Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey, how are you? Good to see you. All right. All right. Good evening. I'd like to call the meeting to order at 7 oh 7:01. It changed right as I was about to say it. Um, we have uh one absent commissioner this evening, uh, Commissioner Hudson. Okay. And first of all, uh, we have citizen communication. The planning and zoning commission welcomes comment on items relevant to the planning and zoning commission not already scheduled on tonight's agenda. In accordance with the Texas Attorney General's opinion, any public comment that is made on an item that is not on the published agenda will only be heard by the commission. No formal action, discussion, deliberation, or comment will be made by the commission. Each person providing public comment will be limited to three minutes and will be asked to state his or her name and address for the public record. Is there anyone present wishing to address the commission this evening? All right, seeing none, uh we will move on to item three, which is the consent agenda. All matters listed under the consent agenda are considered routine by the commission and will be enacted by one motion. The items include preliminary and final plats where staff has found compliance with all minimum subdivision regulations. All items approved by consent are approved with any and all staff recommendations. There will not be separate discussion of these items. If any commissioner desires to discuss an item on the consent agenda, it will be moved to the regular agenda for further consideration. Are there any items uh the commission wishes to remove from the consent agenda? Uh the chair actually would like to move 3D, the master fee schedule update.

Uh, otherwise I will accept a motion to approve items 3, A, B, and C. So moved. Second. All right. All in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Uh, next up, public hearing. Uh, the commission welcomes comment on the following items. Each person providing public comment will be limited to three minutes and will be asked to state his or her name and address for the public record. Uh Jeremy, it looks like you're up for 4A, which is on our uh a land usage update. So, good evening, chair and commission. So, um you'll recall about a year ago, we started this process of having conversations about mobility master plan. And so, um tonight, we're bringing forward all of the hard work that's happened over this course of year. um bringing that to you. Um tonight we have Kimley Horn. Um Kelly Reeves with Kimley Horn is here to uh go through that plan. But just as a quick reminder, the the mobility plan is a combination of our transportation uh master plan and our trails master plan. We've combined those together to be able to establish this to talk about transportation in um as a whole going through the community. So um I'll bring Kelly up. She'll be able to go through the plan with you. um give you a presentation and then any questions that you have, we'll be happy to answer those. So that we'll turn it over to Kelly. Good evening. My name is Kelly Reese with Kimley Horn. As Jeremy said, we have been helping the city put together the mobility master plan, um which we have brought tonight for y'all to see. It is in very near final but draft form as we take it to y'all into council um to get it finalized. I'm going to go over what is this. Um tonight we're talking about what is the

MMP, talking about the draft that y'all have in front of you right now. Um going through some of the key elements of it, the public input we got, the updated roadway plan, updated trails plan and cross-sections, and then talking about what's next from here. Um starting with an overview of the plan. Um as Jeremy referenced, we started with multiple different transportation plans. Y'all have seen this before as well. Um started with the transportation master plan which was done in 2020. This really looked at roadways at the time was its main focus. It was really trying to get total roadway CIP and so it focused mainly on the actual car infrastructure thorough affairs. Um in 22 Flugerville published it comprehensive plan that talked a lot about um walk or communities 10-minute neighborhoods um how do we integrate transportation themes into that as a visioning activity. Um and then in 2023 the parks rock and open space master plan was published that really integrates some of the trails plans. And so this mobility master plan is looking to integrate those three items together. The roadway plan, the trails plan, and then the vision of the 10-minute neighborhood and integrated communities. Um the vision developed for this plan was that the mobility master plan strives to create a sustainable network for multiple transportation options that enhance safety, connectivity, and resiliency for the Flugerville community and visitors. Um, this gets covered in a minute, but we had an advisory committee for this project made up of Flugerville residents, and it was with their input that we came up with this vision as well as the goals um for the overall plan that were summarized as safety, a well-connected system, an effective system, um, a system that offered travel options, uh, used regional partnership, and had a good communication structure to the public. Um, and then these goals, you'll see in the document, align really well with the strategic plan goals that the city currently has adopted of safety, economic development, infrastructure, and services. Um, all of those goals tie back to one of the MMP goals in some form or fashion. So, in front of you, you have the draft MMP. Um, we're here tonight for your comments and so if you have any sorts of thoughts on them, please let us know. Um, it's organized into eight chapters. just an introduction talking

about the engagement that we did going over the roadway thoroughfare plan the active mobility plan and trails um touching on 10-minute neighborhoods from Aspire talking about funding the policy framework and then final thoughts for the plan um gone through some of the key parts public engagement um we had multiple recurring groups city staff had um several departments helping us out planning um parks and wreck operations and um development engineering as well as the advisory committee that I referenced with 11 residents from Flugerville chosen by council to represent the interests. Um I think most of these came from the Flugerville 101 course as well as there's an online website. Uh we went several times to the public trying to meet people where they're at. We went to Deutschfest. We went to several of the music in the park nights. We went to um events in Flugerville to try and catch people and bring them to this website. There was a map that had over 700 comments on it where people can comment on things that they like, things that they don't like that we used to kind of develop this plan as well as surveys about how people use the system that we use to develop the plan as well. Um, a lot of the key takeaways from that was over 50% of the feedback we got was about roadway improvements, intersection issues, and pedestrian safety. Um, we also talked with a lot of the agencies in the area. Travis County, we talked a lot about rideaway coordination within the ETJ. Tex, we talked a lot about um classifications. We changed some of the way cross-sections function in the plan and so we talked with them about how that would work with them. Um and then based on the survey we saw people were most inter are concerned with intersections and were really happy with the trail system and wanted it expanded. Going to the roadway plan um sort of to give an overview first you have an arterial collector and local system where arterials are your biggest roads going down to local are your smallest roads. Arterials are typically higher speed, fewer driveways, while local local is more driveways, lower speed. Um, you can see a map here kind of showing the area where we're at with

Fugerville Parkway and 685. This red network is the arterial network, kind of the backbone of everything, while your collectors are the smaller roads that connect the arterials and then your locals are everything else that connect to the collectors. So, looking at that, the draft plan from the mobility master plan can be seen on the screen. Um it's a lot denser than the current plan, especially in the ETJ. Um and the other big difference from the ETJ is that all the collectors out there are major collectors. Um which means they have the three-lane cross-section compared to the TMP as it's adopted today before we adopt this document has them all as minor collectors and two-lane cross-sections. Um there's a couple spots where roads have been realigned. You can see with the black jag marks, which are mostly due to existing curves that we're trying to smooth out. Um there's also some consideration for flood planes and trying to move roads out of existing flood plane areas. And you can see some thumbs up from areas that we got specific um engagement from the public on roadways that people were interested in seeing. Going over what changed, like I said, there's a fuller grid on the east side in the ETJ to kind of uh promote that goal of increased connectivity. Um, we separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities, which you can see um, a little better on the cross-sections that are coming up so that they're all off the road and behind the curb. This is both a safety improvement and a maintenance cost improvement because the cost of thermoplastic paint has really been going up. And so having eliminating the paint by putting them behind the curb is a cost saving. Um, there's about 200 new travel lane miles in this plan compared to the old plan. A lot of that being new major collectors on the east side. And so there's a lot of those lane miles just come from increasing those to major collectors. Um, one another big piece is that in the old plan, there were two types of arterials, a fourlane and a six lane. Part of what we're doing in this plan is by increasing the connectivity and the density of the network. We're eliminating the sixlane facilities from the plan except for a couple key spots um that I can show here. You can see the pink along 685, Beccan Street, and Flugerville Parkway. because all of those are in such close coordination with another jurisdiction,

Texan and Travis County, and because 685 has its own study going on right now, all of those are being called special corridor areas that we're going to continue to work out as we work with those jurisdictions and as the study progresses. Um, we identified a couple of critical connections, a couple I don't know if I have a mouse I can point at. You can see them in purple. They're all very short stubs and these are areas where existing road stubouts exist. And if we just build a little um low hanging fruit couple hundred feet of pavement, we can make more connections. Um and there is more rightway required in the ETJ again because of that major collector um increase and because the cross-section of the major collector has gone from 70 ft to 80 ft of rideway um which I can cover more in the cross-sections. Um talking about what changed really the key theme that we called for the whole project was creating options for your options. We want options for routes. Um you can see an example of two neighborhoods. One of them is up off of Kelly Lane. Um it's over a hundred houses that only have one connection out to an exterior network. And if anything happens, if there's backups, if there's construction, you're pinched at that one point. Compared to downtown, there's all sorts of options. And so if there's construction or an accident at one of the locations, there's all sorts of routes that you can get out. And so the vision that we're going toward is more of the grid system where you just have more options of how to get from point A to point B. Um, also mode options, wanting people to have any sort of mode that they want to get around, whether it's their feet, whether it's their car, or anything in between, trying to give more access in infrastructure to allow those types of movement. Also view options um that you can see downtown PCON Street on the top image compared to Desa in the south in a more kind of commercial area. And so just really giving a variety of options to Flugerville. Next up is the trails plan. Um, similar to the arterial collector local classifications for roadways, we have spine, loop, and arm for the trail system. You can sort of see here spine serves the same purpose. It's the um, big overall backbone. Loops connect

spines and arms collect loops essentially. And so here you can see the trails plan where spines are shown in red, loops are arms are shown in blue and loops are shown in purple. The solid lines are existing, the dashed lines are proposed. Uh many of these are already proposed today, but almost everything in the ETJ is new to this trails plan. Um a lot of them do follow the line of existing roadways. Think of the charity's path along Flugerville Parkway, the big 10-ft sidewalk. Um we classified in this plan, as long as the facility is separated from the road by at least some form of buffer and is at least 10 ft, then it could be classified in the trails plan. And so some of these roadways out in the or sorry, some of the trails out in the ETJ are assumed to be following a shared use path along a um arterial roadway. There's also several that follow creeks. Um there's a kind of oddlooking electrical easement that has a long east-west kind of straight line. And so trying to find a lot of existing area that we think we can follow to increase the trails plan. It's also a couple critical connections that were identified from the TMP is places that we really um should be looking to connect. You can also see um there's connections to the Hutto, Round Rock, and Austin trail systems. The stars show places that our um plan is proposing to tie into those plans. That we make sure it's not just connection within Flugerville, but within the region. And then similarly to the roadway plan, the thumbs up show areas that public engagement specifically called out looking for um certain trails. going over what changed because a lot of the trails follow the roadway and because the roadway grid is denser on the east side, we again have a fuller grid on the east side. Um we had a lot of considerations for what counts as a trail. Does a shared use path get to count as a trail and so we did end up classifying them all as trails but have different considerations for ones inside or outside of rideway which you can see in the plan u mostly to do with um future considerations of do we eventually one day allow electric vehicles on the road do or on the trail

system? Do we allow scooters on the system? And so as of today, nothing with that is changing, but we do sort of have the two classifications for if that conversation comes out again in the future. Um have tie-ins with neighboring cities. We've updated the inventory of what's existing and proposed. Had a lot of talks about who is permitted on the trail system. Are uh vehicles allowed. Um and some of that is class. Again, as of the final draft, none of that has changed, but some of that conversation has been set the framework for the future and the in and out of rideway. um identified again some critical crossings and updated the classifications of some of the uh trails. Going into the crosssections, um we have five main types of cross-sections. The first one is the local and changed um essentially not at all. Um you have your pavement section and then you have the sidewalk. The main difference is the sidewalk now has a buffer behind the back of curb. The minor collector again is very similar. The big change that you'll see is that the B bike lane has been taken off street and is now behind curb. Um, which again is a slightly higher upfront construction cost but a lower uh maintenance cost over time and is a safety benefit. Major or sorry minor collector is a two-lane section whereas major collector is a three-lane section. There's also an option where instead of having the center turn lane, you could pave it as a median um depending on the context of the road. Again, the bike lane has been moved off the street and is behind um the back of curb. And then the big change between the transportation master plan that's adopted today and will soon be overwritten by this mobility master plan is that the cross-section has increased by 10 ft of rideway to make room for those um active mobility options. An urban cross-section which as of today there's few influ as it gets constructed and Main Street as it gets constructed. This has the option of either a bike lane or parking. Um you can do one of each. You can do both of biking. You can do both parking depends on the roadway in the

