Jan 13, 2026 City Council on 2026-01-13 2:00 PM (SPECIAL CALLED)

[WORK SESSION BEGINS AT 2:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL WORK SESSION ROOM]

[00:00:10]

THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL. HAPPY NEW YEAR. IT'S THE FIRST MEETING BACK, AND TODAY IS TUESDAY, JANUARY 13TH, 2026. IT IS 2:02 P.M. WE HAVE A QUORUM. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND FIRST THING IS. IN PERSON FOR REGULAR CONSENT AGENDA. SO ANYONE IN PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS? NOPE. THAT TAKES US TO. IN PERSON. OKAY. GOT IT.

CITIZEN COMMENTS RATHER IS WHAT I SHOULD HAVE SAID AND THEN REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION AGENDA ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. SO REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION ON PUBLIC HEARING AND INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. SEEING NONE.

TAKES US TO OUR FIRST WORK SESSION. AND I WILL MAKE EVERYONE AWARE WE ONLY HAVE ONE CLOSED SESSION. ITEM A WAS A PLACEHOLDER, SO WE DON'T NEED THAT. ITEM D ON THE WORK SESSION HAS BEEN POSTPONED, SO WE'LL GO A THROUGH C. D IS POSTPONED A WE DON'T NEED AND WE'LL GO INTO B AND CLOSED. AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO OUR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BECAUSE WE WILL TRANSFER TO THE CHAMBERS TO VOTE AND TAKE THAT UP STRAIGHT AWAY. SO THAT TAKES

[A. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding Key Focus Areas for the City of Denton, including Pursuing Organizational Excellence and Collaborative, Respectful Leadership; Enhancing Infrastructure and Mobility; Fostering Economic Opportunity and Affordability; Strengthening Community and Quality of Life; Supporting Healthy and Safe Communities; and Promoting Sustainability and the Environment. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 30 minutes]]

>> A QUICK POINT OF CLARIFICATION, IF I MAY. >> POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

>> THANK YOU. SO TO REPEAT AND MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR IN THE ITEM D IN THE WORK SESSION ITEMS IS

POSTPONED. >> YEAH. THE PRESENTERS UNDER THE WEATHER.

>> COPY THAT. AND THEN IN THE CLOSED MEETING A WE CONTINUE WITH ITEM B IS NO THE OPPOSITE.

>> YES. ITEM. ITEM A WAS JUST A PLACEHOLDER JUST IN CASE WE NEEDED IT. SO WE'LL SKIP THAT.

IT WASN'T CALLED UPON. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM B. >> AND ANYTHING PULLED FROM THE

CONSENT AGENDA TODAY MAYOR. >> ITEM F WAS PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL. YEAH.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THAT COMPLETES MY POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

>> THANK YOU. GOOD QUESTION. OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AMY CASSEY CHIEF STRATEGIC OFFICER WE'RE GOING TO START TODAY'S PRESENTATION WITH A VIDEO HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF THE CITY'S MANY ACCOMPLISHMENTS LAST FISCAL YEAR. WILL THEN FOCUS THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION ON PROVIDING A BIT MORE DETAIL

ABOUT ALL OF THE AMAZING THINGS THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE. >> REFLECTING ON THE CITY'S COLLECTIVE ACCOMPLISHMENTS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CELEBRATE OUR PROGRESS AS A COMMUNITY. AS WE LOOK BACK ON FISCAL YEAR 20 2425, DENTON'S STEADY GROWTH BROUGHT CHALLENGES, YET OUR DEDICATED WORKFORCE ROSE TO THE OCCASION AND DELIVERED OUTSTANDING RESULTS. OUR FOCUS ON COMPLETING PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY COUNCIL'S KEY FOCUS AREAS DEMONSTRATES OUR SHARED COMMITMENT TO ALIGNING GOALS WITH THE COMMUNITY'S NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS. THE FOUNDATION FOR THE CITY OF DENTON STRATEGIC PLAN IS SIX LONG TERM KEY FOCUS AREAS. PURSUE ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE AND COLLABORATIVE AND RESPECTFUL LEADERSHIP. ENHANCE INFRASTRUCTURE AND MOBILITY. FOSTER ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND AFFORDABILITY. STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY AND QUALITY OF LIFE. SUPPORT HEALTHY AND SAFE COMMUNITIES. PROMOTE SUSTAINABILITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT. OUR COMMITMENT TO ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE IS REFLECTED IN OUR CONTINUED FOCUS ON EMPLOYEE WELL-BEING, STRENGTHENING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, AND IMPROVING PROCESSES THAT SUPPORT HIGH QUALITY SERVICE DELIVERY.

CONDUCTED EMPLOYEE SURVEY TO STRENGTHEN WORKPLACE CULTURE AND DRIVE ORGANIZATIONAL GROWTH.

EARNED ALL SIX TRANSPARENCY STARS FROM TEXAS COMPTROLLER DEMONSTRATING EXCELLENCE IN FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY. DEVELOP POPULAR ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT TO MAKE COMPLEX FINANCIAL DATA MORE ACCESSIBLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE FOR RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS. IMPLEMENTED ZERO BASED BUDGETING TO ALIGN DEPARTMENT FUNDING WITH CURRENT NEEDS AND STRATEGIC PRIORITIES.

LAUNCH DENTON 311 FOR STREAMLINED CITY SERVICE ACCESS AND IMPROVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. BY THE NUMBERS 99% EMPLOYEES COMMITTED TO THE ORGANIZATION'S SUCCESS 94% EMPLOYEES RATED DENTON A GREAT PLACE TO WORK. 947,403 SOCIAL MEDIA ENGAGEMENTS, 3,955,713.

[00:05:03]

EXPANDED ADA COMPLIANCE ACROSS SIX CITY FACILITIES. REINFORCING DENTON'S COMMITMENT TO INCLUSIVE PUBLIC SPACES. DELIVERED $149 MILLION IN INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, CREATING A STRONGER ROADWAY NETWORK AND ENHANCED UTILITY SYSTEM FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

COMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS AT LAKE LEWISVILLE WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO MAINTAIN EFFICIENCY, SAFEGUARDING BOTH PUBLIC HEALTH AND OPERATIONAL RESILIENCE. UPDATED PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE TO STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY STANDARDS AND SAFETY, PRESERVING THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. BY THE NUMBERS 8592. CURB MILE STREET SWEPT 1888 POTHOLES FILLED. DENTON REMAINS DEDICATED TO SUPPORTING ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROMOTING AFFORDABILITY, HELPING BOTH FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES THRIVE IN AN ENVIRONMENT OF STABILITY AND OPPORTUNITY DROVE MAJOR ECONOMIC IMPACT. THROUGH 31 DAYS OF HALLOWEEN PROGRAMING, HIGHLIGHTING THE POWER OF CREATIVE ENGAGEMENT TO DRIVE ECONOMIC GROWTH. SECURED OVER 750,000FT■!S IN LEASES TO ADVANE AVIATION DEVELOPMENT AT THE DENTON ENTERPRISE AIRPORT. RECOGNIZED BY GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT AS STULZ USA ANNOUNCES A SIGNIFICANT FACILITY UPGRADE AND THE CREATION OF 200 NEW JOBS IN DENTON. REFOCUSED DENTON COMMUNITY SHELTER SERVICES TO PRIORITIZE STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY FOR INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. EXPANDED ACCESS TO GRANTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS SUPPORTING THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN. BY THE NUMBERS $135,000 VALUE OF DOWNTOWN REINVESTMENT GRANTS $214,731,354. VALUE OF COMMERCIAL PERMITS $615,994. EXPENDED ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. $1,878,078 EXPENDED ON HOMELESSNESS PROGRAMS. OUR COMMUNITY CENTERED INITIATIVES HONOR DENTON'S DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER WHILE ENHANCING PARKS, PUBLIC SPACES, AND AMENITIES THAT ENRICH DAILY LIFE FOR RESIDENTS. UPDATED SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS TO BALANCE NEIGHBORHOOD INTEGRITY AND PROPERTY RIGHTS, ENSURING ONGOING COMPLIANCE. ACHIEVED ACCREDITATION THROUGH THE TEXAS STATE LIBRARY COMMISSION. AFFIRMING THE DENTON LIBRARY'S COMMITMENT TO COMMUNITY, REVITALIZE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT TO ENHANCE SAFETY AND RECREATION AT NORTH POINT PARK, MAINTAINING HIGH QUALITY RECREATIONAL SPACES. COMPLETED KEY SAFETY AND ESTHETICS RENOVATIONS AT WATERWORKS PARK, ENSURING A BETTER EXPERIENCE FOR VISITORS. BY THE NUMBERS 1,002,778 VISITORS AT PARK FACILITIES 2608 PROGRAMS OFFERED AT RECREATION CENTERS 495,927 VISITORS AT LIBRARY BRANCHES 1,109,555 LIBRARY MATERIALS CHECKED OUT. WE HAVE REINFORCED PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMUNITY RESILIENCE THROUGH STRATEGIC PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES THAT PRIORITIZE THE WELL-BEING OF EVERYONE WHO CALLS DENTON HOME. ADVANCED PEDESTRIAN SAFETY MEASURES AROUND KEY CORRIDORS AND CAMPUSES TO IMPROVE WALKABILITY AND PROTECT PEDESTRIANS, RECEIVE FULL ACCREDITATION AND A PERFECT SCORE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES. REFLECTING THE DENTON FIRE DEPARTMENT'S COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE. ACHIEVED ISO CLASS ONE RATING FOR FIRE PROTECTION EXCELLENCE, THE HIGHEST POSSIBLE DESIGNATION, WHICH POSITIVELY INFLUENCES INSURANCE RATES FOR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES. BUILT LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT AND SUCCESSION PROGRAM TO STRENGTHEN CAREER PATHWAYS AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. ENHANCING PROMOTIONAL READINESS BY THE NUMBERS FOUR MINUTE 15 SECOND AVERAGE FIRE RESPONSE TIME 338,525. CALLS ANSWERED BY 911 DISPATCHERS 96% 911 CALLS ANSWERED WITHIN 15 SECONDS SIX MINUTE 14 SECOND AVERAGE POLICE RESPONSE TIME. DEN REMAINS COMMITTED TO PRESERVING NATURAL RESOURCES AND ADVANCING ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY. ADVANCED WATER RESOURCE PLANNING THROUGH DEVELOPMENT OF ONE WATER MASTER PLAN, POSITIONING THE CITY FOR SUSTAINABLE UTILITY MANAGEMENT.

EXPANDED TRASH ABATEMENT PROGRAM TO PREVENT NEARLY 10,000 POUNDS OF DEBRIS FROM ENTERING WATERWAYS. SUPPORTING LONG TERM WATERSHED HEALTH. ENTERING INTO CONTRACTS FOR ADDITIONAL WIND GENERATION, AND THE FIRST BATTERY STORAGE RESOURCE TO MEET DENTON MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC'S GROWING ENERGY NEEDS. INCREASED EMERGENCY RESPONSE FLEET. WITH

[00:10:03]

WE'VE NOT ONLY MET THE CITY OF DENTON'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, BUT WE'VE ALSO STRENGTHENED THE FOUNDATION OF A COMMUNITY WE ARE PROUD TO CALL HOME. TOGETHER, WE CONTINUE TO BUILD

A DENTON THAT REFLECTS THE VERY BEST OF WHO WE ARE. >> EXCELLENT.

>> WELL DONE. >> WILL YOU GO ALL. WHEN YOU'RE WORN OUT, AREN'T YOU?

>> SO, BEFORE I GET STARTED, I DO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK MARK, PARTICULARLY BILLY MATTHEWS AND STEVE FORSYTH, FOR DOING A GREAT JOB AT PUTTING THIS VIDEO TOGETHER. REALLY, I THINK JUST GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO STOP, TAKE A BREATH AND REFLECT ON ALL OF THE WORK THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE OVER THE LAST YEAR, WITH EMPLOYEES ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO MOVING OUR KEY FOCUS AREAS FORWARD. SO HERE ARE OUR SIX KEY FOCUS AREAS, WHICH WERE ESTABLISHED BY COUNCIL IN JULY OF 2022. THERE ARE OVER 100 INITIATIVES BEING TRACKED WITHIN THIS ORGANIZATION. AGAIN, TO MOVE THOSE KEY FOCUS AREAS FORWARD. SO BEFORE I GO ANY FURTHER ON THIS SLIDE AND THE SLIDES THAT FOLLOW, YOU WILL NOT ONLY SEE HIGHLIGHTED ACCOMPLISHMENTS, YOU'LL ALSO SEE REFERENCE TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES. AND YOU'LL HEAR ABOUT THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING TO PROGRESS THESE PRIORITY ITEMS THROUGHOUT THE THE PRESENTATION. SO I'M GOING TO START WITH HOW WE STRENGTHEN OUR ORGANIZATION AND HOW WE SUPPORT EMPLOYEES WHO DO THE WORK EVERY DAY. THIS YEAR, WE FOCUSED ON BUILDING A STRONG, SUPPORTIVE WORKPLACE WHERE EMPLOYEES FEEL ENGAGED, VALUED AND EQUIPPED TO SUCCEED. WE CONDUCTED A CITYWIDE EMPLOYEE SURVEY TO GUIDE IMPROVEMENTS AND ENSURE THAT DENTON IS AN EMPLOYER OF CHOICE. WE MODERNIZED HOW WE APPROACH EMPLOYEE SAFETY THROUGH THE CREATION OF A CITYWIDE SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM THAT IMPROVES TRAINING, TRACKING AND COORDINATION ACROSS DEPARTMENTS. TO STAY COMPETITIVE, WE ADVANCED OUR TOTAL REWARDS AND BENEFITS, INCLUDING NEW MEDICAL AND PHARMACY CONTRACTS AND CLEAR COMMUNICATION. DURING OUR OPEN ENROLLMENT PROCESS. WE ALSO EXPANDED FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC TRUST BY EARNING ALL SIX TRANSPARENCY STARS FROM THE TEXAS COMPTROLLER AND BY INTRODUCING EASY TO READ TOOLS LIKE THE POPULAR ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT.

YOU MAY ALSO HEAR THAT CALLED THE GAFFER AND THE CITY'S BUDGET IN BRIEF. TO BETTER ALIGN RESOURCES WITH CURRENT NEEDS, WE IMPLEMENTED ZERO BASED BUDGETING SUPPORTED BY THE BUDGET TASK FORCE AND PAIRED WITH TARGETED SPENDING AND SPENDING CONTROLS TO HELP US STABILIZE THE GENERAL FUND, WE STRENGTHENED GRANTS MANAGEMENT AND LAUNCHED DENTON 311, MAKING IT EASIER FOR RESIDENTS TO ACCESS SERVICES AND FOR STAFF TO DELIVER QUALITY, CONSISTENT SUPPORT. WE ALSO REBUILT ANIMAL SERVICES, VOLUNTEER AND FOSTER PROGRAMS, IMPROVING TRAINING AND TRACKING AND EXPANDING CAPACITY, SHOWING HOW BETTER SYSTEMS LEAD TO BETTER OUTCOMES. NEXT, I'LL HIGHLIGHT HOW WE INVEST IN MOBILITY AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS THAT KEEP THE CITY MOVING. THIS YEAR, WE DELIVERED MAJOR ROADWAY INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING THE DESIGN AND AWARD OF BONNIE BRAE PHASE SIX, AND CONTINUE TO SHIFT TOWARDS MAINTAINING EXISTING STREETS. WE UPGRADED TRAFFIC SYSTEMS AND ACCESSIBILITY BY INSTALLING NEW SYSTEMS, NEW SIGNALS, REBUILDING OLDER ONES, AND COMPLETING ADA IMPROVEMENTS

[00:15:05]

FINALLY, WE UPDATED THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND MODERNIZED THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS BY WORKING DIRECTLY WITH OUR STAKEHOLDERS THROUGH THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY ALLIANCE TO REDUCE REVIEW TIMES AND IMPROVE SERVICES. SO THIS NEXT SESSION FOCUSES ON HOW WE SUPPORT GROWTH WHILE KEEPING AFFORDABILITY FRONT AND CENTER.

WE ACTIVATED DOWNTOWN THROUGH EVENTS AND PLACEMAKING, INCLUDING A FULL MONTH OF HALLOWEEN PROGRAMING THAT INCREASED VISITORS AND HELPED US SUPPORT LOCAL BUSINESSES. WE ATTRACTED BUSINESS INVESTMENTS AND JOB GROWTH THROUGH TARGETED INCENTIVES AND MAJOR PROJECTS, INCLUDING LANDMARK BY HILLWOOD AND H-E-B AND EXPANSIONS BY ADVANCED MANUFACTURERS INCLUDING STOLTZ, FOR WHICH WE RECEIVED RECOGNITION FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AT THE DEN ENTERPRISE AIRPORT. WE EXPANDED DEVELOPMENT THROUGH NEW LEASES AND COMPLETED A FINANCIAL REVIEW TO GUIDE LONG TERM SUSTAINABILITY. DEFINITELY WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO RECOGNIZE THE AIRPORT STAFF FOR THEIR WORK IN THIS AREA. THEIR EFFORTS AND ACHIEVEMENTS AGAIN, ARE REALLY HELPING US TO STABILIZE OUR AIRPORT FUNDS, SO THAT'S CERTAINLY COMMENDABLE WORK BY THAT TEAM. WE SUPPORTED MUSIC, FILM AND THE CREATIVE ECONOMY BY WORKING WITH LOCAL VENUES AND WELCOMING A WIDE RANGE OF FILM PRODUCTIONS. WE ADVANCED AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC FACILITY CORPORATION, STRENGTHENING DENTON'S CAPACITY TO SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PUBLIC FACILITY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH STRATEGIC COLLABORATIONS. WE ALSO STRENGTHENED HOUSING STABILITY BY REFOCUSING SHELTER SERVICES ON LONG TERM HOUSING SOLUTIONS AND IMPROVING COORDINATED RESPONSE TO UNSHELTERED NEEDS. FINALLY, WE INVEST IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANTS TO SUPPORT HUMAN SERVICES, HOUSING AND PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS. THIS SECTION FOCUSES ON HOW WE SUPPORT THE PLACES AND SERVICES THAT SHAPE DAILY LIFE. IN DENTON. WE INCREASED TRANSPARENCY IN PLANNING BY LAUNCHING PUBLIC FACING DASHBOARDS FOR THE DESIGN DOWNTOWN DENTON PLAN AND THE SOUTHEAST DENTON AREA PLAN, MAKING PROGRESS EASIER TO TRACK AND UNDERSTAND. WE PROTECTED NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER BY UPDATING SHORT TERM RENTAL RULES AND PROPERTY STANDARDS WHILE MAINTAINING ALIGNMENT WITH STATE LAW. WE EXPANDED PUBLIC ART AND CULTURAL EXPRESSION THROUGH NEW INSTALLATIONS, COMMUNITY ART PROJECTS, AND PARTNERSHIPS WITH LOCAL ARTISTS. WE ALSO ENHANCED DENTON'S VISUAL APPEAL THROUGH BEAUTIFICATION PROJECTS. WE INVESTED IN PARKS, TRAILS, AND RECREATION BY PURCHASING LAND AND COMPLETING DESIGN PLANS TO CONNECT OUR PARKS THROUGH OUR TRAIL SYSTEMS. WE UPGRADED PLAYGROUNDS AND COMPLETED IMPROVEMENTS TO OUR WATERWORKS PARK. OUR LIBRARY SYSTEM CONTINUED TO EVOLVE THROUGH EARLY PROGRAMING, EARLY LEARNING SPACES, FAMILY PROGRAMING, AND SERVICE UPDATES TO IMPROVE ACCESS WHILE SUPPORTING FAMILIES AND EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT THROUGH CAREGIVER EDUCATION AND EARLY LITERACY PROGRAMS. TO TO SUPPORT HEALTH AND SAFETY, WE ADVANCED VISION ZERO GOALS BY IMPROVING CROSSINGS AND SIGNAL TIMING ALONG KEY CORRIDORS AND AROUND COLLEGE CAMPUSES. OUR FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES EARNED TOP TIER NATIONAL RECOGNITION, INCLUDING CASSEY ACCREDITATION FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND AN ISO CLASS ONE RATING. WE'RE WORKING TO ENHANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPACITY BY COMPLETING DESIGN FOR FIRE STATIONS FIVE AND SIX WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE STRENGTHEN COMMUNICATION.

I'M SORRY, RECRUITMENT AND PROFESSIONAL LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT. WE ALSO DEPLOYED NEW TECHNOLOGIES, INCLUDING REAL TIME DATA RESOURCES, DRONES AND VIRTUAL REALITY TRAINING PLATFORMS. WE ADVANCED COMMUNITY RISK REDUCTION STRATEGIES, USING DATA TO GUIDE EDUCATION AND OUTREACH, AND WE STRENGTHEN OUR MENTAL HEALTH RESPONSE BY ALIGNING THAT WORK WITH COMMUNITY SERVICES, ALLOWING STAFF TO BETTER SUPPORT PEOPLE IN CRISIS AND THOSE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS THROUGH COORDINATED, COMMUNITY BASED CARE. SO NEXT, I'M GOING TO SHARE HOW WE ADVANCE SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP. WE

[00:20:02]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. QUESTIONS FOR FOR STAFF. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT ONE.

>> THIS QUESTION COMES IN THE UNDER THE FIRE SAFETY THE SAFETY ASPECT. COULD YOU CLARIFY OUR WORK IN WHAT YEAR THAT WAS? I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS COMPLETED THIS YEAR IN REGARDS TO OUR NOT FIRE BUT LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH THE ISDS HAVING TO DO THE SROS AND OUR ROLE IN HOW WE WERE ABLE TO ASSIST THEM IN THAT PROCESS. IS THAT COMPLETED WITH US OR ARE

WE STILL WORKING WITH THEM? >> IT'S COMPLETED. WE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WAS, YOU KNOW, IN DIRE STRAITS FINANCIALLY. SO THEY REQUESTED TO GO WITH ONE SRO, WHICH WOULD BE A POLICE DEPARTMENT, AND THEN THEY WOULD HIRE AN OFFICER THAT THEY WOULD HIRE AT THERE BECAUSE THE CITY HAS CERTAIN AMOUNT MONEY WE COMMITTED. AND SO WE AGREED TO DO THAT AND THE DIFFERENT SCHOOLS. SO IT'S COMPLETED AND WE STILL WORK WITH THEM VERY CLOSELY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, TONY SALAS WAS TEXTING ME TODAY. WE'RE STILL WE'RE ALL WE'RE VERY PROMINENT ON THE CAMPUSES AND WORK WITH STUDENTS THAT MAY NEED SOME ADDITIONAL HELP OR MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OF COACHING.

SO WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH THEM. THEY HAVE ONE OFFICER THAT NOT REALLY AN OFFICER DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY THEY REFER TO HIM, BUT THEY HAVE ONE PERSON THAT THEY HAVE ON STAFF THAT THEY'VE HIRED UNDER UNDER A SUPERVISOR. AND THEN WE HAVE OUR STAFF THAT'S THERE. SO IT'S TWO STILL, BUT ONE OF THEIRS AND ONE OF OURS, AND THEN WE STILL WORK WITH THEM TO PROVIDE TRAINING AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. BUT IT'S IT'S WORKED QUITE WELL AND EVERYTHING SEEMS

TO BE GOING REALLY WELL. >> SO THIS CAN BE AN ONGOING RELATIONSHIP.

>> YES. AND IT WILL BE BECAUSE WE WANT WE WANT OUR RESOURCE OFFICERS IN THE SCHOOLS, AT LEAST ONE IN THE SCHOOL TO HELP STUDENTS. THEY WORK WITH THEM. SOMETIMES THEY'RE OUT THERE SERVING AS A CROSSING GUARD. THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY SEE THAT. THEY SEE STUDENTS SEE THE OFFICERS IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT, INSTEAD OF JUST SOMEONE THAT HAS THEIR

LIGHTS ON, BUT SOMEONE THAT CARES ABOUT THEM. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO. >> THANK YOU. SO I NOTICED THAT YOU YOU HAVE THE SLIDE WHERE IT HAS THE, THE THE GENERAL PROGRESS ON OUR DELIVERABLES.

AND WHILE YOU GO THERE, LET ME LET ME LEAD OFF WITH REALLY GREAT JOB ON INCREASING THE GRANT COORDINATION. I KNOW THAT YOU LED WITH THAT SLIDE, BUT I KNOW THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES IN GENERAL HAS REALLY, REALLY DONE AN AMAZING JOB OF PURSUING AND AND GETTING OUTSIDE FUNDING. SO REALLY, REALLY GREAT FOR DOCTOR BUTT AND THE REST OF THE OTHER STAFF THAT HAVE APPLIED FOR EXTERNAL FUNDING. WE'VE GOT SOME OF THE OTHER DIRECTORS HERE THAT GOT, YOU KNOW, WATER AND WASTEWATER. REALLY, REALLY GOOD JOB ON THAT. THAT'S I REALLY COMMEND STAFF FOR FOR SEEKING THAT OUT THOSE OUTSIDE MONIES. BUT TO MY QUESTION, I NOTICE THAT IF YOU KIND OF ADD UP THE YELLOWS AND REDS, WE'VE GOT 25, 30% IN SOME FORM OF DISRUPTION. IS THERE PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, BARRIERS, ESPECIALLY ONES THAT ARE CROSS-CUTTING, THAT ARE THAT

[00:25:03]

>> I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S A RESOURCE ISSUE.

SOMETIMES IT'S AN EXTERNAL FACTOR, AN EXTERNAL ENTITY THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THAT CAUSES A DISRUPTION. BUT IN GENERAL IT'S BETWEEN RESOURCES AND EXTERNAL DISRUPTIONS AS WELL.

>> SO SO SAY THAT FOR ME, A DIFFERENT WAY. I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THINGS OUTSIDE THE CITY'S CONTROL IN TERMS OF THE EXTERNAL RESOURCES, BUT AND THEN HAVING HAVING ACCESS TO

RESOURCES AND PROBABLY THAT MOSTLY MEANS FUNDING. >> RESOURCES AND SOMETIMES IT'S STAFFING, SOMETIMES THERE STAFFING ISSUES THAT JUST WILL SLOW DOWN SOME OF OUR INITIATIVES. SOMETIMES IT'S EXTERNAL FORCES. WE'VE YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT OF DISCUSSION WITH, WITH THOSE OWNERS OF INITIATIVES BECAUSE I WILL SAY AT FIRST EVERYONE'S VERY AND THIS HAPPENS ANY I'VE IMPLEMENTED A SYSTEM LIKE THIS FOR WHERE EVERYBODY'S LIKE, WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS DONE, WE'RE GOING TO GET IT ALL DONE IN A YEAR. AND THEN THEN REALITY SETS IN WHERE I MEAN, IT'S JUST IT'S JUST THE TRUTH OF IT. SO SO I LOOK TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH PEOPLE AROUND THAT. AND IS IT IS THERE TRULY A DISRUPTION IF THERE IS, WHAT IS THAT DISRUPTION BEEN. AND AND IT IS JUST A LOT OF IT IS RESOURCE DRIVEN.

>> AND WHEN THE REASON I ASK THAT AND I'LL, I'LL WRAP UP HERE, MISTER MAYOR. BUT THAT IS SORT OF LIKE WHAT, WHAT ARE WE TARGETING TO GENERALLY TO GET THROUGH SOME OF THOSE BARRIERS.

SO WE AGAIN WE CAN MOVE THESE THINGS TO GREEN AND BLUE. YEAH. I MEAN IS THERE GENERAL I MEAN MAYBE THAT'S A MANAGEMENT QUESTION, BUT WHAT ARE WE TARGETING IN GENERAL TO TO GET

THROUGH SOME OF THOSE BARRIERS? >> I THINK THAT'S JUST THAT'S DISCUSSION. CONVERSATION, HONESTLY, WHENEVER, WHENEVER DIRECTORS ARE SITTING DOWN WITH THEIR ACMS TO GO OVER THEIR THEIR BUSINESS PLANS, TO GO OVER THEIR PERFORMANCE METRICS, WHAT ARE THOSE BARRIERS THAT WE NEED TO REMOVE? AND IT'S A CONVERSATION, AND IT MAY BE THEN PART OF THE BUDGET DISCUSSION AND BEING ABLE TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD. AND THEN SOMETIMES IT IS IT'S SIMPLY THAT I LEFT THIS ONE OUT. BUT OTHER PRIORITIES TAKE PLACE AND BUBBLE UP, AND THOSE THINGS NEED TO MOVE. MOVE FORWARD FASTER THAN MAYBE SOMETHING THAT'S EXISTING. OKAY. SO

SHIFTING PRIORITIES AS WELL. >> YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT. IF THERE'S A PARTICULAR THINGS I KNOW YOU TEND TO REPORT, BUT IF THERE'S PARTICULAR THINGS THAT WE'RE LOSING TRACK OF THAT ARE ON THEIR WAY TO GET TO GO INTO BLACK, I, I'M SURE YOU'LL LET US KNOW. YES. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FOUR.

>> THANK YOU. >> THOUGH THE HOLES WERE VERY SMALL, THEY HAD TO COUNT THEM ALL. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR ACCOUNTING. COUNTING ALL THE POTHOLES IN TOWN. THAT WAS VERY IMPRESSIVE. NO. I'M SERIOUS. THAT'S VERY IMPRESSIVE. I'M WONDERING ABOUT THE FIRST ELECTRIC FIRE TRUCK IN TEXAS IS. AND AND YOU MAY NOT KNOW THIS, BUT IS IT PERFORMING THE WAY WE

HAD HOPED IT WOULD? >> ABSOLUTELY. I GOT A CHANCE TO RIDE IN IT. IT'S VERY QUIET.

YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW IT'S ACTUALLY RUNNING, BUT IT IS SUPPLYING. CERTAINLY NOT PUTTING OUT THAT MUCH EMISSIONS LIKE IT WOULD NORMALLY IF IT WAS A REGULAR FIRE TRUCK. IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ONE. BUT WE ARE THE FIRST IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

BUT IT ALSO IS JUST AS RUNS JUST AS WELL AS AS A REGULAR DIESEL. THE GOOD NEWS ABOUT THIS ONE IS, IS IF WE HAVE TROUBLE WITH ELECTRIC, OR WE SEEM TO BE OUT ON A SITE WHERE THE ELECTRICITY IS RUNNING LOWER, WE CAN SWITCH TO DIESEL. BUT THE WHOLE THE WHOLE IDEA IS THAT IT'S RUNNING ON ELECTRIC THE WHOLE TIME IT'S BEING USED. AND ALL THE DIFFERENT FIREFIGHTERS THAT HAVE BEEN IN, IN THE VEHICLE SAY IT'S GREAT. THEY LOVE IT AND IT GOES JUST AS QUICKLY GETS UP AND GOES. IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY PERFORMANCE ISSUES WHATSOEVER.

>> YOU BRING UP A POINT THAT I HADN'T CONSIDERED. I KNOW THAT THAT FIREFIGHTERS WEAR EAR

PROTECTION DEVICES. DO THEY HAVE TO WEAR THAT IN THAT TRUCK? >> THEY WON'T IF IT'S ON ELECTRIC, BUT THEY'RE SO USED TO DOING IT THAT THEY DO MOST OF THE TIME. AND IF THEY HAVE TO SWITCH IT TO DIESEL, THEY'LL DO THAT AUTOMATICALLY. IT'S IT'S IT CAN BE DUAL PURPOSE.

>> SO SEAMLESS. >> IT'S IT'S A SEAMLESS OPERATION. BUT IT ACTUALLY IS A VERY GOOD RUNNING VEHICLE. AND HOPEFULLY THE PRICE WILL GO DOWN IF MORE IF MORE CITIES AND

COUNTIES BUY THEM. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. THAT WAS A VERY VERY PRO

PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. REPRESENTATIVE

DISTRICT SIX. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILPERSON CHESTER. NOT A QUESTION. JUST THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT IS VERY HELPFUL TO SEE IN A VERY QUICK, VERY MUCH BIRD'S EYE VIEW, SUMMARY OF WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED BY EVERYONE. AND SO I THINK IT'S VERY HELPFUL NOT ONLY FOR US, BUT FOR THE CITIZENS TO HAVE SUCH AN EASY PLACE, SUCH A USER FRIENDLY PLACE TO GO ON THE WEB AND SEE WHERE WE ARE. SO JUST A BIG THANK YOU TO EVERYONE. THANK

YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> WHERE IS THE WHERE IS IT

[00:30:04]

>> NEWSFLASH NEWSFLASH FRONT PAGE. YEAH. >> IT'S WHAT I'M SORRY.

>> NEWSFLASH. AND DUSTIN SAID HE'LL SEND IT OUT. DUSTIN SAID HE WILL SEND IT OUT. YES. AND

THEN WE'LL PUT IT ON OUR NEWSFLASH. >> OKAY, GREAT.

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

[B. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding recent naming applications for the Civic Center (321 E. McKinney St.), Day Labor Site (301 Fort Worth Dr.), and Juneteenth Softball Tournament. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 45 minutes]]

GIVE STAFF DIRECTION REGARDING RECENT NAMING APPLICATIONS FOR CIVIC CENTER DAY LABOR SITE AND

JUNETEENTH SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M ALLISON WING, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION. WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THE PARKS NAMING APPLICATIONS.

THIS NAMING POLICY FOR CITY BUILDINGS, PROPERTY AND LAND HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE COUNCIL COUNCIL ADOPTION IN 2020. IN APRIL 2021, COUNCIL GAVE DIRECTION THAT THE PARKS, RECREATION AND BEAUTIFICATION BOARD SHOULD SERVE AS THE COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWS THESE APPLICATIONS AND SERVES AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC INPUT. A QUICK POLICY REVIEW NAMING APPLICATIONS CAN COME FROM ANY INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP. ONCE REVIEWED BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, THESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN ROUTED TO PARKS AND RECREATION, WHO TAKES THEM TO THE PARK BOARD ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR, DEPENDING ON VOLUME OF REQUESTS. CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FINAL DECISION FOR ANY NAMING APPLICATIONS. THIS POLICY STATES THAT COUNCIL MUST APPOINT A SEVEN MEMBER COMMITTEE TO REVIEW NAMING APPLICATIONS, AND THAT TWO OF THOSE MEMBERS MUST COME FROM AN EFFECTIVE BOARD OR COMMISSION. WE'LL REVIEW THE THREE REQUESTS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED OVER THE PAST YEAR OR SO. THE FIRST APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BYRD, AND THE PROPOSED NAME FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE DENTON CIVIC CENTER IS QUAKERTOWN CIVIC CENTER. THE PARKS, RECREATION AND BEAUTIFICATION BOARD UNANIMOUSLY, UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVING THIS REQUEST. THE NEXT APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED BY DOCTOR RUDY RODRIGUEZ, FORMER DENTON ISD TRUSTEE AND PROFESSOR AT TWU AND UNT, AND THE PROPOSED NAME FOR CONSIDERATION IS. THE CURRENTLY UNNAMED DAY LABOR SITE IS THE PO-PO GONZALEZ DAY LABOR SITE. THE PARKS, RECREATION AND BEAUTIFICATION BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVING THIS NAMING REQUEST. THE FINAL APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED BY DAVID MARTIN OF THE NORTH TEXAS UMPIRE ASSOCIATION, AND THE PROPOSED NAME FOR THE JUNETEENTH SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT IS THE JOHN ROYSTER JUNETEENTH SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT. THERE IS NOT A PROVISION IN THE NAMING POLICY FOR NAMING PROGRAMS OR EVENTS, WHICH IS WHY THE PARKS, RECREATION AND BEAUTIFICATION BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED DENYING THIS NAMING REQUEST. WHEN WE BROUGHT THESE ITEMS TO COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 18TH, 2025, DIRECTION WAS GIVEN TO STAFF TO SOLICIT ADDITIONAL PUBLIC INPUT FOR THE THREE NAMING APPLICATIONS. SINCE THAT DATE, STAFF CREATED A DISCUSSED DENTON PAGE, EMAILED ALL KNOWN NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS, POSTED A CITYWIDE NEXTDOOR POST, A POST TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION FACEBOOK PAGE, A NEWSFLASH PRESS RELEASE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, THE DENTON RECORD CHRONICLE PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE TO SPREAD AWARENESS, AND STAFF HELD AN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC MEETING ON DECEMBER 15TH. THE RESULTING ENGAGEMENT, TALLIED TOGETHER FOR THE CIVIC CENTER, IS 34 IN FAVOR AND 13 OPPOSED FOR THE DAY LABOR SITE. THERE WERE 34 IN FAVOR FAVOR AND 11 OPPOSED, AND FOR THE JUNETEENTH TOURNAMENT, 19 WERE IN FAVOR AND 19 OPPOSED. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVING THE NAMING APPLICATIONS FOR BOTH THE CIVIC CENTER AND THE DAY LABOR SITE, AND DENYING THE NAMING APPLICATION FOR THE SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT. STAFF ALSO REQUESTS CLARIFICATION FROM COUNCIL REGARDING THE AD HOC NAMING COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FOR.

