Jan 12, 2021 City Council

[Call to Order, Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance and the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution. ]

[00:00:04]

>> MAYOR RENO: GOOD EVENING. IT IS 6:00 P.M.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 12. I CALL THIS SESSION OF THE MIDLOTHIAN COUNCIL TO ORDER. IF OUR SENIOR COUNCILMEMBER WAYNE SIBLEY WILL LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION, PLEASE.

>> COUNCILMAN SIBLEY: LET'S PRAY.

HEAVENLY FATHER, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS DAY.

WE THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THIS COUNCIL MEETING AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO WORK FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY, TO GUIDE THIS COMMUNITY, TO BE THE WAY THAT THEY WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO BE.

HOW WE GROW AND HOW WE WORK. LORD, I ASK THAT THE BUSINESS TONIGHT AS WE MAKE DECISIONS TO AFFECT EVERYBODY.

AND HAVE US LORD TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS.

WHATEVER YOU SAY IS RIGHT IS WHAT IS RIGHT AND THAT IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO, LORD. WATCH OVER US.

GUIDE AND DIRECT US AND FORGIVE US FOR OUR SINS.

SKY THIS IN JESUS' NAME. AMEN.

>> MAYOR RENO: AMEN. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG; I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND

INDIVISIBLE. >> MAYOR RENO: MY APOLOGIES TO JUSTIN. I INDICATED TO HIM I WANTED HIM TO PAUSE FOR THE PLEDGES. THAT IS WHY WE HAD THE PAUSE.

THIS IS THE FIRST REGULAR SESSION FOR THE NEW YEAR.

WE HAVE JUST FINISHED A RATHER INTERESTING AND CHALLENGING YEAR. AND IN FRONT OF US IS ANOTHER YEAR OF UNCERTAINTY AND CHALLENGES.

WE SEE OUR NATION AS TRYING TO FIND ITS WAY FORWARD NOW IN THE MIDST OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CHANGES.

I ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THE PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION.

NOW WHILE THIS IS A PREAMBLE TO OUR FEDERAL CONSTITUTION, I TAKE IT TO BE MORE OR LESS A GOOD MISSION STATEMENT FOR OUR CITY AND OUR CITY COUNCIL. I STARTS OFF WITH THE RECOGNITION WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY AND WORK TOGETHER. WE ARE NOT INDIVIDUALS.

WE NEED TO COME TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY.

AND THERE ARE FIVE POINTS HERE. THE FIRST ESTABLISHED JUSTICE.

THAT IS THE PREMIER THING THAT WE ARE HERE TO DO.

TO ENSURE THAT EVERYBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY RECEIVES JUSTICE.

SECOND, ENSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY.

UNFORTUNATELY, THERE IS A IT WILL OF EXAMPLES OUT THERE OF -- A LOT OF EXAMPLES OUT THERE OF THINGS, OF THE PLACES THAT DO NOT PRACTICE THIS. WE ARE BLESSED.

WE ARE FORTUNATE TO BE IN THIS COMMUNITY AND HAVE A PLACE WE CAN RAISE OUR FAMILIES AND GO TO WORK AND DO THINGS.

NEXT IS PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE.

IT'S NOT DEFENSE SO MUCH AS THE SAFETY AND THE WELFARE OF OUR COMMUNITY. OUR FIRST RESPONDERS.

WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION HERE TO ENSURE THAT OUR COMMUNITY IS A SAFE PLACE TO LIVE. PROMOTE GENERAL WELFARE.

WE PROVIDE SERVICES, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS.

WE DO THINGS TO HELP THE COMMUNITY HAVE A BETTER LIFE.

THE ONE I REALLY FEEL IS THE ULTIMATE THOUGHT SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY. WE HAVE BLESSINGS HERE FROM GOD BECAUSE OF THE LIBERTY THAT THE CONSTITUTION AND THE WAY OF LIFE AND OUR LAWS AND ORDINANCES PROVIDE.

SO THESE, THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE.

AS WAYNE MENTIONED IN HIS PRAYER, WE ARE BEING LED.

OUR PLEDGES IS THE AFFIRMATION THAT WE ADHERE TO THESE PRINCIPLES. ALL RIGHT.

[2021-007 ]

SO, HUD. RAISE YOUR HAND.

IS THAT YOUR LEFT HAND? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

YOUR OTHER RIGHT HAND. I, DAN DAN HUD HARTSON, SOLEMNLR

[00:05:03]

>> MAYOR RENO: CONGRATULATIONS, HUD.

ONCE AGAIN, WELCOME TO OUR COUNCIL HERE.

LEAD BY EXAMPLE. 2021-008, WE INVITE CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL IN ANY TOP I CANNOT ON THE AGENDA.

DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO -- OKAY.

[Consent Agenda ]

AND BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION WITHOUT SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

IF DISCUSSION IS REQUIRED, THEN THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. DO I HAVE A MOTION?

>> COUNCILMEMBER: MOVE APPROVED.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: AND A SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED. 7-0.

[2021-012 ]

DO AHAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: IT'S CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 9.

