[00:00:01]
AND WELCOME TO THE[Development Services Committee on March 21, 2022.]
MARCH 21ST, 2022 MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE COMMITTEE.I'M DYLAN HEDRICK, ALONG WITH ME, I HAVE COUNSEL EDDIE MORRIS AND COUNCILMAN JEFF BASS, AS WELL AS SOME OTHER, SEVERAL STAFF MEMBERS.
UH, FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 21ST MEETING.
WE'LL ON MOTION, MOTION BY SECOND.
WHEN IT'S APPROVED NOW ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, THIS IS LOOKING BACK SEVERAL ITEMS WE'VE LOOKED AT ALREADY PREVIOUSLY.
I KNOW MR. GARRETT IS GOING TO COME BACK TO US WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
OUR FIRST ITEM IS URBAN STYLE MULTIFAMILY STANDARDS, MR. GARRETT.
UM, SO AT THE LAST MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE DIRECTED STAFF TO COME BACK AND COMPARE SOME OF OUR STANDARDS THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, UH, REGARDING DENSITY BUILDING HEIGHT, AS WELL AS SETBACKS, TO SOME EXTENT, COMPARE THOSE WITH THE OTHER CITIES AND KIND OF SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, UH, AS FAR AS MULTIFAMILY, UM, ZONING, MULTIFAMILY STANDARDS GO.
SO IT FOUND SOME INTERESTING THINGS.
UM, I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL, I'LL KIND OF GO THROUGH A FEW CITIES, UM, AND KIND OF THROW IN A LOT OF THERE'S A LOT OF NUMBERS AND ACRONYMS ZONING DISTRICTS UP HERE, BUT KIND OF AS A PREVIEW HIGH LEVEL, IT SEEMED THAT, UM, AND I'VE GOT KIND OF A SUMMARY TABLE AND SOME, MAYBE SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
UM, YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER, UH, DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS TO GO, BUT, UH, IT SEEMED THAT THE STANDARD MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT WAS FAIRLY IN LINE WITH OTHER CITIES AND THAT IT'S, UH, FOR THESE DAYS, AT LEAST FAIRLY LOW DENSITY, UM, THE HEIGHT AND SETBACKS WERE PRETTY SIMILAR, BUT THERE ARE SOME ALTERNATIVE ZONING DISTRICTS, INCLUDING GARLAND THAT, THAT WE HAVE AND OTHER CITIES HAVE, UM, AS FAR AS MORE URBAN OPTION.
AND OF COURSE THE PD ROUND AS WELL.
SO I'LL JUST GO AND JUMP RIGHT INTO IT.
UM, STARTING WITH PLANO, THEY HAVE AN , BUT INTERESTINGLY, THEY'RE ALL, UM, PRETTY SIMILAR THERE IT'S FAIRLY LOW DENSITY.
UM, THIS IS STILL REALLY MORE YOUR GARDEN STYLE COMPLEXES, REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY YOU GO.
OF COURSE, 12 UNITS IS VERY LOW.
THAT'S ACTUALLY OUR TOWNHOUSE, UM, MAXIMUM DENSITY GARLAND, UM, UH, BUT THEY, THEY OF COURSE DO PDS THERE IN PLANO, AS THEY DO IN GARLAND.
THEY DO HAVE AN URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT, UH, KIND OF SIMILAR TO OURS, A MINIMUM 40 UNITS PER ACRE.
IT'S A PRETTY PRESCRIPTIVE FORM-BASED CODE AND THE BUILDINGS, UM, HAVE TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF MORE ZERO SETBACK CLOSE TO THE STREET WALKABLE ENVIRONMENT, THAT SORT OF THING.
AND OBVIOUSLY A PRETTY HIGH DENSITY, UM, DISTRICT WITH A MINIMUM OF 40 UNITS PER ACRE.
UM, IN RICHARDSON THEY HAVE, UH, APARTMENT, UH, DISTRICTS, UM, 40 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT MAX, WHICH IS THE SAME AS OUR STANDARD MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT IN GARLAND, 30 FOOT FRONT SETBACK, UM, 14 UNITS PER ACRE, MAX, WHICH IS, UM, PRETTY LOW THAT'S.
THEY'RE A 1000 ZONING DISTRICT OR 18 UNITS PER ACRE MAX FOR THEIR 8, 9 50.
UM, THE 18 UNITS PER ACRE, AS A REMINDER, IS THE MAXIMUM IN GARLAND FOR MULTI-FAMILY ZONING.
THEY DO HAVE A MIXED USE DISTRICT, BUT INTERESTINGLY, THE STANDARDS FOR THE MULTIFAMILY ASPECTS WITHIN THE MIXED USE GO REALLY SEEM TO GO BACK TO THE APARTMENT, UM, DISTRICT STANDARDS.
UM, SO DIDN'T REALLY FIND MUCH DIFFERENCE THERE.
UM, IN THE STAFF MEMBER I SPOKE WITH, THEY SAID, UM, THEY, THEY RELY HEAVILY ON PDS.
UM, IN FACT, I BELIEVE THE COMMENT WAS, UM, THEY HAVEN'T HAD A SINGLE, UM, URBAN STYLE APARTMENT COMPLEX GOES JUST STRAIGHT THROUGH PERMITTING IN MANY, MANY YEARS, THEY ALL GO THROUGH PDS.
SO, UM, DEFINITELY SOME SIMILARITIES THERE.
WE OF COURSE HAVE HAD A COUPLE THAT HAVE GONE STRAIGHT THROUGH AND MET EVERYTHING IN THE GDC, BUT MOST OF OURS, ESPECIALLY THE URBAN STYLE ONES GO THROUGH THE PD, UM, PROCESS.
UM, DENTON HAS A RESIDENTIAL SEVEN R SEVEN, THAT ALLOWS FOR MULTIFAMILY.
THAT IS ONLY BY SUP THOUGH THAT'S NOT BY RIGHT.
UM, THEY HAVE A LITTLE BIT SHORTER SETBACK FRONT BACK THAN WE DO AT 10 FEET.
UM, 40 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT, SAME THERE, THEY ACTUALLY DON'T REGULATE DENSITY THERE.
THEY JUST DEFER TO THE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE.
AND AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT BUILDING COVERAGE, SETBACKS, UM, THEY DON'T REGULATE DENSITY, BUT OF COURSE, SINCE EVERYTHING MULTI-FAMILY GOES THROUGH AN STP PROCESS THAT CAN ALWAYS BE, UM, YOU KNOW, REVIEWED AS PART OF THAT, THAT PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.
UM, THEY DO HAVE A MIXED USE DISTRICT OPTION THAT REQUIRES A GROUND FLOOR ACCOMMODATION FOR POTENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.
UM, 65 FEET IS THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT WITHIN THAT, ALTHOUGH ANYTHING OVER 40 FEET, UH, BETWEEN 41 AND 65 FEET REQUIRES AN SUP EVEN IN THAT MIXED USE DISTRICT.
UM, AND THEY ALSO HAVE, UH, THE PD ROUTE.
UM, MY COUNTERPART IN DENTON SAID THEY STILL ARE LARGELY SEEING A LOT OF GARDEN STYLE APARTMENT COMPLEXES THERE.
UM, SHE THINKS PARTLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LITTLE, UM, THEY REQUIRE MORE PARKING THAN A LOT OF THE OTHER CITIES DO, WHICH, UM, MAYBE A REASON FOR THAT.
BUT, UH, IN ANY CASE, I WAS JUST A LITTLE COMMENTARY THAT I GOT FROM DENTON.
[00:05:01]
UM, AND ALLEN, I'VE GOT KIND OF TWO SLIDES FOR ALLEN.THEY DO HAVE THEIR STANDARD NF MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS, MF 12 AND MFA TEAM.
THAT'S INDICATIVE OF THE DENSITY.
THEY ARE 12 AND 18 UNITS PER ACRE, MAX DENSITY, UH, 50 FOOT FRONT SETBACKS, UH, WHICH IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT FRONT SETBACK, REALLY.
UM, AS A REMINDER GARLANDS FOR MULTI-FAMILIES 20 FEET MINIMUM, UH, AND THEN THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS 35 FEET.
SO A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN GARLANDS AND, AND MOST OF THESE OTHER CITIES, BUT THEY DO HAVE, THEY DO HAVE AN URBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT THAT SAYS THAT IT MUST BE INTEGRATED WITH A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, IT SEEMS TO BE A REQUIREMENT THERE.
UM, THEY, UH, THEY DO HAVE A RETAIL READY GROUND FLOOR REQUIREMENT, UH, THAT'S 14 FEET, UH, 14 FOOT HIGH CEILINGS, THEY'RE MINIMUM THREE STORIES.
UH, AND THEN 65% OF ALL THE UNITS MUST BE ONE BEDROOMS. UM, AND THEN ALL DWELLINGS MUST BE ACCESSED FROM AN INTERIOR CLIMATE CONTROL CORRIDOR.
THAT'S JUST AVOID YOUR EXTERIOR STAIRWELLS AND THOSE HALLWAYS THAT YOU SOMETIMES SEE FOR MORE GARDEN STYLE, APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
BUT, UM, THE COMMENT FROM STAFF AND ALAN WAS VERY SIMILAR TO RICHARDSON AND THAT THEY, UM, THE VAST MAJORITY OF MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS GO THROUGH THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, UH, PD PROCESS, BECAUSE THEY NATURALLY EITHER DEVIATE ONE MORE DENSITY THAN YOUR MF 12 OR MF 18, UM, OR THEY JUST CAN'T MEET ALL THE STANDARDS IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
UM, SELENA, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN FOR SHARING THIS EARLIER.
UM, THEY HAVE A REALLY INTERESTING, UM, UH, FORMAT AND THAT THEY HAVE KIND OF LIKE , BUT THEY'RE MUCH DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER, UM, PLANOS.
THEY WERE ALL KIND OF JUST DIFFERENT VARIATIONS FOR LOW DENSITY, LOW TO MID DENSITY, MORE GARDEN STYLE COMPLEXES.
UM, SELENA HAS A, THE NF WINE HAS MORE GARDEN STYLE.
MF TWO IS, UM, LITTLE MORE URBAN.
AND THEN AT MYTH THREE IS A TRUE URBAN STYLE, UH, OF DEVELOPMENT.
UM, SO IN F1, SPECIFICALLY AS AN 18 UNITS PER ACRE MAX AND FOUR STORY, THEY, THEY REGULATE HEIGHT BY STORIES, THEIR FOUR STORY MAXIMUM, UM, MF TWO, WHICH THEY CALL URBAN EDGE IS 28 UNITS PER ACRE, A TWO STORY MINIMUM SIX, A SIX STORY MAXIMUM.
AND THEN IN THE THREE IS URBAN LIVING, UH, WHICH IS A 28 UNITS PER ACRE MINIMUM, AND A 60 UNITS PER ACRE, MAXIMUM, AND A MINIMUM OF FOUR STORIES IN HEIGHT.
AND THEY HAVE AN MP3, THEY HAVE A RETAIL READY REQUIREMENT, UH, ON THE GROUND FLOOR OF MULTI-FAMILY, WHICH IS 12 FOOT HIGH CEILINGS THERE, UH, WITH MECHANICAL CHASES NECESSARY FOR COMMERCIAL CONVERSION.