>> THE THANK YOU. THE FIRST OR SECOND SLIDE, COULD YOU GO BACK TO THAT? WHAT WHAT YOU SAID IS

NOT WHAT THE GRAPHIC SAID. THE NAME OF THE CIVIC CENTER. >> FOR THE CIVIC CENTER.

>> THAT WAS IT. NO. RIGHT THERE. >> YES. >> NOW WHAT IS WHAT IS THE

[00:35:04]

PROPOSED NAME OF WHAT I CALL THE CIVIC CENTER? >> THE PROPOSED NAME IS THE

QUAKERTOWN CIVIC CENTER. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS. >> THE APPLICATION SECOND.

>> THE SECOND SENTENCE. >> THE SECOND SENTENCE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER BYRD AMENDED

HER REQUEST. YES, SIR. >> READ THE FULL THING. OKAY. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO.

>> THANK YOU. SO JUST JUST TO ADD A LITTLE CLARITY ON THE THIRD ITEM, THE THE THE MAJOR OBJECTION, BECAUSE IT WAS IT WAS MORE MIXED. THE THE IN PEOPLE, THE THE IN PLACE PEOPLE ATTENDING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND COUNCIL HAD SORT OF ONE RECOMMENDATION AGAINST. AND THEN WHEN YOU TOOK IT ONLINE AND DID A MORE OF A COMMUNITY SERVICE, THE NUMBERS WENT UP A LITTLE BIT AND IT SEEMED VERY MIXED. DO WE HAVE ANY CAN STAFF PROVIDE COLOR ON, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT MIXED RESULTS. AND YOU SAID AND I'M ASKING YOU TO REPEAT IT, SORT

OF THE RATIONALE OF THE PARKS BOARD FOR THE EVENT. SURE. >> YES. BECAUSE THE NAMING POLICY IS FOR PERMANENT STRUCTURES, BUILDINGS, LAND, PARKS AND NOT FOR PROGRAMS OR EVENTS, BECAUSE PROGRAMS OR EVENTS COULD BE DISCONTINUED AT ANY TIME. AND SO THERE'S

HESITANCY TO NAME THAT, TO MEMORIALIZE A PERSON. >> THAT MAKES SENSE. AND WAS THAT THE PRIMARY PUSHBACK FROM FROM SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT THAT WERE IN PERSON AND DIDN'T WANT TO SEE IT? I MEAN, I WASN'T ABLE TO REVIEW THE TESTIMONY TO PARKS BOARD AND

WHATNOT. >> SURE. BECAUSE THE THERE WAS THERE WAS SOME PUSHBACK BECAUSE THE POLICY DOES NOT HAVE A PROVISION FOR NAMING AN EVENT OR PROGRAM, BUT ALSO THE JUNETEENTH SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT, EVENT ORGANIZERS, OR THE JUNETEENTH CELEBRATION. EVENT ORGANIZERS WERE OPPOSED TO CHANGING THE NAME OF OF THAT EVENT WITHIN THE LARGER EVENT.

>> BECAUSE IT WOULD SOMEHOW CHANGE THE FOCUS OF IT. OR DID THEY SAY, OKAY, OKAY, OKAY. ALL RIGHT, I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU ALLISON. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ONE MORE REPRESENTATIVE. DISTRICT FOUR.

>> DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA WHAT WHAT THE COST OF THESE CHANGES WILL BE?

>> I DO THE THERE IS ONLY ONE PLACE THAT THE DENTON CIVIC CENTER IS IS WRITTEN ON ANY SIGNAGE AT ALL. AND THAT IS ON THE MARQUEE. IT JUST SO HAPPENS, COINCIDENTALLY, THAT THIS YEAR IS THE YEAR THAT WE WERE BUDGETED TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AND RENOVATE THE MARQUEE. SO IT IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED, THERE WOULD BE NO ADDITIONAL COST OTHER THAN WHAT WAS

ALREADY EXPECTED TO BE SPENT THIS YEAR. >> OKAY. AND THAT AND THAT IS NOT MENTIONED ON BUSINESS CARDS OR STATIONERY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND THE THE DAY LABOR

SITE. >> WOULD POTENTIALLY BE A SIMPLE SIGN ERECTED AT THE SITE.

YES, SIR. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THEN I WOULD ASK. I READ SOMEWHERE I CAN'T PUT MY FINGER ON IT, BUT IS THERE A POLICY POSITION THAT. SAYS WE SHOULDN'T RENAME THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY NAMED OR SOMETHING?

I SAW THAT, I READ THAT SOMEWHERE. WHERE'S THAT WRITTEN. >> IN THE POLICY? IT STATES IF SOMETHING HAS ALREADY BEEN NAMED AFTER AN INDIVIDUAL, THEN WE SHOULDN'T RENAME IT AGAIN.

>> GOT IT? OKAY. AND WHAT'S THE. AS I READ THE APPLICATION FOR THE REQUEST FOR THE CIVIC CENTER, THE JUSTIFICATION WAS IT'S LOCATION OR PROXIMITY TO QUAKERTOWN PARK OR THE

QUAKERTOWN HISTORICAL AREA. >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT ABOUT EMILY FOWLER

LIBRARY? SAME PARK, SAME LOCATION? THE ANSWER IS YES. >> CORRECT.

>> CIVIC CENTER POOL. >> SAME LOCATION. >> WOMEN'S BUILDING. SAME

LOCATION. CITY HALL. >> YES, SIR. >> SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND THE REQUEST, BUT IT'S HERE WHERE I RENEW MY THOUGHT THAT WE. WE HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT LIVED IN QUAKERTOWN, BEING AL MCCART, WHO WORKS WITH THE

[00:40:01]

AND SO EITHER WE UNIVERSALLY JUST EVERYTHING THAT TOUCHES THE PARK GETS A NEW NAME, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ONE OFF APPROACH TO IT. AND THEN I DID RESEARCH. HOW WE GOT THERE.

THANK YOU, STAFF, FOR THE HISTORICAL INFORMATION. IF THOSE THAT DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO READ THE FOLLOW UP. THIS WAS VOTED ON IN 1992 BY THE COUNCIL. AND HERE'S THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THEN. IF YOU HADN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK IT UP. MAYOR BOB CASTLEBERRY, PUBLISHER CLEARING HOUSE WINNER FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. AWESOME STORY. IT'S AN AWESOME STORY. SO MAYOR BOB CASTLEBERRY, JANE HOPKINS, MARGARET SMITH, REVEREND MARK CHEW, DOCTOR HAROLD PERRY, JACK MILLER, AND DOCTOR JULIAN BROCK. AND SO THAT'S THE OTHER THING. IF I'M GOING TO GET ON BOARD WITH USURPING THAT DECISION AMONGST THAT, I MEAN, THOSE THOSE ARE SOME KEY PEOPLE TO ME IN THE HISTORY OF DENTON AND TO TO OVERLAY THAT FOR JUST A GEOGRAPHIC BECAUSE THE PARKS ALREADY NAMED THE ENTIRE AREA IS NAMED QUAKERTOWN, A BUILDING THAT INTENTIONALLY WAS THEY SPECIFICALLY. I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE MINUTES. THEY SPECIFICALLY WERE TALKING ABOUT NAMING THAT BUILDING, THAT NAME, THAT GROUP, THAT HISTORY IN DENTON. I NOW, AGAIN, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMEONE THAT LIVED THERE OR LIVE THAT AND IS DOING GREAT WORK IN OUR COMMUNITY, OUR CLERK, I THINK THAT ADDS TO IT. BUT THIS JUST PUTS A IT'S ARBITRARY TO ME.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE I STRUGGLE WITH THIS. SO IT'S A WORK SESSION. I'M PUTTING THAT FORWARD. AND I INTENTIONALLY DID NOT GO TO THE FULL DISCLOSURE. I DID NOT GO TO THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I THINK THE COMMUNITY SHOULD BE HEARD AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. AND THAT'S THAT'S THEIR OPPORTUNITY.

THAT'S THEIR FORUM TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. SO IF THERE'S A QUESTION AS TO WHY THAT APPROACH, THAT'S JUST MY LONG PRACTICE APPROACH. I TRY NOT TO TRY TO GO IN AND USE THAT TO MANIPULATE PEOPLE AND TELL PEOPLE HOW IT WILL SAY THIS OR DO THAT. I WANT IT TO HAVE ORGANIC READ OF IT. I WANTED TO HAVE THE HISTORICAL INFORMATION, AND HISTORICAL INFORMATION PROVES QUITE COMPELLING, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE HAVE A POLICY WE WOULD PUT FORWARD A POLICY OR A CHANGE WHEN WE HAVE 5 OR 6 OTHER BUILDINGS THAT TOUCH THAT SAME GEOGRAPHIC AREA AND THEY'RE NOT AFFECTED. SO THAT THAT TO ME DOESN'T. IF I'M GOING BACK AND EXPLAINING TO SOMEONE, WE CHANGE THIS BECAUSE IT TOUCHED THE PARK, THEN I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR WHY THE OTHER BUILDINGS DIDN'T TOUCH THE PARK ALL THE SAME, DON'T HAVE A DIFFERENT NAME. SO, MR. MAYOR, I'M NOT I'M NOT DONE. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING WE CAN WE CAN DO IS ADD SOME SPECIFICITY TO IT AND HAVE THAT CIRCULATE THAT CONVERSATION. BUT THIS IS THE WORK SESSION. THIS IS MY FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. BUT I THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I FALL. AND ANY THOUGHTS ON THE OTHER BUILDINGS, OTHER GEOGRAPHIC THINGS FROM, FROM

STAFF. >> WE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE ITEM BECAUSE WE

RECEIVED AN APPLICATION. OKAY. >> GOT IT. OKAY. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT ONE.

>> SURE. THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I'D JUST ADD A LITTLE LIGHT ON TO THE QUESTION OF THE MAYOR. I PUT THAT APPLICATION IN THERE FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. VERY CENTRIC IN QUALITY OF LIFE. YOU KNOW, IN FAVOR OF. RESPECT, BEING RESPECTFUL. AND TWO YEARS AGO, A YEAR AND A HALF AGO TO THE COMMUNITY OF QUAKERTOWN IS BEING CELEBRATED FOR ITS 100TH YEAR, AND I AND THERE WERE MANY CELEBRATIONS IN THAT IN THE, IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY FOR THAT.

AND I SPOKE WITH THE COMMUNITY. I AM, YOU KNOW, A REPRESENTATIVE OF DISTRICT ONE.

AND AS WE KNOW, ANCESTORS OF QUAKERTOWN ARE STILL VERY RELEVANT IN THIS COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ALMA CLARK AND SOME OTHER NOTABLE PEOPLE. I GOT THAT, BUT WHAT I WANTED TO DO WAS TO PAY HOMAGE COLLECTIVELY AS A WHOLE TO THAT HISTORY. IT'S NOT ABOUT

[00:45:04]

IT'S A SHINING MOMENT NOW. I DON'T KNOW, I COULD BE A GENERALIZED CITIZEN OR I CAN ALSO PUT IN SOMETHING FOR THE POOL. LET'S HAVE QUAKERTOWN POOL. IT COULD BE QUAKERTOWN SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER, BUT I WANTED TO START WITH THE CIVIC CENTER AND CAN COMPROMISE ON THE NAME BECAUSE THERE'S A HISTORY OF IT BEING CALLED A COMMUNITY CENTER. IT WAS CALLED COMMUNITY CENTER AT ONE POINT. SO BUT TO COMPROMISE ON THAT CIVIC CENTER PART, WHY NOT? AS LONG AS WE KNOW WHY IT'S HERE. AND THE MAYOR ASKED WHY. AND SO THIS IS WHY. IT'S THE CONNECTIVITY FROM THE PEOPLE THAT CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT SOMETHING TO THE PEOPLE THAT NEED SOMETHING DONE AND IT ACTUALLY HAPPENING. OKAY. SO THAT'S I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT RIGHT THERE. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU ALL COULD AGREE TO SOME OF THAT. THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> COULD I ASK REPRESENTATIVE BIRD A QUESTION?

>> YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. >> DO DO DO YOU DO YOU ANTICIPATE THE NEED NOT THE NEED THE THE DESIRE TO TO RENAME OTHER BUILDINGS THAT

TOUCH QUAKERTOWN PARK? >> I DON'T I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANYTHING FROM ANYONE OTHER THAN

MYSELF, SO I DON'T KNOW. I CAN'T ANSWER THAT. >> OKAY.

>> SO I CAN'T SAY NO. AND I CAN'T REALLY SAY YES. >> OKAY.

>> BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH VESTED INTEREST IN ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT I'M

DOING AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. OR STAFF OR WHOEVER CAN ANSWER IT IS ARE THESE WE'RE NEEDING DIRECTION TO GO TO A RESOLUTION OR THE RESOLUTION? THE PROCESS IS ALREADY IN PLAY. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE SLIDE, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE FLOW OF EVENTS. ARE WE ALREADY GOING TO VOTE ON A RESOLUTION OR WE'RE NOT? THAT'S ALL I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. BEFORE I CONTINUE

MY QUESTION OR MY DIRECTION. >> WE WILL BRING RESOLUTION BEFORE COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE.

>> OKAY. YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY, DO WE NEED DIRECTION HERE. THAT'S THAT'S JUST THE CLARITY

I WANT. >> AND SO I THINK WE EITHER MOVE FORWARD OR NOT MOVE IT FORWARD. BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL IN THE FORM OF A RESOLUTION OR NO.

>> ALLISON'S CORRECT. CHRISTINE TAYLOR, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. WHEN WE BROUGHT THE ITEM FORWARD, WE LOOKED AT THE CHANGE IN THE POLICY, WOULD INDICATED THE CITY MANAGER WOULD BRING THEM FORWARD TO COUNCIL. SO WE'RE BRINGING THIS FORWARD FOR DIRECTION. STAFF IS

[00:50:03]

CLARIFICATION ON FOUR FOUR ITEMS. >> SO IF YOU WILL CHRISTINE THE

WE WILL HAVE A THING TO VOTE ON ON THE THIRD. >> YES.

>> WE WANT TO BRING THEM FORWARD ON THE NEXT AGENDA, BUT WE'RE BRINGING THEM FORWARD.

OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO APPROVE THE CIVIC CENTER, APPROVE THE GONZALEZ SITE, AND DENY THE NAMING OF THE TOURNAMENT. SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR HOW TO WORD THOSE RESOLUTIONS. AND THEN AGAIN, THE FOURTH IS THE CLARIFICATION ON THE AD HOC.

>> OKAY. NO, I APPRECIATE THAT. THEN MY DIRECTION ON THE FIRST THREE ITEMS IS TO FOLLOW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THOSE. THE NAMING CONVENTION. I ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S EFFORTS IN THE COMMUNITY ON ON THE PUBLIC. GONZALEZ. IT'S IT'S ABOUT TIME TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THAT SORT OF THING SO THAT WE CAN TAKE NEXT STEPS FOR FOR THE DAY LABOR CENTER. AND THEN FOR THE QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION ON DIRECTION OF AD HOC COMMITTEE.

ALLISON DOES DO MOST OF THE NAMING REQUESTS END UP GOING BEFORE PARKS?

>> YES, SIR. >> AT THIS POINT, ESSENTIALLY ALL OF THEM.

>> THE REQUESTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED TO THIS POINT HAVE ALL HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH A PARK

OR A PARK. >> FACILITY IN GENERAL. WHEN WE'VE NAMED THINGS, I KNOW WE'VE WE'VE GOT STREETS THAT WE RENAME AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT FOR THE MOST PART OF THE OR THE LION'S SHARE OF THOSE NAMING EFFORTS SEEN BY THE PARKS BOARD.

>> YES, SIR. >> SO THEN MY MY DIRECTION IS, SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE A BOARD OF OF THE APPROPRIATE CONFIGURATION THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWING THOSE THINGS AND MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, I PROPOSE WE CONTINUE THAT AS THE BOARD THAT RECOMMENDS MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL FOR FOR THE NAMING CONVENTIONS. SO

THOSE ARE MY TWO DIRECTIONS OR FOUR DIRECTIONS. >> OKAY. I HAVE A PROCESS QUESTION. FIRST INFORMATION. THE THE BRICK WAS ADDED IN. I'M SEEING 2008 SO MUCH LATER.

RIGHT? I MEAN I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO KNOW THAT, BUT THAT'S JUST WHAT THE INTERNET SAYS. SO IT'S IT'S IT'S I THINK THAT'S ABOUT RIGHT. I JUST I KNOW IT WAS MUCH LATER, BUT THEN TWO PROCESS QUESTION BECAUSE THIS IS NOT NAMED AFTER AN INDIVIDUAL. SOMEONE COULD COME BACK WITH ANOTHER APPLICATION, LET'S SAY A YEAR FROM NOW WITH A DIFFERENT COUNCIL AND SUBMIT A NAME FOR A CHANGE AGAIN FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AND IT AND IT CHANGE AGAIN. AND THEN THAT NAME WOULD BE LOCKED IN BECAUSE THE POLICY SUGGESTS NOT CHANGING NAMES. SO I JUST SAY THAT TO SAY I'M JUST MAKING SURE I UNDERSTAND THE THE POLICY RIGHT. POLICY SAYS IF WE CONTINUE TO NAME IT AT NOT SOMEONE USING AN INDIVIDUAL'S NAME, IT CAN CONTINUALLY BE CHANGED UNTIL SOMEONE PUTS FORWARD A NAME, THEN IT WOULD FORECLOSE FROM THE POLICY,

WOULD SUGGEST IT NOT BE CHANGED. >> YES, SIR. THAT'S HOW THE POLICY READS.

>> OKAY. >> GOT IT. REPRESENTATIVE. DISTRICT FOUR. NO. THREE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I LOOKING AT THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND THE FEEDBACK THAT WAS GATHERED FROM THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, I SEE, ESPECIALLY IN THE THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, THAT THERE WAS STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE CIVIC CENTER NAME CHANGE. I MEAN, EVEN MORE SUPPORT FOR THAT ONE THAN THE DAY LABOR SITE NAMING. SO LOOKING AT THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF THE CIVIC CENTER DAY LABOR SITE AND THEN OF MOVING THOSE FORWARD AND DENYING THE JUNETEENTH RENAMING. AND THEN I AM I SUPPORT US KEEPING THE PARKS BOARD AS THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR RENAMING. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? DIRECTION. REPRESENTATIVE. DISTRICT FIVE. >> MAYOR, CAN YOU CLARIFY YOUR COMMENTS TO ME WANTING TO. YOUR IDEA WAS TO RENAME IT FOR MISS CLARK RATHER THAN JUST QUAKER THOMAS. ARE YOU SAYING? BASICALLY, YES. SO BASED ON THE POLICY THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN APPLICATION. RIGHT. AND THAT COULD BE DONE AT ANY TIME, RIGHT?

>> YES. >> OKAY. I'M I'M FINE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS. AND I THINK DOCTOR RODRIGUEZ AND PARKS CAN STAY AS

AD HOC. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? DIRECTION. REPRESENTATIVE

DISTRICT ONE. >> YES, SIR. GO. WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND ALSO THE PARKS BOARD BEING THE AD HOC. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE

[00:55:05]

REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT SIX. >> COUNCILPERSON JESTER. THANK YOU. I DIDN'T HEAR ANY SUGGESTIONS OF ALTERNATIVES TO THE STATUS QUO. AS FAR AS THE NAMING PROCESS, WAS THERE ANY OTHER SUGGESTED PROCESS OR STAFF RECOMMENDED CHANGE BEFORE

I GIVE? >> THERE'S NOT. >> OKAY WITH THAT. MY MY DIRECTION IS TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS ITEM. THANK

YOU. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. SO THAT SUPPORT FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND TO KEEP. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT KEEP AD HOC MEANS THEY WOULD ALSO THOSE THINGS WOULD COME BACK TO US FOR WORK SESSION LIKE THIS. YES SIR. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND BEFORE YOU GO, WE HAVE A WE HAVE A WE'LL

PRESENT FOR YOU. >> WELL DONE. YES. WELL DONE. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. SO FIRST TIME I HAVE SO. >> AND CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR POSITION. AND THANK YOU FOR PRESENTING AND DOING A GREAT JOB. AND THAT'S A TOKEN KIND OF

REMEMBER. AND WE'LL GET A PICTURE HERE. >> I'M TRYING TO GET INTO THE

BOOKS I HAVE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT.

>> YEAH. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR. YEAH YEAH I JUST CAME UP. I

DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT. WELL. >> OKAY. THAT TAKES THAT TAKES US TO OUR, OUR NEXT WORK SESSION. WHICH IS ITEM C ID 25340. RECEIVE REPORT WHOLE

[C. Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction regarding Audit Project 044-Park Management & Planning. [Estimated Presentation/Discussion Time: 30 minutes]]

PLANNING. YEP. >> BIG DAY FOR ALLISON. HI, I'M MADISON DENTON, CITY AUDITOR TO PRESENT OUR FINDINGS FROM OUR AUDIT OF THE CITY'S PARK MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING PROCESSES. SO TO BEGIN, PARKS PLAY A CRUCIAL ROLE IN URBAN ENVIRONMENTS BY PROVIDING GREEN SPACES THAT PROMOTE PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, IMPROVE MENTAL HEALTH, ENHANCE COMMUNITY COHESION, AND CONTRIBUTE TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL. THERE ARE FOUR PARK USE CATEGORIES DIFFERENTIATED BY SERVICE AREA, EXTENT OF DEVELOPMENT, AND TYPICAL AMENITIES INCLUDING COMMUNITY PARKS WITH LARGER SERVICE AREAS AND HIGHER DEVELOPMENT. NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS WITH SMALLER SERVICE AREAS AND HIGHER DEVELOPMENT, NATURAL PARKS WITH CITYWIDE SERVICE AREAS AND LOW DEVELOPMENT, AND UNIQUE PARKS WITH CITYWIDE SERVICE AREAS AND DEVELOPMENT FOR SPECIFIC USES. THIS AUDIT EVALUATED THE CITY'S PARK MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING PROCESSES, INCLUDING PARK PLANNING, PARK LAND ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT FUNDING, AND PARK MAINTENANCE, INCLUDING VENDOR MANAGEMENT. SO BEGIN BY DISCUSSING THE CITY'S PARK PLANNING EFFORTS. THE NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION, THROUGH WHICH THE CITY IS ACCREDITED, HAS DEVELOPED STANDARDS RELATED TO PARK PLANNING, INCLUDING ONE HAVING A PARKS PLANNING FUNCTION THAT'S INVOLVED IN LOCAL PLANNING EFFORTS, LIKE THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TWO, HAVING A PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM, MASTER PLAN AND STRATEGIC PLAN THAT INVOLVED THE COMMUNITY IN ITS DEVELOPMENT, THEIR DEVELOPMENT, AND THREE CONDUCTING FEASIBILITY STUDIES AND CREATING SITE PLANS FOR INDIVIDUAL PARKS. IN ADDITION, TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND, A NATIONAL NONPROFIT THAT WORKS WITH COMMUNITIES TO CREATE PARKS AND PROTECT PUBLIC LAND, HAS DEVELOPED A PARK SCORE INDEX THAT MEASURES HOW WELL CITIES ARE MEETING THEIR COMMUNITY'S NEED FOR PARKS, USING FIVE CHARACTERISTICS ACREAGE ACCESS, INVESTMENT AMENITIES, AND EQUITY. BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY'S PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF, PARKS CITY PARKS HAS ESTABLISHED A PARKS PLANNING DIVISION THAT WAS INVOLVED IN DEVELOPING THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS, LIKE THE MOBILITY PLAN AND THE 2040 AREA PLANS. IN ADDITION, THE CITY USES FEASIBILITY STUDIES AND CREATES SITE PLANS FOR EACH PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND SOLICITS COMMUNITY INPUT. LASTLY, THE CITY ADOPTED A PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS SYSTEM MASTER PLAN IN 2022 TO GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARKS, RECREATION, AND TRAILS IN DENTON THROUGH 2040. THIS MASTER PLAN IDENTIFIED 12 PARK SYSTEM SERVICE LEVEL METRICS AND ESTABLISHED PERFORMANCE GOALS FOR EVERY FIVE YEARS BEGINNING IN 2025 AND CONTINUING TO 2040. TO SIMPLIFY ANALYSIS, AUDIT IDENTIFIED ONE METRIC THAT MOST CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND METRIC TYPES FROM THOSE 12, AND THESE ARE SHOWN ON THE SLIDE. BASED ON THIS EVALUATION, THE CITY HAS ONLY ESTABLISHED A PLAYGROUND RELATED AMENITIES GOALS AND HAS NOT ESTABLISHED ANY EQUITY RELATED PARK SERVICE LEVEL GOALS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE AUDIT ALSO FOUND THAT THE CITY IS GENERALLY NOT MEETING ITS 2025 SERVICE LEVEL GOALS FOR THE PARK SYSTEM, EXCEPT FOR THE

[01:00:03]

SPECIFICALLY, WE EVALUATED DENTON BASED ON TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDS, PARK SERVICE, PARK SERVICE METHODOLOGY AND COMPARED THE CITY'S LEVEL OF SERVICE TO SIMILAR CITIES WHERE POSSIBLE. BASED ON THE ESTIMATED PARK SERVICE SCORE, DENTON PARK SERVICE QUALITY IS ABOUT AVERAGE. HOWEVER, I'LL DISCUSS KIND OF EACH OF THE FIVE CHARACTERISTICS IN TURN.

SO BEGINNING WITH ACREAGE, ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION, COMMUNITIES WITH 100,000 TO 250,000 RESIDENTS LIKE DENTON HAD ABOUT TEN ACRES OF PARKLAND PER 1000 RESIDENTS ON AVERAGE, WITH 1 TO 2 OF THESE ACRES BEING NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND 5 TO 8 BEING COMMUNITY PARKS. BASED ON REVIEW OF THE CITY'S CURRENT PARKLAND, THESE ACREAGE GOALS ARE GENERALLY BEING MET FOR COMMUNITY PARK CITYWIDE AND FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND ZONES A AND B OF THE CITY'S FIVE PARK ZONES. FURTHER COMPARED TO POPULATION PEER CITIES, DENTON HAS THE SECOND HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF ITS RESIDENTS THAT LIVE WITHIN A TEN MINUTE WALK OF A PARK AT 57%, THOUGH IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT DENTON'S GEOGRAPHIC PEERS HAVE A SLIGHTLY HIGHER AVERAGE LEVEL OF ACCESS AT 64%. TO EVALUATE THESE METRICS TOGETHER, AUDIT CALCULATED A PARKLAND AVAILABILITY METRIC FOR EACH CENSUS BLOCK WITHIN THE CITY.

BASED ON THIS METRIC, ALMOST HALF OF THE CITY'S DEVELOPED CENSUS BLOCKS HAVE ACCESS TO ADEQUATE PARKLAND BASED ON THEIR POPULATION, AS OUTLINED IN THE TABLE ON THE LEFT OF THE SLIDE. IN ADDITION, DENTON'S INVESTMENT IN PARKS AND RECREATION HAS BEEN INCREASING OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, FROM ABOUT $150 PER RESIDENT IN FISCAL YEAR 2022 TO ALMOST $200 IN FISCAL YEAR 2024. FOR AMENITIES, DENTON PROVIDES SIMILAR OR HIGHER ACCESS TO AMENITIES LIKE TENNIS AND PICKLEBALL COURTS, SPORTS FIELDS, DOG PARKS, VOLLEYBALL NETS, PLAYGROUND, PLAYGROUNDS AND OTHER TEXAS CITIES. AVERAGE. BUT THERE ARE THREE AMENITIES RESTROOMS, SPLASH PADS, AND BASKETBALL HOOPS THAT HAVE LOWER LEVELS OF SERVICE THAN THE AVERAGE. AS SHOWN IN THE FIGURE ON THE RIGHT OF THE SLIDE. IN ADDITION, SOME AMENITIES INCLUDING PLAYGROUNDS, SPORTS FIELDS, RESTROOMS, HOOPS, AND COMMUNITY GARDEN SITES APPEAR TO HAVE SMALLER SERVICE AREAS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS THAT THEY TYPICALLY SERVE. FOR THAT REASON, IT MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO ESTABLISH ZONE SPECIFIC SERVICE LEVEL GOALS FOR THESE AMENITIES, AS THE SERVICE LEVELS KIND OF VARY. OF THESE, FIVE AMENITY TYPES VARY WIDELY BY PARK ZONE. LASTLY, CITYWIDE RESIDENTS OF COLOR AND WHITE RESIDENTS AND LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND HIGH INCOME HOUSEHOLDS HAVE SIMILAR LEVELS OF ACCESS TO PARKLAND.

USING THE PARKLAND AVAILABILITY METRIC, AUDIT ALSO EVALUATED THE RESOURCE RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION DIFFERENCES ACROSS THESE DEMOGRAPHIC GROUPS BY CENSUS BLOCK. BASED ON THIS ANALYSIS, WE FOUND THAT CENSUS BLOCKS PRIMARILY HOUSING RESIDENTS OF COLOR AND CENSUS BLOCKS PRIMARILY HOUSING WHITE RESIDENTS, WERE SIMILARLY LIKELY TO HAVE ADEQUATE OR INADEQUATE PARKLAND ACCESS, BUT CENSUS BLOCKS WITH PRIMARILY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS WERE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE INADEQUATE ACCESS TO PARKLAND THAN OTHER CENSUS BLOCKS.

>> ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION. WHERE IS THIS CODIFIED IN CITY ORDINANCES, POLICIES, ETC. SO THAT I CAN LOOK AT THAT, LOOK THAT UP WHILE YOU'RE FINISHING YOUR.

>> WHAT PART CODIFIED. >> ALL THAT THE CENSUS BLOCK AS IT RELATES TO EVALUATING AGAINST PARKS, LIKE BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT GOALS. SO WHERE IS THIS GOAL. SO THAT I

CAN. >> AS I MENTIONED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A GOAL RELATED TO LOOKING AT ACCESS, DISTRIBUTION, ACCESS ACROSS RACE OR INCOME.

>> SO I'M GOING TO GET IN FRONT OF MY COMMENTS AND SAY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR ROLE IN THIS

[01:05:01]

DISCUSSION. >> THIS IS INFORMATION. >> WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE AUDITOR DOES IN MY ESTIMATION. I'LL LOOK UP YOUR YOUR JOB, POST YOUR YOUR SITE AND AND WHAT YOU BUT YOU EVALUATE WHAT HOW WE'RE PERFORMING BASED ON WHAT OUR GOALS ARE IS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS IS OUT OF LINE IN MY ESTIMATION. AND I'M INTENTIONALLY STOPPING HERE AND I'M GOING TO HAVE MORE TO SAY AFTER YOU FINISH. BUT I NEED YOU TO I NEED TO BE CLEAR WHEN I COMMUNICATE, I DO NOT DO NOT UNDERSTAND I BECAUSE HOW CAN OUR STAFF HIT A TARGET THAT WE'VE NOT IDENTIFIED? AND THEN FOR YOU AS THE AUDITOR TO COME AND REPORT THAT AS THOUGH THEY'RE MISSING THE MARK OR THEY HAVE SOME AREA THEY NEED TO GROW IN, HAVING NOT ESTABLISHED THAT AS A GOAL, A METRICS OR ANYTHING IS A PROBLEM FOR ME, AND I NEED THE PARK STAFF AND MANAGEMENT TO UNDERSTAND THAT I, I DON'T BELIEVE IN THEM HAVING TO HIT A TARGET OR AIM FOR SOMETHING THAT IS UNBEKNOWNST TO ANYONE, AND I CAN'T FIND IT ANYWHERE.

SO I AND IF YOU'RE JUST POINTING OUT GENERAL INFORMATION, THEN THAT'S A BIGGER PROBLEM. AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER. BUT I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW NONPLUSED WITH THIS AND WHAT IT HOW IT HOW IT SHADES THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE IN MY MIND, THEY'RE GETTING BLINDSIDED. SO GO RIGHT AHEAD. BUT I JUST NEEDED TO PUT A BOOKMARK THERE BECAUSE I DID NOT WANT TO WAIT, BECAUSE ANYONE WATCHING THIS NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT.

AND I'LL LOOK UP THE, THE THE WITH THE CITY AUDITOR DOES AND I'LL HAVE MORE COMMENTS LATER.

THANK YOU. >> LIKE OTHER PUBLIC WORKS, NEW PARK CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING LAND ACQUISITION AND PARK DEVELOPMENT, ARE GENERALLY FUNDED THROUGH TAX BACKED DEBT BECAUSE THEY ARE SEEN TO BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. HOWEVER, MUNICIPALITIES HAVE ALSO ADOPTED PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCES THAT REQUIRE NEW DEVELOPMENTS TO CONTRIBUTE LAND AND MONEY TO SUPPORT THE NEED FOR NEW PARKS CREATED BY THE EXPECTED POPULATION GROWTH. ACCORDING TO BEST PRACTICES, THERE ARE GENERALLY THREE REQUIREMENTS THAT A PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE MUST MEET ONE. LEVIED FEES MUST BE PROPORTIONAL TO THE NEED CREATED BY THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. TWO THERE MUST BE A GEOGRAPHIC CONNECTION BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT PAYS THE FEES AND THE PARK CREATED WITH THE FEES. AND THREE, THERE MUST BE A REASONABLE TIME LIMIT SET TO EXPEND THE FEES TO ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT RECEIVES THE BENEFIT. THE CITY OF DENTON FIRST ADOPTED A PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE IN 1998, WHICH WAS UPDATED IN 2022. BOTH ORDINANCES GENERALLY COMPLY WITH THE BEST PRACTICES OUTLINED IN THE TABLE ON THE LEFT OF THE SLIDE. HOWEVER, WE FOUND THAT THE 2022 ORDINANCES METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING THE FEE IN LIEU DOES NOT PROVIDE PROPORTIONAL RESOURCES FOR TWO REASONS ONE. THE CALCULATION USES APPRAISED VALUES INSTEAD OF FAIR MARKET VALUE, WHICH MAY REQUIRE THE CITY TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE. TO ACTUALLY ACQUIRE THE PARKLAND, AND TWO. THE CALCULATION USES THE VALUE OF RESIDENTIAL PARCELS TO APPROXIMATE THE COST OF ACQUIRING PARKLAND. BECAUSE A RESIDENTIAL PARCEL GENERALLY INCLUDES ABOUT ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE OF LAND, USING THIS VALUE INSTEAD OF THE COST PER ACRE MAKES, IT MAKES IT SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER FOR DEVELOPER TO PAY THE FEE IN LIEU WHEN COMPARED TO ACTUALLY DEDICATING LAND. FOR THIS REASON, WE RECOMMENDED THE CITY USE THE AVERAGE ACREAGE VALUE INSTEAD OF PARCEL VALUE TO CALCULATE THE FEE IN LIEU DURING THE NEXT ORDINANCE UPDATE, AND CONSIDER USING FAIR MARKET VALUE INSTEAD OF THE APPRAISED VALUE. FURTHER, THE 2022 PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE WAS BASED ON THE ESTIMATED COST TO DEVELOP A FOUR ACRE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND A 12.5 ACRE COMMUNITY PARK. WHILE THIS COST ESTIMATE IS BASED ON EMPIRICAL DETAILS AS SUGGESTED BY BEST PRACTICES, IT LIKELY UNDERESTIMATES THE ACTUAL COST TO DEVELOP THESE PARKS FOR TWO REASONS ONE, IT MORE HEAVILY WEIGHS THE CHEAPER COST PER ACRE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK. DESPITE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BEING SMALLER AND TWO, THE ACREAGE OF EACH PARK TYPE IS SIGNIFICANTLY SMALLER THAN THE ACTUAL AVERAGE ACREAGE OF EACH OF THOSE PARKS. SPECIFICALLY, WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED, THE CITY'S COMMUNITY PARKS WERE ABOUT 40 ACRES LARGE, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS WERE ABOUT EIGHT AND A HALF ACRES ON AVERAGE. LARGER PARKS GENERALLY REQUIRE MORE FUNDS TO DEVELOP, SO THE ESTIMATED COST MAY NOT BE ADEQUATE TO FUND NEW COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK THE SIZE. THE SIMILAR SIZE PARKS ACROSS THE CITY. STILL, BASED ON REVIEW OF SIX DEVELOPER APPLICATIONS AND PLANS, ARE ALL PARKLAND. DEDICATION AND DEVELOPMENT FEES WERE ACCURATELY CALCULATED PER THE ORDINANCE AND WERE GENERALLY PAID APPROPRIATELY. THE ONE PAYMENT WAS DELAYED BY ABOUT TWO YEARS. FOR THIS REASON, WE RECOMMENDED THAT THE PARKS WORK WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO ESTABLISH A PROCESS TO VERIFY THAT ALL LEVY FEES ARE COLLECTED, WHILE ALL PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FEES APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN USED PER THE RELEVANT ORDINANCES.