[2021-013 ]

MARCOS? >> MARCOS: THE APPLICATION IS REQUEST TO EXPAND THE STORE AND THE RESTAURANT BUILDING BY 1,156 SQUARE FEET. THE PROPOSED EXPANSION WILL BE DESIGNED TO MATCH THE BUILDING THAT USES THE SIMILAR MATERIALS AND THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND THE PROPOSED EXPANSION MEETS ALL MINIMUM DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SIGNAGE. THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITS THE NEW CABINET CAPSULE OR THE CLOUD SIGNS OF ANY KIND. THE APPLICANT PLANS TO REMOVE THE BANDING AROUND THE PROPERTY OR AREAS THAT ARE EXPANDED.

THEY PLAN TO REMOVE THAT BANDING.

EXPAND THE BUILDING OUT. AND THEN INSTALL NEW CABINET BANDING OF APPROXIMATELY 154 SQUARE FEET.

THIS WILL ACTUALLY INCREASE THE OVERALL SIGNAGE BY APPROXIMATELY 34 SQUARE FEET. WE DID SEND OUT THE NOTIFICATION TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. NINE LETTERS WENT OUT.

TO DATE, STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES.

DUE TO THE TYPE OF THE SIGNAGE PROPOSED, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENY OF THE S.U.P. AS PRESENTED. APPLICANT PROVIDED A TENTIVE TO THE SIGNAGE AND IT'S SOMETHING WE WANT TO SHOW YOU ALSO.

THE OPTION WOULD BE MORE IN LINE WITH THE SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS.

BUT THE PROPERTY IS ESSENTIALLY OVER-SIGNED BASED ON THE CURRENT STANDARDS AS IT STANDS. THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL 4-3 OF THIS ORIGINAL PROPOSED REQUEST. SO, GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL, THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION DID APPROVE THIS.

I WILL STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WAS IT A CLOSE VOTE BECAUSE OF THE SIGNAGE? THAT WAS THE ISSUE WITH THE S.U.P.?

>> MARCOS: SURE. THEY RAISED THE QUESTIONS FIRST OFF IS BANDING CONSIDERING SIGNAGE? FROM THE STAFF PERSPECTIVE WE DO CONSIDER BANDING SIGNAGE.

SO REGARDLESS WHETHER WE TALK ABOUT THE LETTERS, LOGOS, ANY COLORS THAT SPAN AROUND THE ENTIRE BUILDING THAT IS ALL

CONSIDERED SIGNAGE. >> COUNCILMEMBER: BUT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL BASED OFF THE SIGNAGE BUT EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE S.U.P. MEETS OUR STANDARD?

[00:10:02]

>> MARCOS: ABSOLUTELY. YES, SIR.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: IF THEY DON'T PUT THE SIGN BACK BECAUSE WHEN I WAS AT THE P&Z THAT NIGHT THE QUESTION I HAD WAS IF THEY DON'T GO, IF THEY DON'T MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT ORIGINALLY DID BEFORE THE REMODEL, WON'T IT KIND OF STAND OUT AS BEING UGLY IN THAT ONE SPOT? IF IT DOESN'T QUITE LOOK -- I MEAN IF 90% OF THE BUILDING LOOKS THE SAME AND 10% OF THE BUILDING LOOKS DIFFERENT IT WILL STAND OUT.

HOW FAR REALLY ARE THEY GOING OVER THE SIGN LIMIT? CAN THEY MAYBE TAKE SOME HEARTS OFF OR SOMETHING TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE? WHERE IT WOULD BE -- I'D RATHER SEE THEM LOOK LIKE A BUILDING WAS BUILT ONE DAY INSTEAD OF ADD

ON AND ADD ON AND ADD ON. >> MARCOS: YOU BRING UP AN EXCELLENT POINT. FROM A CONSISTENCY STANDPOINT IT WOULD LOOK GOOD. I THINK.

PERSONALLY, I THINK CONSISTENCY IS WHAT WE WANT TO GO FOR.

I THINK IT'S AS STAFF WE ARE HELD AND BOUND TO WHAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE. THE ORDINANCE WILL STATE THAT CABINET SIGNS CAN'T, YOU KNOW, AREN'T PERMITTED.

ON TOP OF THAT THE FACT THEY HAVE ALREADY, YOU KNOW, THEY ALREADY HAVE PLENTY OF SIGNAGE. OBVIOUSLY, THEY WOULD BE EXPANDING ON THE SIGNAGE THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE BY RIGHT.

SO THAT IS WHERE, THAT IS WHERE THE QUESTIONS LIE FOR THE STAFF.

THAT IS WHY STAFF IS TAKING THE STANCE WE'RE TAKING.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: JUST THE BANDING IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING

ABOUT? >> COUNCILMAN HARTSON: YES, SIR. JUST THE BANDING.

THEY WOULD BE INCLUDING -- SO THIS BANDING RIGHT HERE WHERE MY POINTER IS. THAT CURRENTLY ALREADY EXISTS.

WHAT THEY WOULD DO IS TAKE IT DOWN AND PUT UP NEW.

THIS AREA WHERE MY POINTER IS, THAT IS ALL BRAND NEW BUILDING AND BRAND NEW BANDING. THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED ON THIS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: IT WOULD BE TAKING THE BUILDING LIKE THIS.

