KEEP US OUT OF JAIL. WE'LL TALK. YEAH. OKAY. IT'S 3:08 P.M. WE WILL START OUR WORK SESSION.
[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:12]
IT'S TUESDAY, JULY THE 21ST, 3 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THIS IS THE CITY OF MCKINNEY[26-0672 Proclamation for National Parks and Recreation Month]
WORK SESSION. FIRST ITEM WILL BE AN INFORMATION SHARING OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE A PROCLAMATION TO READ. IT IS THE NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH.ALL RIGHT. A GREAT LOOKING IN THE UNITED STATES. PARKS AND REC PROGRAMS AND FACILITIES ARE IMPORTANT TO COMMUNITIES. THEY ARE VITAL, ARE VITAL TO ESTABLISHING AND MAINTAINING HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. AND THEY CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL WELL-BEING. MCKINNEY PARKS AND REC. SPEAKING OF WHO'S RUNNING PARKS AND REC TODAY, IF YOU ALL ARE DOWN HERE, IS THERE ANYONE STILL WORKING? MAYBE IT'S HOT TODAY. WE'RE ON A SMALL PORTION.
SO THE MCKINNEY PARKS AND REC OFFERS A VARIETY OF OPPORTUNITIES DESIGNED FOR ALL AGES AND INTERESTS, INCLUDING POPULAR RECREATION, ATHLETICS AND AQUATICS PROGRAMS, AS WELL AS SPECIAL COMMUNITY EVENTS, ARTS AND CULTURAL ACTIVITIES, AND VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES.
PARKS AND REC INCREASES OUR ECONOMIC PROSPERITY BY SUPPORTING PROPERTY VALUES, EXPANDING THE LOCAL TAX BASE, INCREASING TOURISM, AND BY ATTRACTING AND RETAINING BUSINESS. SO, AS MAYOR MCKINNEY, TEXAS, I DO HEREBY RECOGNIZE JULY 2026 AS NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH AND ENCOURAGE ALL RESIDENTS TO VISIT OUR PARKS, TRAILS, AND PROGRAMS AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. CONGRATULATIONS.
OKAY, NEXT ITEM WILL BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON ANY AGENDA ITEM. SO IF YOU COME THIS AFTERNOON. NO ONE MOVING ON. FIRST ITEM WILL BE TWO SIX DASH. I'M SORRY. LET ME BACK UP. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS? ANYONE KNOW? ALL RIGHT. MOVING
[26-0673 Consider/Discuss Update to Parkland Dedication Ordinance]
ON TO OUR WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM 26-0673. CONSIDER AN UPDATE TO PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M DAKOTA CRYER, PARKS CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COORDINATOR. I'M HERE TODAY TO CONTINUE PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD REGARDING PARKLAND DEDICATION. IF YOU RECALL, STAFF CAME BEFORE YOU IN DECEMBER OF 2025 WITH A REFRESHER OF PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE AND HOW WE ASSESS PARKLAND DEDICATION AND THE FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATION. AT THE TIME, COUNCIL REQUESTED STAFF TO PROVIDE OPTIONS FOR[00:05:05]
ADDRESSING HIGH PARKLAND FEES FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENTS NEAR DOWNTOWN. AS THE LAND VALUES THE LAND VALUES USED TO ASSESS THE FEES ARE TYPICALLY HIGHER IN DOWNTOWN THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY. STAFF THEN CONTACTED DOCTOR JOHN CROMPTON, TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR WHO WAS THE PRIMARY AUTHOR OF OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE, AND WE CAME BACK IN TO COUNCIL IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR TO PRESENT SEVERAL OPTIONS RECOMMENDED BY DOCTOR CROMPTON FOR ADJUSTING HOW WE ASSESS FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATION. AT THE APRIL MEETING, COUNCIL ASKED STAFF TO REFINE THE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE DISCUSSION AND CONCERNS VOICED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS DURING THE MEETING. TODAY, WE WILL DISCUSS NEW RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ASSESSING PARKLAND CASH IN LIEU FEES AND TOUCH ON THE EVALUATION OF PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES BEFORE ASKING COUNCIL'S DIRECTION ON NEXT STEPS. AND I DO APOLOGIZE. I FORGOT MY CLICKER. THE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES ARE GOING TO LOOK A BIT FAMILIAR TO YOU AS WE BRIEFLY HIGHLIGHT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. THERE WE GO. YOU GOT TO PUSH THAT A LITTLE HARDER THAN I WAS DOING. YES, WE'LL HIGHLIGHT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE AND HOW IT APPLIES TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN MCKINNEY. AS A REMINDER, OUR PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE HAS TWO MAIN COMPONENTS THE PARKLAND DEDICATION PIECE AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES. PARKLAND DEDICATION IS ASSESSED AT A RATE OF ONE ACRE FOR EVERY 37 UNITS. THE CASH IN LIEU OF DEDICATION OPTION IS DETERMINED BY MULTIPLYING THE REQUIRED DEDICATION ACREAGE BY THE COLLIN CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT'S MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND BEING DEVELOPED. PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES ARE ASSESSED ON A PER UNIT BASIS, WHICH ARE CURRENTLY $1,400 PER SINGLE FAMILY LOT AND $1,600 PER MULTIFAMILY UNIT. AND SOMETHING THAT I JUST WANT YOU TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE MOVE FORWARD HERE, IS THAT THE CURRENT PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES THAT WE ASSESS ARE AT A DISCOUNT FROM THE RECOMMENDED RATE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED DURING THE 2022 ORDINANCE UPDATE. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THAT SECOND LINE OF THE TABLE THERE. THE ORDINANCE CURRENTLY OFFERS CREDITS AND REDUCTIONS TO PARKLAND DEDICATION AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR CERTAIN USES, AND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE PARK LIKE AMENITIES. PARKS WILL BE WORKING ALONGSIDE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN THEIR EFFORTS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES, WHICH WE EXPECT TO COME FORWARD IN THE COMING MONTHS. SO AFFORDABLE HOUSING WILL NOT BE COVERED IN TODAY'S DISCUSSION. I'VE GOT THIS SLIDE IN HERE THAT KIND OF SHOWS OUR PREVIOUS ORDINANCE PRE 2022. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP THIS IN MIND, BECAUSE THERE ARE STILL DEVELOPMENTS OUT THERE THAT FALL UNDER THE OLD ORDINANCE PRE 2022. AND THAT THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE REQUIRED ONE ACRE OF DEDICATION FOR EVERY 50 UNITS AND DID NOT HAVE A PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE. THIS SLIDE JUST SHOWS THE AMOUNT COLLECTED THROUGH PARKLAND DEDICATION ACROSS THE OLD ORDINANCE AND THE NEW ORDINANCE. SINCE 2023, THE CITY'S COLLECTED OVER $29 MILLION IN PARKLAND DEDICATION AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES, WHICH IS CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF A NUMBER OF THE CITY'S PARKS, CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. AND I KNOW A LOT OF THESE SLIDES ARE VERY FAMILIAR TO YOU, BUT JUST ANOTHER REMINDER THAT WE DO NOT COLLECT PARKLAND FEES IN THE THE MCKINNEY TOWN CENTER ZONE. BEFORE I MOVE ON, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE AND HOW WE ASSESS PARKLAND CASH IN LIEU FEES? OKAY. SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE BRING BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A CITY WIDE CAP, A DOWNTOWN CAP, THE POSSIBILITY OF A COMBINATION OF THE TWO OR WE LEAVE THE ORDINANCE AS IS TODAY. WE'LL ALSO TOUCH ON UPDATING THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES TO REFLECT CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS. AS WE GET A LITTLE FURTHER INTO THE PRESENTATION. SO FOR THE CITYWIDE CAP. THE PROS, IT'S A FAIR AND CONSISTENT ASSESSMENT ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY. IT'S CLEAR AND EASY TO APPLY FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE PERSPECTIVE, AND PARKLAND FEES STILL FOLLOW THE C CAD VALUE BELOW THE CAP, BUT[00:10:02]
NEVER EXCEED IT. CONS THE CAP IS A BEST GUESS VALUE MEANT TO REFLECT ALL SEVEN ZONES. IT REDUCES THE CASH IN LIEU COLLECTED IN SOME CASES THAT ARE OVER THE CAP. IT'S SET AS A FIXED VALUE EACH YEAR THAT WOULD BE ADOPTED WITH THE ANNUAL FEE SCHEDULE. SO WE'VE PUT TOGETHER TWO PROPOSED CITYWIDE CAP AMOUNTS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. FIRSTLY, WHAT WE'RE CALLING RECOMMENDATION 1AA $400,000 PER ACRE CAP. THE TABLE ON THE LEFT SHOWS A LIST OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE PAID PARKLAND AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES OVER THE PAST 14 MONTHS ABOUT. WITH THE RED BOXES INDICATING THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE RECEIVED THE BENEFIT OF THE CAP. SO YOU COULD SEE ON THE FAR RIGHT HAND OF THAT TABLE, THE RED BOXES ARE OBVIOUSLY HIGHLIGHTING ANY OF THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE GREATER THAN $400,000 AN ACRE IN VALUE. IN THIS SCENARIO, THE CITY WOULD HAVE SEEN ABOUT A 3% REDUCTION IN THE NEARLY $10 MILLION COLLECTED DURING THIS PERIOD. A CAP SET TO THIS AMOUNT WILL AFFECT FEWER DEVELOPMENTS, BUT WOULD PROVIDE RELIEF TO THOSE WITH DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGHER LAND VALUES. AND I ALSO WANTED TO QUICKLY POINT OUT THE NUMBERS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.THAT IS, THE AVERAGE PER UNIT FEE FOR PARK, PARKLAND DEDICATION AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES ACROSS THE CITY THAT OVER THAT SAME 14 MONTH PERIOD OR SO. ON THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL SEE THE SAME TABLE HIGHLIGHTING DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTED BY RECOMMENDATION 1BA $300,000 PER ACRE CAP. IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE DEVELOPMENTS COME IN WITH C CAD VALUES EXCEEDING 300,000 PER ACRE. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, MORE DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BENEFIT FROM A CAP OF THIS AMOUNT, EQUATING TO NEARLY $1.5 MILLION, OR ABOUT 15% REDUCTION IN TOTAL PARK FEES COLLECTED OVER THIS PERIOD. AND I DID JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK NOTE THAT THESE CAP RECOMMENDATIONS ARE JUST RECOMMENDATIONS, AND AT ITS DISCRETION, COUNCIL CAN DETERMINE A CAP AMOUNT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I HAVE PRESENTED HERE TODAY. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS CITYWIDE CAP? JUST SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS RIGHT. YES, SIR. THIS COST PER UNITS, WE'VE GOT SOME DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE PAYING $3,300 AND THEN SOME THAT ARE PAYING $20,000. YES, SIR. AND I MEAN, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHERE PECAN HILL WHERE THAT DEVELOPMENT IS.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW IT'S I BELIEVE IT'S ALONG LAKE FOREST NORTH BY THE HIGH SCHOOL, MAYBE.
