Oct 12, 2020 Parks, Recreation and Beautification Board on 2020-10-12 3:00 PM

Good afternoon and welcome to the October Parks Board meeting. I am Frances Punch, chair for the Parks Board. Today we have no excused board members absent. First question, do we have any members from the public that need to speak in this meeting today? No, chair, there are no callers for this meeting. Fantastic. First item of business is to consider approval of the minutes. Any questions, concerns? I see James has his hand up. James, you're muted. Sorry about that, minutes were good to me, I was just going to forward a motion. Okay, does anybody have questions, concerns, corrections? Okay, a motion to approve. James is making a motion. I need a second. David is second. All in favor? Show of hands, please. All right, anyone opposed? Motion passes. Second item is an item that was carried over from last month's agenda. We're going to continue to talk about the trails concept map and who's going to do that, Gary? Dr. Walker is here as well as Drew and I, we can all kind of chime in. Let me share this with you real quick. At the end of last meeting, we were towards the end of the presentation and just wanted to, we did not get a chance to go through the specific trails, but I wanted to first of all see if there are any questions that you guys had from last meeting and I could bring up the map and just kind of walk you through some of the larger trails that are planned and I can share with you a PDF so you can go through the specifics at your leisure and take a look at that. As of right now, our plan is to meet with P and Z, planning and zoning, and walk through with them on this and then eventually go to council shortly thereafter and get some feedback from council, make sure we're on the right path. We had a public meeting on October 1st. We had over 100 people pre-register. I think the largest amount we had actually online at one time was about 54, 55 people, so it was very well attended and people stayed through the entire two hours as well. So there was a lot of engagement, a lot of questions, and a lot of positive feedback in the direction we're heading. So this is a wish list. Some of these things may never happen. Some may happen 30 years from now. Some may happen next year. It all depends on funding, priorities, other city projects, and they will not happen in order of phases either. They may happen sporadically. You may jump from phase one to phase six based on what's happening in that area and where funding is available as well. So it's really getting everything down on paper so we could start picking at it and seeing what's feasible, what's not, where the challenges are, where it's easy to go ahead and move forward. So Dr. Walker and Parks and Rec staff have worked quite a bit on this, and every time we look at it, we're updating it. So there's so many ideas and opportunities out there. We wanted to make sure that we got feedback from the board itself, and then I can share the map with you. So if you have any feedback from the presentation, if you remember, if there's anything you want us to go back over, we sure will do that for you. And then after that, I'll bring up the GIS map. Any questions about any of the prior discussions? I'll admit, a month is a long time. I have a hard time remembering what my train of thought was yesterday, but I think I left that meeting feeling pretty clear. Okay, I'll bring up the GIS map and share this with you, and then it may jog some questions for you. Dr. Walker, are you with us? I am. Okay. Also, for the note takers, I guess you guys saw that Kent joined on, just for making sure that we're accurate with our minutes. Hello, Kent. Yes. Thank you, David. I saw him. Okay. Okay. So this is our GIS map, and this is what we use for a lot of our planning efforts. So if you remember, the green items are our park spaces. The purple are city properties that are not specifically park dedication. And then the blue circles are our 10-minute walk. So you get a general sense of where our parks are in that half-mile radius. Now I'm just going to start zooming in here and go over a couple things. So this pink line right here, that's the DCTA Rail Trail that already exists. So that gives you an idea kind of where things are. Here's 35E. Pecan Creek is probably the easiest creek for us to start working on. And that will basically connect to the DCTA Trail, go through Fred Moore, through this purple property right here, into Carl Young, over to Woodrow, through some city property. There's one developer that owns this entire area on the north side and south side of Shady Oaks. They currently have about four to eight miles of trails in this area that would connect up to Mack Park. That would all be built and maintained by the development if that would move forward. So that's still early on in the process. We'd connect to Meadowbrook, I'm sorry, Pebblebrook Park. We'd eventually put some trails through that property as well and then into city property. So this is the treatment plant and the landfill all on the north side of the creek. I guess it's the north and east side of the creek. That would follow all the way down to Lake Louisville into the Army Corps property down in here. This is all Army Corps. So that would connect all the way from the east side, from Lake Louisville to downtown. And most of this is government property, so that's why we feel this is probably the easiest one to do. Some of these obviously have private property in them, and we may not own the property yet, but it's still a visionary because that property could come up for sale. We could work on an easement, and if the property owner's just not going to happen, then we'll figure out other ways to work around it. So that's still an opportunity. So the Mingo Trail, whenever this road is rebuilt, there'll be a 10-foot wide trail along Mingo. It may go to on-street once we get past 288 right now just because of traffic needs. If this eventually grows and redevelops, then we might look at that down the road. But there would be a trail at least to 288 and then on-street out to Clear Creek. So that would technically connect, hopefully, Dallas all the way to Lake Ray Roberts. So that's kind of like the long-term plan there. Cooper Creek, right now, this trail basically almost starts in North Lakes Park. It comes up through the dog park, up to the animal shelter, and then goes north, up to North Point Park in this area. And then it follows the creek all the way down to Evers Park. And then it crosses 2164, and then it goes all the way over to Sherman. From that point in time, and we put this in the Friday report, the connection from Sherman to Avondale is really tight. There's an easement along the creek, but it's very narrow. It would be much easier for us and quicker to follow Sherman down to Windsor, which would be down to here, and then go on-street because there's already a bike path here for half of that distance, and then into Avondale Park. Then from Avondale Park down towards Mingo, it's a little bit challenging here as well. So that's more of a challenging section of Cooper Creek. Just moving up a little bit north, we would take Sherman and try to expand that wherever we can, whether it's on-street or expanded sidewalks, all the way up as far as we can go. At some point in time, there's going to be a road going east-west, basically from Frisco to Denton 35. We're not sure exactly where that's going to sit. That's a long-term tech stop project, but we'd like to try to get a trail along Sherman. That's a popular bike riding route for people. But Clear Creek is this black line that follows Clear Creek. At the very minimum, it would start at 428 and go east and connect all the way over to this purple is the proposed mountain bike trail that we've had some discussions on. We haven't talked in great detail because we're just starting to kind of get that kind of lined up. But it would come through this parcel here and then connect to Clear Creek. And then eventually, a lot of this property is owned by the Carter family. We're talking to the developer about a small trail that would follow some floodplain here that would connect those neighborhoods to the Clear Creek trail, and that's what this blue line is here. Let's see. We'll jump over here. So Bonnie Bray, this is under construction right now, all the way down at Vintage. And so it's going to be on street up into Rose Lawn, up to right about here. It'll be on street, and then it'll go on a 10-foot path, a side path, all the way up to 77, past the new high school, which is slated here, up into this area. And then it might go past 77 to the north side of 288. So that'll be a 10-foot side path. Under construction right now is the Vintage trail. We're actually having a meeting on Wednesday with this neighborhood here because they have some concerns about some of the construction and just want to get them up to speed on what's going on. It would be on the south side of the Vintage road that's being built, and then once it gets to Bonnie Bray, it'll jump to the north side and follow all the way down to 377. And that's a 10-foot path as well. There will be a trail that follows the city property along Bonnie Bray through the Vintage parcel that we own, through a small section of this private development, and into Southwest Park. So there's really Vintage, Bonnie Bray, Southwest Park, and Hickory Creek all merging here. So Hickory Creek starts way down here at the lake, basically. But the real first trailhead is the old Alton Bridge, and it's Army Corps property all the way up pretty much to the south cross timbers. And then there's some private property here. We could either go through our property along the road, and then this section right here is that kind of zigzag portion of Hickory Creek. That's going to be vacated eventually, and it's going to straighten out, and it's going to come all the way across here and connect to 35. So this will be basically our trail bed for that trail. But this would follow up and follow the creek all the way up to 35 at this point, and just keep going all the way over to the west side of the airport, all the way up to basically University. Let's see, right to here. And then there's a future road that's going to be over here that'll take it to University. So Hickory Creek's pretty long. There's a lot of city property here with the airport. The deck, the energy center is in this area too, so we can get through some of those parcels. This area over here, this is all Hunter Cole Ranch. So that's already been kind of laid out. It's still very early in the development, but that already is on our radar from that perspective. 