AND, UM, JUST, UH, DIDN'T REALLY REPEAT THIS OR, UH, UH, REPORT THIS IN A LOT OF DETAIL AND THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS, BUT WE DO IN THE GDC HAVE AN URBAN RESIDENTIAL, UH, URBAN RESIDENTIAL, AND AN URBAN BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, NO ONE HAS REZONED ANY PROPERTIES TO THIS, SO IT'S AVAILABLE, BUT IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY EXIST ON THE GROUND ANYWHERE OTHER THAN A FEW URBAN STYLE.
UM, UH, MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE KIND OF LOOKED AT AND MAYBE TAKING SOME ELEMENTS FROM THAT, BUT IT IS A FORM BASED CODE.
UM, IT, UH, UH, URBAN RESIDENTIAL IS, HAS A HIGHER RATIO OF RESIDENTIAL VERSUS NON-RESIDENTIAL, IT'S A 70, 70, 30 RATIO.
UM, SO 70% MINIMUM, UH, RESIDENTIAL, 30% MAXIMUM NON-RESIDENTIAL MAX FOR, FOR NON FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL.
UM, AND THEN THAT'S, IT'S THE OTHER WAY ROUND FOR THE URBAN BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, WHAT I FIND A LITTLE CONFUSING ABOUT THIS IS IT IT'S, DOESN'T SEEM TO, UM, UH, SAY WHAT THE MINIMUM IS FOR A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.
IT GIVES A MAXIMUM OF 30% VISIT SAY, IS IT JUST ONE TENANT SPACE SUPPOSED TO BE, YOU KNOW, RETAIL OR, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH IS THAT? SO IT DOESN'T REALLY, UM, UH, PROVIDE MUCH CLARITY THERE.
SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO LOOK INTO, BUT, UH, BUT AS FAR AS THE STANDARDS IN THIS, UM, URBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT GOES OR ZONING DISTRICT, EXCUSE ME, UH, THE MINIMUM DENSITY IS 30 UNITS PER ACRE.
UM, MINIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS 30 FEET.
UM, FOR BUILDINGS THAT INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED USE A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS 75 FEET, UH, THE FRONT SETBACKS, WHICH ARE, UM, IT'S KINDA SIMILAR TO OUR DOWNTOWN FORM-BASED CODE AND THAT'S MORE OF A BUILD TO LINE, UH, TO THE CURB, BUT IT'S A 10 TO 20 FOOT, UM, UH, SETBACK ESSENTIALLY FROM THE STREET.
UM, AND IT IS A VERY DETAILED, PRESCRIPTIVE FORM BASED CODE.
THIS IS JUST KIND OF THE HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF, YOU KNOW, DENSITY, HEIGHT, AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, BUT IT'S, IT'S, UM, HAS A LOT OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS IN OUR DOWNTOWN AND THAT IT HAS REQUIREMENTS FOR HOW THE, UM, THE, UH, STREET FACE SHOULD INTERACT WITH THE SIDEWALK STREET TREES, PUBLIC FURNITURE, THINGS LIKE THAT, UM, THAT SOME MULTI-FAMILY URBAN STYLE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS WILL DO, OR AT LEAST SOME SORT OF HYBRID ELEMENT OF, BUT THIS IS A MORE
[00:10:01]
PRESCRIPTIVE, UM, AGAIN, PRETTY SIMILAR TO OUR DOWNTOWN, UH, STANDARDS.UM, WE DO, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS TO LOOK AT THIS WHEN THEY'RE INTERESTED IN MULTI-FAMILY AND IT'S CLEARLY A MORE URBAN STYLE.
WE SAY, WELL, WE HAVE OUR MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, BUT WE ALSO HAVE THIS URBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THAT, UH, WE, WE DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT.
UM, AND I THINK A COUPLE OF, UM, A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE JUST SPECULATING HERE, BUT PERHAPS A FEW REASONS WHY THEY DON'T JUST GO ALL IN ON REZONING THIS WAY.
ONE MAY BE THE, THE, UM, THE FACT THAT IT DOES SEEM TO REQUIRE, UM, ACTUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
I DON'T SAY IT, IT DOES SAY IT ACTUALLY IS REQUIRED, UH, FOR URBAN RESIDENTIAL.
THERE DOES HAVE TO BE A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE COMPONENT, BUT IT'S NOT REAL CLEAR HOW MUCH, UM, UH, DEVELOPERS, UH, FOR MULTI-FAMILY THEY MAY JUST UPFRONT SAY, NOW WE REALLY JUST WANT TO DO MULTIFAMILY.
WE'LL HAVE A CLUBHOUSE AND AMENITIES, BUT WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN DOING A MIXED USE COMPONENT.
SO THAT MAY, THAT BY ITSELF, UH, MAY STEER THEM MORE TOWARDS MULTIFAMILY.
UM, PERHAPS THE FORM-BASED CODE.
I HAVEN'T HEARD THIS EXPLICITLY, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY PROBABLY LOOK AT THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE, THEY'LL OFTENTIMES LOOK AT THE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT AND SAY, WELL, REALLY THE ONLY THING IS WE CAN MEET EVERYTHING JUST WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DENSITY AND HEIGHT.
AND SO THAT'S KIND OF STEERS THEM MORE TOWARDS TO USE THAT IN A BASE ZONING FOR A PD AND JUST REQUEST THOSE TWO DEVIATIONS.
UM, AND IT DEPENDS ON THE SITE 80 UNITS PER ACRE, UM, IS, IS FAIRLY DENSE FOR GARLAND THAT'S THE MAXIMUM DENSITY.
SO WE ALSO WANT TO BE CAREFUL ON, UH, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THE SITE, IS THAT APPROPRIATE ON ALL PARCELS AND GARLAND? UM, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S, UM, ADJACENCY TO RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT JUST WANTING TO MAKE, UH, THE COMMITTEE AWARE WE DO HAVE THAT AS AN OPTION IN THE GDC, BUT AGAIN, IT DOES REQUIRE THAT MIXED USE COMPONENT.
UM, WHEREAS SOME OF THESE OTHER CITIES, UH, IT'S MORE OF A RETAIL READY GROUND FLOOR, SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY REQUIRE THAT COMMERCIAL USE AS PART OF THE CEO, BUT IT DOES AT LEAST HAVE TO BE BUILT TO ACCOMMODATE IT.
SHOULD THAT EVER BE, UM, REQUESTED OR COME FORWARD? SO REALLY IN SUMMARY, UM, IT SEEMS THAT OUR STANDARD MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT IN GARLAND IS IN LINE WITH, UM, OTHER CITIES MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICTS, UM, AND THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL IS TO SOME EXTENT AS WELL, UM, MAYBE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ACTUALLY REQUIRING THE MIXED USE COMPONENT.
UM, SO SOME POSSIBLE OPTIONS, POTENTIAL OPTIONS IS, UM, WE'VE FORCED CAN REVISE THE MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT TO ACCOMMODATE MORE URBAN STYLE PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY THROUGH THE, UH, HEIGHT AND DENSITY, UH, REGULATIONS, WHICH ARE THE TWO MOST COMMON DEVIATIONS.
WHEN THESE PDS COME FORWARD FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, UH, WE CAN CREATE A ADDITIONAL MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT SIMILAR TO, UM, SELENA AND PLANO THAT ACCOMMODATE MORE URBAN STYLE PROJECTS, KIND OF MORE OF A STAIR-STEP, UM, OF, OF DENSITIES.
UM, WE CAN OF COURSE REVISE THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL, UH, DISTRICT, UM, THAT WE JUST WENT OVER.
AND OF COURSE, UM, UM, YOU CAN CONSIDER NO ACTION AND, UM, URBAN STYLE PROJECTS.
WE'RE JUST CONTINUE TO GO THROUGH THE PD PROCESS AND JUST DEVIATE FROM, UM, FROM THOSE PARTICULAR STANDARDS.
SO I THINK THAT'S, UM, I'LL STOP THERE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
WELL, HOW LONG HAS THE, HAS OUR URBAN RESIDENTIAL, UM, BEEN IN PLACE? HAS THAT BEEN SINCE 2015 WITH THE GDC AND IN ALL THAT TIME, WE'VE HAD NO TAKERS, NO TAKERS.
UM, LIKE I SAID, THERE'VE BEEN ONE OR TWO PROJECTS WHERE THEY'VE TAKEN SOME INSPIRATION FROM IT AND DO A PD, UM, WHERE THERE, THEY CLEAR THE ONE IN MORE URBAN STYLE, BUT THEY'RE STILL USING IT IN THE F DISTRICT AS THE BASE.
UM, SO YEAH, NO, NO ONE THAT'S GONE ALL IN, ON REZONING TO URBAN RESIDENTIAL.
I WOULD, I WOULD SEE THAT AS BEING A PRETTY GOOD INDICATION THAT THAT WAS A SWING AND A MISS AND THAT WE SHOULD, THAT WE CAN AND SHOULD, UH, TRY TO TRY TO DO BETTER WITH THAT.
UM, SO FOR ME, THE REASON I WANTED TO SEE HOW WE COMPARED TO OTHER AREAS AROUND IS JUST TO SEE THAT WE WERE IN LINE SO THAT WE WEREN'T MISSING OUT ON ANY OPPORTUNITIES BECAUSE WE WERE MORE RESTRICTIVE OR HARDER TO GET APPROVED THROUGH.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
IT LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE JUMPING THROUGH THE SAME HOOPS ANYWHERE THEY GO AS THEY ARE HERE.
UM, BUT I THINK, I THINK, UH, DEBRA'S RIGHT.
I MEAN, IF WE HAVE A, UH, IF WE GOT THAT PD AND NO, ONE'S TOUCHED IT IN SEVEN YEARS, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT REWRITING THAT OR HER SCRAPPING IT, BUT, UM, BUT I WOULD
[00:15:01]
BE OPEN TO HAVING DIFFERENT LEVELS.I THINK THE ONE FOR SELENA, UM, LOOKED UP A REALLY INTELLIGENT, INTELLIGENT, WANTED TO START FROM, I THINK IF I WAS, IF I WAS COMPARING THE, THE ONES THAT WE WERE SHOWN HERE, SO THAT'S JUST MY 2 CENTS.
SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I LOOK MORE INTO THE SALON AND I READ THEIR CODE A LITTLE BIT.
UM, ONE BIG COMPONENT OF THAT IS THE URBAN LIVING REQUIRES 75% OF PARKING TO BE COVERED.
SO THAT REALLY FORCES YOU TO BUILD A STRUCTURED PARKING OR PARKING GARAGE.
AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REALLY PUSHING FOR THERE.
ESPECIALLY WITH THAT DENSITY, URBAN EDGE GIVES YOU THE OPTION FOR, UH, THE PARKING GARAGE OR COVER PARKING AND GARDEN STYLE HAS THE COVERED PARKING.
THERE'S COVERED PARKING MINIMUMS, BUT IT'S NOT AN A STRUCTURE IT'S JUST OUR STANDARD KIND OF CAR PORT TYPE DEVELOPMENT.
