The afternoon session of the Allington City Council is now called to order and the City Council will now go into closed session at 126 p.m. on April 24th, 2018 and according to the following sections of ETCA Government Code chapter 551.071. 0.071 consultation with attorney 0.072 deliberation regarding real property and 0.087 deliberation regarding economic development negotiations. We can close the doors. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the you Thank you. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the Thank you. I'd now like to call the afternoon work session of the Arlington City Council to order. And our first order of business is the Arlington, Kennedy, El Collaboration Agreement. And I'll call upon Mr. Buzz Pishker. Thank you Mayor, good afternoon. Mayor, Council, City Manager, Buzz Pishker, Director of Water Utilities. Got a few things for you before I get into the slides, but I'm happy to report and actually introduce Brady Olsonson who's here. He's the finance director at Canadaeul. So I'm really pleased he was able to join us today. Glad to have you, Mr. Olson. Awesome. We love our sister city. And then also I'm very pleased to announce to you that last night, Pantigo City Council proved a agreement with us to provide emergency transfer of water in the future sale and delivery of wholesale treated water. And that contract will be coming before you and May, so more to come. So the way I want to kind of kick this off is, what I want to do today is give you a little sense of how we do these things. We're now in our, I guess, talking to our fourth community about providing service to them. So maybe I give you a little insight into how this works and I'm glad Brady's here to talk to you about it. But the outcome, if we're successful with Kennedy, will actually be two contracts that will come back to council. And our process has always been the city that we're working with their council would approve it first. And then of course it would come to this body for ratification. So if all goes as planned or as hoped, there will be two contracts come to council sometime in the future, one for a water sale and the other for an operation contract to operate their water and sewer system. And I guess the other thing I want to say is a prelude is very simply, we have approached this as a prelude is very simply, we have approached this as a service and the term I always remind myself of is seek first to understand then to be understood. And so the goal is to understand what the other partner or the person you're going to provide to service to really wants and then see if you can facilitate that. And I think that's been very positive and how we've worked on these things. So with that, I'll get into the to the meeting potatoes here. I put this slide in because I want to remind you that these things typically take a period of time to go through and if you go through them and you're effective at it. As you know, I brought a staff report to council back in October. And here we are back in April talking about it again. And there's been a lot of work done prior to that, coming to council, and since it's been in your presence. And this gets into the ask first. We sat down and actually sat down with Candidale. And of course Campbell is their city manager and we're working with George. He just couldn't be here today and kind of put together a list of what do the parties want to achieve in this discussion. And I've kind of listed those for you. We were interested in taking responsibility for the operation and maintenance of their system. And there's some reasons for that, which I'll talk about. Candidale certainly wanted to retain those assets, so that this isn't a sale of assets so that there be no confusion. Candidale, inside water and sewer rates, they would like to see them transition to near our rates. What you'll see is a comparison I'll show you, and there's a slide that kind of compares that. We didn't get there. We're going to be able to get a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a as we would be. So we've made provisions for those employees that we identified to be able to continue employment just be working for the city of Arlington. Going down the list, one of the things we asked for was that they consider and include a transition to buying water from us. I think that's an easy transition for them because obviously or at this moment our price for water is lower than the competition and I think everybody knows we have a high quality of water so that'll be and that'll be something that helps them with their financials as well as helps us. We would honor all of their existing obligations. They currently have a contract with the City of Fort Worth to buy water. That contract will stay in place. Much like Dow Worthington Gardens has a contract with Fort Worth, and we've supplemented that. And we'll continue to transition to our supply. Very similar here. They also have a contract in place to take care of customer service, building and meter reading, which will stay in place. The last bullet on this slide, the contract will have a term which will allow the cities to evaluate the relationship. So, we're looking at a short term, initial term, and then some renewal terms, but both parties, when you go into situations like this, there's an unknown, and so both parties were interested in making sure that it was the right thing to do. This slide gets into some of the things I was alluding to, and what this shows is the size of system. is the size of system. And I hope you'll gather from here that Candidale is about 150th of our size when you look at population and customers. Budget's, the thing that I would point your eye to is the fourth line down where it says own M cost per customer. Economies of scale in the utility business work. And so some of the benefits by them aligning with us are that our economy is scale or our cost per resident is significantly lower. I'm not saying that because we're better, I'm saying it because we have a bigger customer base. So please don't draw any conclusions from that. When I talked about rates, you can look at average water and sewer bill. You can see that our rates are about half of theirs. And so they're trying to make progress to drive those two things together. And the fixed fees, as you can see, are significantly different. $26 compared to 10 and 36 compared to 12. So long in the short, you can see what economies of scale doing in the utility business and you can see why they selected some of the goals we talked about. The set third to the last slide talks about employees and as you can see there's about 10.5 FTEs that would potentially make the transition over to our utility operation. And then the last line, I want to give council some appreciation of scope. As you can see, Canada has about 5,400 water and sewer customers if you add them together. Just to give you some perspective since I have been blessed with having this job at the City of Arlington. We've added almost 5,000 customers so just wanted to give you some perspective. This isn't like we're taking on Fort Worth from an operational standpoint but it is significant but we've actually added that many customers to our system in my tenure here. So you heard, you saw what we set out to do. Here's where we're at in general. I talked about terms and feeling each other out and seeing if it's a good thing. We're talking about an initial term of two years and then after that renewable terms for five years. Things you put in agreements remember we're going into operator system we have an operated before. I will tell you and it's a complement to Kennedale that we look at there are some of their statistics compared to ours. Main breaks sewer stoppages those things and they look very good but when you go in to do these things, you have to put some what I'll call stop gaps in. And that's why the annual maintenance and repair limits are listed there. There's also a limit there. The single maintenance expenditure limit, which means if in fact there is a main break or a sewer problem or something that we were doing for them, we would have to get their approval if it was over a certain dollar amount. So there's concurrence and communication. I told you about the employees and we would anticipate offering them jobs in the same or similar positions. We think there'll be a synergy there, it'll be positive for both parties and I think their employees will make an easy transition to our system. Candidale does retain ownership of all its assets so I can't emphasize that more. This is not an acquisition of their assets. We would fund the fee that we were talking about for this contract. We would include the cost to provide the interconnection, which will allow them to purchase water from us. There's a couple of reasons for that. I kind of mentioned it earlier, by transitioning to our system like Dow Worthington did, it'll actually reduce their cost of water somewhat because we're cheaper than the alternative, they currently buy water from Fort Worth, and they operate their own wells. So that combination will change, and they'll come to our water. So if that is a key part of how you generate savings, we certainly had to make provisions for that to allow to happen. So that cost is included. I'm very pleased to say that we anticipate we will do that project with our crews. We'll design it in-house like we did while the Dow-Wirthington Gardens and we'll probably construct it also. So very similar to what we've done in the past. We would provide Canada with a capital improvement plan very much like we do here because we think if you're going to run a water or waste water utility you got to know what you're doing and we got to make that communication. So we'll provide that expertise just like we do here. And Canada would grant us transmission rights for distribution and that clause and that verbiages in all of our water sale agreements. What that means is that we're selling them water. It prohibits them from taking our water and selling it to somebody else, but we have the ability to actually tap onto their system and use it for a transmission. If that need or opportunity presents itself, there's a compensation in there for the city and there's a precursor that says we can't adversely impact their system and their pressures and flows if we do that. to seriously impact their system and their pressures and flows if we do that. So I think it's fair to say, and I hope by Brady being here that both parties proceed this collaboration will be both financially beneficial to the residents of both communities. And so that's where we stand today. And as I said, my anticipation is with your approval here to this afternoon that we'll continue to move forward and bring back to you a contract for those two services. Any questions? Mr. Barker. But this is all you. And this is something that you saw in our operation that we had excess capacity. And that you thought out of the box were innovative, had vision. And you reached out to these different communities and you made this happen. And it is a total credit to your innovation that this whole program has gotten off the ground and it has been successful in reaching out to other communities and benefiting them not only with quality but also with capacity that we can do. So thank you so very much. You are a remarkable innovator especially in the world of water. The guy who flies in the world of water. The guy who flies in the face of bottled water, okay? So thank you very much. Thank you. Other quip, Mr. Gillespie. Thank you, Mayor Hock. Grueb Mr. Parker Hock. Founded this to correctly, the infrastructure adjustment does need to be made, will be done the way of a fee versus somewhat upfront cost. We have to be made will be done the way of a fee versus some upfront upfront cost. We have to be paid. Ask me that question again. I assume there's going to be some infrastructure adjustments so that we can get the water in and look looks as though you indicated that would be incorporating in a fee versus some upfront yards. As with all of our agreements, Bethesda, Dauworth, Inc. and Panthigo, and this one, all the costs to facilitate us providing the water will be funded by that entity. And one of the questions I had, you've had foresight to work with our citizens to provide insurance for, will we be looking at possibly making something like that available to Kennedy also. Oh, I'm glad you mentioned that. We actually did talk about that and my sense is I could convince that company to do that. So yeah, we probably would be talking about that. Yep. Other question, Victoria? I just want to echo. I think this is a great opportunity I was just curious we use the robot here to check all of our lines. Is there any future opportunities for us to utilize that technology with our partner cities that we're partnering with to ensure that we have the same sort of level of confidence in the stability of lines and predictability going forward? Yes. Yes. In fact, I would suggest in this case, as you know, we're a little young in the tooth with the robotics, but my sense is, as the opportunity presents itself, we might talk to a candidate about doing that. And I would think if we do these kind of things in the future, that might be kind of like the, you know, when you buy a house, you have it inspected. Well, it's a great way to see what's going on in the system that you're gonna take over, that most of the time you take over blind. So we think that's a product line for our collaboration with the university quite frankly. Okay, you know, there are questions or comments. Well, I'm very excited here about the opportunity for such a win-win for us and our neighboring cities here. And to Mr. Olsif, if you can pass on to City Manager and Mayor, I really appreciate the cooperation here and really looking forward to continued great relationship there with Kennedale and very excited about this opportunity. And Mr. Pishker, thank you for your innovation and we look forward to the next thing you're gonna bring to us there through innovation. They're really very appreciative and this is going to be a great thing here for our citizens and Kennedale citizens. Thank you very much. Thank you. to be a great thing here for our citizens in Canada. Citizens. Thank you. Thank you. Next we'll move to the gas oil discussion and I'll turn to Miss Jessica Youngblood. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council, Jessica Youngblood Community Development and Planning at the direction of the Neighborhood and Development Committee. I will be presenting to you a discussion on gas well setbacks. Before we get started, I just wanted to go over a few definitions. So in the gas drilling and production ordinance, a residence is considered a protected use, but in a fire Prevention ordinance a residence is not considered a protected use So we'll start with when a gas well site is proposed close to a residence the gas drilling and production ordinance does not allow a gas well to come within 600 feet of a residence or a protected use, which can be reduced by councils approval to 300 feet by 70% waiver, which requires a simple majority vote or a super majority vote. The fire prevention ordinance again does not consider a residence as a protected use, so it doesn't really cover any setbacks there. And then the Unified Development Code, it addresses the process of establishing a drill zone. So now when a residence is proposed next to a gasful site, the setbacks are a little bit different. So basically in the gas drilling and production ordinance, a tank batteries cannot be within 200 feet of a residence. So a home can be built no less than 200 feet from a tank battery. And the fire prevention ordinance, regardless of what the structure is, if it's a protected use or not, it cannot be within 100 feet of a gas wall. And then in the unified development code, it only covers the level three residential screening buffering requirement, which is a 30 foot transitional buffer in a masonry wall. So at the direction of the committee, we were directed to discourage feature homes from being built within 300 feet of gas well, 300 feet of gas well heads or a drill zone. And we were given two recommendations related to existing gas well sites as well as related to future new gas well sites. Though we were given the direction to move forward, we wanted to do in the process. We have a lot of additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional additional have any surrounding vacant, developer land. 15 of the sites have vacant, developer land, but are not zoned for residential uses. And in 13 of the sites were an area of concern. They have residential lease zone. They are residential lease zone vacant, developer land adjacent to a gas well site. So we're proposing two standards. So if a gas well, so if an existing industrial use of adjacent property property is specifically a gas well drilling use when then it's then a building setback for the residential structure of 300 feet must be maintained. So there is an exception to this particular rule. The exception is the requirement does not apply to existing residentially-zoned properties as currently-zoned or lots plated for residential use prior to the date if this particular requirement moves forward. So just to give a little clarification if a property is zoned residential estate and came in to be rezoned to residential single family 7.2, this particular world would still apply. And then also our proposed standard for related to future gas flow sites. A gas well developer seeking a specific use permit for gas well drilling must own simple fee title to real property within 300 foot radius of the proposed Well drill zone so a little clarification there so 300 foot radius of land around the gas will site She'll be owned by the operator to basically eliminate any encroaching of a residence onto a gas will Gas will site and this also guarantees the buffer remains as long as the gas will, on the gas will site. I mean, this also guarantees that the buffer remains as long as the gas will site is present. So the next steps with your approval this afternoon is we would go to planning and zoning commission on May 16th, City Council first reading June 12th and City Council final reading on June 26th. I'm open for any questions. Any questions or Ms. K. Part? Thank you Mayor. Jessica, so the fire prevention ordinance doesn't list the residences. No ma'am. So does it need to include that? So discussion, past discussion is they were just going to cover AES and I as a assembly educational and institutional because those are areas that are heavily populated and harder to vacate. So the fire prevention ordinance does not include residents no ma'am. I'm still not clear as to whether or not should. I can defer the question. Don Kraus in the far