377, we want to actually expand the one on 377. The first section they're working on right now is just a five-foot sidewalk, because we were a little late to the game on that one, but we want to expand it to 10-foot, so it goes all the way down to Argyle and down to Roanoke that provides that connectivity. Then we have Hickory Creek Road going east-west, Ryan going east-west, 2499, Teasley going north and south. Let's see, what else am I forgetting? University Trail, the section from the border all the way to Mayhill is funded, and that's going to be done in the near future by TxDOT. So this section's going to be going under construction. There's already sidewalk, obviously, in a lot of these places, but we'd like to expand it from five to at least eight or 10 feet, if we can. That's kind of it in a really quick snapshot, and we went through this kind of same proposal process with the community meeting just to kind of talk about it, and then some people were chiming in about more specifics, but this is kind of the plan that we have in place. There's a little over 200 miles of trails that have been planned. Again, long-term, 25, 40 years for some of these to happen. Some may never happen. The other thing that we had talked about was paddling trails, so we're trying to figure out how we could get from Lake Ray Roberts all the way down to the Lake Lewisville. We have at the confluence, there's currently a dam right there that's backed up that needs cleaned Texas Parks and Wildlife, and the Army Corps did clean the section on the south side of 380, but one of the ideas that came out of the discussion is create a paddling trail with all the communities on Lake Lewisville. It's about 100 miles of paddling efforts if you follow the shoreline, and about 30 boat ramp areas that could be used for launches. So we're going to be reaching out to all the cities that are on Lake Lewisville to see if we can't put together a paddling trail for the entire lake. So that's it in a snapshot. I mean, that's a quick summary of basically two years of work, so it may not do it justice, but there's a lot of information. If you want more information about a specific trail, this is what we've done as a chapter within our Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Eventually, there'll be a full-blown study needed for each one for this entire trail system with lot by lot design and acquisition needs and the details of figuring out how we would get trails through these properties and identifying what the challenges and opportunities are to move forward on those. So Dr. Walker, do you have any other any comments to add to that? No. You got it all. I mean, that plus everything we covered last time. Yeah. Well, Gary, I want to commend everybody for working so hard on this. It really looks phenomenal. I have two concerns, which you probably have already heard them as well. Community members reached out, and the two concerns, which is one we're going to talk about later in the agenda, is safety along the trails and safe crossings. Okay. So we did go back and put call boxes in our chapter to identify where call boxes would need to be located. You can probably, is that coming up in the next, that's on the agenda, is that coming up later when you talk about safety and security? Yeah, I guess it probably goes with those, but we've added both the crossings and the call boxes to the master plan chapter. So it is on our radar for sure for our trail system. Fantastic. Gary, that plus park access. Yes. Okay. And lighting. Yep. And lighting. Yep. James? Yeah, just a quick question. Are you going to work, you're in the process of working with other towns and cities on the, I guess the lake trail, I recall the boat trail? Paddling trail. Yep. Yeah. And which is good. That's excellent. How about for the best plan trail for the actual hard service trails, like we communicating with Argyle and Crenth and Little Elm, those kind of guys. That's on our radar. We haven't started that process yet. We wanted to kind of run through the local community first, make sure we're on the right path and then we'll be reaching out to them to see kind of what their plan is and see how we could mirror those up. Sounds good. That leads to my second and last question, I hope. On the processes and communicating with neighborhoods that, hey, this is what we're looking at doing and a lot of times you get feedback from, obviously you want to get feedback from the neighborhoods, right? So in that process, how does that communicate this? Because a lot of people, when they see these trail maps, they go, oh, you're going to put this in my backyard tomorrow. And I think that helps to show, well, this is just a process and kind of list out and share with them, you know, the listing of the process and how the whole thing is going to go so that this is like rubber bands, actually, right? Yes. So good timing. We had that exact thing happen last week. So the section on Cooper Creek Trail from Sherman to Avondale Park, it's about 20, 30 houses that this section would, if we followed the creek. Let me flip over to an aerial so you can see it a little bit better. So up in this western side, it's a little more open, but it gets really close to a number of houses here. The Cherry Orchard House is right here and that's actually, Mrs. Smith is who I talked to and she had heard about it and thought that the construction was starting. And I explained to her, said, no, construction isn't starting, we're just right now gathering feedback on a draft of the overall trails and we can talk to anybody. We're more than willing to go out and talk to a neighborhood group for sure. But some of these trails, again, may not happen for 20 years from now. If something's going to happen soon, let's just say, for instance, we were going to build this section next year and we had money for it. We would have to go and get a design contract and get that approved through council. So there's another opportunity for discussion. And then after that happened, we'd go out to bid and get the contract for construction approved. There's another opportunity for discussion with council. So there's going to be a couple touch points on each one of these that we'd be reaching out to city council for various reasons that would spur on additional feedback. We could have a discussion today on the trail, and let's say it doesn't happen for 15 years. Half of those people could have moved on and new people there. So we kind of have to start over. So we're trying to get feedback from a theoretical standpoint. And if this wasn't an option, we'd figure a way to work around it. And truthfully, this is probably option B. Option A would be come down Sherman, go along Windsor and then you could jump into the park in either one of these locations. That's the cheapest and quickest. But if we wanted to follow the trail with an off street trail section, this would be a preferred method. But ultimately, we're willing to talk to anybody at any time about any of these plans. We can have 10 public meetings, but ultimately, someone's not going to hear about it. So we're always going to be kind of chasing down people that may have missed it and trying to provide that information. And we'll keep pushing it as much as we can, whether it's presentation to P&Z, presentation to city council, follow ups with park board, try to make people aware of what we're working on. Well, I was thinking there is like maybe put temporary signs up say, you know, future. I won't say future. I just say that's even too strong a word of saying potential, you know, trail, and here's a website you can go to get the listings of the process, you know, tell you, you know, where you can get, you know, if you don't if we don't have that information, everybody's going to automatically assume the worst, okay, when you're building through, you know, pre existing neighborhoods, that's it's going to be, you know, I can say from experience, we used to get the ones was there, St. Quinn's going to dump all the you know, drive the bus up and let all the local rapists and onto their trail. That's usually what happens. So by communicating in advance and ensuring that like on signs or something, so as a future potential trail, and then here's a website and go to look at the process, you know, here's probably and tell people upfront, when they go to that web page, that, you know, this is not in stone, we want to look for the inputs and, you know, people to give their feedback and all that kind of stuff. But more importantly, to communicate the process to them. So even if a new person moves into the neighborhood, they can read the sign and go, oh, hey, we should get on that web page and try to figure it out, right? Okay, we can we'll work on that. I just I see an opportunity here in the beginning stages. First of all, I love the trails. I think they're so exciting, and I love that they're along the creeks. And one of the things that's missing in our region, bigger than even Denton, but this is like an opportunity is to think about the education of our waterways while you're developing the creeks. And just like keep that in every stage of planning of like, how are we going to do community outreach, teaching people about their creeks and the natural flora and fauna along the creeks? So, Gary, I'll take that one. So I have been and so is Gary and you know, we brought it to Dr. Walker's attention meeting with environmental. And so we actually have a nationally recognized wetlands coming soon that will be donated to us. And along with that, we would like to do a really nice educational piece there amongst the rest of our trails with with nice signage to be able to explain our different waterways and how important they are to us. And just how important they are, and then how important they are to stay clean and healthy. So just just to add to Drew's comments, so we are looking at various ways that we can interpret various opportunities in Denton, whether it's trails to the cemetery and honoring veterans or just residents, founders, those types of people, interpretive trails about community history, similar what we have on the rails of trail right now, memorial trail, similar to Ernest Dallas, nature trails, wildflowers, trees, you know, bushes, whatever landscaping, and then even the Denton Arts Walk of Fame that goes on Hickory Creek. So those are all different ways that we can educate people while they're exercising that we definitely want to try to capitalize on. So that's great idea. Okay, if there are no other questions or concerns, Gary, it seems like everybody is in approval of the current plan. We understand that it will be continuing to be updated and information will be provided to the community when needed. And if no other concerns, we recommend that you move forward. Oh, wait, David has a question. You're muted. Just a little question, what would be the way that citizens could get access to this if they wanted to take a look at its current status at any point in the future? Is this something that will be available on public domain? Yes. So we're going to make some updates to the plan right now. The GIS map is private facing, it's internal right now. We're working with our GIS team to make that publicly faced. There's a number of layers on there. So we got to make sure that some of those aren't available to the public. It would just make it too confusing. But they'll be able to go in there similar to the mobility plan and look at it. And then they can provide feedback to us on specific areas. So if it's their neighborhood or just citywide comment, we'll be able to collect that. So we have a Parks and Recreation Master Plan website that will put all this information on now that you guys have had an opportunity to see it and we'll get that out to the public. And then we'll also share it with people that specifically were at the meeting on October 1st. All right. Even better. Thanks. Appreciate that. Please, for all of y'all, just to save yourselves future headaches, we're talking about a chapter of the Master Plan, not the Trails Master Plan. So again, this is all currently conceptual until you complete a comprehensive Master Plan for each segment. So the term trail plan keeps getting used. That's not what this is yet. So it will be available as part of the Master Plan, but it is not the set