BUT, UM, IF I WAS GOING TO DO SOMETHING, I WOULD AS WELL LOOKING AT THE GOALS OF THIS TO WHAT IS OUR GOAL.
AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE EVER GOING TO GET A STRAIGHT ZONING OF ONE OF THESE CATEGORIES, EVEN IF WE WERE TO DO IT BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS SOME VARIANCE, THE GOAL SHOULD BE THEN TO REVISE OUR MULTI-FAMILY STANDARDS, TO GIVE THEM A BASIS TO USE FOR THEIR PDS GOING FORWARD.
SO IF WE GO TO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO SINAI, I THINK THOSE ARE VERY GOOD OPTIONS TO START FROM GARDEN STYLE ALMOST MATCHES ARE MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICTS ALMOST EXACTLY THIS URBAN EDGES.
I THINK WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT LAST TIME.
WHAT IS THIS MIDDLE GROUND? AND WELL, THEY HAVE IT RIGHT THERE, OF COURSE DEFINED FOR US.
AND THEN URBAN LIVING IS REALLY A LOT MORE.
WHAT WE'RE SEEING THE QUESTION THEN IS, DO WE WANT TO HAVE THIS RETAIL READY PORTION PRESCRIBED IN OUR SITE BECAUSE MR. BARON DID SAY THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE REASONS, BIG REASONS WHY NO ONE'S TAKEN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL PATH, JUST BECAUSE DEVELOPERS MAY NOT WANT TO USE THAT, BUT HAVE BEEN RETAIL READY.
YOU'RE NOT FORCED INTO THAT NECESSARILY.
YOU'RE READY TO CONVERT INTO THAT FROM RESIDENCES.
SO, WELL, MY QUESTION ON THAT WOULD BE, UM, HAVING, YOU KNOW, RESERVING THE GROUND FLOOR FOR RETAIL, EVERY TIME SOMEONE WANTS TO CHOOSE THE URBAN LIVING OPTION.
WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE BENEFIT OF THAT? WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DO THERE? RIGHT.
I MEAN, IT'S A QUESTION FOR US, RIGHT? LIKE ON THAT ONE, THAT'S TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH THAT LINE.
WOULD WE HOPE THAT THEY WOULD PUT SOME RETAIL IN THE GROUND FLOOR OR IS IT EVEN APPROPRIATE ON THAT AND JUST HAVE THE RETAIL, THE SHOPPING CENTER NEXT DOOR.
SO I, I THINK THAT, I MEAN, WE'LL, DO YOU KNOW, IS THERE A REASON WHY EVERY SINGLE ONE HAS THAT ELEMENT IN THERE? WELL, I MEAN, IT'S MIXED USE HAS BEEN PRETTY POPULAR, UM, YOU KNOW, TREND OVER THE PAST DECADE OR TWO.
AND I THINK THE IDEA IS TO HAVE KIND OF A LIVE WORK, PLAY DEVELOPMENT, ALL KIND OF IN ONE PLACE WHERE FOLKS CAN, YOU KNOW, HAVE AN URBAN STYLE OF LIVING LIVE ABOVE SOME RETAIL SHOPS WHERE THEY CAN JUST KIND OF WALK DOWNSTAIRS AND MAKE IT MORE OF A DESTINATION AS WELL TO VISITORS.
UM, BUT, BUT, UH, BUT DO YOU DO MAKE A GOOD POINT THAT MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE ON EVERY SITE? UM, AND YOU KNOW, WE ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO WANT TO BE CAREFUL TOO ABOUT, UM, HAVING RETAIL SPACES THAT MAY JUST REMAIN VACANT IF THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH OF A DEMAND FOR THOSE SPACES.
SO THAT, THAT DOESN'T REALLY HELP THE PROJECT EITHER.
SO THERE'S CERTAINLY A BALANCE THERE, THEY TURN OVER A LOT.
I JUST, I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, AND THEN HISTORICALLY WHAT I'VE SEEN, I MEAN, IN CITIES SURROUNDING HERE IS THAT THOSE, THOSE RETAIL IN THE BOTTOM FLOOR OF THE APARTMENTS, THEY JUST DON'T WORK.
THEY JUST DON'T GO OVER, YOU KNOW, UM, I JUST DON'T SEE THEM BEING SUCCESSFUL.
UM, YOU KNOW, I'D, I WOULD BE WILLING TO STRIKE THAT ALTOGETHER OR AT LEAST DO LIKE SELENA DID AND SAY RETAIL READY AND NOT FORCE THE REQUIREMENT ON THEM.
I'D BE, I'D BE PERFECTLY FINE WITH GETTING RID OF THE, THE RETAIL REQUIREMENT OR AT LEAST MAKING IT TO BE EASILY MODIFIED FOR RETAIL.
UM, AND I AGREE, AND I WOULD BE KIND OF, UM, AND I DON'T, WE, I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE THIS RIGHT NOW, BUT THE, UM, THE COST DIFFERENTIAL WITH TELLING US IF WE TELL THEM, MAKE IT RETAIL READY BETWEEN THAT AND WHAT THEY WOULD NORMALLY CHOOSE TO DO, HOW MUCH OF A FINANCIAL IMPACT WE WOULD HAVE ON DEVELOPERS WHO REALLY ARE WANTING A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT, HOW, HOW MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE WOULD IT BE FOR THEM TO COMPLY WITH EVEN A RETAIL READY REQUIREMENT? UM, AND THERE ARE, THERE ARE CITIES, THERE ARE STATES, THERE ARE A LOT OF PLACES IN OTHER COUNTRIES WHERE THAT MIXED USE WITH RETAIL ON THE GROUND FLOOR IS EXTRAORDINARILY SUCCESSFUL.
WHERE DOES NOT SEEING IT HERE? NOPE.
SO IT'S KIND OF, UH, IT'S HARD TO REQUIRE SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO, TO LEAVE THAT PLUGGED IN FOR
[00:20:01]
A POSSIBLE FUTURE USE.YOU KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF GAMBLING ON THE FACT THAT THAT NUMBER ONE, WE FIND THAT DESIRABLE, THAT WOULD BE WHAT WE'D BE SAYING.
AND SO WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE YOU TO PREPARE FOR THIS FOR A POTENTIAL FUTURE.
AND THAT'S A GAMBLE, UM, THAT IS A GAMBLE.
WELL, AND YOU KNOW, ALSO JUST LOOKING AT GARLAND AS A WHOLE AND HOW BUILT OUT WE ARE.
WE, WE'RE NOT HURTING FOR RETAIL SPOTS.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE, WON'T SELENA NOT BUILT OUT.
THEY NEED TO HAVE SOME, YOU KNOW, RESERVE SOME SPACE FOR RETAIL.
WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE THAT SITUATION.
I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, YEAH, I'D BE FINE WITH JUST STRIKING THAT RETAIL REQUIREMENT ALTOGETHER.
DO YOU WANT TO STAY ON THAT TOPIC AND COMPLETE IT BECAUSE I, I DIDN'T WANT TO PULL IN YEAH.
LET'S, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT THEN.
UH, IT SOUNDED LIKE WE'RE MOVING TOWARDS POSSIBLE THREE DIFFERENT MULTIFAMILY FAMILY DISTRICTS LIKE THAT, UH, BASED SIMILAR TO WHAT SINAI HAS THEIR STRIKE, THE, AND AGAIN, YOU SAY, I DON'T THINK WE'RE EVER GOING TO GET A STRAIGHT MULTIFAMILY ZONING.
THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOME VARIANCES WITH A PD.
SO IF WE, IF WE KEPT THAT RETAIL READY OPTION, THAT WOULD LIKELY BE STRUCK IN PDS THEN, IS THAT WHAT PRETTY MUCH EVERY TIME.
AND THEN WE CAN TAKE THAT PORTION OUT OF THERE, THEN LEAVE IT UP TO THE, AS AN OPTION FOR THE DEVELOPER TO HAVE IN THAT DISTRICT.
UM, DON'T MAKE A HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OR MECHANICAL CHASE REQUIREMENT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THAT DISTRICT, BUT LEAVE IT AS AN OPTION AS A POSSIBILITY, IF THEY WANT TO DO A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, THEN I'M FINE WITH THAT.
SO, YEAH, I THINK THAT SOUNDS GOOD.
I DO WANT TO PULL IN, UM, JEN AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH A DEVELOPER.
WHO'S LOOKING AT A PROJECT IN MY DISTRICT THAT FITS NONE OF THE ABOVE.
AND I'M SITTING HERE LOOKING AT THESE AND TRYING TO SAY, WHERE WOULD THEY FIT IN? WHERE WOULD THEY FIT IN BEST, MOST CLOSELY.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE NEW STYLE, HORIZONTAL MULTI-FAMILY.
LIKE THEY DON'T REALLY FIT ANY OF OUR STANDARD MOLD.
AND SO IT'S DRIVING THEM CRAZY AT THIS POINT, UH, TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, SQUARE PEG IN A ROUND HOLE.
AND, UH, SO WE HAVE NOT MADE THIS EASY FOR THEM.
UM, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT AS FAR AS SURE.
UH, IT'S BEEN ON MY MIND, MAYBE WE CREATE A FOURTH DISTRICT AND THAT'S ONE OPTION IS THAT, SO THE REALLY A FOURTH CATEGORY WOULD BE SINGLE FAMILY FOR RENT, UM, MULTI-FAMILY OR HORIZONTAL MULTIFAMILY, WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT.
BUT, UM, IT'S A NEW PRODUCT THAT'S REALLY POPULAR.
THEY'RE TRYING TO PUSH IT OUT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
I THINK EVERYBODY HERE HAS PROBABLY SEEN ONE OR TALK TO A DEVELOPER THAT'S WANTS TO DO ONE.
UM, AND IF YOU TRY TO, AND OUR STAFF'S DONE THIS AS, AS BEST, THEY CAN TRY TO APPLY OUR MULTIFAMILY STANDARDS TO IT.
AND, UH, DENSITY, OF COURSE IT WORKS FINE THERE BECAUSE IT'S A LOWER DENSITY, BUT, UM, EVEN THE ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENTS THAT WE REQUIRED, IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT YOU ON A SMALLER BUILDING.
YOU CAN'T REALLY PUT SIX DIFFERENT TYPES OF MATERIALS THERE AND YOU DON'T REALLY WANT TO.
SO IT JUST, IT, IT IS IT'S A SQUARE PEG ROUND HOLE SITUATION.
AND SO, UM, I MEAN, ONE OPTION I THINK, WOULD BE TO DEVELOP A NEW SET OF STANDARDS FOR THAT.
UM, IT'S ALWAYS DIFFICULT TO CATER YOUR CODE TO A PRODUCT THAT'S EMERGING AND IS NEW BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GONNA LAST.
UM, BUT I THINK EVEN IF IT JUST GAVE SOME GENERAL GUIDANCE TO PEOPLE, UM, TO DEVELOPERS THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
UM, SO DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE THE COMMITTEE'S FEEDBACK ON CREATING, UH, A DISTRICT FOR THAT.
UM, THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO MENTION TOO, AND, UM, CHAIR HEDRICK, YOU MENTIONED THAT, UM, MOST OF THE TIME PEOPLE AND REALLY WE PUSH THEM INTO A PD, A MULTIFAMILY INSTEAD OF GOING STRAIGHT ZONE.