chief. Miss K. Park and your Peter question, please. So in the gas well drilling ordinance, a protected use is a residence. Correct. In the fire prevention ordinance, it doesn't say it protected use is a residence. That is correct. So my question is, does the fire prevention ordinance need to include residences as a protected use? I don't think so with the gas well ordinance covers it, we should be okay. Okay, so the fact that we don't need redundancy in the fire prevention ordinance. No, I think the goal here in the fire department perspective is to be in alignment with international fire code. We did make an exception to the AE&I issue based on risk. I think the gas well ordinance covers the residential issue sufficiently to where the fire code would not have to be. So there's not a need to apply. No, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Shepherd. Thank you, Mayor. Just a coat. What input did you or the committee get from any of the industry people? They kind of, well some of the input that I received that this was, they liked the fact that it was even across the board as far as their particular operation not being able to encroach and then an operation isn't able to encroach on the gas wall. What about the got a own 300 feet around your gas wall site? Was there any discussion with the industry about that? No, sir. Okay. Thank you. It's Miss Thelman. Thank you, Mayor. Miss Youngblood, do most of our operators own the 300 feet around where they drill? I can't think of any off the top of my head that do. As no man, usually they lease be the land within the S U P boundary. Okay. So in this case, like the one that we rejected a few weeks ago, the cornerstone drill side, the church owns the land. Yes. So in order for that to have passed, then they would have had to sell a portion of their land. Correct. Okay. So then when they still be entitled to the money that's there in synopsis to allow that drilling. Could you repeat that one more time? Yeah, so if they if that had passed, then the church would have received a great deal of money from the proceeds of the gas well. So would they still be entitled to that money since they don't own that land anymore? No, I would assume not. No, no, no. No, so the they going back to the last. I'm sorry. go ahead. Did you? Could be. I'm sorry, yes, they would be because they would sever the mineral rights from the surface rights. Yeah. Sorry. Thanks, Gayle. Miss Kaye-Fart. Thank you, Mayor. Just another question. So, in going back to the phantom farm drill site. So, there was, here to four, when the operator would come in for the SUP, they would usually also ask for the permit. And so, the ordinance was stating that you had to have a neighborhood meeting. Yes. But it was really tagged to the permitting side of things. Yes, ma'am. So we had never encountered that before, where an operator actually bifurcated the system until this most recent event. Yes, ma'am. So the SUP phase is really where the people have the most opportunity to weigh in and discuss their concerns, not at the permitting phase. Correct. So I went ahead and had a neighborhood meeting to get that input from the neighborhood. And then the operator did indeed have another neighborhood meeting when he came back for the permit, which was much sooner than he had indicated to me. He would, but that doesn't matter. But to close that loophole, how do we do that? So that, do you tag it to the SUP phase? Do you tag it? How do you do that so that we're the greatest input from the neighborhood who has to live next to the site has an opportunity to weigh in? How do we fix that loophole? We would put it, we would have a meeting requirement before the SUP phase. OK, so we would incorporate it we were kind of a meeting requirement before the SUP phase. Okay, so we would incorporate it into the gasful ordinance. No, we incorporated it into the unified development codes. Oh, okay. Yes, ma'am. So we'd put it there in the unified development code and that would close that loophole. Yes, ma'am. Okay. That would be something I would be very interested in doing since we came across that very That would be something I would be very interested in doing since we came across that very issue with phantom farms and we were able to find a pretty quick work around with a corporation of council asking for a delay of that vote. But in the future, I think that should be the standard practice for the neighborhoods or not just the neighborhoods with the people that are going to live next to that sign. If the council's in agreement. Is everybody in agreement with that? Sounds really good. Great. Mr. Parker. The issue here that we're trying to solve is we're trying to line up the developer's responsibilities with the drillers' responsibilities. And trying to put both of these particular responsibilities in proper perspective, we're doing it for the safety of our citizens so that we can't build inside the 300-foot radius. The only way to do that is to tie it to this particular briefing that you're giving right now that came out of committee. And that will ensure that the citizens have a 300-foot buffer zone around the drill site, no matter if the drill site is there first or if the development is there first. The 300-foot buffer zone is what we're actually trying to make sure we get on both sides of the fence. And it's not an issue that the developer can say buyer beware. It's an issue now to where we can say developer beware or driller beware. And in other words words they can't put something over on the home buyer that they might not be they might not be aware of so that's the reason for this that's the reason I brought it up and anyway thank you very much for the hard work that you've done thank you any other questions comments all right thank you miss Young Glud and then Mr. Parker thank you I think it's a good idea to put this on the floor. I think it's a good idea to put this on the floor. Thank you, Ms. Young. And then, Mr. Parker, thank you. I think this enables us to be much more consistent on both sides of the fence and really, I think it really helps everyone here and appreciate you pushing forward here and making this happen. Yes, Ms. K. Bart. Shugbud, have we given you everything you need to go forward? We've answered all your questions. Yes, ma'am. Okay, just wanted a double check before we left this topic. Okay, thank you. Mr. Shepard, I make one comment. I am okay with moving forward with both proposals and getting public input, obviously. But absent, you know, additional input, I don't think I can support number two, where we're requiring the oil and gas people to buy 300-foot circle, basically inside land that they've leased. I'm surprised, Galen, it doesn't have asterisk all beside that statement, but in any event, there's something inherently troubling to me about requiring the oil and gas driller to do something that's out of the ordinary in the oil and gas industry for the last 500 years. So anyway, that part I won't be able to support absent compelling evidence to the contrary. Number one, I applaud the committee for coming up with the solution that makes both of them make sense. So thank you for that. That's an excellent point. And I think from here we're looking for all of us to deliberate and come through the process now to work out. I won't say that's a detail but that's a major part of it but yet still there's a lot of meat in here so you're all right with moving forward to PNZ and so forth but reserving the right. I think all of us will reserve the right to be going through the process but this gets it going here to help us be more consistent. All right, anybody have anything else? All right. Thank you. Thank you again. Next we'll move to short term rental and, Mike Bass, Code Compliance Administrator. Thank you, Mr. Bass. Thanks, sir. Mayor and Council, Mike Bass, Code Compliance Administrator. As y'all are aware, the Municipal Cut Policy Committee has been involved in discussion centered around resident concerns and potential impacts of short-term rentals to the community. So the intent of today's presentation is to familiarize the council with some industry terminology, some Arlington specific market context, resident and stakeholder survey feedback and some policy objective considerations. So I'd like to start out with just some brief common industry terminology. Typically a short term rental is defined as one in which a dwelling is leased out or rented out as a short term temporary basis, typically 30 consecutive days or less. While Airbnb is well known in the industry, they're over 125 web platforms at cater to marketing short term residential, short term rentals. I'm sorry. So short-term rentals can be further defined as a home sharing. This is a dwelling where the primary residents of the host unit is shared in whole or part. It can be a bedroom guest house, it could be a couch. It can be hosted where the owner resident remains on site during the guest stay or unhosted where the owner resident remains off site during the stay. And we'll get into some more specifics of that later on. A vacation rental is typically one where an owner does not reside on site and it's used almost exclusively for guests as a way of generating income. So the following sides are going to provide an analysis of the Arlington short-term rental market. This was information that was put together by host compliance, who was the consultant that we hired back in January. So as you can see by this map, these particular listings are inclusive of single-family, multi-family, which includes apartments, condominiums, duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes. So 400 active listings were identified. A listing is active if it's been reviewed or updated in the last 12 months. 404 of those listings fit within the short-term rental definition. And 284 of those properties are considered to be unique properties, which the physical building where an STR operates is identified and some hosts may have multiple listings for the same property. So taking and excluding multifamily condos, duplexes, tries and quads, we were able to determine that there are- Excuse me, just a minute, tris and quads, we were able to determine that there are... Excuse me, just a minute, Mr. Bask, Mr. Chepard has a question. Mike, could you back up? When I got this slide, there we go. I'm confused by the elements of the slide. Are there 284 short-term rental properties? Correct, unique properties. So the 409 listings means someone's gone on to the website, clicked on it, reviewed it, looked at it, but may have also scheduled for a visit. And that represents that within a 12-month period of time. It could also include the host going in and updating, you know, their particular website information. Okay, but so there's 200, I'm just trying to do the math and make sure I have it clear in my head. There's 284 actual physical properties that people offer for rental corrects on a short term basis in Arlington. Correct. That property may be listed five different times, which is what makes up the 409. So it's 284 that we're talking about. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. So if we exclude the multifamily condos, duplexes, and et cetera, then we narrow it down to approximately 162 single family detached homes, which are currently being utilized as short-term rentals. And 43% of those rentals identified as having a homestead exemption. The data was compiled by cross referencing the Tarant County appraisal district database and utilizing software which provides both public and proprietary records. So of the 162-16-year-old family residential property identified as short-term rentals. 71 did not have a homestead exemption. 57 had a homestead exemption. 21 probably had a homestead exemption, and let me just clarify that. When we searched the information, the TAD data represented that the individual lived at the location, however, they did not have a homestead exemption on file. So we can assume that they possibly are using that residence as their principal residence. And then we were not able to identify 13 of those properties through any clear matching. So the types of listings include 68% where an entire unit is being rented that includes a house apartment, a condo and 32% of those are shared space. They may be sharing a room, could be a couch or any other room in the residents. So by listing type 75% of the properties are single family, 22% are multi-family and 3% were unknown. So back in January, the council task staff to host some town hall meetings and conduct an online survey. And so we hired host compliance and they conducted four town hall meetings on your behalf. And they also provided an online stakeholder survey. I think most of y'all that were present at most of y'all were present at the meetings. It was well attended. We had an average combined of 295 residents who made appearances at the town hall meetings. is at the town hall meetings. So when we received the results of the survey, we had 1,055 responses. 915 of those were complete, 140 partial. 58% of the responses were from District 1. And nearly all the respondents are 98% have their primary residents in Arlington. About 53% have never hosted or been in short-term rental guests anywhere, and not just not in Arlington. About 53% have never hosted or been in short-term rental guests anywhere in just not in Arlington and 39% have used a short-term rental platform as a guest and 61 people identified themselves as having been a host. So the individuals who claim to be a host answered some additional questions. 80% are were host and Arlington. The host identified making more money was more profitable than then long term renting and helping to pay bills as the main motivators for hosting. Self identified residents personal experiences with having a short term rental next door 34% the community. We have a short term rental next door. 34% live near one or more. Short term rentals. Of those residents, 62% are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their personal experience or short term renting. The quality of life concerns that were voiced included that they were concerned about party houses, 82% indicated that noise 75% and those still important traffic and trash were slightly less important. And for this one and restrictions on any type of short-term rental exterior signage. So as it relates to priorities that they identified, half of the respondents said the conversion of long-term units to short-term rentals is a critical concern. Only 18% said it was not important. The survey takers were equally divided about whether short-term renters have more of an obligation to be considered than other residents. And the three-quarters believe host should risk losing their permit if they received too many complaints. While 43% of neighbors views were factored, or while 43% want neighbors views factored into the permitting process, 27% believe that there was no need and some took a middle position where the neighbors should be informed but not involved. About 60% think it's important that short-term rentals follow the same taxes, safety inspection and zoning requirements as traditional bed and breakfast motels and hotels. So some survey conclusions that were provided by host compliance in that the survey data lines with the town hall meeting statements from residents related to quality of life concerns. For neighbors, the perception of problems is real, even though many admitted not to knowing if a short term rental was near them. And for those that live next to a short term rental, nearly everyone has adamant on experiencing real issues and feelings like the city could not respond to them adequately. The entertainment district is a unique feature for Arlington on this topic, the mix of huge turf straws, traditional hotels, residential neighborhoods, creates an interesting diversity of opinions. Some see short term rentals as a way for average people to capitalize on the district while some think that short-term rentals negatively disrupt their residential street and some just hate the concept. And this was a similar situation that was experienced by residents in Pasadena, California. And that was the actual example used by the consultant. With regards to hosts, they indicate they want to follow rules that like neighbors, they want consistency in the regulation and enforcement. Host compliance believes there's a strong divide between the hosts with one property and the ones with multiple properties in terms of their goals and their business models. So given the diverse opinions for and against enabling short-term residential, it's important to identify the objectives that the council may identify as important. So if we look at the policy ejectors most commonly utilized by cities, the first being preserving neighborhood quality, the second being creating protections for the well-being of guest, the third preserving hot revenues and creating parity amongst the lodging industry and establishing protections for the supply and affordability of housing. So as we get into the specifics of each of these policy objectives, and establishing protections for the supply and affordability of housing. So as we get into the specifics of each of these policy objectives, I just want to keep in mind that there's no bullet plate system. It's a very complex and dynamic issue for local government to regulate, and typically the system should be tailored for local context. So we look at the objective of preserving neighborhood quality. The council may consider prohibiting short term rentals. They may allow for them utilizing current regulations. They may allow for them with a clear definition. They may allow for them with restrictions. So the following size are going to provide you some additional insight into each of these regulatory approaches. So if we look at the approach of allow but utilize current regulations, So the following size are going to provide you some additional insight into each of these regulatory approaches. So if we look at the approach of allow but utilize current regulations, we can utilize our current nuisance chapter offenses, which address illegal off street parking unclean premises, high weeds and grass trash nuisance outside storage. The traffic and motor vehicles chapter could be utilized for general on-street parking requirements. And then lastly, the Texas Penal Code Offences related to Nile Noise Assault Public Intoxication et cetera could also be utilized for enforcement purposes. So moving to the next regulatory approach of allowing but establishing a clear definition, the council could consider revising unified development code definition of bed and breakfast or they could create a new definition in the lodging facilities use category with restrictions and regulations or the council can consider creating a