document yet of what you're planning to do by full budget and timeline and everything. Thank you, Dr. Walker. That's very important. Just a quick comment. I'd like to thank Dr. Walker. He's put a lot of hours into this, well beyond what his scope was. And I know he's engaged his students, too, and used this as a learning opportunity for them. So that's great in addition to helping, you know, raise future professionals. But I'd like to just thank him for everything he's done for us. Okay. Are you raising your hand or are you clapping, Alana? Oh, you're clapping. Can't tell they're close. Okay. No, any other questions, concerns, if not, let's move to the next agenda item. Thank you, Rosa, for being here. Rosario is here to talk about the absence policy for the city boards. So I'm going to operate the PowerPoint for Rosa. So Rosa, just tell me when you need to change the slides. Can you see that? Can you see that yet? I don't see it displayed yet. Okay, let me see your directory. Let me reload it. How's that? Okay. Well, it's in PowerPoint. I mean, can you make it the slide, like the presentation view? That'd be great. All right. All right. Well, I really do appreciate the opportunity to come in and discuss the policy. I know that there's always questions when something new comes up and then sometimes when there's a delay on any certain issue or process that's in place, then it's the best time to actually discuss it. So to provide a little bit of background, the city council did look at amending the attendance policy and subsequently adopted an ordinance back in January 28 of this year that amended the policy. Now I will say that there was discussion at a work session in September of 2019 where they had the opportunity to come in and provide detailed input about maybe what the proposed changes, if any, were to take place, but the results of the amendments again happened on January 28th. So the excuse absence criteria that you had been provided in, of course, is detailed here. That in itself did not change. Those were actually already in place, so nothing there changed. The main change was that the city council, rather than the border commission, would excuse an absence that does not fall within the excused absence criteria. And then, of course, it provided a notification process that the board member could follow and of course some direction for the city's secretary on how she should handle any requests for basically an exemption or request that an absence be excused if it did not meet that specific criteria. So here, again, you see what the excused absence criteria is. I'm not going to go ahead and read them, but they're detailed here. Next slide. So the notification requirement, which is required in order, again, to seek an excused absence, would be that the member notify the city's secretary of their inability to attend an upcoming meeting. Now again, most times members are going to miss maybe one meeting, but let's just say that summertime's coming or you're planning a family vacation that's going to be an extended amount of time that could possibly encompass more than one meeting date, you would notify my office of the upcoming absence. And again, it's really important that you notify my office as soon as possible. I know some members will notify the board liaison, but it's really important to not cause any delay that you can include me in that notification or even just the city secretary's office in general and I'll get it. But the key is, again, that you provide that notice in advance and I'll go into a little bit more detail here later. An email will suffice. You don't have to provide any supporting documentation, but you do need to state the purpose of your absence and it's accepted again at face value. It's just strictly an honor system. And again, there's a note here that notifying of the absence after it has occurred delays the amount of time a member has to request it be excused if applicable and I'll go into a little bit more detail there. Next slide. So after my office receives the notification of absence, I look at the criteria and determine whether or not it can be designated as an excused absence. And if it is excused, I notify basically everybody that's on that general email that the absence is excused and it will be important that when the time the meeting comes up that the chair announce that ex-member is absent, excused, you don't have to state the reason or anything like that, just that it was excused. Staff will have the backup documentation and of course so would I. In the event that the absence, back one slide please, I'm sorry. In the event that the absence is not excused, and the meeting happens, like in other words, you didn't really know, maybe it was just the last minute thing and the member didn't have the opportunity to notify anybody, then the chair should announce that the member is absent and for tracking purposes I do recommend that you make a mention that whether it's excused or not excused will be reported at a future date. Next slide. So to continue, so if the absence is excused, if the absence criteria is not, excused absence criteria is not met, then I'll promptly notify that member, typically it'll happen the same day and then they're given, it's a one sheet that kind of recaps the process I'm about to outline here, that if they want the absence or considered excused, that they have 10 days as of the date that the absence occurred to request from my office that I basically let City Council, give City Council the option to try and excuse that absence. And that is, that's the key as to why it's really very important that you notify in advance if at all possible or immediately after the absence has occurred. And then what I'll do is I'll place an item on the agenda to the, at the next possible agenda of course the Open Meeting Act has to be followed, but we'll place an item on the agenda, notifying the City Council that this member, you know, to go ahead and exempt the off, the absence if they so choose. Just to let everybody know, typically what we would use to let City Council know, we would provide them the email that the board member provided to explain what the absence is, should the needs, so the needs, should the need arise. Next slide. So then the City Council meets and they consider the item and the final decision is to, you excuse the absence. You know, we'll let the, we'll let the liaison and the staff liaison and the board member know what the City Council final determination was, and it's important that that be reported in the minutes. Next slide. And actually, that's it. So what would happen, of course, that if the absence was not excused by the City Council, then that would need to also be reflected in your minutes, so. And that's basically the end. I know that at the time that the City Council discussed, you know, the criteria, and again, although there wasn't any change to what was already there, was that there could be very, a variable amount of reasons why an absence could occur, that, I mean, the list could go on. And so they felt that if, that the list suffice and then that if there was anything outside of that, then we, my office would submit the request for it for an exception if the member, the board member, him or herself requested it. So I'll take any questions. So my question is, so let me just repeat what I think I heard you say. If I, my absence is unexcused, wait, if I send you an email saying why it's not, why I'm going to miss, and then it's, if it's not on that list, I have an opportunity to go through the City Council, correct? And I just send you an email and I send you an email and you send it to the City Council. Yes, so what I will do is when you send me that email, I will let you know that it, let's just say that it didn't meet the excuse criteria, but that you have the opportunity to request an exception from council. So you would respond in that email. I would let you know that you have 10 days to let me know to that, yes, I want council to consider my absence. And then I would move forward almost immediately at the next possible agenda to have it delayed. If by chance that absence happened maybe like before a big holiday break, then I would just schedule it as soon as possible thereafter. And if I did not receive that exception by those 10 days, then it would be too late for me to move it forward to City Council. Okay, well that helps because I was thinking that we had, as the individual had to connect with the City Council, we just, we need to send you the email, you send the email to Council and submit it to the agenda. Yes. And really what I would do is I would place an item on the agenda and give the City Council the heads up that I'm going to be placing this item on the agenda so that they know well in advance that it's coming. And if the member wanted to provide, you know, maybe a little bit more detail, again, keeping in mind that whatever you provide would be subject to the Open Records Act, then I would be happy to provide it to the City Council. Okay. Be it for one meeting or maybe an extended amount of time depending on what the need for the absence would be. Okay, I know there has been conversation about family matters. Can you talk to us about why that is not on the list of excused absence? We really did not get into maybe including that or not including that. The City Council, again, whenever we presented what the criteria was, they understood that, you know, there was a certain list of criteria. They did not feel that they needed to add to it. But that if there was anything else that a board member felt should be, should be excused, then that board member could communicate it through my office to them that it be accepted. So we never really talked about can you include this, you know, this, you know, family obligation or anything like that specific. So we never really talked about that point being, you know, I guess an excused, possible excused absence. And is it possible we can get that added? Yes. If, you know, if you feel that that's necessary, I would definitely recommend that you take an official position that you are requesting that the City Council consider, you know, whether it's just that one or whatever the reason or reasons that you want to have considered as an excused absence. What I would do then is, you know, it would take not too much time, but it would take a little bit of time for me to go ahead and, you know, place an item on the City Council agenda to we would first discuss it with the agenda committee, obviously, because it needs to go on the agenda. And then we would present it to Council. But it's really it would be important that you as a board, the board as a whole, take that position. Now, you as an individual member, or anybody can certainly communicate with any member of the City Council or even your nominating Council member that they might maybe, you know, kind of present the option. There's a process for each City Council member to do like a one minute pitch of, you know, a policy change or something that the City Council want that they would like the City Council to consider. So you do have that option as well. You take it upon yourself to talk about the Council, to the Council member and see if maybe they perhaps are interested in kind of serving as, you know, kind of your speaker on that topic. Okay, so we would need to take a vote if we wanted to present that as an option to be added. Yes. If you want it to come from the board, because any direction from the board