AND ONE OF THE REASONS JUST, I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL AWARE THAT ONCE IT'S STRAIGHT ZONE, THEY CAN, THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR ANYTHING IT'S.
SO YOU DON'T GET TO SEE IT AGAIN, THE DESIGN, THE ARCHITECTURE, ALL THAT STUFF.
AND IT'S ALWAYS KIND OF BEEN COUNCIL'S, UM, PREFERENCE TO HAVE SOME LEVEL OF CONTROL OVER THAT.
AND SO, UH, WHILE WE'LL CREATE SORT OF STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICTS, IT'S REALLY JUST TO BE USED AS THE BASE FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT, UM, INCLUDING THE SINGLE FAMILY FOR RENT, UH, OR VERTICAL, HORIZONTAL MULTIFAMILY, IF WE GO THAT DIRECTION TOO.
SO HAPPY TO DO THAT A FEW, IF YOU GUYS WANT US TO.
AND, UM, I DON'T, WE HAVEN'T REALLY RESEARCHED THAT.
WE'LL I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE LOOKED INTO IT.
IT'S AGAIN, IT'S A NEW PRODUCT.
SO WE MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT HAVE ANY OTHER CITIES TO COMPARE TO WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPING A COMPLETE,
[00:25:01]
UH, AND I, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE CITY, BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE'S AT LEAST ONE CITY OUT THERE MAYBE IN THIS REGION THAT HAS, UM, THAT HAS CREATED THOSE STANDARDS OR A ZONING DISTRICT FOR THIS PRODUCT.SO WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT.
AND, UM, UM, I BELIEVE THEY HAVE, UM, THEY HAVE ONE IN FORT WORTH DON'T THEY MAYBE SEEN, I'VE SEEN PICTURES OF ONE IN FORT WORTH ON A PRESENTATION.
I KNOW WE'VE SEEN SOME IN MCKINNEY AND HE HAD ONE.
SO MAYBE ONE OF THE NORTHERN CITIES.
WELL, WE'LL SEE WHAT SIT DOWN.
I FEEL LIKE I HEARD FROM A COLLEAGUE THAT WE, THEY DID EMBED IN THEIR CODE.
THEY ADDED A ZONING DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE MORE HORIZONTAL KIND OF SINGLE FAMILY RENTALS, SO TO SPEAK.
SO, AND MR. CHAIR, THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST OF THE COMMITTEE IS THAT WE CREATE A FOURTH CATEGORY THAT WOULD ADDRESS THIS.
THIS IS, UM, THIS NEW STYLE THAT I KNOW IT'S JUST BEEN APPROVED IN DENTON.
UM, THIS IS A NEW THING AND IT'S, IT'S PREFERABLE.
AS FAR AS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, IT LOOKS LIKE TOWNHOMES.
IT LIVES MORE LIKE A TOWNHOME COMMUNITY, AND THERE'S A LOT LESS RESISTANCE FROM SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE THESE ARE BASICALLY SINGLE FAMILY RENTALS.
THEY'RE THERE, THEY LOOK LIKE THAT.
THEY'RE UM, ANYWAY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US ACTUALLY DELVE INTO THAT AND COME UP WITH STANDARDS.
AGAIN, WE, WE LIKE THEM COMING TO US FOR PDS BECAUSE THAT GIVES THAT SENSE OF STATE STRIPPED AWAY A LOT OF OUR CONTROL THAT LETS IT COME BACK TO US FOR THAT, BUT I'M GIVING THEM GUIDANCE AND NOT MAKING THEM TRY TO JUMP THROUGH HOOPS WHEN THEY DON'T FIT.
UM, ONE QUESTION TO THEN IF WE'RE GOING SOMETHING, AND THEN THEY WERE SAYING THAT THEY HAD, I MENTIONED THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
DO WE WANT TO INCLUDE THAT AS PART OF ANY NEW ZONING DISTRICTS THAT WE MAY COME AND W WHAT DID WELL, I MEAN, I THINK WE ALWAYS NEED TO HAVE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THERE.
WHAT DID YOU SAY SELENA HAD ON THERE? I'M TRYING TO PULL UP THERE'S ONE, THEN THE URBAN HAD STRUCTURED PARKING REQUIREMENTS AS PART OF IT.
SO I BELIEVE 75% OF THEIR PARKING.
YOU COULD HAVE SERVICE PARKING, BUT 75% OF THE TOTAL PARKING HAD TO BE IN A PARKING STRUCTURE.
I MEAN, I WOULD DEFINITELY RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT.
NOT NECESSARILY THAT EXACT NUMBER, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT, 67, 75 80 WHAT THE BEST NUMBER WOULD BE, BUT YEAH.
I'D LIKE TO CONSIDER THAT LONGER AND NOT PULL SOMETHING OUT OF THE AIR RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE THAT'S PRETTY, UM, THAT WOULD BE A PRETTY BIG LEAP, I BELIEVE FOR US FROM OUR REQUIREMENTS RIGHT NOW.
UM, AND I WOULD WANT TO KIND OF CONSIDER THAT FOR UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES ON OUR END PLUS, UM, RIGHT NOW THERE IS SOME FLUX ABOUT SOME OF OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS POSSIBLY BEING EXCESSIVE.
WE DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE THAT TREND.
UM, SO IT'S RARE THAT WE GET AN EXCESSIVE PARKING IN AN APARTMENT IN APARTMENTS.
IT'S MOSTLY RETAIL, BUT, UM, BUT LET'S LEAVE THAT THEN WE'LL, WE'LL LEAVE THAT TIME FOR YOU TO LOOK AT IF, AS IF YOU'RE, I WOULD SUGGEST THE NEXT MEETING COME WITH, UH, COMING BACK TO US WITH THESE, MAYBE SOME STRUCTURE AROUND THESE FOUR DIFFERENT ZONING, NEW ZONING TYPES FOR MULTI-FAMILY AND INCLUDE PARKING, LOOKING AT PARKING OPTIONS AS PART OF THAT.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM TWO B, WHICH IS AMENDING THE GDC TO ALLOW FOOD, TRUCK PARKS.
UM, I DID PUT SOME HARD COPIES IN FRONT OF YOU ALL.
UH, IT'S MESQUITE AND ALAN'S, UM, ORDINANCES FOR, UM, FOOD, TRUCK PARKS.
UM, THE ALLEN ONE MAY BE A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION THAN YOU NEED.
IT INCLUDES FOOD TRUCK, UM, SITES, I GUESS, WHICH MEANS, UH, MORE OF THE ACCESSORY USE, UM, TO ANOTHER PRIMARY USE ON THE PROPERTY.
SO FOOD TRUCK PARKS IS MORE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT THE, THERE WAS SOME INFORMATION, SOME REQUIREMENTS IN IT THAT SEEMED TO STILL APPLY TO FOOD, TRUCK PARKS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU HAD ALL THE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF THE PRESENTATION, I'LL FOCUS ON KIND OF THE FOOD TRUCK PARKS, WHICH IS A, UM, WHAT WOULD BE A DEFINED LAND DEPENDING ON THE CITY, YOU KNOW, TWO OR THREE OR MORE, UH, FOOD TRUCKS, UM, THAT ARE THERE PERMANENTLY OR SEMI-PERMANENTLY.
SO, UM, AS WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME, UH, SOME STANDARDS I'VE LISTED HERE THAT WE WERE, UM, GOING TO, UH, LOOK INTO
[00:30:01]
THAT I'VE NOTICED MOSQUITO, UH, SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THESE SUCH AS, YOU KNOW, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, MINIMUM DISTANCE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, ET CETERA, HOURS OF OPERATION.SO JUST JUMPING RIGHT INTO MOSQUITO.
AS A REMINDER, THEY HAVE, UM, A DEFINITION FOR THIS LAND USE, UH, MOBILE FOOD UNIT PARK, UM, WHICH, UH, ARE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE THREE OR MORE MOBILE FOOD UNITS, UM, OFFERING FOOD AND OR BEVERAGES FOR A SALE TO THE PUBLIC AS THE PRIMARY USE OF LAND.
UM, IN MOSQUITO, IT IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN, UM, SOME OF THEIR COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, AND THEN HERE'S SOME OF IT'S INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE AS WELL, BUT JUST KINDA SUMMARIZE, UM, FOR THIS LAND USE OF WHAT MUSKY DOES REQUIRE.
THEY DO REQUIRE A CEO, UM, FOR THIS, UH, LAND USE.
UM, THE MINIMUM DISTANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL, UM, IS 200 FEET.
UH, THAT'S SPECIFICALLY FROM RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS AS THEY, UH, ORDERED IT, UM, HOURS OF OPERATION.
UM, IT NEEDS TO OPERATE, UH, REALLY NO, NOT OUTSIDE THE HOURS OF 6:00 AM AND 11:00 PM.
SO IT CAN OPERATE ANY TIME WITHIN THOSE HOURS.
UM, ALTHOUGH THEY NOTE THAT COOKING, CLEANING, AND MAINTENANCE MAY TAKE PLACE, UM, ANYTIME, UH, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A DESIGNATED SITE MANAGER, I BELIEVE THAT'S PART OF THEIR, UH, BILLING PERMIT OR PART OF THEIR CEO.
UM, AND, UM, THEY HAVE TO HAVE, THERE HAS TO BE A CONTACT THAT THE CITY HAS DIRECTLY TO WORK WITH THAT SITE MANAGER, UH, ELECTRICITY HOOKUPS, AND ACCESS TO POTABLE WATER SUPPLY ARE REQUIRED.
UM, FOR PARKING, THEY REQUIRE THREE VEHICLES PER STALL.
SO THREE, UM, UH, THREE PARKING SPACES PER A FOOD TRUCK, ESSENTIALLY.
UM, AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT SEATING, THEY DO REQUIRE A FOUR SEATS PER STALL THAT CAN BE INDOOR OR OUTDOOR.
UM, UH, THEY CAN HAVE ONE FREESTANDING SIGN PER STREET FRONTAGE, UH, AND THEN PERMANENT RESTROOMS ARE REQUIRED, UM, FOR, FOR THIS LAND USE.
UM, THEY NOTE THAT ESSENTIALLY ONE RESTROOM CAN BE IN PLACE, BUT HAVE YOUR STANDARD, YOU KNOW, MALE AND FEMALE RESTROOMS, UH, THEN FOR PLANO, UM, UH, ACTUALLY I'M GOING TO LOOK, I'VE GOT PLANO AND THEN ALLEN, UM, PLANO HAS A DEFINITION FOR FOOD TRUCK PARK.
THAT'S TWO OR MORE MOBILE FOOD UNITS.
UM, THAT'S ALLOWED ONLY BY SUP, UH, IN MOST OF THEIR NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
THEY'RE NOT BY RIGHT, BUT RATHER BY SUP, UH, MAY NOT BE PERMITTED WITHIN 100 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
AND AS FAR AS PARKING, THEY REQUIRE ONE PARKING SPACE PER 100 SQUARE FEET OF DINING AREA ONLY THAT'S JUST VERBIAGE, TAKEN STRAIGHT FROM THEIR DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UH, THERE WASN'T A LOT OF ADDITIONAL, UM, DETAILED REALLY FROM PLAINTIFF'S DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UM, THAT'S ABOUT AS FAR AS IT WENT, BUT PERHAPS, UH, WITH IT BEING AN SUP PROCESS, THEY REVIEW EVERYTHING FROM A CASE BY CASE BASIS SO LONG AS IT MEETS THESE KIND OF BASIC REQUIREMENTS.