standalone ordinance and definition. So if we, Dr. Myers. Mr. Baskard, go back to that one. Sure. Could you say a little bit more about when you say create any definition in the lodging facilities use category? Can you say a little bit about what it currently is? And what you're suggesting there please? Let me defer to community development and planning to help me with this. Jim or Galen, if you want to assist with this, I can try to take a stab out of it. It's really not in my realm of. So Jennifer, community development and planning. So currently the Unified Development Code identifies these lodging facilities as not transient. And what that means is you're looking at usually lodging greater than, less than 30 days. So that's one of the items. And when you take a look at the Unified Development Code and it references maybe home-based businesses or something of that nature, and someone trying to identify the coordination of those, the home-based business references transient occupancy as usually greater than 30 days, meaning if it's a month, a month, rental. So much different per the UDC. So in addition to establishing a clear definition you may also consider adopting restrictions. You could prohibit vacation rentals in which a guest has exclusive private use of the unit for less than 30 days. You can permit vacation rentals whereby the primary resident of the property does not reside at the location and the property is used exclusively for the use as a rental. You can permit home sharing in which the primary resident at the property occupies the property, but is allowed to book rentals for a maximum number of days annually, an example would be 90 days per year. You can also consider adopting nearly tailored regulations, an example would be that you would require permit upon documented and verified violations. You could also consider requiring local contact representative to be for a property could provide for non-compliant sanctions procedures that could include permit denial revocation or suspension. You could require notification of short-term rental permit issuance to adjoining property owners. And you could also provide for off-street parking restrictions. Continuing on, you could also require guests to receive notification of restrictions. You could instill maximum occupancy limits. You could prohibit exterior advertising signage, prohibit the use of sound equipment that produces audible sound beyond the property line during restricted hours. You could prohibit social or commercial events. You could utilize a third party vendor to provide a 24 or 7 complaint hotline and online complaint form in the event that there may be a problem at the residents. So when we move to the next objective of creating protections for the well-being of guests, the council could consider the following regulatory provisions that include access for public safety, appropriate insurance to be prominently displayed, the requirement of safety inspections, the requirement of safety devices such as smoke and carbon monoxide, alarms, fire extinguishers, et cetera. You could require an evacuation plan. You could provide for self-certification or third-party inspection for fire and life safety and the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of amongst the lodging industry, you can consider requiring a permit. You can utilize a third party vendor to provide online registration and collection of those fees related to the permit. You can also utilize a third party vendor to provide online hot tax collection services. And provide the city with location and information of the short term rentals. Dr. Myers. Mr. Bass, could you articulate in the, my understanding is in current, our current policies right now, there is a statement regarding hot taxes and short term rentals. Could you say a little bit more about that for us please? Yeah, I believe under the, is it the finance chapter like, ordinance, there's a requirement Is it the finance chapter? Like ordinance? There's a requirement that the hot tax has to be paid to the city as far as what the state requires and believe that it's also included as that to which they have to register with the city. I did check before I came in today. We currently have only 35 short-term rental operators that are currently providing hot tax payments to the city. So then lastly for establishing protections for the supply and affordability of housing. The council can consider setting caps on a number of allow short term residential units. You can also set caps on the number of unhosted or hosted nights per year that it could be rented. And you could also adopt restrictions that prevent the physical conversion of residential housing to transient use. So now I've given you a lot of information. So I'm going to try to blend all this together and give you some context based upon three other cities that have adopted differing policy approaches to the regulation of short-term rentals based upon the needs of their communities. So the first approach is what is termed as restricted policy and this is utilized by Santa Monica, California. So as you can see, all four objectives are identified. And if you look at the Preserving Neighborhood Quality objective, it's a standalone ordinance. They do allow for home sharing with primary resident's host onsite during the visit, during the guest visit. They do prohibit vacation rentals and they provide for non-compliant sanctions punishable by fine and or imprisonment and keep in mind this is California or the suspension revocation of a permit. They also provide for any reimbursement of cost to the city associated with the investigation of a short-term rental. Very standard on protection of well-being and guests, providing guest emergency exit information, building site plans, they do require under the hot revenues that are permit be required and that they do collect and remit their hot tax and also require permit number on all advertisements. They do not have a maximum number of rental nights that they impose. So the city of Austin has taken the approach of allowing for a permissive policy and this one's very involved. And so I'm going to try to summarize this the best I can. They enforce this regulation through their zoning ordinance and they divide those by type one through three occupations. The type one is owner occupied. Type two is not owner occupied and they ceased issuing permits for that type of designation in 2015. And then type three is specific to multifamily and not being owner occupied. They do have maximum occupancy of two adults per bedroom plus two additional adults. A type two, which is not a short-term rental that is not owner occupied cannot be located within a thousand feet of another short-term rental. They do have restrictions on sound equipment and assembling and they do prohibit use by more than 10 adults or 600 related adults unless there are other stricter ordinances that apply. They provide for a two hour response time for a local contact and they require that yes be prepared be provided written notification of restrictions. Mr. Parker. Thank you, Mayor. Mike, could you, the type two owner not occupied ceasing to exist in 2015? Do you have any input for why? I don't. Other than that they were probably overwhelmed at that point with the number of non-owner occupied short-term rentals. I can look at this a little bit more in depth and provide you a little bit more detail, but I think that was probably the reasoning behind that. So, I guess my point here is what I'm trying to get at. I'm trying to flesh out, so to speak, is the fact that Austin, as Austin is, decided that owner occupied Reynolds were not to be offered after 2015. That's correct. Thank you, sir. With regards to the other objectives, very much pretty standard permits required fees required hotel occupancy tax to be collected. However, on the protection of supply and affordability of housing they have set caps. For an owner occupied residence there are no caps on the number of short-term rentals. If it's a type two not owner occupied, there cannot be more than 3% within the census tract of properties permitted. And type three non-commercial zoning, they cannot have more than 3% of total dwelling units and no more than 3% of dwelling units within anyone building. And then multi-family type three, that is in a commercial zoning district no more than 25% of the total dwelling units at the property or no more than 25% of the total number of dwelling units within any building are allowed. The last approach is termed a balanced policy which is utilized by Pasadena, California. They regulate their ordinance under the zoning chapter. They allow for hosted home sharing where the resident is on site during the visit and they allow for unhosted host to be on offsite during visit and visits are limited to 90 days per year. Let me just restate that again. They allow for an un-un-hosted where the host is offsite during the visit, but they're limited to 90 days per year that they can be offsite. They do not allow for vacation rentals in which the primary residence is not occupied one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the first one is the They do not allow any street parking, has to be on site. Sensions for not being in compliance, very similar to that of Santa Monica, providing for a local contact. And then the remaining are pretty typical of the rest of the different ordinances that we reviewed. On the protection for supply and affordability of housing, they do not have a maximum number of rental nights for a hosted home sharing. All right, so with that, staff will proceed as directed by Council, and I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have. I know it's been a lot of information to absorb. Sorry, Mr. Shepherd. I just got through the stuff. I just got through the stuff. I just got through the stuff. Mr. Parker. Obviously, I have copied all of you on several of the incidents that have occurred, especially this last week or so. The northern district is obviously the most impacted district by this particular phenomenon. This issue, when we had our town hall meetings. What was it, over 53% is that right, my sir? 53% were from the North District. So more than all the other districts combined. So I feel compelled to speak about the citizens of North Arlington and their concerns. We have experienced over time, over about the last five years, this growing phenomenon in the north. And the question is, is whose property rights are more important? Are the property rights of the individual citizen that lives in the city of Arlington more important than the owners of a short-term rental that may or may not live in that neighborhood or even in the city of Arlington or even be an entity that you can contact. In other words, some of these houses are purchased by companies. So the people that put me in office expect me to represent them and their concerns. And so I'm going to err if I must in on the side of their property rights, being the most important property rights that I have to deal with because they put me here. That being the case, there are several issues that first of all, let me ask you this question. Does a realtor have to disclose if there is a short term rental near the home they're trying to purchase? That's not a question I'm going to be able to answer. I'm not really sure, Mr. Parker. OK, so we don't know that. The answer's no. The answer's no. So essentially, from what I'm told, the realtors don't particularly like showing homes where there are short-term rentals because something could come back to bite them on non-disclosure. That's my understanding of what is currently transpiring. What this boils down to is rate of return on investment. That's all it is. The individuals who own and operate short term rentals are concerned about their rate of return being quicker than a normal rental where you would have a tenant pay off your principal. You can pay off your principal much quicker with a short term rental and higher rent rates than you can if in fact you are renting it by the month. That being the case and that being said, rate of return is the issue and rate of return but's heads with the property rights of my constituents and I take exception to that and I need a solution for this. I have a solution in mind and I will share that at the proper time. We can go ahead and discuss the issues that you believe, that the council believes to be at bar, and then we can discuss some type of solutions if you align. But that's what I see as a conflict. That's what I see as the issue, and the individuals who purchased short-term rentals can still rent their home for a month or more and still get a rate of return on their investment. It simply will not be as fast as a short-term rental. other comments questions. Okay, Sparker. Okay. Essentially, I would seek to try to establish short-term rentals coupled with a homestead exemption. And the reason I do that is because the homestead exemption requires you to live in the residents itself. Now home state exemption is essentially worth about 20% of the values you're home. The average home is $213,000 in Arlington today. So the average homeowner's exemption is going to be about $42,000. The reason I would couple it with the home state about 42-6. The reason I would couple it with the Homestead exemption is because there is no other way that I can think of to ensure that the renter actually occupies the home. I think this does several things. I think this does several things. It allows you to house share, you can rent to students if you'd like. It allows you to swap with other people who live in say Europe or the East Coast or who want to live here and you want to live in their residents. It allows you to rent for less than 30 days and the reason it does is because it allows the neighbors some restitution when it's all said and done. True, they may be standing on your front lawn with pitchforks and torches, but the bottom line is, is that you know who you're going to answer to, when the rental is over, and if it cooks off and goes nuclear, there's somebody there who's going to have to answer to that. Answer to the neighbors, because the neighbors sanctity and their neighborhoods sanctity and the largest investment of their life is sacrosanct and I am for all the improvements that we can have in neighborhoods and ensuring that our neighborhoods and our community that our neighborhoods and our community are safe and they do not have trash. They do not have people parked up and down the street. There's not party houses all night long and the police can actually have some restitution rather than just come to the house. So there are advantages to this and I think that that is probably rather than to have certain cities that do not allow it at all. I think it provides for the property rights of the actual owners that live in these homes. It would allow you to rent to short-term rentals for things such as super bowls and all the events that we have in the entertainment district. But the bottom line is, is it's your home you're renting out. It's precious to you. It's your largest investment. It's the home you're living in. And so that's the home you're living in. And so that's the reason that I would tie the short-term rental requirement to the home state exemption. That's my suggestion. Ms. Wolfe. Mr. Parker, I don't have any conflict with what you're proposing. I do want to know where where would we define when Property owner in a neighborhood owns the very adjacent Single family dwelling next door They can't have two homesteads exemptions Do you see any way that the proximity to their second dwelling that they operate as a short-term rental could be resolved? Is there any? You pose a hypothetical situation. No, real here in Arlington. No, I mean, it's a very limited situation that you pose. Okay, is what I'm saying. I'm sorry, if I use the improper verbiage. I understand that aspect of it. The exceptions to some rules. I can always come up with one of those exceptions to the rules. It would be something that if you wanted to allow something of that nature, it would have to be hashed out by the council. And in that instance, obviously they would be running a short-term rental that would not be a homestead exemption. Am I correct in assuming that? Yes, because I took what you were saying is that accountability of whoever is owns that short-term rental. If they are out of state owners, if they paid no, there's no accountability to that neighborhood. Like you say, there's no, I think if there is someone that is adjacent, if a, if you have a historical home here and you have a small, I don't want to call it an apartment, but a mother-in-law type house that they make available, but it's on the very same piece of property. I think there are many of those exceptions in the city. Do you think we could carve out some type of a, because I just see where the neighbor, they're not going to go away. Well, if you, if you, they are with they will be accountable. The example example that you pose. OK, seems very acceptable because the homeowner is living next door to the individual that's running the house and it's fully responsible for the actions of that individual. OK, and I think that in a situation such as that, I think the responsibility is such that the individual could be fully responsible because of the adjacency of it. So that could be an exception. Yes, we could put that in the ordinance. I think that would be good. Mr. Shepard. Thank you, Mayor. And Mr. Parker in committee, thank you all for the work that you did. I can tell there's a ton of time put into this. And Mr. Parker, I know you want to push this button on your way out, because this has been one of your babies. So you're going to hate what I'm getting ready to say. I can already tell. You knew it earlier this afternoon. I expect it to come with you. I know, I know. That's what we love about each other. This has been one of the most difficult things that I've encountered since I've been on the council. Because as you said, it's pitting property rights one against property rights of the other. And I agree that if we're going to air on someone's side, it ought to be to air on the side of the neighborhood. I'm in total agreement with that. Read the emails that have been sent, kind of looked, it certainly didn't spend near the time that the committee did looking at the assimilation of all the data and all the input. But there are five things that seem to be the problem, the recurring problems. Party House is number one, or at least it rises to the number one list, because it sort of generalizes the rest of the complaints if you wanted to get specific about it. But you've got parking, that's a complaint, you've got noise. That's a complaint. You've got trash and you've got traffic. So what I hear and what I see is not