Aug 18, 2020 City Council Work Session

[00:00:01]

>> GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

IT'S TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2020. 6:01 P.M.

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

THE PUBLIC CAN VIEW LIVE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE OR LISTEN LIVE.

YOU MAY CALL 877-853-5247. WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TONIGHT THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY THE REGULAR MEETING THE FIRST AGENDA IS ITEM 3A. DISCUSS COVID-19 RELATED BUDGET

[3A. Discuss COVID19 related budget adjustments and plans to restart certain initiative and projects. (45 minutes)]

>> I'LL BE DOING THAT, MAYOR. STACY, IF YOU WILL PULL UP THE PRESENTATION, PLEASE. EXCELLENT.

THANK YOU. LET'S JUMP TO SECOND SLIDE, IF YOU DON'T MINDS. COUNSELORS, AS YOU KNOW COVID-19 HAS HAD A IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH OF AMERICA AND THE ECONOMY. EARLIER THIS YEAR, IN APRIL, WE STARTED TO IDENTIFY VARIOUS SCENARIOS THAT COULD END UP IMPACTING OUR FINANCIAL HEALTH AS A RESULT OF COVID APPEAR LOT OF CITIES AT THAT TIME, COUNTIES WERE STARTING TO THINK THROUGH THE IMPACT. NOBODY KNEW HOW LONG IT WOULD LAST. SOME CITIES, WE KNEW, WERE HAVING A TOUGHER TIME WITH IT, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT WERE RELYING ON TOURISM OR HAD MAYBE LARGE RETAIL CENTERS.

SO THERE WAS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY RELATED TO THIS.

WE HAD TO CERTAINLY MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD BE FINANCIAL THE REST OF THE YEAR. AT THAT TIME WE WEREN'T SURE IF THERE WOULD BE AN IMPACT IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR, OR HOW LONG THIS WOULD ACTUALLY LAPSE. SO WE HAD TO MAKE ASSUMPTION TO SEE PREDICT OUR BEST AND WORST CASE SCENARIOS.

THEN WE MET WITH COUNSEL MASON TWEAKS WE HOPED FOR THE BEST AND PLANNED FOR THE WORST. GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, STACY.

COUNCIL, YOU REMEMBER THIS ANALYSIS.

WE DID AS OF APRIL 10. OUR FIRST MEETING, I THINK ESSENTIALLY THE 13TH. SO AT THAT TIME, STAFF IDENTIFIED WHAT WE BELIEVE WAS THE BEST CASE AND WORST CASE.

THEN KIND OF SOMEWHAT IN THE MIDDLE.

AGAIN, AT THAT TIME, WE CERTAINLY DID NOT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE IMPACT, HOW LONG IT WOULD LAST, OR HOW SEVERE IT WOULD BE. WE -- OTHER CITIES AND WHAT THEY WERE PLANNING. EVERYBODY WAS ASKING EACH OTHER, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS GOING ON. AT THIS POINT, WE REALLY FELT STRONGLY THAT WE NEEDED TO PLAN FOR THE WORST CASE.

WE WERE FORTUNATE BECAUSE PROPERTY TAXES WERE ESSENTIALLY ALREADY PAID FOR THE YEAR. THEN WE WERE MOST WORRIED ABOUT SALES TAXES AND BUILDING PERMITS.

NEXT SLIDE. AT THAT MEETING IN APRIL, WHICH I THINK WE HAD ON THE 13TH, WE MADE A COUPLE OF TWEAKS.

ONE WAS TO THE RED ZONE TO ASSUME THE WORST CASE WOULD BE WE WOULD NOT OPEN AT ALL DURING THE SUMMER.

THEN WE ALSO ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL COSTS IF WE HAD ISSUES AT THE GOLF COURSE, WHICH AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE NOT.

THESE WERE THINGS -- DECISIONS WE WERE MAKING IN APRIL.

NEXT SLIDE. SINCE THE ORIGINAL PLAN WAS IMPLEMENTED IN APRIL, OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION HAD IMPROVED. THEREFORE OUR PREDICTIONS IMPROVED. IN FACT, INSTEAD AFTER DECLINING REVENUE, BOTH THE GENERAL FUNDS AND UTILITY FUND REVENUES HAVE INCREASED ABOVE THE ORIGINAL BACKUP BUDGET.

[00:05:02]

AND 1% ABOVE THE ORIGINAL FORECAST.

EVEN BETTER, AT THE TIME THAT JUNE 30, WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE JUNE SALES TAX NUMBERS. THAT WAS 141,000 HIGHER THAN WE PROJECTED. WE ARE ACTUALLY IN VERY GOOD SHAPE THROUGH JUNE 30TH. I REALLY HAVE NO REASON TO BELIEVE, BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW, JULY WILL BE ANY DIFFERENT.

IN ADDITION EXPENSES WERE DOWN. ABOUT A MILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS. PRIMARILY, THIS IS DUE TO THE COVID STRATEGIES WE EMPLOYED BACK IN APRIL, WHICH INCLUDE THE FIRING FREEZE, OPERATIONAL RESTRICTIONS, DELAYS OF PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT, DEFERRING SOME PROJECTS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. NEXT SLIDE.

AND THEN THE GENERAL FUNDS, THE UTILITY FUND IS IN BETTER SHAPE.

AFTER JUNE 30 WE RECEIVED $23 MILLION.

THIS IS UP 5.6% OF THE COVID FORECAST AND 2.4% ABOVE THE ORIGINAL FORECAST. THIS IS DUE, IN PART, TO INCREASED WATER SALES OF ABOUT $27 MILLION.

EXPENSES ARE DOWN IN ADDITION. JUST LIKE THE GENERAL FUND, IT IS PRIMARILY DUE TO STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTED IN APRIL.

NEXT SLIDE. >> SO, AS A RESULT OF THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CONDITION, WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT LIFTING SOME OF THE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE PUT INTO PLACE BACK IN APRIL.

IN THIS ANALYSIS, YOU REMEMBER WE HAD IDENTIFIED ABOUT $5.2 MILLION IN ALL SOURCES THAT COULD BE USED IF THE IMPACT FROM COVID WAS MUCH WORSE THAN PLANNED.

THEN WE BUILT OUR MITIGATION PLAN AROUND $2 MILLION.

THAT'S IN THE SECOND COLUMN. WE EVEN DIPPED INTO A LITTLE BIT TO THE LAND ACQUISITION MONEY AND SOME EXCESS GENERAL FUND RESERVES. AND THEN WE PRESERVED ABOUT $3 MILLION WORTH OF EXPENSES. AGAIN, WE REALLY DIDN'T KNOW HOW BAD THIS WOULD GET. SO WE DIDN'T REALLY CUT THE BUDGET TO THAT. WHAT WE DID, WE SET THE PROJECTS ASIDE AND DID NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

SO IS WHAT WE WANT TO TALK TO COUNCIL ABOUT IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDING BACK SOME OF THE ITEMS, BOTH FROM THE MITIGATION PLAN, THEN FROM THE ITEMS THAT WE HAD PRESERVED.

AT THIS POINT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING, WE'LL GO THROUGH LIST IN A MINUTE. BUT IF THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL IS APPROVED, IT WOULD PRESERVE STILL ABOUT $972,000 TO CARRY INTO NEXT YEAR. THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS BASED ON SOMEWHERE JUST OVER 700,000. IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT WOULD REPLACE OR RESTORE THE LANDS ACQUISITION AND RESERVES, MAKING THAT AVAILABLE TO US NEXT YEAR, IF WE NEED TO DO SO.

WE WILL COME BACK TO THIS SLIDE IN A MINUTE.

I WANT TO GO TO THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES BEFORE WE DO.

STACY? THE ONLY NEW ITEM THAT WE ARE ASKING TO ADD THAT WAS NOT BUDGETED IN 2020 IS THE DISASTER BACKUP AND STORAGE PLAN THAT WAS MENTIONED LAST WEEK.

SO FOR 2020, THAT COST WOULD BE ABOUT $54,000.

THE ANNUAL COST, THOUGH, WOULD BE 120,000, LESS THE 45,000 WE CURRENTLY PAY. IT'S A NET INCREASE ANNUALLY OF $75,000. WE DID INCLUDE THIS? THE STAFF REPORT TO EXPLAIN. JOEY IS ON THE LINE IF WE HAVE ANY DISTRICT QUESTIONS. THE MAIN THING WE REALLY LIKE ABOUT THE BACKUP PLAN, IT DOES PROVIDE PROTECTION AGAINST RANSOMWARE AND ALSO HAS THE ABILITY TO DETECT IT AND PROVIDE OFF-SITE DISASTER RECOVERY SOLUTION.

I KNOW JOEY WENT THROUGH THAT LAST WEEK.

NEXT SLIDE. THIS WAS OUR ORIGINAL VEHICLE REPLACE HEMENT PLAN FOR THIS YEAR.

THERE IS EQUIPMENT, THAT IS NOT JUST ROLLING STOCK.

THIS WAS OUR BUDGET. WE HAVE ALREADY PURCHASED, FOR

[00:10:05]

AND HAVE NOT ORDER T ITEMS IN BLUE, 537,000.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE.