context of what makes sense there. Um you'll see the bike has been moved behind the back of curb and the um cross-section is the same regardless of sorry the width of the cross-section is the same regardless of which one you use and so you can mix and match as a context uh demands. Finally, there's the fourlane arterial. Um big change between the transportation master plan and this one is that the fourlane arterial does have 120 foot of rightway whereas previously um there are major and minor arterials in the minor arterial the four lane had 100 foot of rightway. This one gives plenty of space in the median that can be future proof for all sorts of things. It could be turn lanes. It can be any sort of other future option. Um if transit comes in the future it could play into that. If you have um more active mobility options that you want to put in, it can go into that. It really preserves rideofway. You only want to ask for it once. It's hard to go back and ask for it again. And so it just leaves that option for whatever Flugerville develops in the future with its transportation system. Um, it also has the bike lanes and the shared use path on both sides. Um, as I mentioned earlier, the sixlane arterial option has been eliminated. The ride ofway width is still there with the fourlane. Um, and so that also helps with the ETJ with those special use corridors where we're trying to figure out is it four lane, is it six lane in coordination with Travis County, it just preserves the same amount of rideway, but in terms of what we're proposing specifically within Flugerville, we're no longer proposing six lane arterials. Going over what changed, we have wider bike lanes. Um, trees have been set back from the roadway to be, you'll notice none of them are um, right up against the road. They're all behind the shared use path and sidewalk. Um the lanes in the transportation master plan were a little squeezed, especially in the major collector where we really had to squeeze to get it down to 70 ft. And so some of them were 10 ft, some of them were 12 ft. It was just standardized all through lanes as 11 ft. Um that major collector rideway did go from 70 to 80 ft. Um the urban section, the main difference between the TMP and today is

that there's no longer the center turn lane. um just given the thought that the place that the urban section is going would be more dependent on the active mobility or the parking more than the um center turn lane and that areas that the center turn lane is needed were classified as major arterials instead. Um all bike facilities were moved behind the curb and then we're down to the one arterial type which is the four lane. In terms of what's next, we're presenting this to you today and are interested in your feedback. um we're going to council next Tuesday for the first hearing and then the second reading is going to be um two weeks from then. After that point, we're planning to adopt it and it will roll into the um engineering design manual updates that are happening and um get integrated in the new um development ordinances as well. And so with that, any questions or comments for now? Thanks. Let me uh is there anyone here from the public wishing to speak in the public hearing? All right. Seeing none, I'll take a motion to close the public hearing. Move to close the public hearing. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Public hearing is closed, questions, comments. I'll start with a a quick one. I noticed on a lot of the maps it cuts off at the edge of Sugarville, which makes sense, of course. Um, but when we're talking about kind of like destinations and different amenities and stuff, I wonder did you guys take into account maybe amenities in nearby jurisdictions that are close to the border? Um, like for example, I live kind of on the north west side and like the closest grocery store for me is probably in Round Rock. Um, so and that kind of goes both ways. Like I would probably go to that grocery store, but maybe there's some amenities, parks, and things like that in Flickerville that, you know, we'd like other communities to be able to have accessible. Was that kind of considered in the plans as well? It was considered um there's a section of the plan that shows kind of how we developed the active mobility network and looking at um attractors within Flugerville. And so we really looked at um what's in Flugerville to develop that

network. But then almost anywhere that there's a stub that approached a stub with another jurisdiction regardless of if there's a a tractor there or not, we closed the gap just to promote that connectivity. Excellent. There's also focused on on some of these like improvements into say up in the northern area say around Katus Road and 685. So there's been some focus on looking at those roads in particular as well. So in those areas that we know that there's bottlenecks when we're leaving and entering into other jurisdictions that would be something that would be incorporated. Great. The trail connection to you might touch on that. the trail connections to Hutau and Round Drop were also considered with this where we hadn't done that previously and I think that's that's pretty significant in this plan as well. Yeah, that's great. Thank you. Yeah. Yes, I have a question and sorry my mic's not working so I'm going to I'm going to talk this direction but I mean I'm talking to y'all. Um so small thing on page 11 you see the map the regional network but the EGS aren't included. Um, is that by design or do you think there's there's is there benefit to including that so that if the public has a question about, you know, well, why aren't we touching different parts? Who's got which ETJ? Is that is there value to that or is it just color the map? Yeah, we could add that. I think there's value. It's not excluded for any reason. So, well, just illustrative, but um you know, I know like I used to live in the um in the green part touching the blue part of the city of Austin. I used to live in like that neighborhood and it was weird because you know like I paid Flugerville taxes but city of Austin water and I mean it was really strange. Yeah. Um and so I think some people might not understand the nature of that but if it's too complex or clutter the map then I would mess with that. The

thing I did have a question about is on page 16 with the crash heat map. So it shows that at the intersection of PCON and 685 I think. Yeah, Pan 685 there's a pretty significant drop off uh when the intersection was converted to the continuous flow. Is that something that's is that particular style of intersection uh with the success of that which is remarkable is that being considered at other intersections or is that a because of the nature and shape of that intersection that was the right idea for that one spot and we're not going to include it elsewhere. So, another part of the plan is that we are um Fleerville's already been doing it, but we're kind of formalizing the adoption of an intersection control evaluation process, which is any major intersection looking at how to um improve it for the future. It's a process where you look at all sorts of intersection types, and this is one of the ones that we um would consider. Um I worked on the 685 corridor study. I know that along that corridor, we looked at this intersection type as well. It has pros and cons depending on types of traffic. Um but it's definitely one that the city is looking at and safety is a big factor in the ICE process um as we look at best intersection types. So uh on that note, right, uh I remember when that was going on and I remember before it existed that that intersection was like just hilarious, right? Cuz it just how much of a mess it was and then now that it's been fixed now the now now it's better, right? As a throughput and it makes my life a lot easier when I want to go places. But the public reception has been, you know, pretty vocal, for lack of a better term. Um, is there an opportunity to, if we if we select or we choose as a as a community to start making unique intersections, you know, we should probably lean into that kind of thing and say, "Hey, yeah, you know, we're funny town with a funny name and funny intersections, right?" But if we're if we're advancing new

ideas and doing those things, like some of that stuff is is complicated and challenging to communicate. Um, but I I think the data proves the point that even though it's kind of silly and once you figure it out, you'll be all right, but it it it helps. Last thing and then I'll hand it off to whomever. Um, page 28 is the comment public comment category of the map. So, lots of public comments, lots of places. If I remember correctly, when we did a similar public comment uh experience with parks and recck a couple years ago, I think it was um also incredible engagement. So, you know, kudos to everybody in creating a culture of public comment. Um what and I I was reading here some of the things that stood out, but one of the things that that is interesting to me here is the um the big idea section. So, what were the big ideas that were submitted, you know, was that was that like somebody saying, "I think we should have a fly over here, right?" And then and then you go, "Okay, that's a big idea. We'll park that." Or was it um you know, a little more specific or more applicable? Depends on where they were. Um a lot of the big ideas were roundabouts or other types of innovative intersections. I didn't I didn't even I want you to know I didn't even fill this out. I promise. And I didn't pay anybody to do it for me either. I think you knew she was going to say roundabouts. I didn't. There are a couple of hot areas. Um there's one right at Kelly where you'd see there's a bunch of big ideas um that I don't remember what they were. I do remember they were all different. I was sort of hoping they'd all be the same given that everyone had them in the same area. Um but it was everything from flyover type suggestions to roundabouts to just, hey, why don't we put a pedestrian crossing here? Um there's not a huge theme to the big ideas. Okay. crossings over 130 I think was one of those up by road lane there there were significant project sizes. Yeah. Okay. Um and and so with with this kind of

information so you have like a really and I guess I didn't see a count that said like a percentage of what the breakout was but it looks very very uh significantly varied. So was was there anything that came back from this particular uh part of the study that be that became obviously actionable where you're like oh we hadn't thought about that but it seems like you know 50 comments came about one particular intersection or road connectivity or park connectivity like did that did anything jump out? Things did jump out. Um a lot of the requests were for illumination and so all of our cross sections do have illumination. um some of these as well. Um a lot of requests for improvements along 685, which fortunately are ongoing. Um and then several of the spots with high um commented intersections ended up being some of the intersection projects that we evaluated toward the end that um were scored to be potentially in the CIP. Okay. So, some of have some of those things already started or like or some of them have been started and it's good feedback that people are interested in the things that the city's working on and then some of them were new came up because of this process and we now have them on list to keep looking at. Great. Thank you. Very good work. I'll jump in. Uh I think so. Yeah, very thorough. I was very impressed as I read through the uh all whatever it is 150 pages of uh of content here. So, really appreciate that. Uh I actually had a couple of notes about the roundabout uh thing when I was going through it before you brought it up. I swear I had it in my notes. Um, I was surprised that I think I saw a list in there of like maybe five intersections or something that were being recommended for roundabout and that was the only sort of innovative uh intersection kind that was called out. And I do tend to agree with you that I think that given our right of

way in a lot of these hightra areas, we're going to have to have creative intersection solutions. And I appreciate that you all have a like framework and model to design that, but I also would have loved to have seen more of a a prescriptive or more of a a stronger point of view in the master plan of um which direction we're going in terms of some of these intersections. And maybe it's not specifically, but maybe it's examples, right, of hey, when you have limited right away or you can't acquire everything you need or you've got a particular type of traffic problem, what is going to be our sort of, you know, tier one, tier 2 solution for those types of things. I think that would be really useful and helpful. Um, both from a public communication perspective, but also to paint the vision, right? We've got these great cross-sections of our um different sizes and types of roads, but we don't have the same thing for intersections. Um, so I think that would be a great improvement. Um, I also, and one specific, we just talked about it. I was going to call out Flowville Parkway and 685 because we do have that study. Um, one of the thing I wanted to bring up as well with the road crosssections is it didn't seem to be unified with the downtown master plan. And so I wonder, were you all intending to include like those um road types and forms in as part of this plan as options that the city will now have or uh maybe I misunderstood a couple of your proposals I don't okay I don't know the answer on that one on the crosssection on for PON Street. Yeah. Specific. Yeah. I thought that we had that tied. Are they covered or Okay. Look into that. Yeah. Okay. Check that area. Yeah, I would just make sure we have those those covered.

Um, couple of other notes that I had. Um, I really I I love the trail connectivity improvements. I think that's going to be great. Um I was uh curious to see more and again this is sort of like my preference towards having a point of view in the master plan um around in this case you had examples of trail amenities but we did not seemingly propose any ideas for where things might be appropriate or different types of amenities or what would be the framework for how we would choose an amenity for a particular section of the trails. um love the idea that we're thinking about introducing amenities, but I think going that next step um would be incredibly valuable to paint the picture of, you know, what does that future state look like when we do have uh amenities along the along the trails. Um let me see. I think I had maybe one other Oh, uh again, same theme, having a point of view or at least calling out best practices um for the lighting. um was going through and and was looking at the um at some of those options. And again, I think it's a situation where we could have a a stronger point of view of of what we think uh the lighting standard should be. Um since that'll kick off other work uh eventually. When you say lighting standard, do you mean the like actual type of lighting or like how Yeah, the Yeah, the types. And then uh making sure that we're sort of pulling that together across both the um vehicle traffic lanes as well as I saw the recommendations around the trail and uh shared use paths as well. So just making sure that we have sort of a a clean way of of talking about uh the lighting that we're looking to support. Uh so I've got some more stuff. Uh actually I want to support what you were saying about um uh the idea of kind of unifying the intersection ideas, right?