GEOGRAPHIC RESTRICTIONS. THERE'S ABOUT $8 MILLION IN UNUSED FEES THAT MAY BE REFUNDED TO THE CORRESPONDING DEVELOPER IF NOT USED TIMELY DUE TO THE 1998 ORDINANCES.

GEOGRAPHIC RESTRICTIONS. IN ADDITION, THE COMMISSION FOR ACCREDITATION OF PARK AND RECREATION AGENCY STANDARDS REQUIRES PARKS AND RECREATION AGENCIES TO ESTABLISH WRITTEN PROCEDURES FOR ACQUIRING NEW PARKLAND OR DEVELOPING EXISTING GREEN SPACES. THE CITY HAS CREATED A PARK ACQUISITION STRATEGY DOCUMENT THAT PROVIDES HIGH LEVEL GUIDANCE FOR

[01:10:05]

WHILE THE DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES DO OUTLINE THE GENERAL PROCESS TO DEVELOP PARK LAND, THEY DO NOT OUTLINE THE DETAILED STEPS TO BE FOLLOWED BY PARKS PLANNING EMPLOYEE DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. LASTLY, PARKS AND RECREATION EXPENDITURES APPEAR TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY GENERAL TAXES AT LOWER RATES THAN PEER CITIES WITH SIMILAR SERVICE LEVELS AS OUTLINED IN THE TABLE ON THE RIGHT. SPECIFICALLY, DIDN'T SPEND ABOUT $24 LESS PER RESIDENT THAN PEER CITIES WITH MEDIUM PARK ACCESS LEVELS, WHILE GENERALLY BRINGING IN HIGHER USER FEES. ONCE ACQUIRED, THE CITY'S PARKS MUST BE MAINTAINED, WHICH IS GENERALLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PARKS MAINTENANCE DIVISION. MAINTENANCE PROCESS GENERALLY INCLUDES FOUR STEPS ONE. IDENTIFY NEEDED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES, WHICH USUALLY REQUIRES A COMPLETE INVENTORY OF ASSETS WITH REGULAR STANDARDIZED CONDITION ASSESSMENTS TO PRIORITIZE NEEDED MAINTENANCE BASED ON SERVICE LEVEL GOALS, WHICH USUALLY REQUIRES ADOPTING SERVICE LEVEL STANDARDS AND DETERMINING THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE METHOD OF MEETING THOSE GOALS THROUGH LONG RANGE PLANNING. THREE PLAN MAINTENANCE PROJECTS BASED ON AVAILABLE RESOURCES, WHICH REQUIRES AN UNDERSTANDING OF TIME, LABOR, EQUIPMENT, AND MATERIAL COSTS BY PROJECT TYPE AND SIZE COMPARED TO AVAILABLE RESOURCES SUCH AS STAFF, EQUIPMENT AND MONEY TO OPTIMIZE THE RESOURCE USAGE IN THE SHORT TERM, AND FOUR PERFORM MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WHICH REQUIRES DOCUMENTATION OF WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, HOW, AND WHY. WORK WAS PERFORMED, TYPICALLY THROUGH A WORK ORDER SYSTEM AND APPROPRIATE OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE QUALITY AND TIMELINESS. STANDARDS WERE MET. UNDEVELOPED PARKS HAVE LIMITED ASSETS ASIDE FROM GREEN SPACES OR THE LAND AND VEGETATION IN A PARK, AS WELL AS SOME WAYFINDING AIDS LIKE SIGNS AND SIDEWALKS. HOWEVER, DEVELOPED PARKS TYPICALLY ALSO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL ASSETS LIKE PLAY EQUIPMENT, PLAYGROUNDS, BASKETBALL HOOPS, OR TENNIS COURTS, STRUCTURES SUCH AS PAVILIONS OR RESTROOMS, AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LIKE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS OR WATER FOUNTAINS. THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT MAINTAINS AN INVENTORY OF CITY OWNED PARKS AND IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, AS WELL AS A LIST OF THESE TYPES OF THE TYPES OF ASSETS THAT ARE AVAILABLE AT EACH PARK.

HOWEVER, HISTORICALLY, THIS LIST DID NOT INCLUDE COMPREHENSIVE INFORMATION ABOUT EACH ASSET'S CONDITION OR AGE, OR EVEN HOW MANY OF THE ASSET WAS LOCATED EACH PARK. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE LIST SHOWED THAT THERE WERE BASKETBALL HOOPS AT SOUTH LAKES PARK, BUT NOT HOW OLD OR HOW MANY HOOPS WERE LOCATED THERE. PARKS DID COMPLETE AN ASSET INVENTORY IN DECEMBER OF 2025, SO THIS INFORMATION IS NOW AVAILABLE. STILL, PARKS AND RECREATION HAS ADOPTED SERVICE LEVEL STANDARDS FOR ALMOST ALL PARK ASSETS, THOUGH SOME ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED ON HOW THESE STANDARDS SHOULD BE OPERATIONALIZED. SPECIFICALLY, THE STANDARDS GENERALLY OUTLINED FOR MAINTENANCE SERVICE LEVELS, TWO FOR OPEN SPACES AND TWO FOR AMENITIES. FURTHER CLASSIFICATIONS, INCLUDING DOUBLE A, A, B, C, AND D, HAVE BEEN CREATED FOR GREEN SPACES. HOWEVER, WE FOUND THAT THESE MAINTENANCE CLASSIFICATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN CLEARLY ASSOCIATED WITH EACH PARK OR ASSET IN A CENTRALIZED INVENTORY. IN ADDITION, THE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS DO NOT ADDRESS SPLASH PADS OR COMMUNITY GARDENS, LIKELY BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE THOSE ASSETS WERE ADDED TO THE PARK SYSTEM. FINALLY, DESPITE HAVING TWO PARK AMENITIES SERVICE LEVELS, THERE'S GENERALLY NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE LEVELS OUTLINED IN THE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS.

LOCATED IN DIFFERENT GREEN SPACE CLASSES, AS SHOWN IN THE TABLE ON THE SLIDE. FURTHER, WHILE THESE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED, THEY APPEAR TO BE DISCONNECTED FROM ACTUAL MAINTENANCE PRACTICES. SPECIFICALLY, THE PARKS MAINTENANCE DIVISION HAS CREATED SEVERAL SCHEDULES FOR ROUTINE UPKEEP AND INSPECTION ACTIVITIES THAT GENERALLY COVER ALL TYPES OF PARK ASSETS. HOWEVER, THESE SCHEDULES DO NOT ALIGN WITH MAINTENANCE LEVELS OF SERVICE. IN PARTICULAR, THE PRIMARY PARKS MAINTENANCE FUNCTION IS THE AREA CHECK, WHICH INVOLVES PARK MAINTENANCE STAFF COMPLETING NUMEROUS ACTIVITIES, GENERALLY GROUPED INTO A STATIC UPKEEP OR CONDITION INSPECTIONS THAT MAY LEAD TO REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT.

BECAUSE EACH PARK IS NOT ASSIGNED A MAINTENANCE CLASSIFICATION LEVEL, THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE FREQUENCY OF AREA CHECKS COULD NOT BE VERIFIED. HOWEVER, WE FOUND NO CLEAR LINK BETWEEN THE FREQUENCY OF AREA CHECKS AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE SERVED BY PARK, AS ILLUSTRATED IN THE FIGURE ON THE LEFT OF THE SLIDE. STILL, MOST PARKS RECEIVE AN AREA CHECK AT LEAST WEEKLY. HOWEVER, MOST INSPECTION AND ROUTINE UPKEEP ACTIVITIES DO NOT REQUIRE WEEKLY PERFORMANCE FOR THE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS, INDICATING RESOURCES MAY NOT BE ALLOCATED ECONOMICALLY OR STANDARDS OF SERVICE MAY NOT BE ACCURATE. STILL, PARKS MAINTENANCE HAS DEVELOPED FOUR DIFFERENT FORMS TO HELP GUIDE STAFF ACTIVITIES WHEN ON SITE

[01:15:04]

DIRECT US TO PERFORM A REVIEW SOONER. >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF

REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO. >> THANK YOU. THE TIME I'VE BEEN ON OFFICE, IT'S IT'S BEEN REALLY CLEAR THAT AT LEAST THE PRACTICE OUT OF THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE WAS TO DESCRIBE BEST PRACTICE IN THE INDUSTRY IS THAT GENERALLY THE APPROACH THAT THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE USES.

YES. OKAY. SO SO THAT'S I FOUND THAT VERY HELPFUL OVER THE LAST 4 OR 5 YEARS TO HEAR WHAT THE BEST PRACTICES ARE SO THAT COUNCIL CAN SET POLICY. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE DOING THAT. IN GENERAL. IT SOUNDS TO ME, BASED ON YOUR REPORT, THAT THE THE ACTIVITIES ARE LIKELY BEING DONE, BUT TRACKING IS MAYBE A LITTLE SPARSE AND HARD TO VERIFY THAT

IT'S ALL BEING DONE. IS THAT A GENERAL TAKEAWAY MESSAGE? >> YEAH. AND BECAUSE SOME OF THE TRACKING IS MANUAL OR NOT NECESSARILY BEING DONE CONSISTENTLY ALL THE TIME, IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO TELL IF RESOURCES ARE BEING USED ECONOMICALLY.

>> SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT CAUSED ME CONCERN WAS IT LOOKED LIKE OUR ACREAGE PER CAPITA WAS FALLING BEHIND OFF OF OUR TRENDS. AND DID YOUR ANALYSIS GIVE YOU ANY CLUES TO WHETHER, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WE'RE WE'RE TRYING BUT FAILING TO GET THE ACREAGE. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO GET THE ACREAGE. THE GROWTH IS JUST SO FAST THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO GET THE ACREAGE OR ALL OF THE ABOVE. DID YOUR ANALYSIS GIVE ANY CLUE TO TO WHAT'S CAUSING THE

NEGATIVE TRENDS? >> YEAH, I THINK IN PART IT IS JUST SOME OF THE GROWTH IS SO FAST. IT'S IT JUST IS HARD TO GET A LAND PURCHASE DEAL DONE AND THEN DEVELOP THE PARK AS QUICKLY AS WE'RE GETTING NEW PEOPLE IN. IN PART, THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE SHOULD BE HELPING WITH THAT, BUT IT STILL TAKES TIME TO KIND OF DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS. AND I THINK THERE'S ALSO JUST ALWAYS NEED MONEY, RIGHT. AND SO THE NEW ORDINANCE HAS COME

[01:20:02]

KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. >> I THINK SO, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WELL, AND I THINK COUNCIL RECOGNIZED THAT IT'S WE'VE HAD IT AS A PRIORITY FOR YEARS AND YEARS, LAND ACQUISITION FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES, NOT JUST PARKS, BUT LOTS OF THINGS THE CITY IS ENGAGED IN. WE'VE WE'VE PRIORITIZED LAND ACQUISITION.

BUT BUT TO THAT POINT ABOUT THE COSTS, I NOTICED ONE OF THE THINGS IN YOUR IN YOUR REPORT WAS THAT FEE IN LIEU IS IS THIS HELPING OR HURTING OUR ABILITY TO KEEP UP WITH OUR PARK ACQUISITION? BECAUSE I THINK, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU WERE YOUR REPORT SAID WAS THAT WE MAY NOT IT MAY NOT BE ADEQUATELY REPRESENTING COST RECOVERY. IS

THAT IS THAT WHAT I'M READING? >> YEAH. SO THE WAY THAT THE METHODOLOGY WAS THE KIND OF IMPLEMENTED IN 2022, IT USED SORRY, LET ME GO BACK. SO THE WAY THAT THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE GENERALLY WORKS IN BEST PRACTICES, RIGHT. YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DEDICATE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF LAND BASED ON HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU EXPECT YOUR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO CREATE. AND DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND SO THEN BASED ON THAT AMOUNT OF LAND, IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DONATE THE LAND, YOU PAY A FEE IN LIEU IN THEORY, SO THAT YOU CAN THEN THE CITY CAN THEN GO BUY THAT LAND SOMEWHERE ELSE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT NEW POPULATION GROWTH. THE SERVICE LEVEL, IF THE IF THE WAY THAT YOU'RE KIND OF TRANSLATING OR CONVERTING THAT AMOUNT ISN'T PROPORTIONAL, THEN IT CREATES IT CAN CREATE A. A AFFORDABILITY ISSUE. RIGHT. SO THE CITY IS USING CURRENTLY THE AVERAGE VALUE OF A PARCEL OF RESIDENTIAL PARCEL TO APPROXIMATE THAT COST OF PURCHASING THE LAND. BUT A PARCEL AND AN ACRE ARE NOT EQUIVALENT. SO IN IN GENERAL, RESIDENTIAL PARCEL IS ABOUT ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE. AND SO THAT MEANS THAT WHEN YOU'RE CONVERTING THAT, WE'RE ACTUALLY CHARGING THEM A THIRD OF WHATEVER THE ACREAGE COST WOULD BE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT. I KNOW THAT'S A LOT OF MATH. OKAY. SO SO IT'S SO WE'RE CHARGING THE FEE IN LIEU IS LESS THAN WE WOULD IN THEORY NEED TO BUY THAT LAND BECAUSE OF THAT KIND

OF MATH OKAY. >> NO NO NO, THAT THAT THAT'S FAIR. AND PARKS IS SUGGESTING THAT THEY'RE IN AGREEMENT THAT THEY NEED TO REVISE THAT APPROACH. OKAY. THREE, THREE MORE, I THINK. AND THEN I'LL BE DONE. THE I NOTICED THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IF YOU LOOKED AT YOUR TABLE ON SORT OF AMENITIES AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION OR IN THE AUDIT, BUT IT LOOKED LIKE OUR SECONDARY AMENITIES WERE SORT OF, YOU KNOW, NOT CROSSING THE 50% MARK, AS IT WERE, IN ORDER TO MAKE US SORT OF BE AVERAGE WITH OUR PEERS.

IS DID YOU IDENTIFY ANY PARTICULAR SOURCE OF WHY IT LOOKED LIKE RESTROOMS AND BASKETBALL HOOPS, AND ONE OTHER THAT I CAN'T REMEMBER. SPLASH PADS, SPLASH PAD. THANK YOU.

WE'RE WE'RE DEFINITELY DRIFTING BACKWARDS. IS THERE IS THERE SOMETHING IS THAT STAFFING. IS

THAT WHAT. DID YOU IDENTIFY ANY SOURCES FOR THAT AMENITY DRIFT. >> I THINK THAT SO WE DON'T NECESSARILY WE MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING THAT THE ONLY REAL AMENITY RELATED SERVICE LEVEL GOAL WE HAVE IS RELATED TO PLAYGROUNDS. AND SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WHEN WE AND WE HAVE SOME DESIGN STANDARDS, BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN FORMALIZED. SO I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. AND WHERE ARE WE TRYING TO BE WITH THESE? BECAUSE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY DON'T NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED A SPLASH PAD IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO KIND OF TRY TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON WHERE WE WANT THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS. >> THE GRANULARITY THAT YOU'RE MENTIONING. OKAY, NO, I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT BUT RESTROOMS ARE FOR THE MOST PART AT MOST OF OUR FACILITIES, AND I GUESS PROBABLY HOOPS ARE AT MOST OF THEM. AND SOME OF THE

OTHERS. >> YEAH, THE THE RESTROOMS ARE ARE LARGER PARKS. SO PARKS THAT LIKE COMMUNITY PARKS ARE GENERALLY HAVE A RESTROOM BUT NOT NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE THE ASSUMPTION IS THAT PEOPLE WHO WALK TO A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK CAN GO HOME. YEAH, YEAH. AND SO AND THEN WHOOPS. YEAH. I THINK THERE WERE I CAN'T REMEMBER I'D HAVE TO GO LOOK AT THE DATA.

BUT WE HAVE HOOPS ARE GENERALLY THERE'S AT LEAST 1 OR 2 AT MOST OF THE PARKS.

>> IS IS IT DO YOU THINK SOME OF THAT IS FROM THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE THE WORK SCHEDULES

AND THE MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES OR NOT? >> NO. I THINK THE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS IS ALL ABOUT ONCE WE HAVE A PARK BUILT, WHAT THEY'RE DOING AFTER THAT. SO ALL OF THESE AMENITY DISTRIBUTION THINGS ARE MORE ABOUT, WELL, WHEN WE BUILD A PARK OR DEVELOP

[01:25:03]

THAT FOR THE CITY. >> MY LAST QUESTION IS, I NOTICED THAT IN THE AGREEMENT, THERE WAS A UBIQUITY ON AGREEMENT ON ON FROM STAFF ABOUT THIS. BUT ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS MANY OF THE RESPONSES WERE, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THIS IN OUR 2027 MASTER PLAN UPDATES, WHICH IS GREAT. IT SHOULD BE IN ALL THESE THINGS, SHOULD BE IN THE MASTER PLAN. BUT I, I GUESS IT'S IT'S A CONCERN OF MINE. AND I'LL MAKE A SORT OF COMMENT TO, TO THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE AND TO PARKS STAFF THAT I, I'M WORRIED THAT THESE ISSUES WILL DRIFT OVER THE NEXT YEAR OR YEAR AND A HALF, BECAUSE IF IF THE MASTER PLAN STARTS IN 27, YOU WON'T FINISH IT UNTIL THE END OF 27. SO YOU'RE REALLY LOOKING AT MORE TWO YEARS BEFORE SOME OF THESE THINGS, AND I ENCOURAGE US NOT TO LET THEM DRIFT FOR THAT LONG. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO PRE-PRE FOLLOW SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, OR AT LEAST WHATEVER THE WILL OF COUNCIL IS ON THIS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN LET THINGS NOT, YOU KNOW, NOT LANGUISH BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT LANGUISHING BUT LOSE THEIR EFFECTIVE USE IN THE COMMUNITY OVER TWO YEARS. IF WE'RE NOT CAREFUL. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S

THAT'S SORT OF MY COMMENT. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. >> MISS CITY MANAGER.

>> I'M SORRY I TRUMPED YOU. YOU GO AHEAD. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR WHAT MADISON MENTIONED IT, BUT DEVELOPERS ARE PLAY A VERY IMPORTANT ROLE HERE, AND WE'RE STARTING TO WORK HARDER. BEFORE GARY LEFT AND I TALKED TO ALLISON, AND WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE FROM HUNTER, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NOT ALWAYS HAVE TO BE THE ONES THAT BUILD THESE PARKS. WE DON'T HAVE TO BE THE ONES THAT DEVELOP THESE PARKS, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO BE THE ONES THAT MAINTAIN THESE PARKS. DEVELOPERS OR DEVELOPERS ARE WILLING TO TAKE THEM ON, DEVELOP THEM, BUILD, BUILD IT, MAINTAIN IT AND MANAGE IT. SAME THING THAT'S HAPPENING AT CRAVER RANCH. EVERY BIT OF THAT TRAILS AND EVERYTHING ELSE ARE BEING TAKEN CARE OF, AND IT LESSENS THE BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYERS. THE OTHER PART OF THIS IS I ASK STAFF TO CHANGE THIS ANSWERS. I SAID CHANGE THE ANSWERS ON HERE ABOUT WE WILL DO THIS. WE WILL DO THAT AND PUT IT MORE DEMONSTRATIVE THAT MY EXPECTATIONS ARE WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS EVERY BIT OF THIS IMMEDIATELY AND FORMALIZE THIS STUFF AND NOT WAIT, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THIS DRAFT RESPONSE FROM THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE FOR

AT LEAST HOW MUCH? TWO MONTHS. >> AT LEAST, I THINK. >> AND SO THERE'S NO REASON FOR US TO NOT SAY WE'RE WORKING ON THIS. SO I'M WITH YOU, COUNCILMEMBER BECK. I DON'T LIKE SAYING WE WILL, WE WILL, WE WILL. WE'RE WE'RE DOING IT. WE'RE DOING IT, WE'RE DOING IT.

AND SO IT IS MY EXPECTATION, JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT ALL OF THESE THINGS WILL BE ADDRESSED.

AND THE ONE THING THAT'S IMPORTANT WE LOOK AT IS WHEN WE WORK WITH DEVELOPERS. AND I SUGGESTED THIS TO GARY IS TO CREATE THOSE FORMATS FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK, A COMMUNITY PARK, AND THEN A LARGE PARK. GIVE THOSE DEVELOPERS THREE CHOICES OF DESIGNS OF QUALITY AMENITIES HOW YOU WANT TO MAINTAIN EVERYTHING DOWN TO THE TRASH BINS, THE RESTROOM FACILITIES, THE BENCHES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT COMES THROUGH COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

AND THEN YOU HAVE THAT TO HAND TO THOSE DEVELOPERS AND SAY, THESE ARE APPROVED BY THE COMMUNITY GROUP OF WHICH THIS PARK WILL BE BUILT. THEY HAVE APPROVED ALL THREE OF THESE DESIGNS AND THEY LIKE ALL THREE OF THEM. HERE'S WHAT HERE'S WHAT THE QUALITY OF THESE ITEMS ARE. AND HERE'S YOUR CHOICE. PICK ONE THEY LIKED. THEY LIKE ALL THREE. THIS LIMITS THE PROBLEMS THAT WE EXPERIENCE WITH HAPHAZARD TRASH CANS IN THERE, OR A BENCH THAT DOESN'T MATCH DOESN'T LOOK GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT'S JUST A MATTER OF COMING UP WITH THOSE DESIGNS, SITTING DOWN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, GETTING THEIR BUY IN, AND THEN BRINGING THOSE BACK TO COUNCIL. AND SO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, I KNOW ALLISON'S WORKING ON THAT, AND ALLISON HAS ONLY BEEN HERE FOR A LITTLE WHILE, SO SHE'S REALLY GOTTEN ALL OVER THIS. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T FORGET OUR DEVELOPERS, BECAUSE IN A TIME WHERE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARK LAND, WE CAN PUT THAT BACK ON TO ASK THE DEVELOPER TO SET ASIDE THE LAND, BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND MAINTAIN AND MANAGE IT FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT ALSO KEEP IT OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, WHICH THEY'VE BEEN WILLING TO DO. SO I DON'T WANT TO LOSE

THAT THOUGHT AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISTRICT

FOUR? YEAH. RIGHT HERE. >> THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, ONE OF MY FAVORITE THINGS ABOUT SERVING ON THE CITY COUNCIL IS THAT I, THAT I SEE THINGS THAT I'VE SEEN BEFORE, BUT I SEE THEM IN A DIFFERENT WAY. AND AND I'M INTRIGUED. I THINK IT'S ON SLIDE FOUR. STARTS WITH

[01:30:02]

THAT. >> YEAH. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE HISTORY OF, OF OF WHERE WE ACQUIRED THE PARKS INITIALLY. BUT YES, I THINK. I THINK SOME OF THAT MIGHT JUST HAVE TO DO WITH. THE ABILITY OF LIKE SOME OF OUR PARKS ARE LARGER AND SO THEY CONNECT TO MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOODS. AND SO IT MIGHT BE KIND OF THAT EFFECT AS WELL. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES ANY SENSE, BUT THE ANSWER IS, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY OF WHEN PARKS DEVELOPED.

>> SO SO SHOULD I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M GOING TO ASK THIS SHOULD MORE PARKS BE DEVELOPED WITH

WHITE RESIDENTS AND HIGHER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS? >> I THINK THAT WE, IF WE SET A STANDARD OF OF THIS, IS THE AMOUNT OF PARKLAND THAT WE WANT EVERY RESIDENT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO. WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO MEET THAT STANDARD, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HURT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE AREN'T ACCIDENTALLY KIND OF FURTHER DISENFRANCHIZING THESE

COMMUNITIES LIKE LOW AND LIKE LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS. >> WELL, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE DOING EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. WE'RE PROVIDING MORE PARKLAND.

>> YEAH. >> ACCORDING TO THAT. AND AND AS I THINK OF PARKS, IN MY MIND, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE. BUT I JUST HADN'T I HADN'T PUT A POINT ON IT LIKE THAT.

>> YEAH, I THINK IT, I THINK PART OF IT GOES BACK TO KIND OF THE, THE GEOGRAPHIC NATURE OF THE ABILITY TO ACCESS PARKS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN HAVE A PARK THAT'S IN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, THE PARK AND ROADS AND RANCH, FOR EXAMPLE. RIGHT. THAT ADDS TO THE, OUR, THE THAT ADDS TO OUR THE AVAILABILITY OF PARKLAND FOR THE WHOLE CITY AS CITYWIDE. RIGHT. BUT REALISTICALLY, ONLY THE PEOPLE IN ROBES AND RANCH CAN WALK TO THAT PARK. AND SO LOOKING MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THESE KIND OF POCKETS, LOOKING AT IT BY CENSUS TRACK, ALLOWS US TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT ACCIDENTALLY LEAVING OUT ACCESS TO THESE PARKS FOR SOME NEIGHBORHOODS AND SOME PEOPLE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. I DON'T KNOW.

>> I DON'T KNOW EITHER. >> I. >> I JUST THINK IT'S AN INTRIGUING OBSERVATION. ANYWAY, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MAYOR.

>> ANYONE ELSE? REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT SIX AND MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> YEAH. >> HI, COUNCILPERSON. JESTER. I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

SO THERE WAS A SENTENCE IN THE SLIDES AS WELL AS IN THE REPORT ABOUT THAT. OUR CITY, THE PARKS ARE SUBSIDIZED BY GENERAL TAXES AT LOWER RATES THAN PEER CITIES WITH SIMILAR SERVICE LEVELS.

NOW, I READ THAT TO SAY WE'RE DOING MORE WITH LESS, BUT CAN YOU TELL ME IF THAT

INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. SO WE'RE BASICALLY WE'RE WHEN WE THINK ABOUT USER FEES OR TAXES. RIGHT. IF IT'S A WE GENERALLY FUND COMMUNITY ASSETS WITH GENERAL TAXES. AND THEN WE WANT TO FUND LIKE THINGS THAT ARE MORE SPECIFIC, LIKE IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO DO A WORKOUT CLASS, WE WANT YOU TO PAY FOR THAT DIRECTLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A COMMUNITY ASSET. AND SO WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS THAT THOSE KIND OF BROAD BASED TAXES, WE'RE SPENDING LESS OF THAT MONEY ON THE PARK TO MAINTAIN THE PARKS AND KIND OF SUBSIDIZING IT WITH THESE USER FEES AND STILL GETTING THE SAME ACCESS. SO YES, WE'RE DOING

LESS WITH MORE WITH LESS. SORRY. >> OKAY. AND THEN CAN YOU TALK TO ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE THE INVESTMENT VERSUS REVENUE COMPARABLES AND, AND WHAT SHOULD IT BE. YOU KNOW, I'M LOOKING AT IT, BUT I'M UNCLEAR AS TO IS THIS GOOD. IS THIS BAD I REALLY I, I'M NOT ABLE TO REALLY INTERPRET WHAT WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS AND WHERE WE SHOULD BE. DO YOU MIND TALKING

ABOUT THAT? >> YES, CERTAINLY. SO THIS TABLE IS INTENDED TO SHOW KIND OF BACK TO WHAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT. RIGHT. THE, THE DOING MORE WITH LESS. RIGHT.

THESE OTHER CITIES ARE PROVIDING THE SAME ACCESS TO THEIR RESIDENTS LEVEL THAT WE ARE THERE SIMILAR CITIES TO US AS FAR AS LIKE THEY HAVE SIMILAR POPULATIONS. THEY'RE THEY'RE ALL IN TEXAS AND THEY'RE FUNDING THEIR THE THEY'RE SPENDING MORE ON PARKS WITH THEIR GENERAL TAXES THAN WE ARE. BUT WE HAVE THE WE'RE GETTING THE SAME. THE RESIDENTS

[01:35:02]

ARE GETTING THE SAME. DOES THAT MEAN SO LIKE DOES THAT. >> MAKE SENSE? I JUST WASN'T SURE IF YOU WERE SAYING THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE GETTING THAT MUCH REVENUE, THAT OUR USER FEE

SHOULD BE MORE. I JUST WASN'T SURE HOW TO INTERPRET IT. >> YEAH. NO, I THINK WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THERE'S NOT A CLEAR BEST PRACTICE. RIGHT. LIKE THERE'S NOT LIKE EVERY CITY SHOULD SPEND $200 ON THEIR RESIDENT. THERE'S NOT NOTHING LIKE THAT. SO WE LOOK AT THE BENCHMARKS TO SAY, WHAT ARE OTHER CITIES DOING AND WHAT ARE THEY GETTING FOR THAT VALUE.

AND SO, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S REALLY A POLICY DECISION ON YEAH, WE SHOULD THIS SHOULD BE MORE FUNDED BY GENERAL TAXES OR NOT. BUT THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING OKAY.

>> OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. AND THEN AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER THE ACREAGE VALUE VERSUS THE APPRAISED VALUE. YES. MY QUESTION IS THEN, YOU KNOW, JUST, YOU KNOW, NOT TO JUST WORDSMITH, BUT THEN HOW DO WE DETERMINE THE ACREAGE VALUES. IS THE IDEA THAT WE GET A DIFFERENT APPRAISER VERSUS USING, SAY, THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT? IS THAT THE

SUGGESTION OF HOW TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT IS? >> YEAH, I THINK I THINK THE FAIR MARKET VERSUS APPRAISED VALUE THING IS A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION.

>> AND THAT'S A WHOLE PROCESS OF HIRING SOMEONE AND PAYING FOR THAT. AND WHERE DOES THAT

END UP? SO I WAS JUST WONDERING. >> AND THAT'S WHY THEY MOVED TO APPRAISED VALUE, I BELIEVE, IN 2022 THERE. AND AND IF IT'S JUST EASIER AND THAT'S THE DATA, THEN THAT'S FINE. I THINK THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO KIND OF SEE IF THERE'S A BETTER WAY, BECAUSE WE ARE LIKELY HAVING TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE TO ACTUALLY BUY LAND BECAUSE WE'RE USING APPRAISED VALUE, IF THAT'S OKAY, IF, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S WHAT. BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S OKAY. WE CAN IF WE WANTED TO USE FAIR MARKET VALUE, WE COULD HIRE AN APPRAISER, TAKE A FAIR AMOUNT, YOU KNOW, GET THE LAND VALUE FOR WHATEVER DEVELOPMENT. WE'RE PERMITTING AT THE TIME. RIGHT. AND THEN BE LIKE, OKAY, WELL THAT'S THE VALUE. SO WE WANT YOU TO PAY THE FEE IN LIEU OF X NUMBER OF ACRES, WHATEVER BASED ON THAT VALUE. IT IS A MORE COMPLICATED PROCESS. RIGHT. SO IF WE ARE OKAY WITH, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE UP THIS VALUE BECAUSE WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT TO SPEND IT IN THIS OTHER WAY OR IT JUST MAKES IT MORE COMPLICATED. THEN THAT'S ALL

RIGHT. >> AND DID YOU SEE WHAT SOME OF OUR PEER CITIES DO?

>> YEAH. SO SOME OF THEM DO USE THAT METHOD. SOME OF THEM JUST. >> SAY THE METHOD THAT THEY HIRE ANOTHER APPRAISAL, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO NEED SOME KIND OF LEGAL BASIS TO SHOW WHY YOU

WANT SOMEONE TO PAY A LOT. >> YEAH. >> SOME OF THEM DO USE THAT METHOD. SOME OF THEM JUST KIND OF ASSUME THAT THERE'S A PRICE AND UPDATE THAT. AND THERE MAYBE THERE IS SOME METHOD BEHIND THAT. BUT I AGREE THAT WE DO NEED A LEGAL BASIS. AND SO IT IS MORE IDEAL TO HAVE LIKE TO EITHER USE THE APPRAISED VALUE OR GO WITH.

HERE'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO CALCULATE FAIR MARKET VALUE AND SPELL THAT OUT IN THE ORDINANCE

OKAY. >> AND THEN YOU KNOW SOME OF THE DISCUSSION HAS REVOLVED AROUND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS IN OUR COMMUNITY VERSUS THE CENSUS BLOCKS. AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, DENTON IS PRETTY SPREAD OUT AS FAR AS THE DIFFERENT RACES, SOME HIGH INCOME, LOW INCOME, ETC. SO WHAT WHAT IS WHAT IS THE REASON TO USE NEIGHBORHOODS VERSUS CENSUS BLOCKS? AND I'M ASSUMING CENSUS BLOCKS ARE DETERMINED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN

THEY COME IN AND DO THEIR. YES, CENSUS. >> WE USE CENSUS BLOCKS IN THE IN THE GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT POPULATION DATA BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. RIGHT. SO YOU CAN SAY LIKE, I COULD LIKE A NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? LIKE SOUTHEAST DENTON, RIGHT, IS ACTUALLY TWO CENSUS BLOCKS IN ITS GENERAL BOUNDARIES. RIGHT? SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY TRANSLATE EXACTLY TO NEIGHBORHOOD, SO THAT IT MAKES IT A LITTLE JUST THE LANGUAGE, A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT. BUT USING THE ANALYSIS, THAT'S WHY

WE USE CENSUS BLOCKS, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> OKAY. BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE LOTS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS WITHIN CENSUS BLOCKS. SO IT'S KIND OF.

>> CENSUS BLOCKS ARE USUALLY SMALLER. WELL, IT JUST DEPENDS. IT JUST DEPENDS. YEAH.

>> OKAY. >> YEAH. AND THEN YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THE AUDITS AND THAT WE REALLY WANT TO DRILL DOWN ON THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY WITHIN EACH OF THESE DEPARTMENTS. AND SO I MEAN, JUST KIND OF THE GIST OF IT IS MY WHAT I'M SEEING FROM IT IS THAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT CONTINUES TO DO BETTER AND TO DO MORE WITH LESS. YOU INDICATED THAT WE HAVE BEEN PUTTING MORE RESOURCES TOWARDS PARKS, TRYING TO CATCH UP TO WHERE THE PEOPLE BEFORE US WANTED TO SEE US IN A NUMBER OF YEARS. CAN YOU JUST KIND OF GIVE US THE FISCAL BOTTOM LINE ON ON THE AUDIT?