THERE IS THE BRUSH TRACK FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, PICKUPS AND PARK THE PARK AND RECREATION, THE MINI EXCAVATOR.

>> BRIAN, FOR SPECIFIC ITEMS DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE END?

>> I HAVE ONE MORE SLIDE. THEN WE'LL GO BACK, BACK THREE

SLIDES. >> OKAY.

>> THEN WE WILL PAUSE, YES. NEXT SLIDE.

SO FOR THE FUND WE WILL DO THE SAME THING.

OUR BIGGEST CONCERN WITH THAT WOULD BE THAT WITH SO MANY PEOPLE LAID OFF, WOULD THAT IMPACT OUR ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE.

SEE IF WE SOME DAY COLLECT THAT MONEY WE WERE CONCERNED ENOUGH TO MITIGATE THE STRATEGY. AT THIS POINT, WHAT WE DO KNOW, IT HAS NOT REACHED A LEVEL WHERE WE SET ASIDE ABOUT $900,000.

WE STILL THINK IT WILL BE PRUDENT TO SET ASIDE SOME.

SOME DOLLARS. SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO SET ASIDE ABOUT $200,000. WE THINK THAT WILL BE MORE ALIGNED WITH WHAT WE ARE SEEING TODAY BASED ON THE NEW INFORMATION. BEFORE I GO TO THE FINAL SLIDE, WHICH IS THE DECISION-MAKING. I WANT TO GO BACK, STACY, IF YOU WILL HELP ME. I THINK IT'S ABOUT THREE SLIDES.

NEXT SLIDE. RIGHT HERE.

COUNCIL, AT THIS POINT, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS PAUSE AND THEN JUST START HAVING DISCUSSION ABOUT THE SPECIFIC ITEMS THEMSELVES. I WANT TO NOTE THAT THE LAST COLUMN ARE THE ITEMS THAT WOULD STILL BE PRESERVED OR CARRIED OVER. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, BUDGET PROPOSAL INCLUDED, ELIMINATING OUR CONSTRUCTION CREW.

BUT THERE IS A PLAN IN PLACE FOR WHAT WE WOULD DO WITH THOSE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS, CONCRETE, PARTICULARLY IN THE FUTURE.

WE ARE STILL GOING -- THERE IS STILL POSITIONS WE WILL HOLD.

WE MOVE MORE OF THOSE POSITIONS OFF THE LIST TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. AND THEN IT AT THIS POINT, SO LATE IN THE YEAR, WE ARE NOT GOING TO RESTORE SOME OF THE OPERATIONAL SAVINGS. WE'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND PRESERVE THAT FOR NEXT YEAR. AT THIS POINT, I WILL JUST LET COUNCIL START ASKING QUESTIONS. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE LIST.

SEE WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

>> EVERYBODY JUST SPEAK UP WHEN THEY WANT TO.

>> SO UNDER THE POLICE VEHICLES, 105,000.

IT STILL SAYS IT IS IN THE READVISED MITIGATION PLAN AND NOT IN THE RESTORED COLUMN. WASN'T THAT A PART OF THE LAST

THING YOU SAID WE WOULD RESTORE? >> LET ME MAKE SURE -- IF IT'S IN THE FINAL COLUMN, THAT MEANS WE ARE STILL PRESERVING IT.

YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE TAKEN IT OUT.

BUT WHAT WE ARE PROP PROPOSING O IS RESTORE.

ANYTHING IN THE FOURTH COLUMN OR FIFTH COLUMN WE ARE ASKING TO

RESTORE THAT BACK TO THE BUDGET. >> SO THAT IS BEING RESTORED?

>> YES. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> TWO VEHICLES. >> AND THEN THE TRANSFERRED, MY LAST QUESTION S THAT THE SAME SITUATION AS NOW?

>> YES, THERE IS -- I THINK IT'S SEVEN PIECES OF EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING THE FIRE BRUSH TRUCK, FOR EXAMPLE.

>> OKAY. SURE.

OKAY, THANK YOU. >> BRIAN, I'M CONFUSED.

THE AUGUST 18, 2020 STRATEGY. IT SAYS REVISED FY MITIGATION PLAN. YOU ARE SAYING ALL OF THOSE ARE

RESTORED. >> ALL OF THOSE WITH NUMBERS, MAYOR. THE ONES WITH DASHES, YOU CAN

[00:15:02]

PRESERVED. >> WHAT IS THE TWO DIFFERENT COLUMNS, AUGUST 18 STRATEGY, THOUGH?

>> I'M JUST TRYING TO SHOW THE ONES WE ARE PROPOSING TO

RESTORE, THE APRIL 13. >> I'M ASKING YOU WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TWO DIFFERENT COLUMNS UNDER THE

AUGUST 18 STRATEGY HEADING? >> OKAY.

AGAIN, I THINK MY ANSWER IS WE ARE PROPOSING TO RESTORE THESE FUNDS, THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN CUT OR HAVE BEEN --

>> WHY ARE THEY IN TWO DIFFERENT COLUMNS.

ONE SAYS MITIGATION PLAN AND ONE COLUMN SAYS "TO BE RESTORED"?

>> MAYBE WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE SAID WAS, BOTH OF THOSE WOULD BE ADDED TO BE RESTORED ON BOTH COLUMNS.

MY APOLOGIES. >> I THINK THAT'S WHY I WAS

CONFUSED AS WELL, WHEN I ASKED. >> MY QUESTION WAS, AGAIN, WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TWO DIFFERENT COLUMNS.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING AT.

IN OUR ORIGINAL PLAN BACK IN APRIL, WE HAD SET ASIDE THE MITIGATION PLAN OR THE ITEMS WE CUT OUT OF THE BUDGET.

THAT WAS OUR HARD PLAN. THEN THE THIRD COLUMN WAS ITEMS WE PRESERVED IF IT WAS WORST THAN WHAT WE THOUGHT.

I WAS TRYING TO KEEP THESE THE SAME, THE SAME TWO COLUMNS, JUST SO THAT -- I DO THINK, MAYOR, BY COMBINING IT.

WHAT I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE CLEAR TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO PROPOSE TO RESTORE IN COLUMN 4 MATCHES COLUMN 2.

COLUMN 5 MATCHES COLUMN 3. >> NOW IT MAKES SENSE.

SO THE LAST COLUMN, COLUMN 6, ARE THOSE ITEMS STILL WE STILL

NEED TO HOLD BACK. >> YES.

AND CARRY TO NEXT YEAR. >> IN ESSENCE, WE ARE ADDING BACK 1.8 SOMETHING MILLION BACK IN THE BUDGET.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> BECAUSE THIS IS MY FIRST TIME SEEING IT. I AM SEEING THINGS AS I GET TO THEM. WHY ARE WE STILL PROPOSING TO HOLD BACK ON THE CONSTRUCTION CREW?

>> THAT IS ONE THAT'S IN OUR BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR 2021, TO CONVERT TO OUR BOND PROGRAM. IF YOU REMEMBER, WE HAVEN'T TASKED THAT OUT IN A WORK SESSION YET, BUT THAT IS PART OF

THE PROPOSAL. >> OKAY.

>> WHAT IS TRANSFER TO WORK. >> GO TWO MORE SLIDES, STACY.

MAYOR, IT'S THE LIST FROM HERE IN BLUE.

THESE WERE BUDGETED PIECES OF EQUIPMENT THAT WE WERE GOING TO BUY IN THE CURRENT YEAR. WE HAD ALREADY BOUGHT THE GREEN ONES. WE SET ASIDE THE BLUE ONES.

>> MY QUESTIN ON THIS SLIDE, DO ANY OF THESE FALL UNDER THE LEASE PROGRAM WE ARE PROPOSING IN THE NEAR FUTURE?

>> YES, THE PICKUP, THE VAN. BASICALLY THE PICKUPS AND THE

VAN. >> WHY WOULD WE MOVE FORWARD WITH PURCHASING THOSE? WE TURN AROUND AND DO A LEASE

PROGRAM. >> FIRST OFF, MAYOR, IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED YET AND IT HAS NOT BEEN PRESENTED TO COUNCIL YET.

>> I UNDERSTAND. WE'RE ABOUT TO.

>> IT WOULD BE -- BUT AT THE SAME TIME -- WELL, GOOD POINT.

>> WHY TURN AROUND AND BUY SOMETHING IF WE HAVE A DECISION COMING DOWN ON WHETHER WE WILL MOVE TO A LEASE PROGRAM.

>> YEAH, IT'S A GOOD POINT. THE BIGGER ITEMS LIKE THE BRUSH TRUCK, THE MECHANIC TRUCK, THE MOWER, THOSE WILL -- THE MINI EXCAVATOR WILL NOT BE A PART OF THE PROGRAM.

THE PICKUP TRUCKS, THE VAN, THOSE WILL BE.

SO SO WE CAN SET THOSE ASIDE UNTIL WE MAKE A DECISION ABOUT

THE LEASE PROGRAM. >> YES, PLEASE.

COUNCIL, ANYBODY HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THAT?

>> I THINK THAT'S THE SMART PLAN TO DO.

BECAUSE WE ARE STILL ENOUGH TIME OUT, WE COULD MAKE ANOTHER DECISION NEXT MONTH. I THINK FOR NOW THAT IS THE

SMARTEST THING TO DO. >> WOULD YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER SLIDE, STACY? THANK YOU.