UM, AND ALLEN, THEY HAVE A FOOD TRUCK PARK, UH, DEFINITION WHERE, UM, IT'S, UM, UH, DEFINED AS ONE OR MORE, LOTS OR PARCELS OF LAND WHERE THREE OR MORE, UH, MOBILE KITCHENS, UH, CONGREGATE TO OFFER FOOD OR BEVERAGES FOR SALE TO THE PUBLIC AS THE PRINCIPAL USE OF THE LAND.
UH, THIS IS ONLY, UH, ALSO SIMILAR TO PLANO ALLOWED ONLY BY SUP IN SOME OF THEIR, UH, COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, THIS IS JUST TAKEN STRAIGHT FROM THEIR CODE, BUT, UH, THEY REQUIRE, UH, THE SITE PLAN, UH, TO BE APPROVED, UM, TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED, UH, PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITIES ARE ALSO, UM, UH, REQUIREMENT, UM, IN ALLEN.
UM, LET'S SEE, IT REQUIRES A THAT THEY MUST BE LOCATED WITHIN 1000 FEET OF EACH LOCATION WHERE A MOBILE KITCHEN MAY BE PARKED.
UM, ALL VEHICLES, INCLUDING MOBILE KITCHENS SHALL BE PARKED ON AN IMPROVED SURFACE.
UH, ELECTRICITY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH PERMANENT OUTLETS BY WAY OF A PORTABLE CORD THAT COMPLIES WITH THERE'S AN ELECTRICAL CODE, ELECTRICAL CODE REFERENCED THERE.
UH, AND THEN ANY WASTE LIQUID OR SOLID SHALL BE DEPOSED, UH, DISPOSED OF SAFELY AND PROPERLY AS PER ALL ASSOCIATED LOCAL AND STATE REGULATIONS.
UH, TRASH SERVICE AND RECEPTACLE SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY REQUIREMENTS.
AND A MOBILE KITCHEN CANNOT BE LEFT UNATTENDED OR LEFT ON SITE OVERNIGHT.
UM, AND MOBILE KITCHEN, I BELIEVE THE DEFINITION IS IN THERE, BUT THAT, UM, REFERS SPECIFICALLY TO A MOTORIZED VEHICLE OR TOW BEHIND TRAILER, UM, EQUIPPED WITH KITCHEN FACILITIES.
UM, SO IT, UH, MAY INCLUDE MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS OR MOBILE FOOD TRAILERS, BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE INDIVIDUAL LIKE VENDING CARTS AND A CONSTRUCTION SITE, FOOD VEHICLES, OR MOBILE ICE CREAM, UM, VEHICLES, THAT'S ALL DEFINED IN THEIR, UM, CODE.
UM, BUT THAT'S, UM, REALLY THE, UM, THE MOST KIND OF DETAILED FROM THE CITIES IMMEDIATELY IN OUR AREA.
UM, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND LIKE I SAID, YOU'VE GOT THE ALLAN AND MOSQUITO ORDINANCES IN FRONT OF YOU, UM, FOR A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION THERE.
[00:35:01]
ANY QUESTIONS? UM, NO, SORRY.THE, UM, GOING BACK TO THE FIRST ONE, I GUESS THAT'S, MAYBE IT WAS PLANO THE, THE LINE.
ONE ONCE PARKING ONE SPACE PER 100 SQUARE FEET OF DINING AREA ONLY SINCE THIS IS A PRIMARY USE OF THIS LAND.
SO IS THIS TALKING ABOUT DINING AREA AS FAR AS TEMPORARY CHAIRS AND TABLES PUT OUT BY THE FOOD TRUCKS, OR IS THIS TALKING ABOUT THE FOOD TRUCK PARK WHERE THERE'S PERMANENT, A PERMANENT DINING AREA PROVIDED BY THE PARK ITSELF? DO YOU HAVE, DO YOU KNOW? WELL, TH THIS IS, UM, THIS PARKING REQUIREMENT IS SPECIFIC TO FOOD TRUCK PARK AS DEFINED, UH, RIGHT ABOVE THAT.
UH, SO THIS WOULD BE YOUR MORE PERMANENT OR SEMI-PERMANENT LAND USE WHERE THIS PARKING REQUIREMENT APPLIES, NOT JUST YOUR, UM, KIND OF ONE-OFF FOOD TRUCKS THAT, UM, KIND OF SHOW UP OR COME AND GO.
UM, SO, SO IT IS SPECIFIC TO FOOD TRUCK PARKS, AS FAR AS WHAT DINING AREA MEANS.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S REALLY A HALL.
IT SAID I'M KIND OF ASSUMING IT MEANS THE SEATING AREA, WHERE YOU GET YOUR FOOD AND THEN YOU GO SIT DOWN AND YEAH, JUST PROVIDED BY THE PARK.
NOT BY THE TRUCKS WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION.
CAUSE THAT WOULD BE VERY STRANGE OTHERWISE, UM, YEAH, THIS IS A VERY COMPLICATED, UH, SO MR. CHAIR, ONE OF THE GOALS GOING, HAVE YOU ALREADY BROKEN THIS DOWN INTO, INTO QUESTIONS OR STEPS GOING THROUGH THIS? CAUSE I HAVE A NUMBER OF THEM CROWDING MY MIND, LIKE, YOU KNOW, PRIMARY.
SO DO WE WANT THIS TO BE THE PRIMARY USE? DO WE, UM, DO WE WANT TO, UH, DO WE WANT TO SAY A NUMBER? HOW MANY, HOW MANY TRUCKS COMPRISE A FOOD? OKAY.
WE'D LIKE TO START PUTTING TOGETHER A FRAMEWORK IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE, IF WE WANT TO HAVE THIS AS AN OPTION AND THEN PUT, WHAT DO WE WANT THE PARTS TO BE? SO I THINK WE'RE ALL AGREED THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE AS AN OPTION.
SO THEN, THEN THE QUESTIONS ARE EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAY, HOW MANY, WHAT, WHERE ALL THE, ALL THE OTHER DETAILS THAT YOU'VE SEEN HERE.
SO, UM, FOR ME, FOOD TRUCK PARK MEANS MORE THAN, I MEAN, WHAT DOES THIS TWO RIGHT HERE IN PLANO? I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE THAN THAT.
MAYBE THREE OR FOUR MINIMUM IF IT'S THREE OR MORE, THREE OR MORE, THREE OR MORE THREE OR MORE IS WHAT MESQUITE.
SO I THINK THAT'S A PLACE TO START THERE AND THEN I KNOW SOME OF THEM AND LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S WHY I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT TOO, IS THE PRIMARY USE QUESTION.
AND THEN WE HAVE PRIMARY USE VERSUS, YOU KNOW, IN MY DISTRICT CALI.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE PRIMARY USE.
IT'S A SECONDARY USE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS.
I CAN THINK OF THAT FIT, THAT EXACT CATEGORY, THE FIFTH AVENUE NUTRITION.
SHE'S GOT ALL OF THAT SPACE NEXT TO IT, YOU KNOW? UM, SO YEAH, I DON'T, I, AND YEAH, THERE'S WE ALREADY GOT TOO MANY EXAMPLES OF WHERE THE PRIMARY USE WOULD REALLY INTERFERE WITH WHAT, WHAT THEY WANT TO DO THERE.
SO, WELL, THE DIFFERENCE IS, AND THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE NUMBERS.
SO OF COURSE IT'S NOT PAST, AND IT'S NOT IN FINAL FORM, BUT THE INITIAL RECOMMENDATION FOR NOT A FOOD TRUCK COURT, BUT FOR DAY BY DAY RE ROUTINE FOOD TRUCK USE WAS MAXED OUT AT FIVE.
SO YOU USED FIFTH AVENUE, NUTRITION, NO NEED FOR HER TO FALL UNDER SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
IF OUR ROUTINE USE OF FOOD TRUCK CITYWIDE ALLOWS UP TO FIVE, SHE SH SHE WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE A FOOD TRUCK COURT.
SHE WOULD JUST ALLOW FOOD TRUCKS AND BE A HOST BUSINESS.
SO THAT'S WHERE THESE TWO THINGS NEED TO PLAY WELL WITH EACH OTHER.
UM, SO YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY IT THE WAY WE DRAFTED THE WAY THE COMMITTEE, UM, HAS CURRENTLY THE CURRENT DRAFT OF THE COMMITTEE IS THAT IT HAS TO BE LESS THAN FIVE AND IT CAN'T BE THE PRIMARY USE ALL THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE WOULD DO BY CHANGING THE GDC WOULD BE ALLOW IT TO BE THE PRIMARY USE.
THAT MEAN THAT, THAT MEANS THE ONLY USE.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE CARWASH LOCATION AT APOLLO AND SHILOH THAT LOCATION AT JUPITER, SORRY, UM, THAT LOCATION CURRENTLY, ALTHOUGH ITS CEO IS THE CARWASH.
IT'S NOT BEING USED AS A CARWASH.
THE PRIMARY USE USAGE FUNCTIONALLY IS THE, UM, FOOD COURT, UM, MOBILE
[00:40:01]
FOOD, FOOD TRUCK COURT, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO SAY IT.UM, AND SO THIS WOULD ALLOW THEM TO CONVERT TO GET A CHANGE OF ZONING AND THAT LOCATION BE A PD, UM, UM, A MOBILE FOOD TRUCK COURT.
CAN BE THE ONLY USE INSTEAD OF BEING A SHARED USE.
THAT'S THAT'S, THAT'S THE MECHANISM.
THIS IS THE MECHANISM THAT ALLOW FOR THAT RIGHT NOW, IF THE, IF THERE WERE THE COUNCIL PASSES, THE ORDINANCE THAT'S IN COMMITTEE RIGHT NOW, THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
AND UNDER IT'S UNDER ITS CURRENT ZONING, THAT MAKES SENSE AND SERVES AS COMMITTEE BRIGHT.
SO IF I GET THIS RIGHT, WHAT WERE THE, BASICALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM, BETWEEN THEM IS, IS IT THE PRIMARY USE OF THE LAND OR IS THAT NOT THE PRIMARY USE? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO IF IT'S NOT THE PRIMARY USE SUCH AS FIFTH OF NUTRITION OR KELLEY SAIGON MALL, THEN IT WOULD FALL UNDER THE OTHER CATEGORY, THE OTHER ORDINANCE, THE OTHER ORDINANCE.
AND THEN THIS MO THE MOBILE FOOD TRUCK PARK IS JUST FOR, IF IT'S GOING TO BE THE PRIMARY USE OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY.
AND IS YOUR CHAIR ONE OF THE TALKING ABOUT THE, UM, THE CARWASH? I THINK THE MINIMUM DISTANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL THAT SEEMS TO BE BUILT INTO ALL OF THESE, AM I RIGHT? DID I, I SAW IT IN A YES.