really a we don't want them at all. It's just we don't want any of that. If that comes with them, then we don't want them. So to me, as difficult as this might be, I think it's, I see our job is trying to figure out a way that we have a win win, that we protect the neighborhoods from all of these things that are certainly worries from and troubles them. And yet, not take a sledgehammer and just correct the problem with one failed swoop and say, okay, one size fits all. If you don't live in it, you can't have it done. Nice ordinance wrap up, let's go home. So I prefer, and I wish I knew that the committee looked at someplace else besides California and Austin that troubles me greatly to know that we're looking at the most liberal state in the union and the most liberal state in this state. As far as policies are concerned, but having said that, I think there is an approach where Pasadena works with some modifications. I think if we had an on-site host, for example, or as Miss Wolf pointed out, a next door host, if you will, if it was a duplex, let's say, and you lived on one side and rented out the other side. I, to me, that rises to that level of accountability that we, that you talked about with the home owner being there. Those people are there. They know the neighbors. They know the neighborhood. They're going to be accountable. So I think there's a way that we can kind of mold this. I think the permit is, is absolutely imperative. I think we've got to have this. I think the permit is absolutely imperative. I think we've got to have that. I'm not really as concerned about the hot tax, but that certainly is a consideration that a permit provides us the opportunity to be sure that we know who we've got. I'm shocked that there's 35 registered at a 284 properties. I probably shouldn't be shocked, but it blows me away. The noise can't have it during the evening hours, 10 PM to 7 AM, with the exception of like the duplex and so forth, the proliferation of STRs and a particular neighborhood, there's a limit. You can't have one within a thousand feet or 10,000 feet. So a lot of this makes sense to me. And I think we ought to, again, the committee spent a ton of time and we got dumped all this two weeks ago, I guess, when Gilbert sent us the packet. And of course, we had the full briefing today. But I think there's a way we can have a win-win here if we spend a little time. And maybe we can do it between now and two Tuesdays for now. But I think the issue is important. I think it needs to be addressed, but I think we need to address it in a measured way so we don't just jump into this thing and then for the next four years or five years, we're doing what we've been doing to the UDC, which is adding little, well, accept this and well accept that and let's add a subparagraf I hear because we didn't really think about that. So I would love to move forward with some type of Pasadena-ish regulation that we kind of tailor to our own particular situation here in our market. Mr. Parker, every week that we go about this without any type of resolution to this particular issue, our neighborhoods are being usurped by visitors. And the quality of life in those neighborhoods is being reduced. And they deserve a decision by this body at some point. I may or may not be here. I do not know. But the bottom line is, is that even a delay of a week or two is going to be another incident where we have individuals that are reducing the quality of life in our neighborhoods. If you take a look at the survey itself, the survey states that our residents don't want these. That's what it says. We have, we've gone out to a third party, independent third party, done the survey. We've gotten the results. We've compiled the data, and we've come to the same conclusion that Austin has. Austin, okay, as goofy as Austin is, they've come to the same conclusion as no non-only residents. So it is not something that works in Austin and I don't think it's something that works in Arlington and we need to do something as I think our citizens to deserve it as quickly as possible. So I think that the home state exemption aspect of it is an extremely sensible one in the event that and I believe that Ms. Wolfe is absolutely correct. You could carve out an adjacency clause to be within an adjacent property in order to do a short-term rental without a homestead exemption. I think that those are concessions that seem to be realistic. So I'm ready to act on this. Mr. Shepherd. Yeah, Mr. Parker, and I don't know this. I wasn't on the committee, but what I'm going to suspect about Austin's ceasing of permits in November of 2015, as they already had several hundred non-owner occupied STRs. So they quit issuing any new ones, but it doesn't mean that they don't have any at all. That's correct. Other questions, comments? Mr. Glaspie. Just a general comment that you may have an idea now while we felt we need to get out of the committee and get in general discussion. Sure. Very difficult. Well, from here, is anyone have a proposal that you'd like to do here? We hear that we want to move forward. I really didn't hear that. I think we're in an agreement. We need to move forward. It's just how we move forward and on what? There. Okay, everybody's him win up. That is awesome. We have got some movement. Miss Wolff, Miss Thalman here. I'm just gonna pose we've never talked about enforcement and I think that's a primary issue I have. We all know I know one particular short-time rental lady lives in California and she just tells the neighborhood, well, if you don't like what's going on, call the police. And you got the code that addresses trash, you got cops that address noise. How many of us want to go higher and other hundred cops just to oversee and you know get the call we got loud noise You know at one in the morning or eleven if so we're at I said on the committee and let me tell we didn't do every we did not pick Pasadena and we did not pick California that That's that part of that consult that was able to pull in all of that stuff. But Mr. Bass, can you tell us in simple terms how regardless of what we come up with because this has to be addressed. It is an issue in this city. How's it going to be enforced? Sure. An approach where cities have been successful, such as Denver and Boulder. They utilize a third party vendor to provide the 24 or seven hotline. And they can also provide an affidavit to be online where it can be completed by the resident upload pictures videos that can then in turn be used as an administrative hearing for purposes of reviewing the status of their permit. All right we got well anything else on enforcement did that bring a court a question before we move Miss Thalman on that point is no one's going to respond to that issue that weekend. You got to fill out an affidavit. You got to see it's like going well, I mean, if the council, you know, desires that that's, you know, that the appropriate department responds, obviously we will respond. You know, enforcement can be tailored however the council desires and we can come back with some proposals for you all to review. I think that just delays our whole issue here. Yeah, a lot of information. In my scenario, what I'm envisioning with the on-site person is you've got a 24 hour contact, number one. Number two, I mean, I don't know. Maybe they get one mistake and after that you pull their permit. They can't operate an STR for 24 months, or some sort of real draconian thing, so they know we mean business, but I don't like the call of police and call code either. I mean, I think the neighbors deserve some sort of immediate action like that. And in my world, that's what I was thinking. Mr. Dalman. Thank you, Mayor. So Mr. Parker asked, whose rights are more important? And I think that we need to have a balance. It's not the people who live in our neighborhoods. A lot of them are not even homesteaded owners. We don't get to choose our long-term renters. And we have the same types of issues that we have with short-term rentals. We have them all across neighborhood with homeowners who live in their homes as well as long-term rentals. And we have to address those as we come up, whether it is calling the police or co-enforcement. But to the point, Mr. Bass, I did sit on the committee and one thing that we talked about a lot was the permitting process and also different options for handling the complaints as they come in. And I think that would be a great option, you know, if they have one or two complaints throughout the year, then we can pull their permit and use whatever resources we need to shut down the STR to take the permit and, you know, whether they have to wait a couple of years or whatever we decide. But I think that requiring that we have a homestead exemption or somebody living on side or adjacent is too strict in my opinion. We have a lot of responsible us to our owners and operators here in Arlington that respond right away or within an hour. I think Tammy's here. I've spoken with her several times. She came to our town hall meeting. And someone who lives next door to one of her rentals said, I'd rather live next door to her short-term rentals than I would any long-term rental in the city because they have to keep them clean and they have to be responsive. The neighbors have her cell phone numbers as she does respond. And it's not just her. A lot of people who were at our town hall meeting said we don't have a problem with this we like this we just want it to be fair across the board and we want the issues to be addressed so having a permitting process like slides zero done 28 through 33 Mr. Bass had a lot of good options for requirements that we can put into that permitting process so that the issues that we have primarily in district one also surprising district three has the second highest number so less than half of district one but so that those issues aren't degradating our neighborhoods that's you know top priority is to preserve our neighborhoods but also all of us at homeowners we want to balance those rights as well thank you. Dr. Mars. I was just going to go back to more of what Mr. Shepard was discussing. Coming into this meeting, I was very interested in the idea of attaching it to a homestead. However, I guess for me, and I'm going to hear more from my colleagues perhaps, because there really is a balance here between what we call hosted and vacation rental. We go back to that very first slide, right? And we have a lot of short-term rental owners here in the inner city who are doing a good job as Miss Salmon just talked about of trying to take care of their homes. They're actually taking care of their homes much better than the long-term. I was much surprised at our town hallstice to learn how much more of a problem long-term rentals are than short-term rentals. So I'm interested in understanding from my colleagues, go back to the question about in this Anheim, for example. Pasadena, excuse me. By the way, we didn't pick California. But this is what was told us as a short term. I'm interested in terms of just this idea about prohibiting vacation rentals, not owner-occupated anytime. I think that's coming down to the difference between a homestead versus do we have short term rentals in this and what kinds of other agreements? I do like what I like about Pasadena, which doesn't come with the homestead proposal that Mr. Harker is putting forward is the other protections for the well-being of the guests for preserving the hot tax revenue. I go back to my question already in our laws right now. Is it provision that we should be collecting hot tax on all short-term rentals right now? So I just want to point that out and make that point once again again because I think that regardless of what we do here today, that's there. And last but not least, I think that the other protections that are provided here on the Pasadena recommendation protections for supply and affordability of housing, I think are also very important. So I'd like to see us have a more comprehensive approach to that. That's where I stand at this point, but I'm interested to hear more from my colleagues about, because we really are getting down between the difference between a vacation rental and a home-most. And I just want to hear more from my colleagues, because that's, I think, the crux of what we're dealing with on what's making this difficult for a, the committee to move forward, and b, for us right now. Let's address that right on. Ms. Walman. Now I would agree with you. This is one of the hardest decisions we've made because it is about property rights for everybody. Enforcement I think is one of the things that has been one of the bigger ones because as you said we have it on the books right now that we're supposed to be collecting and it hadn't been enforced. Obviously it's such a low percentage of people that are really We have it on the books right now that we're supposed to be collecting and it hadn't been enforced obviously It's it's such a low percentage of people that are really you know following the rules Which is what usually happens in most of our ordinances or of this type is that some are really good citizens and do the right thing And they keep the lawns and fix the house and others don't but it's the same thing with even long term rules and you know that Okay, so But what I've heard today is that But there's no, but it's the same thing with even long term riddles and you know that. Okay, so, but what I've heard today is that you all spent, I don't know how many weeks in a committee talking about this and there are four of us here. This is really the first time we've really talked about it. We've heard about it. We've gotten the complaints. We know that. And I would agree. I was thinking, well, maybe this would be the solution. But then after hearing all of the rest of you talk, I'm thinking, I do think we need to study a little bit more. I think we need to, I would go with Mr. Shepard's suggestion that we really thrash this out to be sure that we don't start down a road and then have to come back. That's the problem. I hope when we come to this conclusion that we have an ordinance that we won't have to come back to for a long, long time. There has to be something done. I agree with that because we've had too many complaints and too many things and it's gotten out of hand and I think what I've mentioned was the party houses. That's just, I mean, that's unbelievable that they're even advertised that way and that's where I think a lot of our, you know, a cost for service have been. Anyway, I would like to have a little more time to really talk about this, maybe in the next meeting. I'm sorry, Charlie, Mr. Parker, but that's where I am. Mr. Parker. I had to have talked to the lady that owns several homes on Roosevelt and she has done a good job. She really has done a good job and she is a good, I believe, short term rental owner. That being said, however, she was never registered with the city and has never paid any hot tax until we had our discussion. The fact that we have had, we've beat this thing to death really. And I brought it up five years ago and we've kicked the can down the road until this particular meeting right here. Okay. And it's gone to legislature and it's been killed in committee. It's gone to extended legislature and it's been killed in committee and the reason being I talked to the Gentlemen who chairs the committee is because he didn't want one next to his house and That is a significant statement and I believe that if you Look at the results of the survey your constituents Do not want one of these next to them. And for you to allow one next to them doesn't seem to be representing their best interests. And so I'm going to stick to my guns here, and I'm going to say that you cannot legislate for the best possible scenario that occurs. You cannot legislate for the best rental owner that occurs. Some of these houses are owned by corporations. They're owned by companies and the West Coast and that kind of stuff and they come in and they buy several of them. So who are you gonna call? Are you gonna call a VRBO? Let me tell you, they are non-responsive. So the best thing that we can do for our constituents, for our citizens, for our neighborhoods is put some restrictions on these things and do it in such a way that it will preserve the sanctity of those neighborhoods and the investments that those citizens have made in their in their communities. So what I'm hearing is that we have all the, you know, we want to move forward on legislation. And but yet we are somewhere between the Pasadena proposal and the Parker proposal. And some are on the Parker proposal and I don't think anybody's quite on the Pasadena. They're a little bit further towards Charlie than that. Yes, Mr. Parker, good. I address the Pasadena proposal. Sure. Pasadena requires you to live in your home for nine months and then you can short-term rent it for three months and it has to do with their I believe their Rose Bowl parade and the Rose Bowl itself and the working on the floats and that type of stuff and the people who come in to work on the floats and it takes a certain amount of time to do that kind of stuff. We don't do that. That ain't us. And so consequently, that's indigenous to Pasadena. And I don't think that the citizens of Arlington, especially North Arlington, want three months of chaos and then nine months of serenity. I don't think that you, there's a, I don't think there's a season or an event that we have that justifies that type of user ship. So those are my concerns on Pasadena. Yes, Mr. Schupper. And Mr. Parker, whether you intended to or not, you made my point. I've just pointed to Pasadena's containing some elements, not all of the elements. And the fact that there's already one that I agree is not an Arlington fit begs the question to me that it requires more discussion. There's five of us that weren't on the committee and didn't spend the weeks that the committee spent. As I said, this is the second time I've even been presented anything in writing about this issue other than the emails we receive from folks. So I mean, give us a minute to kind of process. It's all I'm saying. By the same token, Mr. Shepard, you proved my point. And the fact that the North District has been inundated for the last five years by this growing phenomenon. And you're at large. Neither was I, Mr. Shepard. Yeah. Quickly. Okay. Ms. Swalman. Well, I was just, I was going back to what Ms. Wolf talked about the adjacency and even in the Pasadena, it says that they are restricted to renting the property residence plus one additional dwelling unit on the property. So it could have said adjacent are on the property and we know we do have those properties where and I can think of several in town that as you said the the mother-in-law house or whatever in fact there was