WE'LL ADJUST THAT, BRIAN? >> I WILL, MAYOR.

>> I HAD A QUESTION ON THE HIRING FREEZE.

[00:20:04]

CAN YOU BREAK THAT DOWN? >> WHAT WE -- BASICALLY IT WAS ABOUT 20 SOMETHING POSITIONS. IF YOU REMEMBER AT ONE TIME, WE WERE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE FOUR POLICE POSITIONS.

COUNCIL INDICATED THEY DID NOT WANT TO FREEZE THOSE POSITIONS AND TO MOVE FORWARD. SO THESE WERE ABOUT 20 POSITIONS THAT WERE JUST SOMEWHERE IN THE STAGES OF BEING VACANT.

THEY ARE ALL EXISTING POSITIONS. THEY WERE NOT NEW.

THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW THAT WE HAVE RESTORED.

WE HAVE ASKED THAT MOVE FORWARD ON THE HIRING.

BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION TONIGHT, THEN WE WILL START IN EARNEST TRYING TO FILL THE OTHER POSITIONS.

ONE THING I WILL TELL YOU, HALF OF THOSE POSITIONS ARE IN PUBLIC WORKS ALONE AND PRIMARILY HAVE TO DO WITH MAINTENANCE WORKERS.

NER THE PROCESS OF ADVERTISING FOR THOSE POSITIONS.

IF WE WERE ABLE TO FREE UP MORE OF THOSE, HE MAY BE ABLE TO GET MORE OF THOSE IN THIS HIRING PROCESS.

>> SO IS THOSE POSITIONS ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR NEW PROPOSED

BUDGET, CORRECT? >> THEY ARE.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT $217,000 NUMBER, WE HAVE ALREADY HIT THAT. THE AMOUNT THAT WE SAID WE NEEDED TO PRESERVE, WE ALREADY HIT THAT NUMBER.

>> WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE BACK INTO ITEMS RESTORED IF WE CAN

HIRE THOSE POSITIONS? >> BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY CAPTURED IT IN THIS YEAR. THAT WAS MY POINT.

I DON'T NEED ANY MORE MONEY TO CAPTURE 217,000 BECAUSE I'VE

CAPTURED MORE THAN THAT. >> GOTCHA.

>> I WANT ALL OF THESE POSITIONS OF WE CAN.

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE WERE NOT HIRING THESE POSITIONS.

I CAN UNDERSTAND IF THEY WERE NEW POSITIONS BUT TO -- IF THEY ARE IN THIS POSITION, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.

THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

COMMENTS? >> I THINK IT'S ABOUT 70,000 WE TOOK OUT OF THE VERV. IS THERE SOMETHING WE COULD USE

THAT FUNDING FOR NOW? >> FIRST OFF, IF FOR SOME REASON WE DON'T LIKE THE PROGRAM, THE LEASE PROGRAM, THEN THOSE WOULD STILL BE PIECES OF EQUIPMENT WE WOULD WANT TO MOVE FORWARD TO PURCHASE. MY GUT TELLS ME WE'LL WANT TO DO THIS. BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT, I DON'T HAVE -- WITH EXCEPTION OF THE DISASTER COVID PLAN, THERE IS NOT REALLY ANYTHING I WOULD RECOMMEND US ALSO DOING OTHER THAN THIS. I WAS VERY INTERESTED IN TRYING TO GET THE MONEY BACK INTO THE LAND ACQUISITION.

AND TRY NOT TO USE THE RESERVES, IF WE COULD.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ON MY LIST RIGHT NOW WITH ME, HONESTLY, TO

SAY WE WOULD DO. >> OKAY.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION. IF WE HAD SOMETHING THAT WAS ANOTHER BURNING ITEM OUT THERE THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY FUND, THAT IS EXTRA MONEY TO SPEND, AND WE COULD DO THAT.

BUT IT'S STILL TO KEEP BACK OF MIND.

>> LET ME MAKE THIS POINT. IF, FOR EXAMPLE, WE GET TO OUR DISCUSSION, WHICH IS ON THE SCHEDULE FOR SEPTEMBER 1, ON THE LEASE PROGRAM. AND COUNCIL LIKES IT AND THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, THEN THAT COULD FREE UP DOLLARS TO DO SOMETHING ELSE WITH AND WE COULD STILL MAKE A DECISION AT THAT POINT. WE ARE NOT GOING TO LOSE IT BY NOT DOING IT, IS THE POINT I'M MAKING.

I WILL ALSO TELL YOU THIS. IF OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR HAD HIS CHOICE, THERE IS A LOT MORE EQUIPMENT ON THAT LIST HE WOULD

LIKE TO GET. >> I'M HAPPY THAT WE'RE ABLE TO

[00:25:01]

>> I'M NOT HEARING ANYTHING ELSE, BRIAN.

>> ALL RIGHT. IF YOU WILL GO TO THE LAST SLIDE, STACY. THESE WERE THE DECISION POINTS THAT I THINK WE ARE IN AGREEMENT ON THE GENERAL FUND, THE C.I.P.

AND UTILITY FUND. IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THE

PROPOSAL ITSELF. >> OTHER THAN THE STACY, CAN YOU GO TO THE POWERPOINT. COUNCIL ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT? RAISE YOUR HAND?

YOU HAVE CONSENSUS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE INITIATIVES AND PROJECTS, WHICH I UNDERSTAND -- I HAVE A QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE TALK ABOUT IT NOW, IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDAS.

DO YOU KNOW WHEN WE'LL BE MEETING IN PERSON AGAIN?

>> THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. >> WE'LL PUT IT ON THE NEXT ONE.

>> LET'S TAKE IT OFFLINE. IT'S NOT THE A COUNCIL MEETING

DISCUSSION, NECESSARILY. >> IT'S NOT IN THE BUDGET MEETING. I THINK WE COULD DO THAT OFFLINE. BRIAN CAN SEND OUT A COMMUNICATION AND SEE HOW COUNCIL FEELS.

>> I WILL DO THAT. NEXT ON THE AGENDA, 3B, UPDATE

[3B. Update City Council on the amended Regulating Plan for Homestead at Liberty Grove, which includes revisions to the phasing sequence, amendments to the lot type and quantity distributions, and reallocates open spaces, blocks, and streets. (30 minutes)]

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.

WE WANTED TO PRESENT A REQUEST FROM ARCADIA DEVELOPMENT.

HE WILL BE PRESENT TO DISCUSS THE ITEM AND PRESENT HIS CASE.

STACY, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND DIVING TO THE THIRD SLIDE, PLEASE. COUNCIL, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU, THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU WAS TO AMEND THE REGULATING ADOPTED FOR HOMESTEAD DEVELOPMENT.

THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS BECAUSE THERE IS A CAVEAT IN THE CODE THAT HAS SIGNIFICANT CHANGES REGULATING, BUT ALTHOUGH CAN BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY, THERE ARE OTHER APPLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH IT FROM A TRANSPARENCY PERSPECTIVE. WE'LL MOVE THESE FORWARD TO ULTIMATELY CITY COUNCIL. WITH THAT, I WILL DIVE INTO A LITTLE HISTORY REGARDING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

>> EARLIER PART OF 2013, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED WITH ARCADIA REALTY GROUP, A FLAGSHIP PROGRAM PROJECT, BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING A THE THIS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE. THE AGREEMENT FACILITATED THAT A GRANT EQUAL TO THE IMPACT FEES IN THE FORM OF IMPACT FEE CREDITS FOR WATER, SEWER, WASTE WATER AND ROADWAYS WAS 2 AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS. THIS AGREEMENT DOES ALSO EXPIRE TEN YEARS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

THAT BEING SAID, TWO-THIRDS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP BEFORE YOU, REFLECTIVE ON THIS PROPERTY, IT'S AN AGREEMENT 1, 2, 3, BUT IT CONTINUES TO 4 AND 5.

IT HAS CHANGES TO IT. 2016, A REGULATING PLAN WAS APPROVED THAT ESTABLISHED THE MASTER PLAN THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND ALSO REFLECTED THE BUILDING TYPES, THE STREET NETWORK AND

[00:30:02]

>> THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 20D 2 WITH A TOTAL OF 260 UNITY OR LOTS ARE ESTABLISHED, PRESENTLY ISSUED FOR 165 OF THESE LOTS.

THE PHASE 1 A PRETTY MUCH COMPLETE AND PHASE 2 IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW. IT'S MOVING WELL.

THE DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATING PLAN BUT NOT OUT OF -- ONE IS TO CHANGE THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE APPROVED FADING PLAN.

THE SECOND ITEM IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE BUILDING TYPES AND THE LOT QUANTITIES. THE THIRD IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE LOCATION OF THE FUTURE OPEN SPACE ALLOCATIONS AND REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE, AS APPROVED.

THEN RE-ORIENT THE STREET NETWORK.

NEXT SLIDE? THANK YOU.

THIS SLIDE GIVES A GOOD ILLUSTRATED PERSPECTIVE OF THE APPROVED PHASING PROGRAM WITH PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 REFLECTED ON THE APPROVED PHASING PLAN. THE PROPOSED PHASING PLAN SHOWS 2, 3 ON A COUNTER-CLOCKWISE ROTATION.