And that that's much more elegant way of of kind of what I was saying is that you know if if uh if we had a whole bunch of the continuous flow intersections then everybody would be really accustomed to that experience. Um same with any other unique intersection type. So, you know, obviously there's not one sizefits-all for everything, but um to to his point about kind of having a stronger preference for, you know, if we can if if three of these five conditions are satis satisfied, then we're going to pursue our best, you know, uh case at that kind of thing. So, that that I really thank you for summarizing that. Um the other thing that I was thinking about is uh signage and and wayfinding and placemaking and how all that goes together. So, Um, and I I don't know if if this is the appropriate time or we can talk offline for it, but one of one time I visited San Diego and San Die particular part like where my friend was living, they their neighborhoods are very well defined um in a in a very in a in kind of the old part of town. And so there are sections of town, you know, maybe a couple square blocks that have a have a name and that particular section of town has a big like cool artistic neon sign and then you have, you know, this this other part and and so everybody kind of has a placemaking just defined by the geography or or whatever it was named 100 years ago. I don't even know how that happened. Um, and kind of the same thought process about um, you know, how like say um, Six Flags or Disney World approaches their placemaking and the signage and the and the direction. Um, I think that really goes a long way to easing uh, traffic uh, uh, for visitors, right? Cuz oh, Stone Hill, like there's a big there's a list of signs and oh, Stonehill is that way, you know, and uh, Flugerville Rec Center

this way. kind of like they do with some new home construction, right? But um but if you see it in like I think Fredericksburg has a really strong way finding program in their town that lends itself to both the identity of the community but also actually like directing traffic in a in a tasteful and kind of minor way and um and then lends itself to one of the big sections you have in here which is placem um and where people are going and why the connectivity matters. you know, connectivity matters a lot infrastructure wise, but people got to know where they're going and why they want to get there. Thank you. I'm going to attempt to be brief. Um, y'all know I'm not good at that, but uh, first of all, very good job and very clear presentation, very well laid out and easy to understand given the volume of information. Um, I love seeing here on page 124 E11, incorporate connectivity requirement into Flugville's unified development code. Residential street systems must be designed in a manner that discourages through traffic without eliminating connectivity. Because I know a lot of the comments we get here are around traffic and a lot of the time the comment is coming from people who live in neighborhoods who are like that example with all the culde-sacs where there's one maybe two ways in and out of the neighborhood. And I think a lot of that stress could be avoided if we're making sure that neighborhoods aren't designed that way moving forward. Um, and that's a big part of how I picked my house. I was like, I can get to my house from multiple streets. I can get out of my neighborhood several ways and everything is already developed around me. Um two, uh kind of in adjacent to but not quite what you guys were talking about with placemaking and then just environmental concerns. Uh I love the idea of the bike being behind a curb and then a sidewalk. And um I don't know what those those little burm

like strips of grass are called. I call them hill strips. um if they could any chance you have to make them be not grass and have them be you know silver pony foot or antana or something else native and drought tolerant. Um again tying back to the uniform development code and the uh flourishing flora and just you know being stewards of our land. Grass is evil here because we don't have enough water to and also it would probably save maintenance cost along with not having to buy the paint. you're not going to have to water and mow if it's something that is native, drought tolerant, and low growing. Um, as long as it can also withstand the the the flip side is can it withstand foot traffic. But, um, I'm not I'm sure you've got horiculturalists who can help with that. Um, and then on the lighting, uh, I know we've talked about it before in residential development stuff that I just wanted to confirm you guys are going to be thoughtful about lighting that it's, you know, directed down as much as possible and not up light pollution, migratory birds, blah blah blah. I would rather not get in a car wreck and if I have to like make a bird confused in order to be safe, I'll do that. But if we can have both, that'd be great. And then um yeah, and anything we can do to help with public education. Like I know if I had a nickel for every time I told somebody, I know that intersection at Picon and 685 is really weird, but have you looked at the stats, man? It's so much safer. They're like, "Anything we can do to help? Anything? Uh let us know." I think that pointing out we have the data and I know we see the data and I know sometimes it's on public media or public social media. Uh any hey public media too like y'all should be calling KUT and being like why are y'all not paying more attention to Flugerville? We're awesome. Anyway, thank you. So that not brief. So real quick, can I respond us a few

things just to help with? So a lot of the things that um that I heard were design related. And so I think these are foundations that gives us that platform of what do we want to do and then all of the things that you just talked about are are critical for us to be able to take into that next step which is where we would pull into the EDM or into UDC updates and and so we'll have those conversations on a lot of those pieces. the lighting are things that we already have in our current um design standards. And so then if there if there's options for making adjustments such as you see on Colorado sand, they have a different kind of style. We worked with Encore to make sure that the lighting was sufficient to meet the minimum requirements, but then it provided a different style and things. So I think those are that's one thing that we can do is that this this kind of gives us that the opportunity to then do those next steps because it sounds like you read through the document and you were like oh but these things and you're like no I read through the document that's what we need to do is is move into those next stages. Yeah this this part is done and I'm like okay when you go to implement what you've done please implement it this with these things in mind. Yeah. The other thing was um you talked about intersections and one of the things that we we did have a lot of conversation. This has taken a year of us going through lots of meetings and having conversations and going down one road and and one rabbit hole and then all a sudden wait stop. That may not be it. So then we reprogram and have further conversations on it. One of the things that we tried to do inside of here was to offer opportunities of suggestions on intersections so that there are a couple intersections that were like, "Hey, we think that these could work for the roundabouts that that came off of the maps, cames off comes off of the survey information, but we also wanted to make sure that it was really loud in here that roundabout may not be the option or a stoplight may not be the option, something else may not be the option, but instead that we're going to use the

ICE criteria to go through that process to figure out what really does make sense for that intersection. So that we don't tell somebody you have to put in a stoplight and now it caused all of these accidents because everybody runs it, you know, or chases to to get through it. Or we don't implement another kind of intersection where we say only roundabouts in our town, but that just doesn't work because you have to have some sort of stop control there. So just to kind of hit on that piece. Um, and I think with the the question about the um street types, I think we can look at that again. We may maybe what we need to do is call this as the special corridor area and just extend that along PCON street so that make sure that we've incorporated um all of those types because we do have a lot of other plans that are in place and so that's one of the things that we had to make sure that we were catching and I think maybe we just extend this pink line further west. um so that we can ensure that we are catching all of the plans and I appreciate that. Okay. Um I think did that does that help with some of those responses? Okay. Did you all have any other comments or I thought I do real quick. Um on page 100 it talks about federal and state funding and I was wondering are these things that are listed funding that like we already have or we hope to have the safe streets and roads for all under FHWA grants is something that the city has currently been awarded um to develop a safety action plan for the city. somewhere in here, if I can find it, it might take me a minute, is a list of um what we call a high injury network. Um Travis County actually also had a safe streets for all plan. And so Blueville was part of it um and helped develop that higher injury network, which is where are the roads and intersections

where the most crashes are happening today. And then the funding is to do, okay, what do we do with this? Um and then as well, um I think there's some state funding for a couple of intersections currently as well. And just out of curiosity, like with everything kind of going on in the country, are we uh is there any worry about maybe this funding not being available in the future? The SS for a back and forth on um if we have access to it or not. Um it changes all the time. My current understanding is that the city does have access to it and it will be honored, but it's being figured out. Yeah. Yeah. That's all. Thank you. Just had a quick question. Um, first want to say thanks to everyone for their really insightful comments. Um, getting more and more familiar with the different types of documents that our incredible city staff puts together and there's a lot and that's a really beautiful vision and I appreciate hearing everyone's comments. It's it's a great learning experience and I apologize if I missed this within the document. One um curiosity I have is related to safe routes um to get to schools and um and if there's a certain imagery or or a certain part that that could clarify kind of where schools are located and and is this mobility plan going to increase more access, more ways of getting to schools and and certain types of like necessity infrastructure? Grocery stores are something that I think about. There's there's times I wish I could ride my bike to HB a little bit easier. Just those kind of specific places that people have a tendency of wanting more walking access and and biking access to. Um it's just one question that I have. Um there is a map on page 72 that calls out a lot of these items and is part of our like framework of how do we develop

the trails and active mobility system. Um, I think we've gotten the comment about schools a couple of times and so we can really highlight a piece about school connectivity. You said what page 72. Okay. I was looking for 17. Wow. You guys read my mind. Perfect. Thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah, I think that that's a great call out and I think there's probably um maybe take another look at the pedestrian crossing um recommendations in there and unify that with some of the school work as well. Um some of our schools are on roads that are the higher uh speed um than would um is probably appropriate. So we may need to like down uh reduce that um uh in terms of whether it's the uh active signals or whatever other uh tactic may be appropriate. Uh and I had one other comment very much related to that um that I wanted to point out as well which was neighborhood uh traffic calming. Um I think there was two sentences in the entire plan about that and I think that is um I think that's not enough. Um, I think that there are, um, several opportunities and we've gotten um, public comment in the past as well about areas that because of our increased connectivity, they see an increase in traffic and a lot of times that's a great thing. Sometimes it's not. And I think we need criteria on how we look at those situations and what our toolkit of how we can respond. Um, what that might include. Um I think it's it's very much a a safety issue in a lot of in in a lot of ways. Um so that was one where would love to see some additional work uh to flush that out a little bit. Um and I think we that's one of the implementation pieces, right? Is I think you said toolkit explicitly. Yeah. To

create a road management calming program. Yeah. Um so that it was to to identify that there is still work that we could do. Yeah. I have a question about schools actually. Um, glad you brought that up. So, do y'all did y'all ever did y'all through this process, did you consider the school district maps for attendance areas when you were considering some of this? Here's here's why I ask. So, uh, my kiddos go to Mkasen Elementary and I am significantly benefited because we live on the south side of Kelly Lane. However, a large portion of Merkasen, Kelly Lane Middle, and Hendrickson, well, Hendrickson High School, it's much different. But, uh, Mkasen especially, and Kelly and and, uh, Kelly Lane Middle, lots of foot traffic, and lots of them live on the north side of Kelly Lane. I recognize that Kelly Lane was probably not designed to be fourlane or fourlane divided at the time, etc. Um, and there's probably not a future where the district is going to realign those maps just to address safety concerns, right? And and so then the solution is like, all right, well, if that's not going to happen at the district level, then what do we do? Do we do a tunnel underneath like we have over in front of I think it's Park Crest Middle off a railroad. Um, which I do think is is great or do we do a a foot bridge over the top which seems like it'd probably be uh more challenging. Um, so I think that would be a major consideration. And also I forget the I forget the school that's there's one that's over like off of a Grand Avenue I think or something that's over there. Yeah. Is elementary school. And so I got to imagine just when I've gone flying down Grand Avenue Parkway that that's um a very I absolutely and I will follow the law. But even at 45 miles an hour that is a really quick pretty quick, you know, and and I think I think with that note too,

if I remember correctly, Grand Avenue is five or six lanes there if you include the turn lane and the median. And so if you think about a nine-year-old trying to cross six lanes of traffic in a stoplight, uh that is that is a long way to travel, especially if they're unescorted. So, you know, like I said, when it comes to uh those types of considerations, if the school district map wasn't included, then I just recommend you kind of touch on that and, you know, work with them about other solutions. So, one one thing as a One of the things that we really wanted to to hit on in inside of this plan was to create the options for the options, right? And it was to find methods of people to get to those different locations and these destination locations using a vehicle in in a safe way, but also looking at the opportunity to use the trail system, using the sidewalk system, finding ways that they can bike there. And that's why you see in the crosssections where we've created these these channels of places where a person can walk, they could ride their bike and they could go quicker on that section, but those are off the street. They're not on the street anymore. So, you can feel comfortable of somebody being able to utilize that and trying to create these connections. Um, they're critical connections that I think we had talked about of of building those bridges in between, not truly bridges, but creating those links um between neighborhoods. Um the hope is that as we continue to build out, there are always going to be those locations that we need to go back and retrofit and try to find a good solution on it. But as we continue to move into the east and we have more of that development and this is our guide that says that we want to have more of those connections, focusing on doing the fourlane arterial streets versus the six lane is right to your point because once you have a six lane now you have nine lanes that they have

to cross and can they actually get across it or if they need to diagonal it or whatever. So those were the reasons why we went into these different directions and hoping that we're setting this up for the future so that we don't make the mistakes that we've made maybe made in the past but then finding ways to be able to overcome it. Thank you. Did any of the parents have any big ideas because there doesn't seem to be very many big ideas near the schools. So, did a lot of parents do the survey or come to the public meetings cuz it doesn't obviously wouldn't know what the big ideas are, but they might have better ideas. We don't have a ton of demographic people and demographic information on the people who did comment and so I couldn't say for sure whose parents are not. Um, we did get several comments near schools about wanting increased safety for pedestrian crossings. Um, I don't know if they were called out as big ideas or something else, but we did get comments on it from people that I presume are parents, but we don't have great data on what did parents say versus other people say. Can you do like a survey in the school to get parents ideas instead of just the gener not generic, but the big public comment survey? We did not do specific ones in the schools. We did um have sidewalk stickers that had QR codes um that we placed outside of several schools and so I would hope that they caught people but then we don't have a way of knowing. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And we do we do have routine conversations with the schools with the school district right now. So that these are elements that do come up and have conversations on. Yeah. I mean people do fly through Grand Avenue. I was just joking because they don't even listen to the like the school speed limit. I don't have a child in school. I cannot believe parents have just sl like gh so annoying. I mean, I've had a couple close calls with the parents flying into school