IS IT NORTH? I THINK IT'S JUST JUST NORTHWEST OF THE HIGH SCHOOL ON THE WEST SIDE OF LAKE FOREST, I BELIEVE. BOYD HIGH SCHOOL. CORRECT. BOYD HIGH SCHOOL, BUT IT'S LIKELY A GREENFIELD DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS RIGHT. YEAH. RAW LAND AT THE POINT IT'S DEVELOPED. SO. YES, SIR. AND THEN THE LIKE THE HIGH 1HL DAVIS. I ASSUME THAT'S DOWNTOWN. THAT'S SOMEBODY THAT'S DIVIDED A LOT IN DOWNTOWN. YES IT IS. AND YOU'LL NOTICE ALL OF THOSE OR NOT ALL, BUT MANY OF THOSE. HIGHER ONES, THE HIGHER ONES ARE THESE INFILL DEVELOPMENTS DOWNTOWN.
SO THE, YOU KNOW, THE COASTAL 14,000 PER UNIT, THE 20,000 PER UNIT, THOSE WERE BOTH DOWNTOWN.
WE'RE WE'RE APPRAISING. I MEAN, CAD IS APPRAISING DIFFERENT THINGS. AND WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT A GREENFIELD LIKE PECAN HILL THAT'S UNDEVELOPED, THAT DOESN'T HAVE UTILITIES THAT MAY HAVE SOME DEFICIENCIES, LIKE FLOODPLAIN ISSUES VERSUS THE DOWNTOWN LOTS, WHICH ARE DEVELOPED. THEY HAVE DELIVERY OF UTILITIES, WATER, STREETS, THEY'RE BUILDABLE AND THEY'RE COMPACT AND SORTS. AND SO YEAH, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'RE CREATING A WEIRD COMPARISON HERE. AND I'M JUST POINTING THAT OUT SINCE WE'RE WE'RE GETTING TO THE POINT HERE. SURE.
YEAH. AND REALLY, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF SHOW THAT THAT TOTAL THAT WE HAVE COLLECTED AND I PULLED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BACK ABOUT 14 MONTHS, IT SEEMED LIKE A GOOD SPECTRUM OF ACROSS THE CITY AND THE ZONES THAT WE TYPICALLY COLLECT IN AND REALLY WANTED TO SHOW THAT THAT PER UNIT AVERAGE. AND REALLY WITH THOSE INFILL DEVELOPMENTS BEING SO SMALL IN, IN NUMBER OF UNITS, IF YOU REMOVED THOSE THAT AVERAGE ACROSS THE CITY DOESN'T CHANGE BY MUCH. RIGHT? TO. SO
[00:15:10]
MOVING ON TO RECOMMENDATION NUMBER TWO, A DOWNTOWN CAP. IF COUNCIL DOES WISH TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DOWNTOWN CAP, STAFF RECOMMENDS ALIGNING IT GEOGRAPHICALLY TO THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT ZONE OR THE Z. SINCE THE H AND Z IS AN EXISTING ZONE WITH DEFINED BOUNDARIES, THIS WOULD BE EASY TO UNDERSTAND AND APPLY. THE H Z REACHES FURTHER THAN THE MTC, WHICH WE NOTED EARLIER IS ALREADY EXEMPT FROM PARKLAND DEDICATION, THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE, AND WOULD ENCOMPASS MANY OF THESE HIGH VALUE INFILL DEVELOPMENTS. A DOWNTOWN CAP WOULD ALSO INCENTIVIZE AND PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT NEAR DOWNTOWN.CONSIDERATIONS WOULD BE DEVELOPMENTS THAT LIE JUST OUTSIDE THE HIZ LIMITS MAY ALSO WARRANT THE DOWNTOWN CAP, AND IT COULD ALSO BE SEEN AS UNFAIR TO OTHER HIGH LAND VALUE AREAS IN THE CITY. AND JUST FOR REFERENCE, HERE'S A QUICK LOOK AT THE H Z. GENERALLY, IT STRETCHES NORTH TO SOUTH FROM UNIVERSITY DRIVE TO INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND EAST TO WEST FROM AIRPORT DRIVE TO US 75. FOR THE DOWNTOWN CAP, WE HAVE TWO PROPOSED OPTIONS. A CAP SET AT $300,000 PER ACRE WOULD EQUATE TO ABOUT A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $9,500 PER UNIT, AND THAT'S INCLUSIVE OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE. AND AT $200,000 PER ACRE, THE CAP WOULD RESULT IN A MAXIMUM PER UNIT COST OF ABOUT $6,800. AGAIN, THE AVERAGE CITYWIDE PER UNIT FEE WE'VE SEEN OVER THE PAST YEARS AND EXCLUDING EVEN SOME OF THOSE SMALLER INFILL DEVELOPMENTS, IS GENERALLY AROUND $7,500 PER UNIT. AND JUST FOR CONTEXT, THIS MAP SHOWS SOME OF OUR MORE RECENT INFILL DEVELOPMENTS. I KNOW YOU GUYS MAY HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE.
ALL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BE WITHIN THE H Z IF THAT WAS WERE THE LIMITS THAT WE USED FOR DOWNTOWN CAP. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS AROUND DOWNTOWN CAP? YEAH. GO BACK TO SLIDE 12, PLEASE. YES, SIR. 13. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY TO. SO ARE YOU TELLING GO BACK TO 12. THIS IS GIVING ME TROUBLE. I'M SORRY. SO PROPERTY IN DOWNTOWN MCKINNEY, DOWNTOWN PROPER. SAY, ONE BLOCK OFF THE SQUARE. IF WE GAVE IF WE IF WE GAVE A REDUCTION IN THAT AREA, THAT REDUCTION ALSO WOULD COUNT IN AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OUT OFF OF INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD.
RIGHT. IT WOULD, BUT ONLY IF IT WAS A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. OKAY, SO YOU'RE LIMITED TO ELM STREET, WILCOX, FOWLER KIND OF A THING. OKAY, OKAY. GO TO 15 REAL QUICK. SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS RECENT ACTIVITY AS FAR AS INFILL DEVELOPMENT. AND MOST OF IT IS EAST OF WELL IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. YOU'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT EAST OVER INTO. THAT'S WHAT'S AT THE OLD COTTON COMPRESS, RIGHT. RADHIKA'S PROPERTY PART OF IT. THAT'S IN THE IN THE BOX. YEAH. OKAY.
YEAH, THAT'S IN THE MCKINNEY TOWN CENTER. YEAH. SO THE RED AREAS ARE THE MTC ZONE PARKLAND ZONES ALREADY EXEMPT FROM THIS. ALREADY EXEMPT ZONES ALREADY EXEMPT FROM THIS SHOULD BE OUTSIDE. IT'S OUTSIDE. OKAY, HERE WE GO. AND PATRICK NO THAT'S ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.
THAT'S WHAT WE HAD THAT TOWN. SO IF THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE DOWNTOWN CAP.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE. EARLIER IN MY PRESENTATION, I NOTED THAT THE CURRENT PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE AMOUNTS ARE AT A DISCOUNT FROM WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED USING CONSTRUCTION COST DATA FROM 2022. BASED ON PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF 2025 AND 2026 CONSTRUCTION COSTS, THE RECOMMENDED PER UNIT PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE SHOULD BE UPDATED TO 3192 FOR SINGLE FAMILY LOT AND 2612 FOR A MULTIFAMILY UNIT. SECTION
[00:20:10]
142166 OF THE CURRENT PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE CALLS FOR A REVIEW OF THE PARK FEES EVERY FIVE YEARS, WHICH IS COMING DUE IN 2027. WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS TO A FUTURE WORK SESSION, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO TEE UP THAT FUTURE CONVERSATION. JUST GIVE YOU SOME OF THAT CONTEXT THERE. AND WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS AND HEAR HOW COUNCIL WOULD LIKE STAFF TO PROCEED. I'LL OPEN IT, IF THAT'S OKAY. MR. MAYOR, I APPRECIATE THIS. YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE WHO HAVE REAL BIG LOTS HERE IN EAST MCKINNEY, REAL BIG BY OUR STANDARDS, AND THOSE OF US WHO LIVE IN THE WEST, THAT THEY WANT TO SUBDIVIDE, THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO GET OTHER FOLKS LIVING DOWN HERE. THOSE OTHER FOLKS DO WANT IT. THEY DO. THEY'RE FINE WITH SMALLER LOTS. BUT MAN, THIS PRICE TAG HAS GOTTEN CRAZY ON THEM. AND IT'S IT HAS ALWAYS STRUCK ME AS NOT REALLY RIGHT, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE BUILDING ANY MORE PARKS DOWN HERE. I DO GET THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY THEIR FREIGHT AND THEY AND WE DO HAVE STUFF THAT WE CAN DO, BUT I, I LIKE THE DIRECTION THAT YOU'RE HEADED WITH THIS. AND SO I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK. AND I LIKE THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PART BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHERE OUR PROBLEM IS. SO I THINK THAT WAS MORE OR LESS B AS OPPOSED TO A, WHICH WAS A CITY WIDE OVERLAY. MY INCLINATION WOULD BE TO LEAN TOWARD B, BUT I'M ONE OF SEVEN. SO THERE WE GO. AND TO BE CLEAR, YOU COULD DO A COMBINATION OF THE TWO. WE COULD, BUT I'LL JUST LET YOU KNOW. THAT'S THE ONE THAT RESONATES WITH ME. YES, SIR. COULD YOU GO TO. GO AHEAD. YOU GO AHEAD, MR. MAYOR. SO SLIDE SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED, RIGHT? YES, SIR. SO THIS IS THE CURRENT FEE THAT'S ASSESSED ON THE PARK DEVELOPMENT. THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE IS THE PER UNIT FEE NOT TIED TO THE THE THE LAND'S VALUE IN ANY WAY. THESE NUMBERS WERE. WELL I SHOULD SAY THAT THE, THE RECOMMENDED THE RECOMMENDATION IN 2022. THOSE PER UNIT FEES WERE SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN WHAT WE DO ASSESS. SO WE DID GET A DISCOUNT WHEN IT WAS INITIALLY INSTALLED. AND THIS USING THAT SAME KIND OF FORMULA THAT WAS USED TO DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE. THIS IS WHAT THOSE NUMBERS LOOK LIKE TODAY WITH CURRENT CONSTRUCTION COSTS.AS FAR AS IN TERMS OF, SORRY TO INTERRUPT THE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT HAD INPUT ON GOING FROM 1400 TO 3200 WERE WHO WHO HAD INPUT. HOW DID THIS MAKE IT TO A SLIDE? WAS IT A STAFF DECISION? WAS IT INPUT FROM THE INDUSTRY OR HOW DID HOW DID WE GET HERE? I'M NOT SURE I HAVE THAT INFORMATION. I BELIEVE IT WAS DETERMINED FROM OUR FROM OUR SOME OF OUR RECENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN PARKS. AND THEN SORRY, I'M GOING TO DEFER TO JENNY ON THIS. JENNY BAKER, PARKS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER. WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THE COSTS, WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT IT AMONGST STAFF, SENIOR LEADERSHIP, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE CONSULTANT DOCTOR CROMPTON, AND THEN IN VARIOUS WORK SESSIONS WITH THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME, WE DETERMINED WHAT WE FELT WAS AN APPROPRIATE REDUCTION. AND THAT'S HOW WE KIND OF SET THOSE FEES, WHICH WHICH IS THE 1416 HUNDRED. WAS THERE ANY INPUT FROM ANY STAKEHOLDERS OR PROPERTY OWNERS? YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SAY WE TOOK IT TO A MAYBE A DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE OF SORTS. I'M I'M MEMORIES A LITTLE FUZZY, BUT I WANT TO SAY WE DID, YOU KNOW, KIND OF VET IT THAT WAY, BUT IT WASN'T NECESSARILY A TRUE, YOU KNOW, VETTING THROUGH STAKEHOLDERS.
OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANKS. ANYONE ELSE? DAKOTA ON THE ON THE ONE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, TRYING TO TRIANGULATE INTO WHAT'S EASY FOR YOU ALL TO COME UP WITH, WHAT IS A FAIR COST OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT SOMEONE SHOULD PAY OR WHAT A DEVELOPMENT SHOULD PAY AND WHAT PROVIDES US A RESPONSIBLE REVENUE STREAM TO MEET OUR PARK DEMANDS IS KIND OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. I THINK I AGREE WITH PATRICK THAT THE WE'RE GOING TO SEE THOSE ODDITIES BECAUSE THIS THIS IS INFILL, BUT IT'S ALSO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APPRAISING A DEVELOPED LOT VERSUS AN UNDEVELOPED LOT. AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE THOSE ODDITIES MORE IN THE KNEES THAN WE ARE IN MOST PLACES. NOW. THERE MAY BE INSTANCES WHERE WE SEE THEM IN OTHER PLACES, BUT THE THE ONES THAT WEREN'T IN THE H N, I, Z WERE HIGH VALUES BECAUSE OF OTHER REASONS, NOT BECAUSE WE WERE APPRAISING A SINGLE DEVELOPED LOT. THEY WERE
[00:25:01]
HIGH VALUES BECAUSE THEY WERE THEY WERE MULTIFAMILY OR THEY WERE COMMERCIAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH WHERE THEY WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN THE CITY AS WELL. YEAH. BUT IN TERMS OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S EASY, WHAT'S FAIR, WHAT'S RESPONSIBLE, IT SEEMS LIKE THE, THE SCENARIO B OR THAT PATHWAY IS THE BEST WAY TO, TO KIND OF COME UP WITH THAT IN MY MIND. OKAY, I AGREE. PLUS WE ALREADY HAVE AN EXISTING ZONE TO APPLY IT TO. YES. DAKOTA, ARE YOU LOOKING FOR A RESPONSE TODAY OR DID I HEAR YOU SAY, WE'RE BRINGING THIS BACK FOR ANOTHER WORK SESSION? WELL, THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE WILL CERTAINLY BE COMING BACK ON ON UPDATING THESE COSTS. THIS WAS KIND OF FOOD FOR THOUGHT AS, AS YOU KNOW, THAT WE TALK ABOUT THAT DOWN THE ROAD. I THINK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR TODAY IS FOR COUNCIL TO, YOU KNOW, SAY, WHETHER THEY PREFER A CITY CAP, A CITYWIDE CAP OR A DOWNTOWN CAP. AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE THE AMOUNTS THAT I'VE PUT IN MY PRESENTATION TODAY, BUT PROVIDING SOME DIRECTION ON, ON THAT CAP AMOUNT, IF YOU CHOOSE, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE THAT HAD THE OPTIONS UP THERE? IT WAS MIDWAY, FIRST, THIRD OR SO.YEAH. SO THIS IS THE DOWNTOWN CAP. AND THESE WERE OKAY, KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING.
NO, THERE'S A SLIDE. YOU'RE GETTING REALLY CLOSE. THAT ONE. SO DOES THIS HELP SUMMARIZE.
THE SLIDE KIND OF WHAT WE'RE DOING. AND YOU'RE LOOKING FOR US. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE. YOU KNOW WHETHER YOU CHOOSE ONE OR OR MORE OF THESE OPTIONS AND PROVIDING THAT, THAT DIRECTION ON ANY, ANY CAP AMOUNT THAT YOU CHOOSE. I JUST MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY WEIGH IN ON THIS, THIS IS REALLY THERE'S A THERE'S ANOTHER ELEMENT TO THIS CONVERSATION THAT WILL BE COMING FORWARD AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH MULTIFAMILY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WHAT TYPES OF PARK PARKLAND DEDICATION OR CASH IN LIEU OF IS MOST OFTEN THE CASE THAT WILL BE COMING. THIS IS REALLY FOCUSING ON THOSE INFILL LOTS. AND WHAT METHODOLOGY DOES THE COUNCIL FEEL MOST COMFORTABLE WITH? WILL WILL GO FORWARD AND BRING SOME MORE NUMBERS BACK TO YOU BEFORE YOU ADOPT ANYTHING. BUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GAUGE THE COUNCIL ON WHAT WHAT IS YOUR APPETITE FOR EITHER A CITYWIDE CAP, A DOWNTOWN CAP COMBINATION OR LEAVE IT AS IT IS? I'LL MAKE A QUICK COMMENT. I'M MORE APT TO GO WITH THE CITYWIDE CAP. I THINK IT HAS LESS DISPARITIES CITYWIDE. GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE COST OF THE. PER PER UNIT COST THAT WE'RE CHANGING. I THINK IT WAS YOU HAD THE ONE AT THE 300,000, THE 200,000, I THINK THAT WAS THE DOWNTOWN CAP. SO IF WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THE CITYWIDE CAP, I HAD A $400,000 PER ACRE CAP, WHICH IS THIS SLIDE, AND THEN A 300 000 ACRE PER ACRE CAP. I'D BE MORE APT TO GO WITH THE 400,000 IF THAT WERE THE CASE. AND JUST TO REITERATE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THESE NUMBERS ARE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT STAFF PUT TOGETHER WE THOUGHT WOULD PAINT A GOOD PICTURE OF, OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT THESE CAPS MIGHT LOOK LIKE IN TERMS OF REDUCTION IN FEES COLLECTED. BUT COUNCIL CAN CHOOSE ANY CAP AMOUNT ABOVE, BELOW OR IN BETWEEN, EFFECTIVELY LIKE A CIRCUIT BREAKER, 400,000. GO BACK. I'LL MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT. THAT LAST SLIDE THAT YOU HAD WHERE WE'RE RAISING THE THE FEES. FROM MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY.
YES, SIR. THERE WE GO. JUST A COMMENT OF WHAT THE INDUSTRY MIGHT SAY BECAUSE WE'RE IN A PERIOD RIGHT NOW WHERE HOUSING IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE. AND IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS REALLY NOT THE TIME TO GO UP A GREAT DEAL ON OUR FEES, KNOWING THAT INTEREST RATES ARE HIGH, COST OF CONSTRUCTION IS HIGH. YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD HOMES, NOT JUST
[00:30:02]
LOW END, BUT JUST HOMES. OUR AVERAGE PRICE IS PROBABLY ABOUT 372,000 OR SOMETHING. YES, SIR.HOUSEHOLD. I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT THIS THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME TO RAISE THOSE FEES. A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD SAY THOSE ARE HIGH ANYWAY. YES. YEAH. AND THIS SLIDE REALLY IS INFORMATIONAL TO KIND OF TEE UP FUTURE DISCUSSIONS AROUND THIS. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING TO NECESSARILY MAKE A DECISION ON TODAY. AND I'M NOT SAYING IN THE FUTURE WE DON'T NEED TO GO TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, BUT I THINK WE'RE IN A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE NEED TO BE CAUTIOUS ABOUT DOING THINGS LIKE THAT. SURE. I WOULD JUST POINT OUT, COUNCILMAN FRANKLIN, THOSE ARE GREAT COMMENTS. AND THESE ARE OBVIOUSLY POLICY DECISIONS FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE TO MAKE. IF YOU DON'T CHARGE THESE FEES FOR NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, THEN THE EXISTING TAXPAYERS WHO HAVE ALREADY PAID FOR PARKS AND AND DEVELOPMENT WILL BE PAYING MORE. SO IT WOULD BE KIND OF A YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO CARRY MORE WATER, TO BUILD PARKS THAT THEY'VE ALREADY PAID FOR. SO IN A SENSE, DOUBLE DIPPING. SO WE TRY TO DO SPREAD THAT OUT WITH IMPACT FEES AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES. THAT'S THE RATIONALE BEHIND IT. BUT OBVIOUSLY IT'S A POLICY DECISION ON WHAT DO YOU THINK? WHERE DO YOU THINK THE THE PAIN POINTS ARE IN THE COMMUNITY? OKAY, LAST TIME TO KIND OF GO BACK TO THE FOUR OPTIONS TO MOVE THIS ALONG, WE'LL ASK COUNCILMAN JONES WHAT HE THINKS. I THINK WE MIGHT BE. DEPRECIATION. I LIKE OPTION TWO.