THE PHASING PLAN IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE, THERE IS NO CONCERN FROM THE PHASING ON THE IMPACT FEES FOR THE FIRST THREE PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT. IT'S THE LOT DISTRIBUTION AND THE STREET NETWORK AND THE OPEN SPACE ALLOCATION THAT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THE OVERALL SUMMARY THAT'S REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING REPORT CLEARLY SHOWS AN INTENT TO REDUCE THE LARGE IRESTATE LOTS. THOSE YOU CAN SEE ARE IN THE BRIGHT YELLOW ON THE APPROVED CONCEPT, YOU CAN SEE THOSE ALLOCATED. THOSE ALLOCATIONS.

THEN YOU CAN SEE ON THE PROPOSED TYPE YOU CAN SEE LESS OF THE YELL AND MORE OF THE OTHER. THIS IS ACCOMPLISHED BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM LOT DEPTH FOR ALL LOTS TO A UNIFORM 110 FEET.

WHAT THAT BASICALLY MEANS, THE MINIMUM LOT DECK REQUIREMENTS ARE 110 FEET. IN THIS INSTANCE, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, THOSE LOTS WERE LARGER, THE ESTATE LOTS, WHICH ARE THE YELLOW LOTS. NOW THERE IS MORE UNIFORMITY AS RELATES TO THE LOT TYPES. IN ADDITION THE LOTS WIDTH HAVE BEEN REDUCED FROM THE MINIMUM OF 565 FEET TO 60 FEET.

-- 65 TO 60 FEET. AND THEN THE MINIMUM REQUIRED 4.

STACY, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS TABLE REFLECTS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE. AS YOU CAN SEE THE CATEGORIES WITHIN THE CODE. EACH CATEGORY ALMOST CAPTURES THREE TYPES OF PRODUCTS. CATEGORY 1 IS THE ESTATE AND VILLAGE LOT DISTRIBUTION. THE ESTATE LOT DISTRIBUTION, CATEGORY 1, WHICH THIS IS PROPOSING IS LESS BASED ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. WE WANT -- WE SHOULD TAKE IT INTO CONSIDERATION, THAT THE FORM BASE CODE REQUIRES A 20% DISTRIBUTION EVER UNITS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN EACH CATEGORY. ALTHOUGH THE TYPE 1 PRODUCTS HAVE BEEN REDUCED SIGNIFICANTLY. APPROXIMATELY BY 58% TO 49% FROM WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED TO WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED NOW.

IT IS STILL WITHIN KEEPING OF THE FORM-BASED CODE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, STACY? THIS PROVIDES A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF EXACTLY WHAT THOSE IMPACTS ARE BASED ON THE -- THE LOT WIDTH REDUCTIONS ON THE TYPE 1 LOT WHICH IS THE ESTATE AND VILLAGE UNITS, ARE BEING REDUCED FROM 367 UNITS TO 290 UNITS. THE NUMBER OF COTTAGE UNITS INCREASED FROM 127 TO 279. AND THE KA CITA AND TOWNHOME UNITS HAVE INCREASED 163 FROM 145 UNITS.

THE EXISTING PLAN REFLECTED 629 UNITS.

THE PROPOSED PLAN IS 732 UNITS. IT DEFINITELY HAS INCREASED.

SO THERE ARE AN ADDITIONAL 103 UNITS FROM THE INITIAL PLAN.

THEY HAVE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF THE LARGER ESTATE LOTS TO ACCOMMODATE A HIGHER DENSITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

[00:35:05]

WE HOPE THESE VISUAL AIDS PROVIDE THE CONCEPT BEING PROPOSED. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SLIDES, THE SLIDE IN FRONT OF YOU, THERE IS A YELLOW CIRCLE AROUND A TERMINUS POINT. YOU CAN SEE THE STREET NETWORK HAS BEEN ALTERED. WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THAT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BRIGHT BLUE DASHED LINE AND SOME OF THOSE LILAC OR MAUVE PINK LINES, REALLOCATED OR REALIGNED, SO TO SPEAK WHAT IS HAPPENED IS THE MAJOR TERMINATING VISTA HAS BEEN ELIMINATED, AS ORIGINALLY APPROVED.

YOU NOW DON'T HAVE THE MAIN TERMINATING FOCUS POINT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. THE OPEN SPACE AREA OF THE THE PROPOSED PLAN HAS BEEN REALLOCATED.

IT WAS INTENDED TO FUNCTION AS A CULMINATION POINT, OR TERMINATING VISTA, FOR THE LARGER 50-FOOT RIGHTS OF WAYS THAT LED INTO LIBERTY GROVE, WHICH WAS THE MAIN IN AND OUT OF THE SUBDIVISION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THE DEVELOPER HAS JUSTIFIED THE AMENDMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE STREET NETWORK. STATING BECAUSE OF PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS FOR THE PROPERTY, THAT PLACE THE OPEN SPACE SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE THE ADJACENT HOMES ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, WHICH CREATES A BRILLIANT CONDITION THAT IS NOT VAIFERRABLE WITH THIS RAN DOM. REVISED TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND ALLOW FOR A DIFFERENT DISTRIBUTION OF OPEN SPACE. ALL STREET SECTIONS, INCLUDING THE BIKE LANE REQUIRED BY THE WOODSIDE LIVING FRAMEWORK PLAN HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

>> THERE IS ALSO AN AMENDMENT -- PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE THE TOTAL OPEN SPACE PROVIDED ON THE ORIGINAL APPROVED REGULATING PLAN AND WHAT WAS PRESENTED AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT.

IT'S BEEN REDUCED BY 61.9 ACRES, TO 44.5 ACRES.

THE FORM BASE CODE REQUIRES A MINIMUM OPEN SPACE OF 14%.

THEY ARE STILL IN KEEPING WITH THE FORM BASED CODE.

IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

BASED ON THAT AND BASED ON THE FORM BASED CODE, THE ABILITY TO FORWARD PLANS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING CONDITION AND ULTIMATELY THE CITY COUNCIL, THIS ITEM WAS PRESENTED TO THE TM ZE AND THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 61 EVER THE PROPOSED REGULATING PLAN. THE PLAN REPORT DID DISCUSS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATING PLAN.

IT WAS NOT IN CONCERT WITH THE FACE SITE PLAN.

THAT WAS ONLY APPROPRIATE WITH REVISIONS REFERRED TO THE THE COUNCIL FOR ACTION AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. WE AS A STAFF ARE SEEKING CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL REGARDING THE REQUEST OF REVISIONS TO THIS REGULATING PLAN AND SEEKING GUIDANCE AT THIS TIME.

I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTION AND ANSWER THE BEST I CAN.

>> SHE ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION. >> COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS FROM Y'ALL BEFORE WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? DO YOU WANT TO WAIT FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> LET'S WAIT. >> I SAW --

>> COUNCIL, ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE

APPLICANT? >> I'M NOT SEEING ANY.

GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR TAKING THE TIME. I WILL MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.

THE CONTROLS ARE STACY? >> ASK IF YOU NEED TO ADVANCE.

>> PLEASE ADVANCE, STACY. I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SHORT PROJECT UPDATE. AS WAS STATED PHASE 1 IS COMPLETE. WE ARE EXPERIENCING STRONG SALES IN PHASE 2. IT LOOKS LIKE FROM LAST SEPTEMBER UNTIL NOW, WE HAVE 82 SALES IN PHASE 2 AND IN THE LAST YEAR, HOMESTEAD HAS ACCOUNTED FOR 26% OF STARTS.

[00:40:03]

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE PRURP FOR AMENDING THE PLAN IS TO LOOK INTO THE REST OF THE PROJECTS.

WE WANT TO CREATE A BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD THAN WE HAD ACTUALLY PLANNED. WE STARTED TO LOOK AT THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE STREET NETWORKS AND THE OPEN SPACE AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP, ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WE SAW IS SOMEWHERE THE OPEN SPACES WERE, WHERE THEY WERE SITUATED, THERE WERE ISSUES. MAKE OPEN SPACE MORE USEABLE, INCREASE WALKABILITIES, OFFER A WIDER RANGE OF HOUSING TYPES AND AFFORDSABILITY. LOOK AT THE PLAN IN FACE 1 AND PHASE 2 AND CREATE A PHASING PLAN AND ACCOMMODATE THE FUTURE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. I WILL RUN DOWN THE DIFFERENT ITEMS IN THE PRESENTATION. STACY, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

REALLY THE DISTRIBUTION OF OPEN SPACE, WE SAW IN OUR FIRST COUPLE OF FACES AND TALKING TO PEOPLE WOULD LIVED THERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE SMALLER POCKET PARKS ARE WHAT SEEM TO BE ENJOYED AND USED. WHEN WE STARTED TO LOOK AT THE NEXT PHASES OF HOMESTEAD, THE LARGE PARK IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

YOU CAN SEE PRETTY MUCH WHERE IT SAYS PROPOSED SPACE.

EACH OF THOSE DARKER LINES IS 5 FEET TOP GRAPHIC FALL.