one built over in district four just recently well in the past year where they built a house on the back and they would be able to do that and I think that needs to be in there though they're not living in it they have the homestead and on the property. So would that? Absolutely. That is something that, as a matter of fact, I stated that the homestead exemption also allows house share, okay, which would allow you to be in the house as they go ahead and rent a portion of the house. So that being the case, that works. And the adjacency, I feel as though that you could carve out an adjacency clause into something of that nature too, that also makes it work and have the owner on the premises or near the premises that allows some restitution by the rest of the neighborhood. Mr. Jones. Mayor, I was just gonna suggest that the staff kind of take a stab at some of the things that we hear there to be a little bit of consensus on to start putting kind of the Arlington framework together. And then perhaps we can either do on our own work or work with the host compliance people to find some alternative cities that are maybe more aligned kind of from a philosophical perspective as a couple more gobyes. So you can take those three maybe three or four others with a little bit of the framework we start to build around some of the consensus that we hear from you for a work session at the next meeting if that's of interest to you all. I got Ms. K. Pardin and then Mr. Shipper. Thank you Mayor. It's easier for me at this moment to know what some of the things that I would like to see in the ordinance is kind of limited. So I really believe it has to be permitted. I believe we have to collect hot tax and I believe there ought to be some penalty for some violation. Now what that penalty is, what that violation is, I don't know. But with regard to, is it home-seditors, is it not home-sedited? Do you limit the number? Do you limit it primarily to one area of town? You know, those are things that I'm still unsettled about and don't see a clear path for. But the things I am certain of for me personally is the permitting, the fee for the permitting, and some kind of penalty for a violation of a permit. of the department. It's Shepard. I mean, I'm happy to try to get together next week if you think staff can have something to present next week to continue this discussion as an immediate thing because while it's fresh on our minds, I'm perfectly fine doing that. If we can come up with an ordinance between now and May the 8th that everyone's happy with, I'm perfectly content to let Mr. Parker go after pushing the button. But we've got, you know, maximum occupancy, for example, I think we need to have. Must utilize onsite parking, no parking on the street. I think we should have, but there's another ordinance that prohibits you from we should have, but there's another ordinance that prohibits you from paving your front yard to provide on-site parking, which I want to do that too. So if you can park four cars in your driveway, great, but you can't build a parking lot in your front yard to make yourself into a short-term rental deal. The permits have already been talked about, notification to a budding property owners, I think is important that they be notified 24 hour a day local contact. No exterior signage, got to comply with all the codes. You can't have commercial events parties or group gatherings like weddings, bankwoods, party houses, gotta have your extinguisher smoke detectors. I mean, just, I think, I think if we had, again, I hate to call it Pasadena thing, because it's California, but if we had something along that line, I believe that if we're able to get together next week, we collectively could probably go through the checklist and go, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, and have some direction for staff to maybe put an ordinance together. Mr. Parker. If I can ask one question and that is the question, I would probably, might this be you, I'm not real sure. But what do you say to the individual, the citizen who lives out there, and there is a business being operated as essentially a hotel in a residential neighborhood as a short-term rental. How is that codified? How is that defined in the UDC? I'll address that, Jennifer. I'll let Jennifer try to address this, I'm sorry. It's complicated and that's one of the reasons why you had an objective to identify a clear definition and that because it is ambiguous. And so I think Jennifer indicated that it doesn't fit within a home-based business permit because of other provisions under the unified development code for a property that's being rented out for less than 30 days. Would typically fall under a hotel lodging bed and breakfast, but short-term rental is excluded from that definition. So that's where we're gonna need some guidance from you I mean, I'm not going to ask you to ask me to ask you a question. I'm going to ask you to ask me a question. I'm going to ask you to ask me a question. I'm going to ask you to ask me a question. I'm going to ask you to ask me a question. I'm going to ask you to ask me a question. I'm going to ask you to ask me our committee's conversation. And this is what I was told back. Key controversial question is, is this a business? The UDC only mentions tenancy for household living, single family or multi-family units as arranged on a month-to-month basis or longer. Lodging where tenancy may be arranged for a period or less than 30 days is classified under the lodging facilities category and it only includes bed and breakfast and hotels. That's my question earlier about short-term rental and where that falls under that UDC capture. Right. And I think that, you know, we've indicated that at this point it's sort of in the air. I think that's a really good question. Jim Paragion deputy C manager. Right now the unified development code does not speak specifically to short-term rental. So when when use of a piece of property doesn't speak to isn't spoken to directly in the unified development code. It becomes interpretive. And that interpretation is really a zoning administrator interpretation. It does something fit a similar category or has similar characteristics. Then the determination can be that it is similar to us a currently stated use and then that use as long as the as well as the companion use become allowed in that particular zoning district. There are also instances where it is not directly consistent with a use on that we currently have in our code. And therefore, the termination typically is it's prohibited unless the unified development code would be changed. In this case, it's quite frankly, it's a tricky question. I mean, there's probably some uses of property that would fall very closely to a commercial use and then there are some that probably would fall more towards a residential use that has some companion associated activities as opposed to a use of the property and that's really the big distinction when you think of zoning administration You have to think of the primary use of the property. That's that's really the big distinction when you think of zoning administration. You have to think of the primary use of the property. That's a, that is an interpretation. So Mr. Paragel and Moist will have you there? So under the Unified Development Code, which would be Article 3 used standards section 3.3.6, if I am correct in my research, the Section 5 said, prohibited home-based business. It says the following uses because of their effects on the surrounding residential area, shall not be permitted as home-based businesses. Bed and breakfast and other such transient lodging. So are you telling me right now, because we don't have a short-term rental separate ordinance, that transient housing is open for interpretation and therefore it is up to this body to decide if a transient housing is a short-term rental. That would be correct. Thank you. So from that, a whole lot of information, Mr. Bass, at least this is on record. So you'll be able to go back. But we'll follow, we'll have some more comments but we want to move forward with the suggestion that Mr. Yeoverton here and then the potential here for us to have a meeting next week. Does somebody else have their hand up? Speak. Mr. Glassman. Just come I think we should make sure that what we define what our primary priority is and this helps to me like to sink to the other our Neighborhoods is real key. Absolutely. So, listen, I lose sight of that. It's a priority of ours to champion great neighborhoods, and this is Paramount, Mr. Yevrton. I wanted to just ask one question. I might be open a little bit of Pandora's box don't want to, but I think I know where you want to go, but I want to use an example to see if I get consensus as this being explored when we come back to you. Talk about party houses and that's some of the neighborhood sanctity, et cetera. And I don't know if we can get to the point where there's either an occupancy standard or an occupant limit, but I know one of the things that we get concerned about as someone who advertises, you know, sleeps 20, for example. That's a different thing than sleeping a family of four who's in town. So is that something that as an example, you would like us to put on the checklist to address? Yes. Yes. Okay. Mr. Parker, I can respond to that just in just a second. If you go into VRBO or you go on to Airbnb and you see a property that is say 4500, 5,000 square feet something of that nature. There is nothing that prohibits Joe Blow from Delta Phi Kappa or whatever, okay, from booking that particular property on Texas OU weekend. And what will happen, because I've seen it happen, is that that particular fraternity combined with that particular some sorority of invitation will show up and they will park cars all the way down the street and they will be two or three people in each one of those cars. So that's when you are listing a property online you don't know what kind of fish you got on the other end. The actual property owner knows that they have revenue, but they do not know what the quality of that particular individual is or what the purposes of their stay is going to be. And that is problematic, to say the least. So I have seen 30 cars in the street. I have seen a party house all night long. I have seen people taste at three o' cars in the street. I have seen a party house all night long. I have seen people taste at three o'clock in the morning. I have seen the cop show up and the ambulance show up. I've seen all these things. And so has Dr. Carbari that lived next door. So it can happen in any neighborhood at any time. And it can happen to anyone who doesn't live in a homeowners association. Most homeowners associations frown upon this and do not allow it. And just because our citizens haven't all become homeowners associations doesn't mean that they don't deserve the same sanctity for their neighborhoods. And the internet makes this animal available. And you don't know what you've got on the end of your line until you really did. And so that's the concern I have on something of that nature. Okay, so with that we'll move forward and try to see if we can schedule something next week. Is everybody in agreement to that? Great, thank you all very much. Okay, we move to traffic signal preemption systems and Mr. Keith Brooks. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Keith Brooks, the Assistant Director of Public Works and Transportation. This is a sort of a follow-up presentation on the traffic signal preemption systems. Before we get started, I wanted to just introduce Munsoor Amit. He's our ITS coordinator. And so he's also like the brains behind all of these things that I'm going to be presenting today. So I wanted to make sure you knew who he was. So as we get started here. So emergency vehicle preemption. So this is for, of course, emergency responders. Of course, they're a lifeline of our communities, delays to the scene, can put property and lives at risk. Of course, preemption helps to make sure responders get to emergencies quickly and safely. With signal preemption and the likelihood of crashes can be reduced and responses can take less time. These devices located on the vehicle and on the signal allow the normal operation of traffic signals or lights to be manipulated in the path of emergency vehicle, halting conflict and traffic and allowing the emergency vehicle right away. So as we look at our existing system, our existing opticon system, it's basically based on, it's an infrared transmitters. So the vehicle emitter sends a request for preemption. The receiver on the mast arm receives that request. And then the controller notify the centralized signal software to change the signal from red to green. The emitters on emergency vehicles require a clear line of sight and the intersection receivers using infrared communication. So the line of sight could be interrupted by trees or buildings or weather like fog or rain. Normally there's four receivers at an approach. So on each Masterm if you will it requires wiring from the receiver at Masterarms to the cabinet. Our current system is over 15 years old and some parts have become obsolete which can make repairs expensive. So what we've been looking at is new technology. So a preemption and priority system that combines the cellular, radio, and GPS technology. So the emitter with this new technology is sends a signal. You have a roadside unit that receives that signal. And then the centralized software received notification to change the signal from red to green. But all of this is connected to the cloud. So it's all cloud base. And the particular vendor that you would select, or we would select, would have that server. select or we would select would have that server. As we continue with this, as we mentioned, as I mentioned, it's the cloud based solution. It also uses a combination of radio frequencies also. So a sort of a redundant communication, if you will. The primary source of the connectivity or the communication is through cellular, but it's a redundant system. It uses the radio, if you will, as sort of a backup if there's an issue with the cellular network. So the vehicle monitors, even monitors turn indicators, whether you turn your left signal or your right signal on, it sends a request to the roadside unit. And basically what the roadside unit does is it notifies the central system to basically clear a path of travel for their approach. Only one with the new system, with these new systems, only one control unit is installed at the signal cabinet. There's no line of sight issue that you have to be concerned about or there's no wiring that's also necessary. It's a web-based system. It tracks the vehicles and predicts and performs intersection preemption request in real time. And it also provides strong reporting capabilities. So as we look at response times and see how well the system is doing, we have a strong reporting system that we can also use to analyze what's going on. Now as we look at this preemption, this is not what we want to do is combine that with a lot of the smart city solutions, not just a preemption or the existing opticon where it's just that. It's just about changing the signal for emergency vehicles. We also want to, this would be sort of a collaboration of not just preemption, but also other smart city technologies that we want to start implementing as we start preparing our city for any type of smart city vehicles like some of the newer vehicles and of course with our connected signals also with our autonomous vehicles. So these units are compatible with vehicle technology so whether it's built into a newer vehicle or you can use an app on your phone to have access to information that's coming from the signal. So the unit can receive and broadcast signal phase timing and to users and also green time and red approach. So you would get information in your vehicle as you're approaching these signals as to how long the signal is going to be and when when is it gonna turn green things of that nature if it's about to turn red things of that nature drivers will also get alerts Like when the railroad crossing arms are about to be activated It also give you a time for if you need to reroute you have time to see what's coming up ahead You can also reroute your entire route. So these units, they also provide, of course, the preemption of the emergency vehicle. And it will also alert drivers when a vehicle is approaching also. So if you've ever heard a signal or heard a siren going off and you trying to figure out where is the siren coming from, you're looking around, you know, in your mirror, you're looking to the front and to the right, trying to figure out where is it coming from. Well, this this type of application will allow you to know where where where that siren, where that vehicle is coming from and can alert you. It also will help with our pedestrians and also with our cyclists. So a lot of these, this is a web-based program. If they have the program also, the system would basically pick up that program, can see the pedestrian or see the cyclists and give you time for the alert for the approaching vehicle. So they can see what's going on in a roadway with pedestrian cyclists and things of that nature. So all of this is safe. Sorry to interrupt. I just have a really quick question regarding the smart city of energies. We talked a little bit about when you did the sequencing of traffic lights that was also attached to the Ways program. Is there some interfacing with the other programs like that or could you say a little bit about more about that? Sure. With the ways a lot of with the smart city technology that we're looking at, one of them is ways. Of course we use ways for all of our traffic, a lot of our traffic management within our election as far as alerting our citizens. For example, of course, we got the draft coming up this weekend. So there's all of the any type of road closures are inputted into ways. So if you have the ways app, you can pull up and say, I want to go to this particular lot, or even if you're not going to a lot, or you're not even going to the draft, or whatever the event is, you can pull up ways and say, I wanna go from point A to point V, how can I avoid this area at this time because of all these different road closures or things that that nature that's involved? So all of this is all integrated, even with ways they have a thing called Icon. And with the Icon, these are devices. They look like your regular traffic control devices out there. But it actually sends alerts. It pings and sends alerts to drivers that have the ways app. And it can also let you know if, OK, here's a situation with construction and things that it can send those type of alerts to you. and things of that nature, it can send those type of alerts to you. And so, also, this