ME TOO. YEAH. OPTION TWO. TRYING TO THINK THOSE FEES WERE MULTIFAMILY. WHEN YOU'RE DEVELOPING DOWNTOWN, YOU'VE GOT SO MANY ROADBLOCKS AND SO MANY CHALLENGES WITH EXISTING LOTS AND EASEMENTS AND THINGS THAT JUST UNEXPECTED COST. SO ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP, HELP THAT AREA IN PARTICULAR, I THINK WE SHOULD DO, AND I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, BECAUSE I'M THE ONE WHO, WHO SAW THIS AND ASKED FOR THIS TO COME UP. THE THE BIG ONE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THAT $20,000 FEE. YES, SIR. WE'RE NOT ASKING, OKAY, THAT THAT HOMEOWNER OR THAT DEVELOPER TO GET A BREAK IN THIS. WE JUST WANT IT TO BE COMPARABLE TO THE REST OF THE CITY. BECAUSE I JUST ANECDOTALLY WITH THAT ONE THAT WAS USING LAST YEAR'S VALUE, THAT VALUE LAND VALUES IN DOWNTOWN ROSE BY ABOUT 40% THIS YEAR. HE WAS SLATED TO PAY $32,000 IN THAT FEE. BUT THE THE CURRENT. THE 2025 VALUE HASN'T BEEN CERTIFIED YET. AND SO IT WAS 20,000. LIKE I THINK THAT I THINK WHEN YOU'RE APPLYING THAT CAP, YOU'RE JUST BRINGING IT DOWN TO SOMEWHERE CLOSE TO WHAT WE'RE GETTING ON AVERAGE IN THE CITY SO THAT THESE ARE REASONABLE TO DO. SO I IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE NECESSARILY GIVING THEM A DISCOUNT OR REDUCING THIS COMPARED TO OTHERS, IT'S THAT WE'RE BRINGING IT IN LINE WITH ALL THE OTHERS BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME VERY. ODD AND UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES IN DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT. SO ANYONE ELSE CARE TO WEIGH IN? NO. YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED. I BELIEVE I HEAR THAT OPTION TWO IS PREFERRED. THAT'S FOCUSED ON DOWNTOWN CAP.
YES, SIR. YEAH. GOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. GOOD. THANK YOU. OKAY. OUR NEXT ITEM 26-067. FOR
[26-0674 Consider/Discuss Potential Changes to McKinney Requirements for Dams]
POTENTIAL CHANGES TO MCKINNEY. REQUIREMENTS FOR DAM MAINTENANCE. DAM MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE. LET'S GET OUR SNICKERS OUT OF THE WAY. YES, MR. MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM JENNIFER ARNOLD, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER WITH THE CITY OF MCKINNEY. YES, WE DO HAVE A FUN TOPIC TO TALK ABOUT THIS AFTERNOON. YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT WILL LAUGH WHEN WE HAVE TO REFER TO DAMS THROUGHOUT THIS PRESENTATION. SO WE'RE ALL WE'RE ALL TOGETHER IN THAT. BUT I'LL START BY SAYING I WANTED TO TEE THIS UP FOR OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.CITY OF MCKINNEY IS BLESSED WITH A LOT OF NATURAL FEATURES AND TOPOGRAPHY, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES INCLUDES SEVERAL BODIES OF WATER THAT WE SOMETIMES HAVE TO LOOK AT TO DETERMINE HOW WE WANT TO CONTROL FLOWS IN AND OUT OF THOSE BODIES OF WATER. THOSE ARE THE DAMS THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO TODAY. IN RECENT HISTORY, WE'VE HAD SOME QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE CITY COMPARES IN TERMS IN THAT REGULATION TO SOME OF OUR SISTER CITIES AND TO THE STATE. SO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS TAKEN A LOOK AT OUR REGULATIONS. THIS PRESENTATION WILL KIND OF HIGHLIGHT HOW WE CURRENTLY
[00:35:01]
APPROACH THAT, HOW IT COMPARES TO SOME OF OUR SISTER CITIES, AND SOME POTENTIAL OPTIONS THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED FOR CHANGES. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR THE COUNCIL TO TAKE ANY ACTION TONIGHT, REALLY JUST TEEING UP THE DISCUSSION AND AN APPETITE FOR HOW WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT THAT MOVING FORWARD. IF THERE IS A DESIRE TO CONSIDER CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE, OBVIOUSLY OUR TEAM WILL EVALUATE THOSE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SOME OTHER DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING LEGAL, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT A GOOD BALANCE BETWEEN WHAT THE REGULATIONS ARE INTENDED TO HELP CONTROL AND PREVENT VERSUS RISK AND LIABILITY TO THE CITY. SO THAT I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO DANNY, STILL WITH OUR DRAINAGE ENGINEERING TEAM, AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO WALK THROUGH THIS AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. HOW'S IT GOING? I'M DANNY, WE HAVE ABOUT 64 DAMS IN MCKINNEY CITY LIMITS AND ABOUT 25 MORE IN OUR ETJ.AND WE'RE HERE, AS JENNIFER SAID, TO TALK ABOUT OUR RULES FOR THEM. SO WHY WE'RE HERE? AS SHE SAID, WE'RE HEARING CONCERNS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY ABOUT OUR RULES FOR DAMS. SOME ARE ASKING WHY WE MAKE DEVELOPERS UPGRADE DAMS WHEN OTHER CITIES DON'T. SOME DON'T LIKE OUR RULES FOR WHAT'S ALLOWED IN DAM BREACH AREAS. SO WE'VE TAKEN A SECOND LOOK AT OUR REGULATIONS. WE'VE GOT A FEW IDEAS FOR POTENTIAL CHANGES. AS SHE SAID, WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY. WE JUST WANT TO GET A SENSE ON THE DIRECTION FORWARD FROM YOU. AND PLEASE STOP ME AT ANY POINT. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. SO LET ME START WITH A FEW THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND. THE FIRST TWO ARE THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF FAILURE AND THE CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE FOR DAMS ARE TWO IMPORTANT CONCEPTS, AND THEY'RE DIFFERENT. THE LIKELIHOOD OF FAILURE FOR MOST DAMS IS LOW. AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THERE'S NEVER BEEN A DAM BREACH IN MCKINNEY. A FEW MAKE THE NEWS PERIODICALLY, BUT THEY ARE VERY, VERY RARE. THE CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE FOR A DAM IS DIFFERENT, AND THAT CAN VARY WILDLY DEPENDING ON WHAT'S DOWNSTREAM OF A DAM THAT FAILS. IF A BREACH HAPPENS IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE, THERE MIGHT BE NO CONSEQUENCES. IF A BREACH HAPPENS IN THE MIDDLE OF A CROWDED CITY. DEPENDING ON SEVERAL FACTORS, THERE MIGHT BE CATASTROPHIC IMPACTS. IT'S ALSO HELPFUL TO REMEMBER THAT THE HAZARD CLASSIFICATION CAN CHANGE OVER TIME IF DEVELOPMENT IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BREACH AREA, AND I'LL DISCUSS THESE TERMS MORE ON THE NEXT FEW SLIDES, IF THAT'S OKAY. ANOTHER KEY CONCEPT IS THAT BECAUSE BREACH AREAS EXTEND FAR DOWNSTREAM, OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR DAMS CAN IMPACT OTHER DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DAM. SO IT'S I THINK IT'S GOOD TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. OKAY. A FEW KEY TERMS. THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE DAM AT STONEBRIDGE LAKE. OBVIOUSLY, THE DAM IS THE BIG MOUND OF DIRT THAT HOLDS BACK THE WATER. WATER NORMALLY FLOWS THROUGH OUT ONLY BY THE PRINCIPAL SPILLWAY PIPE RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OR DURING A REALLY BIG STORM. WATER IS ALSO DESIGNED TO FLOW OVER THE AUXILIARY SPILLWAY, WHICH IS THE BIG CURVED PART ON THE ADRIATIC SIDE. THE NORMAL POOL IS THE WATER LEVEL. ON A NORMAL DAY LIKE TODAY, SOMETHING CALLED THE SUNNY DAY BREACH IS A POTENTIAL DAM FAILURE. THAT COULD HAPPEN WHEN THE WATER LEVEL IS AT THAT NORMAL POOL.