WE WERE FACING AN ISSUE IN THE OVERLAY THAT TOPOGRAPHY WHERE THE OPEN SPACE IS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE AREA ON THE LEFT.

IF YOU WERE STANDING ON THE RIGHT HALF OF THAT OPEN SPACE, YOU WOULD BE EYE-LEVEL AND LOOKING INTO THE ROOFTOPS OF THOSE HOMES TO THE LEFT WHERE THE ARROW IS POINTING.

SO WE WANTED TO -- ALSO THE DRAGE OF THAT IS TOUGH WITH WATER GOING FROM THE OPEN SPACE TO HOMES.

WE WANTED TO TAKE THE OPEN SPACE ON THE RIGHT SLIDE, RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE, AND HAVE THAT OPEN UP INTO THE MEADOW DOWN THERE.

IT WILL CREATE REALLY INCREDIBLE VIEWS ACROSS THAT OPEN SPACE.

ESPECIALLY FOR SUNSET, FOR THAT PARK.

NEXT SLIDE. ANOTHER THING WE STARTED TO LOOK AT, TO INCREASE WALKABILITY AND A SENSE OF COMMUNITY W THE OLDER STREET NETWORK WAS NOT WORKING WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY AS MUCH.

YOU WOULD HAVE MANY MORE INSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE RETAINING WALLS IN FRONT OF HOMES.

WE WERE TRYING TO CHANGE THE STREET LEVEL FOR GRADING.

YOU HAVE EXAMPLES OF HOMES ON THE RIGHT.

YOU DON'T HAVE THE WALKS SEPARATING THE PEDESTRIAN WALK FROM THE FRONT PORCH AND THE STREET AREA.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF HOW THE INSTANCE ON THE RIGHT, IF YOU CAN ELIMINATE WHAT MADE RETAINING WALLS POSSIBLE IT BECOMES MORE WALKABLE AND PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THE REAL REASON FOR THIS AMENDMENT WAS TO ADDRESS THE STREET NETWORK AND THE GRADING AND THE OPEN SPACE FOR THESE PHASES. WE ARE SHOWING AN INCREASE -- A DECREASE IN THE LARGER LOTS AND AN INCREASE IN THE SMALLER LOTS.

ONE THING THAT WE HAVE HEARD ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND ACROSS THE METROPLEX AND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS IN MUNICIPALITIES IS THAT AFFORDABILITY IS REALLY THE THINGEN JUST AN EXAMPLE, FOR AN ASI, 2010 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD WAS 203,000 AND IT'S GONE UP TO 322,000. THAT'S A 58% INCREASE.

[00:45:01]

WE ARE SEEING A LOT OF PEOPLE -- WE ARE BRINGING IN MORE FAMILIES, MORE EMPTY NESTERS. WE ARE BROADENING THE DEMOGRAPHIC OF OUR HOMEOWNERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT IS THE BEAUTIFUL THING ABOUT THE FORM BASED CODE.

AS YOU GO ALONG, YOU CAN TUNE YOUR HOUSING MIX TO NOT ONLY WHAT THE VISION FOR THE CITY IS, BUT ALSO WHAT IS ATTAINABLE, WHAT PEOPLE CAN AFFORD AND WHAT PEOPLE WANT.

THE FORM-BASED CODE HAS THE BRACKETS OF 20% MINIMUM.

PREVIOUSLY OUR CATEGORY 1 WAS REALLY BUMPING UP AGAINST THE MAXIMUM. SO WE ARE TRYING TO BRING OUR HOUSING MIX IN MORE ALIGNED WITH WHAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL MIX AND WHAT IS CONTEMPLATED IN THE FORM-BASED CODE.

THE WHOLE REASON IS TO HAVE A LARGER HOUSING SPECTRUM IN TERMS OF TYPES AND INVITE MORE HOUSEHOLD TYPES AND PEOPLE TO LIVE THERE. NEXT SLIDE.

THE PHASING PLAN WE ARE SHOWING IS MULTI-FACETED.

ONE, IT HELPS US ADDRESS THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE AS WE GO.

PHASE 1 AND 2 IN THE NEW 3 AND TOP RIGHT CORNER, WILL PROVIDE EXTRA DIRT FOR THE NEXT PHASES TO HELP FLATTEN THEM OUT A LITTLE BIT. THAT MAKES IT EASIER TO DEVELOP AND MAKE IT MORE WALKABLE AND USEABLE.

AS WELL AS -- NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS IN THE FUTURE.

FOR SO ARE OUR LATER PHASES. WE HAVE BEEN TRACKING AND THIS COMES IN -- NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. RIGHT IN OUR FUTURE -- OUR PROPOSED FUTURE PHASE 5 INTERSECTION IS ENTRY.

WE WOULD LIKE TO DELAY THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

THAT INTERSECTION. TO POTENTIALLY HAVE THE INTERCONNECTOR COME IN FIRST. OR HAVE MORE PLANNING ON THAT SO WE CAN COULD POSSIBLY HAVE THE INTERCONNECTOR GO IN FIRST BEFORE WE HAVE RESIDENTS USING THAT ENTRANCE.

THAT IS MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, APPRECIATE THAT.

SO IS, COUNCIL, THIS IS A WORK SESSION BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CONSIDER IN A REGULAR MEETING.

IS THAT RIGHT? >> HELLO.

THE INTENT WAS TO BASICALLY HIGHLIGHT TO YOU AND SEEK YOUR GUIDANCE AS TO -- TO SEEK YOUR GUIDANCE ON WHAT YOU BELIEVE SHOULD OCCUR. HE IS SHAKING HIS HEAD IT IS NOT

A REGULAR ITEM. >> I RAISED MY HAND.

>> I SAW YOU RAISE YOUR HAND REALLY QUICK THERE, DAVID.

WHY IS THIS ON A WORK SESSION? HELP ME UNDERSTAND.

>> REGULARLY PLANNED AMENDMENTS TECHNICALLY UNDER THE FORM-BASED CODE, ABLE TO AT YOUR DISCRETION.

THERE IS A PROVISION THAT SAYS STAFF CAN DEFER QUESTIONS, IF THEY WANT TO, IN THIS CASE IT'S A HIGH VISIBILITY ONE.

BUT OBVIOUSLY REGS SPECIFICALLY REQUIRE FINAL AUTHORITY OR APPROVAL OR REJECTION OF AN AMENDMENT.

RATHER THAN STAFF DOING IT BY THEMSELVES AND TELLING COUNCIL WHAT TO DO, IT WAS CUED UP A WORK SESSION TO GET FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL AND DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL TO STAFF.

IT WILL NOT EFFECT THE -- >> IT P & Z.

>> I SEE YOUR HAND UP FIRST. DAVID WAS FIRST.

>> I WILL GO FIRST. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

I'M GLAD YOU TALKED ABOUT THE AFFORDABILITY, THAT IS WHERE I WAS GOING TO GO. AFFORDABILITY IS ONLY WHEN YOU

[00:50:03]

FIRST OF ALL WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE COTTAGE AND THE

KA CITAS? >> STARTING AT $250,000.

THE CASITAS ON 35-FOOT LOTS ARE STARTING AT 270 TO 280 AND GOING INTO THE LOW 300S. IT'S DEFINITELY -- THE SMALLER THE HOME, THE HIGHER THE SQUARE FOOT PRICE.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT MORTGAGE PAYMENT AFFORDABILITY, THAT IS STILL -- ESPECIALLY -- IT'S CHANGED IN DFW.

THE INNER LOOP IS NOW GEORGE BUSH.

I WOULD SAY YOU ARE HARD-PRESSED TO FIND HOMES IN THOSE PRICE RANGES IN THE INNER LOOP OR CLOSE TO THE INNER LOOP AND WITH OPEN SPACES AND ARCHITECTURE WE ARE PROVIDING.

OBVIOUSLY AS WE GO FORWARD, WE WILL TRY TO KEEP THAT AFFORDABILITY RELATIVE TO THE OVERALL MARKETPLACE INTACT.

WE HAVE STRONG SALES THERE. THE REASON WE HAVE STRONG SALES FROM PHASE 1 TO PHASE 2 WAS WE INTRODUCED THE SMALLER IN THE 30,000 TO 40,000. WE ARE SEEING WAY MORE PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO AFFORD THOSE HOUSES.

HOMESTEAD IS AN OPTION FOR MORE PEOPLE.

I WILL SAY AFTER PHASE 1, OUR GOAL IS WE HAD A LIST OF 150 PEOPLE INTERESTED IN HOMESTEAD BUT COULDN'T QUITE AFFORD TO BE IN THERE. THAT IS WHEN WE HAD 45-FOOT, 55-FOOT AND 60-FOOT LOTS. NOW WE OPENED UP THE SPECTRUM, WE ARE ABLE TO BRING THOSE PEOPLE IN THAT WANTS TO LIVE IN HOMESTEAD. THEY SEE IT, OH, I LOVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I COULDN'T AFFORD IT IN PHASE 1.

NOW WE CAN HAVE THOSE PEOPLE AND BROADEN THE SPECTRUM OF

HOMEOWNERS. >> THE INTRODUCTION OF OPEN SPACE BUT I UNDERSTAND THE REASONS WHY YOU ARE DOING THAT.