is all tied into with what they call the dedicated short range communication. So this is kind of like an industry standard as we start getting into two, the smart cars, smart cities, and things that add nature. This communication is basically a standard that can be used with all this, all integrated together. So whatever type of smart city applications we wanna use, it can all be integrated and tied together. So we have the cost per intersection for this technology. As you can see for a roadside unit, this would basically be a unit that would be placed inside of the controller cabinet. It's $4,000 per roadside unit. the cost to outfit a emergency vehicle is 4,500 to install the emitter inside of those vehicles. We're looking at a one-time installation cost of 1.75 million. Now this includes a five-year data plan. Like I said, this is all connected with Cellular. So it's like a data plan that's included with this. Now as a part of that's included with this. Now as a part of that cost, there's also the vendor would be responsible for maintenance. So any type of maintenance with the system, whether it be in the vehicle, whether it be in the controller, whatever issues that would come up, that maintenance cost is built into that. And then of course the data plan would have to be renewed after the initial five years. So it would be a five year data plan. And so this is basically the cost of this type of system. Okay, we've got a couple questions, Mr. Brooks, Mr. Almond and then Miss Wom. Thank you, Mayor. Do we have an idea of what the cost would be to renew the data plan after five years? Yes. Right now it's looking at, so after five years it would be approximately 100,000 per year. Miss Walman. When you talk about the emergency vehicles, are you, is that only for fire trucks or can any of our other emergency vehicles like our ambulances could they ever be incorporated into this system. Yes, and I want to say that the cost that we looked at it was the cost was to to outfit 70 vehicles. The current cost of the outfit seven 70 vehicles, which would include ambulance and of course fire trucks. Does that come on? The 70 vehicles are all fire trucks. Come on, come on up. So in this cost estimate we mainly use the fire trucks because what we heard that we provide the units or emitters that goes in the fire trucks and ambulances purchase their own emitter. So we didn't include the cost that goes into the ambulances, but the number four fire trucks, we have 75 trucks that has the emitters and 32 ambulances that also has the emitters. So if the emitters for the ambulances, that will be a additional cost for the waiver provides that cost. Thank you. So, and I think it's important to note that in addition to the ambulance provider providing their own cost for the emitters for them, we didn't price in this police vehicles. So if we were to scale up and I think it's equally as important for police to have that kind of thing, so that would drive up 200 you know, 200 and some odd cars times they met or so. That number can get a little bigger if we expand into the police department world as well. Okay, because that was going to be my next one. It was about the police department and I wondered. I mean, they wouldn't need them all the time. Can you, this probably sounds another, not knowing very much about this, but do they turn them on and turn them off? I mean, if a police car is on an emergency run, could they hit a button and then it would use the admit or would it be there all the time? It's active, it's really activated by the siren. So when they turn the siren on, it automatically. That's what it would turn on. I mean, it wouldn't be on like you're just cruising to down Abrams Street. Okay, that's it. Thank you. That's correct. Mr. Shepherd. Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Brooks, thank you for the presentation. I'm curious. We, this chief Krausen and I have got to be really good friends over the opticon system. I seem like I called him every other day for a while. I was saying it doesn't work at this intersection. So I guess what I'm a little surprised about is we just had the conversation two weeks ago or four weeks ago about the possibility of reviewing the possibility of replacing. And we've got cost already. And so I guess my first question, it might have taken it from the presentation. There's only two technologies. Opticon and this one. No, sir. This is what we're we use they right now we have a pilot product project going on. It's called applied information. Now that's on Cooper Street and that's basically we're doing a pilot between Randall Mill and UTA Boulevard. It's just a pilot. So we're basically working with a vendor. What we're showing is that this type of technology, not necessarily that one particular vendor, this type of technology. This is what it's kind of running right now. All of this, of course, is new. And so that's why we're doing pilots to make sure that it's working properly and we're testing it. So there's other technology out there, but this is just one form of it. Okay. All right. And I guess the second question then of it. Okay. All right. And I guess the second question then kind of relates to the bid process and it kind of ties back to my first question. If there's a sole source, then I don't know if we have to bid it or not. But will this go through a normal RFP or RFQ process if and when the city elects to move forward with whatever technology we choose? I believe it would. And what we tried to do here was give you an example of where we think the future is, because we don't think the future kind of to your point is the optical system. It's the next generation. And then based on an order of magnitude of what kind of money should we need to budget for? If we were to do this kind of stuff, we it's in the million seven five to two and a half million depending on police fire etc so we would need to make that decision of is this the order of magnitude for that business plan that we would like to proceed then we need to develop the funding plan the procurement plan and so on and so forth. Go ahead Mr. Parker. Real quick questions and probably for the chief. Chief, with this particular technology, what do you anticipate the reduction in a rival time would be call time? Pint on the scale of the project, currently the city is about half the intersections are covered with the Opticom system. Are you planning on a full scale? Yes, the scale is for all signalized intersections. I would expect a reduction in response to that. And I mean, is there, I guess I want to ask are there departments that have utilized this system and they've seen a significant reduction in call-out times or and Go ahead go ahead and answer that one. Well, I'm aware of a candidate question So one benefit of this system is it includes the GPS technology and the unit itself actually connects to the vehicle left turn and right turn indicator. So with that, it basically knows if the left turn indicator turn is on, so it's going left. So it basically allows to the next signal that the fire track is coming on your approach, which the kind of become system cannot do. So with that, it actually reduce the overall, you know, the arrival time for the fire truck or overall the support time. With the exact number, it depends on how far it is from the source to actually where the destination is for the fire truck. But on average that it saves in that, you know, significant amount of time because it allows the next signal in advance. My question didn't have anything to do with the next signal. I had to do with another city. And it had to do with the utilization of this particular product in another city. And what types of times that they were experiencing or more specifically, what the reduction in time was over the expenditure of $1.75 million. So this technology is being, specifically, this technology is being used by many other countries, a county in Georgia that we know. There are several other GPS-based technologies that are out there. There's also used by several other agencies. On average, it actually saves your response time by 10 to 20% on average call. And like I mentioned, it basically depends on from source to the origin. So for this particular technology, we know that is being used by immediate accounting in Georgia So we're talking about 20 to 40 seconds. Is that right chief? Maybe a little bit more. No, Mr. Parker. I would I wouldn't guarantee that number That's that's too many variables in this equation to guarantee you I wanted to elaborate you know part of part of what we've experienced. I'll be at older technology You know, we've had the opticon system deployed for over a decade. So a lot of that efficiency in response time is already been compressed out of the system because we've had a technology and it's on the main thoroughfares. So the incremental response time will be decelerating as far as what we've done to go from 10 to 8. I don't know that you can go from 8 to whatever we'd have to do more research, but it'll be a lesser amount than what we've experienced over the last decade. Another question to the chief would be using the current technology, say over the last five years, how many accidents have we had where somebody has run into a fire truck that's going with lights and siren? I can't think of any. I think the Opticon system has been a win for the city, tickling the emergency response area. It has made our response time much lower and it's averted many many accidents for us. Thank you. Okay I'd like to go a little further direction because as we see what it can do for us or the emergency vehicles but we are moving into a time of technology in which our signals can be smart enough to be able to realize what is happening in real time on traffic. And most of our signals are timed to take care of different times during the city, such as rush hour and non rush hour. In Arlington, Texas, that does not work very well. And I really want to compliment Mr. Brooks and I'm sure appreciate all the efforts you're doing because you're helping to move us into the next stage because here's what I'm talking about. When the University of Texas at Arlington has a major event that happens that can really mess us up because that may be dumping traffic out and right in a non-rush hour time. Or during a rush hour time when we normally don't have a lot coming in, or we could have multiple events that are taking place that also contribute to traffic. And there's nothing more frustrating than to sit at a light and nobody to be coming from the other direction. And you're wide open and you're sitting there, well that can happen many times versus when we get to the stage of this being a step in that stage of the signal actually knowing where the traffic is and in fact that's happening right now in our command center when we have events, you have all of the cameras going. It's reading everything that's going and when we have events, you have all of the cameras going. It's reading everything that's going and so we have actually the control of being able to see for miles around to know what should be green and what should be red and how long. Well we have got to move now to take better advantage because I believe our city, more so than any other city in the Metroplex, needs a technology of smart signals to be able to see where that traffic may be coming from because of all of the events that take place in our city. And there is no other city in the world that has a major university, a major amusement part, a special event center like AT&T, besides major manufacturing that is happening. So we have that changing all the time and I feel the pain of our traffic department of trying to anticipate that and try to time these signals. And so that's why when this engineer came into office, I didn't jump all over Cooper Street in that timing because it's so hard to do that. But I think right here, I think I see enthusiasm from our council to look at moving forward because this is an ability for us to better use the streets that we have and be more efficient. So in summary, I want to say, can we instruct our public works and transportation and all of our staff involved to look at what we can do? And you've got a pretty good framework right here. And then I understand you've got some good local vendors that know a little bit about traffic and transportation. In fact, they know a whole lot. I'm kind of excited about that. That we could actually help, you know, have some Arlington people help. And then for us to look at this, because Mr. Yovarton isn't this something that might need to go into our bond program coming up here? That's what I was going to suggest is that we've got timing not only of the operating budget, you know, plans during during the summer but also the capital budget. So we need to take a look at the types of technology would be here and what the lifespan is of certain equipment, whether it's a capital expenditure and operating expenditure and explore which pathway is best. But if there's consensus for you all for us to proceed and something like that, I think that was what Mr. Shepherd wanted to facilitate was dialogue around that, see if there's consensus and we'll work on at least a funding plan for the possibility of a certain type and then we can procure it by putting out the specs and working with the emergency providers and such that make sure we meet all their needs. So are you all in agreement to move forward on that and then I know we get some more comments. Everybody okay? Move forward. Okay. Miss Walman and Miss Salman. Okay. All I want to, you talked about a pilot project on Cooper Street. How long has that been in effect? And what information have you gained from that that would help move this along? Because I agree with you. Mayor, we have, this is awesome. And we're in the new technology. And that's what we want to do. What are the results that have come out of that? Okay, so the current pilot project on Cooper Street is happening about four months. So we have tested the application for some of the connected vehicle features that the signal phase and timing information providing in vehicle or on a cell phone device as well as some of the alerts like pedestrian bicycle as far as the fire truck or Premchon we used a dummy box in our vehicle Pretending as a fire truck and tested all the Premchon settings because we didn't really tap into any fire truck to actually put that in So it tested in our vehicle with that. And from that, we have seen that yes, it can, it can print the way we wanted to or when the signal indication is on for the left turn or right turn, it basically talks to the next signal and it says that the fire truck is approaching. So we have tested those applications. Okay, and it all turned out positive. All turned out positive. Good, thank you. On Sir, hang with it, man. We appreciate what you're doing there. This is great. It's great. Now, Ms. Thalman. Right, just a quick question. What are we looking at the total cost for this product? To see the 1.75 is that in addition to the 4,000 per unit and 4,500 per meter. No, that 1.75 million basically includes everything for intersection and all the big, all the quadrux. OK, great. Thank you. But to clarify, not the police cars or ambulances, which would incrementally raise that number. All signalized intersections everywhere there's a traffic signal, 340 or so. 340. Yeah. Mr. Glassby. We're going to be out of business with that if we stay in that state while we are versus doing something else. I think what we were saying is that the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, the system, We stay in that stay where we are versus doing something else. I think what we were saying is that the system works. It's just that it's getting older and it's just like with any type of technology as it gets older, it's hard to find replacement parts as you continue with it. And so we're trying to get ahead of that to solve one issue with, of course, keeping the opticon or the preemption updated, but also integrate all this smart city technology, also in one integrated unit as we move forward. Thank you all, really appreciate the presentation and looking forward here to moving ahead here. We'll look forward to hearing more details here on how we can work this there with it. And thank you for the hard work that you're about to do because our bond committees moving ahead I know and very excited about their progress there on that. But thank y'all very much Keith and Moncero. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, next we'll move to aging whale expo and Vanera floor Stafford. And then while she's coming up here, Vanera yesterday, we had a NFL draft kickoff in which they were planting trees there in our park. Many of y'all were there. But when I arrived, the NFL representative was so impressed with our Parks and Recreation Department how organized they were and what a great job they did and complemented the park itself. So thank y'all for the job you're doing there. And of course, same way, I think almost all of us were at the aging well expo. And wow, waiting to hear that because it was very exciting to be there. Well, you're welcome. And the near floor is Stafford from Parks and Rec. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Really, I mean, a lot of you guys attended the aging well. And we've left some goodies for you guys on your desk and it's really kind of a compilation of the hard work from multiple departments,10 D's. It was at the Arlington Convention Center, which was the first time we had it there, which allowed us to have 158 vendors there, vendors and sponsors. And we totaled about $55,000 and it expensed out about $42,000. So netted about $13,000, which will be seed money for next year. So it's a fantastic event. I'll take any questions for you. But, Nair, could you cover what the taps of vendors they were and what they were doing there with the people for, especially for our TV audience? Sure. We had gardening. We had a multitude of health screenings. They looked at your cholesterol, they took your blood pressure. They even did diabetes checks. So that was really interesting. We had our police there looking at our new cars. And that was pretty interesting. We had nutrition. And then of course we had our demonstrations. So we had tons of people going in there for our line demonstrations. And those you can get at any of our rec centers and at our facilities. Any other questions or comments? Mr. Glaspy. Thank you, Mayor. Based on the tremendous response we had this year. Do we have any sort of anticipations of what to expect? And then we have turned out next year. and the anticipation is what to expect and we have turned out next year. Well, obviously we wanna grow, but we can only do so much at the Arlington Convention Center because of our new endeavor that we're planning there. So we'll have to wait to see how that grows and that'll kind of dictate whether or not we go back there or we have to look for another facility. Well, that is nice. We have some new venues coming online. So we may have more options or we will have more options here in the the coming couple of years with with our new lows hotel Texas live and then our new covered ballpark will be another location there too besides the world's greatest special events in our AT&T stadium so you know it's kind of many of our nonprofits there look forward to the time they grow big enough to get on the field at AT&T you know salvation army worked up to that and now has an incredible event that's coming up as a matter of fact the inspiring hope luncheon. Yes. Any other questions or comments? Well the NARA send back to the Parks and Recreation Department. Thank you to you and the whole department for what you're doing and y'all keep it up They're pretty sure of the hard work. Well, thank you. Thank you so much Next we'll move to fiscal year 2019 council priorities and I'll call upon this Jennifer Wigman Good afternoon, Mary and Council. Jennifer Wickman, interim deputy city manager of our support services. So on, at your April 3rd retreat, the council worked on figuring out what its next council priorities would be for FY19. And there were a couple of questions and tasks for staff that came out of that. So the first one came from Mr. Glassby, it related to the champion great Neighborhoods Priority. And he had a question about whether it would, had an emphasis on public safety there. So attached to your, the item in your agenda, we actually attached all five of the current proposed FY19 priority. So I just wanted to read to you a bit of that first tenant really of Champion Great great neighborhoods, which is secure and attractive, which is the first thing we talk about in there when we put words to what this meant. And just the first sentence is the city works with residents and visitors to ensure that Arlington is a place where they feel secure. It goes on to say we prepare residents and visitors to make choices that enable them to act, feel and be safe. So we do have that emphasis that's there. It's right up front and we wanted to make sure that you all had that awareness related to the existing foundational document for champion great neighborhoods. And I know we see every council meeting, you see those quarterly newsletters and that's really the work that we're doing, but just as a reminder, each of have some foundational documents to talk about what the what the element is and they're all created by cross departmental teams. We heard what you all said and came together to try to put that into words and then you all reviewed all four of them and then I additionally have one more today to review but I'll does anyone have questions on the Champion Great Neighborhoods priority that you'd like me to answer? Okay, fantastic. So the next option was the, or the next item that we, you asked us to work on was to take the support quality education and really expand that into a broader priority, which was supporting youth and families. And so what we've done is expand that. But we also, if you'll notice at the beginning, right at the front, the introductory paragraph, we really addressed that we will continue to work with our educational initiatives. This isn't something that will stop doing any of the stuff that we've been doing before, but it's just an opportunity for us to expand it and emphasize more of the broader things that we do for youth. And so we do state our public and private educational institutions of all levels provide essential elements of this formula, meaning the support youth and families. And the city of Arlington will continue to support their efforts in collaborative ways. Additionally, the city will seek to provide programs and services directly to directly support youth and their families, enabling them to reach their highest potential in life. And it has some elements after that. But this really gives us the opportunity to include all of the great youth program, youth and family programming that our parks department does, that may not be connected directly to a school. And additionally, a lot of the mentoring work that police does that they do with the youth in our LinkedIn. So that really, we appreciate that expansion because it allows us to highlight and make and include in the priority a lot of the other work that we have somewhat spontaneously been doing but knowing that it is certainly the council's priority will be helpful. And so if the council has any changes to either of those or any of the other foundational documents, we can certainly make those. And if you're ready to, with these, they'll move forward. And these will be the basis for our FY 14 budget as we put in budget requests and craft the budget in the business plan. Council, any questions? Dr. Farmer? Not a question, just merely a comment. I just want to thank staff for expanding and taking the educator on the council seriously. When I asked you to take the support education out and put support youth and families, I really like the direction it goes. It is much more reflective of what we do and what we are providing in the city. So I very much thank the staff for taking that seriously and I thank the Council for their support in that initiative. Any other questions? Thank you Ms. Wigman. Thank you. Do you also have the next one? Yes, ma'am. I'll just remind you of that. The technology to work. Ms. Wigman. Thank you. So you have at your places the latest, the third installment of our Technology to Work. And so that, I just want to point out a couple of articles that are there. The first one is, right in the front page, it talks about our data governance and innovation committee. And that's the work that's been done. It comes out of our WhatWorkCities effort. And it talks, we have a monthly cross across departmental team that gets together. We talk about not only we changed the name a little bit, it used to be the Data Governance Committee, which sounded frankly a little boring and stayed. So and the other thing we're trying to do with data is really innovate. So we've changed the title to the Data Governance Innovation Committee. Every month when we meet we really work on creating, looking at one data set that we're putting together for, we're looking at for release and then we also try to look at one innovation and we'll actually have a lot more. We have two innovations that are pretty exciting in the work so we'll have those to report in August at our next quarterly update. And then if you look at the back of the document, you can see that VIA continues to attract a lot of attention from not only CBS, but also a lot of other places. And you can see that that's one of three projects we've got that's up for a Smart Cities Awards. So we're particularly pleased about that. And I got a great anecdote this morning from Jim Paragion, who was at the American Planning Association Conference this past weekend. And he said that at their vendor fair, the VIA booth was all about Arlington. And they just kept talking about the Arlington model, the Arlington Texas model and how that was working. And I think he had a hard time getting a word in eduase with the VIA folks because we had, there were so many people who were crowding around and really needing to talk to them. So that does continue to go well and as you can see, continues to track attention. So I'm happy to take any questions that you have about put technology to work. Dr. Mars. Again, not a question. Just merely a comment. I just want to congratulate staff and the city for the Data Governance and Innovation Committee. I just want to share anecdote with you. As you all know, I'm a social scientist and a professor who loves data. And I had an opportunity to sit down with a working group I've been working with for about 10 years now. And they were super, they were so excited and so complimentary of the fact that they are now able to locate and utilize data in real time research. And I think that speaks volumes. Not only the university here in our home city, but universities also in the DFW these were folks from UNT SMU, UTD and other locations. So I think there's a renewed interest in municipality research and in city research in general. And I think we're going to be at the forefront of the data being used. So thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from council? Mr. Parker. Jennifer do you have any any kind of a comparison or any standards as to how VIA is doing in comparison to the max? That is not something I have right now I can tell you I do have the latest numbers on the VIA that they're up to over 19,000 rides and but I can I can certainly get that back to you. I can speak to that a little bit Mr. Parker. I think on on average Max was doing around 250 rides a day you'll give a take up to 400 sometimes down in the hundreds sometimes. VIA right now is running in the 350-ish range per day, but covering a much larger swath of geography. I mean, so if you were to look at the pickup drop-off mapping, for example, it's covering, you know, a quarter of the city as opposed to two points. So a little stronger than what we saw with VIA, but also inter with Max, So a little stronger than what we saw with VIA, but also inter with Max, but also incrementally stair stepping up. Nice steady incremental progress. What we saw with Max was kind of a run up and then kind of a fade off or parallel slot slide. It's going the opposite with VIA. It's kind of incrementally ratching up, nice, slow, and steady kind of growing into the space that it's filling. Do we have some type of an indication as to what growth rate or what level would be a self-sustaining type of operation? Probably depends on how you want to look at that. Self-sustaining could be looked at one way if the city is putting $322,000 in it. You could make a definition of self-sustaining as, when did we generate $322,000 with a revenue as an offset, right? I mean, that's kind of an angle. I believe that if we're going to want to continue to grow areas, we're going to need to put that revenue back into the program as opposed to calling that kind of a victory in that sense. And so to answer the other part of your question is, I don't think you'll ever find a situation where it will be self-sufficient. So if you're really saying there is no city, subsidy, period, end of story, I don't think you'll find a model that will work that way. But if you want to say we seeded it and then we took revenue back, you could get to making an argument along those lines, but you would be constraining your ability to serve a broader footprint. Does VIA not operate in a self-sustaining manner in some other cities? I think they do, but in Alicia could correct me, but they're usually more in a corporate contracted type relationship where Amazon or Facebook or somebody like that's paying for a corporate contracted amount. And we are exploring some of those kinds of things with THR or some of the nonprofits. And you could look at some of those kinds of things with THR or some of the nonprofits and you could look at some of the shopping areas if you had more kind of corporate support to pull people into those areas you could improve your financial model to address the self-sufficiency side. But in some of those other markets they're really almost contracted services where they're being paid for by a corporate client in large sense. Mr. Glisbee. Thank you. What indications are we getting that demand is outside the area that we already have to find? Well, she's walking up. We can show you a map of that. At some point it's kind of like a fence. If you were to look at the heat map it's fenced and there's people right up against the fence. You can clearly see where the boundary is which within you need to open but Alicia could probably elaborate. Sure good afternoon Alicia we can couple like assistant director of Strategic Planning. A great example of that is a recent expansion we did down from Mitchell to kind of the park row area. The folks at Villa, we're seeing that people were opening the app down there trying to book rides in that area, but it was just outside the service area. So we made the decision to expand the area and capture those rides. So I think, you know, we're starting, you see most of that demand around the edges of the area. In addition to maybe some other areas in the city, but it's more common around the areas, the edges of the service area where people are thinking, you know, can I get it right here or not, how close am I? And so that's really great data. And we're capturing all of that and then using it as we plan future expansions. Thank you. Next we'll move to municipal policy and a different kind of transportation power. Mr. Glassillespie. Thank you, ma'am for 10 pay part municipal policy committee met this morning and everyone was there and our focus was on bike sharing and what we And what we discussed, some of the dynamics of what's going on in the metroplex and there, like Plano and Denny put some ordinances in place to kind of control. And I think it's howland park has restricted the use of these bicycles and Dallas's steel monitoring, what's going on and looks like they are beginning to get a little better response from those we have have them out. And so in our discussion we looked at a couple of options. We've been operating on sort of a monitoring and interacting with vendors to assure that the company's closest possible of doing things that are reasonable in our citizens could relate to. And one option was just to continue to monitor and interact with vendors. Option B was to look at putting together a master agreement and working with them in own. I think each one of you have a copy of the biking regulation option, the master right away lease a license agreement. The committee decided that we all in favor of taking this approach. And if you have any specific questions about it, I think, oh, this is Mr. Liz here to help. In fact, if you don't mind, would you just kind of do a general summary of what this is? Sure, good afternoon. Lindsay Mitchell, Planning Manager, with Strategic Planning. Before you have an overall summary that describes all of the provisions that we would propose to include in a master ride away license agreement. So that's going to cover things like fleet standards, the specifics of the bikes themselves, specifics on operations, complaint resolution, issue resolution, customer service issues, parking and storage, which is obviously one of the greatest concerns with programs like these, and also data governance or data reporting in insurance requirements. So if you have any specific questions, I'm happy to answer them. You want to have any questions? Yes sir. Yes sir. The first piece was used by the public service driver at the state of New York. That same amount of support that is used by the public service driver. Excuse me, I'm sorry. Rather than just having them parked out on some kind of a curb or right away or something of that nature. What about them simply dropping them where they want? I mean, that is really problematic that I see because Dallas is suffering under this particular phenomena. And I could see, I've seen some just dumped along the side of the road also when the guy got done using them, he just threw it to the side and then walked off or something of that nature. So how do we, first of all, how do we dock these things properly and secondly, how do we return them to where they are supposed to go? Sure, so the master license agreement, each of the operators would be required to complete one of these agreements with us. And in there, it stipulates very stringent standards on where they would be able to stage the bikes, which is when the operator takes their inventory and rebalances it and goes and puts, say, in our proposal up to five, no more than five, at a given location. And then there are requirements for rebalancing on a daily basis. So bikes would have to be rebalanced by 8 a.m. every morning, seven days a week. And that means they'd have to go around and collect all of the bikes that a customer puts in any location, because it is difficult to control customer behavior, although you can do customer education. So it would be their responsibility, the operators responsibility, to go around and collect those and restage them in the very specific locations that they would negotiate with us through this agreement. It would not be just anywhere. We would be able to specifically tell them docked, I mean, if they want to make an expenditure to install a dock in some way, shape, or form, it only takes one person to shove these things over and they're all on the ground. And so consequently, I would like to see a stipulation that would say that in the event that we're going to do business with these people that they make an expenditure to actually fabricate some type of a docking system so that they could they they would have some support. for Mr. Parker, along the same lines of having a doc. So some of the bike sharing models are doc lists and some are doc. If they were of the doc list model, would providing a regular bike rack satisfy you on that point? I think that if they have a fabricated, if they make some expenditure to have some kind of, I wanna say control over their product rather than just parking it out in the middle of one of our easements and calling it a business. I think that's essential. And then of course the fact that you can simply leave them anywhere you feel like leaving them is absolutely unacceptable to I think anybody on this council. Okay, thank you. Mr. Glass, for anything more from your committee, do you need some council direction or action? As I said, our recommendation would be for us to stop with this master right away license agreement as our approach versus leaving it where we just strictly interacting with businesses and Appreciate the council support on that Council any questions are you ready to move forward with this? Mr Shepherd Again, I was not on the committee And so I did look at the slides in the packet and I had a time briefly to look at this but Is Is this going to prevent them from having bikes? Anywhere in the city except the right of play? No, not exactly the area that we control of course is our right of way So the locations that we would negotiate with them to stage the bikes would be located solely within the right-of-way. That doesn't prevent a private business or private property owner from either installing a dock for a docked system or otherwise allowing a dockless company to park on their property. So, what we have before then doesn't really provide any type of permitting requirement for the bike sharing company itself to operate in the city. It's just, it's