right there cuz I walk and run down Grand Avenue quite a bit, but So, yeah. Yeah, it's real. And shout out to city staff. I know my kids go to uh well, one of my kids goes to Spring Hill Elementary and I never saw I clearly there's a stoplight. There's a stoplight that went in. Made a world of difference. Although I had to get used to it being a stoplight and not a stop sign cuz I've been taking a kid, one of my two kids there for like almost 20 years now. Um that wasn't I don't think even in any of these plans. It was like somebody brought up a safety issue. you guys assessed it, found it to be urgent and addressed it. And so, thank you from the bottom of my heart um for that. And um I like that you guys are talking about, you know, or you I guess, but like that you guys are keeping it open to different kinds of solutions based on the location cuz I was in El Paso for work a couple weeks ago and my hotel was near a pedestrian crossway over a major um arterial and it was great. like I could go grab the best tacos and coffee and I wouldn't have been able to get over there because it was like six lanes of traffic and I'm I'm too old to take risks like that. Um and then I got my steps in. I'm climbing concrete stairs like I would never do. Anyway, um but yeah, I know as as a parent with kids in school, I've definitely had opportunities for feedback and I appreciate you guys. Awesome. Any other comments, questions? All right, I'll entertain a motion to uh approve continuing forward with the mobility plan and uh look forward to seeing you all's final version. So moved. Second. All right. All in favor? Any opposed? All right. None opposed. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Uh, let's jump back to the item I pulled off of the consent agenda, which was 3D, which is updates

for FY26 on the master fee schedule. Um, I had just a couple of questions/ comments on that. I was hoping you could speak very briefly uh to the competitiveness um because obviously the fee schedule goes directly to how we incentivize different types of developments in the city and whether u particular developers or land owners choose Flugerville over our neighboring cities and towns. And so I was hoping to hear a little bit about um the approach that was taken in terms of these proposed updates. Sure. So, some of these were a couple that we just didn't have or some that we thought were kind of out of range. We do compare to our comparison cities, whether it's Georgetown, Cedar Park, Round Rock, Leander. Um, we do kind of sit about right in the middle if you look at them overall. We're not on the high or the low. Um, as an average, there are some where we might be a little bit higher, some we might be a little bit lower. Um, but I think we sit pretty much right in the middle. Okay, great. And then I So, thank you for that. Uh, and then the other one I uh two of them that I noticed are new are the deanexation fee and annexation fee. And first of all, I wanted to say I appreciate that you all have sort of weighted those towards um the activity that we want to see um versus the activity that we would prefer not to see. Um, I did wonder how much we know about the annexation fee specifically, which is 500 plus legal fees plus a tech fee, which you all added tech fee to a number of line items this year, I see. Um, was that based on your all's experience in handling those cases in the past? Was this a more arbitrary number or a hey, we see our uh neighboring cities using a similar fee for this? No, annexation was a little bit kind of all the over the board in the past. We hadn't we didn't have a fee for annexation, but there is a cost to

staff to the city for that. And so in thinking about um having development growth pay for for growth, we thought that was appropriate there. Um we think that's probably right on par for kind of the the staff as well as the legal fees and looking at the ordinances and notifications for annexation. Okay, cool. Uh one last question in looking at the uh water meter and tap fees. Um you know obviously water is a huge deal uh even like we were just talking about from the mobility side of things. Um I noticed that those increases are pretty nominal for the most part. Is that largely due to our own cost increases or what was is there a little bit of justification on Yeah. Brandon our utility director can help with that one. So when you're talking about um meter fees, T fees, those are all uh the increases of those are based upon our material costs. Um so there's some a very marginal increase for staff cost to you know install, go inspect um but it's based upon the material for you know brass, copper, whatever we're putting in the ground. Okay. Okay. So largely materials. Okay. Yes, sir. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Uh I think that was all of my questions. Did anybody else have Actually, I just have one. Uh how often do we experience deanexation? Um I think we've had four maybe five um since that law passed. Um we're fortunate on that side I guess where other cities have had quite a few. Um so while I don't want to see any of that we've I think we've we're on the lower side than some cities have. So four to five. Okay. Thank you. Mhm. No. Motion to approve as drafted. Second. All right. All in favor? I I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you. All right. Uh next up, we are

moving into the discuss and consider portion of our agenda. So, item 5A. Uh I believe uh Abby was going to speak to this. Uh, and this is uh the latest update on the uh five-year capital improvement plan. Yes. Good evening. Abby Morrison, public works services director. I'm here with the public works and parks capital team. Tonight, we are here to request your approval uh to request your uh recommendation of approval of the 5-year CIP to city council. Just as a a quick reminder from the last time that we were here on April 7th to talk about the program, we took your feedback and went through these programs. So there is about 118 projects over the next 5 years totaling $2.3 billion in investment over the next 5 years. Uh so what's changed from then to now? So um they were minim most minimal changes. We did add one project. It's the skater SCADA network fiber project uh that was added to the facilities program. Um other modifications that were made were um to project costs uh descriptions or justifications for ease of reading. Uh page numbers and a new um chart at the beginning of the program um of the book that shows exactly what funding covers what project. and it's split to be a little bit more visible than that. Um, and that starts on page 14. Um, and so I'll just go through the programs and what was changed and we can do a quick overview. So we'll start with drainage. As a reminder, there's 12 projects listed within the drainage program. Seven of those projects remove

homes from the flood plane. Um so five of the projects do not and we made a note of the ones that do and do not uh remove those homes from flood planes and how many that is. Uh so facilities uh this is where we added the one SCADA project. So we went from seven to eight projects in this program. Um there was some discrepancy between the funding source and how much the the project cost. And so we went back to ensure that all of those matched and we were looking at if we said we needed 2 million either that was covered for the project or we needed future debt. Um another consideration that we made was on the facility condition assessment. Um over the next 5 years we added inflation to that so that each year we're adding a little bit um to that program. Uh moving on to parks again this was another consideration regarding u the in uh inflation over year-over-year for that annual trail improvements um at 3% uh transportation this is our largest program um we had again on so on Kelly Lane phase three um we just corrected some of the costs in the categories where one was in preliminary design and it should have been in design. So, we made sure to shore that up and correct that. Uh, no major changes to the cost. Uh, Schultz Lane, we updated the project description. Um, FM685 at Seeds Crossing, uh, we updated construction cost and we updated the description on the SH130 connections project description. Uh, we'll move to utilities. So reclaimed water, we just moved funding on the reclaimed water

line along Weiss Lane to start in fiscal year 26 and not 25. So we just pushed that out a few months. Uh water we did some we realigned the summary page to reflect the priority of the projects. Uh wastewater we um updated a OPCC so the opinion of probable construction costs got updated. Um wastewater project 2403 Boulder Ridge lift station. Um we needed to add a force man to that project. So combining it did increase that cost but it was identified as a need. Um and then the Upper New Sweden interceptor project uh we updated that cost to reflect preliminary um design as well. Uh as a reminder, we are uh here to request your approval of the CIP and propose it to city council. Um our next next time we'll see you is at the joint city council meeting and PNZ meeting for the CIP presentation at the work session on May 13th. Uh formal adoption of the C um of the CIP is September 9th and that's a part of our annual budgeting process. And so tonight, uh, we would we are recommending that you provide a recommendation of approval to city council for the five-year CIP for fiscal years 26 through 2030. Thank you. Uh, I did have one question. I was hoping you could uh speak briefly to the um impetus for adding the SCADA uh fiber network. It does look like a a great project for security and resiliency, but uh Sure. I'll let Brandon speak. Since we're adding a new project, I want to make sure we're clear. Absolutely.

Absolutely. So, so we currently have um three active capital improvement projects in construction or design that are putting a conduit. So, the conduit and I'm going to do my best to do this without a map. Um so, the Wilbar wastewater treatment facility uh now near Greg Lane. Uh there's a interceptor that goes up from there that will eventually eventually connect a conduit to another project through Reclaimed Water Line, the 1849 park that also connects to the Weiss Con water line. So we'll have connect connectivity with conduit between our three major infrastructure facilities um that currently rely on a uh how do I put this a an on network uh connectivity um without and we can separate those completely but then they can communicate to each other. Uh so we're installing that conduit with the intent of installing fiber in that line so that way each one can communicate to each other and so then there's redundancy and communication across the large three facilities that we have that's off off-rid so to speak. So, it's a local network. Okay, great. Any other comments, questions? I I have a question. I think I asked this uh at the last meeting. So, um and and first of all, amazing stuff. Thank you. This is great. Uh y'all added the the charts and graphs for people who like those. Yes. Uh so, God bless your finance team. Yes. Yes. Yes. Um and I don't remember uh what the answer was last meeting. So I recognize that this document is the uh the future for all this fun stuff that we're doing and it's amazing. So in its full form, right, where who's your who's your target audience? Like is it the public? Is it uh professionals in the development space? Is it boards and commissions? You know, I guess who who is who is who do you expect or anticipate that would be ingesting this and comprehending and using it uh in its full form or does it get sliced? So all

of the above. Okay. Um so we would want resident um residents first and foremost for transparency. They know what's coming on. Developers can use it so that they know um and we know those impact fees and things like that. Hey, maybe there's somebody coming in and we have a project going on in that area. Maybe they can take that project on and instead of paying impact fees, things like that. Um, and then it's a guiding document also for staff of when a planning guiding document so that staff knows, hey, as we continue to grow, there's no signs of slowing down right now. We need to be able to keep up services to our community. This document is one of those guiding documents that we need to be able to keep up with that growth. Okay. Thank you. And so does it does it um uh as it exists and iterates did there are there do you expect changes to this or is it an amendment like is it is it is it hardline changes or is it amendments and additions and uh so it's updated annually. So it is ever changing evolution. We wish we had a crystal ball but we don't. Um, and so we put this information together with the best information that we have at this time. We do our best to for when we go into a project, we know that we have a budget. Uh, but when we're budgeting for a $5 million project that's going to be done in 5 years, we don't know what that looks like. We're we're giving our best um educated guess at that point. And so as that project either gets closer or comes online, there are things that come up not only through the economy but through um a need might change and so maybe a project comes off cuz a development did come in and put that infrastructure in. So it would come off at that point. Um so understood. Okay. Thank you. So uh with that and that's all really good stuff considering the

fact that uh this is absolutely something that the public will view and that would be uh I would consider the public as less informed but just as educated and interested um but also to live on with uh our contractors but who also will have people who are instructed to perform work or review things with with having had the benefit of years of knowledge. I think these charts and graphs he did are incredible absolutely incredible and I think you could have more of them. Absolutely. Um, so with that, I would like talk about some charts. Charts and graphs, man. I like circles. All right. Big fan of circles at my house. Um, and the only reason I say that and and this is this is it. Like I haven't I haven't made it through the whole things, but I will I promise you I will read it. So like one of the things that I really like about um the um is the is this and and the numbering, right? And like oh this this satisfies uh category 1, two, three, four, five. And I forget when that initiated. I think was it a couple years ago? I think it might have been two years ago. Yeah. Yeah. And and I forget the if it was the um which I forget the acronym of the program that started it, but I think I was in one some of those meetings. Um I think it'd be really helpful if those same connections can be explained or or up I say explained, I mean up in the front, right? So like your category summaries, I I love this detail. It's really really helpful. But I think if if you um we talked about the executive summary section and so adding the charts to the pages was very very helpful. Um but when you get to uh the bullet points on page I'm so sorry. What page is that on? Five. Sorry. Here we go. There was a lot of Oh, here we go. Project funding. Right. So, this is really, really, really great because the detail in the broken out. Um, if there's a way to

categorize or kind of tighten up the way that this very important, very uh critical information would be communicated to the general public trying to figure out where this stuff came from. That'd be super helpful. And the only reason that I'm on this particular piece is because when uh the public information came out about the new rec center, which we voted on in 2019, 2122 and all these bonds and things, you know, we have this really amazing idea. We've been working on for years and years and years. We go out with this announcement and the only real uh feedback that I saw just by observing social media, which not my favorite, but also talking to my friends who they're like, "We didn't vote on that." And I go, "Yeah, you did three times, you know, like, yeah, and we've been working on it for years." And and so um I think it'd be really helpful for for the general public who might not remember that not only would we pass it, it was overwhelmingly supported for things like that, like these billions of dollars of public infrastructure has been able to like hand out a white paper or one sheet and just go here's the sheet and by the way it satisfies all of this really great information, links to all of this really great information and here's our subjects and things. So like no no no changes don't change anything just uh approve with recommendation and if and if that's too much by the way feel free to tell me this is no way no I um I can definitely take a look at that but so the pillars that you're referring to the little stamps the pillars yeah um of the strategic plan we do have that on the second page it's the flickerville strategic plan sorry folks and so it doesn't so it's safety economic development infrastructure and services. And so that's where the four stamps came from. And so that was our that's the guiding document for those stamps. And

