is not enough but okay that's we have 300 and then there's there's limitations on hours of operation okay yeah so that and that makes a difference yeah that's already built in yeah excellent thank you all right any more questions for staff councilmember melzer is uh temporary explicitly defined as 30 days or less you're you're allowed up to three i think it's three permits for a total of i'm sorry 60 days per permit up to three so 180 days i think i might have said 30 but it's 60 days per permit a maximum of three for per the project if you will so it could go for 180 days maximum okay thank you anybody else seeing none we'll open the public hearing this is a public hearing anybody wish to speak please come down state your name and address and your time will begin anybody wishing to speak i feel like i'm in a movie just asking people to speak it there's no one in here so anyway um i see no movement so we will close the public hearing mayor pro tem move approval councilmember ryan second we have a motion to second let's vote for agenda item eight e motion carries seven zero agenda item 8f hold a public hearing consider adoption of an ordinance of the city of denton texas amending the denton development code specifically amending section 7.9.6 d2 relating to location of parking areas thank you mayor members council uh this is the third uh development code amendment that you've heard who's going to be hearing this is relating to location of parking areas specifically section 7.9.6 d2 where it talks about all other uses and where parking is permitted or rather park where parking in front is prohibited part of the development code update the areas or the zoning districts where parking in front is prohibited continues to be mn where there's protection oriented areas typically in the mn the md is typically your downtown area where you would not want parking in front as as a site design and what was added was the mr the mixed use regional as part of the 2019 development code however what we found through development reviews since april of last year is that most of the mr's are located along i-35 and along regional centers such as the golden triangle mall in some areas to the north by razor ranch as well as other uh regional draws such as the the hospital so what we found out was that having parking in front prohibited in the mr wasn't really um consistent with what's out there today as far as existing site features it wasn't consistent with the urban character of the area just for your um for examples the restaurants along i-35 the the red lobster the olive gardens those those have parking in front so what we ended up doing was really prohibiting creating those uses or those restaurants to become non-conforming by adding mr as a zoning district where parking was prohibited so what staff is proposing is that we correct six section seven nine six d2 to allow for parking in front in the mr zoning districts and also to add where they are allowed as well not only along arterials but also along collectors because collectors are also very high volume traffic areas segments of transportation and parking in front is an appropriate site design feature for those parcels that front collectors with that this is the proposed code amendment again we are striking the mr from where it would be prohibited it would only be prohibited if this code amendment were to be approved only in the mn and the md we are also adding collector as a street classification where it can be located so it will also it would also be allowed along either side of an arterial or collector as defined by the mobility plan that concludes my presentation planning zoning commission recommends seven zero for this code amendment so the option to put the parking in the back still would exist for yes yes no right because i remember our conversation about it and um on those larger roads when when you're driving down it looks nicer to see to see the building up front and not necessarily a big giant thing of concrete and so i remember talking about that from our conversations for newer development um so the the option to place it on the side or the rear that's still available where they are prohibited to be in the front would be in those parcels or properties that are currently zoned mn and md and by looking at the zoning map it's kind of hard to see but mn is is the the lighter purple and then md of course is in the downtown so those are the areas that would be prohibited for parking in front otherwise all the other areas in the city would be allowed they don't have to but certainly they have the flexibility to locate parking in the front okay councilmember davis can you give us a quick example of uh two questions quick example of something that would recognize as an mn district or a business we could think of that's an mn district um i'm trying to think um most of the down and most of the areas surrounding the downtown and the universities um are mn so if you look at university of north texas and rtw most of those areas that surround that that the campuses are mn so uh in those instances those would be prohibited um i can't think of specific location and then of course the downtown as well or business that is the downtown if surrounding the downtown there there would be no parking in front allowed in the mn so but it would otherwise be allowed if the developer chose or whoever chose to for instance in sc in the neighborhood of say mckinney and loop 288 they they would be allowed correct cast my monitor so i'm concerned but open-minded about uh you know the effect on either current or future bike lanes or just kind of biking in general because i know that on street parking is a concern for that and there's you know you mentioned something about the mobility plan but i'm wondering is uh you know if if you think additional language would needed need to be added to allow for that or if you feel like that's already built in the the the bike lanes i believe are already built in as far as part of the street classifications per the uh transportation criteria manual in each of those street classifications there are a list of what's required and some of them um show bike lanes i don't remember exactly which ones but i'm i'm i'm looking at a table of what is in the transportation criteria manual and there are bike lanes that are required for certain street classifications yeah so i'm thinking of like you know okay yeah so is this my understanding because which one is it does mn allow um which one is it allows apartments by right mn does it i don't think it does it does yes it's the um r7 that would require a specific use permit but everything past mn md would all permit uh sing a multi-family by right so then what you're saying is with this if you're if you're an apartment building and you're in an mn or md you you can't park in the front you got to put your building although really almost up to the street correct and the same with the retail or office building you've got to put it all up close front to the street that's that's correct that's that is what um the current code um says that you have to do that in the mn what we are proposing this part of this as part of this code amendment is specifically the mr where we felt that that was into an appropriate zone industry to have that the to have that program so you're adding mr to that list no i'm sorry we're deleting that from that list gotcha okay yes you asked about mn i just wanted to clarify that no yeah yeah well mn md okay all right got you those are the only two that were that you're doing that on all right correct um okay all right any more questions for staff seeing none thank you very much this is a public hearing so we will open the public hearing anybody wishing to speak on this item anybody wishing to speak all right we will now close the public hearing councilmember davis i move approval of this item councilmember ryan second let's vote on the board please we have a motion to second for agenda item 8f motion carries unanimously concluding items councilmember briggs yeah so um i'll make this really quick because i would like for council to to get an update in an email or a friday report when i left earlier for dinner um i went into a local business and over um a locust and spoke to a business owner and they've had um a lot of construction there um down to one entrance driveway entrance in that shopping area and rate wainwright has been closed or locked or blocked off for a very long time and is just sitting there and so she spoke to a foreman and he told her that they're out of money that it's just going to sit there that the project is out of money and i would like an update on that and it seems to me that wainwright is paved enough it's actually better shape than locust at this moment um if we could just open it up so that they can have better access it's been months and they are under a lot of pressure so if we could do that while we're trying to figure out um how to pay for it that would be really helpful okay all right anybody else mayor pro tem yeah uh so really quick so um focusing on events so this friday there's uh friends at a family evening of awareness that i would draw people's attention to as well as uh next door my little valentine family dance and soho salons having a first friday event so those three things fantastic anybody else all right seeing none we will stand adjourned at 12 16 a.m on wednesday morning