>> SURE. YEAH. I THINK BOTTOM LINE, I THINK HISTORICALLY IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE BEEN SPENT WE'VE BEEN MAINTAINING A SIMILAR ACCESS LEVEL TO PARKLAND AROUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR, SORRY, AROUND IN OUR PEER CITIES. RIGHT THERE ARE GOING FORWARD, WE ARE GOING TO JUST NEED MORE MONEY TO CONTINUE HAVING A LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT WE WELL, ONE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE WE SAID WE WANT. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS FEASIBLE. SO WE NEED TO

[01:40:01]

BUT ALSO THAT'S A POLICY DECISION ON HOW MUCH WE DO WANT TO CHARGE NEW RESIDENTS FOR THAT PARK LEVEL, THAT SERVICE LEVEL. AND THEN, YEAH, THE ON THE MAINTENANCE SIDE, WE'RE DOING WE'RE WE'RE PROBABLY DOING THE MAINTENANCE. AND WE COULD THERE'S PROBABLY SOME ROOM FOR EFFICIENCIES. BUT WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE DOING THE MAINTENANCE THAT WE NEED TO BE

DOING. >> OKAY. >> AND YEAH, JUST THERE WERE SOME INTERESTING POINTS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DENSITY IN SOME NEIGHBORHOODS OR TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS, MEANING MORE MAYBE APARTMENTS OR JUST THE UNITS BEING CLOSER TOGETHER, JUST THE LACK OF AVAILABILITY OF LAND TO THEN ACQUIRE. BUT I ALSO VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS IN THAT I THINK THAT IN THE FUTURE, MOVING FORWARD, WE SHOULD INCLUDE SOME OF THESE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES THAT ARE EITHER ALREADY IN PROGRESS, GOING TO BE IN PROGRESS, ETC. TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE UTILIZING TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY PARTNERS IN IN GETTING US TO OUR GOALS SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST ON TAXES. SO ANYWAYS,

THANK YOU SO MUCH. I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> THANK YOU. I JUST ONE QUESTION. IT IS REGARDING THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE.

I SEE THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY UPDATING IT IN THE MIDST OF UPDATING IT. DO WE HAVE AN ESTIMATED TIMELINE, MAYBE BY QUARTER OF WHEN WE MIGHT WHEN THIS BODY MIGHT EXPECT TO SEE

THAT COME BEFORE US? >> THAT IS NOT SOMETHING I HAVE. >> I'M ALWAYS HAPPY WITH BALLPARK. SO IF YOU DON'T KNOW AN EXACT PREDICTING THE FUTURE, THAT'S OKAY.

>> OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE THAT DONE THIS CALENDAR YEAR. >> DO YOU HAVE IT DOWN TO

QUARTER BY ANY CHANCE, LIKE QUARTER, THREE, QUARTER FOUR. >> QUARTER THREE, QUARTER FOUR?

>> OKAY, SO TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR NOT NOT ANY TIME SOON OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ENOUGH.

THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. OKAY. SO I DID SOME LOOKING. PAGE 40 OF YOUR REPORT SAYS REVIEW DOCUMENTATION TO DEVELOP CRITERIA INCLUDING DOCUMENTED POLICIES, INDUSTRY STANDARDS, STATE OF TEXAS REGULATIONS, CITY REQUIREMENTS AND BEST PRACTICES. CAN YOU THEN EDUCATE ME AS A AS THE AUDITOR HOW YOU BALANCE THOSE THINGS? BECAUSE THOSE THOSE THINGS DON'T ALWAYS ALIGN. SO WHAT'S WHAT WHAT'S YOUR PRACTICE IN BALANCING THOSE THINGS THAT YOU SAID? ARE YOU IDENTIFIED ON PAGE 40 OF YOUR

REPORT? >> YEAH. SO GENERALLY IF THERE'S A FEDERAL REGULATION THAT'S THE STRONGEST CRITERIA SOURCE THAT WE HAVE. IF THERE'S FEDERAL GUIDANCE, THAT'S KIND OF THE SECOND STRONGEST BECAUSE IT'S NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT NECESSARILY, BUT IT'S FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THEN WE USUALLY LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES, WHICH COME FROM KIND OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS THAT MAY ACCREDIT ORGANIZATIONS OR MOST ORGANIZATIONS LOOK TO. IN THIS CASE, WE LOOKED AT THE NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION AS WELL AS TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND. AND THEN WE ALSO LOOK AT THEN WE LOOK AT INDUSTRY STANDARDS, WHICH ARE KIND OF GOING TOWARDS THERE'S MAYBE SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE KIND OF GENERAL GUIDANCE IN AREAS. SO NOT NECESSARILY LIKE A THIS IS THE BODY THAT ACCREDITS EVERYBODY, BUT THERE'S KIND OF 2 OR 3 GENERAL ORGANIZATIONS LIKE SHERM WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE. THE HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT OFFICE WOULD BE AN INDUSTRY STANDARD. AND THEN AND THEN WE LOOK AT BEST I'M SORRY, BENCHMARKING. SO THEN WE WOULD BASICALLY LOOK AT HERE ARE CITIES THAT ARE LIKE US. WHAT ARE THEY DOING. AND THAT WOULD KIND OF BE THE LEAST, LEAST THE WEAKEST CRITERIA THAT WE MIGHT PULL BECAUSE IT'S WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING, BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ENDORSED BY KIND OF A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S JUST WHAT'S GOING ON OUT HERE. AND THEN AS FAR AS POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, GENERALLY, WE LOOK AND SEE IF THE CITY'S POLICIES AND PROCEDURES LINE UP WITH THOSE BEST PRACTICES. AND IF THEY DON'T, WE MAY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY SHOULD. AND THEN AND THEN SOMETIMES THERE ISN'T A POLICY PROCEDURE THAT EXISTS. AND SO WE JUST HAVE TO RELY ON THE BEST

PRACTICES THAT I JUST DESCRIBED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. >> OKAY. AND SO I MAY HAVE MISSED IT, BUT YOU WHERE DOES THE STATE FALL IN THAT. BECAUSE THE STATE AND THE TOWN OKAY.

AND SO THE STATE HAS. >> I MEAN IT WOULD BE UNDER FEDERAL BUT. RIGHT. YEAH.

>> YEAH. AND SO THE STATE HAS COME OUT STATE OF TEXAS AT LEAST HAS COME OUT AND SAID THEY'RE DOING AWAY WITH HUB AS IT'S, AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED. AND NOW THEY

[01:45:07]

THEY'VE DONE AWAY WITH THE CHARACTERIZATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT ABOUT ETHNICITY AND

GENDER. ARE YOU AWARE. >> I WASN'T LOOKING AT HUB AS PART HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED

BUSINESSES AS PART OF THIS AUDIT? >> I UNDERSTAND MORE TO SAY, THE STATE OF TEXAS IS NOT IS MOVING AWAY FROM RECOGNIZING THOSE CHARACTERISTICS THAT YOU IDENTIFIED IN YOUR REPORT AND MOVING TOWARDS SOME OTHER. I'M NOT I'M NOT ADVOCATING ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S THE CLIMATE. AND SO TO ME, THAT'S NOTEWORTHY BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD BE APPLYING FOR STATE FUNDS OR GRANTS AND THAT SORT OF THING.

AND OUR POLICIES HAVE TO PUT US IN THE BEST POSITION TO TO WIN THOSE, I WOULD THINK. BUT AND THEN. SO YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THAT QUESTION I. I WOULD ALSO GO TO YOUR YOUR SITE.

REFERENCES THE SO YOU YOU MENTIONED IN THE FAQS OF THE AUDIT DEPARTMENT, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU ARE BASED ON THE GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS YOU USE. 20 1824 2024 IS AVAILABLE NOW. SO I USE THAT AND IT'S 3.09 TALKS ABOUT INTEGRITY, OBJECTIVE FACT BASED, NONPARTIZAN AND NON-IDEOLOGICAL VIEWS ON THINGS. AND SO THAT'S ANOTHER CONCERN I HAVE IS JUST EVEN AS WE TALK ABOUT IT, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF CONFUSION. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M OKAY WITH AN AUDIT THAT DOESN'T GIVE US ACTIONABLE THINGS, AND IT'S JUST AMBIGUOUS TO ME. AND SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. I'M GOING TO ASK LEGAL QUESTION. I'M GONNA GET OUT OF THE WAY FOR YOU. ARE YOU RECOMMENDING THAT WE USE CENSUS? IS THAT A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU THAT WE USE CENSUS? WE BEGIN TO WE'RE NOT DOING IT CURRENTLY. BEGIN TO START USING CENSUS DATA AND

RACE IN OUR PARK SELECTION. >> THE THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO CONSIDER LOOKING AT THE WAY THAT RESOURCES ARE DISTRIBUTED GEOGRAPHICALLY. YES. AS PART OF OUR PARK ACQUISITION AND

DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. >> RIGHT. BUT BUT THEN YOU LIST THE DATA ON SLIDE FOUR. ARE YOU I MEAN, AND SO TO BE MORE POINTED ON, ON SLIDE FOUR, ARE YOU RECOMMENDING WE BEGIN TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON. IF THE PEOPLE OF COLOR, ETC. OR JUST THE TITLE CENSUS BLOCK? YEAH.

THAT'S WHAT YOU TITLED IT. SO ARE YOU ARE YOU RECOMMENDING. >> HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN A CENSUS BLOCK COMPARED TO HOW MUCH PARK LAND THEY CAN ACCESS, AND THEN MAKE DECISIONS ON WHERE PARK SHOULD BE BASED, BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF PARK THAT WE AS A CITY HAVE DECIDED ARE RESIDENTS SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO VERSUS HOW MUCH THEY ACTUALLY HAVE ACCESS TO RIGHT

NOW AT A GEOGRAPHIC LEVEL. >> OKAY, FOLLOW UP TO THAT, ARE YOU THEN YOU ALSO SAY PRIMARILY RESIDENTS OF COLOR, SHOULD WE MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON PRIMARY, PRIMARILY RESIDENT ON COLOR?

>> I THINK THAT'S AN INFORMATION THAT IS GOOD TO HAVE AS PART OF THE.

>> I'M ASKING FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION. >> THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S

WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION SAYS. >> I'M ASKING YOU, DO YOU RECOMMEND.

>> THAT THEN? NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION SAYS. >> OKAY. WELL THEN I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S IN HERE. AND SO I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. AND MACK AS A YOU'RE YOU'RE IN CHARGE OF OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT. SO I ASK YOU, SHOULD WE USE CENSUS BLOCK DATA BASED ON EXAMPLE WHICH PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT ON ON SLIDE FOUR, SHOULD WE USE RESIDENTS OF COLOR, WHITE RESIDENTS INCOME LEVELS TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON PARKS OR INFORM PARK

POLICIES? >> IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED QUESTION, MAYOR, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A VERY COMPLICATED ANSWER AND A LOT OF DETAIL AND INFORMATION. OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULD FOLLOW ALL LAWS WHEN WE WERE MAKING THESE DECISIONS. THE LAW, ESPECIALLY AS INTERPRETED BY ADMINISTRATION, STATE, FEDERAL AND OTHERWISE, ARE A PART OF THAT ANALYSIS THAT WE WOULD LOOK INTO TO SAY, LIKE YOU MENTIONED BEFORE, DOES THAT PUT US AT RISK OF LOSING POTENTIAL FUNDING? DEPENDING ON WHICH DECISION WE MAKE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER? SO IT'S HARD TO ANSWER AND GIVE YOU A DEFINITIVE ANSWER. OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS FEDERAL AND STATE AND LOCAL LAW HERE THAT SAYS WE SHOULDN'T DISCRIMINATE BASED ON CERTAIN THINGS. SO WE WOULD ALL WE WOULD WANT TO COMPLY WITH ALL THOSE THINGS AT THE SAME TIME. WHATEVER THE CITY'S GOALS ARE, INITIATIVES WISE AND OTHERWISE, WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE AND WEIGH ALL THOSE IN THE BALANCE, AND COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A HARD DECISION, AND WE'D GIVE LEGAL ADVICE ON WHERE WE THINK WE COULD BE SAFE IN THOSE WITHIN THOSE PARAMETERS. SO I KNOW IT'S KIND OF A NON-ANSWER, BUT THAT'S IT'S A VERY COMPLEX QUESTION. I CAN'T GIVE YOU A

CLEAR ANSWER LIKE ON THE SPOT RELATED TO THAT. >> WELL, THEN THEN I'LL, I'LL,

[01:50:03]

THANK YOU. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW AT 3:53 P.M. CONVENE IN CLOSED MEETING TO DELIBERATE

[1. Closed Meeting:]

CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEYS UNDER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODEGOOD. WELCOME BACK TO THIS MEETING.

AND CITY COUNCIL IS NOW AT 5:44 P.M. RECONVENED FROM CLOSED SESSION AND NO OFFICIAL ACTION WAS TAKEN. THAT TAKES US TO OH, LET ME DO IT. LET ME TAKE TWO. CITY COUNCIL IS NOW AT 5:44

[AFTER DETERMINING THAT A QUORUM IS PRESENT, THE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL WILL CONVENE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY HALL, 215 E. MCKINNEY STREET, DENTON, TEXAS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE CLOSED MEETING. CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING(S) WILL CONVENE AT 6:30 P.M.]

SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MAGEE. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. WHAT'S THAT?

>> CAN WE DO A VERBAL. >> SURE. OR I THINK THEY GOT IT DIALED IN NOW. AND SO AGAIN, CONGRATULATIONS TO CASSEY. OGDEN. THANK YOU, MISS CITY MANAGER AND ASSISTANT CITY MANAGERS FOR HELPING US KIND OF GUIDE US THROUGH THIS TRANSITION AND LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. SO REALLY EXCITING TIMES. VOTE ON THE SCREEN. AWESOME. THAT PASSES SEVEN ZERO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AGAIN, CONGRATULATIONS. OKAY, THAT TAKES US TO. THAT. THAT TAKES

[1. CONSENT AGENDA]

TWO. >> I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ACCEPTING ITEM F.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MR. SIX. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. BUT FOR ITEM F ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THAT PASSES 7 TO 0 TAKES US TO ITEM F, WHICH IS ID 252309. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A

[F. Consider approval of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Denton, Texas, supporting the listing of the Little Chapel in the Woods, located at 415 Chapel Drive in Denton, Texas, on the National Register of Historic Places; and providing an effective date. (ID 25-2309, Cameron Robertson)]

TWO. >> LONG OVERDUE TO FOR US TO FORMALLY RECOGNIZE LITTLE

CHAPEL IN THE WOODS. I HAPPILY MOTION APPROVAL. >> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FIVE.

SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. AND THAT PASSES 5 TO 0. AND THAT TAKES US TO OUR ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. AND WE WILL START OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS RIGHT AT 630 OR AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. SO THAT

[A. Conduct the second of two readings and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, annexing approximately 4.47 acres of land, generally located on the south side of Hartlee Field Road, approximately 580 feet east of East Sherman Drive into the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a correction to the City map to include the annexed land; and providing for a savings clause and an effective date. (A25-0002c, Denton Striker, Ashley Ekstedt)]

[01:55:06]

OF SHERMAN DRIVE INTO THE CITY OF DENTON. >> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ASHLEY ECKSTEIN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER. THIS IS A 20 52C THE SECOND READING FOR DENTON STRIKER. THIS REQUEST IS TO CONDUCT THE SECOND OF TWO READINGS TO ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 4.47 ACRES OF LAND INTO THE CITY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HARTLEY FIELD ROAD, EAST OF EAST SHERMAN DRIVE. THE APPLICANT IS KIMLEY-HORN ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, DENTON DOUBLE, LLC. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND IT IS PART OF A LARGER TRACT OF LAND THAT IS ALREADY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. FOLLOWING THE ANNEXATION SCHEDULE. THE FIRST THREE ITEMS WERE BEFORE THIS BODY BACK IN NOVEMBER. WE THEN PUBLISHED THE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE IN THE NEWSPAPER, AND THIS IS THE FINAL ITEM ON THE SCHEDULE. THE SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF THE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE AND ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT. I'LL NOW READ THE CAPTION INTO THE RECORD. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY 4.47 ACRES OF LAND GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HARTLEY FIELD ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 580FT EAST OF EAST SHERMAN DRIVE INTO THE CITY OF DENTON, DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR A CORRECTION TO THE CITY MAP TO INCLUDE THE ANNEXED LAND AND PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS IT COMPLIES WITH THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, AND I'M HAPPY TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING

NONE. MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I'D LIKE TO MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

>> OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND REPRESENTATIVE? DISTRICT FOUR. >> I'LL SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. OH, YEAH. AND THAT PASSES SEVEN ZERO. THE. THEN THAT TAKES US TO ITEMS B, C AND

[B. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the execution of a Third Amendment to Hunter Ranch Project Agreement clarifying the binding obligations as it relates to the developer and future developers and other related matters; and providing an effective date.]

[C. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the execution of a second amendment to Hunter Ranch Operating Agreement relative to funding of improvement projects and adding definitions; and providing an effective date.]

[D. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton authorizing the execution of a cost sharing agreement between the City, HR 3200, LP, Hunter Ranch Improvement District No. 1 of Denton County, Cole Ranch Development, LP, and Cole Ranch Improvement District No. 1 of Denton County for the construction of the Roark Branch wastewater trunk main; authorizing an escrow agreement and expenditure of funds for the City’s allocated share of improvement costs; and providing an effective date.]

IT'S ITEM B ID 262396. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO HUNTER RANCH PROJECT AGREEMENT, CLARIFYING THE BINDING OBLIGATION AS IT RELATES TO THE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER AND FUTURE DEVELOPERS AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS. IN ITEM C, ID 262397. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A SECOND AMENDMENT TO HUNTER RANCH OPERATING AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO FUNDING AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND ADDING DEFINITIONS AND ITEM D ID 252102. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF COST SHARING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY. HR 3200 LP HUNTER RANCH IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER ONE, DENTON COUNTY COAL RANCH DEVELOPMENT LP. COAL RANCH IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER ONE, DENTON COUNTY, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROURKE RANCH WATER WORK. WASTEWATER TRUNK MAIN AUTHORIZING AN ESCROW AGREEMENT AND EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE CITY. ALLOCATED SHARE OF IMPROVEMENT COSTS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. AND IF ANYONE'S TRACKING ALONG, HUNTER RANCH IS ALSO KNOWN AS LANDMARK FOR THOSE THAT THAT MAY NOT

KNOW. >> SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, CHARLIE ROSENTHAL, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. AS THE MAYOR MENTIONED, THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS ACTUALLY THREE SEPARATE ITEMS. IT'S FOR A COST SHARING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY, HUNTER RANCH AND THE COLE RANCH DEVELOPMENT. SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR HUNTER RANCH, AND A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE PROJECT AGREEMENT FOR HUNTER RANCH. A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE DEVELOPMENT. IT'S A 3167 ACRE MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY ON THE WEST SIDE OF TOWN. YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT 6500 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS, 3250 MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND 365 COMMERCIAL ACRES. THIS ITEM ORIGINALLY CAME TO CITY COUNCIL IN 2020. WE'VE HAD AMENDMENTS TO THE OPERATING AND PROJECT AGREEMENT IN 2024, AND A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE PROJECT AGREEMENT THAT CAME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL IN DECEMBER.

YOU CAN SEE HERE THE STRUCTURE OF THE AGREEMENTS. SO THE CITY OF DENTON HAS A PROJECT AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER, HILLWOOD, AN OPERATING AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT.

AND THEN THE DEVELOPER HAS A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ITSELF AND THE DISTRICT FOR COST SHARING AGREEMENTS. THE ROURKE RANCH INTERCEPTOR WAS AN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN THE ORIGINAL 2020 AGREEMENTS. THE DEVELOPER PROVIDED NOTICE TO THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT AGREEMENT OF THEIR INTENT TO START DESIGN OF THAT, AND THE CITY RESPONDED WITH AN

[02:00:04]

METHODOLOGY FOR SPLITTING COSTS OUT ON THIS. SO BASED ON BENEFITS RECEIVED, THE CITY WOULD PAY FOR ITS PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE FLOWS BEING CONTRIBUTED TO THE LINE.

OVERALL. SO THE THE FUNDING WOULD HAPPEN IS THROUGH AN ESCROW AGREEMENT. SO THAT'S PART OF THE COST SHARING AGREEMENT. THE CITY AND COLE RANCH WOULD FUND AN ESCROW AGREEMENT THAT THEN HILLWOOD WOULD DRAW DOWN. AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LINE COMMENCES. YOU CAN SEE HERE THE COST SHARE BREAKDOWN. SO THE CITY WOULD PAY APPROXIMATELY $13 MILLION. HUNTER RANCH WOULD PAY 11.5 MILLION IN THE COLE RANCH WOULD PAY 4.5 MILLION. SO SOME OF THE COST SHARING CONSIDERATIONS THAT ALLOWS FOR THE FACILITY TO BE SIZED IN A WAY THE CITY CAN ACCOMMODATE FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS UPSTREAM OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING SOME OF THE MODS THAT WE HAVE AGREEMENTS FOR. WE ANTICIPATED THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS LINE WHEN WE ENTERED INTO AGREEMENTS WITH THE MODS, AND IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE TOWN OF PONDER AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING A REGIONAL PROVIDER FOR THEM AS WELL, AND ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION THAT IF WE WERE NOT TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THIS LINE, THE CITY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO BACK AND AND PUT ANOTHER LINE IN THE FUTURE. WE DON'T KNOW THE EXACT COST OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE, BUT WOULD BE BETWEEN 13 AND $20 MILLION, AND THAT WOULD HAPPEN SOMETIME IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS. THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO IN AND PUT A SECOND LINE IN AND MAINTAIN A SECOND LINE IN THE FUTURE. SO MOVING ON TO THE OPERATING AGREEMENTS, THERE'S A FEW CHANGES IN HERE IN THE OPERATING AGREEMENT. ONE OF THOSE IS THE DEFINITION OF DEVELOPER. SO THIS IS TO CLARIFY WHAT IS MEANT BY DEVELOPER IN THE OPERATING AGREEMENT. AND YOU'LL SEE IN THE ASSOCIATED PROJECT AGREEMENT AS WELL. AND IT'S TO CLARIFY THAT ANY FUTURE BUYER OF A PLATTED PROPERTY ON THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONSIDERED DEVELOPER UNDER THESE AGREEMENTS. SO THIS CAME UP WITH HEB, WHERE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT WHETHER THEY WERE DEVELOPER UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. AND SO THE INTENT OF THIS CHANGE IS TO CLARIFY THAT. AND THIS ALSO CHANGES TO WHERE SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECTS CURRENTLY IN THE AGREEMENTS ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO BE FUNDED AFTER AN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IS PAID FOR.

THIS WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DO IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OR SUPPLEMENTALS UNDER THE TAXING AUTHORITY THAT THEY HAVE. THIS WOULD ALSO ESTABLISH HOW WE USE THE METHODOLOGY FOR SPLITTING COST SHARING OUT ON WASTEWATER PROJECTS IN THE FUTURE, AND THEN JUST SOME MINISTERIAL CHANGES TO REFLECT THAT THE CONTRACT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR WORK, AND THAT THE CONSTRUCTION HAS STARTED ON THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AND THEN THE PROJECT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, LIKE I SAID, IS TO CLARIFY WHAT A DEVELOPER IS IN THE PROJECT AGREEMENT. SO WITH THAT, STAFF'S RECOMMEND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE COST SHARING AGREEMENTS, THE AMENDMENT TO THE OPERATING AGREEMENT AND THE AMENDMENT TO THE PROJECT AGREEMENT. AND I'LL TAKE ANY

QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REPRESENTATIVE FROM

DISTRICT TWO. >> MR. MAYOR, DO YOU WANT THE QUESTIONS FOR THE THREE ITEMS ALL TOGETHER OR SEPARATE ALTOGETHER? ALL TOGETHER? OKAY. SO THANKS, CHARLIE. CAN YOU CAN YOU HELP ME JUST FOR THE SAKE OF EDUCATION? NOT BECAUSE I PARTICULARLY HAVE A QUALM, BUT WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE WHY? WHY THE THE THE BUFFER ON ENCUMBRANCE, MAKING IT CLEAR WHO'S ENCUMBERED AND WHO'S NOT ENCUMBERED. WHAT'S THE ADVANTAGE TO THE VARIOUS FOLKS

[02:05:01]

THAT THAT CONVEYS? >> IT'S JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THE SO THE THE IN BUYER, THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE DEVELOPER IS REQUIRED TO DO UNDER THOSE AGREEMENTS AND TO TO REMOVE ANY CONFUSION ABOUT THE THE FUTURE BUYER NOT BEING REQUIRED TO DO THOSE SAME IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE AGREEMENT. SO THEY'RE REQUIRED TO MAKE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LIKE THE ROURKE BRANCH INTERCEPTOR BEING ONE OF THEM. RIGHT. IT'S LIKE A THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT PROJECT. WE'RE NOT EXPECTING THE FUTURE BUYER OF A PLATTED LOT TO BE

ENCUMBERED WITH THAT SAME REQUIREMENT. >> FOR, FOR THE REST OF THE PROPERTY. OKAY. NO. OKAY. THAT'S CLEAR. FOR THE THE FLEXIBILITY, THE FLEXIBILITY THAT'S BEING ASKED FOR IN THE EXPANSION WHERE YOU YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TILL ONE PROJECT FINISHES BEFORE YOU START ANOTHER PROJECT. DOES THAT EXPOSE THE CITY TO ADDITIONAL RISK IF BOTH PROJECTS END UP FAILING? THAT'S THE POINT OF OF SERIALIZING THEM WAS. SO IF ONE STARTS AND FAILS, OR THERE WAS SOME PROBLEM THAT YOU'RE NOT ON THE HOOK FOR A SECOND PROJECT, BUT NOW YOU'RE WE'RE ASKING FOR FLEXIBILITY TO WHERE THEY BOTH COULD. IT'S UNLIKELY, BUT THEY BOTH COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE A PROBLEM. WHAT WHAT'S OUR WHAT'S WHAT PROTECTS US FROM THAT

HAPPENING. ANYTHING. >> WELL REALLY THE CHANGE IS MORE RELATED TO THE THE ABILITY TO BE REIMBURSED FOR THE PROJECTS. AND RIGHT NOW UNDER THE AGREEMENTS, THE THE AGREEMET ITSELF. SO THERE'S NOT AN ADDITIONAL RISK I WOULD SAY, BECAUSE THEY CAN THEY CAN ADD

IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AS IT AS IT SITS NOW. >> OKAY. NO THAT'S THAT'S CLEAR.

NO. AND THAT WAS THE END OF MY THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING NONE I'LL TAKE A MOTION FOR ITEM B FIRST REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT SIX.

>> I MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. >> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT ONE.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR ITEM B. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THAT PASSES SEVEN ZERO. I'LL TAKE A MOTION

FOR ITEM C. >> MAYOR. SO MOVED. >> MOTION BY REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FOUR. IS THERE A SECOND BY REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FIVE? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THAT PASSES 7 TO 0. THAT WILL TAKE US TO THE LAST ITEM. ITEM D I'LL TAKE A MOTION. MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> AND IS THERE A SECOND REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT.

>> FOUR I SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. AND THAT PASSES 7 TO 0. THANK YOU. TAKES US TO ITEM

[E. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, a Texas home-rule municipal corporation, authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Integrated Power Co., for transmission line construction and maintenance for Capital Improvement Plan projects for Denton Municipal Electric; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (CSP 8776 - awarded to Integrated Power Co., in the not-to-exceed amount of $67,990,000.00).]

>> GOOD EVENING, MARK ZIMMER ENGINEERING. DME HAS MANY CIP PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE TRANSMISSION LINE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, WHICH INCLUDE CONSTRUCTING TRANSMISSION POLE FOUNDATIONS, ERECTING STEEL TRANSMISSION POLES, AND INSTALLING TRANSMISSION CONDUCTOR. SO THIS CONTRACT WILL BE USED FOR THESE SERVICES AND FOR SERVICES REQUIRED TO RESTORE TRANSMISSION LINES DUE TO DAMAGE FROM STORMS AND LIGHTNING AND OTHER THINGS.

EMERGENCY SITUATIONS ON THIS SLIDE IS A LISTING OF CIP PROJECTS USED TO DEVELOP THE CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THESE PROJECTS ARE GROUPED BY DME, TMPA AND TEX-DOT. THE COST FOR THESE PROJECTS, LISTED AS DME, WILL BE RECOVERED THROUGH THE TEXAS PROGRAM, AND THE COST FOR PROJECTS LISTED AS TMPA IN TEXTILE WILL BE RECOVERED BY THOSE AGENCIES. DME DEVELOPED AN RFP TO SOLICIT THESE SERVICES, AND THREE PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED. THESE THREE PROPOSALS WERE EVALUATED BASED ON SAFETY, RECORD QUALITY, SCHEDULE AND PRICE. BASED ON THESE CRITERIA, INTEGRATED POWER COMPANY EVALUATED THE HIGHEST AND BASED ON THE RESULTS THIS RFP, DME RECOMMENDS A CONTRACT WITH

INTEGRATED POWER COMPANY. >> OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT

TWO. >> YEAH, IT WAS A LITTLE UNCLEAR TO ME HOW MUCH OF THE

COST RECOVERY IS GOING TO COME FROM TEXAS. IS IT 100%. >> 100% OF THE TRANSMISSION

LINE COSTS FOR DME? OKAY. >> YES, SIR. AND I'LL HAVE A SIMILAR QUESTION ON THE NEXT

ITEM. AND I'M I'LL JUST WELL, I'LL WAIT TILL THE NEXT ITEM. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

SEEING NONE I'LL TAKE A MOTION. MAYOR PRO TEM. >> MOTION APPROVAL.

[02:10:04]

>> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT TWO. SECOND HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THAT PASSES 7 TO 0. TAKES US TO ITEM F, ID 252222.

[F. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, a Texas home-rule municipal corporation, authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Stuart C. Irby Company, LLC, for the purchase of high voltage circuit breakers for Denton Municipal Electric; providing for the expenditure of funds therefor; and providing an effective date (RFP 8836 - awarded to Stuart C. Irby Company, LLC, for one (1) year, with the option for four (4) additional one (1) year extensions, in the total five (5) year not-to-exceed amount of $22,257,824.00).]

ASSOCIATED WITH THE PRICE OR. NO NO NO SIR. >> WELL THAT.

>> TWO MAN. YES IT'S BOTH. GO RIGHT AHEAD. SORRY. >> YES, SIR.

>> HIGH VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKERS ARE USED IN ALL SUBSTATIONS TO INTERRUPT THE FLOW OF FAULT CURRENT, TYPICALLY CAUSED BY LIGHTNING STRIKES ON POWER LINES, ANIMALS, FELLED EQUIPMENT AND OTHER CAUSES. CIRCUIT BREAKERS ARE REQUIRED EQUIPMENT IN OUR SUBSTATIONS BECAUSE THEY LIMIT THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY FAULT CURRENT AND ARE NEEDED TO ISOLATE EQUIPMENT FOR OUTAGES AND OTHER REASONS. THIS SLIDE SHOWS TYPICAL LEAD TIMES OF 2 TO 4 YEARS FOR DOMESTICALLY MANUFACTURED CIRCUIT BREAKERS, AND IN CASE AND INDICATES THE LEVEL OF PLANNING DME IS REQUIRED TO DO TO MEET OUR PROJECT TIMELINES. DM DEVELOPED AN RFP TO SOLICIT A UNIT COST CONTRACT TO PURCHASE HIGH VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKERS FROM TWO DOMESTIC MANUFACTURERS. TWO PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED AND STUART IRBY WAS EVALUATED, THE HIGHEST. ON THIS SLIDE IS A LISTING OF THE TYPES OF CIRCUIT BREAKERS DME USES FOR OUR PROJECTS, AND THE MAXIMUM QUANTITIES OF EACH. THIS CONTRACT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY MINIMUM EXPENDITURE, AND PURCHASE ORDERS WILL BE ISSUED AS NEEDED FOR PROJECTS. SO

BASED ON THIS, STAFF RECOMMENDS A CONTRACT WITH STUART. >> THANK YOU. REPRESENTATIVE

FROM DISTRICT TWO. >> SAME QUESTION AS LAST TIME. IS IT 100% COST RECOVERY ON THIS ONE? AND THEN I'LL ALSO ASK LIKE 2 TO 4 YEARS. AND Y'ALL HAVE TOLD US THIS BEFORE.

BUT YOU KNOW FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE THAT'S SUPER RISKY. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN FOR YEARS. HOW DO WE MITIGATE THAT RISK TO FOR US, GIVEN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT

THESE LEAD TIMES THAT ARE CRAZY. >> SURE WE DO. WE DO TRANSMISSION PLANNING YEARLY TO IDENTIFY THESE LONG TERM NEEDS LIKE THIS. SO WE DO OUR PLANNING. WE IDENTIFY THE NEED.

WE GET CAPITAL PROJECTS APPROVED BY YOU GUYS AND BUDGET FOR THEM. AND THEN WE ORDER

THROUGH THESE TYPE OF CONTRACTS SO THAT WE CAN DO THEM IN TIME. >> AND I GUESS MORE THE 10% CONTINGENCY IS ENOUGH TO COVER WHAT WE GUESS THE FLUCTUATIONS IN THE MARKET RATE MIGHT BE

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> REPRESENTATIVE. FROM DISTRICT FIVE.

>> 2 TO 4 YEAR WAIT TIME. >> YES, SIR. >> SO IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THREE YEARS AGO, WE INCLUDED TRANSFORMERS IN OUR FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLAN. WHY WOULD THESE NOT BE CONSIDERED IN OUR PLAN THIS YEAR? I DON'T REMEMBER DISCUSSING THIS BACK IN OCTOBER WHEN OUR FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES, WHEN OUR LOBBYISTS, CAME AND SPOKE WITH

US. >> I BELIEVE THESE WERE DIFFERENT TRANSFORMERS, BUT MY

MY BOSS, JERRY FIEDLER. >> NO. YES THEY ARE. I'M SAYING, WHY IS THIS NOT INCLUDED IN

THIS YEAR'S LEGISLATIVE AGENDA FOR OUR FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES? >> JERRY FILLER, DIVISION ENGINEERING MANAGER FOR DME. I'M NOT QUITE SURE I CAN FIND OUT, BUT YES, THERE SHOULD BE SOME CONSIDERATION FOR THESE OUT LONG TERM ITEMS. ALSO. YEAH, WE CAN CERTAINLY I REMEMBER.

>> WE WE WHEN WE WENT UP TO DC, WE WE LOBBIED FOR THIS. AND I REMEMBER LAST YEAR, IN FACT, I REMEMBER THE MAYOR SPOKE ON THIS VERY TO SENATOR CRUZ OFFICE VERY WELL, THANKING HIM FOR THE WORK. HE HELPED US IN GETTING TRANSFORMERS QUICKER. WOULD THIS NOT FIT THE CRITERIA

FOR DOING THE SAME THING AS WE GO THIS YEAR? >> YEAH, WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT THIS ON OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. I THINK WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO WITH THE MAYOR'S HELP, AND CERTAINLY WITH COUNCIL, WAS TO RALLY, PARTICULARLY SENATOR CRUZ, WHO WORKED WITH US TO HELP EXPEDITE SOME OF THE TRANSFORMERS THAT WE NEEDED. WE CERTAINLY DO THAT AGAIN FOR THIS NEXT 2027 LEGISLATIVE PERIOD. AND I THINK THAT'S WHY IT'S SO CRITICAL TO GO AHEAD AND ORDER OUT 2 TO 4 YEARS BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT MAY OCCUR OR, GOD FORBID,

EMERGENCIES WHERE WE HAVE TO REPLACE TRANSFORMERS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT. >> FOUR HOW LONG DO HIGH VOLTAGE CIRCUIT BREAKERS LAST.