UM, I DID NOT SEE THAT IN AN ORDINANCE.
IT MAY NOT BE, OF COURSE IT IS AN SUP PROCESS, BUT, OKAY.
WELL THE, IF, IF A FOOD TRUCK COURT INVOLVED A MINIMUM DISTANCE FROM, UH, RESIDENTIAL OF ALMOST ANY DISTANCE THAT WOULD DISQUALIFY THE CARWASH, BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT ON TOP OF RESIDENCES.
UM, AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD THINK JUST BECAUSE OF A NUISANCE FACTOR THAT WE WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO INCLUDE FOR A FOOD TRUCK COURT OR PARK TO HAVE A MINIMUM DISTANCE FROM RESIDENCES.
UM, INTERESTINGLY ABOUT THAT SITE BEING IN MY DISTRICT, I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ONE COMPLAINT ABOUT THAT AT ALL, FROM PARKING OR NOISE.
THE VACUUM, I MEAN, WITH IT'S NORTH SIDE OF THAT PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY FACES THAT RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THE ONLY I'VE I HAVE SECOND-HAND GOTTEN COMPLAINTS ABOUT IT, BUT IT WAS BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC BACKING UP ONTO THE NEARBY ROADS.
IT WASN'T ABOUT THE TRUCKS THEMSELVES, BUT, UM, ANYWAY, AND, AND BACK TO KELLY SAIGON MALL, WHICH I THINK WE TOUCHED ON ON LAST TIME, ONE OF THE, AND THIS IS THE PRIMARY USE, I WONDERED.
UM, SO IF, IF THE OTHER ORDINANCE THROUGH CFC PASSES IN SOMEWHAT SIMILAR FORM TO ITS ROUGH DRAFT, THEN KELLY SAIGON MALL WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE EXACTLY.
AS THEY HAVE BEEN WITH UP TO FIVE, UP TO FIVE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S LESS THAN FIVE IT'S UP TO FIVE, FIVE OR LESS.
UM, SO THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT IF THEY JUMPED OVER THAT AND HAD SIX OR SEVEN, THEN, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE WITH THIS COMMITTEE TO, TO, FOR US TO HAVE AN AVENUE THAT THE OWNER COULD GO THROUGH TO, UM, TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SEGREGATE OUT A PORTION.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD BE REPLANTING, UM, YOU WOULD UPDATE THE SITE PLAN OR THE DETAILED PLAN, RIGHT? UNLIKELY.
BUT TO ENABLE THAT TO BE DONE BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE ACCESS PARKING SPACES.
UM, SO THERE WOULD, WOULD THERE WOULD THERE BE AN AVENUE FOR THEM TO CREATE, UM, AND THAT PROBABLY WOULDN'T WORK THERE, FRANKLY, BECAUSE THERE'S, UM, THERE'S NOT WATER.
SO FOR A LOT OF THESE THINGS, THEY'RE SAYING YOU HAVE TO HAVE WATER AND POWER HOOKUPS THAT AREN'T REALLY LONG DROP CORDS OR GENERATORS, THINGS LIKE THAT THEY DON'T HAVE.
THERE IS NO WATER ACCESSIBILITY OUT THERE BY JUPITER.
UM, THE OWNER SAYS HE'S ALREADY LOOKED INTO THAT.
THERE'S NO MANHOLE THERE'S NO, WELL, THERE IS WATER, THERE'S A FIRE JUST CAUSE I'VE WORKED ON A PROJECT THERE, THERE WATERLINE LOOP THAT RUNS AROUND THE PROPERTY FOR CAR SERVICE.
SO THEY COULD TAP OFF THAT IF THEY WANT IT TO BE ALL RIGHT.
SO THE MAIN THING, I DO THINK A FOOD TRUCK COURTS SHOULD BE LABELED AS A PRIMARY USE, NOT A SECONDARY USE.
I THINK OUR OTHER ORDINANCE SHOULD, SHOULD COVER SECONDARY USES AND REGULATE THOSE.
UM, BUT FOR THIS, IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO ME THAT THIS, IF WE'RE GOING TO DESIGNATE IT AS BEING, UH, A FOOD TRUCK PARK, THEN WHATEVER THE SECTION IS, NEEDS TO BE.
THAT'S WHAT, THIS IS NOT, MULTI-USE
[00:45:02]
NOW IN OUR PARKS COURSE.WE CAN, WE CAN DO WHAT WE PLEASE, WE'RE ONLY FOCUSING ON PRIMARY USE HERE.
SO THAT LIKE CALI, SAIGON, ALL THAT TO THE OTHER.
BUT AS FAR AS PRIMARY USE GOES, THEN LOOKING AT, I LIKED THE REQUIREMENTS OF A, OBVIOUSLY A CEO FOR THAT IT'S A SEPARATE USE.
SO WE'LL HAVE THAT AS PART OF IT, UH, PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITIES.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING TO HAVE, UM, HOURS OF OPERATION, THE, UH, SIX TO 11:00 PM.
IS THAT YEAH, GOOD HOURS, UH, ELECTRICITY AND WATER.
A LOT OF THEM HAVE THEIR OWN GENERATORS OR THEY HAVE THEIR OWN WATER STORAGE.
IS THAT, WHAT ARE THE THOUGHTS ON THAT? WELL, WE'LL SAY THE ALLEN, WHEN ALLOWS FOR THE THEM TO USE THEIR OWN WATER SUPPLY AND USE THEIR OWN STORED WATER, THEY BROUGHT WITH THEM AND, AND A GENERATOR.
IT JUST SAYS THAT THAT THE GENERATOR CANNOT GENERATE VISIBLE SMOKE, EXCESSIVE NOISE OR EXCESSIVE FUMES.
I WOULD RATHER HAVE THE REQUIREMENTS BE KEPT AS LIGHT AS WE CAN REASONABLY DO WITHOUT HAVING A DISSERVICE TO THE, TO THE USERS, THE RESIDENTS.
AND THAT, THAT IS THE THING, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE'S NO REASON WHY THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO USE A GENERATOR UNLESS IT IS, YOU KNOW, CREATING ONE OF THOSE NUISANCES.
AND AS FAR AS THE CARRYING THEIR OWN POTABLE WATER SUPPLY, I MEAN, ALL THE FOOD TRUCKS ARE SET UP FOR THAT.
AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DO ANYTIME THEY GO ANYWHERE.
SO THEY KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO LAST, HOW LONG THE WATER SUPPLY IS GOING TO LAST THEM.
SO, YEAH, I'VE GOT NO PROBLEM WITH, WITH LEAVING, LEAVING THAT, THOSE UTILITIES ON THE TRUCK AND LEAVING OVERNIGHT.
THAT'S A, IT SEEMS LIKE FOR CREATING A PARK FOR THEM, THIS IS THE PLACE TO PUT THEM.
AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS REALLY ODD.
THAT ONE THAT SAID THEY CAN'T LEAVE THEM OVERNIGHT BECAUSE THEY'RE THERE, THEY HAVE PERMISSION TO BE THERE FROM WHOEVER, LET THEM BE THERE AND THEY'RE NOT DISTURBING ANYTHING.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THE REASON FOR THAT.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD BE RESTRICTED FROM BEING THERE OVERNIGHT, RICK, POSSIBLY DUE TO THE HEALTH REQUIREMENTS, GOING BACK TO THEIR GROUND-BASED GRENACHE XEN ROAD, DAILY MICROPHONE, YOU GOT TO RECORD.
UH, PROBABLY DO THE HEALTH REQUIREMENT TO GO BACK TO GROUND ZERO TO SANITIZE AND RE REPLENISH 24 HOURS WITHIN A 24 HOUR PERIOD.
BECAUSE PRETTY MUCH A MOBILE FOOD TRUCK IS A RESTAURANT THAT YOU'RE TAKING APART AND PUTTING TOGETHER EVERY SINGLE DAY.
AND I BELIEVE THAT IS A HEALTH REQUIREMENT.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE IN HERE.
IT'S ALWAYS REQUIRED BY THE HEALTH.
AND WOULD IT HAVE TO BE OVERNIGHT? CAUSE THEY LEAVE IT OVERNIGHT AND THEN IN THE MORNING AND THEY ACTIVITIES AT LUNCH OR AFTERNOON, EVENING HOURS.
I MEAN, I'M FINE WITH TAKING THAT IF IT'S ALREADY COVERED BY ANOTHER EXACTLY.
THE HEALTH PERMIT ALREADY REQUIRES THAT.
SO IT MIGHT BE KINDER, YOU KNOW, WE'D REPEAT THINGS ALL THE TIME, BUT THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S CONFUSING.
CAUSE PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHERE, WHERE THE REQUIREMENTS COMING FROM AND WHY.
SO HEALTH AUTHORITY, I THINK ADDRESSES THAT.
AND IF YOU LEAVE IT WITH HEALTH, THEN HEALTH IS THE ONE ADDRESSING IT.
YOUR OTHER QUESTION WAS PARKING SPACES.
I'M STILL HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING MY HEAD AROUND WHY WE WOULD DO IT THAT WAY.
WAS THERE ANYBODY BESIDES PLANO? WELL, NO, THAT ONE WAS THE FIRST VEHICLE.
THREE PER STALL IS MOSQUITO HERE.
NO, THAT 3% ALL SOUNDS PRETTY.
THAT SOUNDS PRETTY EXCESSIVE, RIGHT.
THEN PLANO PURCHASE IT VERY DIFFERENTLY.
AND WHAT DID ALAN SAY? I'M PARKING HELEN DID NOT FIND IT ACTUALLY, IT WAS NOT LISTED IN THEIR BLOOD WORKING MATRIX.
I DIDN'T SEE IT READING THROUGH THIS EITHER.
MOSQUITOES REQUIRES THAT THE STALLS BE MARKED OR DESIGNATED, UM, SEPARATED FROM BUILDING STRUCTURES AND OTHER THINGS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FIRE CODE AND THAT THE BUILDING STRUCTURES AND MFQ STALLS BE SHOWN ON THE SITE.
THEY, THEY DO GO ON VEHICLE PARKING.
I DIDN'T READ FAR ENOUGH REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF THREE PARKING SPACES FOR EACH MARKED OR DESIGNATED
[00:50:02]
STALL.I MEAN, I'D BE FINE WITH THREE I'D ALSO, I'D ALSO BE FINE WITH DROPPING IT DOWN TO TWO 'CAUSE WITH THREE, IF YOU THINK ABOUT A, ONCE YOU GET UP TO FIVE NOW THAT'S 15 PARKING SPOTS.
THAT'S A PRETTY BIG SIZE AREA.
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT HERE TOO, JUST TO THROW AN IDEA OUT.
IS THAT, UM, SO YOU THINK ABOUT THE CARWASH SITE IN PARTICULAR, IF THEY WERE TO TURN THAT INTO A FORMAL MOBILE FOOD UNIT PARK, UM, THERE IS ON-STREET PARKING ADJACENT TO THERE, UH, THAT COULD HELP SUPPORT THE PARK.
SO FACTOR IN THAT AT LEAST INTO SOME SCENARIOS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME ON, ON STREET PARKING.