IF THAT HAPPENED, A CERTAIN AREA DOWNSTREAM WOULD BE FLOODED, WHICH MIGHT BE THE RED AREA, AND WE'LL CALL THAT THE SMALL BREACH AREA. IT'S ALSO CALLED THE SUNNY DAY BREACH AREA BECAUSE IT COULD HAPPEN ON A SUNNY DAY LIKE TODAY. THE GREEN AREA IS A BIGGER BREACH AREA, WHICH IS TECHNICALLY CALLED A FULL BREACH AREA. AND BY THE WAY, THESE GREEN AND RED AREAS ON THIS IMAGE ARE JUST CONCEPTUAL. THIS IS NOT THE TECHNICAL BREACH AREAS FOR THIS DAM. AND THE BIG BREACH AREA IS WHAT MIGHT FLOOD IF THE DAM WERE TO BREACH WHEN THE WATER LEVEL WAS AT OR VERY NEAR THE TOP OF DAM ELEVATION. SO IMAGINE WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A REALLY BIG STORM. WATER IS FLOWING OUT BOTH SPILLWAYS. WATER IS ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TOP OF DAM AND THEN BOOM! THE WHOLE DAM BREACHES, THAT WOULD BE A BIG BREACH, AND IT WOULD BE A LOT BIGGER THAN THE SUNNY DAY BREACH IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN. AND IN TEXAS, DAMS ARE EITHER LOW, SIGNIFICANT OR HIGH HAZARD PER TKC RULES. AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE TO. SO THESE ARE THE THREE HAZARD CLASSIFICATIONS. LOW HAZARD IS WHEN THERE'S NOTHING IN THE DOWNSTREAM BREACH AREA BUT OPEN LAND. SIGNIFICANT HAZARD IS WHEN THERE'S 1 OR 2 HOUSES OR 1 OR 6, 1 TO 6 LIVES THREATENED OR MINOR ROADWAYS IN THE BREACH AREA. HIGH HAZARD IS WHEN THERE'S THREE OR MORE HOUSES OR SEVEN OR MORE LIVES THREATENED OR MAJOR ROADWAYS IN THE BREACH AREA. MOST OF THE SMALLER DAMS IN MCKINNEY ARE LOW HAZARD. MANY OF THE BIGGER ONES ARE HIGH HAZARD. OKAY, SO HERE'S A COMPARISON WITH SOME OTHER CITIES. AND LET ME JUST SAY THERE'S LOTS OF NUANCE TO RULES IN MCKINNEY AND EVERY OTHER CITY. BUT THIS IS THE
[00:40:03]
KIND OF A CLEAN, SIMPLE COMPARISON THAT WE CAME UP WITH. SO TO START, THE TOP ROW SHOWS THAT ALL CITIES WE CONTACTED SAID THAT T-C-E-Q RULES MUST BE FOLLOWED. THE NEXT ROW SHOWS THAT THE TIME TO ENFORCE STATE RULES ABOUT DAN. REHAB IS TYPICALLY WHEN A PROPERTY FIRST DEVELOPS AND YOU CAN SEE THREE OF THEM USE THE EXACT SAME PHRASE. THE THIRD ROW, WHICH HAZARD CLASS REQUIRES REHAB. WE'RE BASICALLY THE SAME AS PLANO AND FRISCO, BUT THEY USE THE WORD MAY AS IN MAY NEED TO BE UPGRADED. THE FOURTH ROW ARE HOMES PROHIBITED IN THE BIG BREACH AREA? AGAIN, OUR RULES ARE SIMILAR TO PLANO AND FRISCO. THE LAST ROW IS THE NUMBER OF NRCS DAMS IN EACH CITY. AND AGAIN, THIS DISCUSSION TODAY IS ABOUT ALL DAMS, NOT JUST THE BIG DAMS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE GOOD NUMBERS ON SMALLER DAMS IN OTHER CITIES. SO THIS IS THE ONLY COMPARISON WE'VE GOT. WE'RE FAIRLY CONFIDENT THAT MCKINNEY HAS THE MOST IN COLLIN COUNTY, WHERE BOTH NRCS AND SMALLER DAMS. AND I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE PERHAPS SOME THINK THAT OTHER CITIES DON'T MAKE THEM FOLLOW RULES ON DAMS, ONLY BECAUSE THE OTHER CITIES DON'T HAVE MANY DAMS. BY THE WAY, THE NRC'S ARE THE REALLY BIG ONES THAT ARE GENERALLY MORE LIKELY TO BE HIGH HAZARD. THINK STONEBRIDGE LAKE, EL DORADO LAKE, AND THE ONE BEHIND TRADE DAYS. AND I'M SUPPOSED TO FLIP MY SLIDE HERE. OKAY, SO CURRENT MCKINNEY RULES REQUIRE LOW HAZARD DAMS TO BE UPGRADED JUST LIKE THE OTHER DAMS. ONE IDEA FOR A CHANGE IS THAT UPGRADES WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED FOR MOST LOW HAZARD DAMS. AND AGAIN, LOW HAZARD ARE THE ONES THAT WOULD BE BREACHED. THERE'S NOTHING DOWNSTREAM THAT COULD BE IMPACTED. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS CURRENTLY PROHIBITED IN NRC'S DAM BREACH AREAS IN MCKINNEY. THAT'S THE CURRENT RULE. ONE POTENTIAL CHANGE HERE WOULD BE TO ADD OTHER TYPES OF OVERNIGHT LODGING, LIKE HOTELS AND HOSPITALS, TO THE PROHIBITION IN BREACH AREAS FOR ALL DAMS. I KNOW THIS SLIDE MIGHT BE CONFUSING, BUT LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION. CURRENTLY, THE SPECIFIC BREACH AREA SCENARIO, THE SMALLER BRIDGE SCENARIO, THE SUNNY DAY OR THE FULL BREACH IS NOT SPECIFIED. IT'S HISTORICALLY BEEN INTERPRETED AS THE BIG BREACH AREA. ONE CHANGE HERE MIGHT BE TO USE THE SMALLER BREACH AREA FOR COMPLIANT DAMS. THOSE THAT MEET CURRENT DAM SAFETY RULES, AND USE THE BIG BREACH AREA FOR THOSE THAT DON'T. SO IF WE DID MAKE CHANGES LIKE THAT, THIS IS WHAT THE NEW COMPARISON MIGHT LOOK LIKE. LOW HAZARD DAMS WOULD NOT REQUIRE UPGRADES. IN MOST CASES, WE'D FOLLOW T-C-E-Q RULES ABOUT WHEN THEY'RE NEEDED, AND THEY HAVE THIS LITTLE CHART THAT SAYS WHEN THEY'RE NEEDED, HOMES AND OTHER OVERNIGHT LODGING WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE BIG BREACH AREA FOR COMPLIANT DAMS OR THE DAMS THAT HAVE BEEN UPGRADED TO MEET SAFETY STANDARDS. AND THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF A BIG CHANGE. THEY WOULD STILL BE PROHIBITED. IF THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO FROM THE SUNNY DAY BREACH OR THE SMALLER BREACH, BUT HOMES COULD BE ALLOWED IN THE BIGGER BREACH. AND THAT WOULD BE A PRETTY BIG CHANGE. MAINLY, WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH ALL THIS IS CLARIFY OUR RULES TO REMOVE ANY AMBIGUITY AMBIGUITIES, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE SOME THINK THERE ARE SOME. HEY, DANNY, THIS MAY BE SOMETHING YOU DON'T KNOW, BUT WE ENJOY A PRETTY GOOD ISO RATING HERE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES HERE IN MCKINNEY. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE'RE ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN A HIGH BREACH OR, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THESE BIGGER DAMS THAT COULD JEOPARDIZE IT.DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT THE ISO RATING, BUT DOES ANYONE ELSE KNOWS? OKAY, I GUESS WE HAVE TO GET WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ON THAT. OKAY. SORRY. THANK YOU. BUT THAT'S IT. SO IF YOU HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'RE HERE. I HAVE A QUESTION. THE OTHER CITIES THAT REQUIRE YOU TO MEET T-C-E-Q RULES, DO THEY HAVE THEIR OWN ORDINANCES THAT ADDRESS DAMS LIKE PLANO, FRISCO, PROSPER, CELINA, OR ARE THEY JUST SAYING THAT THEY ABIDE BY THE T-C-E-Q RULES? WELL, ALL THE CITIES, I THINK, AS FAR AS I KNOW, HAVE ORDINANCES OF THEIR OWN, JUST LIKE WE DO. AND WE TRIED TO LOOK UP ALL THEIR RULES AND TALK TO THE ENGINEERS AT THOSE CITIES. AND FROM WHAT WE CAN TELL, YES, THEY THEY DO FOLLOW THE RULES. YEAH. BUT I'M SAYING, DO THEY HAVE A SEPARATE ORDINANCE LIKE WE DO? I DON'T RECALL IF TOP OF MY HEAD I'M SORRY. THEY HAVE THEY HAVE THE
[00:45:01]
ORDINANCES. I THINK WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY EARLIER ABOUT THE NUANCES, THE WAY THEY WORD IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT THAN HOW WE WORD IT, BUT THEY, I GUESS THEY DO HAVE STUFF IN THEIR ORDINANCES THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW X, Y, Z RULE. YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW T, C, Q, AND SOIL CONSERVATION RULES. I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN TO GET BACK TO YOU ON EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAY. BUT THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT. YEAH. OKAY. SO FROM AN INSURANCE STANDPOINT, ARE THE BIG BREACH AREAS, ARE THEY CONSIDERED FLOODPLAIN OR. NO THEY'RE NOT. THE FLOODPLAIN IS GENERALLY SMALL, ALMOST ALWAYS SMALLER THAN THE BIG BREACH AREA. OKAY. AND USUALLY SMALLER THAN THE SUNNY DAY BREACH AREA TOO. BUT THE SUNNY DAY BREACH AREA IS SIMILAR, MORE SIMILAR IN SIZE TO THE FLOODPLAIN. SO WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGES TO OUR FLOODPLAIN RULES. THIS IS JUST THE DAM BREACH AREAS. OKAY. SO USUALLY THE BREACH AREAS ARE BIGGER THAN THE FLOODPLAIN. SO A HOME BUILT IN A BREACH AREA, THEY WOULDN'T GET AN INSURANCE HIT. IT'S THEY WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW. I GUESS THE INSURANCE COMPANY WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT THEY WERE BUILT IN FRONT OF A BREACH AREA. AS FAR AS I KNOW. YES. KYLE. IS THAT TRUE? KYLE ODOM IS OUR FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR. HE MIGHT KNOW THAT ONE BETTER THAN ME. SO I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR ME AGAIN? FROM AN INSURANCE PERSPECTIVE, DOES INSURANCE EVEN LIKE, I GUESS, DING YOU FOR FOR BUILDING? IF YOU WERE TO BUILD A HOME IN A, IN A BREACH AREA OR, OR IS IT NOT EVEN ACCOUNTED FOR RIGHT NOW? IT'S, IT'S NOT PART OF THE FIRM PROGRAM. IT'S NOT PART OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE PROGRAM AS FAR AS BREACH AREAS ARE CONCERNED. LIKE DANNY WAS SAYING, YOUR SUNNY DAY BREACH, WHICH IS THE SMALLER OF THE BREACH AREAS, THE THE LESS CATASTROPHIC, THOSE TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE NARROW THAN THE BIG PMF, PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD. AND THAT SUNNY DAY BREACH IS OFTEN PRETTY WELL ALIGNED WITH THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. BUT AGAIN, THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN, THERE'S FLOOD INSURANCE AVAILABLE. OKAY. THE BREACH AREA IS NOT AVAILABLE. YOU COULD IN THEORY, ANYBODY CAN BUY ANY KIND OF INSURANCE, ANY KIND OF FLOOD INSURANCE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE IN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN TO OBTAIN FLOOD INSURANCE. IT WOULD JUST BE IF IT'S IN A BREACH AREA, BUT IT'S NOT