I SEE ALL THE OTHER AMENITIES ARE STAYING THERE.

I STILL THINK 250 IS -- FOR A FIRST-TIME HOMEOWNER.

I THINK YOU ARE LOOKING AT SECOND-TIME HOMEOWNERS.

YOU ARE NOT GETTING SINGLE FAMILIES, TEACHERS, WHO CAN AFFORD A SITE LIKE THAT. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT PRICES WILL DO IN THE FUTURE. I WISH THERE WAS A WAY FOR US TO TO BE HAVE AN AGREEMENT IF AFFORDABILITY YOU ARE SHOOTING FOR, THAT IS WHAT WILL YOU STAY WITH AND NOT GO WITH THE MARKET.

THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAVE, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> I THINK, MATT -- I DIDN'T HEAR THE ANSWER. I THINK YOU ASKED THE SIZE OF

THOSE? >> YES, I DID.

>> SIZE-WISE, THE THOMES 131400P TO 1800, 2,000.

LAST YEAR WE EXPANDED THE SIZE RANGE UP TO 35-FOOT CASITAS.

THOSE RANGE FROM 1600, UP TO 22. WE ADDED ONE LARGER ONE.

WE ARE SEEING SALES FROM MY LAST CONVERSATION ON THE 35S AND THE 2,000, 1800 SQUARE FOOT AREA.

>> THAT'S THE MAJORITY OF THE TOWNHOMES.

>> THE TOWNHOMES HAVE IS JUST STARTED SELLING.

THEY ARE AVERAGE OF 1600 SQUARE FEET BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT

SIZES. >> YOU HAVE SUCH BIG RANGES.

>> I'LL ASK ONE MORE QUESTION, REAL QUICK.

-- THE LAST TWO YEARS, AND ASSUMING THAT THIS YEAR WE'LL GET THE SAME QUESTION. THEY WERE TELLING ME THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ART COMPONENT IN THIS AND THEY HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET. CAN YOU GIVE ME AN UPDATE ON WHEN THAT WILL HAPPEN AND WHERE YOU ARE WITH THE OTHER AMENITIES

IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? >> THERE IS AN ART COMPONENT IN THE -- THERE IS AN ART FUND THAT IS FUNDED EVERY TIME THERE IS A TRANSACTION. IT'S A CERTAIN SMALL PERCENTAGE WITH A CAP THAT GOES INTO THIS ART FUND.

AS THAT GROWS, WITH THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WE'VE HAD THIS, IT GROWS SUBSTANTIALLY AS WE GET THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER

[00:55:04]

IN HOMETOWN, THEY HAVE, I THINK, AROUND 8 TO 10 LARGE INSTALLMENTS OF PUBLIC ART PURCHASED THROUGH THAT FUND.

>> BREEZING THROUGH THE SECOND PHASE, YOU PROBABLY HAVE FUNDS IN THERE, IT MAY HELP TO COMMUNICATE WITH SOME OF THE RESIDENTS OVER THERE AND MAYBE GET THAT COMMITTEE GOING.

I KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

SOME OF THEM STRESSED THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THEY BOUGHT IN THERE AND THEY ARE DISAPPOINTED THEY HAVEN'T SEEN THAT COME TO FRUITION. FYI FROM THINGS WE ARE HEARING

FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> BASED ON MARKET SALE, BUT THE SECOND SALE. NEXT TIME WELL HAVE AN HOA ANNUAL MEETING, I WILL SHOW THEM THE MONEY THAT'S IN THERE AND THE BUDGET FOR PUBLIC ART AND WHAT THEY CAN EXPECT IN THE

FUTURE. >> WHEN YOU DO THAT ANNUAL

MEETING, WILL YOU INVITE ME? >> SURE.

>> I REALLY THINK YOU NEED TO GET OUT AND GIVE OWNERSHIP OF THAT. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE THE INSTALLATIONS BUT IT DOES MEAN YOU HAVE A GROUP TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF IT. PUT IT IN THE HANDS OF THE RESIDENTS, NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE DEVELOPER.

>> I WILL TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT, FOR SURE.

>> YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP, MARTHA.

>> I KNOW THAT THERE IS NOT A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, PER SE, WITH THIS. I AM ASSUMING THAT IS BECAUSE IT FALLS WITHIN THE FORM-BASED CODE, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE SOME CHANGES. IS THAT CORRECT?

OR DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION? >> MARTHA, YOU'RE CORRECT, ALL THE PROPOSED CHANGES, INCREASES IN LOT SIZE OR REDUCTION IN THE OPEN SPACE AND REALIGNMENT OF THE STREET NETWORK, WOULD BE OPEN SPACE STILL WELL WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. ON THEIR REDUCTION AND BASED ON THE CONCERN WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE AS JUSTIFICATION.

YES, ABSOLUTELY IT IS ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL HAD THERE NOT BEEN INCENTIVE TIED TO.

IT WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT WITH OUR RESIDENTSEN THE ONLY THING THAT WAS OF CONCERN TO US, BECAUSE IT FALLS WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL ASPECT OF THINGS, WAS THE RELOCATION OF SOME OF THOSE LARGER LOTS. TO HAVE A MORE VARIED AND DIVERSE HOUSING STOCK INSTEAD OF SHRINKING THAT CATEGORY.

AGAIN, IT IS STILL IN KEEPING. SO ABSOLUTELY, THAT IS WHY OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS THE WAY IT WAS.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'M WITH MATT.

USUALLY I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF REDUCING OPEN SPACE AT ALL.

BUT LOOKING AT THE CONFIGURATION OF YOUR STREETS AND PARTICULARLY OPENING UP THAT AREA WHERE THE OPEN SPACE OVERLOOKS THE MEADOW.

IT MAKES SENSE. ALSO FOR DRAINAGE.

I DO UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DENSITY. I DON'T KNOW, I FEEL LIKE ADDING OVER 100 MORE UNITS TO THIS DEVELOPMENT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT MUCH. AND SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

I'M SO GLAD THAT THE DEVELOPMENT HAS TAKEN OFF.

AND THAT YOU ARE GETTING A LOT OF INTEREST IN YOUR PHASE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER AS FAR AS INCENTIVES OR NOT. I KNOW THIS PROJECT -- OBVIOUSLY IT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IS AS THAT PROJECT.

WITH THE INCREASE IN DENSITY. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO LOOK

[01:00:02]

>> THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER HANDS UP YET. I WILL MAKE MY COMMENTS NOW.

AND QUESTIONS. WILL, YOU SAID LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE EARLY PHASE. WHAT LESSONS DID YOU LEARN?

>> SO A COUPLE OF LESSONS WOULD BE THE PHYSICAL LAYOUT AND THE TOPOGRAPHY, HOW THEY WORKED WITH THE ENGINEERING AND THE LAYOUT OF THE STREETS. WE HAD SOME INSTANCES OF LARGER RETAINING WALLS, WHEN YOU ARE THERE IN PERSON, I'D RATHER HAVE 2-FOOT RETAINING WALLS THAN ONE 4-FOOT.

YOU CAN TELL WHEN YOU ARE WALKING AROUND THE DIFFERENCE IN WALKABILITY AND FEEL. SECOND MAJOR LESSON WAS THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE OPEN SPACE AND THE USABILITY OF THEM.

FROM WHAT WE HAVE GATHERED, THE DISTRIBUTION OF SMALLER OPEN SPACES, SMALLER INSET COURTS ARE MORE USEABLE THAN THE LARGER ONE. SO DISBURSING THE OPEN SPACES WAS A LESSON LEARNED. SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO TRY TO ACHIEVE MORE OF. THEN THE THIRD ONE WAS JUST THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE, HAVING THOSE LARGER LOTS CAUSED IN TERMS OF HELPING THE NEIGHBORHOOD MOVE FORWARD IN TERMS OF SALES. THAT LIST OF PEOPLE THAT SAID, MAN, WE LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE CAN'T AFFORD IT.

REALLY TRYING TO OPEN UP THE HOUSING TYPES AND AFFORD LKT SPECTRUM FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE ESTABLISHING A MARKET OUT THERE. WE ARE BUILDING -- THESE WERE HOUSING TYPES THAT, YOU KNOW, SIX, SEVEN YEARS AGO, IF YOU WENT TO THE BUILDERS AT DFW METROPLEX, THEY WOULD SAY NO WAY. THAT'S NOT DONE THERE.

WE ARE ESTABLISHING THE ABILITY -- THAT YOU CAN DO THAT.

PEOPLE DO WANT THOSE HOUSING TYPES.

THOSE ARE THE THREE MAIN LESSONS WE HAVE TAKEN AWAY.

JUST GOING FROM PHASE 1 TO PHASE 2.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THIS COUNCIL IT AT A LITTLE BIT AFTER DISADVANTAGE OR A LOT OF DISADVANTAGE BECAUSE NONE OF US WERE ON COUNCIL BEFORE THIS PACKAGE WAS APPROVED.

IT WAS APPROVED ONE YEAR BEFORE I GOT ON COUNCIL.

I DID SERVE WITH THE PREVIOUS MAYOR, WHO WAS A PART OF APPROVING THAT. THERE IS ONE THING IN MY EARS WHEN HE WAS TALKING ABOUT HOMESTEAD.