UM, SORT OF, I THINK WHAT THE CODES TALK ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IS OFF STREET PARKING, BUT SOME SITES ARE GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO ON STREET PARKING TOO, SINCE THEY'RE ON A PUBLIC STREET.
AND THAT'S ANOTHER WIZARD REASON TO BE LESS CONSTRICTIVE ON THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.
I WAS GOING TO GIVE SOME NON-LEGAL ADVICE, JUST MY 2 CENTS I'M IN AUSTIN, IT'S PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED.
BUT THE IDEA OF BEING THAT IN DOWNTOWN AUSTIN, MOST SITES DON'T HAVE ANY PARKING ONSITE PARKING BECAUSE IT'S PEDESTRIAN WORK.
SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER DOING ABOUT WHERE YOU'RE LOCATED IN THE CITY, WHAT TYPE OF DISTRICT YOU'RE IN THE CITY.
I MEAN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO HAVE ANY, BUT IF YOU'RE SOMEWHERE ELSE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, YOU MAY WANT TO HAVE SOME, IF YOU ALLOW IT IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, JUST NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
WELL, I GUESS MY, MY QUESTION IS, DO WE WANT TO ADDRESS, ARE WE GOING TO SEPARATE THESE FROM RESIDENCES BECAUSE DOWNTOWN WILL SOMEDAY AGAIN BE LARGELY PEDESTRIAN.
UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY WHERE WE HAVE LARGELY PEDESTRIAN AREAS.
WELL, I MEAN DOWNTOWN OR EVEN LIKE FIRE WHEEL, YOU KNOW, TOWN CENTER DOES HAVE PEDESTRIAN RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL THERE'S APARTMENTS THERE.
THE DISTRICTS FROM RESIDENTIAL IS KIND OF TRICKY.
THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T KNOW THE ZONING OF THE CARWASH DISPLAYS.
I ASSUME IT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD JUST GIVEN ITS USE, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
UM, NO, JUST A LEGAL IDEA THIS TIME.
SO I'LL GET BACK IN MY LANE AFTER GETTING OUT OF MY LANE.
UM, ONE WAY YOU COULD STRUCTURE THE REGULATION IS, UH, MAKE IT AN SUP AND THAT WAY IT'S A CASE BY CASE THE COUNCIL GETS TO DECIDE, OKAY, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THIS IS NOT A GOOD LOCATION BECAUSE IT'S TOO CLOSE TO SOME TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL, UM, FOR WHATEVER REASON, BUT MAYBE THE NEXT CASE IT'S NEXT TO A RESIDENTIAL, BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON, IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE.
AND THAT WAY THE COUNCIL CAN DETERMINE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
YEAH, I'M FINE WITH SUP IT SEEMS OTHER CITIES HAVE THAT AS THIS.
YEAH, I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH THAT.
ONE ITEM HERE WAS IMPROVED PARKING OR IMPROVED SURFACE.
PUT IT ON AN IMPROVED SURFACE RATHER THAN JUST A DIRT, DIRT OR CRANKY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S SEEMS LIKE WE'RE HAVE PRIMARY USE.
DOES THIS DISTRICT FOR MOBILE FOOD OR MOBILE KITCHEN OR MOBILE FOOD UNITS OR WHATEVER WE'D LIKE TO CALL IT? UM, IT'S MY SUP C O WILL BE REQUIRED WITH PERMANENT RESTROOM FACILITIES.
HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE 6:00 AM TO 11:00 PM.
THAT'S THE REQUIREMENTS I HAVE RIGHT NOW.
AND WERE THERE ANY OTHERS THAT I'M MISSING AND PER RESTROOM, RIGHT.
AND IMPROVED SURFACE FOR PARKING THE TRUCK AND IMPROVED WOULD BE BY OUR WELL, OR WE HAVE IMPROVED SURFACES THAT ARE GRAVEL, UM, THAT FIT IN SOME CASES, AT LEAST WITH, UM, OUR BUILDING CODES, AT LEAST IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
SO DO WE WANT TO DEFINE ALAN, HAS IT IMPROVED SERVICES TO FIND WITHIN THERE ANOTHER PART OF THEIR CODE? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER, WHAT THEIR DEFINITION IS IMPROVE.
[00:55:01]
SO THERE YOU GO.YES, WE CAN, WE CAN REFERENCE IT AS WE CAN MAKE IT THE SAME STANDARD AS, AS IN THE PARKING AREA OF OUR CODE, WHICH IS ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL WHERE IT'S NOT CONCRETE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING ELSE WE COULD DO THAT WE JUST REFERENCED BACK TO THAT, UM, IF THAT'S WHAT THE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO DO, LIKE IT TO BE CONSISTENT.
AND THEN IN THAT, IN THAT INSTANCE, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE STANDARDS THAT A CERTAIN TYPE OF GRAVEL, A CERTAIN TYPE OF DECOMPOSED GRANITE OR WHATEVER.
SO THEY HAVE ACTUAL STANDARDS IN THERE THAT YOU COULD, YOU COULD JUST PIGGY BACK ON THAT.
AND THEN THE FINAL ITEM WAS NOT ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT IS THAT, I THINK I AM FINE WITH SAYING, NOT ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE AT PDS, NOT RESIDENTIAL ZONING, RIGHT.
AND SOMETIMES THESE THINGS ARE IN RESIDENCES, BUT THAT'S A SPECIAL EVENT AND THAT'S A SPACE THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THIS.
SO, BUT HAVING AN ACTUAL FOOD TRUCK PARK IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DOESN'T STRIKE ME AS BEING SOMETHING THAT WOULD WEAR WELL.
UM LONG-TERM BUT SOMEBODY ELSE MAY DISAGREE.
OR DO WE WANT TO SAY BY SUP LET'S LOOK LIKE THE OTHER CITIES, WHETHER IT'S BY RIDE OR BY SUP THEY'RE ALL IN THE NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, NEELY, JUST GIVEN MY DISTRICT, IF THE DUCK CREEK GOLF COURSE WENT UNDER AND THEN THAT PARKING LOT BECAME A FOOD TRUCK CENTER.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD PLAY WELL, BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S ZONED SINGLE FAMILY SEVEN OR RIGHT NOW.
PEOPLE WOULD NOT BE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN.
I WOULD, I WOULD PREFER TO KEEP IT IN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
I MEAN, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF OTHER ZONING IN A BIG CITY.
I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
THIS WILL, OF COURSE REQUIRED AMENDMENT TO THE LAND.
USE MATRIX CLEARLY SAYS WHAT USES ARE ALLOWED AND WHAT ZONING DISTRICT IT'S ALL IN ONE CHART, OF COURSE, DOWNTOWN THAT'S ANOTHER LAND USE MATRIX.
SO WE COULD BRING BACK A PROPOSAL FOR WHICH COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICTS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW IT BY, BY SUP I'M HEARING.
SO ALLOWED BY SEP AND ASSUME EVERYTHING EXCEPT RESIDENTIAL THEN.
MR. CHAIRMAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YES, SIR.
UH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION ON THE PERMANENT RESTROOM, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A PERMANENT PORTABLE POTTY OR A, AN ACTUAL STRUCTURE FOR A RESTROOM THAT WOULD REQUIRE PLUMBING AND PORTABLE SOUNDED A LITTLE, UH, I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PERMANENT STRUCTURE.
RESTROOMS AND MESQUITE WENT IN A LITTLE MORE DETAILED KIND OF PARAPHRASE THAT THEIR PERMANENT RESTROOMS REQUIRED, BUT THEY TALK ABOUT PLUMBING.
UM, THEY GOT PRETTY SPECIFIC MAKING SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS FOR THEM.
DID WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT SIGNS AT ALL? SIGN SIGNAGE, MEET THE ZONING REQUEST, PERMANENT SIGNAGE, TEMPORARY SIGNAGE, MEET THE EXISTING SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BASE DISTRICT.
I WANT TO JUST STICK WITH OUR CURRENT SIGN REQUIREMENTS AND NOT GO TOO WILD ON DRILLING DOWN ON THAT.
UM, WHAT ABOUT WASTE TRASH DUMPSTER REQUIREMENTS? I KNOW THERE'S SCREENING.
THAT ALSO GOES ALONG WITH THAT.
AND IF THEY HAVE A FOR MAKING THEM DO A RESTROOM BUILDING, DO WE WANT TO HAVE A DUMPSTER LOCATION LIKELY TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT? I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CRASH.
SO, UM, YEAH, I'M, I'M DEFINITELY OKAY WITH HAVING, BECAUSE THERE WAS GOING TO BE TRASH BEING THERE NO MATTER WHAT.
WITH APPROPRIATE SCREENING OR WHATEVER WE WANT TO SAY.
HOW DO THEY, UM, AT SOMETIMES OUR DUMPSTER HAS TO BE BEHIND BUILDING.
THERE'S REALLY NO BUILDING AT A FITNESS OTHER IF IT'S A RESTROOM TYPE STRUCTURE.
BUT, UM, I DON'T, I ALREADY HAVE REQUIREMENTS ON THE DUMPSTER, LIKE WHERE, WHERE DUMPSTER CAN BE, OR SOMETIMES IT'S BEHIND THE BUILDING AND THERE'S REALLY NO.
BUILDING WITH THIS, UNLESS YOU HAVE A SMALL, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT RESTROOM
[01:00:01]
CEILING WOULD BE ENOUGH TO SCREEN DUMPSTER, BUT WE DO HAVE, DO WE HAVE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS WALL? AND I DON'T REMEMBER OFF HAND.I KNOW THERE IS SCREENING REQUIREMENTS, BUT I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE LOCATION.
THAT'S GREAT THAT THE DUMPSTERS DO HAVE TO BE SCREENED MASONRY WALL ON THREE SIDES AND WITH A GATE OPENING.
UM, AND THEN YOU'RE CORRECT MR. CHAIRMAN, THE LOCATION.
IT DOES SAY THEY HAVE TO BE BEHIND THE BUILDING ON THE SITE.
UM, YEAH, IN THIS CASE IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT AND THAT THERE'S NOT A BUILDING EXCEPT FOR MAYBE THE RESTROOMS. SO DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY PUT THAT, BUT SURE.
SO I MEAN, I WOULD WANT IT TO BE SCREENED.
BUT DEFINITELY FIRST LOCATION.
I'M NOT AS WELL WE COULD SAY TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, BUT I MEAN, IT, IT'S STILL GOTTA BE ACCESSIBLE BY THE SERVICE TRUCK TO GET TO IT.
THAT'S WHY THAT'S KIND OF A TRICKY ONE ON THIS ONE.
UM, UM, KEEP IN MIND SINCE IT WILL BE BY SUP UM, WE COULD PUT A PROVISION IN THERE THAT STATES THAT IT HAS TO BE LOCATED.
IT HAS TO BE POSITIONED IN A LOCATION, UM, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THE SUP WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON THAT.
AND THEN JUST THINKING OUT LOUD HERE IN, ON A WORLD, IMAGINING HOW IT'S GOING TO LOOK, THE DUMPSTER SIZE, THEY'LL PROBABLY CHOOSE FOR ONE OF THESE IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE SMALLER ONES.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CHOOSE A EIGHT YARD OR 10 YARDS.