LABELED AS 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. YOU COULD GET FLOOD INSURANCE AT A LOWER RATE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT IN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. SO WE HAVE THIS WOULD BE CALLED ZONE X. IT MEANS IT'S FEMA CONSIDERS IT TO BE A FLOODPLAIN, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. SO SOMEBODY ACROSS THE STREET OVER HERE, THEY COULD PURCHASE FLOOD INSURANCE IF THEY WANTED TO, BUT NOT REQUIRED TO. IF YOU'RE IN THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, IT'S REQUIRED BY FEMA. OKAY, SO I HOPE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. PERFECT. THANK YOU. IF IF SOMEBODY WERE TO DEVELOP OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, OUTSIDE OF THE ETJ, WOULD THE COUNTY REQUIRE THEM TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF TCEQ. AS FAR AS I KNOW, YES. AND I DON'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. DREW, DO YOU RECALL OR. MATT, DO YOU? DO YOU REMEMBER THIS ONE? SORRY, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE COUNTY ON OUR TABLE HERE. YEAH, WE DID NOT HAVE THE COUNTY ON OUR COMPARISON, JUST BECAUSE THE COUNTY IS GOING THROUGH AN UPDATE OF A LOT OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS RIGHT NOW. AND WE'RE WE'RE NOT SURE OF WHAT THEIR FINAL FORM OF THAT IS GOING TO BE. BUT AS IT SITS NOW, THERE, THEY DON'T REQUIRE THAT, DO THEY? I DON'T RECALL WHAT WE LOOKED AT ON THAT, MR. FRANKLIN. CAN CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME SCENARIOS OF WHAT'S DRIVING THIS? LIKE, IS IT DEVELOPERS WANT ACCESS TO MORE LAND WHEN THEY'RE DEVELOPING AROUND A DAM? OR IS IT THE COST OF IT? LIKE WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE, THE RUB FOR THE DEVELOPERS THAT THEY'RE SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE OUT OF LINE WITH OTHER NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES. THERE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES IN THE NORTHERN PART OF MCKINNEY, IN THE, IN THE IN THE IN THE DEVELOPING UNDEVELOPED PART OF NORTHERN MCKINNEY THAT DO HAVE DAMS ON THEM THAT VARY IN SIZES AND CLASSIFICATIONS AND. REHABBING A DAM DOES, DOES COST MONEY. SO BUT I MEAN, IS IT IS IT MAINLY AROUND THE REHAB AND THE REHAB OF, OF THE SMALL DAMS OR IS IT I MEAN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT KIND OF TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES HERE. THE, THE REHAB COSTS AND WHAT, WHEN WHEN WE REQUIRE IT. BUT ALSO WOULD WE ALLOW CERTAIN HOMES TO BE BUILT BENEATH IT, WHICH BOTH SEEM TO BE, I GUESS, LOOSENING OF OUR REGULATION. IS THERE AN EXPECTATION THAT THERE WOULD BE A LOT OF HOMES BUILT IN THESE BREACH ZONES? IS THAT WHAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING FOR? THAT'S A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER BROADLY, BECAUSE EACH DAM, EACH[00:50:07]
BREACH ZONE, CAN CAN BEHAVE. I'M VERY THEY CAN BEHAVE VERY DIFFERENTLY. SO IT'S A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER BROADLY. JUSTICE, I GUESS. I MEAN, I'M I'M, I'M TRYING TO BE.I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE MOTIVATION BEHIND WANTING TO CHANGE IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT THERE WOULD BE A WHOLE LOT OF REASON, BOTH FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT. AND I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE COST STANDPOINT REQUIRED IN THE REHAB, BUT IN, IN GIVING ON THESE THINGS, WHAT WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE ARGUMENT MADE? JUST LOOKING FOR THE ARGUMENT MADE BY DEVELOPERS TO, TO LOOK AT ONE OF THE VERY LARGE DAMS, ONE OF THE NRC'S DAMS, SOMETHING LIKE STONEBRIDGE, THE THE, THE ONE BEHIND TRADE DAYS AT PAINTED TREE. THOSE COULD COST 4 OR $5 MILLION TO REHAB. A SMALLER DAM COULD BE CONSIDERED, COULD, COULD, COULD BE CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN THAT. CAN I GO INTO A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY? CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. BACK IN THE DAY, SEVERAL COUNCILS BEFORE US, THERE WAS A MOVEMENT TO REHAB THE DAMS, AND AT THAT POINT WE HAD FEDERAL FUNDS TO DO THAT. SO THERE WERE GRANTS AVAILABLE. ALL THAT MONEY IS PRETTY MUCH DRIED UP. SO NOW IT FALLS ALL ON THE DEVELOPER. HE'S RIGHT. IT'S IT COULD BE 5 MILLION, 3 TO 5 MILLION PER DAM. SO IT IS A COST ISSUE. BUT THE ONE THING THAT I ALWAYS WAS TOLD WAS THAT YOU COULD REHAB THE DAM AND YOU DON'T GET ANY BENEFIT ON THE OTHER SIDE. YEAH. IT WAS IT DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING. THIS ACTUALLY DOES SOMETHING BECAUSE IT ALLOWS YOU TO BUILD HOMES IN THE IN THE BIG BREACH. AND WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME THAT A DAM HAS TO, TO NEED MAINTENANCE LIKE THAT OR TO BE REHABBED? AND WHO DOES THAT FALL ON AFTER? I MEAN, BECAUSE WE EXPECT HOMES TO LAST FOR, YOU KNOW, DECADES. HOW LONG DOES THE DAM LAST? BECAUSE YEAH, DAMS LAST A LONG TIME, YOU KNOW, 50 YEARS, 100 YEARS LONGER. I MEAN, A NUMBER OF THE LARGER STRUCTURES, THE NRCS STRUCTURES THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THOSE WERE BUILT BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BACK IN THE 50S, AND THOSE ARE A NUMBER OF THE ONES THAT THE CITY HAS SOUGHT FEDERAL FUNDING THE LAST OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS TO HELP HELP REHAB SOME OF THOSE. THEY WERE 50 TO 70 YEARS OLD, DEPENDING ON WHEN THEY WERE WHEN WHEN THEY WERE REHABBED. SMALLER DAMS, ULTIMATELY, THE THE, THE OWNERSHIP AND THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR SMALLER DAMS RESTS WITH THE UNDERLYING PROPERTY OWNER. SO, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S SOMETHING ON A HOA PROPERTY, FOR EXAMPLE, THE HOA WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THAT DAM OVER TIME. AGAIN, THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO THAT IS SOME OF THOSE NRCS STRUCTURES THAT WE TALK ABOUT, SOME OF THOSE LARGER STRUCTURES IN MCKINNEY, WHICH WERE BUILT AS PART OF A AS PART OF A COOPERATIVE PROGRAM WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND THEY'RE.
CO-OWNED, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, BETWEEN. SEVERAL DIFFERENT ENTITIES, INCLUDING THE CITY OF MCKINNEY FOR, FOR, FOR SEVERAL OF THOSE LARGER DAMS. IT IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME, YOU KNOW, BOTH OF THESE ARE LOOSENING. I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU'D WANT TO LOOSEN BOTH AT THE SAME TIME OF THE REGULATIONS. LIKE IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO REQUIRE THE REHAB, WHY WOULD YOU EVER ALLOW THEM TO BUILD HOMES BENEATH IT? IS THAT WHAT'S BEING ASKED NOW? IF WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE JUST SEEKING INPUT RIGHT NOW TO, TO GET TO, TO GET AN IDEA FOR HOW WE CARRY THIS FORWARD. I'LL GIVE YOU MY INPUT. AND I KNOW WE'VE GOT A TIME CRUNCH ON THIS WORK SESSION. WE STILL HAVE A BIG ITEM LEFT TO GO, BUT WE HAVE 13 OF THESE IN OUR DAMS, OUR SISTER CITIES THAT ARE MATURE CITIES, PLANO, FRISCO HAVE ZERO. SO OF COURSE THEY'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT IT. I WOULDN'T BE EITHER PROSPEROUS THREE. SALINAS FIVE. BUT SALINAS NOWHERE EVEN CLOSE TO BEING BUILT OUT TO BE WORRIED ABOUT REAL ESTATE LIKE THIS FOR ME, I WANT THE QUESTION ANSWERED. DOES THIS AFFECT THE ISO RATING IN THE CITY? AND IF IT DOES, I'M GOING TO BE A HECK NO ON DOING ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. I NEED THAT QUESTION ANSWERED, BUT STILL, I'M RELUCTANT TO DO A LOT OF BUILDING IN THESE AREAS AND PASSING ON A POTENTIAL PROBLEM TO FUTURE COUNCILS, BUT I MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE TALKED INTO IT IF I'M CONVINCED IT'S SAFE. SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. CAN I MAKE ONE
[00:55:01]
MORE COMMENT? OUT OF THE 13 DAMS, HOW MANY HAVE NOT BEEN REHABBED? TWO. THERE'S ONLY TWO DAMS THAT HAS NOT BEEN REHABBED AND HAVE NOT BEEN REHABBED. AND AND YOU HAD MENTIONED BEFORE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, THERE'S DAMS THAT ARE 40, 50 YEARS OLD. AND OF THOSE, HOW MANY HAVE FAILED? WE DON'T HAVE THE RECORDS ON DAM FAILURES. DAM FAILURES ARE RARE, BUT THEY DO HAPPEN, BUT THEY ARE RARE. I WAS TOLD BY SOMEBODY THAT IT'S ZERO. THERE'S NEVER BEEN A DAM FAILURE OF A OF AN NRCS LAKE SINCE IT WAS. YEAH. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE NRC'S STRUCTURES.I CAN SPEAK TO DAM FAILURES GENERALLY THAT THEY DO HAPPEN. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE NRC'S STRUCTURES. SO WE'VE GOT ONE OPEN QUESTION REGARDING THE ISO RATING, WHICH IS A GREAT QUESTION. AND YES, IF SOMEONE COULD COULD PULL THAT TOGETHER. ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT I CAN GIVE? MATT. THAT'S PROBABLY THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF THAT I WOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT. AND, AND TO ME, IT'S, IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD AFFECT THE RATING SINCE IT DOESN'T EVEN AFFECT INSURANCE. SO IT'S LIKE, BUT IT'S GOOD TO FIND OUT.
YEAH, YEAH. ANYONE ELSE? MATT, WERE YOU GOING TO BRING THIS BACK OR DANNY OR GARY OR WHAT? WE'LL CIRCLE JENNIFER. IS THIS COMING BACK? MATT, I DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF. YES, I THINK SO.