just, if you're going to use our right of ways to park these things, you can use the right of the property. So, what we have before then doesn't really provide any type of permitting requirement for the bike sharing company itself to operate in the city. It's just, it's just, if you're going to use our right of ways to park these things, you need to pay us a fee and do all of this. They would be required to provide documentation similar to a permit process in a sense. There's requirements for insurance. They would also have to provide a map of all locations that we would negotiate with them on where the bikes would be stored. And they would have to provide proof of their feasibility as a company and some of those types of documentation. So standard permitting type documentation, but in the form of an agreement. For me, I think if we're going to go down this path, we probably need to make sure we're doing as much as we can. I don't have anything against them. What happened in Dallas was terrible or laying everywhere and I certainly don't want that to happen here, but I also don't want to adopt a bunch of regulations that they don't have to abide by because they just go to restaurant X and says, hey, can I store my bikes here and they go, sure, you bet, no problem. And we still have them. So I don't know really what we've, so I'm great with expanding it if possible. Again, I don't remember what all the slides said, but I think this is a good start. And I don't know if we can regulate their placement on private property or not by permit or license or some other vehicle that says you can't have them anywhere in the city unless you've got this sticker. So I don't know, this is a good start for me. Miss Walman. Okay. I think, I don't, which it was mentioned over here, but I don't have a problem with, with where they pick up the bicycles. It's where they leave them. And I noticed that we said that we must have an unlock, that we can unlock and remove the bicycles. But I mean, if they can just leave them anywhere and that's what I've seen, maybe it's been on teeth, I don't know, maybe that's what happened to Dallas, where they just drop them anywhere in our park and a yard on the side of the street. So who's responsibility and how do we hold them responsible for knowing where those bicycles are? Do they have a system to know where they are all the time? Yes, they do. If they do, then is it their responsibility and can we hold them responsible? Because I don't want to send our code enforcement or somebody out to pick up their bicycles when they're someplace they shouldn't be. Absolutely. Part of this agreement, kind of on two fronts, addressing that issue, one would be the daily rebalancing requirement. So they're required to come through on a daily basis without any delay and pick up those bikes by 8 a.m. If there is a specific complaint about a bike in a given location, they have to resolve that within two hours on a Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. basis and 24 hours on holidays or weekends. So there's kind of a two-pronged approach to resolving that issue. Other questions, comments? Direction, Miss Cape Art. Mayor councilmember Galasi reported out of the municipal policy but I think he was seeking some council support for the municipal policies agreement to go forward with this. I think we've heard around the horseshoe today that we're in agreement to start with this and then see if something else arises that we need to address if I read the council correctly. I think that's where we are, Mayor. Everybody's shaking their head, Miss K. Parton. So that's great. Thank you. Oh, except for Mr. Parker. We've never met Mr. Parker. So, Mayor, I'll report assuming that the council is in agreement with us starting with this. We'd ask staff to put this together so we can see how it might operate. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Gloss. But yes, Mr. Parker, please. Having this company or these companies come to our city and park their bicycles on our right of ways. What benefit is it to the city? Over? OK, well, all right. Well, yeah, who wants to? OK, Dr. Myers, you want to start that? Well, no. If you go back to the place map that's in front of you, one of the, there's two advantages that we talked about in committee today and please other committee members pipe in. But the data reporting and insurance box, the green box that's on your placement, they're going to be collecting data for us about total numbers of trips per day, the demographics of people are using it, where they're using it, where the routes are. It gives us another tool to understand what are the mobility and what's the mobility and what are the avenues of mobility here in the city. So it gives us another set of tools and data for us to make some decisions on how we move forward in a mobility plan. The other thing is it gives us an opportunity to have what we talked about is providing alternative mobility options. So I think that was two things we discussed in the committee and I know other committee members might have more to say. What's the price per? I don't have, he said what is the price per session for a bike ride? Oh, it varies. It's variable pricing. It varies by average. But they have introductory rates of a dollar trip. It goes up to $3. It depends on where you are in the use and time of day. The three bucks you're doing, you want to get that? I'm not sure. I'm not sure what the benefit is, but tick the winner aspect. Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm leaving soon anyway. What were you saying, Mr. Parker? Well, didn't you hear me? No, essentially. When you have a $3 via ride pretty much anywhere in the city you want to go. I mean, having these bikes for three bucks or whatever it is seems to me to be and not only redundant, but it also is a mess that we're opening up and we're putting on our easements. So anyway, that's just me. Miss Walman. Well, I would say there's a whole generation coming up and they prefer the bike and they will do that you can look over at UTA They've been riding forever Most of our younger people living and want to live in an urban atmosphere want to ride bikes That's a reason that we have bike claims. That's a reason and it's growing and we can't ignore it and to not provide this service I think would be a disservice to many of our citizens. I know there are a lot of them that they love Uber, and they're not going to ride a bicycle anyway. Or the Uber. But this is something that I think we have to, as a progressive city, offer to the citizens of Arlington. Any other comments? Okay, we'll move to discussion of miscellaneous items, appointments to boards and commissions, Miss subpoena. No appointments this evening, Mayor. Okay. Evening agenda items, Miss Wolff. Just want to bring to the council's attention this evening on a consent agenda is item 8.19. It's the approval to give the neighborhood grants. Just wanted to remind you that there were 12 separate grant requests made. The committee recommended nine of those with the balance of the funds some $60,000 will be allocated for future neighborhood planning. So if you want to see if that's one of your neighborhoods just open that tonight and that agenda and it lists the nine neighborhoods that we recommend and we will be funding. This will if I think this one's important enough. I think tonight in the evening agenda, if staff could pick out two or three of them kind of give us some highlights, I think that that would help be inspirational there too, and especially with our TV audience and so forth. If you're off the field. I think Sarah Stubblefield would love to do this. Do you think she can do that, Ms. Wolfe. I know she's able. Thank you, Mr. Devilfield. Well, and I appreciate saying I'm so excited about that. It's really good. Miss K-PART. Thank you, Mayor. Item 8882, which is the vapor canine. Mystery overton is that. I don't see if Chief Carlson here. Is that a replacement for retiring dog or is that an additional dog to the squad? If I understand what it is it's a contract renewal for if we need to acquire a dog it's the contract by which we would procure it. I don't know chief do we have plans is the contract there a renewal in case we need to replace or acquire or do you have a specific replacement? the contract there or renewal in case we need to replace or acquire or do you have a specific replacement? We are proceeding on a dog but it's part of a contract of a larger effort so we don't have to come back to council every time. The funding for these dogs are done through you, Ossie or Homeland Security Grant program. So the demand is getting significant for us and our only way to deal with this produce another dog. But so it's it's in preparation of a dog retiring? Yes. Okay. Well I'm adding a dog. Adding a dog and preparing for future demand is what the. Okay so adding a dog. Okay got it. And then Mr. Yarton it's not on the evening agenda but it brings to mind. Where are we on the canine unit for the police? Chief Johnson's over to Cornwall FM address that. Mayor and Councillor Wilden Johnson, your police chief. Presently we are trying to program Jag Jag funding for the necessary equipment for the dog and then we'll be programming selecting a dog in the fall for training late fall early winter. This fall you said? Potentially. Assistant. Provided that the associated funds are released as well. Okay, great, thank you. Anything else on evening agenda items? And then I understand we are gonna have a continuance on the glow motel, is that okay? And then we'll move to issues relative to city and tech start projects. Mr. Brooks Brooks, understand we've got a big moment coming on state highway 360 south there and going to have an opening and so forth on yet. Yes sir Mayor. So we're finally here with this project. It went pretty smooth, the relatively smooth. So on May 11th Friday May 11th there will be a kind of a ribbon cutting, if you will, for the project, for the tollway. So we're all excited about that. So we'll go out there and celebrate. Some things that I want to mention here that I think are really important. One is this road would not be there if it was not a toll road, period. But the good news is is that because we are going to have the main lanes of 360 coming through that is a toll it will free up traffic on the frontage roads. Now for us here in Arlington it also is going to free up traffic on Collins and Matlock which have received a lot of congestion because of people deturing over there to get away from this construction. So this is huge for us, but also it extends our skilled workforce down to the south within that 30-minute travel time. So we are able to bring people here. And then our six flags president reminded me he's going to make people down south much easier for them to get six flags and to get here. So we've got a great project that's about to open up that is going to be a game changer for us. Yes, Mr. Shepherd. Thank you, Mayor. There was a new story today on Good Morning America regarding eGaming, which is a city project that we've discussed. Yes, it is. And I just wanted to point it out, anybody that missed that should probably go online and take a look at it. But it pointed out there are 66 universities now in the United States for providing scholarships for e-gaming athletes. So, in one of those is the University of Texas at all. Yes. And so something that at least I hadn't heard of really six months ago. Right. None of us had. Yeah. It was a huge deal. So I just want to point that out. It really is a thing. So, very exciting. And I'd be remiss if I didn't think Miss Walman for her leadership on this 360 extension project too, who is the past chairman of the Southeast Terrent Transportation Partnership here too. Did I see somebody else's hand up? Okay, all right. Then, and then we know that State Highway 360 and I-30 is going well in Mr. Brooks. Yes, sir. Yeah. We don't want to forget our big project that's going on. It's going to be opened up in 2020. And that would be leading into future agenda items. Sometime in the next couple of months, I think it would be good to have a briefing on that project to talk about the different phases that will be opened. You know, it's not going to be just one opening, it'll be different phases. Okay. Future agenda items, Mr. Shepherd. Thank you, Mayor. It, if it's okay with the council, I know that, that Mr. Yellerton and I have talked for quite a while on our hotel standards. This, the most recent glow hotel kind of brought that back up to the surface. We experienced a similar problem with the jewelry that we went through and I don't know the best way to start that. I thought the CVB had already done some late work for us, but if it's okay with the rest of the council, I'd like to go ahead and put that on a future agenda just in terms of reviewing our existing ordinance. And it will probably require some committee work, you know, if the council wants to do that. But I think our ordinance is old enough now. At least it merits some review. I'm not saying we need to change it but I think we ought to take a look at it. I think that would be great and I think two even the different parts of our city are changing and so forth and so I think it merits that is everybody all right with that agenda item. Okay Mr. Parker. I had the I had the privilege to go to the Concordale against this weekend and anyway there were some remarkable automobiles there and by the way is a city project. And so this is a future agenda item. So anyway the bottom line is that along the walk back to the parking lot. There were several cars that were parked along that way, and it was a lovely walk if you looked at the cars. If you looked at the lake, some way, shape, or form to where we can, we have some pride in that particular body of water. Okay, Mr. Parker, I agree with you that we need to collect like, but in our city's defense, what happens is every time it rains, the full 11 miles of Johnson Creek ends up in that lake. And so that's what, and then I was very grateful because I was standing there with the organizers of the Concours and they said that they said it looked great until that rain hit and the rain hit. So now, consequently too, Mr. Yeoverton is working on a project here that I think will help you know that because we got to catch that trash, you know, before it gets down there and, you know, it's in the early stages of trying to put together a project to help improve the creek there and take it to the next level and catch it because you're right. That's a pride thing there that we need to get cleaned up. Miss Shelton, you want to add anything too? I just add those floatables they do in the storm. Thankfully the rangers, when it rains around the ballpark, they clean all that up. I mean, it's a pretty heavy deal. But as we look at making improvements in the area, going back to the south through the stadium areas, the new areas, we put additional money in for landscape maintenance. In fact, I think you've got an item on your agenda tonight, relative to something you took action on last year. So we'll be working with, just a basic on that. And then we're working with the adjacent developer on a broader improvement vision of not only the leg there between Randall Mill and Cowboys, just kind of improving the amenities and not looking more like a snake pit, if you will. But then also dredging, probably not this year, but next out of the stormwater, until it'll be time to dredge that lake again. It's been probably a decade. I think since we did it, I think it was 2008-ish. So those are a couple of things that we're doing. We're gonna need to dredge that lake, gonna maintain that segment better, and we're gonna make some improvements in that area that will make it prettier. What's kind of embarrassing for you very honest? Oh, yeah, we're supposed to be discussing on future agendas here, but that is a future. We'll put that on future agenda. Yeah, okay, Miss Cape Art. Thank you, Mayor. I guess it's a future agenda item, but this summer, the National League of Cities summer meeting is June 25th through the 27th. That's in conflict with a council meeting on June 26th, and there are four or five of us who would likely go. So I don't know if we want to entertain the idea of moving that June 26 meeting to June 19th. The two meetings back to back that it's in conflict with our in LC meeting. Okay. All right. We'll look at that. Any other things on future agenda items? Dr. Myers. Actually, I'd like to raise something that Ms. K. Parted had raised previously. We had a short staff report that we never got a chance to really take a look at due to some crunching of time dealing with recycling and multi-family. And I know there's a renewed interest both at East Arlington Renewal as well as an organization is really working with citizens here on that question and also dealing with mulch and some other broad, broad issue. So I'd like us to maybe have an opportunity to look at that report. Maybe have a fuller discussion on that. That's on future point in time. Okay. Another one that I had there I'd love for wherever legacy living science center to come and give us a report now. they have opened up their new section there and so forth and I think that would be a very good report timely report. Oh, Mr. Yolfe-Ton. During our retreat time, I made some reference to this, but we're at a point where we're going to need to make some decisions. And I need to get a council process by which you all can look at some of the newer facilities, the vertical construction in particular that's coming online, as far as kind of how we want to brand and or name these facilities. A lot of times, things just kind of get built and they open up and they kind of have their own organic name And then there's other times where we need to think a little bit about how we go about that And so not only do we have some new part facilities are getting ready and we're getting to the point where we need to make sign package decisions and stuff like that As well as some corporate Approach I mean some of its honorary but part of's business and we need to be able to market and sell. So it's how we weave those things together is important. And I'd really like to find a way for you all to be able to discuss that as well as maybe some other legacy type projects for some naming opportunities. So if we can create a maybe a miscellaneous section item where y'all can talk about that a little bit and then get it on a track, that'd be great. the community. I'm going to go to the council and the council and the council and the section item where y'all can talk about that a little bit and get it on a track. That'd be great. Sounds good. Any other things on future agenda items. Okay, seeing no other business will stand adjourned and we'll come back together at 630 in the council