AND THAT WAS THAT THE AMENITY PACKAGE THAT WAS ENVISIONED WAS MUCH MORE GRAND AS FAR AS POOL AND THE AMENITIES AROUND THE POOL THAN WHAT ENDED UP ULTIMATELY OCCURRING.

I'M JUST RELAYING INFORMATION THAT WAS SPOKEN TO ME OFTEN.

WHEN I GO OUT THERE AND LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S A GORGEOUS NEIGHBORHOOD WHAT A GREAT ASSET FOR OUR CITY.

THEN I LOOK AT THE POOL AREA. IT COULD BE SO MUCH BETTER.

IT COULD BE SO MUCH MORE. THERE IS CONCERNS I HAVE ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL. ONE IS THE DENSITY.

I THINK IT'S INCREDIBLY DENSE. I THINK YOU WILL LOSE SOME OF THE FLAVOR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A RESULT IS OF THAT.

I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I WORRY ABOUT THE NARROW STREETS AND THE CARS PARKED IN THE STREETS BECAUSE THE DRIVEWAYS BEING SO SHORT. I'M VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE REDUCED OPEN SPACE. OPEN SPACE WAS A MAJOR CONTRIBUTION CONSIDERATION -- CONSIDERATION IN THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE. WHILE IT MEETS FORM-BASED CODE REQUIREMENTS, BUT IS DOESN'T MEAN IT WASN'T AN INCENTIVE.

I UNDERSTAND THE ORIGINAL PLAN CAUSED SOME ISSUES WITH THE OPEN SPACE IN REGARDS TO TOPOGRAPHY. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE OPEN SPACE COULDN'T GO SOMEWHERE ELSE AND CREATE LESS DENSITY.

I'LL COME BACK TO MY INITIAL POINT, WHICH WAS I THINK THAT POOL AREA COULD BE SO MUCH MORE. I'M GLAD YOU ADDED A DOG PARK.

I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT. I NEED TO LOOK AT THAT DOG PARK.

NOT EVEN JUST ART WORK, WHAT WILL WE DO IN THIS DEVELOPMENT FOR ADDITIONAL AMENITIES? WHAT YOU'VE GOT IS NOT ENOUGH

[01:05:05]

FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. >> ON THE AMENITY PACKAGE, WE DON'T HAVE THE -- THAT IS POST-DEVELOPMENT.

WE HAD AN IMPACT FEE MOVING FORWARD EVERY TIME THERE IS A HOME SALE, MY GOAL AND MY PLAN IS TO INCREMENTALLY IMPROVE THAT SPACE. SO WE HAVE THE POOL AND THE CABANAS AND THE BATHROOM NOW. WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF -- WE PROJECTED THE DOG PARK AND FURNISHING IT.

THE NEXT PHASE MIGHT BE AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN OR IT COULD BE A PARK IN TERMS OF PLAY EQUIPMENT. IT MIGHT TURN OUT THAT IN THE NEXT PHASE WE MIGHT WANT TO JUMP TO ANOTHER OPEN SPACE AND START AMEN TIEING THAT AREA. THE FLEXIBILITY OF ADDING PER PHASE IS WHAT WE ARE PLANNING ON MOVING FORWARD WITH.

IT'S ABOUT INCREMENTAL IMPROVEMENT AND ADDITION.

I THINK THAT WE HAVE THE ADDITION OF THE FORM-BASED CODE AND THESE INTEGRATED OPEN SPACES, THE ATTACHED GREEN, GREEN STREETS. THOSE THEMSELVES ARE ALSO AMENITIES THAT WE PUT TOGETHER IN AMEN TIEING, THAT MIGHT NOT BE BUT THEY ARE DISTRIBUTED AROUND THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

ON THE OPEN SPACE ITEM, THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE OPEN SPACE, THE REDUCTION, I THINK WE WERE NOT TRYING TO REDUCE OPEN SPACE IN TERMS OF PARKS. OUR AMENITIZED LANDSCAPE OPEN SPACES, WE WERE TRYING TO REDISTRIBUTE AND MAKE MORE USEABLE. I THINK THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A SMALL AREA ALONG THE FLOOD PLAIN CHANGED FROM WHEN WE HAD A BETTER IDEA ON THE FLOOD PLAIN BOUNDARY.

WE RETAINED A LITTLE FLOOD PLAIN.

OUR GOAL WAS NOT TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE PARKS IN THE CHANGE. WE WERE SIMPLY REDISTRIBUTING THEM THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE NORTH END OF THE PROJECT.

>> THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US TODAY.

I DON'T SEE A COMPARISON OF OPEN SPACE PARKS PREVIOUS AND OPEN SPACE PARKS CURRENT. SO I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

YOU ARE TAKING AWAY AMENITIES. YOU ARE TAKING AWAY OPEN SPACE.

I HEAR YOU MIGHT DO THIS AND YOU MIGHT DO THAT AND YOU MIGHT DO THIS. I JUST THINK IT'S SUCH A HIGH-END DEVELOPMENT, THERE NEEDS TO BE THAT COMMITMENT TO THOSE AMENITIES. MATT, YOU HAVE A HAND UP AGAIN?

>> YEAH, YOU ARE SPOT ON. IS THERE ANY WAY TO PULL UP THE PROPOSED NEW PLAN? I THINK YOU WILL LOSE A BIT OF THAT FEEL. THE MAYOR HIT IT SQUARE ON THE FIELD. YOU PUT 158 HOMES IN THERE, WILL YOU LOSE THAT FEEL. ONE OF THE BEST THINGS THAT ARE OUT THERE ARE THOSE POCKET PARKS.

I THINK THOSE ARE THE -- THAT'S GOOD.

YOU WANT TO GO BACK? >> RIGHT THERE.

I CAN UNDERSTAND NOT HAVING THE BIG PARK AND SIGHT LINE ISSUES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THOSE HOMES ARE IN THE GREEN SPACES. YOU GO TO THAT BACK SIDE IN THE UPPER RIGHT-HAND CORNER, YOU HAVE DOUBLED THE AMOUNT OF HOMES IN THERE. YOU COULD TAKE TWO OR THREE LOTS OUT AND TURN THAT INTO ANOTHER POCKET PARK.

COULD YOU TAKE ACROSS THE STREET, TAKE A COUPLE OF LOTS OUT THERE. YOU WOULD ADD 649 NEW LOTS, ADD 600 NEW LOTS AND CREATE MORE POCKET PARKS AND REALLY PUT THOSE AMENITIES IN. I THINK A BIT OF AN ISSUE THAT YOU GUYS ARE SUBSIDIZING AMENITIES ON THE BACK END.

SOME OF OUR BEST DEVELOPMENTS PUT THE AMENITIES ON THE FRONT END TO INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO COME AND BUY PROPERTY THERE.

I HAVE LIVED IN WATER VIEW MY WHOLE LIFE.

THEY DIDN'T PUT THE POOL IN AFTER.

IT WAS A POOL AT THE BEGINNING. IT WAS A MAJOR PART OF THE

[01:10:02]

I'M ATRADE THEY WILL WAIT UNTIL IT'S DONE.

THERE IS A LOT THAT DOESN'T SIT WELL.

I KNOW YOU DON'T NEED APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD BUT THERE IS A LOT THAT DOESN'T SIT WELL WITH ME.

>> I AM VERY SORRY. THE POINT OF WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THIS PROPOSAL HAS COME UP LIKE THAT.

I VIEW HOMESTEAD AS -- I MEAN -- I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE TOMORROW, A YEAR FROM NOW, THREE YEARS FROM NOW.

ARCADIA AND MYSELF AND MY FATHER AND HIS PARTNER, WE ARE ALSO CONCERNED WITH PLACE-MAKING. WHY PUT THE AMENITIES IN THE MIDDLE? WE DON'T WANT TO PUT IT OUT FRONT TO SELL MORE HOMES, WE WANT EVERYONE TO WALK TO THE POOL. IF YOU ARE LIVING IN THE BACK HALF, YOU CANNOT WALK TO THE POOL.

YOU HAVE TO DRIVE TO THE POOL. YOU HAVE GREAT WALKS TO GET TO THE POOL. THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE VIEW AND ARE DONE IN DEVELOPMENT THAT OR MORE CYNICAL THAN FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF EVERYBODY LIVING THERE.

WHY HAVE THIS BIG WATER PARK UP FRONT.

IT DOESN'T HELP OUR SALES THAT OUR POOL IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT IS BETTER FOR EVERYBODY LIVING THERE OVER TIME. I VIEW THAT WITH EVERYTHING.

I DO NOT GET UP EVERY MORNING THINKING ABOUT HOW TO NECESSARILY MAKE MORE SALES. WHAT GETS ME OUT OF BED EVERY MORNING, WHAT IS WHAT I'LL BE CREATING GOING TO BE LIKE IN 100 YEARS. I THINK THAT IS LOT OF DEVELOPMENT AND THEY MAY NOT -- I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY LOOK IN 100 YEARS. BUT I KNOW THE ART FUND, THE STREET TREES, THE ARCHITECTURAL REGULATION, ALL THE CCRS WILL HELP THE NEIGHBORHOODS MATURE. IN 100 YEARS I'M CONFIDENT THIS WILL LOOK AMAZING. IT WILL BE A PREMIER PLACE TO LIVE. THERE WILL BE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS, BUT WE ARE OUT HERE TRYING TO A HOME BASED CODE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PEOPLE-CENTRIC AND FUTURE-LOOKING. THAT IS WHAT GETS ME UP IN THE MORNING. WE ARE STILL TRYING TO DO THAT.