I THINK IF THERE'S AN APPETITE FROM THE COUNCIL FOR STAFF TO CONTINUE EXPLORING SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE ORDINANCE, OF COURSE, IN CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL IN TERMS OF A RISK AND LIABILITY ASSESSMENT, THE ISO RATING. WE'LL TAKE THAT BACK WITH US AND BRING BACK A PACKAGE FOR THE COUNCIL TO POTENTIALLY CONSIDER. OKAY. THANK YOU. DANNY. THANK YOU MATT. THANK YOU. GENTLEMEN. MR. QUINT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT. WE APPRECIATE IT AS ALWAYS.
[26-0675 Informational Update on the Better Together Initiative, Specifically Related to the Initial Needs Assessment]
260675. INFORMATIONAL UPDATE ON THE BETTER TOGETHER INITIATIVE, SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE INITIAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT, MISS LEE. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MARGARET LEE, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.THERE YOU GO. OR NOT. OKAY, SO THIS AFTERNOON WE'LL BE PROVIDING YOU WITH A PRESENTATION ON THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT FROM THE BETTER TOGETHER INITIATIVE. SO DUE TO THE COMPLEX AND OFTEN SENSITIVE NATURE OF HOMELESSNESS ISSUES, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED GUIDING PRINCIPLES BACK IN OCTOBER TO PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK FOR OUR HOMELESS STRATEGIC PLAN, WHICH WE'RE CALLING THE BETTER TOGETHER INITIATIVE. AND SO THE GOAL OF THE INITIATIVE IS REALLY TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE AND COMMUNITY BASED PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THE ROOT CAUSES, LIVED EXPERIENCES, AND THE IMPACTS OF HOMELESSNESS ON OUR COMMUNITY. AS PART OF THE INITIATIVE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT COMPONENTS, THE FIRST OF WHICH IS OUR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN, FOLLOWED BY OUR NEEDS ASSESSMENT, WHICH WILL BE PROVIDING YOU WITH A PRESENTATION ON THE FINDINGS FROM THAT TODAY, AND THEN A STRATEGIC PLAN AND THEN AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE SOME EFFORTS TOWARDS ADDRESSING HOMELESSNESS. AND SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HAND IT OVER TO TED BENAVIDES FROM UT DALLAS TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THE FINDINGS FROM THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF, PUBLIC. GLAD TO BE
[01:00:07]
HERE THIS AFTERNOON. YOU GET ME, BECAUSE MY OTHER THREE COLLEAGUES ON THE TEAM FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS APPS PROGRAM IS ONE IS IN SPAIN, ONE IS IN TEXAS, A AND M, AND ONE IS TEACHING A CLASS IN DALLAS CITY HALL. SO YOU GET ME TODAY. SO AGAIN, MY NAME IS TED BENAVIDES AND JUST CALL ME TED. OKAY. TODAY WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT WE'VE STARTED FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, THE, THE SERVICE PROVIDERS, THE, THE CITY STAFF, THE CITIZENS, OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, BUSINESS COMMUNITY, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND TO TRY TO GET AN ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTABILITY IN THE HOMELESS AND HOUSING SITUATION IN MCKINNEY. SO WITH THAT, I WANT TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE PRESENTATION ON WHAT WE FOUND SO FAR TODAY IN OUR ASSESSMENT. ON THE SCALE OF THE ISSUE, WE HAVE 240 PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE POINT IN TIME ASSESSMENT. AND THE MOST OF THE OF ABOUT 42% OF THE FOLKS IN THIS PROGRAM THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ARE FROM FROM FAMILY FORMATION THAT HAVE CHILDREN IN THEM. AND ABOUT ANOTHER THREE QUARTERS OF THEM HAVE, HAVE SHELTER. AND ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THIS IS THAT WE HAVE. SO WE'RE HIGHER THAN THE REGIONAL AVERAGE FOR THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE SHELTERED IS BECAUSE OF SAMARITAN INN IS REALLY IMPACTED. THIS FACTOR WHERE THE POPULATION AND HOMELESSNESS IN THE CITY IS ABOUT ONE TENTH OF 1%. AND IT HASN'T. IT MOVES UP WITH THE POPULATION. IT HASN'T BEEN INCREASED. IT HASN'T BEEN DECREASING. IT IS A STABLE POPULATION. BUT I'M NOT SAYING THAT STABLE MEANS SUCCESS. IT MEANS THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT AND SEE ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD DO WITH THIS, THIS DATA, AND SEE IF WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING TO MOVE THESE NUMBERS. OKAY. AS WHAT IT COST US, WE WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT THE COSTS RANGE FROM 9 TO $15 MILLION IN THE COMMUNITY. THE CITY HAS MORE DIRECT COSTS, WHICH IS LAW ENFORCEMENT, EMERGENCY MEDICAL CLEARING, DEALING WITH THE ENCAMPMENTS ISSUES. AND THAT'S ABOUT $1.6 MILLION. AND SO WE DID IDENTIFY THAT THE COST IS ABOUT 40% CHEAPER. WHEN YOU HAVE COORDINATED SERVICES AND, AND SUPPORT SERVICES THAT GO WITH ADDRESSING THE HOMELESS POPULATION IN THE CITY. SO THERE'S WAYS THAT WE COULD REDUCE THE COSTS, BUT WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT AREAS WE WANT TO PUSH ON. SOME AREAS WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO IMPACT THE COST MORE THAN IN OTHER AREAS. SOME AREAS MIGHT BE EASY, LIKE JUST POLICY CHANGES OR HAVING BETTER INFORMATION. SOME OF THE AREAS ARE IMPACTED BY HOW MANY FEDERAL GRANTS WE HAVE REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBILITY TO GET SERVICES. SO ALL THESE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT THAT GO INTO THE FACTOR AS TO WHERE WE PUSH, WHERE WE DON'T PUSH, WHERE WE CHANGE, WHERE WE MIGHT WANT TO THINK ABOUT CHANGING. GO TO SLIDE TWO. WHAT IS THE COMMUNITY SAID? WELL, THE COMMUNITY SAYS THAT THEY THINK THAT WE ARE DOING A PRETTY GOOD JOB, THAT WE WE, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT NOT HAVING ENOUGH CAPACITY, SHELTER CAPACITY. WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH HOUSING CAPACITY IN THE CITY THAT THERE'S A LACK OF COORDINATION TO GIVE US BETTER DATA TO DEAL WITH THIS SITUATION, AND THAT A GREAT DEAL OF THE POPULATION IS SITED ON EAST OF HIGHWAY FIVE. AND SO THESE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT TO TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN MAKE THESE SITUATIONS BETTER AND TO ADDRESS THE THE SERVICES THAT THE HOMELESS FOLKS NEED MORE, OR THE UNHOUSED IN THE COMMUNITY. WELL, WE'VE BEEN SAYING IS THE ROOT CAUSE IS, IS THAT IS THAT PEOPLE HAVE COME IN, KEEP COMING INTO THE SYSTEM, BUT THEY COME BACK OUT OF THE SYSTEM. AND THAT'S BEEN A REALLY CONSTANT KIND OF THING. AND THERE'S SOME THINGS SOME PEOPLE FEEL THAT BECAUSE MCKINNEY IS A COUNTY SEAT THAT THAT THEY THAT BECAUSE THERE'S MORE THE THE JAILS HERE, THE COUNTY OPERATIONS ARE HERE. OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES ARE HERE THAT PEOPLE ARE HERE BECAUSE.[01:05:03]
AND THERE'S MORE VISIBILITY FOR THEM TO, TO BE SEEN IN THE COMMUNITY. IT MIGHT MAKE THE PROBLEM FEEL MORE ACUTE IN THIS COMMUNITY. HOUSING COSTS ARE RISING FASTER. THERE'S RE ENTRY BARRIERS FOR PEOPLE THAT SAY MAYBE GOING INTO INCARCERATION OR COME OUT OF MENTAL HEALTH, THAT DON'T GET INTO THE SHELTERS VERY QUICKLY. THERE'S DIFFERENT KINDS OF HOMELESSNESS ISSUES LIKE LOSS OF IDENTIFICATION, NOT PLACES NOT TO HAVE THEIR, THEIR SUPPLIES OR THEIR GOODS AND SERVICES. THEY DON'T HAVE LAUNDRY SERVICES. AND SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE HAVE HOMELESS IS THAT THEY IMPACT THE HOSPITALS, THEY IMPACT EMERGENCY MEDICAL, THEY IMPACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEY IMPACT THE LIBRARY DEPARTMENT. THEY IMPACT CODE COMPLIANCE. AND SO THERE'S A THERE'S A QUITE A BIT OF LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOW GOOD THE SERVICES THAT WE PROVIDE BY THE CITY OF MCKINNEY AND HOW TO ACCESS THOSE SERVICES AND WHAT THE RULES ARE FOR BEING ELIGIBLE. AND THERE MIGHT BE INSUFFICIENT FUNDING TO DEAL WITH THESE, THESE ISSUES THAT ARE IN THE COMMUNITY. SO KEY LEADERSHIP CONSIDERATIONS IS, IS THAT WE WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, THE COUNTY, THE COUNCIL, TO HELP US WITH DECISION MAKING AS WE GO THROUGH OUR ASSESSMENT IS THERE IS THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT STRATEGIES YOU CAN USE TO AFFECT THE SITUATION AND. AND SO YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO USE SOME THINGS THAT COST LESS, SOME THINGS COST MORE, AND THEY IMPACT DIFFERENT SEGMENTS. LIKE THE CITY MIGHT DO SOMETHING THAT REDUCES THE COST ON THE HOSPITALS, OR THE HOSPITALS MIGHT DO SOMETHING THAT REDUCES THE COST ON THE COUNTY. AND SO WE HAVE TO KIND OF LOOK AT IT IN A IN A RELATED SORT OF PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT, WHAT THINGS WE WOULD MIGHT WANT TO DO AND WHERE THE, WHERE THEY IMPACT AND WHAT BENEFITS AND WHAT COSTS THEY MIGHT HAVE. AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE QUITE A FEW SERVICES IN THE AREA WHERE WE PROVIDE SERVICE THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY SERVICE, POLICE OFFICERS, THROUGH THE SOR PROGRAM, AS WE HELP PEOPLE IN THE HOMELESS SITUATIONS THAT OUR COMMUNITY IS IMPACTED WITH. AND SO THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT IS THE IS 9 TO $15 MILLION. WE'VE WE'VE HAD SEVEN LISTENING SESSIONS. WE'VE HAD TWO 350 RESPONSES SO FAR. WE WE'VE IDENTIFIED SOME KEY GAPS, WHICH IS THERE'S A, A, AN EXPECTATION, THERE'S A, A FEELING THAT WE NEED SHELTER, THAT WE NEED MORE HOUSING AND THAT WE NEED BETTER COORDINATION. AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE IS THAT THERE'S FEELINGS THAT WE NEED TO IMPROVE OUR TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO TRY TO MAKE SERVICES MORE ACCESSIBLE IN THE CITY. TED, I'M GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU FOR A MOMENT. THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS. LET'S DRILL DOWN ON THAT 9 TO $15 MILLION COST. I WAS IN THE LITTLE WORK SESSION THAT WITH WITH COUNCILMAN BELLA ON THIS. BUT WHERE IS THE CITY PAYING 9 TO 15 MILLION RIGHT NOW? IS IT THROUGH EMS? IS IT THROUGH POLICE? IS IT THROUGH FIRE? WHERE'S HOMELESSNESS? MOVING THE NEEDLE ON COST FOR US RIGHT NOW? REALLY IT'S THE DIRECT COST IS ABOUT $1.6 MILLION.THEN NINE TO IS TO $15 MILLION IS ALL THE OTHER COSTS THAT'S IMPACTING ON THE HOSPITALS INTO THE COMMUNITY. AND SO THE HOUSING ISSUES, PROVIDING SERVICES TO THE SAMARITAN IN OTHER PLACES WHERE YOU PROVIDE FUNDING THROUGH C, S, C, S, G GRANTS THROUGH CDBG. SO IT'S IT'S REALLY HARD TO IDENTIFY SOME OF THE COSTS THAT ARE IMPACTING THE COMMUNITY.