really needs to be a consensus, and you would want it clearly stated. For example, you could place an item on the agenda, you know, at the next time because right now this is really just for discussion purposes. But if you reach some kind of a consensus, then you could do it as a consensus and, you know, we could also check with a City Attorney in case, you know, we have to do an official resolution or an ordinance from the board, but a lot of times the staff direction that we provide, that we receive is by a consensus of the Council and that's accepted. Okay, I'm sorry for interrupting, we're lucky to have the City Attorney with us today. Okay. Okay. So, do we need to put it to a vote today or do we need to discuss it as a board and then present it to you? I apologize, I don't know if you're actually posted for that today, Gary, can you speak to the posting? You're muted, Gary. The posting says, "Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff input regarding the amendments to the Code of Ordinances as modified by 1928-66." Okay, so you can give, yes, you could. You could give staff that direction if you chose to do that. Okay. If I could maybe throw an input, maybe, unless there is a timely nature of this rather than us trying to rush a resolution in this meeting, maybe that's one we can bring back for a future meeting, unless there's a reason that we would need to rush it today. Yeah, let's put it on the next agenda. I'm okay with that. So, may I have a motion to table this or actually amend this? Well, we will just add a new agenda item about the absentee provision for our next meeting. May I have a motion for that, please? So moved. Second. Danona, second. I'm sorry. As a point of order, is that something that really needs a motion to pass to just simply request something for the next meeting? I'm not trying to disrupt the process, but I'm just trying to figure out if that's really actually necessary. Technically, I believe it could be in your information at the end, or that's the input that you're giving as a group to bring another and more formal item back on the agenda next time. Right. So, in our concluding items, we would just say, "Hey, we've had this discussion. Can we next time actually put this to a vote or make it a presentation with the intent to vote on this being changed?" You could do it that way. Okay. Or staff could take this discussion as sufficient input to put it back on the agenda next time. Okay. I think we have a clear vision. As do I. Okay. Okay. For a minute's purposes, what am I doing? Probably withdrawing it. We're going to add it at the end. That sounds good. Okay. Like an additional item for the next meeting. I mean, that's what we typically do every other meeting, so I think that would work out fine. And for housekeeping, for a minute's purposes, we do have a motion on the table. We might ... Whoever made that motion could potentially withdraw it if they felt they needed to. Yeah. I'll withdraw it until the end of the meeting. Okay. And, Denoni, you want to withdraw your second, I guess? Yes. Done. Do we need to vote on that? I've never been in this position. Okay. Good. All right. Any additional questions for Rosa while she's here? We have her. Let's pick her brain. Thank you so much for your time. All right. I have just a small question. I noticed that it said that we do contact the city secretary. I guess it didn't mention contacting your own committee as part of that, but I guess it's just assumed that you would be one of several people on an email chain. Is that correct? Yeah, so a city secretary, then we do have a deputy city secretary who acts in my state in my absence, and then an assistant city secretary. I didn't have that right, I guess, but from a committee standpoint, we would go ahead and put Frances and Gary and whoever else on that as well, right? Yes. It's usually me, Gary, Eddie, and Rosa. Okay. Just making sure. All right. Thank you, Rosa. You're so welcome. Really appreciate it. Thank you so much for your time. You take care. Next agenda item, receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff input regarding safety and security signage in the parks. All right, I'll let Gary pull that up, or do you just want to have a discussion? Yeah, there's no PowerPoint, it's just general discussion. Okay. So this was brought up a few months ago about safety signage in the park, and we did quite a bit of research on what different cities are doing for safety signs, and I did contact our GIS department along with our 911 dispatch department. So good news, our 911 dispatch has the ability to triangulate your location anytime you call them. We also did some research on what it was going to cost to put these different signs up. City of Colleyville just did a project, they installed 36 signs. Based upon those 36 signs, it cost them $1,000 a sign, and it took a year and a half to completely put the signs in, GIS locate every single one of the locations, and put the QR codes on the signs so where you could scan that sign and be able to tell 911 dispatch exactly where you are. The city of Denton, like I said, does have that capability to triangulate your location, and that really gets you within a 3-meter radius, which is 9 feet, and 99% of the time they can find you if they can get within 9, 10 feet from you. So we kind of wanted to give some discussion with this board to really see where we wanted to move with that. We did talk about signs in our trails plan. We do have a plan as these trails are constructed, and especially with Clear Creek, really updating those signs at cross-sections. So if you've been to Clear Creek, if you're on Fisherman's Trail, and you come to the Prairie Trail, you'll have a sign to let you know you are here. So the majority of the time we have issues or there were issues in the past that we talked to sustainability with anyone getting lost in Clear Creek is they went around the trail's closed signs, or they left a marked trail. So they left a trail that is barely marked. There's crushed granite there, or you can really tell where the trail is, whether it's dirt or crushed granite or rock or anything that's out there at Clear Creek. And if you leave that trail, then you wander off in the woods, which you're highly discouraged if you go and especially if you read the signs when you first enter Clear Creek, please stay on the trails. That's for everyone's protection, not only like we spoke about a minute ago, environmentally, but it's also for your protection for using those trails. So I'll leave it up to the discussion on kind of where we want to go with these just based upon that information that I just gave you, because I mean, we do have safety signage that we do want to install as these trails are built and of course update the trail signs that we already have for those locations or you are here where it shows you exactly where you are on those points. Are we open for questions? So I mean, I think what I'm hearing is sort of an implied sort of a leaning that the value might not totally be there for the signs, since we have other ways to triangulate the people. I mean, you mentioned the time it took to install and the fact that it would be $36,000 and I'm not exactly sure that I heard what that would net us if we already can do. I mean, if the point of the signs is we can tell people, hey, I'm at sign A and they have a record of where sign A is and they already have the ability to triangulate someone, it doesn't sound like there's a lot of value in having a sign. Is that? Yes, sir. That's why I wanted to bring that up. Okay, I just want to make sure I was understanding your point and I agree. I don't see a lot of value unless I just don't. Yes, Brooke. I was just going to say, I think the only value that they provide is kind of a false sense of security, maybe that, you know, that you have somebody that's in action or maybe they understand that they can call and be triangulated. So I think if you go and make a big effort on the education piece of, hey, out here, you can actually call 911. They can find you and take away the fear that maybe is associated with that. And maybe that's something that would be appropriate for a larger sign at an entrance or a trailhead, you know. So I'm the person who asked for just some information about safety in the park. And like, so those signs don't really address kind of like what I was asking Brooke's idea of like having a sign that just says like, this is what you do if you lose your child near water. This is who you should call or I don't know, like the reason I brought it up is I was in a situation where I could not find a child and there's like three trails and all these bodies of water and I didn't know what to do. In my situation, it turned out fine, but I go to parks all the time and I've never thought about it before until I was in that moment of panic. And so I guess that's what I was, that was my original question is how are we going to let parents know or anybody know who goes out there, like what to do in case of an emergency. And what if they don't have a phone or their phone is dead, the battery doesn't work or they lost their phone. I don't know. There could be a million things. Those are the kind of questions I have of concern. Okay. And I think we talked about that a little bit with our master plan and with call boxes of hopefully updating, you know, our parks whenever we finish our master plan. And of course all the funding is identified as maybe we, you know, install call boxes in different parks. And obviously anytime there's an emergency or something like that, that happens. The best thing to do would be to call 911. So you know, of course we get, you know, through our process, we could update those signs and obviously look into different types of call boxes for parks. I kept thinking that the answer to most of those questions that she was bringing as theoretical questions were call 911, call 911, call 911 until she got to the point of what if you don't have a phone. So I mean, it could be a little bit redundant if the answer was always call 911, but that was a good point if they don't have phones, you know, what's the best point of action too. Or like maybe you don't need to call 911 or they wouldn't be there fast enough. Like how do you know it's trail to go down? Like what's the, what's the best practice of like finding someone on a trail system? Like just some tips, maybe I don't know. Okay. I don't have the answer. I have no idea. I've thought about it. That's why I asked you guys, y'all are professionals. I have no idea. Those are really good concerns, Elana. So James, I saw you had your hands up. I'm sorry, Gary. I was just, I was just say at the crossroads, I just put not call 911 for emergencies. That's going to take care of 90% of the issues. Okay. For the other, the other 10%, put, put spot on your kid. That's a little advice. You can test your kid and it will follow the satellite will follow wherever your kid goes. So, and you can find them within a one meter radius. Okay. Is there a cost involved with that? Yes. Yeah. No, it's a little spot. They're called spots. A little. Yeah. I don't think that's probably going to be. And the other way to do it cheaply is, is they have we're on an Apple, at least an Apple, you can go in and change it. So it has it, if they have a cell phone with them, you can find them with your cell phone. I forgot the name of the application, but there's a bunch of them out there now. Yeah. But like two year olds, they don't have cell phones. And I would say the time when you lose your kid is the time that your phone has died and like everything. I mean, those are the times I feel I have been there, I feel you on that one. And it's the time you don't have the phone. And so I love the idea of like trail tips or something that, because people go out to these places and they think they know what they're doing. I've done it. So I'm the first to admit, be like, I'm outdoorsy and then I go out and I do something stupid. And so it would be nice as Texans to have like some tips for the weekend warrior. When that happens, you know what to do. And we have something at Parks Foundation, you could just use in marketing and stuff. I mean, I don't, that might be the best way to get the, yeah. And Drew, you mentioned call boxes, call boxes, you said in certain parks, will they be in all parks? Of course we would look at that as all parks that was in, I meant certain sections of the park. Cause obviously something as big as South lakes, you would be, you know, four to five of those, depending on whether you're at the playground, you know, the South pond, the North pond, the football field, the Northern, yeah. And so on and so forth. So yes. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. Yes. What other questions, concerns? Just to comment. I found the spot that I think James was talking about there on Amazon, they're $120. But obviously as technology changes, you know, I'm sure there'll be something that you can, you can put on your kid's belt or a watch or something like that, that down the road, you'll be able to track them. Cause I've been in that same situation where I turn your head for one second at a Rangers game and Carson's, you know, tearing down the, down the, the sidewalk or down the steps or whatever. Um, so I, I know exactly what you're talking about. Yeah. We lost one out of eight and Pike's peak one time. So I can relate out of eight kids, just takes one. And one time we went in van and I had five kids with him and I counted them all getting in the van and we got to the destination. As the kids go off the van, I recognize one of the kids as being one of my neighbor's kids. It wasn't my kid. You know, it's always a, you know, I know that panicky feeling understand. So I think the, the immediate takeaway would be when we're looking at our master plan to look at call boxes, maybe around critical points, um, whether it's a body of water or even a, uh, a dark area in the Parker or, you know, whatever it would be, we can look at those locations and see what those costs are, um, and, and prioritize those, uh, you know, around bodies of water seems to make the most sense, uh, as a, as a high pressure point for sure. Um, and kind of start, start from that point. Well, thank you, Gary. Any other concerns, questions? All right. That is not an action item. It's an informative item. The next agenda item, receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff input regarding the assessment and use of parkland dedication and park development fees. Hello everyone. It's been a while since we last talked about this item, um, and we actually were making really good progress on it up until about March and then took a pause. So we have jumpstarted this project and I want to start by giving just a little bit of background, a little bit of review if we can hit the next slide. So parkland dedication, also known as 915 and park development known as 916 are funds that developers pay into or dedicate land, um, through for new residential developments. And that's how, um, we actually, it's just another revenue source for us and being able to keep up with new development and expand our parks and purchase a new land or even update existing, uh, parks due to, uh, usage from new developments. So the current ordinance that we have right now was adopted in 1998 and has not been touched since. Uh, the land requirement is currently 2.5 acres for, uh, 1,000 or per 1,000 population of a new development. Uh, there's a number of dwelling units. They're also a part of the factor and the, uh, the actual dedication is based on single family or multifamily, uh, factors per dwelling unit. You can also pay a fee in lieu of land requirements, so if for whatever reason the, um, developer cannot or does not want to give land, they can pay a fee in lieu of that and it's based on the individual property value. So every single development or every single project would have its own fee based on that specific development. On the park development side, uh, the factors are currently based on a five acre park costing $208,000 to develop. Of course we know that that is very low, uh, and has not been updated since then and it sets a fee for single family and multifamily, uh, developments as well. Both of these have a parameter for use of a half a mile to a one mile radius. We've talked a little bit about the challenges that this, um, can pose for us. Uh, number one, tracking is very difficult. The administrative side of that, uh, in being able to keep record of who's paying into what development and then mapping that half mile to one mile radius is difficult. And then the other piece is that it's creating, um, kind of dead zones in our city. We've got areas that have seen little to no residential development and so they don't have access to that same kind of fund, uh, or special revenue as others do. And so instead of this money being driven by need, it's being driven by location. Where do we have money and how can we spend it within that half mile or mile radius, even though it may not really have a need for it. So under the proposed, uh, draft ordinance that, um, you have, we've updated several factors. Uh, number one, we've updated our demographics and the development costs specifically. And so again, we know now that the cost for developing our parks is much higher than $2,008 for a five acre part. And so that we don't get behind in the future, we've built in a three year review. So every three years we would go back and we would re review the demographics that the ordinance is based on and make those updates to it. This ordinance also establishes zones. So rather than having to spend the money within a perimeter or a certain radius, we've broken the city up into five different zones. And we'll be talking a little bit more about that and I'll show you, um, a map of that on the next slide in a minute, uh, so that any, uh, development within that zone, any residential development within that zone that pays into, uh, that zone, the money could be used within that zone. We also established a level of service, which is very important for the legal requirements that we have to meet. And I'll get into detail on the next couple of slides in that the proposed ordinance also sets fees for each zone. So it's no longer dependent on the individual development will actually have set fees and the developer will know if they're building in a certain zone, they'll know what that be in lieu of is, uh, they'll know what the land requirement is. And they'll also know what the park development fee is. And this entire draft ordinance that you have was actually based on a collaboration between our department and Dr. John Crompton, uh, we've also, Dr. John Crompton is with the Texas A and M university and has extensive background in this area and is within the park industry, um, known as kind of the Godfather of this particular, um, topic. Uh, we've also made several presentations to a larger developments group, uh, our development services department originally was holding monthly meetings, um, town hall meetings with developers and so we've presented to them and from that group, we established a smaller focus group of developers and we have about, uh, anywhere from 10 to 12, uh, representatives from eight different development groups that have been, uh, going through the old ordinance with us and helping us draft the new proposed ordinance. And, uh, we've, we've got, uh, that's been a really great process to work through with them. Next slide. So for the legal background, there are two Supreme court cases that are specific to park dedication and park development. The first one, uh, establishes a nexus principle that essentially says anything that is paid into either one of these funds has to be tied to the new residential development that's paying into it. So it's, it's got to be located within proximity to the new development and that's really the only guidelines that were given and again, the funds deposited within each zone or area had to be expended within that same zone or area and that again goes to the proximity. The next Supreme court case actually took it a step further and they established a rough proportionality test and they said that there has to be a connection between the imposed requirements of the development and the park use that we are projecting or will result because of that new development. Uh, because this is much more specific and says we have to have this specific connection, we have to take an individual approach. So we can't benchmark, for example, we can't say what are the, you know, cities around us doing us, what do they charge? And then come up with a fee schedule based on those comparative cities. We have to have an individual approach that shows how that development is impacting our city. It also assumes that new residents will require the same level of service as the existing residents. And to meet all of these requirements under this new rough rough proportionality test, we have to determine a level of service. So we have to know what's on the ground today. What is that level of service? How do we provide that to the new residents coming in? And that gives us our individual approach. Next slide. So how do we determine a level of service? Well, what we did is we started with a road impact, uh, fee map. It already had the city broken out into zones, but as we started to look at it, there were some inequities within each zone. So we modified it just a bit and we took several other factors into consideration. We also looked at identified needs. Where do we currently have projected growth? We took maps from our development services group and imported them kind of a layer in our GIS map to see where new development was going to be coming in. For instance, um, E zone E is where ropes and ranch is located. And that's about the only residential development in that entire zone. And while on the surface it looks, you know, it sways the other zones. We do know that there's going to be major development coming within that zone in the next five years that will balance it out or make it more equal to the other zones. So we looked at all of those and in those, um, calculation factors, we looked at the population within each service area. We looked at the existing acres of park in each service area or park land. We took the average price per, actually, this is, sorry, this still says acre, but we actually took the average price per parcel in each service area. So we looked at all of the residential parcels within DCAD and took those values and came up with an average for each zone. And then we updated our cost to develop a park and we based it off two recent projects to come up with that for our development fee. So once we map that, we'll use zone A as an example. We have a population of 35,000 people, almost 36,000. Within zone A, we have 117, just under 118 park acres. We have 5,700 residential parcels within that zone for a total land value of about $437 million. We took those factors and we were able to come up with our service level, which is, if you can look at the map, 108 dwelling units per park acres. So we have 108 residents or residential parcels for every park acre in that zone. We took that calculation across to the other zones. So from that calculation, now we have an established land dedication fee in lieu of and also land requirement. So a developer coming in would have to give us one acre for every 108 dwelling units built within that development or pay $698 per dwelling unit. We take that across each zone, again, based on that service level. So B is one park acre for every 139 developments and so forth. So if we take a 300 dwelling unit development, we did a little comparison under the current calculations, what that would look like, and under the proposed calculations, what that would look like. And remember, under the current calculations, we have to look at each individual parcel. This is a couple of years old, but this was the Selwyn Platte, essentially. It has three different parcels related to that development or that proposed development at the time. So we took the acres of land there, the value, a DCAD value for each individual parcel, and then we do a per acre value under the current ordinance. We worked the calculation on that, and we have a park dedication of 2.1 acres, and then we have a fee in lieu of $99,000. Under the current proposal, looking at those values for zone A that we've now set based on a service level, we would have a park dedication of 2.76 acres and a fee in lieu of $2009,000. I'm sorry, $209,000. Ooh, somebody was about to get a good deal there, huh? Taking the same concept over to park development fee. The current calculation, $208,000 for a five acre park. It has a set fee of $291 for a single family dwelling unit and a set fee of $187 for a multifamily dwelling unit. These factors were based on a HUD calculation that at one time set the number of people per dwelling unit for a single family residential home and a multifamily residential home. They no longer do that. They just now have one factor, which is 2.8, 2.8 people per household. They no longer distinguish between single family and multifamily. That's the current calculation. Under the proposed calculation, again, we have updated those costs for a four acre park. We're looking at approximately $1.3 million to develop it. For a community park of 12.5 acres, about $5 million to develop. Just out of due diligence, we took some of the same bids and cost factors that we were using for the neighborhood and community parks and estimated what a 50 acre city park would look like and that's just under $8 million. The other reason why we wanted to include city park is under the new ordinance, we are proposing that we take 10% of any fee that's paid and put it towards a city park. Right now under the current ordinance, we can only use any fees that are paid into the programs for neighborhood parks. But we know that residents, even new development, will eventually use our city parks, so there's an impact to usage on the city parks as well. One of the challenges with the current ordinance is that you may live across the street from a parcel that's a community park or a city park just because it's more than 20 acres and a neighborhood park is classified as between 5 and 20 acres. Just because the property across the street from you is 25 acres, we can't use the money from the development that you're building your house in towards that park, it has to be used in another location. I don't think that was the intention of how that was written, but it's an outcome and it's a challenge because to you as a resident, that property across the street, which may be North Lakes, is your neighborhood park because it's right across the street. You may have to go a mile away to go to what you would classify as a neighborhood park where that money would be invested, so that's a little bit of a challenge right now in how that ordinance is written. So just a little bit of background. So based on the neighborhood and community park costs, we have an average now of $355,000 per acre. So again, big difference, big update between the current cost to develop a park and the cost of the current ordinance. Next slide. So we've established a fee within each zone, again, we have $3,269 per dwelling unit in zone A, and then you can see the cost for the zones going out. You'll notice immediately, well, number one, there's a huge jump in that cost, right? We're going from a low of $197 for multifamily residential, which we wouldn't have anymore, but still roughly $300 now to a low of $3,000 almost, or I'm sorry, $2,929. But across even these zones, you'll see a big swing from that low under zone B to a high under zone D of $6,243. So the contributing factors to those, again, are the differences in population, the differences in the number of park acres within each zone, and then a major difference is the land value within each zone. Next slide. Again, another scenario on a $300 dwelling unit development. Under the current ordinance, we would have those two separate fees, and the cost based on the number of dwelling units, $300, would be $87,000 for single family, $56,000 for multifamily. Under the proposed ordinance, you see how those significantly increase. Excuse me. So for zone A, at that proposed fee, we would have a development fee of just under, well, $980,000 for 300 units. The bottom table will show you what that collective cost is if a developer was going to pay the fee in lieu of plus their park development fee, what those two costs together would be per dwelling unit. Next slide. So we have a couple of options. Obviously, this was a sticker shock for all of us. We knew there was going to be an increase. How much of an increase? Really, we didn't know until we started working those numbers. So for the developers group who just experienced, frankly, increases in other development fees, this was a major concern for them. So we started looking at other ways, other methods or options that we would have in assessing these fees. And again, if our foundation, our level of service is in place, then we can work with the numbers from that point forward. And what I mean by that is that we could take that established fee and do an average of it. We could do a percentage of it. We can phase it in. There are a number of ways that we could work with those factors, those fee, the established fees, if we maintain the basis of level of service. If that's our baseline. So one of the, I guess, options that we have that was discussed and was actually proposed by one of the developers is averaging out the costs or the factors that get us to our costs. And what this would do is balance out those ranges. And there's a combination of increasing them in some zones and decreasing them in others. But if we average our factors for park dedication, we go from a proposed fee in zone A from $698 to 392. And we wanted to assess what our cost recovery is. Assuming that the proposed numbers are 100% cost recovery because we haven't modified those and they're based on those original factors, if we average, let's say, the population, if we average the cost of the residential homes and we come up with this new average number, what now does that do to our cost recovery? So we have a low of a cost recovery of 48% in zone E to a high of 82% in zone B for those averages. But you can also see that it's really evened out those fee factors within each zone. So now we have a high of 628 and a low of 306, which is a range of about $300. Originally, we had a range that was closer to about $700. On the development side, we did the same thing. We have the proposed fee. We looked to see what that fee would be at 60%. You can see those factors there. We also averaged that established a flat fee of $3,484. You see the cost recoveries for some zones were over 100% because it went over what the proposed fee using the original factors would be and then in other areas it went below 100%. And then we took that average at 60%. The reason why we started looking at a 60% fee is because the city of Fort Worth charges 60% of their baseline and with the intent of increasing it, it's a phased in approach. If we did something like that and we started at 60%, we would actually have two review periods before we got to that 100% and it would take six years to fully implement or realize 100% cost recovery, but it worked nicely just with the three-year review process. Again, this could be 20%. It could be 80% as long as the baseline is there. So our options moving forward and that we've been discussing with the smaller developers focus group is the full cost recovery, which we've outlined. That's the actual proposed document. We have our averaging option, which reduces fees overall. It closes the range of fees between zones for the fee in lieu of, and it produces a flat fee for the dedication. It also provides some equity between each zone. We can do a combination of the two. We can use the original dedication fee in lieu of and combine it with the averaging option of the park development fee. We also have the option to do a phased implementation. Again, if we began at 60%, we increase it by 10% each year. We reach 100% at year six of implementation and we'll have two good reviews of those factors in between. So they'll be updated throughout this process. I can tell you, Gary, if you want to go back to those proposed fee, this one, yes. The developers really like the averaging option at 60%. The sweet spot for them is 2000 to 2500 for fees. And so if you take that averaging at 60% option for park development and you add the average option for park dedication, you hit that spot, you hit that target. And that's really where we are today. We met with the developer group last Friday. The purpose of the meeting was really just to catch up with them, review the proposed ordinance. We're also working on a handbook that's a supplemental manual that has the specifications for park development. So if a developer wants to come in and develop the park themselves, we have very specific requirements for that park development that fall in line with our long-term master plan. You can't ask them to develop a park per the new master plan or the proposed master plan because that's not the level of service that's on the ground today. It has to be comparable to what you see in today's parks. But we can still impose specific requirements to help get us to those new kind of benchmarks that we're wanting to hit under the master plan. Some other really, I think, creative things that we've added is the opportunity to do more development agreements that's actually written into the ordinance. So if we've got a development that's coming in and we want to sit down with them and talk to them about what their parks are going to look like, their trail systems, any other amenities, we can do that separately in a development agreement. Cole Hunter Ranch is a great example of that. And Gary and Drew are working on other projects, too, that can help us achieve some of our master plan projects through a development agreement. So we could actually get more out of a development agreement than strictly following the park land dedication and park development factors that would be written in this ordinance. The one thing just to add to what Laura had commented on is that came out from our developers, this only addresses residential parcels. It does not consider the commercial