THEY'RE GOING TO CHOOSE ONE OF THE LITTLE ONES WHICH ONLY STAND ABOUT MAYBE NOT EVEN FOUR FEET TALL.
AND I'M GRATEFUL YOU DIDN'T USE ME AS A MEASURING STICK.
SO YOU ONLY AS TALL AS ALRIGHT, SO TRASH RECEPTACLES FOR CUSTOMER USE.
AND MS. SKATE, UM, DO WE WANT TO, DO WE WANT TO DRILL DOWN THIS FAR INTO SAYING HOW MANY TRASH RECEPTACLES FOR OUR, I REALLY DON'T.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO GO THAT FAR.
WE CAN SAY WE CAN PUT IN A REQUIREMENT THAT THEY PROVIDE TRASH RECEPTACLES FOR CUSTOMERS, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TELL THEM HOW MANY, I THINK WE HAVE A GOOD FRAMEWORK HERE.
IF WE WANT TO DRAFT SOMETHING, I'M GOING TO DIG INTO THESE ALSO.
AND WHEN WE COME BACK NEXT TIME, AND IF THERE'S ANY THING WE MISSED, JUST COMING OFF, OFF THE TOP OF OUR HEADS HERE, THEN WE CAN ADD THOSE LATER.
AND OUR ENVIRONMENTAL WASTE AS PART OF OUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
SO THEY, THEY ATTEND PRIESTS AND THAT'LL MEETINGS AND THE LIKE, SO THEY, UM, THEY TYPICALLY WORK DIRECTLY WITH APPLICANTS ON THE APPROPRIATE, UM, YOU KNOW, BINS AND, UM, OBVIOUSLY MAKING SURE THEY CAN ACCESS, ACCESS THE, UM, THE CONTAINERS AND THE DUMPSTERS.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A GOOD FRAMEWORK AT LEAST TO START FROM THERE AND LOOKING AT, CAN I, IS BRITTA STILL HERE? YOU'RE LISTENING TO, DO YOU HEAR ANYTHING IN HERE THAT FROM AN ENFORCEMENT VIEWPOINT OR DEALING WITH A BIS VIEWPOINT, DID YOU HEAR ANYTHING IN HERE THAT'S ALARMING OR DIFFICULT OR ACCESSORY RAISES FLAGS? HEY, ALL RIGHT.
GET A MICROPHONE, RIGHT? UM, NOTHING SPECIFIC UNTIL YOU POTENTIALLY GET TO A LARGE FACILITY, CAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MINIMUMS AND I THINK NOT MAXIMUMS. SO IN, IF THIS CATCHES ON AND IS POPULAR, YOU COULD CONCEIVABLY HAVE QUITE A LARGE FOOD TRUCK MALL OR FOOD TRUCK GATHERING.
UM, AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THERE MAY WARRANT, YOU KNOW, WITH A LOT OF SEATING OR IT HAS A PARTY ATMOSPHERE OR THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS.
SO IT MAY WARRANT ADDITIONAL RESTROOMS, BUT I THINK THAT COULD BE HANDLED THROUGH THE, THE, UH, PROCESS THAT YOU'RE OUTLYING HERE.
AND THEN, UM, I'M GUESSING THAT WE PROBABLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO REGULATE IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THINGS LIKE TRAFFIC.
I MEAN, SOMETIMES THE PARKING NUMBERS ARE HARD TO DETERMINE DEPENDING ON HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE COMING VIA VEHICLE.
BUT IF THERE'S TRAFFIC BACKING UP, WHICH I THINK WAS SOME OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT ARE RECEIVED, THERE'S PROBABLY A WAY THROUGH POLICE DEPARTMENT OR SOMETHING TO HANDLE THAT.
BUT, UM, THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT I CAN REALLY THINK OF IS WHAT IF IT GETS BIG, THERE ARE PLACES THAT IT'S, IT REALLY IS KIND OF LIKE A DESTINATION, SO IT CAN GET LARGE.
SO SINCE WE'RE TALKING HERE, WE SHOULD PROBABLY PUT IN HERE MINIMUM.
SO WITH THINGS LIKE RESTROOMS, WE'RE SAYING WE REQUIRE ONE, YOU KNOW, ONE MALE, ONE FEMALE, I THINK WHATEVER IT WAS THAT WE CAME UP WITH IS THAT, DID WE, DID THAT MAKE IT INTO THE FINAL OR DID WE JUST SAY RESTROOMS LANGUAGES IN RESTAURANT JUST LIKE PERMANENT RESTAURANT QUANTITY, BUT IS THAT HEALTH CODE, DOES THAT DETERMINE RESTAURANTS? I MEAN THAT OFTEN DETERMINES NUMBER OF RUSSIANS REQUIRED
[01:05:01]
FOR AN OFFICE, OR THAT WOULD BE THE BUILDING CODE, THAT BUILDING THAT REGULATES THE NUMBERS.AND I'M A LITTLE BIT NAIVE ON THIS ISSUE, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU HAVE FOOD TRUCKS THAT CAN SERVE ALCOHOL AND HAVE A LIQUOR LICENSE? IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? IS IT PROHIBITED? I DON'T, I DON'T THINK EVER KNOWN THE SQUARE HAS A ROLLING BAR TRUCK.
THAT IS THAT'S JUST FOR CATERINGS THOUGH.
THAT'S WHAT THAT MEANS FOR YOU.
IF I COULD IMAGINE THAT, ESPECIALLY IF THESE FOOD TRUCKS ARE TIED TO ANOTHER RESTAURANT, SO MANY TIMES THE RESTAURANTS, BRICK AND MORTAR RESTAURANTS HAVE FOOD TRUCKS, SO THEY COULD, I COULD IMAGINE A SCENARIO WHERE THEY COULD SERVE ALCOHOL.
IT'S NOT VERY OFTEN, BUT I COULD CERTAINLY SEE HOW THAT COULD HAPPEN.
IT DOES INCREASE WELL, IN THEORY, IT INCREASES THE NEED FOR RESTROOMS, THE ALCOHOL SERVICE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE THINKING WORST CASE SCENARIO.
IT MAY NOT HAPPEN ONE, ONE WAY TO HANDLE THAT MIGHT BE.
SO THIS IS A NEW SUP USE THAT WE'LL WANT TO CONSIDER ADDING A TIMELINE TO IN OUR TIMELINE GUIDE THAT COUNCIL CREATED LAST YEAR.
MAYBE SHORTEN THAT TIME SO THAT IT'S NOT A 20 YEAR SUP, BUT MAYBE IT'S A THREE TO FIVE YEAR, ONE TO TWO YEAR, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO THAT IF IT DOES BECOME AN ISSUE THAT AT LEAST THERE'S THAT OUTLET, UM, THAT IT WOULD COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL AT SOME POINT.
UM, ANYWAY, LOOK FOR SOME FEEDBACK ON THAT, I GUESS FROM THE, FROM THE COMMITTEE.
IT'S AN UNKNOWN I'M FOR SHORTER TIMELINE TO START OFF.
AND, AND I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT TO THE FUTURE BECAUSE YEAH, WE ARE ENVISIONING A CERTAIN THING.
THAT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING HAPPENING HERE, BUT IF THIS DOES CATCH ON, WHICH WE'D LOVE FOR IT TO, IF THIS DOES CATCH ON AND GET BIG, THAT CHANGES A LOT OF DYNAMICS.
SO THE SUP IS A PROTECTIVE MECHANISM FOR THAT.
AND, AND THAT CAN, I'M ASSUMING THAT WOULD ALSO ADDRESS HOW MANY RESTROOMS THAT WE WOULD SAY THEY NEED TO HAVE.
SO ALL OF THAT WOULD BE PART OF THAT PROCESS.
SO, UM, AND ALCOHOL, THAT'S IT? I, I WILL SAY AT KELLY SAIGON MALL, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THE SITE OWNERS HAVE ENCOUNTERED HAVE BEEN EXCESSIVE NOISE AND STAYING UP LATE INTO THE NIGHT AND APPARENTLY THEY HAVE GOTTEN COMPLAINTS.
SO, UM, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY OF THOSE COMPLAINTS, BUT THEY HAVE THE OWNERS HAVE, SO WE HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION.
AND IF IT'S ALCOHOL OR IF IT'S JUST, UM, HAVING HOURS THAT ARE NOT ENFORCED, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY TO ENFORCE, UM, ALL THESE THINGS I THINK ARE IMPORTANT.
WELL, I THINK WE HAVE A GOOD FRAMEWORK AT LEAST TO START WITH AND GIVE YOU SOME MORE HOMEWORK AGAIN, MR. GUERIN, ABSOLUTELY.
WITH ON THIS TIME, UH, QUICK QUESTION IS, MAY BE MORE OF A QUESTION FOR BRIAN, BUT, UM, I KNOW EARLIER WE TALKED ABOUT THE THREE OR MORE FOOD TRUCK KIND OF THRESHOLD IS PART OF THE FOOD TRUCK PART SINCE THE ORDINANCE Y'ALL ARE WORKING ON FOR ACCESSORY FOOD TRUCKS, IS THAT WAS FIVE OR FEWER, SHOULD THIS THRESHOLD BE SIX OR MORE OR, WELL, YOU COULD STILL HAVE A, A SITUATION WHERE AN OWNER ONCE A PARK, UM, BUT ONLY HAS ROOM FOR THREE OR FOUR.
AND IT'S THE ONLY, IT'S THE ONLY USE, BUT IT'S THE PRIMARY USE.
SO I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T SAY YOU PROBABLY WOULD NOT WANT TO LIMIT IT TO A MINIMUM KEYWORD IS PRIMARY, RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT ON IT.
IS THERE A REASON THAT EVEN PUT A NUMBER ON IT AND THEN THINKING YOU GOT A FOOD TRUCK PARK WITH ONE TRUCK THAT'S THERE ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? WELL, YEAH.
IF THE, IF THE DIFFERENTIATOR IS PRIMARY USER, NOT PRIMARY USE THAN YET, WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE A NUMBER ON THE YEAH.
THEY COULD HAVE A ROTATING FOOD TRUCK PARK, NEW ONE EVERY DAY.
WE HAD THE DISCUSSION ON THE NUMBER BEFORE I WENT.
THE DIFFERENCE WAS THE PRIMARY AND NON-PRIMARY USE, SO, ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMITTEE? GOOD TO START WITH.
MOVE ON TO THE NEXT TIME OF JUNE.
THIS IS A TO SEE ITEMS ARE REPORTING TO COUNCIL.
I THINK THIS IS JUST INFORMATIVE.
UM, JUST, THESE ARE TWO ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED OUT OF THE COUNTS OR OUT OF THE COMMITTEE.
JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW, THAT'LL BE ON THE OD OR AUGUST, APRIL 4TH, COUNCIL WORK SESSION.
WE DON'T WANT TO SKIP THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.
WE'LL REPORT THOSE OUT AND BE READY TO HELP, UH, PRESENT ANY OF THOSE TO COUNCIL.
I THINK ON BOTH THOSE ITEMS, WE'RE NOT REALLY MAKING ANY CHANGES TO WHAT'S
[01:10:01]
ON THE BOOKS, SO IT SHOULD BE PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD.THEN WITH THAT, THEN OUR LAST TIME ORIGIN IS THE CHURN.