>> LIFETIME OF SUBSTATION, WHICH IS ALSO ABOUT 30 TO 40 YEARS. THE LAST ABOUT THE SAME

AMOUNT OF TIME. >> OKAY. SO SO THESE ARE FOR THESE ARE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.

>> NEW CONSTRUCTION. OR IF OUR STUDIES IDENTIFY A NEED TO REPLACE A TRANSFORMER DUE TO A

[02:15:04]

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT

ONE. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> IS THERE A SECOND

REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT. >> FOR A SECOND? >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR ITEM F. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. AND THAT

[G. Consider approval of a resolution of the City of Denton nominating a member to the Board of Directors of the Denton Central Appraisal District; and providing an effective date.]

APPRAISAL DISTRICT, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL MATT HAMILTON, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, HERE TONIGHT TO SEEK A NOMINATION FOR THE CENTRAL DENTON CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS. SO, AS BACKGROUND, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CURRENTLY HAS A NINE MEMBER BOARD WITH FIVE MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE TAXING JURISDICTIONS, THREE PUBLICLY ELECTED MEMBERS, AND ONE SEAT FOR THE TAX ASSESSOR. YOU MAY REMEMBER IN DECEMBER WE HAD BROUGHT THIS ITEM FORWARD SEEKING NOMINATIONS AND VOTES FOR TWO BOARD MEMBERS, PLACES FOUR AND SEVEN. BOTH OF THE INCUMBENTS, AND PAUL AND MIKE JENNIFER WERE REELECTED TO SERVE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

FOLLOWING THAT, WE WERE NOTIFIED BY THE DCAD THAT BOARD MEMBER ROB ALTMAN, IN PLACE FIVE HAS RESIGNED, AND THE DCAD IS NOW SEEKING NOMINATIONS FROM THE TAXING JURISDICTIONS TO FILL THAT VACANCY. FROM HIS RESIGNATION, MR. ALTMAN WAS AN APPOINTED MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WHOSE TERM ENDS ON DECEMBER 31ST, 2027. THE CITY COUNCIL MAY NOMINATE ONE INDIVIDUAL TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM, AND ONCE NOMINATIONS ARE RECEIVED BY DCAD, THE CURRENT BOARD OF DIRECTORS SHALL APPOINT ONE OF THE NOMINEES BY MAJORITY VOTE TO FILL THE VACANCY. SO, UNLIKE A NORMAL NOMINATION AND VOTE BY THE TAXING JURISDICTION THE CITY, ONCE WE MAKE OUR NOMINATION, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL MAKE THAT SELECTION FROM THE NOMINEE LIST SO IT WON'T COME BACK FOR A VOTE. AND I'LL STAND FOR ANY

QUESTIONS. >> GOT IT. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I WOULD THANK YOU, STAFF FOR ANSWERS. SO THERE WAS SOMEONE ALSO THAT WAS CONSIDERED THAT WASN'T DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY VOTES. SO I WOULD JUST PUT FORWARD DEVAUGHN ENGLISH. BUT I'LL TAKE OTHER NOMINATIONS AND WE'LL JUST TAKE THEM IN ORDER. AND I DON'T KNOW DEVAUGHN. HE'S PUT FORWARD BY LITTLE ELM BUT WAS ON THE LIST PREVIOUSLY AND LIKE YOU SAID, THEY'RE GOING TO SELECT WHO THEY WANT. SO IT'S NOT AS PARTICULAR. SO REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT.

>> SIX. >> COUNCILPERSON JESTER THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF YOU HAD RECEIVED ANY NOMINATIONS OR ANY COMMUNICATIONS ASKING FOR THIS NOMINATION.

>> WE HAVE NOT. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT TWO.

>> WE WE JUST VERY RECENTLY NOMINATED SOMEONE I DON'T SEE WHY WOULDN'T YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO CONTINUE THAT FORWARD AGAIN. I THINK THAT MAKES LOGICAL SENSE. THAT WAS THE CONSENSUS OPINION OF THIS BODY. SO I, I GUESS I'M RECOMMENDING THAT WE WE INCLUDE THAT FORMER NOMINEE

JORDAN VILLARREAL IN THE LIST. >> MACK. DO YOU KNOW IF THAT'S A CONCERN FROM A CANDIDACY

STANDPOINT? BECAUSE HE'S. >> I THINK THIS BOARD ALLOWS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ACTUALLY TO SERVE ON IT. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S A CONSTRAINT ON THE COUNCIL MEMBER.

>> NO, I DON'T REMEMBER. BUT I'LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT. OKAY. GOT IT. OKAY. THEN I'LL ADD THAT. OKAY. ANY OTHER NOMINEES SEEING. NONE. SO FIRST IS IS REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT

FIVE. >> JUST A QUICK QUESTION. I READ THE QUESTIONS. I JUST WANT TO. IS EVERYONE ALL THE TAXING ENTITIES NOMINATING SOMEONE. AND THEN THE BOARD WILL CHOOSE

OF ALL THE ENTIRE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >> YES.

>> THANK YOU. >> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FOUR. >> I BEG YOUR PARDON. WE ARE

NOMINATING FOUR CANDIDATES. ONE AND. AND WHO IS THAT CANDIDATE? >> SO THERE'S THE TWO NAMES THAT PUT FORWARD ARE DEVON ENGLISH, WHO WAS A HE WAS PERFORMED BY THE TOWN OF LITTLE

[02:20:02]

>> ORDER ON, ON ONE OR THE OTHER OF THOSE CANDIDATES. CORRECT.

>> THANK YOU. YES. SO IF YOU'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THE OTHER, YOU VOTE NO OF THE ONE YOU'RE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER NOMINEES? I'LL CLOSE THAT OUT. AND FIRST BEFORE US IS DEVON ENGLISH. I HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND REPRESENTATIVE? DISTRICT

FOUR. >> I SECOND THAT NOMINATION. >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY ANY DISCUSSION. I WOULD JUST SAY IT'D BE I AGAIN, DON'T KNOW HIM, NOT PERSONALLY, BUT I DO, I WILL NOT I HOPE THIS IS SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE IT'S A NEUTRAL PARTY. MY CONCERN ABOUT SOMEONE THAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT AND ANNOUNCE THEY'RE GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT, GETTING SOME SORT OF ADVANTAGE BY THEN SAYING, OH, I WAS THE COUNCIL VOTED ME ON THIS. I JUST DON'T I WANT TO AVOID THOSE THINGS AND STAY OUT OF THE POLITICAL PROCESS.

UNDERSTANDING THIS IS NOT A CUMULATIVE VOTE. IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE A SELECTION PROCESS.

AND SO I THINK WE JUST NEED I'M ADVOCATING WE KEEP IT CLEAN AND NOT GET INVOLVED IN THE THE PENDING ELECTIONS. SO MOTION AND A SECOND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. THE VOTE IS FOR DEVON ENGLISH VOTE ON THE SCREEN. CERTAINLY. SEE SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND.

AND THAT FAILS FIVE TWO. NEXT IS MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BECK

FOR JORDAN VILLARREAL. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND? OKAY I GUESS NOT

SURE. >> GO AHEAD. >> SORRY. SHE GOT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT ONE SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I WILL JUST AGAIN I'LL REITERATE IF THIS IS OBVIOUSLY I CAN READ HOW THE VOTE IS GOING TO GO. AND I JUST WOULD ASK THOSE THAT ARE SUPPORTIVE TO MAKE A PHONE CALL.

AND LET'S NOT MAKE THIS SOME POLITICAL MANEUVER TO SAY OR PUBLISH OR USE IT AS A QUALIFICATION OR ALL THOSE THINGS. I JUST WOULD RATHER TRY TO IMPRESS UPON THE THE IMPORTANCE OF NOT DOING THAT. BUT IT'S ONLY A REQUEST. BUT I WANT IT DOCUMENTED THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS. SO ON THE SCREEN.

PASSES FIVE TWO TAKES US TO OUR WHAT IS THAT. THAT'S G H ID 252298. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN

[H. Consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton ordering an election for Place 5, Place 6, and Mayor to Place 7 and a special election for filling a vacancy in District 1 and District 2 for the unexpired term ending in May 2027, to be held on May 2, 2026 and if required, a runoff election to be held on June 13, 2026; prescribing the time, manner, and conduct of the election in accordance with a joint election agreement and contract for election services with the Elections Administrator of Denton County; and providing an effective date.]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. INGRID RIGGS, CITY SECRETARY, HERE TO PRESENT ORDINANCE 252298 ORDERING THE GENERAL ■AND SPECIAL ELECTION FOR MAY 2026. THE GENERAL ELECTION WILL BE HELD TO ELECT AT LARGE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR PLACES FIVE AND SIX, AND FOR THE MAYOR AND PLACE SEVEN FOR FULL TERMS, WHICH WILL END IN MAY 2028. THE SPECIAL ELECTION WILL BE HELD TO ELECT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO FILL VACANCIES FOR DISTRICTS ONE AND TWO FOR UNEXPIRED TERMS, WHICH WILL END IN MAY 2027. EARLY VOTING WILL BE HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL THE 20TH, AND FROM WEDNESDAY, APRIL THE 22ND THROUGH TUESDAY, APRIL THE 28TH.

[02:25:03]

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM AND MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S TRACKING ALONG THE SPECIAL ELECTIONS FOR SEAT ONE AND TWO ARE ONE YEAR TERMS, TRADITIONALLY TWO YEAR TERMS. BUT SO THEY'LL THAT SEAT WILL RUN AGAIN IN 27. YES. YEAH. GOT IT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. SEEING NONE. MAYOR

PRO TEM. >> I'D LIKE TO MOTION APPROVAL. >> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT

TWO. >> I'LL SECOND. AND I WANT TO THANK STAFF REALLY FOR ALL THE HELP THEY HAVE IN GIVING ME INSTRUCTIONS ON THE CHEAPEST AND MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO TO DO

WHAT I DID. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. STAFF. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE SCREEN I'M GONNA COME DOWN. I FIGURE THIS WILL BE.

>> OKAY. >> SO IT'S YOUR FIRST PRESENTATION. SO YEAH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOU. GREAT JOB. YES, YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HERE WE GO. AWESOME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> INGRID, DO YOU KNOW WHAT SAN

JACINTO DAY COMMEMORATES? >> THE WINNING OF THE BATTLE AGAINST THE.

>> VERY GOOD. VERY GOOD. >> VERY GOOD. >> THANK YOU. I'LL TELL YOU

AFTERWARDS. >> YEAH. >> OKAY. LET'S VOTE ON THE

SCREEN. >> I WAS ON THE BENCH. DO BETTER. OKAY.

>> AND THAT PASSES SEVEN ZERO. THAT. SO OUR REGULAR MEETING STARTS AT 630. BUT WE HAVE TIME.

SO LET'S DO CONCLUDING ITEMS SO THAT WE CAN FINISH OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND LEAVE PROMPTLY THEREAFTER. CONCLUDING ITEMS. REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FOUR.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR. FEBRUARY 8TH IS BOY SCOUT DAY. FEBRUARY JANUARY 24TH IS PEANUT BUTTER

DAY. >> PEANUT BUTTER. >> I AM EMBARRASSED TO TELL EVERYONE THAT THIS PAST FRIDAY WAS LAW ENFORCEMENT APPRECIATION DAY, AND FRANKLY, I DIDN'T KNOW. AND I'M EMBARRASSED ABOUT THAT. OF ALL THE THINGS THAT WE CELEBRATE AND OF ALL THE THINGS THAT WE DON'T CELEBRATE, I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAN SALUTING THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO WHO WORK 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK TO KEEP US SAFE. AND AND I AND I APPRECIATE THEM, AND I WISH THEM GODSPEED AND AND A SAFE DAY. AND IF YOU PLEASE JOIN ME IN A ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR THE MEN AND WOMEN OF LAW

[02:30:03]

ENFORCEMENT. >> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> THANK YOU. CAN I GET THE IMAGES? I'M TRYING IMAGES FOR THE FIRST TIME. SO THIS PAST WEEKEND, I GOT A TOUR OF THE TEXAS VETERANS HALL OF FAME, WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE MALL. SO THERE'S ME GETTING THE TOUR FROM GARY. THAT'S JERRY THERE ON THE RIGHT. SO JERRY WAS THERE FOR PART OF IT. SO HIGHLY RECOMMEND PEOPLE STOPPING IN, TAKING A LOOK AT IT, READING SOME OF THESE STORIES. THERE WERE REALLY INTERESTING STORIES IN HERE. COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE? THERE'S ALSO AN AREA FOR KIDS. SO THIS IS SHOWING IN VIETNAM. THERE WERE SOME SOLDIERS OF THE VIET CONG THAT STARTED SORT OF THEY CREATED TUNNELS SO THAT THEY COULD HIDE FROM THE US SOLDIERS. AND SO THEY WERE KIND OF LIVING DOWN THERE, AND US SOLDIERS STARTED GOING DOWN THERE TO BATTLE THEM. SO IN IN THIS MUSEUM, THEY HAVE A PLACE WHERE KIDS CAN CRAWL THROUGH THE TUNNEL. NEXT SLIDE. WHEN THE KID CRAWLS THROUGH THE TUNNEL, I DISCOVERED I COULD FIT. SO I DID THE WHOLE TUNNEL. THERE'S A LITTLE FAKE RATS, FAKE SCORPIONS, FAKE BATS. I BARELY FIT AT THE END THERE, BUT WHEN YOU'RE DONE, YOU GET THIS COOL CERTIFICATE THAT YOU ARE AN OFFICIAL TUNNEL RAT, WHICH IS WHAT THEY CALLED THE US SOLDIERS WHO WENT DOWN THERE AND DID BATTLE. SO IF YOU KNOW A VETERAN OR YOU KNOW THE STORY OF A VETERAN, A TEXAS VETERAN, STOP BY HERE, SEE IF THEY'RE IN THE DATABASE THAT THESE GUYS ARE KEEPING AND IF THEIR STORY'S NOT IN THERE, IF THEY'RE NOT IN THERE, ASK HOW TO GET THEM ADDED SO THAT WE CAN REMEMBER THEIR STORIES. THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT WORK THEY'RE DOING IN THERE. ALL

RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT ONE.

>> YES. I ALSO WANT TO REMIND YOU ALL THAT THE ENGAGED CITIZEN ENGAGED DENTON HAS NOW GONE TO 311. YOU ALL CALL. PLEASE CALL 311 FOR ALL OF YOUR NEEDS NOW. OKAY. AND THEN THE DENTON HAS MOVED TO CITY OF DENTON. SLASH DISCUSS DENTON.COM. SO THIS IS AN AREA WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP UP WITH ALL THE LATEST HAPPENINGS THAT'S GOING ON IN DENTON, AND MAY EVEN ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE BEFORE. MAYBE YOU CALL YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBER. THAT ANSWER MAY BE THERE FIRST. ALL RIGHT. SO THANK YOU ALL. THANK

YOU MAYOR. >> THANK YOU, REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FIVE.

>> THANKS, MAYOR. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO LIFT UP THE NAME OF RENEE. GOOD. RENEE.

GOOD. WHO WAS MURDERED BY ICE A FEW DAYS AGO. OFTENTIMES, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MURDERED AT THE HANDS OF POLICE VIOLENCE LOOK LIKE ME. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ANYONE CAN BE MURDERED BY BY LAW ENFORCEMENT. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE LIFT UP HER NAME AND THINK ABOUT HER AND HER FAMILY AND OUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS, AND RESOLVE TO DO BETTER IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE HAVE DONE BETTER IN DENTON. I HOPE THAT WHAT WE DO IN DENTON SPREADS THROUGHOUT

THE COUNTRY. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE CONCLUDING ITEMS? OKAY, I'LL SAY THIS I WANT TO START OFF, I'M JUST HEARTBROKEN ABOUT THIS, BUT. SO BO ROZELLE WAS 21. HE IS THE HIS I THINK IT WOULD BE. HIS UNCLE IS ON OUR FIRE FORCE. HIS HIS GRANDMA WOULD BE THE DIANE HUEBNER WHO HELPED US WITH THE GREEN FIRE TRUCK AND HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS CORPORATE CITIZEN, AMAZING ENTREPRENEUR, JUST A GREAT PERSON, GREAT FAMILY OF FAITH. SO TO ZACH AND LEANNE, I AM HEARTBROKEN AND BROKEN ABOUT THEIR LOSS. I SEND MY CONDOLENCES. HIS SERVICES WILL BE AT THE VILLAGE CHURCH AT 1030 ON THE 17TH. THEN I WANT TO SAY THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT REGULARLY TO SUPPORT TWU GYMNASTICS, I'D ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT. THERE'S SOME AMAZING PROGRAMS THEY'RE BRINGING INTO TOWN, AMAZING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FROM HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS AND ALL THAT. THEY'RE BRINGING IN SOME SOME BIG TIME SCHOOLS HERE. AND AND SO REALLY, WHAT TIME? FRIDAY AT SEVEN. THERE YOU GO. YEAH. AT THE HERE AT MCGEE KITTY MCGEE GYMNASIUM. SO YOU CAN BE THERE. SUPPORT THEM. AND THEN ON AGAIN. ON ANOTHER SAD NOTE, MAYOR, FORMER MAYOR PERRY MCNEIL. DEAR FRIEND, HIS SERVICES ARE ON THE 17TH AS WELL. HE PASSED AWAY. AND SO I'LL BE THERE TO SUPPORT HIS FAMILY. AND THEN UNITED WAY IS SATURDAY EVENING. IF YOU'VE NOT GOTTEN YOUR TICKETS ALREADY TO THEIR DANCING WITH THE STARS EVENT IS SATURDAY EVENING, SO PLEASE PLAN TO BE THERE. AND THEN LASTLY ON MONDAY, THE HOLIDAY, THE 19TH AT 10:00, THERE'S THE MLK JUNIOR, HIS PROGRAM AT THE MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR CENTER'S 1300 WILSON STREET. AND THERE'S SOME THERE'S A THERE'S A WALK AND THEN THERE'S SOME PROGRAMS, EVENTS THAT HAPPEN INSIDE THERE. SO AND I THINK THEY NORMALLY

[02:35:06]

[A. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas regarding proposed revisions to the Accessory Dwelling Unit and Townhome standards of the Denton Development Code; amendments include but are not limited to Table 5.2-A, Table of Allowed Uses, regarding zoning districts which permit Accessory Dwelling Units, Subsection 5.4.3, General Standards for Accessory Uses and Structures, regarding the location of accessory dwelling units on residential lots and general applicability of architectural compatibility; Subsection 5.4.4, Additional Standards for Specific Accessory Uses, regarding general standards, maximum size, location, and design of accessory dwelling units; Table 7.9-I: Minimum Required Off-Street Parking, removing requirements for additional parking for accessory dwelling units; Subsection 1.5.2, Regulations Applicable to All Nonconformities, regarding applicability for residential uses; Subsections 3.2.5B, R4 District Dimensional Standards, 3.2.6B, R6 District Dimensional Standards, 3.2.7B, R7 District Dimensional Standards, 3.3.1B, MN District Dimensional Standards, 3.3.2B, MD District Dimensional Standards, and 3.3.3B, MR District Dimensional Standards, related to minimum lot dimension notes for townhome developments; Subsection 3.7.2A.2, Minimum Lot Dimensions, related to lot dimension applicability and maximum number of units; Subsection 3.7.6D, Building Coverage, related to maximum building coverage for townhome developments; and Subsection 7.10.3, Single-Family Detached, Duplex, Townhome, Triplex, and Fourplex Dwelling Site and Building Design, regarding the open space requirements for duplex, townhome, triplex, and fourplex dwellings; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the request with a change to the Table of Allowed Uses. Motion for approval by Commissioner Pruett and second by Commissioner Garland. (DCA25-0001a, Missing Middle Housing, Angie Manglaris and Julie Wyatt)]

AND. TABLE 5.2 A ET AL. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M JULIE WYATT AND I'M PRESENTING DCA 20 51A MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING. SO THE PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU IS TO UPDATE THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE TO CLARIFY AND REFINE SOME REGULATIONS RELATED TO MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING, IN PARTICULAR TOWNHOMES AND ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO SUPPORT OUR HOUSING GOALS AND AND OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOOLKIT.

ALSO, THE SOUTHEASTERN AREA PLAN AND THE DESIGN DOWNTOWN DENTON PLAN TO TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO REMOVE SOME COMPLICATED AND DIFFICULT LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW. AND BOTH OF THESE ITEMS WERE HAVE BEEN WORKSHOPPED AND CREATED OVER THE LAST YEAR. SO TOWNHOMES WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ABOUT THIS TIME LAST YEAR, I THINK IT WAS IN FEBRUARY AS A DISCUSSION ITEM, THE ADU DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THE PROPOSAL HAS BEEN WORKSHOPPED WITH THE DCR OVER THE LAST YEAR. WE ALSO DID SOME NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT IN AUGUST WITH THREE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, TWO IN PERSON, ONE VIRTUALLY. AND THEN WE HAD AN ONLINE SURVEY THAT WAS OPEN FOR A MONTH. AND WE HEARD WE GOT WE HEARD FROM ABOUT 54 TO 55 PEOPLE IN THAT SURVEY. SO RESPONDENTS AND GENERALLY THE COMMUNITY WAS IN FAVOR OF OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. SO WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TOWNHOMES FIRST AND THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AFTER THAT. WITH TOWNHOMES, THERE ARE REALLY THREE TOPICS WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT. LOT LOT SIZE MAXIMUM UNITS AND THEN OPEN SPACE. SO WE'LL START WITH LOT SIZE UNDER THE CURRENT DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR TOWNHOMES IS 2000FT■!S. REGARDLESS OF WHERE T IS IN THE CITY. WE ARE PROPOSING TO REDUCE THAT TO 1000FT■!S IN OUR MIXED USE DISTRICTS. WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO CLARIFY SOME APPLICABILITY NOTES, AS WELL AS SOME REFERENCE NOTES, TO MAKE SURE THE COMMUNITY WHO USES THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE CAN FIND THE REGULATIONS, AND THEN ALSO CLARIFY THE TOWNHOME BUILDING COVERAGE TO PERMIT GREATER COVERAGE IN THOSE DISTRICTS WHICH ALLOW IT. STAFF ANALYZED OUR TOWNHOME REGULATIONS AND PARTICULARLY IN THE LOT SIZES, AND DETERMINED THAT OUR MIXED USE DISTRICTS ARE INTENDED FOR MORE COMPACT, WALKABLE DEVELOPMENT. THAT THOUSAND SQUARE FEET IS MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THESE DISTRICTS. AND IN FACT, IN OUR DOWNTOWN AREA, WE HAVE A TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF ABOUT 900 TO 1000FT.

SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR MIXED USE DISTRICTS ALREADY. AND ONCE AGAIN, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN OUR MIXED USE DISTRICTS. THIS WOULD NOT CHANGE OUR OUR OTHER DISTRICTS, WHICH ALLOW TOWNHOMES THAT 2000FT WOULD REMAIN IN PLACE. WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO MODIFY THE MAXIMUM UNITS. UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS, THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TOWNHOMES ALLOWED ON A SITE CANNOT BE ANY MORE THAN THE NUMBER OF UNIT SINGLE FAMILY UNITS THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED ON THE SITE. HOW DO WE APPLY THAT? WE DIVIDE THE GROSS SQUARE FEET OF A SITE BY THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT, AND IN THAT WE GET THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS. WE ARE PROPOSING TO REMOVE THIS COMPLETELY. IT'S DIFFICULT TO APPLY. IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND, DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN. IT ALSO CREATES A DISINCENTIVE FOR TOWNHOMES BECAUSE THIS IS THE TOWNHOMES ARE THE ONLY RESIDENTIAL USE TYPE WHERE THIS WOULD APPLY, AND INSTEAD JUST RELY ON THINGS THAT TYPICALLY LIMIT OUR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, THINGS LIKE LOT DIMENSIONS, ANY RIGHT OF WAY, DEDICATION, DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE OR OTHER EASEMENTS. THOSE OFTEN CAN LIMIT THE NUMBER OF UNITS.

[02:40:03]

WE FIND THAT THAT IS REALLY JUST KIND OF TOO SMALL TO CREATE USABLE OPEN SPACE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT APPROPRIATE OPEN SPACE SO PEOPLE CAN ENJOY IT AND USE IT TO PLAY OR FOR RECREATION. WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO EXEMPT. SO WE'RE PROPOSING THAT ANY, ANY DEVELOPMENT OVER THREE ACRES WOULD, WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DEDICATE THAT 5% OPEN SPACE.

SO EXEMPTING ALL PROJECTS UNDER THAT THREE ACRES. WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO EXEMPT PROJECTS THAT ARE WITHIN A HALF MILE OF A CITY OWNED PARK OR OPEN SPACE. WHAT THAT ALLOWS US, IT ALLOWS US TO GET MEANINGFUL, USABLE OPEN SPACE IN AREAS WHERE THERE ISN'T A PUBLIC PARK. SO ALLOWING THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT STILL ARE REQUIRING THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT THAT ARE MAYBE ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF TOWN OR A LITTLE BIT LARGER TO PROVIDE THAT OPEN SPACE, BUT EXEMPTING THOSE OTHER PROJECTS THAT MAYBE ARE INFILL OR HAVE FEWER LOTS FROM THAT REQUIREMENT. SO WITH THAT, I'VE CONCLUDED TOWNHOMES. I'LL BRING UP ADUS. NOW, UNLESS YOU HAVE

ANY QUESTIONS ON TOWNHOMES NOW. >> ANY QUESTIONS ON TOWNHOMES OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING. ANGIE MAGLARAS, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR HERE TO TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS OR ADUS TODAY. AS JULIE MENTIONED, THESE AMENDMENTS WERE LARGELY WORKED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE OVER SEVERAL MONTHS BEFORE TAKING IT TO PUBLIC FEEDBACK. THE AMENDMENTS ARE PRIMARILY DESIGNED TO MAKE ADUS EASIER TO CONSTRUCT WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON BY REMOVING SOME OF THE KNOWN BARRIERS TO ENTRY, AS WELL AS EXPLORING AREAS IN WHICH WE DO ALLOW ADUS. SO STARTING OFF, WE ARE LOOKING AT AMENDING THE TABLE OF ALLOWED USES. ADUS ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY ALLOWED IN ALL OF OUR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AND THE ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH PERMITS SINGLE FAMILY BY RIGHT. THE REASON WE'RE PROPOSING TO ADD IT IS A PERMITTED USE IN MD AND M-R IS BECAUSE AS PART OF THESE AMENDMENTS, ADUS WOULD BE ALLOWED WITH A TOWNHOME, A DUPLEX, OR A TRIPLEX. IN ADDITION, IN SOME OF THE GENERAL STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, THERE IS SOME CLEANUP OF THIS EXISTING LANGUAGE. WE DO HAVE A CONFLICT IN THIS PART OF THE CODE. IT SAYS ANY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CANNOT BE ALLOWED IN THE SIDE YARD. WHEN WE GET INTO THE ADU SPECIFIC STANDARDS, IT SAYS ADUS COULD BE. SO WE'RE REMOVING THAT CONFLICT IN OUR GENERAL STANDARDS. MOVING ON TO THE SPECIFIC STANDARDS RELATED TO ADUS, THESE AMENDMENTS ARE PREDOMINANTLY DESIGNED TO CLARIFY ADUS CAN BE ATTACHED OR DETACHED FROM THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. ONE ADU MAY BE PERMITTED PER LOT, AND ADUS MAY BE ACCESSORY TO SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED TOWNHOMES, DUPLEXES, AND TRIPLEXES. THE REASON FOR PLEXUS IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS IS BECAUSE WE DEFINE MULTIFAMILY AS FIVE UNITS OR MORE ON A LOT, AND SO FOURPLEXES DOESN'T WORK WITHIN THIS EQUATION, BUT EVERYTHING BELOW IT DOES. FURTHERMORE, WE CLEANED UP SOME OF OUR LANGUAGE RELATING TO HOW WE MEASURE ADUS AND CREATED ONE STANDARD FOR THE MAXIMUM SIZE FOR ADUS ACROSS ALL LOTS. CURRENTLY, WE DIVIDE OUR REGULATIONS FOR LOTS OVER 10,000FT■!S AND LOTS UNDER. THIS SETS THE SAME STANDARD ACROSS THE BOARD. IT GUARANTEES ALL ADUS MAY HAVE A MINIMUM OF 800FT■!S, REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE OF THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT, BUT IT COULD ALLOW SOMEBODY WITH A LARGER HOME TO EXPLORE UP TO 75% OF THAT PRIMARY DWELLING UNIT. AND REALLY WHAT THIS DOES IS IT ALLOWS SOME OF THOSE WITH SMALLER HOMES TO HAVE ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY WHEN CONSIDERING AN ADU ON THEIR LOT. WE ALSO LOOKED AT PROVIDING SOME CLARITY AGAIN, WHERE ADUS CAN BE LOCATED BY SPECIFYING THEY CAN BE IN THE SIDE YARD, PROVIDED THEY'RE OFFSET FROM THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE, AND SOUGHT TO CLARIFY AND PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY CURRENTLY TODAY, ANY ADU BUILD VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR NOT NEEDS TO BE ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE. THIS REALLY NARROWS IT TO THOSE UNITS THAT ARE VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, DO NEED TO BE ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE, AND FURTHER SPECIFIES WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE BY PROVIDING TWO OF THE FOLLOWING. AND THAT COULD BE COLOR, ROOF, PITCH, ORIENTATION OF BUILDING MATERIALS, OR SAME DESIGN OR DETAIL. SO MID-CENTURY MODERN ADU OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THE AMENDMENTS ALSO FURTHER CLARIFY THAT ADUS COULD BE YOU COULD HAVE SEPARATE OWNERSHIP VIA A CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION. CURRENTLY, WE DON'T ALLOW IT AT ALL. THIS WOULD PROVIDE THE OPTION FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE IT TO DO SO, AND ALSO REMOVES THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR ADUS, BUT DOES SPECIFY THAT IF YOU ARE TO REMOVE A REQUIRED

[02:45:02]

BECAUSE AGAIN, ONCE WE GET INTO FIVE OR MORE, THAT'S WHEN WE START HAVING CONFLICTS OF DEFINITIONS. AND SO THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION THAT CAME OUT OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THIS MAP BEFORE YOU JUST KIND OF HELPS ILLUSTRATE WHAT THAT MILE AND A HALF BUFFER COULD LOOK LIKE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENTS. IT DOES SUPPORT SEVERAL OF OUR GOALS AND STRATEGIES, BOTH IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOOLKIT, AS WELL AS SEVERAL OF OUR SMALL AREA PLANS. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE DESIGNED TO REMOVE CONFLICTING AND COMPLICATED LANGUAGE, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION RECEIVED FROM THE DCR AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AND DOES CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING WITHIN THE CITY OF DENTON. I'M

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MAY HAVE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT

TWO? >> THANK YOU. I WAS ONLY ABLE TO PARTIALLY REVIEW PLANNING AND ZONING. WHAT WAS THE THE RATIONALE FOR THE RADIUS AROUND MD?

>> THIS MAP HELPS JUST A LITTLE BIT. OH WRONG WAY OKAY. >> AND I GUESS THE CONTEXT AS YOU PULL THAT UP IS IS WHY WHY LIMIT IT TO THIS AREA AROUND MD. WHY WHY NOT ELSEWHERE?

>> SURE. I BELIEVE SOME OF THE CONVERSATION AROUND THIS WAS THEY WERE LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL WAYS IN WHICH THOSE LOTS WHICH COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING TWO UNITS OR MORE, WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SO WITHOUT NEEDING THE SP. AND THE THOUGHT WAS THAT THIS MILE AND A HALF

WOULD CAPTURE MOST OF SORT OF THE CITY'S INNER INNER CORE. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FOUR. >> THANK YOU. IS IT IF ONE WERE TO BUILD AN ADU ON THE BACK PART OF THE PROPERTY, IS IT PERMITTED TO HAVE A SEPARATE ELECTRIC AND WATER METER FOR,

FOR THAT, FOR THAT UNIT, FOR THAT NEW UNIT? >> SURE. SO AS IT RELATES TO, TO METERING OF WATER, WE DON'T ALLOW ADDITIONAL TAPS INTO THAT MAIN LINE. BUT SUBMETERING IS PERMITTED. SO THEY COULD SUBMETER OFF OF THAT MAIN METER AND THEY COULD HAVE A SEPARATE ELECTRIC METER. IN DISCUSSING WITH OUR UTILITIES, THERE IS THE ABILITY FOR IF FOR SOME REASON THE MAIN HOME HAD THEIR WATER SERVICE CUT OFF. WE DO HAVE SEVERAL ACCOUNTS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO ADUS WHERE THEY'RE NOT AFFECTED BY THAT, BUT IT'S NOT A SEPARATE TAP INTO THE

MAIN LINE. IT IS A SUB METER. >> BUT BUT A A STANDALONE ELECTRIC AND WATER WATER METER

IS PERMITTED. >> THE WATER METER IS SUBMETER. BUT ELECTRIC, THEY'RE ABLE TO

SERVE AS WELL. YES. >> THANK YOU. >> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FIVE.

>> MAYOR I'VE JUST GOT A COUPLE AND IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL ASK THE REST AFTER PUBLIC COMMENTS.

YEAH. WHAT IS SUBMETERING? I MEAN, I KNOW WE ALREADY HAD THIS CONVERSATION.

>> BUT SURE. >> PLEASE EXPLAIN. >> IN GENERAL TERMS BECAUSE I'M NOT THE WATER METER EXPERT. IT IS NOT GOING TO BE A SEPARATE LINE, A LATERAL LINE RUNNING FROM THE STREET TO THAT ADU. SPECIFICALLY, THERE IS A METER TO THE HOME, AND THEY'RE ABLE TO PUT IN A SUB METER TO THAT TO SERVE THAT SPECIFIC STRUCTURE. BUT TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF OF TAPS, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE IT'S OWN LATERAL LINE, INDEPENDENT COMPLETELY

FROM THE THE MAIN ONE. >> WHAT'S THE BARRIER TO A SEPARATE LINE. IS IT SIMPLY

COST? >> I BELIEVE IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH UTILITIES. SOME OF THAT COMES DOWN TO STATE LAW, WHERE ONE LINE IS SERVING A RESIDENTIAL LOT. IN ADDITION, IT IS IT IS A SAFETY THING. IT REDUCES JUST THE NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS INTO THE MAIN LINE AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMETHING TO GO WRONG. BUT IN TALKING WITH CUSTOMER SERVICE AND HOW THE BILLING GOES, IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT'S POSSIBLE TO HAVE AT LEAST A SEPARATE

[02:50:01]

ACCOUNT WITH THAT SUBMETER. >> OKAY, AND LAST THING I'LL SAY IS JUST HELP ME WALK THROUGH HOW ONE WOULD TROUBLESHOOT THIS. I OWN A PROPERTY AND COUNCIL MEMBER HOLLAND HERE RENTS AN ADU IN THE BACK. AND IF I DECIDE FOR WHATEVER REASON NOT TO PAY MY WATER BILL, DOES HIS WATER GET SHUT OFF? SINCE I OWN THE MAIN HOUSE?

>> SO IN MY CONVERSATIONS AND IT WAS IT WAS LATE LAST WEEK, THERE IS THE ABILITY TO SET UP THE ADU ACCOUNT THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THE MAIN METER OR THE MAIN USER OF THE ACCOUNT PAYING IT. SO IF IF THE MAIN HOME HAS ITS WATER SHUT OFF FOR PAYMENT ISSUES, IT DOES SOUND LIKE THERE'S THE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT SUBMETER INDEPENDENT OF IT SO THEY DON'T

LOSE THEIR WATER CONNECTION. >> WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT OR WOULD THERE BE AN ADDITIONAL

COST FOR THE PERSON IN THE ADU TO GET THAT SET UP? >> I'M SURE THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL COST FOR THE INITIAL INSTALLATION OF THE SUBMETER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THAT WOULD

ENTAIL THOUGH. >> AM I CORRECT IN ASSUMING IT'S A MINUSCULE COSTS MORE? MORE ADMINISTRATIVE IS NOT TOO BIG A DEAL. IT'S NOT A BARRIER TO ENTRY FOR ANYTHING.