parcels or retail, any industrial, any of that type of thing. So what we would do and have an option for is if we wanted a parcel that was zoned commercial that let's say it's behind a Walgreens that would be a good place to put a trailhead for an area, we could use that instead of a piece of land that they were going to give us that maybe didn't have any value to us. So we can address those types of situations where we're being more creative with the developer because say the developer may say, I need that space to put houses where I can make my money and then we could say, well, we need this commercial property that you have that would be more valuable for us as a trailhead for a neighborhood. So that allows us to be a little more creative with that type of opportunity as similar to what Laura just stated. So the proposed ordinance is really killing a lot of birds with one stone. Again, updating is a major factor. The legal compliance is another major factor because our current ordinance just isn't getting us there. And then some of the lessons learned since 1998 are all things that are also being addressed. Again, something like the proximity and creating those donuts of no funding within our city and reversing that drive back to need rather than location for using these funds, which is the original intent, are all things that we're addressing. Going back and updating the specifications for development. If a developer was going to either donate or develop their own park, that needed to be done. So all of those things are updated. Something else really quick, under the current ordinance, any funding that we receive has to be spent within 10 years. And if it's not spent, then the developer has one year to come back and ask for reimbursement. To my knowledge, there's been one developer that has initiated that clause. And it was several years ago. And I don't know the details. That's just my understanding. But in this current ordinance, we have looked at reducing that time to seven years. I know that seems a little bit of an odd number, but it's almost a compromise. We're wanting to let the developers know that this money is being used. And not only the developers who are actually paying in, but the residents who should be benefiting from this money, letting them know that we are working as quickly and as diligently as possible to make these improvements and to make sure that these parks are, you know, they're keeping up with the need. But it also gives us the wiggle room that we need. Let's say if we have a bond program that's over five years, you know, we might ask for one specific element to be funded through a bond program. And then we can supplement amenities using 915 or 916 funding. So that gives us, again, that extra cushion to plan out for bond projects or major construction projects. Those can take a couple of years, as y'all know. So that's where we've landed on the seven years. Just to tie in with what Laura's talking about there and kind of what you see on the screen in regards to cost recovery, and I need to actually take this down. In regards to cost recovery, if you think about it now, we're talking even at the 60% in six-year rollup, anywhere between, you know, 48 to 82%. Right now, based on the cost to construct the park, our formula is based off of $208,000 for a five-acre park, and it's $1.5 million for a similar park size. So that's right now, at full pay, we're at 20% cost recovery, and we're not getting full pay. So we only have a little bit of money in a lot of places. There's a couple locations across the city that we have a large lump of 915, 916 funding, and that's like near the McKenna property. And we're doing improvements to that park that's going to utilize that funding. But there are some areas where we may have, you know, $5,000 in funding sitting there, and that's not going to build a neighborhood park. It's not even going to build a one-acre park. So that's part of the challenge of having these based off of one-mile radius around a geographic area, as opposed to a zone where we can lump funds together and build some parks. So even at the 60%, we're coming up way ahead to where we were at before. Obviously, you know, I think the concern is developers pay their way. There's a lot of discussion about that with the Hunter and Cole Ranch meetings with City Council when we were working on that. They are currently planning to build parks above the cost of what they're required to do. In Razor Ranch, which is the next topic for discussion, they are spending, I don't know, three or four times more than they're required to do by ordinance at their choosing. So there's a lot of developers that are actually paying more than they're required to, and that's just because that's what it costs to build those properties. So we're fortunate to have that, but that's just a little background on the cost recovery thought process. Any questions? I know it's a lot of information again, and I know we haven't talked about it in a while. And while it looks really complicated, walking through the actual fee calculations gets us there is pretty easy. George has his hand up. Yeah. First off, thank you, Laura, for that presentation. I love me some good math. That was fun. So it sounds like, and I just want to maybe ask this in a really simple way because I want to clarify that by increasing this percentage that we're becoming, I guess, a little more competitive in what we're asking developers to give in terms of helping us to have more funding per se. Is that correct so far? Yes. Okay, awesome. I'm 100% behind this, and I love the explanation of different types of parks, sizes of parks. I have a question about the drafted ordinance, the recommendation. It says in Section 2245, right to refund, it's a five-year period. Am I reading that wrong? Is it supposed to be seven? Well, we've gone back and forth, and I need to update that. It should be seven. I think that's where we've landed now. We reduced it to five, but then again, just having gone through the bond process, if we've got money that's not scheduled to be sold for five years, and we're wanting to buy park land, and then we're wanting to use development money to put in this infrastructure, that's not going to work. So under this current bond program, again, we've got money for land, but if we want to use the development piece, the 9/16 money, the timing's going to be off. So we're going to extend that to seven. I agree. Yeah, I want to make sure that you guys have access to those funds for as long as you really need them, because it's right, you don't want to go too far and wait too long, and all these developers are like, "Where are these parks that you guys said you were going to use this money for?" And on the other side, it's bonds haven't come through, we haven't had time to access this money. I just wanted to make sure that we gave ourselves enough time, so I'm glad that it's seven. Yeah, I also agree with the 60% method. I feel like it's both competitive and it meets the needs of what the revised ordinance would bring to the table. So that would kind of be where I'm at, is with the 60% model, because it both is attractive to developers who want to bring in development here, but it's also attractive to the staff who wants to have more income. And that's all I have to say about that. Thank you so much for this presentation. That was a lot, but I learned a lot reading that. Thank you, George. David, I see your hand. Yeah, I wanted to talk a little bit about that period as well. I thought that was a pretty good place of compromise because I don't think we're really giving up much, but it shows that we're coming off of some hard lines that don't really affect us anyway, or they shouldn't affect us anyway. And I think one net positive of that is when you're delaying out tenures, if you look at a city council or a board in a ten-year period, directions change and priorities change, and keeping a tighter schedule will probably keep things moving a little bit better anyway. The one question I think I had, and it was kind of follow-up to the 60%, I think the 60% number makes sense, but what I think I heard was an incremental scheduling of increasing that to 100, I guess? That's what we're saying in every two years or every three years, would it make sense to make that more gradual and just so it's not as much of a sticker shock on developers? Yeah, so we're looking at 10% a year, and so first year, obviously 60%, second year, 70%, year three would be at 80%, and that's going to be a review year. And then after the review, we would essentially reset at that 80%, then 90%, 100%, and then the third year, we would reset 100%. Does that make sense? I'm not going to claim I totally understand that, but yeah, okay. It's based on land. It's based on property values. Oh, I understand. Okay. And not just property values, but it's based on population. It's based on residential parcels within each zone, and it's based on the land value. It's also based on the level of service is also based on the number of park acres in each zone. So if we have new parks there or we've added to existing parks, which we've done over the last three years, then that number will change as well. So we'll actually have one year at 100%, and then the second year, which would be year six, is another review year. So we would reset at 100%. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. I'm sorry. Were you done, David? I was just thinking. I said it totally makes sense. So thank you. You answered my question. Okay. Thank you, Laura. And for the sake of time, we only have 15 minutes left, and I want to thank you for all the detail because it did make it much clearer for me. I read it and thought I understood it, but your explanation drove it home. Thank you. Thank you so much. It's so good to see you. Thank you. Okay. Our next item, Receiver Report Holder Discussion and Give Staff Input Regarding the Future Park that is to be located at the corner of Heritage Trail and Linden Drive in Razor Ranch Town Center. Gary, is that you or Drew? Yeah. I'm bringing it up. Hang on one second. Okay. Thank you. All right. Drew, you want to do this one? Yeah. Okay. Can you guys see that? All right. So this -- oh, it went down. Sorry. I didn't know you had it. There you go. So this is the proposed Razor Ranch property. As depicted on the park, it's, you know, northwest of McKenna. It's over behind -- I guess it would be southwest of Bonnie Bray and US 380 behind WinCo Foods. Here is the look of the park, and this is really Razor Ranch, you know, at almost its buildout. Gary's circling the park right now. And then, yeah, there's WinCo, like I said, it's southeast of WinCo. For community feedback, you know, we had a meeting back in March, so we talked about walking trails and connectability to other parks, water fountains, shade, public transportation and bike racks, educational signs, lighting and call boxes for safety, the turf quality, green space, trees, and of course, more trees, and in fact, the developer, if you haven't been there to see it, I highly encourage you to drive by and take a look at it and get out and walk around. They did a really good job. Parking and ADA accessibility, so there is parking along the streets, and there's ADA parking spaces there. They're all parallel parking areas. There aren't any restrooms there. They are looking to, as they do, build out, possibly partner with a business to put outdoor restrooms at the very north end of the park. Street