THIS EXERCISE WAS NOT TO FIND A WAY TO GET MORE LOTS.

WE WERE LOOKING AT HOW DO WE MAKE THIS BETTER.

THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO.

THAT IS MY GOAL. >> STACY, CAN YOU PULL THAT? THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT.

MATT, YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? MICHAELAL? YOU HAVE YOUR HANDS UP?

>> ARE YOU OPEN TO PUTTING SOME OF THE DENSER LOTS OUT OF THERE AND CREATING MORE OF THOSE POCKET PARKS?

>> WELL, I MEAN, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF DENSITY -- I MEAN -- I THINK MAYBE WE ARE REDUCING THE ACTUAL OPEN SPACE AND I WAS LOOKING BACK AT THIS, HOW WE WERE COMING UP WITH A SHORTAGE OF OPEN SPACE.

I THINK IT WAS REALLY BECAUSE WE ARE ARE CARVING OUT A LITTLE BIT OF FLOOD PLAIN. THE ONE THING, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE ADDING MORE LOTS, WE ARE NOT REALLY ADDING REVENUE, NECESSARILY. WE ARE CHOPPING UP WHAT WAS THERE INTO SMALLER LOTS. WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY MAKING MORE MONEY. THIS REALLY WAS TO MAKE THE SPACE WE HAD MORE USEABLE. CAN WE FIEDGED WAYS TO MAKE -- FINDS WAYS TO MAKE THOSE MORE USEABLE?

THAT'S ALWAYS OUR GOAL. >> SO IF YOU ARE NOT ABOUT MAKING MORE SALES AND THIS ISN'T ADDING REVENUE, THERE SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE, THEN, WITH CREATING MORE OPEN SPACE IN THE DEVELOPMENT. IF THAT'S REALLY TRUE.

[01:15:02]

>> I MEAN -- WELL -- FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, WE TOOK -- IT WAS NOT OPEN SPACE IN THE BOUNDS OF THE FLOOD PLAIN REALLY DIDN'T CHANGE VERY MUCH. WE ARE ALLOCATING THE NUMBER OF UNITS TO SMALLER UNITS. YOU MIGHT SELL MORE QUICKER BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A MONEY THING.

IT'S NOT A MAKE MORE MONEY SCHEME FOR US.

>> THE THING, IF YOU ARE WANTING TO CONTINUE THE FUND FOR FUTURE SPACE STATIONS THEN THE PRIMARY GOAL WOULD BE WHERE ARE WAYS WE CAN CREATE SOME OPEN SPACE. BUT WHAT I'M SEEING, LIKE THE OTHERS HAVE SAID, IN THOSE FUTURE PHASES THERE IS LESS OPEN SPACE. IT FEELS MORE LIKE ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE IT'S HOME AFTER HOME AFTER HOME.

SO WHILE THE PHASE 1, PHASE 2 HAVE THAT FORM BASE CODE FEEL, WHICH IS THE OPEN SPACE, THE WALKABILITY.

I THINK THAT'S THE CONCERN THAT WE HAVE, IS THAT WE WANT TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT FROM START TO FINISH. THAT THERE IS OPEN SPACE, THE FEELING OF WALKABILITY. WE ARE NOT SEEING IT IN THE FUTURE PHASES. IF PUTTING MORE LOTS AND PUTTING MORE LOTS AND OPEN SPACE IS NOT GOING TO MAKE MORE MONEY, THEN DON'T PUT MORE LOTS. KEEP THEM OPEN AND MAKE MORE

OPEN SPACE. >> I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE LACK OF

VARIETY. >> I'M SORRY?

>> I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE LACK OF VARIETY OF HOUSING IN THE NEW PROPOSAL, LIKE YOU'RE SAYING. IT'S LIKE EVERY OTHER

NEIGHBORHOOD. >> NOTHAT'S OUR FEAR THAT WE ARE

VEERING OFF FORM BASED CODE. >> WE ARE GOING MORE IN LINE WITH -- THE ORIGINAL PLAN HAD ALMOST AS MANY LARGER LOTS AS WAS ALLOWED UNDER THE CODE. IN MY VIEW --

>> THE FORM-BASED CODE, WE ARE VEERING OFF THE FLAVOR OF THE

NEIGHBORHOOD. >> THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO SAY

THAT, YES. >> IT'S A FORM-BASED CODE.

WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT. >> WHEN YOU GO FROM THE FIRST PHASE TO THE SECOND PHASE. THE FIRST PHASE IS 45S, 55S AND 60S. THE SECOND PHASE IS EVEN DISTRIBUTION OF 55S, 45S AND TOWNHOMES.

GOING FROM THE FIRST PHASE AND THE SECOND PHASE IS A DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT LOT MIX. THE WHOLE THING ABOUT THE FORM-BASED CODE IS THAT EVERYTHING IS REGULATED AND MANAGED FROM THE ARCHITECTURE. THERE IS FRIEW TREES AND DISTRIBUTING OPEN SPACE. WHERE YOU ARE REGULATING THE FORM BUT NOT THE DENSITY. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE HIGH-QUALITY DEVELOPMENT AND HIGH-QUALITY ARCHITECTURE, IT'S THE FORMULA THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE X AMOUNT OF 55, X AMOUNT OF 45S. THAT'S THE WHOLE, TO MY MIND, THE GREAT THING ABOUT THE FORM-BASED CODE.

IT GIVES YOU THE FLEXIBILITY TO MEET THE FUTURE'S DEMANDS AND

CHALLENGES. >> THAT WOULD BE ALL GOOD AND WELL, WILL, IF THERE ISN'T A HUGE INCENTIVE THAT WAS BASED ON A PLAN THAT IS NOW DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT.

I'D BE INTERESTED TO SEE USEABLE OPEN SPACE, PREVIOUS PLAN, NEW PLAN. I DON'T BELIEVE YOU HAVE THAT.

>> I DO ON MY SLIDE. WE CAN PULL THAT UP.

>> IT IS ENTIRELY TOO DENSE. I THINK IT IS LOOKING A LITTLE BIT LIKE A COOKIE CUTTER DEVELOPMENT IN THE LATER PHASES THAT I AM VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT.

THAT IS NOT THE WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

STACY, YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SLIDE 11. EASIER SAID THAN DONE, HUH, STACY. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO OVER

THIS SLIDE? >> WHAT I'M HEARING WILL SAY, THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY -- OR DIDN'T WANT TO NECESSARILY DECREASE THE USEABLE OPEN SPACE. BUT THEN I'M SEEING THAT WE'VE

[01:20:02]

HOW DO THOSE TWO THINGS COINCIDE OR COLLIDE?

>> PERHAPS A COLLISION OF THEORIES OR THOUGHTS AT THE THIS POINT, BASED ON WHAT WAS GIVEN TO US.

THIS IS WHY WE CAME BEFORE P & Z AND YOURSELVES, COUNCIL.

THE REDUCTION IN SPACE IS APPROXIMATELY 6.4 ACRES.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE LARGER OPEN SPACE AND THE TERMINATING POINTS OR VISTAS, SOME OF THE STREET NETWORKS, THAT IS AMENITIESED OPEN SPACE ANY WAY.

THERE DEFINITELY IS A REDUCTION.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOP RIGHT BY THE FLOOD PLAIN AREA, YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE CHANGES THERE, TOO.

YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE CHANGES IN FLOOD PLAIN.

THERE IS FLOOD PLAIN RECLAMATION WHICH WILL MENTIONED, THAT IS SOMETHING WE WILL HAVE TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER, TOO.

THE DIVERSITY OF JUST THE LOT DISTRIBUTION, TO THEN A REDUCTION IN THE OPEN SPACE, WE SEE THE REDUCTION IN OPEN SPACE IT APPEARS IS TO ACCOMMODATE INCREASED DENSITY.

>> STACY, IF YOU WOULD PULL THE POWERPOINT BACK DOWN.

COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? OPINIONS? I JUST THINK YOU LOST 7 ACRES OR SO OF OPEN SPACE THERE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT REDISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT.

THAT WOULD REDUCE SOME OF THE DENSITY THAT HE IS PROPOSING.

>> I AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS CHANGE.

YOU PUT THIS IN A WORK SESSION TO GET OUR OPINION.

THAT'S MY OPINION. >> IT'S MY OPINION.

>> I AGREE WITH THAT AS WELL. THE STAFF DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH

INFORMATION TO PROCEED. >> I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER HANDS UP. DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED?

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. A THAT CONCLUDES THE WORK SESSION ITEMS. COUNCIL IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AND SEE IF THERE IS ANYTHING YOU WANT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION. OR IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY ITEMS. SEEING NONE WE WILL KEEP THOSE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE HAVE 6 MINUTES BEFORE WE START OUR REGULAR MEETING. WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK? 6-MINUTE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.