so but I can definitely see what we can put together and hopefully we can come up with something that you're looking for more of a just a holistic summary page that we can add. Well, so I think like so these images those are those those those icons are hugely uh impactful, right? and at on page two they're not here. You talk about it and it's really I mean like that that's the the pillars right that's what we're building the whole thing on. Um and so I think uh the imagery is hugely important uh especially when when you know in a case just like now I got handed this and I went right past page two you know and uh and had to be instructed. So consider me your uh your test case. Any other comments, questions? It's really good. All right. It is really good. And it's really And there's tabs. There's tabs. And I love like Yeah. Uh in an a couple jobs ago, I was director of grant management. And so your financials table is beautiful and I know how much work went into it and I'm so grateful. Um, and yeah, I think I I would say to your point like maybe there should be a separate like one pager or fivepage document because this is like if you want to get into the details here it is because you know people who don't know that they voted on the rec center three times probably aren't reading this. Well, you make a good point cuz we even split the I was on that bond committee. We split the rec center out separately from the other parks projects because we were so like the public isn't going to want a rec center and we were like fine then let's just make it separate and we had three. We had roads and infrastructure, we had

parks and we had rec center centers. So like they all passed and they all passed overwhelmingly it was ridiculous numbers and the rec center was an all by itself. like people voted on the rec center all by itself like 20 granted co happened right around that vote. So I can see why people forgot cuz I don't remember what year it was that we voted on it. I was on the dum committee 2020. I just know we were meeting in person and then we were like oh crap I met in person and am I sick now? Anyway, uh I I have a maybe a an idea or suggestion just kind of ripping off of what you all were thinking. I wonder if the um uh communications team might want to have a working session or focus group or something, especially with maybe a couple of commissioners who like have dug into some of that um to help them figure out ways to translate the the program um and let them do their magic. But um if that would be helpful, I'm sure we could recruit a couple of folks from the commission to to help out with something like that. Be happy to serve as needed. Be happy to serve if you need sarcasm, but I am terrible at communications and marketing. I excel all day. All right, I'll entertain a motion to uh approve the uh CIP. Just one quick question. Sorry. Um, one I want to say I really appreciate the visuals that show where projects are happening throughout the city. Um, one question I would have so I'm guessing is this data available in the on the city website to see where projects are happening? Um, absolutely. Some of them where there's a lot it's it's kind of hard to read which dot corresponds to which project especially whenever you're obviously looking at the transportation map. It's very very challenging to read. That's completely

understandable. And then just one question or you know also when it comes to like large amounts of inje injections of funds in a city there'll be questions of well where in the city are these funds being allocated? Is it you know is there consideration to all parts of Flugerville or is it like a lot of funding in only specific areas? Who has access to that? Is it equitable? Um, so I know that there's like for a couple of the sections there's a there's a couple there could be interpretation of oh well there's only like in this category there's only projects happening in this specific area of town. Why is there there not funding or capital improvement projects in other areas of Flugerville? So, I'm wondering I don't know if there's a visual y'all could do on here or if there's like GIS data where people can see other projects that have been funded and put in so that if there was ever a question about, you know, where projects happen in Flugerville and where there's allocation of funds and where we're choosing to put our future dollars that we know that, you know, holistically we are funding Flugerville as a whole and not just specific areas is just one kind of observation I had. I don't think there's anything that y'all could really put in here that would kind of give that bigger picture, but I think that is something that like I kind of noticed in the, you know, maybe the facility capital improvements is there's probably a lot of reasoning why it's in specific areas, but it's definitely something as a community member, if I didn't have some of the background knowledge, I could look at it and say, well, why why are why is there so much funding in these areas and not, you know, in my area or where where I'm located in Flugerville? For sure. So, I'm really glad actually that you brought that up because we do have a capital improvement program dashboard. So, it's flugervilletx.gov/projects. At the very top of that, there's a projects stamp

that you can click right on and it brings up all of our active projects. Um, we try to keep that as up to date as possible. And so, it shows active and ongoing and then future. And if you look at that map, it really shows everywhere in Flickerville has something going on. Um whether it's preservation um or if it's building a whole new road, we have something really going on all throughout Flicker Mill. Okay. And and if I missed it, I'm apologize, but in the intro, is there like any discussion related to that dashboard? cuz I think that'd be a good thing to highlight in this plan of, you know, this is giving you one piece, but here's all where you can find all the following information if you look at, you know, this following website and and dashboard. I think that'd be a good thing to highlight in here so people know where to go for for more info if they have more questions. Okay, she took that right out of my mouth. Uh, I would actually recommend I would recommend doing it in each like like the opening page of each section. So like I turned to parks, first page of parks, big spreadsheet guy, love circles. We already discussed that. It's amazing. But I think if there was a uh either like the other side of it, if you want to know where physically where this is, go to this, go to the ArcGIS or whatever it is, and this is where you can click and follow along with your projects or even a footer on every single page. For more information, go to this website. It is really cool, by the way, if you guys haven't been to it. The dashboard is awesome. Thank you. All right. It's a really really great plan. All right. Any other comments requested? Motion to approve as drafted. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Thank you all so much. Nice. All right. Next item. 5B. discuss and consider action to approve the

unified development code assessment report. Jeremy, here we go. Good evening, chair and commission. So, this is a another project that we've been working on for quite a while. Um, looking at doing an assessment for the unified development code. So recall that um the last time we updated unified development code really like cohesively big big picture dump on that code was about 2015ish. Um but we've gone through a lot of time between there. We've updated master plan, gone through the expired plan, and so we we wanted to revisit that plan, uh revisit our code and see uh what are the tweaks that we we may need to make to be able to accommodate the the goals and the aspirations that we have inside the unified development code. So um with that, we um we selected Clarion Associates. who have gone through our code, gone through the Aspire plan, um listened to staff, had conversations, and then um objectively gone through our unified development code and developed an assessment report. Um what we will do with this information is then take it and and look for next steps on what are those changes that we need to make. And so then there's additional hard work that'll you know that we'll jump into. But this is intended to give us that launching point. um and kind of a gauge on where we're at. So with that, um Matt, there he is. Matt Goal with um Clearion is here to be able to uh do a presentation over the work that they found. All right. Thanks, Jeremy. Thank you all for the opportunity to speak. It's good to be here. Um this is a big document. There's a lot of detail here. So I just want to start uh giving you an overview tonight of of some of what we think are the big takeaways uh from the assessment report.

Um to move forward I um so just just as a reminder uh clearing and associates we worked on the project we have worked on uh development codes around the state around the country um I think we brought a lot of best practice knowledge to this just to help um provide some you know relative knowledge of what other communities in Texas are doing in terms of updating their development codes and I think we could bring a good sense of kind of where you've really moved the ball forward farther than a lot of other places and and where you've got opportunities to learn from other places in Texas and around the country. Um, as Jeremy said, we kicked this off with a a uh uh really casting a broad net uh talking with a lot of folks primarily internally with city of Flugerville about uh all the different ways that you're using the unified development code, what you think the strengths are, uh what where the opportunities for improvement are. Um we we we uh we we did a public engagement piece. We talked with folks in the community. Um it was but again though I think a lot of the the key feedback that we got was internal from a lot of the departments that are using the code. Um and we've turned the feedback around into an assessment report that we have worked on with staff. Um we've turned the document around a few times based on feedback that we got from them just to clarify some of the projects that you were working on. And the result that you have tonight is is the final assessment report. Um, I'm going to spend the bulk of my time now talking about the assessment report. Um, which is structured like this. There's an executive summary right at the front. Uh, there is a table that summarizes all the recommendations uh, right up front. So, you don't have to read the whole thing. Uh, right up right off the bat, you can just skim that table to look at the topics that are interesting to you. Uh, there's some background about the project, why we did this, uh, about uh, introducing the future land use map and its comparison to zoning districts. And then the bulk of the document is implementing the plan key UDC issues. This is really where we look at Aspire 20 240 and we look at the issues that

y'all have raised in that plan and we compare them to the zoning code and we say do you have the zoning tools to implement Aspire 2040? That's the bulk of the document. Um on the right there we get into beyond plan implementation. This is where we look beyond the comp plan to look at things that maybe are not really Aspire issues like like like procedural efficiency, but they still are important for improving the code in the future. So, I'm going to I'm going to hit what I think are the high points of this overall document. Um, just pulling from some of the different categories on this slide. Um, before I get into the discussions, just a few more things about the the overall organization. As we worked with Jeremy and his team, um, we wanted to look at comparison communities. You know, everybody thinks about peer communities and what are what are Fluville's pure communities? And y'all might have different ideas on the DAS about which communities you aspire to be like or or think you're like currently. Um for purposes of this report, we used the communities that are there on the left, uh Texas communities ranging from Cedar Park, uh Georgetown, Round Rock in the immediate area, also Frisco up in the metroplex, Sugarland down by Houston. uh just to give you a sense of some other communities that are grappling with some of the same things that y'all are looking at, you know. So, for example, Sugarland has a mixeduse activity center concept in their plans like you do and they've been struggling and thinking about how to implement this mixed use center zoning. So, that's why we included them there. Uh a range of population sizes. On the right, you see a summary of that table. And as I mentioned again, the document has a summary of recommendations right up front. So you can get a sense of how all these different buckets of ideas kind of relate to the big picture. So those are organizational as I mentioned. Um staff really asked us to focus this project on the plan. You know, how does this implement Aspire 2040? And thinking about all the the thematic areas that you all identified, safety and healthy, community uh building, environmentally

sustainable, etc. How does the how does the the code implement those ideas? And we thought through, you know, we tried to break that down and tried to deconstruct it and think about, you know, for example, in the diverse and equitable theme, does the table of allowed uses permit a variety of housing types? You know, that helped get at that equity concept that's introduced in the plan. And so that's that was the lens through which we looked at our analysis of the code. this this idea of plan implementation was was our our guiding light. So big takeaways. I'll just start off with these right up front and then I'll get into more specifics. Y'all have a good code. Uh Flugerville staff is uh I think unique. You haven't done a lot of outsourcing of your code drafting. You've done a lot of it internally. We got some thoughtful planners. I'm not just trying to pat our bosses on the back. We have some really good code drafters and they have looked around. They've looked at models in the region. They've looked at the state and they've brought in um some good ideas and they've they've workshopped them internally. We we've heard about all these projects from the corridor design standards to downtown and there's good tools there. So the the basic framework of the zoning districts that you have is reflective of us buyer 20 240. That's a good thing. There's not a lot of major reworking or major surgery to be done here. It's it's fine tuning. Um you've got new tools in place u that reflect those new city priorities like they mentioned. Um, it's it's not a bad document in the way it's organized in terms of uh the use of summary t tables, the illustrations, things like that. Yeah, you could do more and there's ways that you could clean up the organization, but it's you're certainly not starting from by any of the worst codes that we've seen and we've seen some bad. Um, you do have some challenges. Uh, you know, you've done a lot of peace meal amendments over time as the staff has worked on these different pieces. they've they've been uh uh uh inserted in a way that's maybe not kind of stepped back and looked at the holistic organization. Um and so you've

got an opportunity now with with a full code rewrite to really maybe clean up those those multiple amendments and make sure that they're integrated as seamlessly as possible. There is a perception of inflexibility from a lot of the stakeholders we talked about we talked with. Um I'm not going to say that's entirely, you know, accurate. That's why we use the word perception here. Um there is a lot of options in there. There's menus of approaches, things like that. I think a better PR job could be done on some of the the flexible tools that you've got incorporated into that code. But that's not to say that you couldn't add more flexibility, you know, where it's appropriate. So that's an opportunity. Um you do need to do some targeted updates to implement the plan. Um and I'll talk about that in the balance of this presentation. Um, I think the biggest ones right up front are increasing housing diversity, uh, to support affordability. The biggest issue everybody talked about when we kicked this project off was increasing housing costs. Um, and then ensuring that future growth respects and builds on Flugerville's distinctive sense of place. Um, uh, it Flugerville is a is a place that is growing fast. You don't have a lot of history here. there's not a lot of sense of place to protect yet. And we heard about that from people. We heard that you don't just want to see new subdivisions develop, you know, one after the other ne not necessarily showing their flugerville roots or showing kind of how they're connected to the place. And so you have an opportunity with future growth to think a little bit more about placem and to create places that are distinct. So they couldn't be in Dallas or they couldn't be in Plano or Frisco or or Round Rock or Leander. Um so I think you know moving forward with that placemaking piece is a real opportunity here. So with that let me jump into um a little bit more uh just issue by issue uh breakdown of some of those big ideas. We start off with housing diversity. You know y'all y'all talked a lot about this. It's it's not that you're not