crossings, there are street crossings in that area that they're constructing right now. Traffic light at University and Heritage Trail. Traffic does know about that consideration, and of course, consideration for a future spray ground. This is the rendering that we showed a few months ago, I guess almost a year ago now. So Gary's circling now what would maybe be future eateries or bars or restaurants in that area there at the far north end of the park. Here's our parking spaces that we talked about where you have parking along the roads, and of course, on the very far end, that'll be a shared parking lot for those eateries and for the park also. So here's what it looked like when it first really started, and they started kind of sculpting the dirt. This is another rendering of what it anticipated to be, and of course, that kind of depicts where the eateries would be, people playing in the open space, your kind of courtyard area where the transitions are, educational signs, little traffic flow around the park where the future apartments are going up. Here's a real-time photo, so like I said, it looks really good. It's a very kind of quiet place that you just get in, and especially when you're around, you know, the moundings of the dirt there where all the trees are built, you get in there, you just kind of forget where you are, and you kind of lose those apartments in the background. So that's a really good place for those that are going to live around here, especially living in those apartments so they can get out and be in that open space. So there are lights, and Gary, if you'll go back one, you see the, yeah, Gary has a light on the mouse right now, those are the same lights that we installed at the North Lakes Dog Park, those solar lights. There's another picture. So on the very far north end, it'll be your left, that area right there, they did install, after this picture was taken, some electrical outlets, some large electrical outlets for maybe a future food truck area before those eateries were built, so that we could host or someone could host a kind of a food truck event there on the north end of the park. We have the courtyard there where the little crossing, landscape very nicely. So this was the total cost of construction, and of course, it's going to go up some. Various amenities, that number's going to change because they did change out some amenities as far as some exercise equipment that they're going to put along the trails there at Razor Ranch. Park construction started last summer, went through the winter, and it was all sodded and irrigated, and all the grasses were planted throughout this spring, summer, and early fall now that we're in, so. All right, we have any questions, and there is one thing, this property has not been fully dedicated to us, it has not gone to council. I know Gary sends weekly emails reminding them that we do need, you know, that proper paperwork to be able to take to council for that dedication, and we hope to have it soon. It was supposed to happen quite a long time ago, but still, we're still waiting, so. All right, Mary, you'll take it now. I see George. Sorry, I just have one quick question, I don't know why I'm apologizing. It's been a long time since we talked about this. I just wanted to make sure, I don't, did we never talk about restrooms in the capacity of them helping provide that? I know that you just said that they're going to try and partner with the business to provide them, but I imagine this will be ready before maybe commercial has actually been developed there yet. So, because it's such a large piece of land, I'd like to make sure that there are bathrooms accessible to everyone, but sooner rather than later, I guess. What we could do after this is dedicated to us, but once it's dedicated to us, they will hold a maintenance agreement for the first year. So that really works in our favor, we're not paying to maintain that park for the first year, but we could look into putting some portable restrooms there before permanent restrooms are built. As we've mentioned earlier, the requirements for the overall development that they're supposed to provide from a land equity standpoint is this is almost exactly what they were supposed to provide, it's a little bit more, but from a construction standpoint, it was a little over $300,000 and they're over $1.2, $1.3 million and a restroom facility is not cheap. We've realized that ourselves, so they've really exceeded the expectations. So anything that we want to add to it, we're going to have to add to ourselves, I don't think they're going to be interested in putting more into the park, other than what they've agreed to at this point in time. So whether it's a port-a-john or it's a future restroom facility, it's something we'll have to address long-term. The one thing that we do need to discuss as we continue to move forward in the development of our park system is when and where do we provide restrooms? A neighborhood park typically does not provide restrooms because they're a neighborhood park, they're generally available for the people that live around that park where they can walk back and forth. This one's a little bit different where it has a little bit of a tourist destination twist to it. So in the agreement, it does outline the goal of them providing restrooms once those developments are constructed for general public use. So that's going to be a complicated process and discussion, depending on when that happens, but there is going to be a period of time that we're going to have to provide something that we'll have to work through. So it's a challenge for sure. Yeah, absolutely. Just wanted to double check because with all that commercial and even food trucks, when you're giving people food and places to sit and eat, you should also give them access to bathrooms. Cool. I just wanted to make sure that that was, I know that's $380,000 that was on that side budget that was just listed. I just wanted to circle back around and keep that in people's forefront of their mind. Thank you. Really good question, George. Thank you. Any additional questions, concerns? Okay, this is not an action item. This is an information item. The next item is to talk about items for next, the next meeting. And so this is what I have, Gary, correct me if I'm wrong, UNT, a property, Veterans Park, however you want to phrase that, KDB. Clear Creek. Okay. Yeah, we're going to tie Clear Creek and KDB together since it's kind of the same group. Okay. So that'll be one item in itself. And I've had some community residents come. And Gary, we've had this conversation. If you could share this brief overview of when parks are going to reopen and how. So everybody's on the same page. Yep. Just about every council meeting, we have a COVID presentation that covers something, whether it's a governor's order or a change in a regulation, whatever it would be, or a change in park operations. So tomorrow we're going to provide a brief update to city council on kind of where we're at with our programs and facilities and what our long-term plan is. And I want to say long-term, it's the next three or four months. It's COVID years, so it's long-term. And as part of our initial reopening plan from last April, we anticipated Denia and the senior center and civic center opening up towards the end of this year in the first of January. We opened up MLK over Labor Day weekend or just after Labor Day weekend. And we're trying to balance need, community need, participation levels, programming need, COVID, COVID, all at the same time. MLK has been fairly slow in regrowing. We do get a lot of kids that come over to that facility and hang out. Right now you have to have supervision. So that's definitely impact numbers. Denia neighborhood has reached out wanting their facility open. We are starting to get some of our senior center users reaching out. They want the senior center reopened. So we have a couple of items for discussion tomorrow on athletic programming, on starting some senior programming at North Lakes and MLK, social distance, small groups to kind of help control that. So the feedback we're getting is some of the seniors are struggling because they don't have the social engagement that they need and it's impacting mental health. And I think we've all experienced that in some form or fashion over the past six, seven months. So we're trying to address that and balance budget and staffing at the same time. So part of the discussion and consideration is opening Denia maybe part time and sharing staff between MLK and Denia going back and forth until we get programs up and running and we see more attendance and more participation and then opening expanding hours. So we're going to have some of those discussions with council tomorrow and we'll see where that discussion goes and we can provide you an update next month for sure and our game plan moving forward. Fantastic. So that will be added for next month as well. I have the other community concern was the relationship between the parks board and our art committee, there was a concern of about where the art is being placed in which parks. And if you could add that for next time and just speak to that, that would be helpful. Just a point of clarification. The relationship between the public art committee and the park board and where art goes. Yes, with what parks. How is it determined what art goes in which parks? And, Eddie, can we go ahead and get December scheduled because December is going to be December is already here. And the absentee policy, we want to have a discussion about adding family obligations to the list. Everybody in agreement for that? Okay, if there are no other, oh, yes, I'm going to add one to December. It'll be I have we've been working on this for quite a while and it's time. It's time to bring it to you. So it's a citywide, citywide, wildflower and plant, prairie planting program. Okay. Say that more than once, so George was thinking that. So it's a wildflower and prairie restoration planting program. All right. Anything else for next month? Just a real quick, just to kind of add a couple of just comments, we've got, I guess, one minute left, jumping back to the 9/15/16. The ordinance, the way it's written, we are eligible to reimburse ourselves. So if we buy property ahead of time to try to get it at a better price, we can use that funding for reimbursing the city for that to go back into a land acquisition fund. So that's something that's new. And there will be a time between once the ordinance is approved and once it'll start that gives anybody that has a project in the works time to kind of flush that through the system and kind of be grandfathered in. That way, if they bought property based off of a certain budget and then we come in and raise those fees, that gives them an opportunity to kind of get that project approved and get it stamped and then they won't be subject to the new fees. So that's something that Dr. Crompton also recommended to us as well. So that might be six months or five, six months, whatever we determine and settle on is just another opportunity that we're showing how we're working with the community to try to balance the burden of fee increases. Thank you. Thank you so much. Anything else? All right. May I have a motion to adjourn the meeting? So moved. David in second. Go ahead, George. Second. Yes. All in favor? Anyone oppose? Motion passes. Meeting adjourned at five o'clock exactly, Eddie. Have a good evening, all. Thank you. Thank you.