>> I WOULDN'T THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, BUT I, I WOULD NEED TO LOOK AND MAYBE I

CAN DO THAT DURING PUBLIC COMMENT. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D LOVE FOR SOMEONE TO JUST TEXT STEPHEN. I'M JUST I'M THINKING ABOUT THE BARRIERS BETWEEN

MAKING THIS A FEASIBLE, NOT FEASIBLE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YES.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> PIGGYBACKING ON THE THE WATER QUESTION, I MEAN, IF WE COULD JUST GET SOME SORT OF, I GUESS, WRITTEN CLARIFICATION OR COMMENTARY AFTER AFTER THIS VOTE AFTER TONIGHT REGARDING CONFIRMATION THAT IF THE FRONT HOUSE, IF THEIR WATER WAS SHUT OFF FOR SOME REASON, THAT THE ADU COULD STILL HAVE WATER, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POSSIBLY GIVING THE ADU OCCUPANT OWNERSHIP OF THAT BUILDING OF THE ADU. THAT'S ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT IN THAT CASE. SO JUST CONFIRMATION THAT THERE WOULD BE A WAY FOR THEM TO KEEP THEIR WATER ON IF THE MAIN STRUCTURE WERE TO BE TURNED OFF. AND THEN DID WE LOOK AT THINKING STILL ABOUT THE OWNERSHIP POTENTIAL THAT WE MIGHT BE OPENING UP? DID WE LOOK AT ALLOWING THE POST OFFICE TO DECIDE HOW IT THE ADDRESS WORKS ON IT? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE ADDRESS IS ADU, RIGHT. IT'S NOT C OR B OR YOU KNOW, TWO.

>> YES, WE WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO CONNECT WITH THEM TODAY JUST TO CONFIRM EVERYTHING. LET ME DOUBLE CHECK MY NOTES. THEY DON'T RECOGNIZE SEPARATE ADDRESSES. SO THE MAIN ADDRESS FOR THE HOME IS WHAT THE POST OFFICE GOES BY. AND THAT'S WHERE THEIR DELIVERY SYSTEM IS.

AND SO THEY'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF DISTINGUISHING A SEPARATE ADDRESS NOR SEPARATE MAILBOX IN

ORDER TO AVOID ANY SORT OF CONFUSION AND DELIVERY OF MAIL. >> IF THERE WERE TWO ADUS IN A, LET'S SAY, IF SOMEBODY HAD A REALLY HUGE YARD AND THEY HAD TWO ADUS, HOW DO WE KNOW HOW

THAT WOULD WORK? ADU AND WOULD THEY BOTH BE ADU OR. >> I DON'T HAVE A GREAT ANSWER FOR THAT. IT COULD BE A AND B OR ADU AND ADU ONE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> SOMETHING. JUST SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT PROBABLY AFTER TONIGHT. SO I'LL RESERVE THE REST OF MY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FOR AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. SO I A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS I WAS GOING TO ASK HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. BUT ONE OF THE ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS BROUGHT TO ME WAS THE VALUE.

AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE VALUE OF THE TWO MILE RADIUS WHICH ENCUMBER IT COVERS UNT. SO SO I JUST WANT TO CLEARLY COMMUNICATE I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A MOTION YET, BUT WHEN I DO, IT'S GOING TO BE TO EXPAND THAT OUT TO TWO MILES SO THAT IT COVERS THAT. BUT TO REQUIRE SUPPORT FOR ALL OF THEM, BECAUSE IS THERE A HEIGHT RESTRICTION FOR ADUS?

>> IT'S THE SAME AS WHAT THE ZONING DISTRICT ALLOWS. SO IN SINGLE FAMILY 40FT, OKAY.

>> AND IS THAT SINGLE STORY, TWO STORY. >> IT WOULD TYPICALLY BE TWO

STORY. >> YEAH. AND SO THAT'S MY CONCERN IS IN ANY OF THIS I'M NOT TRYING TO ADD A BARRIER, BUT IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO PUT A UNIT BEHIND MY HOUSE OR NEXT TO MY HOUSE, I SHOULD. IT'S JUST A NOTIFICATION THING. UNLESS YOU CAN TELL ME THAT THE PROCESS WHERE IT'S WHERE IT'S IT'S TITLED. I CLOSE THE PRESENTATION, BUT IT'S A IT'S WITH LET ME GET THERE. DOES THE WITH SPECIAL WITH SPECIFIC STANDARDS APPLY. DOES THAT

REQUIRE A HEARING OR NOTICE TO YOUR NEIGHBORS. >> THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS ARE SORT OF JUST DESIGN DETAILS WITHIN THE DDC. IT'S THE SUPP THAT WOULD REQUIRE THAT PUBLIC

NOTICE TYPICAL OF A ZONING CASE. >> YEAH. AND THAT TO ME IS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE'RE GOING TO IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO CLOSE DOWN THE STREET, NOTHING PERMANENT, THEY MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY HAVE TO GO TO THEIR NEIGHBORS, THEIR NEIGHBORING BUSINESSES AND GET THEM TO SIGN OFF SAYING, HEY, ARE YOU OKAY WITH ME? WITH US HAVING AN EVENT ON THE STREET,

IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT SOUNDS CORRECT, BUT I'LL ADMIT I'M NOT THE STREET.

[02:55:03]

>> WHO? WHO CAN ANSWER THAT? WHO CAN CONFIRM? IF YOU'RE REQUESTING TO CLOSE THE STREET? ANYBODY TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. SO. BUT THAT'S THAT'S A TEMPORARY THING, RIGHT? IT'S A TEMPORARY ROAD CLOSURE. AND YOU HAVE TO GO TO GET APPROVAL FROM YOUR FROM YOUR, THE SURROUNDING BUSINESSES. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT A PERMANENT STRUCTURE THAT OVERLOOKS POTENTIALLY YOUR FENCE, I WOULD THINK WE'D WANT AT LEAST FEEDBACK. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE CUMBERSOME. IT JUST HAS TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE YOUR NEIGHBORS TO BE HEARD ON THAT. AND SO THAT TO ME IS IMPORTANT. SO I WANT TO EXPAND THE RANGE YOU GIVE AND YOU TAKE. RIGHT. SO I THINK THAT'S GOOD TO EXPAND THE RANGE. BUT THEN ALSO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A NOTICE REQUIREMENT TIED TO IT FOR YOUR FOR YOUR NEIGHBORS. AND SO THEN YOU ANSWERED. YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION I RECEIVED ABOUT THE POST OFFICE. YOU ANSWERED ABOUT THE WATER METER AND THEN THE CURB CUTS THAT THAT'S THAT ALSO THAT CAN BE REQUESTED. BUT THAT'S NOT THE THAT'S NOT AN ORDINANCE ISSUE. THAT'S A

REQUEST FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. RIGHT? >> YES. ALL OF OUR DRIVEWAY SPACING REQUIREMENTS ARE OUT OF THE CRITERIA MANUAL. SO IF SOMEBODY WANTED AN ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY TO THEIR SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY, THEY'D HAVE TO MEET THAT MINIMUM TEN FOOT SEPARATION NOT ONLY FROM THE DRIVEWAY ON THE EXISTING LOT, BUT ANY ADJACENT ONES.

>> GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. OKAY. SO WE'LL GO. ARE THESE TO SPEAK AGAIN OR. NO.

OKAY. YOU SURE? MAYOR PRO TEM. >> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT MY UNDERSTANDING OF OF THE MAP OR THAT MOTION AT PLANNING AND ZONING WAS THE BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING KIND OF ADDED MODIFICATIONS. IT WAS THAT TWO ADUS, IF THEY MEET ALL CODE AND ALL THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WOULD BE ALLOWED, WITH THE SECOND ONE REQUIRING AN SP. AND SO WHAT THE THE MODIFICATION WAS FROM PLANNING AND ZONING WAS THAT THAT THAT'S TRUE, EXCEPT FOR IN A ONE AND A HALF MILE RADIUS AROUND DOWNTOWN, YOU COULD HAVE UP TO 280 USE OR BACKYARD COTTAGES WITHOUT AN SCP FOR THE SECOND ONE. SO THAT WAS THE THAT'S WHAT THE RADIUS IS ABOUT IS OUTSIDE OF IT. YOU WOULD NEED AN SCP FOR THE SECOND INSIDE OF IT. YOU DON'T NEED AN

SCP FOR THE SECOND. THAT WAS WHAT THE RADIUS WAS ABOUT. >> YES. SO THE YES, THE ORIGINAL THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO PNC WAS WAS ONE PER LOT WITH NO CONSIDERATION OF A SECONDARY. SO THEN THE CONVERSATION WAS, WHAT IF WE ALLOWED A SECOND WITHIN SCP? BUT THEN THAT'S WHERE THE BUFFER CAME INTO. YOU'RE CORRECT THAT ANYTHING YOU SEE WITHIN THE THE BLUE AREA, THE INTENT WAS THAT THEY COULD HAVE THEIR SECOND ADU WITHOUT THE SP.

THE REMAINDER OF THE CITY WOULD REQUIRE THAT SCP, AND THAT WOULD BE FOR THE SECOND UNIT

ONLY, RIGHT? >> YEAH. NO, I'M 100% CLEAR. I DON'T I JUST I'LL LISTEN TO THE COMMENTS AND I'LL LISTEN TO THE DATA. BUT MY I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE WORLD WHERE I MEAN, WE MAKE PEOPLE GO HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS FOR JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING AND TO HAVE AN ESTABLISHED AREA THAT DIFFERENT FROM THE TOWNHOMES TO ME, TOWNHOMES, NEW CONSTRUCTION, I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND BUY THE LOT AND POST OR DO WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO DO, PULL A PERMIT, ALL THOSE THINGS. AND SO PEOPLE CAN HAVE NOTICE THIS. I JUST I'M AGAINST HAVING GIVING YOUR YOUR NEIGHBOR NO NOTICE AND PUTTING SOMETHING TWO STORIES TALL IN THE BACKYARD OVERLOOKING YOUR BACKYARD WITHOUT AT LEAST GIVING YOU A SAY. SO LIKE, HEY, HERE'S WHAT'S ABOUT TO HAPPEN RIGHT BEHIND YOUR HOUSE. LIKE, BECAUSE ALL THE THINGS, RIGHT, YOU CAN RUN INTO WATERSHED ISSUES WHERE WE'VE RUN INTO THAT IN SOUTHRIDGE ALL OVER THE PLACE. AND SO YOU'RE TAKING AWAY SURFACE AREA. YOU'RE NOT CONSIDERING THAT. YOU'RE NOT CONSIDERING RUNOFF. THERE'S JUST THERE'S JUST ONE OFFS WHERE I THINK WE NEED TO AT LEAST HAVE NEIGHBORS HEARD TO SAY, OH, BY THE WAY, I'M ALREADY HAVING WATER FLOW ISSUES. NOW THEY'RE PUTTING IN ANOTHER, THEY'RE TAKING AWAY SURFACE AREA. AND I DIDN'T KNOW.

AND WE'RE GOING TO I MEAN WE'VE I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO AT LEAST HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SUPER LONG, BUT I THINK IT'S JUST THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

>> MAYOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO WORK THROUGH CLARIFYING THAT YOUR FUTURE POTENTIAL MOTION

NOW, OR WOULD YOU RATHER WAIT UNTIL LATER TO CLARIFY? >> YEAH, NO. WE'LL GET I JUST WANTED TO COMMUNICATE IT BEFORE PEOPLE SPOKE BECAUSE THEY WON'T GET TO SPEAK AFTERWARDS. AND SO I WANTED TO GIVE FULL AND FOR PEOPLE TO CONSIDER AS THEY'RE LISTENING WHERE WHERE I'M LEANING. AND I DIDN'T WANT TO MISLEAD ANYONE THAT I'M, I'M GOOD WITH IT AS IS.

>> OKAY. >> SO THAT'S THE THING. SO OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS. ISAIAH. IS IT.

HECK THANK YOU. IF YOU CAN COME DOWN GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.

>> ALL RIGHT. HELLO COUNCIL. YEAH I'M ISAIAH. >> HECK I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING

[03:00:02]

ALL, ALL OF YOU TO VOTE FOR THIS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. NEXT IS KATE ROSE.

YOU CAN GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> OKAY. I RUN A RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND I OWN RENTAL HOMES. AND TO ECHO WHAT HE SAID, WE HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS. WE DON'T HAVE HARDLY ANYTHING. SORRY. ANYTHING UNDER 1000FT■!S OR $1,000 A MONTH FORA FOR A PERSON OR A COUPLE. I'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR ME THAT MAKE $20 AN HOUR LIVING IN RVS AND TRAILERS AND DRIVING FURTHER AND FURTHER OUT. SO JUST I THINK MISSING MIDDLE IS A TERM FOR A VERY VALID REASON. AND WE NEED DUPLEXES AND FOURPLEXES AND AFFORDABLE,

WALKABLE SPACES. SO JUST PRO THESE CHANGES TO CLARIFY. >> GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

>> AND AND JOSH TAYLOR YOU CAN COME DOWN AND GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES.

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT TO THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE, RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND TOWNHOME STANDARDS. THESE CHANGES REFLECT CAREFUL PLANNING, BROAD PROFESSIONAL INPUT, AND A CLEAR COMMITMENT TO EXPANDING HOUSING OPTIONS IN WAYS THAT ARE THOUGHTFUL, INCREMENTAL, AND COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. AT THEIR CORE, THESE AMENDMENTS HELP DENTON DO SOMETHING IMPORTANT GROW MORE WISELY BY ALLOWING ADUS IN MORE ZONING DISTRICTS, CLARIFYING DESIGN STANDARDS, AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY PARKING REQUIREMENTS. WE MAKE IT EASIER TO ADD MODEST, WELL-DESIGNED HOUSING WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOODS WE ALREADY HAVE. THAT MATTERS, BECAUSE EVERY TIME WE MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ADD HOUSING IN THE CITY, WE PUSH GROWTH FURTHER OUT, FUELING URBAN SPRAWL, LONGER COMMUTES, HIGHER INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS, AND GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. THE SAME IS TRUE UPDATES. CLEAR MODERN DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS ENCOURAGE THE KIND OF MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING THAT FITS NATURALLY INTO DENTON'S FABRIC HOUSING THAT IS OFTEN MORE ATTAINABLE, MORE EFFICIENT, AND MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR FIRST TIME BUYERS, SENIORS AND WORKING FAMILIES. THESE CHANGES DON'T ELIMINATE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THEY DON'T LOWER DESIGN EXPECTATIONS. THEY SIMPLY PROVIDE MORE CHOICE, MORE FLEXIBILITY, AND MORE RESPONSIBLE STEWARDSHIP OF LAND, ALL WHILE ALIGNING WITH THE GOALS OF DENTON'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND THEY HAVE THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. IN A MOMENT WHEN AFFORDABILITY, SUSTAINABILITY AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER ARE ALL AT STAKE. THIS ORDINANCE HELPS US HOLD THOSE VALUES TOGETHER, RATHER THAN TREATING THEM AS COMPETING PRIORITIES. FOR THOSE REASONS, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY.

>> THANK YOU. DANA ZELTNER. IF YOU CAN COME DOWN, YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES.

>> CAN YOU. >> CAN WE HAVE THE DOCUMENT CAMERA, PLEASE?

>> OH. I'M SORRY. WHAT? >> THERE YOU GO. >> OKAY.

>> HOPEFULLY IT'LL FLIP BACK AND FORTH THAT YOU ALL CAN LOOK AT WHILE I'M SPEAKING. I HAVE FOUR MINUTES. MINE'S LESS THAN THREE. I WANT TO ADDRESS THE PEOPLE AHEAD OF US. NOBODY MENTIONED THE MILLIONS OF APARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING UP EVERYWHERE. SO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISN'T QUITE THAT AGED, IS IT? PEOPLE THINK IT IS. THIS IS CUSTER'S LAST STAND FOR ME.

I FOLLOWED THIS ADU PROCESS, BEGINNING WITH THE DECIMATION OF THE HOUSE ACROSS MY STREET.

SINCE THE D, P AND Z AND NOW CITY COUNCIL SEEM TO THINK THAT MY PROTESTS ARE MERELY BECAUSE I WANT TO STOP DEVELOPMENT IN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS, THEY CONTINUE TO IGNORE MY CONCERNS.

[03:05:07]

HOPEFULLY YOU ARE NOT FOOLISH ENOUGH TO THINK NOT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE WHAT YOU SEE IS A VERY REAL POSSIBILITY THAT YOU WILL NOT HAVE A LEG TO STAND ON TO REFUSE THE PERMIT.

THIS MONSTROSITY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ADU BECAUSE IT FITS TWO OF SEVERAL CRITERIA TO CHOOSE FROM THAT MUST BE MET WHEN BUILDING A NEW UNIT. THIS ONE, AND I'M SORRY BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WOULD CONTAIN. THIS ONE. ITS ROOF LINE AND COLOR.

PERHAPS A CITY COULD TAKE THE TIME TO FIGURE OUT HOW NOT TO PANDER TO DEVELOPERS AND MAKE SURE THAT AN ADU IS BUILT THAT BLENDS WITH ACTUAL HOUSES AND NEIGHBORHOODS. PLEASE TABLE THIS UNTIL YOU CAN ASSURE YOUR CONSTITUENTS THAT WHEN WHAT GOES INTO THEIR NEIGHBOR'S BACKYARD CONFORMS TO THE AREA, I YOU KNOW, I MEAN, ALL I CAN SAY IS, IS THIS IS A DONE DEAL FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M DOING THIS BECAUSE EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOW VULNERABLE WITH WHAT

YOU'VE GOT IN THIS ORDINANCE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> LIAM WAKEFIELD CAN COME DOWN

AND GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS LIAM WAKEFIELD. I'M A 411 PONDER AVENUE. I'M COMING TO SUPPORT, COME TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS. AND THE MAIN REASON WHY IS BECAUSE ESPECIALLY THE THE BY RIGHT, THE TWO ADUS, THAT 1.5 MILE. AND I WOULD NOT MIND TO SEE A TWO MILE CIRCUS AS SORRY MATH WORDS BECAUSE EVERY BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS ADDS COST. AND THAT COST IS THEN EITHER ENOUGH TO STOP PEOPLE FROM BUILDING THE THAT ADU, OR IT'S PASSED ON TO THE RENTER TO PAY FOR THE EXTRA COST. IT'S TIME AND COST BECAUSE IT'S IT'S CONSTRUCTION. ANYTHING, ANY DELAY IN TIME, IT'S DELAY IN GETTING WORKERS, IT'S DELAYING GETTING MATERIALS. AND THAT IT EVEN IF IT'S NOT THAT, EVEN IF IT'S A MONTH THAT ADDS EASILY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF COST TO A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH FOR A SMALL ONE, BUT FOR A STANDARD ONE, EASILY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. AND IN THAT, AT LEAST IN THE 1.5 CIRCLE. I MEAN, EVEN IN THE TWO MILE CIRCLE, A LOT OF THOSE PLACES ARE GOING TO BE WHERE COLLEGE STUDENTS LIVE INSTEAD OF IT. IT HELPS FREE UP THE HOUSING DEMAND AND THUS MAKES IT MAKES LANDLORDS HAVE TO ACT BETTER. IF THERE'S MORE COMPETITION. IT'S SUPPLYING SIMPLE SUPPLY AND DEMAND, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO, ESPECIALLY ON THAT NORTHERN END. THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEW BUS ROUTE. THERE'S THREE BUS ROUTES

[03:10:04]

AND THEN WITH THAT TWO MILE CIRCLE, IT'LL BE EVEN CLOSER TO ROUTE THE NEW ROUTE FOUR COMING UP THIS UPCOMING YEAR IN AUGUST. AND THOSE THAT LIVE IN ADUS ARE MORE LESS LIKELY TO HAVE CARS.

AND WHICH IS WHICH IS GOOD BECAUSE WE WANT LESS PEOPLE DRIVING AROUND. IT'S SAFER FOR EVERYBODY. LESS POLLUTION. IT'S QUIETER, CARS ARE LOUD. BUT ALSO, FUNDAMENTALLY, THESE ADUS WILL ALSO BRING IN TAX REVENUE FOR THE CITY, BE IT SALES TAX FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY ABLE TO LIVE HERE, INSTEAD OF BEING FORCED TO MOVE OUT TO EITHER LIKE ARGYLE OR SANGER OR PROPERTY TAX, BECAUSE THOSE THAT HAVE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE ADUS ARE WORTH MORE, AND THEY THEN HAVE THE INCOME TO PAY THOSE TAXES. THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SPEAKER IS. BRAD BRAND. IS THAT RIGHT? BRAND. RICHARD. RICHARD,

SORRY. IF YOU GIVE YOUR NAME, YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL. MY NAME IS BRAD RICHTER. I LIVE AT 1804 LINDEN DRIVE. I SPEAK ON SUPPORT FOR THE ADOPTION OF THIS PROPOSAL, AND I APPRECIATE YOU SCHEDULING THIS PUBLIC HEARING. I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND BOTH OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT PLANNING DEPARTMENT HELD. THANK YOU, ANGIE, AND THANK YOU, JULIE, FOR VERY SUCCINCTLY SUMMARIZING THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK THAT THE ATTENDEES OF THOSE MEETINGS HAD. AND I HOPE THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO READ THROUGH, OR AT LEAST LOOK AT SOME OF THE NOTES FOR THOSE MEETINGS, BECAUSE WHAT THEY WERE ABLE TO DO WAS A REALLY COMMON SENSE SUMMARIZATION OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY WAS INTERESTED IN SEEING WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. MANY OF YOU RAN ON PLATFORMS OF AFFORDABILITY. YOU'VE HEARD FOR YEARS ABOUT RISING COSTS OF HOUSING AND COST OF LIVING, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE EASIEST SOLUTIONS THAT WE CAN GET TO ACHIEVE THAT NEED TO TO FIX THIS PROBLEM. AND IT IS A REALLY EASY AND SIMPLE FIX BY CLEANING UP THIS UNCLEAR CODE, BY MAKING IT SIMPLER TO UNDERSTAND FOR SMALL SCALE DEVELOPERS, IS A WAY TO INCREASE THE ACCESSIBILITY OF SOME OF THESE HOUSING MODELS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY WITHIN OUR PORTFOLIO OF HOUSING STOCK. SO I JUST WANT COUNCIL TO CONSIDER, EVEN WITHIN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS, WHERE YOU HEARD MISS HULTNER, FOR EXAMPLE, TALK ABOUT A NEIGHBORHOOD JUST NORTH OF UNT WHERE I SHARE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL, A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DEVELOPED OVER A LONG TIME, 20, 30 YEARS. THOSE HOMES WERE BEING BUILT.

WE HAVE NO NECESSARILY UNIFORM CHARACTER. I'D ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO ADAPT TO MEET THE NEEDS OF TODAY, AND THAT OUR CURRENT CODE REDUCES THAT ACCESSIBILITY BY OVERCOMPLICATING OR INCREASING BARRIERS THAT MIGHT BE UNNECESSARY TO MEET THAT NEED. SECONDLY, AND I JUST HAVE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. PART OF THIS WAS INTRODUCED DURING THIS HEARING, WHENEVER THAT WENT TO THEM. A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, THE TOWNHOME REQUIREMENT DOESN'T CONSIDER EVERY CURRENT RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE. SOME OF OUR R3 ONE, TWO, AND THREE DISTRICTS I BELIEVE ARE NOT UNDER THIS PROPOSAL. THAT INCLUDES MY NEIGHBORHOOD AGAIN, WHICH IS JUST NORTH OF UNT, SOUTH OF UNIVERSITY. IT ALSO HAS SOME OF THE LARGEST LOT SIZES IN THE CITY THAT HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSING WHERE WE REALLY NEED IT, WHERE IT'S CONVENIENT, WHERE IT'S ACCESSIBLE, WHERE TRANSPORTATION IS EASY TO ACCESS. THOSE ARE PLACES WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO BUILD NEW UTILITIES, WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO SERVICE NEW LINES. IT ALL IT DOES IS BUFF UP THE RESIDENT, THE LOCATIONS WHERE RESIDENTS CAN LIVE WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THEN SECONDLY, I WOULD ENCOURAGE POSSIBLY THIS GOES TO PLANNING STAFF TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRE PERMITTED ADU DESIGNS. OTHER CITIES WITHIN OUR REGION, INCLUDING LEWISVILLE, HAVE ALREADY PACKAGED THESE TOGETHER BASED OFF OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AARP. THAT ESSENTIALLY JUST PUTS TOGETHER A BUFFET OF OPTIONS WHERE THE CITY SAYS, WE LIKE WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE. WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT LOOK LIKE THIS. THIS COULD BE REALLY GENTLY NESTED WITHIN THOSE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND ALLOWS SMALLER SCALE DEVELOPERS OR RESIDENTS WHO WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THEIR LOT. A REALLY EASY WAY TO LOOK THROUGH A SLATE OF OPTIONS AND SAY, THIS WORKS FOR ME. PASS THAT OVER TO PLANNING AND WE GET A STAMP THERE. INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH A LONG AND COMPLICATED DESIGN PROCESS. SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME, AND I'D ENCOURAGE YOU TO ADOPT THIS

PROPOSAL. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN. CHRIS G ARE I. AM I CLOSE. YEAH.

[03:15:07]

YOU HAVE A DESIRE TO SPEAK PLEASE DO THAT. GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> SURE.

>> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS CHRIS GRIESHABER. I AM A DENTON.

>> RESIDENT AND I AM A HOMEOWNER IN ONE OF THESE CLOSE IN BLUE COLLAR, ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE IN QUESTION THAT CAN BE IMPACTED BY THIS, BY THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE DENTON DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL INFILL DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING THE ZONING CHANGES, TOWNHOUSE ADU DEVELOPMENT BY RIGHT, AND REMOVAL OF MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS. AS SOMEONE WITH ROOTS IN THE COMMUNITY AND FRIENDSHIPS HERE WITHIN THE CREATIVE ARTS INDUSTRY, I HAVE A LONG STANDING CONCERN REGARDING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY. BECAUSE OF THIS, I AM A SUPPORTER OF INCREASED URBAN DENSITY AND BELIEVE THAT ALLOWING THIS ADDITIONAL INFILL DEVELOPMENT IS INSTRUMENTAL TO SUPPORT THE VIBRANCY OF OUR CITY AND TO HELP IT GROW SUSTAINABLY AND TO MANAGE THAT GROWTH SUSTAINABLY. BY ALLOWING FOR THIS ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY AND INFILL DEVELOPMENT, WE CAN INCREASE OUR HOUSING CAPACITY THROUGH A VARIETY OF PROPERTY TYPES CLOSER TO THE URBAN CORE.

ADA'S IN PARTICULAR, ARE OFTEN HIGHLY COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. WE HAVE PLENTY OF PARKING, LAND, AND DEMAND, AND WE NEED THIS FLEXIBILITY TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP AND DELIVER THIS SORELY NEEDED HOUSING. CURRENTLY. CURRENTLY, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TENDS TO BE EXPENSIVE. LUXURY MARKET POSITION UNITS SPRAWLING FAR FROM THE CITY CENTER AND NOT SERVING THE NEEDS OF THIS CITY. I'M EXCITED FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR THOSE WHO RESIDE HERE, INCLUDING ME, TO GROW THEIR INVESTMENT IN THE CITY, CONTRIBUTE TO MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING. ADAPT AND CHANGE THE CITY WITH TIME, AND LOWER THE BARRIERS FOR ALL WHO WANT TO BE ABLE TO LIVE AND WORK HERE. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REGISTER MY CONCERN IN PARTICULAR ABOUT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT COMMENTARY FROM THIS EVENING, AND WISH TO SUPPORT THESE INITIATIVES WITHOUT SUP REQUIREMENTS, BECAUSE OTHER PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT TENDS TO NOT REQUIRE THEM, AND BUILDING CODE AND ZONING REVIEW ALREADY HELP CONTROL ENCROACHING DEVELOPMENT IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. BROAD REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENTS OF SPECIAL USE PERMITS OFTEN THROW UP SIGNIFICANT BARRIERS AND CHALLENGES TO ALLOWING HOMEOWNERS TO ACCESS WHAT THEY MIGHT FEEL IS THE BEST USE OF THEIR PERSONAL PROPERTY, POTENTIALLY NEGATING THE PURPOSE OF THIS ENTIRE INITIATIVE. THOSE ARE ALL MY

COMMENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. AND THEN LAUREN

PENN. YOU GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> GOOD EVENING COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS LAUREN PENN. I LIVE AT 2308 GEORGETOWN DRIVE.

I'VE CALLED DENTON HOME FOR 20 YEARS, AND I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THESE UPDATES TO OUR ADU ORDINANCE. THIS UPDATE IS ABOUT FLEXIBILITY, DIGNITY, AND SMART INCREMENTAL GROWTH. FIRST, THIS MATTERS DEEPLY FOR OUR AGING NEIGHBORS, SEVERAL ELDERS AND WIDOWS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ON MY STREET, THEY WANT TO DOWNSIZE, BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO LEAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THEY'VE ALREADY BUILT RELATIONSHIPS AND COMMUNITY. AND I TELL THEM WE DON'T WANT THEM TO LEAVE EITHER.

ADUS GIVE THEM OPTIONS TO AGE IN PLACE WITH INDEPENDENCE, SUPPORT AND DIGNITY, WHILE ALLOWING DENTON TO RETAIN THE PEOPLE WHO GIVE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS CONTINUITY AND CARE. ADUS ALSO SUPPORT YOUNGER HOMEOWNERS AND FAMILIES WHO ARE STILL RECOVERING FINANCIALLY FROM THE PAST 15 YEARS. IT PROVIDES SUPPLEMENTAL INCOME THAT COULD HELP COVER A MORTGAGE OR FUND EDUCATION, ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, 90% OF GEN Z AND MILLENNIAL RESPONDENTS SAID THEY'D PAY MORE TO LIVE IN A WALKABLE COMMUNITY. SO THIS IS JUST A REFLECTION ON THE TRENDS AND HOW OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOW OUR YOUNGER RESIDENTS ARE WANTING TO LIVE AND MOVE ABOUT OUR CITY. FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT, ADUS REPRESENT LOCAL INVESTMENT. THESE PROJECTS ARE TYPICALLY BUILT BY SMALL DENTON BASED CONTRACTORS, ELECTRICIANS, PLUMBERS, FRAMERS, AND SUPPLIERS, AND THAT MEANS DOLLARS STAY IN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY. INSTEAD OF FLOWING TO LARGE OUT-OF-TOWN DEVELOPERS ASSOCIATED WITH MAJOR APARTMENT PROJECTS. SPEAKING OF BIG APARTMENT COMPLEXES, A LOT OF DEBT KNIGHTS DON'T LIKE THEM, BUT WE DO NEED TO MAKE ROOM FOR MORE PEOPLE, FOR YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND FAMILIES AND RETIREES. AND SO ADDING HOUSING WITHIN OUR ALREADY CHARMING NEIGHBORHOODS WILL DETER THE NEED FOR THESE LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES. AND FINALLY, I WANT TO MENTION THAT MULTIGENERATIONAL LIVING IS ON THE RISE AS COST OF LIVING, CHILD CARE, AND ELDER CARE INCREASES. MANY PEOPLE LOOKING TO BUY A HOME ARE SEARCHING

[03:20:03]

SO IN MY MIND, THAT'S THAT'S HELPFUL WHEN WE THINK ABOUT ADDING THE TWO PER PROPERTY.

AND SO IF WE'VE GOT PLACES LIKE REDFIN AND ZILLOW, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE AN OPTION TO SEARCH FOR PROPERTIES, A CHECK BOX THAT SAYS HAS AN ADU ON SITE, IF DENTON ALREADY HAS A LOT OF THOSE, THAT'S ONLY GOING TO MAKE OUR CITY MORE ATTRACTIVE. I PERSONALLY DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE DESIGN OF ADUS AS FAR AS BLENDING IN WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I PERSONALLY LIKE THAT EACH PROPERTY OWNER CAN KIND OF MAKE THEIR HOME IN THEIR PROPERTY TO WHAT THEY WANT IT TO BE. I FIND THAT AS PART OF THE CHARM ABOUT DENTON. SO IN CONCLUSION, I THINK THIS ORDINANCE UPDATE SUPPORTS OUR SENIORS, WHICH I BELIEVE IS ABOUT 10% OF OUR POPULATION, OUR FAMILIES, OUR LOCAL BUSINESSES, AND OUR LONG TERM NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY. IT IS, IN MY OPINION, A THOUGHTFUL, INCREMENTAL STEP THAT MAKES DENTON STRONGER ECONOMICALLY,

SOCIALLY AND GENERATIONALLY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. STEFAN SHADE.

COME DOWN, GIVE YOUR NAME AND YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS STEPHEN SHADE. I AM GOING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR IN SUPPORT OF THIS CHANGE. JUST PERHAPS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON THE ADDRESSES. I OWN THE PROPERTY AT ON THE CORNER OF BELL AVENUE AND WOODLAND ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER. AND THERE IS WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED NOW AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. IT IS A AN APARTMENT THAT SITS ON THE TOP FLOOR OF A TWO STORY GARAGE, WHICH WAS BUILT, I THINK, IN 1950. SO IT'S BEEN THERE, AND I BRING THAT UP SIMPLY BECAUSE IT HAS A SEPARATE ADDRESS. THAT MAY BE BECAUSE IT'S ON THE CORNER AND BOTH ARE ACCESSIBLE, BUT THAT IS AN ADU THAT DOES HAVE A SEPARATE ADDRESS. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE POST OFFICE DEALS WITH THAT, BUT THAT'S HOW THAT WORKS. WE ALL KNOW NIMBY, NOT IN MY BACKYARD. WHAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING WITH SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE THIS IS. NOT IN YOUR BACKYARD. AND I FIND THAT TO BE TROUBLESOME WITH WITH HOW WE CHOOSE TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES THAT MANY PEOPLE HAVE BROUGHT UP SO ELOQUENTLY TONIGHT. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ECHO WHAT THEY SAID BECAUSE I THOUGHT THEY PUT IT SO BRILLIANTLY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. CHARLES. >> WHAT WOULD. >> OH THANK YOU. IF YOU CAN

GIVE YOUR NAME, YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND THANK YOU, COUNCIL. AND SORRY FOR THE BAD HANDWRITING, BUT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT MY SUPPORT FOR THE ADU UPDATE. I THINK IT PROVIDES A COMMON SENSE PATHWAY TO ALLOW FOR A MORE EFFICIENT USE OF THE LAND TO INCREASE THE SUPPLY THAT MATCHES THE DEMAND, AND THUS REDUCING THE PRICES FOR HOMES IN DENTON. I PERSONALLY FEEL LIKE A VICTIM OF IT. I LIVE IN SANGER AND I DO WISH TO LIVE IN DENTON. I WENT TO SCHOOL HERE. I REALLY LOVE THE COMMUNITY HERE AND I FIND MYSELF HANGING OUT HERE A LOT. AND PART OF THE REASON THAT I LIVE IN SANGER IS DUE TO A LOWER HOUSING COST. AND I THINK THAT BY INCREASING THE SUPPLY THROUGH THIS ADU UPDATE WOULD GIVE A COMMON SENSE PATHWAY TO MEET THE SUPPLY. I ALSO KNOW THAT IT PROVIDES HELP FOR INTERGENERATIONAL LIVING. I'VE GROWN UP WHERE GRANDMOTHERS HAVE LIVED IN MY FRIENDS BACKYARD AND THEY WERE ABLE TO STAY TOGETHER. I'VE ALSO KNOWN PEOPLE WHO HAD DOWN SYNDROME, WHO WERE ABLE TO LIVE WITH THEIR PARENTS AND THEIR ADULT AGE AND KEEPING THE FAMILIES TOGETHER. AND I THINK THAT ADUS PROVIDE A PATHWAY TO MAKE IT A MORE ACCESSIBLE HOUSING FOR EVERYONE IN A COMMON SENSE, WHILE ALSO MAKING A MORE EFFICIENT USE OF THE LAND. AND THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. LINDA MCADAMS. IF YOU CAN COME DOWN, GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES.

>> MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. I WANT TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROPOSAL AS IT IS CURRENTLY UNDERSTANDING THAT PEOPLE IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS BOUGHT THEIR HOUSES IN GOOD FAITH, THINKING IT WAS ONE THING. AND YOU'RE PROPOSING TO CHANGE IT TO SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT? MANY OF THOSE HOUSES HAVE. THEY DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEY HAVE NARROW STREETS. WHEN YOU ADD

[03:25:04]

>> THANK YOU. AND THEN AMANDA CONWAY, COME DOWN, GIVE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. MY NAME IS AMANDA CONWAY. I'M A DENTON RESIDENT, AND I ALSO SERVE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR. I SERVE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR DENTON AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION. I'M A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND I'M A FORMER RESIDENT OF DISTRICT ONE HERE. WHEN MY DAUGHTER AND I BECAME JUST A FAMILY OF TWO, I REALIZED THAT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WAS NOT THE RIGHT THING FOR US ANYMORE AND BEGAN LOOKING FOR AN ADU I HAD. I LIVED IN ONE AND A GRADUATE SCHOOL AND IT WAS GREAT. I GOT TO LIVE BEHIND SOMEONE'S FENCE, SO MY FAMILY FELT GREAT THAT I WAS IN SOMEONE ELSE'S BACKYARD. I DIDN'T HAVE THE VULNERABILITY OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR THE LARGE AREA OF A MAJOR APARTMENT COMPLEX, SO I STARTED LOOKING FOR THOSE THAT MIGHT SUIT ME AND MY DAUGHTER, AND THERE'S JUST NOT A SUPPLY. I SUPPORT

THIS, THANKS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES OUR CARDS. SO I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL READ THAT THERE ARE. TWO CARDS IN SUPPORT THAT DIDN'T MR. THREE IN SUPPORT THAT DIDN'T WISH TO SPEAK. AND SO I'LL INCLUDE THOSE

REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FIVE. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR ANGIE OR CHARLIE OR WHOEVER. HOW MANY HOW MANY MEETINGS DID STAFF HAVE ABOUT THIS?

[03:30:05]

>> WE HELD THREE PUBLIC MEETINGS, TWO IN PERSON AND ONE VIRTUALLY. AND THEN WE ALSO ESTABLISHED A DEDICATED, DISCUSSED DENTON WEB PAGE. AND ON THAT PAGE WE RAN OUR SURVEY

FOR ABOUT A MONTH. >> ROUGHLY SPEAKING, WHEN WAS THE FIRST MEETING? ABOUT THIS.

>> MID TO EARLY TO MID AUGUST. >> OKAY. BLESS YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. SOME MORE QUESTIONS.

GO AHEAD AND STAY RIGHT THERE. SURE. WHAT EXACTLY IS AN SUP. YES OF COURSE I KNOW THERE'S LOTS OF INTERESTING PEOPLE WATCHING. HELP ME OUT. WHAT IS AN SUP.

>> IN SUP IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. AND WHAT THAT IS, IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE OUR TABLE OF ALLOWED USES. WE HAVE PERMITTED USES. WE HAVE USES THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED. AND SUP IS SORT OF SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN WHERE WE RECOGNIZE THIS USE MAY BE APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION, BUT IT REQUIRES SOME ADDITIONAL REVIEW AND DETAIL. IT IS TREATED LIKE A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO IT DOES GO TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND THEN ULTIMATELY TO YOU ALL WHERE YOU

HAVE THE FINAL VOTE. >> SO I WANT TO GET AN SUP. IS THERE A COST ASSOCIATED WITH

THAT? >> YES. >> WHAT IS THAT COST? ON

AVERAGE. >> WE HAVE TWO TIERS OF SUPS. SO WHEN YOU HAVE A LARGER SCALE DEVELOPMENT FULL BLOWN SEP. THAT'S CLOSE TO $9,000. WE DO HAVE A SMALLER ONE AS WELL WHERE IT DOESN'T INVOLVE THAT DETAILED REVIEW. AND THAT'S $601. THESE ADUS WOULD FALL IN THAT $601 CATEGORY IS THERE WON'T BE ENGINEERING REVIEW AND THINGS LIKE THAT ASSOCIATED

WITH IT. >> OKAY. I WANT TO GET AN SUP. WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME BETWEEN THE TIME I WALK INTO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND START THE PROCESS TO A TIME? GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN COUNCIL GREENLIGHTS IT, I SEE I'M ASKING YOU TO GUESS.

>> YES, IT'S A VERY BIG IT DEPENDS AND IT IS DEPENDENT UPON THE QUALITY OF THE INITIAL SUBMITTAL. SO BEST CASE SCENARIO, YOU'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE TWO AND A HALF MONTHS TO GET TO CITY COUNCIL, AND THAT ASSUMES A PERFECT APPLICATION UPON FIRST SUBMITTAL. TYPICALLY YOU MIGHT BE LOOKING AT A 3 TO 4 MONTH TIME PERIOD TO REALLY GET THINGS INTO YOUR MEETINGS

AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT IT IS VERY SITUATIONAL. >> WHAT HAS BEEN THE THE PRESSURE ASSOCIATED ON STAFF WITH REQUESTS FOR ADU? IF YOU CAN QUANTIFY THAT, WOULD YOU SAY THERE'S GENERALLY THERE'S LOTS OF INTEREST OR THERE'S NOT A LOT OF INTEREST FROM PEOPLE WHO WANT TO HAVE ADUS ON THEIR PROPERTY? I WILL ACCEPT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DON'T KNOW BECAUSE

I'M PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT. >> IT IS NOT ONE OF OUR MORE REQUESTED REVIEW ITEMS. IT IS.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE SEE VERY FREQUENTLY. WE DO SEE THEM, BUT NOT LIKE WE DO OTHER

APPLICATION TYPES. >> BASED ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAYOUT OF THE CITY OF DENTON, WOULD YOU SAY THERE ARE A LOT OF PROPERTIES THAT CAN FIT A SECOND ADU DWELLING ON THEIR PROPERTY? I'LL ACCEPT, I DON'T KNOW, I'M PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT.

>> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT A LOT. I DO THINK THERE ARE. THERE ARE CERTAINLY GOING TO BE SOME LOTS THAT ARE SUITED TOWARDS IT. IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON, ON SEVERAL THINGS. SO BASED ON THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT YOU'RE IN, YOU HAVE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE PERCENTAGES. WE ALSO HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SETBACKS FROM PROPERTY LINES, BUT AS WELL AS FROM OTHER HABITABLE STRUCTURES. TYPICALLY DUELING HABITABLE STRUCTURES HAVE TO BE AT LEAST TEN FEET APART UNLESS YOU WANT TO BUILD A FIRE RATED WALL. THERE'S ALSO EASEMENTS AND FLOODPLAINS. AND SO THERE ARE A LOT OF ENCUMBRANCES THAT COULD MAKE THAT SECOND ADU MORE DIFFICULT TO BUILD. I WOULD THINK MOST LOTS COULD PROBABLY ACCOMMODATE ONE, BUT WHEN YOU GET INTO TWO,

YOU NEED A LOT WITH LARGE AREA THAT'S GENERALLY UNENCUMBERED. >> IS IT A A REASONABLE ASSUMPTION TO MAKE THAT IF THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE LARGE ENOUGH TO HOUSE A SECOND ADU MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE IN THE CITY CENTER, BUT MIGHT BE PUSHING TOWARD THE OUTSKIRTS OF TOWN BECAUSE OF LOT SIZE AND WHATNOT. IS THAT A REASONABLE ASSUMPTION TO MAKE?

>> IT'S IT'S GENERALLY PRETTY ACCURATE. I WOULD NOTE WE DO HAVE SOME OUTLIERS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, AS YOU WOULD ANYWHERE WHERE YOU DO HAVE LARGER THAN TYPICAL LOT SIZES, PARTICULARLY IN SOME OF OUR MORE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT GENERALLY THOSE LARGER LOTS ARE NOT

WITHIN THAT MAIN CORE. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR QUESTIONS. DO YOU WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO ME BEFORE AND LET HER SPEAK, OR LET ME GO AHEAD AND GET ALL THE WAY?

>> WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, BUT YEAH, YEAH, WHATEVER. YOU CAN DO WHATEVER'S FASTEST.

>> I'M I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. I APPRECIATE STAFF, STAFF GIVING PEOPLE THE TIME TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS. I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION.

AND I REALLY WANT TO THANK BRAND FOR HIGHLIGHTING THAT SOME CITIES ARE ALREADY AHEAD OF US AND GIVING PREFAB DESIGNS FOR ADUS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT'S ABSOLUTELY THE DIRECTION

[03:35:03]

RADIUS. >> YEAH. NO, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. SO THANK YOU.

REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO. >> THANK YOU. I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR ANGIE, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE. ANGIE, WE HAD FULL DISCLOSURE. I'M ON THE DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND ANGIE DIDN'T. WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT A LOT OF THESE ISSUES. AND IN IT, WE BROUGHT UP THIS IDEA OF A HEIGHTS. CURRENTLY, IF YOU OWN A PROPERTY, YOU CAN YOU CAN GO GET A BUILDING PERMIT AND BUILD UP TO THE TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. IS THAT

CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> SO IF I WANTED TO BUILD UP TO A SECOND STORY, I CAN ALREADY DO THAT WITH THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH JUST REGULAR BUILDING PERMITS. I DON'T HAVE TO GO GET AN SUV OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT.

CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> AND SO IF I HAD A GARAGE, I COULD, I COULD PUT A UNIT OF MY OWN, AN ATTACHED GARAGE, UP ON THE TOP OF IT, JUST AS AN ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE, JUST WITH A REGULAR STANDARD BUILDING PERMIT. RIGHT?

>> CORRECT. >> AND THEN THERE, IF THAT IF THAT ALREADY EXISTED, YOU, YOU AND YOU COULD YOU DID THE BUILDING PERMIT TO MAKE IT HAVE A SEPARATE ENTRANCE. THEN IT COULD BE A COMPLETELY CONFORMING USE AND THEN SUDDENLY TURN INTO AN ADU WITHOUT COMPLETELY BYPASSING ANY OF THESE RESTRICTIONS. IS THAT IS THAT ALSO CORRECT? WELL, I MEAN, NOT NOT COMPLETELY, BUT BYPASSING SOME OF THE HEIGHT CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT

FORWARD. SURE. BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAD AN. >> EXISTING HEIGHT. IF YOU HAD

PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED BUILDING. YES. >> AND REMIND ME WHICH

RESIDENTIAL OR WHICH DISTRICTS ALREADY ALLOW ADUS. >> ALL OF OUR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. SO RR ALL THE WAY THROUGH R7 PLUS THE MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT.

>> AND ALL WE WOULD BE DOING WITH THESE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT WERE ONE OF THE 3 OR 4

CHANGES WAS ADDING MD AND MR. >> CORRECT. BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE ALLOW TOWNHOMES,

DUPLEXES, AND TRIPLEXES. >> AND TO SOMETHING THAT COUNCILOR MCGEE ASKED. I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME EBBS AND FLOWS, AND WHEN ADUS REQUIRED PERMITS, I BELIEVE IN THE 2002

BUILDING CODE WE HAD, WE REQUIRED FOR ALL ADUS. >> YES.

>> AND DID WE? WHAT EFFECT DID WE SEE ON ON THE THE IMPORT OF OR THE BUILDING OF WITH THAT

REQUIREMENT OF AN SCP? >> I DON'T HAVE THE THE RAW NUMBERS ON THAT. I KNOW WITH THE UPDATE OF THE 2019 DDC, WE DID MAKE ADUS PERMITTED IN ANY DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. SINCE ABOUT 21 THROUGH 24, WE SAW ROUGHLY 45 PERMITS, WHICH I BELIEVE

[03:40:05]

WOULD BE MORE THAN WHAT WE WERE SEEING WITH THE SCP RATE. >> SO IN SOME SENSE, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY WE HAD FEW TO ALMOST NONE? AND AND SINCE RELAXING SOME OF THOSE CODES A LITTLE BIT AND ALLOWING THEM IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS AS AND AS COUNSELOR MCGEE, IN LINE WITH SOME OF WHAT'S COMING OUT OF THE STATE. WE'VE NOW SEEN THEM COMING BACK AGAIN.

>> WE HAVE CERTAINLY SEEN THEM MORE FREQUENTLY. YES. >> OKAY.

>> AND. THE LAST. YEAH. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. ANGIE. >> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FOUR.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR. >> YES, SIR. >> THAT WAS A RHETORICAL MAYOR COUNCIL. I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT WHEN WHEN ONE BUYS PROPERTY THAT YOU TAKE KIND OF A MENTAL PICTURE, MAYBE A REAL PICTURE OF WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS LIKE, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. AND, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, PEOPLE THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW THAT LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO YOU START CHANGING THINGS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD DOESN'T LOOK THE WAY IT DID WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT, THAT YOU EXPECTED IT TO. WAY TO LOOK WHEN YOU WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT. I WAS IMPRESSED WITH MISS ZOLTAN'S PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE OF THE LARGE OF THE LARGE HOUSE BEHIND A RELATIVELY SMALL HOUSE THAT JUST COMPLETELY CHANGED THE CHARACTER OF EVERYTHING. I'M A BIG I'M A BIG PROPERTY RIGHTS GUY, BUT IF SPEAKING ONLY FOR MYSELF, IF IF MY MY NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE OF ME BUILT A BUILT A HOUSE IN THE BACKYARD, IT IT WOULD, IT WOULD AT LEAST DISAPPOINT ME. IT MIGHT ANGER ME. SO I'M I'M I

CANNOT SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT ONE.

>> I JUST WANTED TO I JUST BRING A VISUAL OR SOME CLARIFICATION FOR THE RADIUS.

AS I UNDERSTAND, I DO REPRESENT ONE OF THE, YOU KNOW, DISTRICT ONE IS A COMMUNITY WHERE THERE IS A LOT OF HOMES THAT WERE BUILT IN THE 50S AND, YOU KNOW, IN THE 40S AND SUCH SOME SORT COTTAGE TYPE HOMES, AND THERE'S A LOT OF INFILL THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN THOSE AREAS. AND THIS NOTION OF THIS PARTICULAR RADIUS REALLY DOES DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE ARE NEIGHBORHOODS WHOSE BACKYARDS CAN HANDLE THESE TYPES OF TYPES OF DWELLINGS. AND SO ONCE YOU GO OUTSIDE OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, OUTSIDE OF THAT, THAT RADIUS THERE THAT WAS SHOWN, YOU'LL START SEEING SOME NEWER NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE OUR CITY IS GROWING OUTWARD. IT'S NOT GROWING INWARD. AND SO WE WERE NOTICING THAT THOSE LARGER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE COMING IN THOSE HOUSES ARE PRACTICALLY SITTING ON TOP OF EACH OTHER. A LOT OF HOA HOMES, AND IT'S MORE HOME, LESS YARD. SO, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THIS IS NOT GOING TO EVEN BE APPLICABLE. IT'S NOT GOING TO EVEN FIT. BUT TO ALLOW FOR, YOU KNOW, JUST START HERE WITH THIS RADIUS. IT REALLY DOES DEMONSTRATE THAT THE THE MINDFULNESS OF WHY WE WOULD WANT TO START THERE. AND I'M JUST OF COURSE, THINKING ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER AREAS CLOSER TO UNT, YOU KNOW, JUST SPACES WHERE YOU CAN PUT A LITTLE APARTMENT COMPLEXES UP, YOU KNOW, IN, IN INFIELD SPACES. SO I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, OF COURSE, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS. I WANT TO, YOU KNOW, MEET THAT MISSING MIDDLE. WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT. WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT. WE SAID WE WERE A COMMUNITY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GIVE EVERYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY. AND IF WE CAN GIVE EVERYONE AN OPPORTUNITY TO FIND THEIR SPACE, TO FIND THEIR PLACE, AND WE WILL HAVE DONE

WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO, THANK YOU. >> MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> ANGIE, I HAVE JUST ONE QUESTION FOR YOU. IF I WANTED TO BUILD A SHED OF SOME SORT IN MY BACKYARD, WOULD THAT REQUIRE AN SCP LIKE A TOOL SHED OR STORAGE SHED?

>> YEAH. NO. >> WHAT IF IT'S TWO STORIES? DOES IT NEED AN SCP?

>> NO. >> WHAT IF I BUILD TWO? TWO SHEDS?

>> NO. >> NO SVP. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO MOST PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF 40 ARE PRICED OUT OF OWNING A HOME. I'M ONE OF THE RARE FOLKS THAT GOT LUCKY ON MY TIMING. AND I AM UNDER 40, AND I HAPPEN TO OWN A HOME, BUT MOST PEOPLE ARE PRICED OUT AND THAT'S THE REALITY. SO WE'VE GOT A LOT OF FOLKS OUT THERE WHO ARE RENTING, AND ONE OF MY BIG CAMPAIGN THINGS WAS THAT RIGHT NOW, DENTON OFFERS MOSTLY TWO HOUSING OPTIONS. WE WE OFFER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND WE OFFER LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES. THAT'S MOSTLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN

[03:45:03]

FOR YOUR PATIENCE. >> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT SIX. >> THANK YOU. I'LL TRY TO GO FAST. COUNCILPERSON JESTER. HI. FIRST OF ALL, A QUICK THANK YOU TO NOT ONLY THE STAFF FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT THEY HAVE PUT IN, IN REVIEWING WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING AND COMING UP

[03:50:04]

FORWARD TONIGHT. THANK YOU. >> YEAH. THANK YOU. AND I'M GOING TO JUST SAY WHAT I KNOW SO I DON'T HAVE TO ASK IN QUESTION FORMAT SO I CAN GET THROUGH IT FASTER. I DO I DO WANT TO SAY PICKING UP WHERE COUNCILMEMBER JESTER LEFT OFF IT. I FIND IT ODD THAT TO REQUIRE SUP SOMEHOW HAS BEEN COUCHED AS SAYING NO, AND I FIND IT ODD THAT EVERYONE THAT TALKED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY DID NOT OFFER A PROHIBITION ON PRICING OR REQUIREMENT ON PRICING, ESPECIALLY AFTER JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO. WE THIS BODY PASSED A DENTON HOUSING TAX CREDIT ISSUE WHERE WE MEASURE AGAINST THE AM I. THIS BODY SAID, HEY, IF YOU'RE BUILDING A NEW APARTMENT AND YOU WANT TAX CREDITS, WE HAVE ESTABLISHED AND UNDERSTAND THE PRICING THAT IS AFFORDABLE. SO EVERYONE THAT CAME UP HERE IS WILLING TO HAVE ADUS, AND EVERYONE THAT SPOKE IN SUPPORT IS ALL OF A SUDDEN WILLING FOR ADUS WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED TO REQUIRE FUNDING, WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED TO REQUIRE PRICING, NO AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT. YOU CAN CHARGE WHATEVER THE HECK YOU WANT. AND I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT EVERY EXAMPLE IS POSITIVE. I GOT AN AILING GRANDMA, I GOT THIS, I GOT THAT, THERE'S NO NEGATIVE, WHICH IS THE REALITY THAT IT DOESN'T CUT ONE WAY. WE HAVE A HABITAT HOUSE THAT I GET MORE COMPLAINTS ABOUT BECAUSE ADMINISTRATIVELY THEY GOT REQUIRED. THEY GOT ACCEPTED A TWO CAR DRIVEWAY AND THEY HAVE SIX CARS AND ONE IN THE BACKYARD. SO NOT ALL THESE THINGS WORK OUT WELL, BUT NO ONE MENTIONS THAT. AND WE ALL GET THE EMAILS. WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT SOMEHOW THAT GETS OMITTED. AND AGAIN IT'S NOT NO, IT'S WE SHOULD WE REQUIRE. MATTER OF FACT, ON OUR WEBSITE IT SAYS IF YOU WANT TO BE CLICK THIS BUTTON, IF YOU

[03:55:07]

BUT IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE HAVE A NEW MULTIFAMILY UNITS, NEW MULTIFAMILY CONSTRUCTION, 2488 CURRENTLY PER OUR WEBSITE, NEW MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN DEVELOPMENT 2674. SO IMAGINE EVERYTHING YOU SEE AND THEN ADD BASICALLY 5000 TO THAT. AND AND SO THE AND IT'S UNDENIABLE THAT THE UNITS WE'RE HEARING, CITY MANAGER AND I AND OTHERS ARE HEARING REGULARLY FROM APARTMENTS THAT ARE STRUGGLING 20%, 40%. AND SO THERE IS AND THEY'RE DROPPING THE PRICES. MY NEIGHBORS WERE ABLE TO GO RENT A HOUSE BECAUSE HOUSE RENTAL PRICES ARE DOWN. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT WE HAVE A SHORTAGE. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE SEEING THE MARKET RESPOND TO TOO MUCH, TOO MUCH STOCK. AND SO I BE WELCOME. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO TELL ME HOW WE'RE GOING TO GUARANTEE THESE ADUS ARE AFFORDABLE. I DIDN'T HEAR ANY COMMENTS ON THAT. NONE.

NO RESTRICTIONS, NO REQUIREMENTS. SO YES, YOU CAN BUILD IT CHEAPER. OKAY. YOU PASSING THAT ON? ARE YOU YOU YOU WRITTEN AT AN AIRBNB AND MAKING A FORTUNE. WE DON'T KNOW.

THERE'S NO RESTRICTIONS. WE DON'T WE DON'T CARE. AND SO THAT THAT TO ME IS IF YOU'RE SAYING IT'S THERE'S AN AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT PUT THAT IN WRITING. AND THEN I CAN'T IMAGINE A COUNCIL THAT WOULD NOT WANT TO THEN SAY, HEY NEIGHBOR, YOU AT LEAST HAVE A RIGHT TO BE NOTIFIED. WE MAKE THEM DO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. WE DO ALL THESE THINGS FOR NOTIFICATIONS, FOR TRANSPARENCY. SO I'M REALLY SHOCKED THAT THAT'S NOT AGAIN, IT'S NOT. NO, IT'S JUST SAYING YOU SHOULD TELL YOUR NEIGHBOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND IT'S NOT A SHED I HAVE I HAVE A NINE YEAR OLD DAUGHTER THAT RUNS IN THE BACKYARD. WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT SHEDS. WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT PEOPLE WALKING THE STREETS. YOU TALKED ABOUT A SAFETY COMPONENT. OTHER PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT A SAFETY COMPONENT. WELL, IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE DON'T LIVE IN SHEDS, PEOPLE LIVE IN HOUSES. AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF INSTANCES OF PEOPLE RECORDING AND DRONES AND ALL THE CONCERNS. YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE SAFETY CONCERNS. AS A CITY GROWS, IT'S NO LONGER A SMALLER CITY WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THOSE THINGS. SO. AND THEN I DO I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE STAFF COME UP HERE. BUT YOU GOT TO JUST TRUST ME ON THIS. IF YOU HAVE AN EXISTING HOME AND YOU'RE GOING TO ADD A SECOND STORY STRUCTURE TO THAT, THE COST WOULD STUN AN ELEPHANT. THAT'S NOT EVEN A REAL THING. LIKE, I GET IT. THE STAFF ANSWERED THE QUESTION AND THEY WERE SUPER NICE. THAT'S NOT A REAL THING. NO, NO ONE DOES THAT. AND TO BE AFFORDABLE, YOU HAVE TO. IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT IT HAS. YOU GOT TO REWIRE IT. YOU GOT TO I MEAN THAT YOU GOT TO THE FLOOR IS THE ROOF. THE CEILING IS NOT WEIGHT BEARING. SO THEN YOU GOT TO DO ALL THOSE THINGS THAT THAT'S NOT A REAL EXAMPLE. IT SOUNDS GREAT, BUT IT'S NOT A REAL EXAMPLE. AND SO I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT SIMPLE. YES. BUT IN AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD YOU NEED TO LET YOUR NEIGHBOR KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING SO THAT THEY CAN BE HEARD. THAT'S THE SIMPLE THING. SO MY MOTION IS TO APPROVE EVERYTHING THAT. P AND Z IS PUT FORWARD WITH THE ADDITION OF EXPANDING THE RADIUS TO TWO MILES AND REQUIRING AN SP ACROSS THE BOARD FOR ADUS. SO THAT'S MY AND IN THAT, IN THAT RADIUS. SO EVERY AS IT PERTAINS TO THIS, WHAT'S PUT BEFORE US, THAT RADIUS, IT SAYS RIGHT NOW YOU NEED AN SUV FOR TWO ADUS. I'M SAYING YOU NEED AN SUV FOR 1 OR 2 ADUS. AND THAT IS TO GIVE YOUR NEIGHBORS IN THESE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. THAT'S

MY MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. >> YEAH. YOU GOOD? ARE YOU GOOD WITH THAT? I JUST WASN'T SURE IF YOU WERE OKAY WITH IT. OKAY. GOT IT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS, AS INDICATED ON THE ON THE SCREEN HERE. DISCUSSION REPRESENTATIVE FROM

DISTRICT FIVE. >> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, MAYOR, YOU SAID WITHIN THE RADIUS YOU WANT AN SUV FOR THE FIRST AND THE SECOND. ADU. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> YEAH. THAT. SO I WILL BE I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THAT

[04:00:02]

SO I'LL BE I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS. AND I JUST WANT TO REMIND US THIS IS ABOUT MAKING THINGS MORE AFFORDABLE. SO, MAYOR, LISTENING TO WHAT YOU SAID, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU SAID. YOU'RE ACTUALLY RIGHT. NO ONE OFFERED ANY TYPE OF SOLUTION. SO LET ME OFFER THE SOLUTION. WE ARE THE COUNCIL. WE ARE THE BOARD OF THE CITY. WE SET THE RULES. SO MY HOPE IS THAT THIS MOTION WILL FAIL. AND RIGHT AFTER THIS, I WILL MAKE AN AMENDED MOTION TO WHAT PNC ORIGINALLY SENT US WITH THE CAVEAT THAT IF IF AN ADU IS RENT CONTROLLED OR IS RENT CONTROLLED TO SOME DEGREE, THEN THEY CAN BYPASS THE COST OF THE SCP. THAT'S A WAY WHERE WE CAN MEET THE NEEDS, BUT ALSO NOT SHIFT AS MUCH RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PERSON WHO IS TRYING TO PAY TO GET AN SCP ON. SO I GUESS I GUESS WE'LL WE'LL GO WITH THE MOTION AND THEN WE CAN TALK

ABOUT THE LEGALITIES OF THAT. >> YES. SOUNDS GOOD, MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> SO THANK YOU FOR COUNCIL MEMBER MCGEE FOR SUMMARIZING WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE THE RADIUS.

WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHAT HAPPENS OUTSIDE THE RADIUS IN THE CURRENT MOTION. SO SCP FOR ALL ADUS IN THE RADIUS, FIRST AND SECOND, WHAT HAPPENS OUTSIDE THE RADIUS?

>> IF THAT'S NOT BEFORE US? SO. COME ON UP. >> SO RIGHT NOW, THE FIRST SUSA1 SP IS OR. SORRY, ONE BACKYARD COTTAGE DOES NOT REQUIRE AN SCP RIGHT NOW.

>> I'M SORRY. SO I DID JUST WANT TO CLARIFY REAL QUICK AS IT IS TODAY IN THE CITY, ONE ADU IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN ALL OF OUR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. IN THE INITIAL BACKUP OR IN THE INITIAL AMENDMENTS BROUGHT TO PNC, RETAINED THAT ONE ADU IS PERMITTED PER LOT. THE PNC AMENDMENT WENT ON TO SPECIFY THAT YOU MAY HAVE AN ADDITIONAL ONE ANYWHERE IN THE CITY WITH THAT SUP, UNLESS YOU'RE WITHIN THIS MILE AND A HALF BUFFER, IN WHICH CASE THE SCP WOULD BE WAIVED. BUT AS IT IS TODAY IN THE CITY, ANY RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY BY RIGHT CAN HAVE ONE ADU. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CLARIFIES ANYTHING.

>> OUTSIDE. >> SO WHAT'S WHAT'S BEEN WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED TO US TODAY IS

THIS AMENDMENT IN THE RADIUS AREA? YES, YES. >> SO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AS PART OF THIS PNC WOULD WOULD BE THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND WITH THAT SCP, BUT GIVING A

PASS FOR THE SCP FOR WHAT YOU SEE IN BLUE, RIGHT. >> SO THAT'S WHY I READ IT, TO SAY THAT YOU DIDN'T COME BEFORE US AND SAY YOU DIDN'T GO TO PNC AND SAY, OR YOU, MAYBE YOU DID,

BUT BEFORE US, THE CHANGE IS IN THE RADIUS. YES. >> I'M SORRY. MAYBE I COULD HAVE BEEN MORE CLEAR IN THE INITIAL PRESENTATION. THE CHANGE THAT PNC RECOMMENDED WAS RELATED TO THIS RADIUS. AND THE SECOND ADU. WITHOUT PNC CHANGE, WE STILL ALLOW ONE ADU PER LOT.

>> YES. AND SO THAT'S WHY I FOCUSED IN ON THE I'M HAPPY, I'M HAPPY. I'M HAPPY TO EXPAND IT OUT BEYOND WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED. BUT FOR ME, I WAS JUST RESPONDING TO THE CHANGES THAT WERE BROUGHT BEFORE US. YEAH, THAT THAT'S WHAT I WAS RESPONDING TO. I HAVE I HAVE MY CONCERNS ARE THE SAME. AND I'M TRYING TO BE AS. CONSIDERATE AS POSSIBLE. RIGHT. AND SO THOSE THAT UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY CAN HAVE AN ADU NOW, I DON'T I'M NOT INTERESTED IN CHANGING THAT TODAY. YES. I'M GOING TO FOCUS IN AND MY PEERS CAN CORRECT ME, BUT I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO FOCUS IN AND SAY 1 OR 2 IN THE TWO MILE RADIUS, BECAUSE IT'S EXPANDING THE BLUE THAT YOU HAVE HERE. SO IT EXPANDS THAT 1 OR 2. AND THAT EXPANDED AREA WOULD REQUIRE SCP.

>> NO. >> THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE IS I THINK WE DON'T CURRENTLY REQUIRE AN SCP FOR JUST ONE. AND SO THIS WOULD MAKE THAT MORE RESTRICTIVE AND COULD POSSIBLY CREATE SOME NON-CONFORMITIES, IN WHICH CASE WE ARE NOT POSTED AND WE'D HAVE

TO GO BACK AND DO A 9 TO 9. AND SO. >> LET ME LET OTHER PEOPLE

[04:05:03]

MAYOR PRO TEM, ARE YOU GOOD? >> ARE YOU? NO. NOT YET. OKAY. SO. SO YOUR MOTION RIGHT NOW IS INSIDE OF THE CIRCLE. AN SCP WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE FIRST, WHICH IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN CURRENT, AND THE SECOND, WHICH WOULD BE A NEW THING. AND I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS

OUTSIDE OF THE CIRCLE. >> YEAH, I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO TALK TO MACK WHILE YOU'RE AGAIN, IT'S THE CONCEPT IS THIS YOU SHOULD TELL YOUR NEIGHBORS IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A HOUSE THAT LOOKS IN THEIR BACKYARD. SO THAT'S WHATEVER THAT IS. THAT'S IN SUMMARY, AS

YOU PREPARE YOUR COMMENTS. >> ARE YOU ARE YOU DONE? YOU DONE I JUST WANT I DON'T WANT I

DON'T. >> WANT TO I WANT TO KEEP IT FLOWING AND I WILL CIRCLE BACK.

>> SURE YOU CAN. I'M STILL NOT CLEAR ON ON THE MOTION, BUT THEN LET ME CIRCLE BACK.

>> LET ME COME BACK TO YOU. OKAY. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO.

>> YEAH, I, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING ANY OF THAT. AND I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE, BUT IT'S.

WE ARE ADDING RESTRICTIONS. WE'RE TAKING AWAY WHAT IS ALREADY HOMEOWNERS RIGHTS TO DO IN THE CITY OF DENTON WITH THE WITH THE MAYOR'S MOTION. AND THEN WE CREATE A SECOND CLASS OF CITIZENS, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCILOR MCGEE WAS PROTESTING AGAINST HAVING THESE DIFFERENTIAL RULES SUCH THAT EVERYONE OUTSIDE THE CIRCLE CAN FREELY DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, WHICH IS THE CURRENT STATUS QUO. AND WE'RE WE'RE DOUBLING DOWN ON RESTRICTIONS IN THE MAIN BODY OF THE CITY. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S CONFUSION OR THIS IS WHAT THE MAYOR INTENDS, BUT I WON'T BE SUPPORTING ADDING RESTRICTIONS IN THAT WAY ANYWHERE IN THE CITY OF DENTON

FOR FOR THE FIRST ADU. >> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT SIX.

>> THANK YOU. I'M JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A FIRST ADU IN THE ENTIRE CITY IS ALLOWABLE BY RIGHT, WITHOUT ANY KIND OF SOUP. WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS FOR A SECOND, ADU OR WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR THE RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS A SECOND ADU HAS TO GO THROUGH AN SUP, EXCEPT FOR WHAT IS IN THE RADIUS HERE, WHICH IS NO SOUP. THEREFORE, AS FAR AS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN OUTSIDE OF THE RADIUS, YOU'RE STILL ALLOWED, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND. STILL ALLOWED ONE ADU BY RIGHT. BUT THE SECOND YOU WOULD NEED TO GET AN SUP

FOR THAT SECOND. >> THAT'S NOT THE MOTION. >> I KNOW.

>> BUT I. >> THINK WE'RE NOT ON THE SAME PAGE. AND SO I JUST WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY. SO I AM ALSO CLEAR ON ONE WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON AND TWO, WHAT THE MOTION IS. SO I

HOPE THAT WAS HELPFUL. I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT. >> YEAH. THANK YOU. AND CAN WE CAN YOU CLARIFY IS THE PARKING PARKING STANDARD DOWNTOWN DIFFERENT THAN EVERYWHERE ELSE

IN THE CITY. >> IN MD WHEN IT'S NON NONRESIDENTIAL THERE'S NOT A

MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT OKAY. >> SO SO WE'RE USED TO THAT. WE KNOW HOW TO HANDLE THAT. DIFFERENT ZONES GET DIFFERENT THINGS.

>> WE DO. >> YES. YEAH. THANK YOU. SO MY MY QUESTION IS THOUGH COME BACK.

SO MY QUESTION IS ON THE. NOTICE FOR THIS. DID WE MAIL ANY NOTICES FOR THIS MEETING.

>> NO. THIS WAS DONE THROUGH THE WEBSITE AS WELL AS THE NEWSPAPER. THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE ZONING CHANGE THAT ADVANCES HOUSING OPTIONS WITHIN THE CITY. SO WE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF SOME OF THOSE PROVISIONS WITHIN STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS THAT NOTIFICATION.