allowing a lot of different housing types now but they are not explicitly called out and encouraged and identified in the current code. you could do a better job of specifically identifying uh duplexes and triplexes, all the missing middle type housing that y'all are familiar with. Um the graphic on the right shows how we created some illustrations and and and commentary based on all these different housing forms. Uh and we talk about the way that they're allowed now and the way that uh they could be potentially allowed in new ways uh moving forward. Um one of the bigger ideas here is allowing smaller density increases in established areas. you know, as this growth comes in, a lot of it might be be in the form of infill and redevelopment in established neighborhoods, and you've got an opportunity to think through, well, maybe like like the final bullet says, allowing duplexes, two family homes, and some existing single family neighborhoods. We have a lot of experience in communities where those are not, you know, it's not the end of the world. They don't have to be battles. you know, that's a pretty well accepted housing form these days, provided that the standards are in place to ensure that they just um fit what the what the other single family homes have to look like. Um the housing diversity piece is is a starting point. I think there are other things that you could do. Um you might want to look at creating new tools like a flexible residential zoning district. You know, you could allow some of those other things like missing middle housing in your existing districts or you could be more aggressive and or be more aggressive by creating new districts that require a diversity of housing types. Um I live in Denver, Colorado, right? Denver has a has a requirement for large subdivisions to have a minimum number of different housing types in different subdivisions. And so they've got tables, you know, of different housing types and you have to choose X, Y, and Z uh from those tables. And so you can be more formulaic and and more uh prescriptive in a flexible district. McKenna has done this. They just adopted

this in their new code. I think u there's some other examples around the state. Reduce minimum lot size requirements. This is a kind of issue by issue or building type by building type uh discussion. But like for duplexes, you've got a 9,000 foot doing where we just said on the prior slide, you should be allowing more duplexes. And so you need to be looking strategically at things that are barriers like high minimum lot sizes for certain housing types to allow them more uh aggressively in the future. Um, one district that has been pretty well used is the new SFMU, relatively new. Um, primarily because you've got that 40 uh 40 foot lot size. Um, you could do more though in terms of loosening up some of the restrictions in SFMU on where the the non-residential is allowed and make that an even more uh, you know, good opportunity to introduce um the density that you need in that district. Um the MF districts could be another place to allow more housing types as well. Um I think they could be more flexibly structured. Right now you've got a real reliance there on just those flat uh density maximums. Um and I think thinking not just in requirements based on density, but thinking about more building form and where appropriate building forms should be allowed and and related to existing districts would would be a good way to move those districts forward in the future. Um so that's housing diversity. that's that's more housing types. Um mixeduse development is emphasized in Aspire as well. Uh you'll talk a lot about it on the right hand side. You've got there examples of the graphics from the plan. Mixeduse neighborhood, mixeduse commercial. Um again going back to the staff developed tools. You all have these new corridor districts that are good steps. That's a good foundation for introducing mixeduse development. those tools could now be expanded to go beyond

corridors specifically and to allow the different scales of mixed use that they allow in different places. Um, going back to the district list, you know, you could look at say the retail districts or maybe the office districts and allow some housing types in those districts. We've worked in a lot of places now in in again back in the Denver metro area where um some of those old uh large shopping centers that are being redeveloped so that they don't have just have seas of parking lots but they're they're actually putting multif family in in some of those old uh redeveloped centers. Um which is a good opportunity for those older centers. Um allowing more commercial. The flip side of more housing in the non-residential is allowing more commercial in some of the residential and and maybe that's more smallcale, you know, uh retail, you know, maybe it's the corner shop, you know, something 5,000 square ft or less, but those are those are kind of targeted amendments to the use list that you could look at. Um, so there's there's targeted things you could do with the use list. There's adapting your corridor districts to go forward. You also could just look at new mixeduse districts altogether. You know, I mentioned Sugarland and they're in the process of evaluating new mixed use districts by right. Um there's other places in Texas now that have a lot of experience with this. Fort Worth has a good program of mixeduse villages of different scales that they've introduced through these districts. If you really want mixed use, you know, a a use a district dedicated to that can be a really great tool. And so we intro we proposed that idea here too. Let's see. Um, I've talked a lot about residential districts so far. Other non-residential districts illustrate the point that you don't need to throw everything away. You know, you again, you're starting with a very strong code and some of your current districts do uh get at the aspire issues really well. Um, especially in this non-residential category. Uh I think the the downtown districts that are shown the neighborhood services office and retail support your downtown goals as as as articulated in Aspire 20 240. Your

economic and employment development goals are I think are well uh supported by the GB1 and GB2 for example. So there's good stuff there that doesn't need to be touched. You know one of the things that we look at in an assessment of a code is what's working well and should be carried forward. And I think everything on this slide is just an example of how again you're not starting from scratch. You have a lot of good tools in place. All right. Beyond districts altogether, what about the uses allowed within the districts? Um I think this is a an opportunity for more targeted updates to the code to get at some of these themes that have already introduced. So for example, more housing opportunities. Uh you could have more live work units that are introduced in a brighter broader array of districts like I show here o neighborhood services the new mixeduse districts already you allow accessory dwelling units in all your single family districts maybe looking at moving that forward and and allow them in the 2F as well. um consider multif family a little bit more broadly as maybe as a conditional by right use in CL4. Again, these are all kind of stretching the boundaries of in of ideas that you've already got, but I think so these wouldn't be seen as radical, but they're they're they're moving the ball forward in terms of getting at those plan goals in terms of the standards that apply to the uses. um updating the ADU regulations. I think there are some barriers there that there's some regulations that could be seen as barriers to doing ADUs, such as the ownership requirement in the principal dwelling. And a lot of communities have either gotten rid of that so you can have the owner either in the ADU or in the principal dwelling or just not have the owner on site altogether. And that could be a policy discussion uh worth having. um updating this there's a lot of just cleanup maybe updating the definitions and standards for group living uh to get more uh in line with with as as those terms are revised and continually modified by the state. I will just flag the use table

graphic here uh and we're going to come back and talk about user friendliness at the end but this is a place where I think there is more opportunity to clean up and better uh organize uh the presentation of uses in your current code. This is a bit of a the whole alphabetical list of non-residential uses makes it really hard to understand kind of subcategories, you know, food and beverage versus office versus uh uh utilities, etc. So, that's an opportunity to clean that piece of it up. Moving beyond uses, the development quality standards is a place where again you've got opportunities for targeted updates to get aspire issues, architecture, site design and and and layout. Um, I think there's more opportunity to introduce uh incentives and bonuses for projects that that are getting at the quality that you want to see. Um, you know, maybe you allow reduced lot widths or you reduce lot sizes or something. You know, if somebody's providing really an exceptional design, you need to start walking a finer line here with the mandates that the state is now putting on you in terms of regulating design. You know, you all know that you can't regulate building materials now. And there's a lot of uh standards in there where you've specifically said, "Well, we can't enforce this standard based on based on state law." Um, you need to clarify, you need to clean that whole piece of the code up. Get rid of the things that are clearly not enforceable that you don't want to try to enforce, but but maybe look for, you know, uh, incentive based approaches where you want to try to keep some of those design-based regulations. Um, a lot of communities have looked at at keeping that type of intent, uh, through incentive based approaches. targeted updates to building design standards. Y'all standards are pretty good, especially in the new downtown. Um there's places to take them even further and to do clarifications. Um I've got graphics here of parking structures and one place that's talked about is new standards for parking structures. Um we did hear about some real nitty-gritty details here uh from some of the folks

we talked with. I think you regulate window trim um and door trim. uh there's and and I think there's an opportunity to now to just step back and say which of these pieces are really uh important to us and which might just be seen as uh unnecessary barriers, you know, to developing some of these areas. There's there could be more intent statements throughout the the design standards to really clarify what is it we're trying to achieve in these different districts. And as you're looking at new mixed use districts, that's a really good opportunity to clarify what some of those uh design intentions are. Um oops parking you've got minimum parking requirements. Think about maximums. You know a lot of cities now in in the state and in the country have said you know you can't have more than okay here's our minimum. You can't have more than 125% of our minimum. Um and if you go beyond that maybe you've got to have permeable pavers or something. But a lot of cities have started to say everything non-residential you can't go beyond 125% something like that. So, uh, doesn't have to be a a for all uses. Maybe it's just on residential, but that's something to think about. Um, I think revisiting the minimum on-site for parking requirements is is worthwhile. Some of them do seem high uh relative to some of the other particular use types. Uh, and we we have some example tables uh in the report that talk about some of those. Um, there needs to be more flexibility in how you meet your minimum parking requirements. Is it shared parking? Is it valet parking? Is it off-site parking? Is it a transportation demand management study that's submitted by employer? Is it a uh you know some type of just uh study unique to that site that shows that your parking demands are going to be less than would otherwise be expected. Um all those types of things are pretty common these days but and they can be enhanced here in the downtown. you know, if if that is a place, you know, as you move with some major redevelopments there. As you think

about um what that walkable place might look like, maybe you don't need to have parking requirements there moving forward. Um this is, you know, still a place where you probably need cars to get around in a lot of Flugerville, but maybe there's places where you can think about not having parking requirements. Then moving into that italicized bullet at the bottom, maybe it's not just downtown. Maybe you want to think about the overall city and you don't want to have parking requirements at all. You've seen Austin, you know, go through this. You know, Austin's the biggest city in the country now that's that's gone through this discussion. Um, we've got some tables in the report that talk about other places. These are just Texas cities that have eliminated parking minimums. Um, it's every place we look we work in, you know, is is going through this conversation. It's not saying you're not providing parking. It's saying that the market is going to determine what parking is provided and you as a city are not going to be in the business of trying to set those, you know, standards which are often perceived as arbitrary. Uh other other sections here, I'm not going to cover everything. There's a lot, but um multimodal connections very related to what you heard about from the Kimley Horn representative tonight. um you know requiring trail better trail connections uh in the code you know to link neighborhoods and districts and um I think that's just reflective of of some of the themes that you heard about earlier uh ensuring that bike bicycle parking requirements are are strengthened um incentivizing bicycle parking maybe by allowing uh reductions in car spaces. Um, we heard from a number of stakeholders that you did think that bicycle parking should be a little bit more encouraged even despite the climate. Um, that there you have a lot of bikers here. Uh, reduce on-site landscaping requirements uh or change the approach so it's not a fixed percentage necessarily. There's more uh flexibility there. Um, refocus landscaping requirements to emphasize tree plantings. Uh there's a lot of other things in the code in the report

that I'm not mentioning like um uh updating the native plant list and and the prohibited plant list, things like that. Parks and open space, you all have a new plan. Um you know, the code implements the plan. You you need to look at things like uh revising the fee and l rate uh to be more reflective of that uh plan's goals and also just to make it a more manageable tool in the future. Codes should not specify specific fee requirements. they should refer to fee fees that are outside the code in some type of adopted users guide or fee manual which was another item on the agenda. Um you have a set fee schedule. Last time I checked you still had a fat set fee in the code. Um and that could have been changed but I that that should be taken out of the code and updated. Um improving the criteria for parkland we accepted. Uh this was an issue that we heard a lot about from the staff of sometimes we're just you know they tell us this is the park plan we're proposing but it's not really a good fit for our park needs and um do we have clear criteria in the code for dealing with those types of situations. You've got public dedication of park um covered. Um other communities are also looking at private open space set aides that complement those public dedications uh for non-residential. you know, maybe it's a plaza, maybe it's some type of gathering area. Um maybe it's a green roof, but something that's accommodating the the recreational or open space needs of people on a site. Not necessarily meeting a public dedication requirement, but it's helping to contribute to that overall need of recreation in the community. And you'll have a great reputation now, you know, for trails and for parklands. This would just be to complement um the the requirements you already have. All right. So, I mentioned that the bulk of this was on the plan and that's what I covered here, but it's worth noting a few other things beyond the plan. Um, you know, this all this user friendliness stuff, you know,

there's there's a lot of things you can do, you know, graphics and and tables and things like that, and you don't need me to go through more of those, but um user friendliness is in the eye of the beholder, you know, and you've got an opportunity now to to maybe do a more uh in-depth survey of your development community and say really, you know, how easy is this to use? what are the tools that we could use either through online presentation or what have you, you know, to make this a more uh user-friendly tool and to encourage you to to do the right type of development in Flugerville. Um, I think the procedural piece is important as well. Um, you know, there's opportunities to eliminate repetition by expanding your common review procedures. you know, you know, if if every procedure type is subject to the same steps, you know, let's try to think of a clean, simple way to repeat those once or twice versus having to repeat them multiple times. You've got some updates to the subdivision procedures that are noted uh to comply with um always evolving state laws. Um, I think just the overall combination of subdivision and zoning, uh, is a real opportunity for you to clarify, um, how those pieces fit together, you know, and how if the property is subdivided, it's going to have to comply with zoning requirements and how the same definitions apply within both contexts. So, pretty obvious stuff, but it it it should be looked at as part of the code update. So, that's a that's a whirlwind of things. Um, I would love to take questions, but just as a reminder, we we appreciate the opportunity. This was a lot of fun to look at this code because it's an interesting code. It's again it's you're doing things that we don't see in elsewhere and the fact that you've done them all internally and with such thought is was was surprising and and gratifying to see and talk about. So we enjoyed it. Questions? Yeah, sure. I can get us started. Um yeah, you know, first of all, definitely want to, you know, commend you and staff for putting in uh clearly a a ton of work