THEY'RE JUST, THEY'RE JUST KIND OF THEIR ESTIMATES OF HOW MUCH IT'S COSTING THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE. SO 1.6 IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO POLICE TO THE CITY, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND ENCAMPMENTS.
OKAY. SO SO 1.6 AND FORGIVE ME FOR ASKING THIS A THIRD TIME, BUT 1.6 IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BUDGET THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING. AND THAT'S JUST MONEY GOING TO THIS PROBLEM.
YES, SIR. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. SO WE NEED TO IDENTIFY THESE GAPS. WORK WITH THESE GAPS.
WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE NEXT PROCESS WHICH IS THE STRATEGIC PLAN. WE'RE GOING TO MEET WITH ALL THE WORKING GROUPS, WHICH IS THE THE THE UNHOUSED, THE CITY STAFF, THE THE SERVICE PROVIDERS, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THINGS THAT THEY THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO DO BASED ON THE ASSESSMENT AS TO WHAT INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED AND KIND OF RANK THOSE AND SEE WHICH ORDER WE SHOULD TAKE THEM IN. AND WE WILL WORK THROUGH ALL OF AUGUST AND MAYBE A LITTLE PART OF SEPTEMBER TO COME UP WITH GRADING ON ALL THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND HAVE ALL THE COMMUNITY, ALL THE WORKING GROUPS LOOK AT THESE
[01:10:04]
SOLUTIONS AND THEN KIND OF SEE IF THERE'S ANY MORE GAPS AND TO SEE WHAT'S THE BEST SOLUTIONS TO GIVE AND ALSO TO BRING IT BACK. AND THAT WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE A VERY ROBUST PUBLIC PROCESS, EVEN THROUGH THE FALL, TO MAKE SURE THAT NOT ONLY THE WORKING GROUPS, NOT ONLY THE CITY STAFF, NOT ONLY THE UNIVERSITY STAFF, BUT THAT THE COMMUNITY STILL HAS THE ABILITY TO HAVE INPUT. AND ALSO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE INPUT INTO WHAT SOLUTIONS ARE COME ABOUT. OKAY. AND SO THAT WHOLE PROCESS, WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE COMMUNITY, THE STRATEGIC PLAN, WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON THAT, BRING THAT BACK. THEN WE'RE GOING TO GO LOOK AND SEE ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN BASED ON THE ANALYSIS BY THE WORKING GROUPS AS TO WHAT THINGS WOULD BE THE BEST THING TO DO. HAVE THE BIGGEST BANG FOR THE BUCK BUCK, AND WOULD PRODUCE THE BEST RESULTS FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND ALSO TO CREATE A SYSTEM THAT LETS US LOOK AT HOW WE ADDRESS THIS GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE THIS ISSUE IS GOING TO BE WITH US FOR A WHILE, AND SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOLVED IN THIS ASSESSMENT. OKAY? BUT WE WANT TO CREATE A SYSTEM, A PROCESS THAT LETS US IDENTIFY HOW TO DO THIS. OKAY. AND SO WE WANT IN TOTAL INVOLVEMENT OF THE COMMUNITY, THE STAFF, ALL THE THE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THIS PROCESS AND ALSO TO IF WE GO TO ISSUES LIKE MORE SHELTER, MORE HOUSING CAPACITY, IT COULD LEAD TO A WIDER RANGE OF INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER GOVERNMENTAL JURISDICTIONS, WIDER IMPACT TO THE COMMUNITY. SO THAT WOULD TAKE SOME TIME TO GO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT. IF WE WANT TO DO THAT AND HOW WE WOULD PRODUCE THOSE RESULTS. OKAY. BECAUSE NOT EVERYTHING MIGHT BE WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE CITY OF MCKINNEY TO SOLVE OR TO ADDRESS. SO THAT WOULD ALSO TAKE SOME TIME TO COORDINATE. SO WE'RE WE FINISHED THE ASSESSMENT. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO THE STRATEGIC PLAN. AND THEN ONCE WE FINISH THAT, WE'LL COME BACK AND OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER AND WE'LL WE'LL TRANSITION INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND THEN GO MAYBE INTO THE FIRST PART OF THE CALENDAR YEAR IN 2027 TO SEE WITH FORMULATING DIRECT RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROCEDURES AS TO WHERE WE SHOULD PROCEED TO AND WHAT THINGS WE SHOULD DO AND IN WHAT ORDER, AND TO GIVE YOU SOME TIMELINES AND TO GIVE YOU SOME COST ESTIMATES OF HOW MUCH THESE THINGS ARE ALL GOING TO COST, OR WHAT THEY MIGHT SAVE BY BEING ABLE TO DO ALL THESE THINGS. AND SO THIS PROCESS IS WE'RE TAKING OUR TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT WE INVOLVE EVERYBODY AND THAT WE HAVE ALL THE DATA TO MAKE A GOOD DECISIONS, AND THAT WE INVOLVE THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. SO I THINK THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS US TO, TO LOOK AT PROVIDING BETTER SERVICES TO CREATING MORE CAPACITY HERE. AND BUT THAT THAT WE NEED TO GO AND ANALYZE ALL THE SERVICES WE HAVE NOW, HOW BETTER TO, TO EMPLOY THEM. AND MAYBE WE NEED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES, BUT TO TRY TO IMPROVE THE SERVICE DELIVERY AND IMPACT HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING INSTABILITY IN THE COMMUNITY. SO WITH THAT, I'LL, I'LL END MY CONVERSATION AND BE ABLE TO ASK ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS, ANYONE? I DID HAVE A QUESTION. SO BASED ON WHEN YOU STARTED THIS, WHEN YOU WERE CONTACTED ABOUT THIS, THIS STUDY AND WHAT YOU'VE LEARNED THUS FAR, DID IT MEET YOUR EXPECTATIONS, EXCEED YOUR EXPECTATIONS OR SITTING HERE TODAY? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT HAVE YOU SEEN AND MET OUR EXPECTATIONS? BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONSENSUS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, THAT WE NEED TO HAVE BETTER COORDINATION, THAT WE NEED TO CREATE MORE CAPACITY, MORE TO PROVIDE SERVICES BETTER TO THAT WE NEED TO COOPERATE MORE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF UNANIMITY ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE CHALLENGES THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS THEM. THERE'S SOME FOLKS THAT FEEL DIFFERENTLY ABOUT HOW MUCH ENFORCEMENT WE SHOULD DO AND, AND HOW WE SHOULD APPROACH MEDICAL SERVICES AND POLICE SERVICES. BUT REALLY, THERE'S A LOT OF CONSENSUS THAT AS TO HOW WE SHOULD APPROACH A PROBLEM, HOW WE SHOULD ALL WORK TOGETHER TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM, AND HOW WE NEED TO COOPERATE MORE TO USE OUR SERVICES BETTER SO THAT WE CAN GET GRIND THE MOST RESULTS OUT OF THE, OF THE, OF THE EFFORT AND RESOURCES WE'RE ALREADY PUTTING INTO THE SYSTEM.SO I SEE A LOT OF TOGETHERNESS AND I SEE A LOT OF COOPERATION. AND I AND, AND YOU'RE JUST LIKE, LET ON JULY 9TH, I WENT TO THE FEEDBACK SESSION DOWN THE STREET AND IT WAS REALLY WONDERFUL TO SEE THAT KIND OF TURNOUT, THE KIND OF ENGAGEMENT. AND SO I, I'M, I'M REALLY HOPEFUL THAT THE COMMUNITY IS, IS AWARE OF THIS ISSUES AND WANTS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT
[01:15:06]
THEM. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU. I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR TO YOUR NEXT PRESENTATION.THANK YOU MARGARET. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MARGARET. THAT IS OUR LAST AGENDA ITEM. DO WE HAVE ANY COUNCIL LIAISON UPDATES? ANYONE KNOW? ALL RIGHT. WE DO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.0712071 A 072 DELIBERATIONS ABOUT REAL PROPERTY. 551.087 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MATTERS. WE WILL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. IT IS WE HAVE A MOTION L INCLUDED TO AMEND PROJECT PLUM BLOSSOM, AS EXPLAINED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. SECOND. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN LYNCH. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED. SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN THE WORK SESSION. I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE WORK SESSION. I'LL SECOND.SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MAYOR PRO TEM FRANKLIN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. IT'S 510. WE ARE ADJOURNED. WE'LL START OUR. WELL, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE CHAIRMAN, MAYOR PRO TEM FRANKLIN, WE'LL START OUR FIRST MEETING
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.