>> SO PEOPLE AFFECTED IN THIS AREA NOT LIKE NORMALLY WE'LL SEND OUT NOTICE. OH BY THE WAY HERE'S A HEARING PUT OUT SIGNS. DID WE DO WHAT ALL. AND I HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT IT BEFORE BUT NO PHYSICAL SIGNS WENT OUT SAYING IN THIS AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADUS. WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T MAIL TO PEOPLE LIKE WE WOULD DO IF WE WERE DEVELOPING SOMETHING A DEVELOPER WOULD DO AND SEND OUT AND SAY, HEY, TWO 200 FOOT NOTICE. OH, BY THE WAY, THINGS ARE CHANGING. WE DIDN'T DO ANY

OF THOSE THINGS. >> CORRECT. AND THAT'S TYPICAL OF A TEXT AMENDMENT VERSUS A ZONING CHANGE WHERE WE'RE CHANGING THE ENTIRE ZONING DISTRICT. WE'RE AMENDING THE

TEXT AND THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS. >> RIGHT. YEAH. AND SO I JUST I JUST THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION, AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHO WE'RE REPRESENTING, PEOPLE HEAR VOICES, CONSIDERATION, FEEDBACK, ALL THOSE THINGS I WOULD I WOULD HAZARD A GUESS. ONE LAW WOULDN'T LET US TWO WE WOULDN'T WE WOULDN'T BE OKAY WITH JUST A SIMILAR NOTICE FOR SOMETHING BEING DEVELOPED. WE WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO MAIL AND DO ALL THOSE THINGS. SO THAT SAID, I TAKE YOUR POINT, COUNCILMEMBER JESTER, MAYOR PRO TEM AND I AND

[04:10:05]

MAYOR PRO TEM. >> LET ME REPEAT. JUST MAKE SURE I GOT IT. I THINK I'M ON BOARD NOW WITH SO NO SECOND ADU EVEN WITH AN SUP OUTSIDE OF THE RADIUS, IS THAT THE MOTION?

>> JUST SUP. >> FOR ANY SECOND ADU. >> IN THE CITY.

>> OH, SO YOU GOT RID OF THE CIRCLE? >> YEAH. FOR THE.

>> NO, I DIDN'T GET RID OF THE CIRCLE. OH, NOPE. >> WE'RE NOT THERE YET.

>> WELL. >> CAN I PROPOSE SOMETHING AND SEE IF IT HELPS?

>> YES. >> WHAT IF WE GOT RID OF THE CIRCLE? IGNORE THE CIRCLE ANY SECOND. ADU WOULD REQUIRE AN SUP ACROSS THE CITY. JUST IGNORE THE CIRCLE.

>> SURE LOVE IT. THAT WORKS. YEAH. LOVE IT. OKAY, GOOD. >> YES.

>> THAT SIMPLIFIES IT A LITTLE BIT. OKAY. >> YEAH.

>> GOOD. >> THANK YOU. >> MOVING I MEAN SECONDER YOU OKAY. SO FOR THOSE TRACKING ALONG IT WOULD BE FIRST ADU IS THAT THAT REGULATION WOULD STAY BECAUSE AND MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS REAL SIMPLE. I DON'T WANT TO SEND MAIL TO EVERYBODY IN THE CITY AND HAVE ANOTHER HEARING AND HAVE THIS CONVERSATION THAT IT'S ALREADY AN UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU HAVE THOSE THOSE RIGHTS. OKAY. THE SECOND ADU ACROSS THE CITY, REGARDLESS OF LOCATION, YOU WOULD NEED A SUP. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE US. THE SECOND IS AGREED. SO

REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT FIVE YOU HAD A FLOOR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL STILL BE I WILL STILL BE RISING IN OPPOSITION OF THIS. I WILL NOT BE VOTING FOR THIS MOTION BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT DOES NOT DO WHAT THIS WAS DESIGNED TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND THAT IS TO MAKE HOMEOWNERSHIP MORE ATTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE. SO, MR. CITY ATTORNEY, GOING WITH WHAT I SAID, IS THERE A WAY TO PROPOSE SOME TYPE OF RENT CONTROL STRUCTURE IN LIEU OF

HAVING TO DO AN SUP LEGALLY? >> IN LIEU OF THE SUP IS ALREADY A CONVOLUTED QUESTION, BUT ADDING THAT, I GUESS I WOULD SAY THIS THERE'S THERE'S TWO KIND OF CONFLICTING ISSUES GOING ON IN THE STATE. SO TEXAS DOESN'T ALLOW FOR INCLUSIONARY ZONING, WHICH IS IMPOSING RENT CONTROLS BASICALLY AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU HAVE THE CONCEPT OF A DENSITY BONUS. YOU ARE NOW ALLOWING POTENTIALLY SOMEONE TO HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN THEY HAVE TODAY. AND THE STATE DOES ALLOW FOR THAT KIND OF INCENTIVIZED CONCEPT AND TIME. BUT WHERE I DON'T HAVE REAL GOOD ANSWER RIGHT NOW IS WE REALLY HAVE TO DIG INTO IT WOULD NOT BE DONE TONIGHT. WE WOULD HAVE TO DIG INTO WHERE THIS FALLS IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO

AND HOW THAT WOULD WORK. >> YOU'RE KILLING ME, MACK. OKAY, SO YOU SAID THAT THE STATE STATE RULES DO ALLOW FOR SOME TYPE OF INCENTIVE FOR PEOPLE TO DO INFILL DEVELOPMENT,

SUCH AS BUILDING A SECOND ADU. CORRECT. >> POTENTIALLY. YEAH. YEAH.

THAT'S RIGHT. THE DENSITY BONUS. >> BASICALLY I COLLEAGUES I WILL STILL BE I'LL STILL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS BECAUSE BECAUSE OF THE THE UNCLARITY HERE, WE'RE STILL REQUIRING AN SUP. THE SUP IS THE IS THE ISSUE. IF WE WANT TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORS AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR PROPERTY, WE CAN SIMPLY ACCOMPLISH THAT THROUGH RULES. WE CAN SIMPLY

[04:15:01]

>> REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FOUR. >> THANK YOU. AND I HATE BEATING THIS HORSE ANYMORE. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR MOTION HAS NO EFFECT ON THE ON THE FIRST AUXILIARY DWELLING UNIT

BY RIGHT? >> CORRECT. THAT IS THE CURRENT THAT IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TO

PEOPLE TODAY. >> YOUR MOTION HAS NO EFFECT ON THAT. THAT ALONE. CORRECT.

THANK YOU. >> YES. REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT TWO.

>> THANK YOU. I KNOW IT TOOK US A WHILE AND THERE WAS SOME BACK AND FORTH AS PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD THINGS, BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MAYOR'S RESOLUTION. I, I'M, I'M

SUPPORTIVE OF WHERE WE FINALLY GOT TO. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE BEFORE WE.

SO THE MOTION BEFORE US IS MAINTAINING THE STATUS OF THE ABILITY FOR ANYONE IN THE CITY.

DIDN'T HAVE A SINGLE ADU BY RIGHT. AND THEN THE SECOND ADU REQUIRE A SUPP PROCESS. THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE US. AND THEN IT CAPTURES ANY OTHER PROVISIONS THAT THE PNC INCLUDED IN THERE.

I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH ALL THOSE PARTICULARS FROM DISTRICT TWO. IS THAT. YES,

SIR. >> THANK YOU. AND I'M JUST ADDING THAT ALSO THE OTHER THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE ALSO TO BE, YOU KNOW, WE BEAT THIS ONE TO DEATH, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE

ANY DISAGREEMENT ON THE OTHERS. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> OKAY.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> YES. I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT'S IN YOUR MOTION.

>> YES, SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION. THANK YOU FOR THE HELP. MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBER JESTER AND EVERYONE. COUNCILMAN BYRD GOOD.

GOOD CONVERSATION. JUDGE HOLLAND, I'M SURE YOU DID SOMETHING. THANK YOU. LET'S

VOTE. >> BRUTAL. >> AND THAT PASSES 6 TO 1. THAT

[B. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, regarding a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from the Agriculture Future Land Use Designation to the Regional Mixed Use Future Land Use Designation on approximately 16.524 acres generally located north of West University Drive (US 380), approximately 2,800 feet west of Golden Hoof Drive, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; adopting an amendment to the City’s Official Future Land Use Map; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing for a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (4-2) to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval by Commissioner Riggs and second by Commissioner Ketchersid. (CA25-0003a, Hickory Grove Multifamily, Mia Hines)]

UNIVERSITY AND APPROXIMATELY 282,800FT WEST OF GOLDEN DRIVE. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. THIS ITEM IS ACCOMPANYING THE FOLLOWING MOBILITY PLAN ITEM. WE HAVE OPENED THESE UP AT THE SAME TIME IN THE PAST. WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THAT THIS EVENING AS

WELL? >> YEAH. THAT THAT SEE. >> THE MOBILITY PLAN.

>> YEAH OKAY. MAKE SURE. YES OKAY. THIS IS AND ALSO I'LL CALL ITEM C MP A250004. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS, REGARDING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE THOROUGHFARE MAP OF THE 20 2022 2022 MOBILITY PLAN, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE REMOVING THE FUTURE EXTENSION

OF C WOLF ROAD BETWEEN US 380 AND JACKSON ROAD. >> ALL RIGHT AGAIN, MIA HINES,

[C. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, regarding a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Thoroughfare Map of the 2022 Mobility Plan, including but not limited to removing the future extension of C Wolfe Road between US 380 and Jackson Road. The general location of the target road is located west of Future Loop 288 western extension, and north of US 380 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; adopting an amendment to the City’s official Mobility Plan; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (6-0) to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval by Commissioner Riggs and seconded by Commissioner Ketchersid. (MPA25-0004b, Hickory Grove Multifamily, Sahar Esfandyari).]

[04:20:05]

ADDITIONALLY, THE REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING WITHIN THE CITY AND IN THE CITY'S ETJ, AND I HAVE SOME SLIDES THAT FOLLOW TO SORT OF EXHIBIT THAT. AND THEN FINALLY THE REGIONAL MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT AT THE HIGHEST DENSITY ALONG REGIONAL CORRIDORS, SUCH AS WEST UNIVERSITY DRIVE US 380. SO THE AREA HERE, WHAT I'M TRYING TO SHOW WITHIN THIS SLIDE IS THE REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'VE SEEN WITHIN THIS AREA, THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND WITHIN THE CITY'S ETJ. SO THIS YELLOW AREA HERE ARE THE IMAGE. TO THE LEFT IS AN AERIAL FROM 2021. THE IMAGE TO THE RIGHT IS AN AERIAL FROM 2025. WE SEE A LOT OF MUDS BEING DEVELOPED, MOSTLY AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ETJ ONE AND TWO. WE ALSO SEE A LOT OF INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE AND BUSINESS COMMERCE BEING DEVELOPED WITHIN THIS AREA SOUTH OF UNIVERSITY. AND THEN, OF COURSE, I'M SURE WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE RASOR RANCH AREA ON THE NORTH SIDE OF I-35, BRINGING IN ROOFTOPS AND RESIDENCES AND ULTIMATELY CONTRIBUTING TO THE GROWTH IN THIS AREA. SO WE ARE SEEING CHANGES FROM MOSTLY LARGELY UNDEVELOPED LAND WITHIN THE CORRIDOR IN THE AREA WEST OF I-35. AND THIS IS IN KEEPING WITH THAT TREND. WITH THAT, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR TWO OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, AND STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THAT AMENDMENT AS IT IS PRESENTED.

THAT CONCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD HAPPILY TAKE QUESTIONS, OR WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE MOBILITY PLAN AND TAKE QUESTIONS AFTER.

I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU, MAYOR. >> YEAH. LET'S SEE. WELL, FIRST I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ARE THERE QUESTIONS, REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO.

>> YEAH, SAME THING I HAD BEFORE. ARE WE COVERING ALL THREE AT ONCE OR YOU WANT TO

TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME. >> DO YOU HAVE YOU HAVE ANOTHER PRESENTATION. YES.

>> YEAH. >> YEAH. SO IF THERE'S. >> ONE AT A TIME. YES. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. SO THEN FOR THIS ONE DO YOU HAVE THE MAP OF THE FLOODWAY.

>> THERE IS A MAP ON THE MOBILITY I THINK THIS. >> ONE FIRST OR SECOND SLIDE WHERE YOU HAD THE PROPERTY OVERLAPPING. YEAH. THERE YOU GO. THAT IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE ON THIS SCALE. BUT YOU KNOW YOU CAN SEE IT BETTER. WHAT THE THE LIGHT BLUE OUTSIDE THE FLOODPLAIN ITSELF. WHAT'S WHAT'S THE DESIGNATION ON THAT ONE.

>> THAT IS SHOWN ON THIS MAP AS THE ANNUAL CHANCE. NO BUFFER, BUT IT'S LARGELY THE THE PERMIT

[04:25:05]

BUFFER. THAT'S THE 200 FOOT PERMIT BUFFER THAT'S REQUIRED. >> RIGHT. THAT'S THE AS I RECALL, THAT'S THE 2% CHANCE OF FLOODING OUTSIDE THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN, WHICH IS THE ONE 1%

CHANCE OR HALF PERCENT CHANCE. >> THE RED IS THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. SO THE RED IS THE IS FURTHER DOWN SOUTH IN THAT CORNER THERE.

>> SO I GUESS HELP ME WITH MY CONCERN. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM DEVELOPING THIS CORRIDOR IN THE WAY THAT THE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED. WHAT I HAVE IS THAT ONE ELEMENT OF THAT, WHERE A LOW INTENSITY USE IS, IS MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE FOR POTENTIAL FLOOD HAZARD REGION. SO WEST OF THERE, WHERE IT'S OUTSIDE, THE FLOOD WAYS DEVELOP THAT AS A AS A 380 CORRIDOR NORTH OF IT. I THINK IT'S ALREADY COMING IN ETJ HOUSING AND WE DON'T CONTROL THAT OR WE HAVE PARTIAL CONTROL OVER PLATTING OR DESIGN STANDARDS. BUT BUT LIKE THAT ONE, THAT ONE RIGHT THERE, THAT'S THE SUBJECT MATTER IS RIGHT HERE IN THE FLOODWAY. AND AND HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW A HIGHER INTENSITY USE IS APPROPRIATE FOR FLOODWAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO

UNDERSTAND. >> SO YEAH, IT THEY'LL STILL HAVE TO OF COURSE MEET ALL OF OUR COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR OVERALL PROPERTY COVERAGE. IF THIS I BELIEVE A LARGE OF THIS IS NOT ACTUALLY IN THE FLOOD PLAIN OR THE FLOODWAY. RATHER IT'S IN THE FLOODPLAIN. SO IT THAT 200 OR THE THE MINIMUM FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION BUFFER KICKS IN. SO IT'S, IT'S PROPERTIES HAVE TO BE BUILT UP ACCORDING TO THE MINIMUM FLOOD, FLOOD FINISHED FLOOD ELEVATION.

AND THEN THE PROPERTY THAT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT DEVELOPS WITH LOW INTENSITY OR MODERATE INTENSITY USES, WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE TO ALL OF OUR DRAINAGE AND ENGINEERING STANDARDS IN THAT ASPECT AS WELL. SO IF THEY ARE, IF THEY ARE, AND WHICH A MORE INTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT WOULD LIKELY BE. HAVING OR HAVING A MORE, MORE NON-PERMEABLE SURFACE THAN A LESS INTENSE DEVELOPMENT, IN THIS CASE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO ENGINEER IT ACCORDINGLY. SO WHETHER THAT COMES WITH A LETTER, A LETTER OF MAP REVISION OR ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE STUDIES TO WHERE THEY HAVE TO PUT A DETENTION POND OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT ON SITE THAT WILL BE ACCOUNTED FOR WITHIN THE ENGINEERING AND DRAINAGE REVIEW, REGARDLESS OF

HOW THE PROPERTY, WHAT THE LAND USE IS. >> ALL RIGHT, I YEAH, I STILL HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS. I THINK THE DEVELOPER AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THE MAYOR'S. IT'S HIS RIGHT TO RUN THE MEETING. BUT MR. MAYOR, IF YOU WOULD LET THE DEVELOPER SPEAK TO THAT WHEN

IT'S APPROPRIATE. THANK YOU. >> SURE. >> YEAH. REPRESENTATIVE

DISTRICT SIX. >> THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. SO WITH THE MAP, WITH THE FLOOD PLAIN, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ENTIRE TRACT IS SOMETHING LIKE 24 ACRES. IS THAT SOUND RIGHT? I'M JUST TRYING TO DO THIS FROM MEMORY. AND THEN THEY'RE ACTUALLY ONLY DEVELOPING ABOUT 16 OF THAT ACRES. AND I ASSUME THAT THEY ARE MAXIMIZING THE

AREA OUTSIDE OF THAT PLAN. WOULD THAT BE A SAFE ASSUMPTION? >> SO THE ENTIRE TRACT IS IT'S IT'S ODD RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE WHERE THE PROPERTY OR IT WAS THIS PROPERTY WAS JUST ANNEXED.

THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION JUST FOR THIS EVENING IS 16.5 ACRES. THE REMAINDER OF THAT 24 ACRES IS THIS AREA THAT I'M KIND OF SHOWING RIGHT HERE. AND THAT IS WITHIN THE CITY'S ETJ. IT'S IT'S A PART OF THE MUD. AND THEY ARE PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT. BUT THAT'S IN THE

CDC. ETJ. SO DIFFERENT THINGS APPLY. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT

CLARIFICATION I APPRECIATE IT. >> OKAY. IS IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YES.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. >> I'LL TAKE THE MAKE YOU

OFFICIAL. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> THOMAS FLETCHER WITH KIMLEY-HORN, 6160 WARREN PARKWAY, FRISCO, TEXAS. COUNCIL MEMBER. BACK TO ELABORATE AND ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN, THE THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AS PART OF THE LEGENDS RANCH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE MUD. ORIGINALLY, THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WAS A PART OF THE MUD. THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, HAD APPROXIMATELY 42 ACRES THAT ARE IN THIS SOUTHWEST CORNER. A PORTION OF THAT WAS GOING TO REMAIN DEVELOPED WITHIN THE MUD. AND THEN WE CAME BACK AND AMENDED THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH INCREASED THE THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN. UNDER THAT AGREEMENT, WE AGREED TO ANNEX ZONE AND DEVELOP WITHIN THE WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. WHEN WE WENT THROUGH AND DID THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, WE HAD TO DO AS PART OF THAT, THE DOWNSTREAM ASSESSMENT. AND BECAUSE THERE'S RECLAMATION WITHIN THE PROJECT, WE HAD TO DO THE CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION. SO WHEN WE DID THE THE DRAINAGE STUDIES, THE CLOSER WE LOOKED AT IT WITH HOW WE INTENDED TO DEVELOP. SO WE

[04:30:03]

THE INDIVIDUAL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR THE SITE ITSELF WILL HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH.

WE'LL GO THROUGH THE CITY'S PROCESS AND THEY WILL CONFIRM THAT EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE PROPOSED, AS FAR AS RUNOFF CONDITIONS, MEET, ALL THE CONDITIONS OF THE CLOSURE.

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. SO THAT YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION, DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT FIRST OR.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE COMP PLAN FOR NOW. >> ANY QUESTIONS? NO.

>> OKAY. >> SO OUR SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER.

>> THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, SAHARA ESFANDIARI, SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER. TONIGHT, I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE MOBILITY PLAN AMENDMENT COMPONENTS OF HICKORY GROUP MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THE HICKORY GROVE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT HAS REQUESTED AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF DENTON MOBILITY PLAN THOROUGHFARE MAP, SO THEY REQUESTED TO REMOVE THE FUTURE EXTENSIONS OF SEAWOLF BETWEEN US 380 AND JACKSON ROAD. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE MAP TO THE RIGHT, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED WITH RED DASH, THE REASONS BEHIND THIS REQUEST IS FIRST, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP TO THE RIGHT, THE THE PROPOSED ROAD SITUATED WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN ZONE OF NORTH HICKORY CREEK CREEK. AND IF THE ROAD CONSTRUCTED, IT WILL RESULT IN NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. ALSO, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP TO THE LEFT, THIS ROAD LOCATED BETWEEN FM 156 AS A PRIMARY ROAD TO THE WEST AND THOMAS J. AGAIN AS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL TO THE EAST, AND ALSO THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT. THE HICKORY GROVE MOD ESTABLISHED A NORTH SOUTH CONNECTION THROUGH THE. YOU CAN SEE THE DASHED ORANGE ONE, THE GOLDEN HOOF DRIVE. CONSIDERING ALL OF THESE ALTERNATIVES, THERE WILL BE ENOUGH ROAD CAPACITY TO NAVIGATE THE TRAFFIC IN THE ABSENCE OF THE TARGET ROAD, SO THIS PROPOSAL MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, ESPECIALLY REGARDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MOBILITY PLAN AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST. VOTED SIX ZERO.

STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST AS IT COMPLIES WITH THE CRITERIA IN SECTION 245 AND TWO SEVEN 1D OF DDC FOR APPROVAL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. ANY

QUESTIONS ON MOBILITY PLAN AMENDMENTS? >> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE MOBILITY PLAN SEEING NONE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. SO

BACK TO ITEM B REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT SIX. >> I MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED.

>> MAYOR PRO. >> TEM SECOND. >> MOTION IN A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION B? FOR ITEM SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. AND THAT PASSES 5 TO 2.

AND THEN THAT TAKES US TO ITEM C I'LL TAKE A MOTION. MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. >> OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND

REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT TWO? >> I'LL SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THAT PASSES SIX ONE TAKES US TO. LIKE I SAID, ITEM D WILL COME BACK TO US AT A

[E. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, regarding a change in the zoning district and use classification from Rural Residential (RR) District to Residential 1 (R1) District on approximately 224.9 acres of land generally located at the southwest corner of the FM 2153 bend, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, adopting an amendment to the City’s official zoning map; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (4-2) to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval by Commissioner Ketchersid and second by Commissioner Dyer. (Z25-0015a, Estates at Craver Ranch, Mia Hines)]

[04:35:01]

APPROXIMATELY 224.9 ACRES OF LAND. >> EVENING AGAIN. MAYOR.

MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. MAYOR HINES SENIOR PLANNER. THIS ITEM IS STATED IN THE CAPTION IS A REQUEST TO REZONE JUST UNDER 225 ACRES FROM R R TO R ONE. IT'S LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FM 2153, BENDS NEAR THE NORTHERNMOST EDGE OF THE CITY, AND THE PURPOSE IS TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONE ACRE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE CURRENT ZONING, AS SHOWN ON THE IN THE IMAGE TO THE LEFT, IS THAT RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND THE REQUESTED ZONING IS R-1. AS YOU CAN SEE, SOME OF THE SURROUNDING ZONING INCLUDES THE KRAVER RANCH PD TO THE WEST AND SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THEN SOME RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING TO THE EAST. WE DID PUT THIS REQUEST UP AGAINST THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL, AND ULTIMATELY FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE R-1 PURPOSE STATEMENT.

THE PROPOSAL IS ALSO GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE PROPOSAL, OR THE PROPOSED ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING CONTEXT WITHIN THE CITY AND IN WITHIN THE CITY'S ETJ. AND THEN FINALLY, THE ZONING IS NOT EXPECTED TO GENERATE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO THE CITY WITH REGARD TO THE EXISTING AGRICULTURAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THIS FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE R-1 REQUESTED ZONING DISTRICT IS HELPING US ACHIEVE SOME OF THE GOALS WITH REGARD TO THAT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, AS WELL AS GROWING RESOURCEFULLY AND THEN DESIGNING A FISCALLY ADVANTAGEOUS LAND USE PATTERN, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE CONSIDERATION OF THE MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND PD THAT IS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

THE R1 OR THE R1 ZONING PURPOSE STATEMENT IS INTENDED TO PRESERVE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, ENSURE THAT ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT PROMOTES CONSERVATIVE CONSERVATION OF SCENIC, RURAL, OPEN SPACES, AND TO ENSURE SOME COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING LAND USES AND PATTERNS, WHICH WE SIGNIFICANTLY FIND TO BE THE CASE WITHIN THIS PROPERTY. I WANTED TO SHOW THIS EXHIBIT OVER HERE TO THE RIGHT, TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE OF AN IDEA OF WHAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS OUT THERE. CURRENTLY, OF COURSE, THE WE HAVE THE RANCH PD THAT WAS APPROVED TO THE SOUTHWEST, WHICH PROPOSES A DENSITY AT ABOUT 4.5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE JUST TO THE SOUTHWEST, THERE AND WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. AND THEN WHEN WE LOOK INTO THE CITY'S ETJ, THERE IS A LAKE RAY ROBERTS ZONING DISTRICT THAT REQUIRES A MINIMUM ONE ACRE LOTS JUST WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THEN MINIMUM FOUR ACRE LOTS TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEING PROPOSED TO REZONE TO R-1, WHICH DOES ALLOW FOR A MINIMUM 32,000 SQUARE FOOT ACRE LOT, THAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN WHAT WE HAVE WITHIN THIS SORT OF MODERATE TO HIGH DENSITY CRAVER RANCH PD, AND THEN TO WHAT WE SEE WITH THE 1 TO 4 ACRE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY AND AROUND THE ETJ. WE DID PUT PUT OUT A NOTIFICATION AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW FOR THIS ZONING CASE. AND AS OF THIS REPORT, HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION OR IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST. WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST TO RESIDENTIAL ONE, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. >> OKAY.

>> THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AT THIS TIME.

>> THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU CARE TO SPEAK, YOU CAN JUST FILL OUT A CARD. SEEING NO SUDDEN MOVEMENTS, I'LL CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOGNIZE MEMBER FROM DISTRICT SIX. >> THANK YOU. COUNCIL GESTURE I THINK THIS IS A VERY NICE COMPANION AND COMPLIMENT TO WHAT IS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

AS FAR AS THE HOUSING IN THAT AREA. AND SO AS WELL AS WHAT IS SURROUNDING. SO I'M HAPPY TO

MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU. >> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT

ONE. >> I'LL SECOND. >> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT

FOUR. >> MIA. I HEARD SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.

>> ONE ACRE. >> THAT IS THE APPLICANT STATED INTENT. YES, SIR.

>> PERFECT. THANK YOU. >> REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT TWO.

>> YEAH. I APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT STAFF AND EVERYTHING PUT INTO THIS, BUT FOR VERY SIMILAR REASONS TO WHY I DIDN'T SUBMIT SUPPORT THE PREVIOUS PD. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS ONE.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND MAYOR PRO

TEM. >> JUST WANT TO SAY ALSO BE OPPOSING FOR SIMILAR REASONS

THAT I'VE LONG WINDED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE LET'S VOTE ON SCREEN. THAT PASSES FIVE TWO. TAKES US TO ITEM F,

[F. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, regarding a request for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) to allow for a Modular Data Center use on approximately 4.064 acres of land, approximately located 3,800 feet south of Jim Christal Road and 1,200 feet east of South Western Boulevard and legally described as Lot 9, Block A Westpark Addition Phase 2 in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing for severability; and establishing an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (6-0) to recommend approval. Motion for approval by Commissioner Riggs and second by Commissioner Ketchersid. (S25-0007a, Denton20, Angie Manglaris)]

[04:40:03]

>> GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ANGIE MANGUS, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR, HERE TO PRESENT S 25 0007. THIS IS DENTON 20. THIS REQUEST IS FOR A MODULAR DATA CENTER ON APPROXIMATELY 4.064 ACRES OF LAND. IT IS LOCATED SOUTH OF JIM CRYSTAL ROAD, EAST OF WESTERN BOULEVARD, ADJACENT TO THE RT WELL SUBSTATION. IT'S PREDOMINANTLY ZONED PUBLIC FACILITIES, BUT DOES HAVE SOME HIGH. THE SURROUNDING AREA IS LARGELY ZONED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LEASE AND POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE OPERATION OF A MODULAR DATA CENTER ON THIS SITE. THIS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WAS REVIEWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT DOES MEET THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS SPECIFIED FOR MODULAR DATA CENTER AND APPROVAL OF THIS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO GENERATE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS. THEY'RE NOT EXTENDING UTILITIES TO THE SITE. THEY'RE ABLE TO USE THE CLOSED LOOP COOLING SYSTEM. THEY'RE ADJACENT TO AN ELECTRIC SUBSTATION, AND IT'S ANTICIPATED TO GENERATE MINIMAL TRAFFIC. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES DESIGNATE THIS AREA AS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE. THIS DESIGNATION IS FOR AREAS WEST OF 35, NEAR THE AIRPORT, WHERE THE PREDOMINANT USE IS LIGHT AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES. THIS USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT. IT IS LOCATED APPROPRIATELY WEST OF 35, ADJACENT TO AN EXISTING SUBSTATION. IT'S GENERALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, WHICH IS LARGELY HEAVY.

INDUSTRIAL LAND USES. GIVEN ITS LOCATION SIGNIFICANTLY REMOVED FROM THE ROADWAY, IT'S NOT ANTICIPATED TO HAVE ANY VISUAL OR AUDITORY IMPACTS, AND IT GENERALLY JUST CONFORMS TO THE FLUM GOALS AS SPECIFIED. WE DID CONDUCT NOTIFICATION AS OF THIS TIME, NOBODY HAS REPORTED IN FAVOR, AND OPPOSITION OR NEUTRAL STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THESE CONDITIONS AS LISTED HERE. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID VOTE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH STAFF.

SUGGESTED CONDITIONS SIX ZERO AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MAY HAVE.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT TWO.

>> THANK YOU ANGIE. AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE'RE ONE OF THE FEW COMMUNITIES IN THE REGIONS THAT HAVE PUT ALL THESE SORT OF DATA CENTER DEFINITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ON FOR TO, TO, TO

GET TO BEST PRACTICES, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YEAH. I BELIEVE WE'RE ONE OF

THE FEW. YES. >> ALL RIGHT. >> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. I DON'T BLAME HIM. I'M OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE CARE TO SPEAK. YOU CAN FILL OUT A CARD AFTERWARDS. SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL GIVE.

IS SPENCER SMITH STILL HERE? HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? ARE YOU GOOD? OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU.

REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT FIVE. >> IN GENERAL, I'M REALLY THANKFUL THAT THE WAY THAT STAFF HAS HELPED US NAVIGATE THE DATA CENTERS THAT WANT TO COME TO OUR COMMUNITY. SO REALLY THANKFUL FOR THAT. I'M GLAD THAT IT OFTENTIMES WE ARE NOT IN OPPOSITION WITH WITH THE DIRECTION THE STATE CLEARLY WANTS TO GO IN THIS RESPECT. SO WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO MOVE

APPROVAL. >> OKAY. REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT SIX.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? I'D SAY I APPRECIATE IT, AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR ALL THE DATA CENTERS. THEY HELP ALEXA WORK WELL. AND IN THE SPIRIT OF THAT, ALEXA, PLAY HAMMER TIME BY MC HAMMER. SO WHEN SOMEONE, MAYBE SOMEBODY AT HOME WATCHING THE MOVIE, WATCHING THE COUNCIL MEETING AND, AND THEY'RE LISTENING TO MC HAMMER, OKAY, LET'S VOTE. LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN.

>> WOW. BETWEEN 40 AND 73. >> THAT'LL BE GOOD. IT'LL BE LIKE, HEY THERE.

>> I LOVE THOSE PANTS. WHO ARE WE MISSING? ALMOST, ALMOST. >> THAT PASSES SEVEN ZERO TAKES

[G. Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of an ordinance of the City of Denton, Texas, providing a Special Sign District zoning overlay on an approximately 120-acre property generally located on the northwest corner of Robson Ranch Road and Interstate 35W Frontage Road, in the City of Denton, Denton County, Texas, adopting an amendment to the City’s official zoning map; providing for a penalty in the maximum amount of $2,000.00 for violations thereof; providing a severability clause and an effective date. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (6-0) to recommend approval of the request. Motion for approval was made by Commissioner Garland and seconded by Commissioner Riggs. (SD25-0001a, Landmark Special Sign District, Cameron Robertson)]

RANCH ROAD AND I-35W FRONTAGE. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS CAMERON ROBERTSON, PRINCIPAL PLANNER. AS STATED, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMERCIAL AREA ALONG I-35 WEST, JUST NORTH OF ROBSON RANCH ROAD. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 120 ACRE COMMERCIAL AREA THAT WILL INCLUDE A GROCERY ANCHORED

[04:45:01]

YOU CAN SEE PEDESTRIAN DIRECTORY AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. THEY ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO BE SHORTER THAN WHAT'S PERMITTED WITHIN OUR SPECIAL SIGN OR WITHIN THE SIGN CODE. AND THEN TEMPORARY SIGNS ARE GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT TALLER BY EIGHT FEET MINIMUM SETBACKS.

EVERYTHING IS GOING TO FOLLOW OUR SIGN CODE AS IS, EXCEPT FOR ALONG I-35. FOR THOSE MULTI-TENANT SIGNS, AS STATED, IT'S GOING TO BE THAT MINIMUM SETBACK OF ZERO FEET, AND THAT'S DUE TO THE CURRENT EASEMENT CONSTRAINTS THAT WE HAVE ON THE SITE DUE TO TEXDOT.

AND THEN LASTLY, NUMBER OF GROUND SIGNS, LANDMARK TRAIL ROPES AND RANCH ROAD I-35, THEY'RE GOING TO BE THAT MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED BY THE DENTON SIGN CODE.

BUT IT IS ALSO GOING TO ALLOW MULTI WITH THOSE SIGNS. AT LEAST ONE SINGLE TENANT SIGN PER PARCEL. IN TERMS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PACKAGE AND COMPATIBILITY. LIKE I STATED ALONG 35 LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND SIZE ALONG THAT CORRIDOR. AND THEN IN TERMS OF COLOR, MATERIAL AND SHAPE, IT WILL BE CONTROLLED BY DEVELOPMENT CC AND R'S OPERATED BY HUNTER RANCH. SO THERE IS GOING TO BE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD THAT REVIEWS ALL THOSE SIGNS THAT ARE GETTING PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS CONSISTENCY IN UNIFORM DESIGN, LANDSCAPING. THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET THEIR MPC SECTION 777 AND 775 FOR BOTH SCREENING AND STREET TREES IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC SAFETY AND TRAFFIC CIRCULATION. AS I STATED, THEY'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO MEET THAT MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT EXCEPT FOR THE MULTI TENANT SIGN ALONG I-35 BECAUSE OF THE EASEMENT. AND LASTLY, PORTABLE SIGNS.

THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED BY OUR SIGN CODE. BUT WITHIN THIS THEY ARE ALLOWED AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE RESTRICTED IN TERMS OF THEIR MAXIMUM EFFECTIVE AREA WHICH IS 12FT■!S, MAXIMUM HEIGHT, WHICH IS THREE FEET SIX INCHES, VERY SPECIFIC AND THEN NUMBER PERMITTED PER BUSINESS, WHICH WILL BE TWO. PUBLIC OUTREACH WAS DONE IN DECEMBER. STAFF AT THIS TIME HAS NOT RECEIVED ANYTHING IN OPPOSITION OR IN FAVOR. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS IT DOES COMPLY WITH OUR CRITERIA. OF THE SECTION THREE, 33 18.4 AND THEN PLANNING ZONING DID

RECOMMEND APPROVAL SIX ZERO AND I CAN STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT TWO.

>> JUST REAL QUICKLY. WHEN SIGNS ARE BANNERS AND FLAGS. >> THEIR BANNERS. SO THE BEST EXAMPLE, CAROL BOULEVARD, THOSE BANNERS THAT YOU SEE ALONG CAROL BOULEVARD, THAT WOULD BE

A WIND DEVICE. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. >> WHAT'S THE LITTLE CRAZY

THING THAT FLIES IN THE WIND? IS THAT A WHAT IS THAT CALLED? >> OH, THAT THING THAT MOVES.

>> THE DANCING ONE THAT. >> YOU SEE, I SAY CRAZY. >> YEAH.

>> I'M NOT SURE ACTUALLY. >> HOW MANY OF THOSE CAN WE ADD? >> ALEXA?

>> LIKE GEORGE WASHINGTON? >> NO. REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT SIX.

>> I MOVE APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. >> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> I SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.

SO FIRST LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN LET'S VOTE ON THE SCREEN. THAT PASSES SEVEN ZERO. AND AT

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.