here uh to consider ideas to pour through all of the detail in the existing code. It's not super user friendly like you called out, which means it's also not super friendly to audit, I'm sure. Um and so, um this is great. I think there are a ton of really good ideas that I hope that we can act on um uh quickly on on some of these things. I think that um in general I love the emphasis on uh affordability for sure on the housing side. Um I do think there's some areas where we could potentially increase our our leverage and incentives. Um to the point that you made a few times around um you know incentivizing uh the types of development that we want. Um some of the other things that I uh uh really really loved was um I'll switch over to the parking side now. Um it was really useful to see the table of comparison uh cities and their minimums and uh I was surprised that we were so much uh higher uh than some of our our other towns. Um I'm not sure personally that we're quite ready to be a no minimum city, but I think we could get creative and innovative in terms of how we again incentivize um lower parking. Um I I definitely think we should be um meeting or exceeding in the downward sense um our our neighboring cities of course. Um that's certainly the trend. I think some of the things we could look at um for that might be I've heard some stories of cities that do uh basically like uh I don't know what the right word would be but basically land banking or reserving the space for parking and really you're hoping they don't ever actually have to build the parking right um keep it pvious for a while um right instead of requiring hey day one you've got to have all your per all of your pavement down um that so I think there's some things like that I think our parks. You know, you called out uh our parks fee in L. I

think that's an interesting concept when you talking about parking as well, right? Can we actually just buy off spaces potentially? Um I, you know, I looked at some of the examples of like alternative ways of meeting parking minimums. I would toss out I think EV chargers is another good avenue beyond bicycles. Um which I love that idea as well. Um see what else I had in parking. Um, I'd spend a lot of time in the parking section. Uh, oh, and then I think, um, you know, the other thing related to parking, um, again, in the in the spirit of I don't know that we're in a position where we would necessarily want to completely remove minimums, totally agree with the idea of of having maximums. Uh, I also think that we should probably build something in from a process perspective to make sure that we're re-evaluating utilization um, every couple of years. I don't know if it's 2 years, if it's 5 years, whatever makes sense. So, if we're going to have a minimum, we should have a set time frame where we go and do a fairly simple study and see where we're at and continue to ratchet it down as we can. Um, I would say a similar tactic could probably be used on the housing side as well with lot sizes and setbacks, right? Let's look at what the market does after we reduce these lot sizes and setbacks for a couple of years and then re-evaluate and see if we can further reduce them. Love that. Um I think that's a a good way to make sure that we're building in the flexibility in the in the code rewrite that you are doing. Um definitely one of the things that stood out to me on the housing side was uh was definitely the the lot size, the duplex minimum lots. I think those are all clear, you know, bullseye right on. We've got to we got to reduce some of those sizes for sure. Um love the idea of the corner store um piece. I think one area that I didn't see called out that I do think we should revise or update in some capacity is food trucks.

Um our flugerville has continuously sort of struggled with the right balance of providing space, having standards, setting the guidelines and rules. Um I think that's something that um would be would be great to be called out. Um, a few other pieces. Oh, one I absolutely wanted to bring up. Um, and I know I've talked to a couple other commissioners about this before as well. The, uh, unit ratios in our multif family places. We got to get rid of that, right? It's it we should not be mandating um the ratios of how many bedrooms you're allowed to build in our multif family homes. Um, I think that's uh it's a from a bygone era of Flugerville, right? Um, it's the wrong incentive. Um, so I think that's a really big one. Um, I didn't see in here any concepts around, you know, there's and Austin is doing some of this now to like single stair uh requirements. Um, that might I don't know, you know, how effective that might be or how much upside we might get from it, but that could be something to consider. Single stair for multif family or for multif family. Yeah. Um, let's see. A couple of the other things that I uh was thinking about just trying to come up with some other ideas. Um uh we could look at incentives by way of like impact fee reductions for lot sizes could be a way to help um incentivize that. Um because that's one of the ways that we can show I think value, right? We may not be the least expensive place to build new homes and housing. Um and our our fees are are a big part of that and how we can compete. Um, so that could be a really great way. Um, you could tie that to the design standards like you were saying as well, right? Um, you know, we can you can increase your density and and decrease your lot sizes if you you know, abide by some of these. Um, and then uh love the idea as well around the uh adaptive reuse on the

commercial side as well. I think um having some of that uh framed out would be good. Uh loved a lot of the ideas on the reformatting and ease of use. Um, one of the things I was thinking about as I was going through it, um, especially seeing some of the diagrams and those things, I think it would be a really useful tool, um, for our development community to have playbooks of like, hey, here's here's what you do step by step if you want this type of thing. Here's what we're looking for. Here's the things to look out for. Um, and quite frankly, it's another opportunity to incentivize, right? Maybe we have a fasttrack review process. I think does Dallas, city of Dallas maybe have or San Antonio maybe too. Oh, okay. Yeah. So, maybe there's an opportunity to expand that then as well. Um, uh, again, you know, cut down those those cycle times to, you know, weeks instead of months or months instead of years. Um, for some of these projects, a playbook, that's a great term. I Yeah. Well, yeah. Sometimes they're called users guides or just development examples, but yeah, a playbook is a great idea. showing people how they can get through the process and then which pieces you're really going to be focusing on. Yeah. That you want to see and where you want to see emphasis and what's going to get you through faster. Yeah. I mean, I think it's an interesting balance that we have to strike, right? Because we want the we we need the flexibility to attract the market. Um, but we also need to be prescriptive in terms of what we expect and want. Um, and uh, I think the phrase I've been using a lot lately is like negotiate from a position of of strength, right? Um, we're not just taking any developments anymore in Flugerville, I don't believe. I think we have a ton of opportunity to have like a super smart connected city and we just went through the capital improvement plan. Um, and I think this is this is a way that we can set that right framework, set those examples, um, and make it easier and faster to to build. threw a bunch of stuff out but yeah I completely support all that. Um the so

I've actually participated in the pre-development process uh both as a individual but also uh as a representative of other organizations. I think the ease of use thing is is really interesting. Um I think the thing that's uh I got one here. I don't know if it's picking me up. Um the uh so I was actually uh in that process I think when the law passed that you couldn't prescribe building materials and so we had gone from it was something like 50% stone with metal facade to oh you don't have to do that anymore. Um, we also had something here one time where a developer was trying to build an apartment complex and the I think it was apartments and like the um the landscape design plan was was uh the way it was prescribed and implemented in their plan drawings. they were coming before us to request a a reduction because of uh you know if if the trees are planted at this spacing today in 10 years we're gonna have to take away every other tree because the the canopy growth and that kind of stuff. Um so I think those those forward thinking uh ideas one reduce the cost up front but also mean that you don't have to deal with u future issues uh with stuff like that. One of the things that I uh I really appreciated was your incentive based uh development guides or or or uh subscription I guess for lack of a better term like hey if you if you uh if you're willing to build these things we're willing to make some accommodations. Yep. Um I don't know how much lead development get like lead building code gets into that or if we can incentivize things like that because in my mind the the the things that I see uh in our future are water resource limitations but then also energy uh conversion right so how do you take a hot building and make it cold and so if there's a way to uh incentivize or or you know I mean I'm not an architect an engineer anybody who's got

any experience with that stuff but if there's a way to incentivize uh private development into that uh building style, right? Then then what we see is an overall reduction in our energy consumption and then less of you know heat pollution and light pollution and all those other things that go with that. So um you know for whatever that's worth the whole category of environmental sustainability is broad and um challenging to get at from a code perspective. A lot of that stuff is building code, but some some cities have really tried to get at that from the land use side. Um, we can share with Jeremy and his team some examples from like Henderson, Nevada, where they've done point systems. Um, and basically they say, "We want you to be more green, but here's a menu. Here's a lot of different ways you could do it. You pick out five things from this menu, kind of like the menus y'all have, but some of it might be waste reduction on site. Some of it might be alternative energy. Some of it might be alternative building materials." But and the thing about those types of systems is like like all the point systems you have, you have to monitor them over time and make sure that they stay current, that that your point values are actually calibrated well, that they reflect the the relative cost of of doing those things. But yeah, they they can be a good way of of providing options. So we can share some examples on that. Yeah. And and I wish I had a um you know, I wish I had some more guidance to provide you. It's just a passing thought. So, if if it uh you know, if it didn't go anywhere, I don't understand because I hadn't thought about it until you mentioned it. But it's really great. Thank you. Thank you. So many great comments. I appreciate that. Um the only sections that I wanted to make a comment on one I mean more of anything is just to express my absolute excitement of seeing um the fee in Lua for Parkland dedication being reconsidered. That's very very very very exciting. Um I think that's going to be

a great benefit to our city and developments as they come up. And then related to um like planting and I I appreciate that we're looking at um really making sure that we're removing any invasive species from approved tree lists and prohibiting the planting of invasive species. But I would say whenever it comes to providing um you know different options for planting pro providing information related to what are pollinators and what are pinators what are active pollinators um you know we're right like really like really productive pollinators um really giving the information to folks so what they put in developments are really going to help our ecosystem inflville is is is of great importance. increasing bee populations and different pollinator populations should be um a high priority. Not just moving away from invasive species, which is a given, but also just really promoting planting in a very very very mindful way, considering less water and um all the awesome critters that help our ecosystem. You know, just one super nitpicky thing about what you just mentioned, speaking of pollinators, right? I think keeping in mind that our our native bees um largely live underground um and so thinking about how we position the um the regulations and suggestions around planted areas um to keep that in mind. Agreed. And and and also you know thinking about the beautiful bees, butterflies, but you know also bats um there there's a lot of different pollinators and there's different types of trees. It's not just about flowers. It's I mean it's it is a wide array of of landscaping that can really promote uh this really awesome healthy ecosystem that we want to have here in Flugerville with our really incredible green spaces. And um I I'm not sure even if this is a code item. I'm just going to throw it out there. Really encouraging no

mozzones. No mo zones. um as much uh natural greenery as possible and um trying to to allow for more um you know just natural growth and and native plants. You mean no lawnmowers? No or no modification or what? No mo zones. Okay. I haven't heard that term. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. areas where we're in specific parts of this um season we there's no mos mowing allowed and maybe it's just encouraging that in uh in in developments as well. I don't know I don't think there's anything related to the code for that but if there is I just wanted to state it. Thank you. Okay, I'll go. I have a qu Okay. Um, so right now this feedback that we're providing, is this going to staff for what you're going to have in mind as you redo the code and then it goes to council or is council going to see this report? This is where this report stops. That's what I thought. And so we're taking this and then um on the street right now is um a request for a proposal for someone to help us redo the code. While staff has my opinion done a great job doing the code for so long, it is quite a So um we bring with that um so they'll take this report do stakeholder feedbacks you'll have many work sessions um with us to get into the details um of all those changes. Awesome. So then so then my thoughts I'm going to try to stay higher level like I love the report. I don't usually um that's a lie. I do like policy and read it. But um this one was really easy to read. The layout was fantastic. The recommendations, some of them were things I'm like, "Yes, we've been saying that." And some of them were, "Oh,

that's a good idea." Um I appreciated the recommendations on layout. And I also appreciated some of the specific call outs that I think were examples that have more of like let's focus on the design elements that we really care about and let go of the ones that we don't because anything we can do that isn't that important to us that can reduce the cost to the developer um brings more development in here. And the affordability too is huge. Like I it would be much harder for me to afford to buy influ now than when I did. Um and all of and while supply is an issue and increasing the supply helps with the overall cost, we really are only seeing higherend things come before us. And um so anything that we can do to and I like um you know to the extent that we and council as a policy decision can encourage mixed income. I love that. Uh, regarding the re recommendation on um changing the way we think about mixed use, I do think that the existing residents are already really frustrated with some of the changes, although the ones who who come here have been really receptive. Um, I think the political fight on moving more commercial into residential that's existing would be a huge barrier. But I do think allowing residential in commercial wouldn't be a fight because people if there's an area that's currently commercial and it's not currently residential, allowing residential in there wouldn't upset the existing residents. Um so thinking about that. Um but again, um I also like the idea of more flexibility in green spaces and and parks and planning discretion on

what is this lot? what is the need here and does it need to be a recreation park or does it need to be a green space that is something else and storm water all of that I'm really excited to see what you guys and your consultant come up with so I have a few things so I'm kind of on the the side of no parking requirements period because you have a a developer who's built let's just say three subdivisions and six commercial properties. They know what they need for parking so they can make the right decision. Maybe they only need 40 parking spaces, but they're supposedly required to do 100. That's way more than they need for such a big commercial spot. So, I'm kind of different than I apologize than you because I think there shouldn't be any. Um, and then also I have a question. So, most of the neighborhoods are subdivisions within an HOA. So, how do you get HOAs to allow an ADU? Is this not a thing? No, that's that's a great point. I'm like I'm smiling because you're totally wrong. I don't I don't I don't have a yard for an ADU. Um I put a pool in my yard, but there's other places where So, for an example, like my HOA is like super restrictive on fence. Um, I live in front or back of a big RV parking space and like 18 wheelers are driving by. I'd love an 8ft fence, but my HOA said no. So, how in the world are we going to get the HOAs to say yes to an ADU when I can't even get an 8ft fence? You need to go lobby the Texas legislature, right? But they actually the the government has no control over HOAs. It would actually have to come from us. So if you Well, so it it'd have to come from the city to

have some kind of allowance for an ADU because we do we do allow for that, but then the private restrictions associated with the HOA. So more of us need to get on HOA boards and do all that. I'm just saying there's just so much. I mean, I know cuz I was on an HOA. Um I am obviously now in planning and zoning and I've been to a bunch of meetings with my clients for commercial uh to build commercial. So, like I've seen it from both sides and I'm just wondering how you can fix that. Well, the city making a policy decision that these are good for us, these are good, we don't have a problem with these and we encourage them, that really changes the conversation. And yeah, you you might still have HOAs somewhere that want to, you know, stand against that, but and you and you can't overrule them, but they're going to have to overcome now this new um policy position from the city that these are a good thing for for Flville. Yeah. Because it it's definitely cost effective. But I'm not saying like, okay, the subdivision then builds an ADU for you because then you're looking at a million dollars and the affordability is out the door. Yeah. Because two units, 500k each. That is mathematically a million dollars. So like there has to be something there to fix it. That's a big question. It's such a big question. I just threw it out there. Some really in like specific knowledge that I could share privately just because this is going to take forever. It would take forever. Yeah. and I've been on multiple committees and multiple HOAs and tried to fix things and explain things to my clients how to fix things but uh but no it's not it's not a bad idea right and also I think that the challenge so so one of the things we've talked about for the last uh five years four and a half year how long I'm doing this is that the affordability problem is is like a three or four I got three or four prongs to it one there's the land availability shovel ready sites who's got them uh and then how can they

be incentivized to either act or well I mean act would be in the form of start construction or dispose or acquire parcel together so that next steps to be taken um so that's one aspect of it and then the second is uh cost of actual construction right so concrete prices have doubled in the last however many years lumber when it was going through the roof well we have no idea what's going to happen now with right manual labor the whole thing like it's just a it's it's interesting and then you combine on top of that interest rates purchasing hour, value of the dollar, who's doing what and where, right? So, what's what is what um and I'm sure in your experience, you you've seen this where people are saying, well, why is why why is our town not getting this thing? Right. Right. And I see other towns are getting other things. And that's a it's an it's a nearly impossible question to answer in a normal way other than saying whoever owns that land doesn't want to sell. Right. Right. Right. Or they're not ready to or they're ready to develop it. And so, um, we don't live in a society where we can go in, unless we're condemning things or forcing into the domain to to make those things happen. But I think on the ADU and the affordability side, the to incentivize that type of development, you could take a um like an owner or developer that isn't necessarily taking down 500 acres to build 3,500 units. they're taking down 10 acres or 20 acres or 30 acres and they can put instead of uh 30 units on it, they can do 60 or 75 or whatever the case may be and create that neighborhood service like the sea store. Brilliant idea, you know. I mean, I wish our neighborhood had something much closer for, you know, even though the the CVS is uh the closest retail store at my house is about a/4 mile away. to get there. I've got to cross a couple of busy roads and it's it's not a pleasant journey, so to speak. So, you know, I

think uh the infill development is the part of that that that really stands out because once you start getting, you know, out into the uh the large acreage tracks that are still available, that's when a developer just by mechanism says, well, we're going to create HOA because part of the development code is I have to build X number of parks and I got to I'm going to build a pool of the mini center, right? Well, as a developer, I'm not gonna I'm not going to uh maintain that building and the city is not in the position to accept that parkland as an operator to maintain and keep and so we have to create a a mechanism by which those facilities can be maintained and move forward. And so I think that's the um that's the challenge faced there. But by incentivizing in the code, then maybe some of that stuff. Yeah. And I don't necessarily want the developer to build the second ad the ADU. I'd rather it be built in like that we can do it ourselves later because that adds into affordability. Is it possible uh to within the code to um require or encourage a developer to bring their HOA development documents forward in part of the review process? So we can see them but we can't change them. Yeah, that those are a separate separate document that's tied into the state. Yeah. your own but I it's it's private restrictions and so the city is not a part of those private restrictions but I do think the portion of allowing so let's say a commercial person wants to buy one and a quarter acres to build a 8,000 foot shopping center. um we can or maybe possibly incentivize for them to build to buy 2 and 1/2 acres and then allow the multif family to go

up behind them or something like that because right now it's just commercial period. But if we can do commercial and mixed use or mixed use and allow like a convenience store or gas station and then boom right behind it. We we have some of that and that's where some of the conversations also came through. Like our GB1 district allows for you to have um vertical mixed use inside of it, but you're limited in density. So it's 20 units per acre. That's a requirement. There's also some design pieces that come into play that's talked about inside of the code of like making sure that we're that we've calibrated that correctly. And so in these next steps, that's what why we wanted to do this process was to establish this assessment to find where are the issues or where are the things that we can make improvements to, right? And then our next step is to move on into those particular piece. Yeah. Because if a developer is developing a building, they're already doing flat work. They're already doing a detention pond. They're doing all the things that need to be done. You know, traffic lights, uh, traffic impact analysis. They're doing all of these things. It would be a great incentive to say, "Okay, but we there's like another acre, ma'am, or sir, you can purchase that and then we'll give you this extra thing." Yeah. But anyhow, I you know, a couple of things occurred to me on the HOA conversation and we don't have to like continue to dig into. Yeah. I apologize. I dug into a a area that no man can go, right? But um I I am uh I am mindful though that there's really only three or four main HOA attorneys that do that write up most of these documents and there's really only four or five management companies that then enforce those. There could be an interesting and maybe this is you know fantasy land but there could be a world where maybe we do have some guidance. Obviously, we can't enforce anything, but if we have preferences or we want to do some

education, there's potentially we could do some outreach to folks like that, including with the developers who are bringing in new subdivisions as well and say, "Hey, these are things that our city cares about. Here's our fancy new code, but by the way, while you're considering your HOA, we've already met with, you know, the three attorneys that mostly write every Right. that could be that could be on the incentive side of things, right?" Right. Yeah. So like you know if if uh if the HOA documents that you know as a private developer if you're willing to bring your HOA documents before us and satisfy these things that meet the uh development code etc then that might qualify into a fast dry it could be it could be a density thing if you do so many ADUs as part of the the project then you know density increase could be there but the that's where these conversations can can lead us Based on off this assessment, I don't think always shortening or making a 40 foot by 60 or 100 foot lot line is an incentive to many people. I mean, not everybody wants to I like you very much, but I'm not sure I want to like see you in your house. So, so I mean these are things that I get on a not on a daily basis, but on a more regular basis that they just don't want to be almost a zero lot line. I mean, I have one of my clients has a zero lot line development happening soon and I think it'll sell very very fast because it'll be very reasonable, but in the end when they have to resell, people are going to be like, "Oh my god, I have no yard." So, this is a difficult eventually a difficult sale. I think there's also some generational you know recently I saw some data from the uh ethnography work that you all have done as well that I think there are different generations have different needs as well and so I think if we think

about what different parts of the population you can serve through right specifically I know some folks who love their zero lot line neighborhood because right you know it's easy it's easy you know anyway I I don't refute anything you say no and I'm not refuting you either I'm just saying like only small lot lines would just be tragic. Yeah. That's where what I think came out of this report too was just making sure that there are those a different that we have brought in these different pieces so that it can accommodate. I think one of the things that was loud inside of the report was if you don't offer it. If you're not right, you're not vocal about it, then it's not necessarily going to happen and therefore we just need to be more deliberate about how we go about making those adjustments. If it's not even an an option, you're not going to get it. Yeah. Yeah. Right. So on that, so one of the things that's been talked about too is like the affordability piece is that you know in the past we've talked about encouraging development from like like local development as opposed to uh incentivizing developers from outside, right? Where where their money comes in, they build a thing and then they take the money they've made from it and they left and they leave. Yeah. Right. So I think that's that's um that's been a theme throughout the years of service on with with all this which um you know I don't know how that applies to the code and then the um the other affordability piece that we've discussed and it was just on the tip of my tongue but um oh uh we talked about many times that ownership right is is considered you know by economists and etc that it's ownership of a property is the pathway to the next socio status or class. And so, um, I don't know. I mean, it's probably a broad deep question about how do you take the how do you take the code and how do you take our Aspire plans and how do you take all of our forward plans and things and

effectively create a um a a place where uh ownership is incentivized, right? So you incentivize uh builders and developers to create those things that then become valuable uh resales and and placem like we talked about placemaking earlier. So, you know, if you take a community of duplexes where they're not, you know, standard side by side like uh uh you know, has very conventional, but if they're different shapes or if they're uh in your in your design guidelines where you have uh you know, four or six units on a lot that have a common park space, well, now you've created a place. And then if you can have the a unit of say 10 or 12 of those and then you have a sea store or a a threeunit shopping center, right? how you incentivize that type of development and then ultimately ownership and then ultimately stability and growth and etc and so forth. Um, you know, I think a lot of that stuff is addressed here and really good, but you know, for what it's worth, top of mind. You reminded me of something I meant to bring up, which is there was a big section in not a big section, there was a section in here talking about uh build to rent and incentivizing that, and I absolutely do not think we should be incentivizing build to rent. Um, the market is bringing those in, but I think we need to put our emphasis and our hard work to incentivize ownership. going back to what you were saying. I don't think they should be disallowed, but I don't think we necessarily need to make it incredibly easy to have those neighborhoods. See, I think it when we talk about affordability here, it's a very common trap that we all fall into thinking about ownership and thinking about building wealth, but we're talking also about affordability like to live like and like not to brag, but I've been really really poor and um I have driven by all through my 20s. I saw people under the bridges at I35 and I was like,

I am one more missed shift away from that. Um, and the people who work in our coffee shops here need to be able to also get to work quickly and you can't commute in or out. We all know quickly Austin is not affordable at all. You can't have kids in Austin. Um, I wouldn't go so I wouldn't necessarily incentivize renting, but do not forget the people who are living paycheck to paycheck. they will not be buying. That's not a thing that they can do. And when we talk about affordability, that's really missing here. The apartments that are going up are very expensive. Like preschool teachers cannot afford them. Baristas cannot afford them. And so, anything we can do to address that, which is a huge gap in Flugerville. It's the one thing I don't like about our city, honestly. Um, is I would love to see more ways to do that. And I honestly think that would it's a bigger question than our code. It's a much bigger question than our code. It's a funding issue. It's a participation in federal and state HUD programs issue, but it can also be done through code with things like the Mueller development in Austin. Um, which really is still not the paycheck to paycheck family because I did definitely not. Yeah, I saw all the rules on that. I did too. I was I worked at CPS at the when they were building that and I was definitely low income and I definitely could not afford and then you can't sell your house for like but so the idea of Mueller there are better policy ways to do that. Um but I do I do want to make sure that we do still have things for our preschool teachers who take care of our kids here in town and our teachers. Well, there needs to be some grants for the teachers. There needs to be more there for teachers. that won't go as far as having a better code to support.

I'm not anti, right? No, it it's a it's another piece of housing diversity. Right. I'm ready to move to approve whenever you guys are. I move to approve the approval of the unified development code assessment report. Second. You get a second. All right. All All in favor? I I I Any opposed? Hearing none. The motion passes. Thank you all very much. We are adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Thanks for your comments.