IT'S BANDED. NOW WE MAKE IT LOOK BIGGER AND

BAND THE WHOLE THING, RIGHT? >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

YES, SIR. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WHICH SIDE OF THE BUILDING? I PULLED THIS UP ON THE GOOGLE EARTH VIEW. I SHOWED JUSTIN.

PART IS BANDED BUT WHERE THE ARBY'S IS, IS NOT.

>> MARCOS: CORRECT. THIS AREA HERE THAT IS GHOSTED IS NOT GOING TO INCLUDE ANY BANDING.

THAT IS SEPARATE FROM WHAT I CONSIDER THE LOVE SECTION THAT IS ARBY'S. CORRECT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: WOULDN'T IT BE SAFE TO SAY THAT THE BUILDING

STOOD BEFORE THE ORDINANCE? >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

IT DID STAND BEFORE THE CURRENT ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. WELL, NOT THAT OBVIOUSLY THE THOUSAND FEET THEY ARE GOING TO BE ADDING OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I'M TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS SIGNAGE.

SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR SIGNAGE. >> MARCOS: YEAH.

SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR SIGNAGE IN 2001 WAS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE ALLOW RIGHT NOW. FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, A BUILDING THAT IS LESS THAN 11,000 SQUARE FEET CAN ONLY HAVE MAXIMUM OF 150 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, JUST WHAT THEY ARE ADDED TO THE EXPANDED AREA MEETS THE 150. SO NOT TO MENTION ALL OF THE OTHER SIGNAGE THEY HAVE AROUND THE BUILDING AND IN THE POLE SIGNS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. IT'S A LOT HIGHER IN 2001.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: WOULDN'T IT BE SAFE TO SAY THIS IS AN AREA WHERE USING A LITTLE BIT OF COMMON SENSE IN OUR DECISION WOULD PROBABLY GO A LONG WAY? LOVES IS A NATIONAL INTERSTATE TRUCK STOP. THEY HAVE A CERTAIN LOOK, CERTAIN BRANDING. LANDMARK FOR THE TRUCKERS.

THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR.

IF WE GO CHANGING THAT UP, ARBITRARILY BECAUSE THE BAND THAT IS AROUND EVERY SINGLE LOVES TRUCK STOP FROM HERE TO SEA TO SHINING SEA IS THE SAME EXACT WAY, IT WOULD BE FOOLISH FOR US IN MY OPINION TO OPPOSE THIS.

AND IMPOSE ON THE BUILDING OWNER OUR OWN ARBITRARY CHANGE.

>> MARCOS: NO, I SEE EXACTLY WHERE YOU ARE COMING FROM, COUNCILMEMBER. I THINK LIKE, YOU KNOW, THROUGH MY RESEARCH, I HAVE LOOKED AT THE NEW LOVES CENTERS THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.

THEY DON'T USE THIS BANDING ANYMORE.

THIS IS ONLY BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THAT BANDING.

THEY ARE JUST, YEAH. THEY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE THE SAME LOOK. THEY HAVE ACTUALLY GONE MORE TO JUST A CHANNEL LETTER LOOK. I BELIEVE THE ONE UP IN DENTON IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT. THAT IS PROBABLY ABOUT A YEAR OLD MAYBE. THEY DON'T HAVE ANY BANDING.

EVERYTHING IS CHANNEL LETTER. WHICH PRETTY MUCH ADHERES TO WHAT OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS ASK FOR ANYWAY.

I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES. >> BUT AT THAT POINT THEY WOULD

STILL BE OVERSIGNED? >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

ABSOLUTELY. >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT P&Z APPROVED AND WHAT YOU ARE

BRINGING FORWARD? >> MARCOS: SURE.

SO WITH THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED THEY

[00:15:01]

>> MAYOR RENO: CONTINUATION OF WHAT THEY --

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. IT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE APPLICANT BROUGHT FORTH AND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.

SO WHAT STAFF PROPOSED IS STRAIGHT DENIAL.

THAT IS ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE -- >> RIGHT.

>> MARCOS: YEAH. THEY ARE NOT MEETING THE SIGN

REQUIREMENTS. >> MAYOR RENO: THEN THEY MADE A CHANGE WHICH HASN'T BEEN BEFORE THE P&Z, CORRECT?

>> MARCOS: NO. IT HAS.

WE SHOWED THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AN

ALTERNATIVE. >> DID YOU?

>> YES, SIR. >> MARCOS: THEY STILL --

[INAUDIBLE] >> STILL OVER SIGNED WITH THAT.

>> MARCOS: IT IS. >> DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC

SPEAKERS? >> I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE FROM

LOVES OR ANYONE SIGNED UP. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> MAYOR RENO: REMIND COUNCIL THAT WE ARE DOING THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.

I DON'T WANT A MOTION UNTIL I CALL FOR ONE.

ALSO I DON'T WANT A SECOND UNTIL I CALL FOR IT.

BETWEEN THE MOTION AND THE SECOND, THERE WILL BE DISCUSSION. AS SOON AS I HAVE A SECOND WE'LL GO STRAIGHT TO A VOTE. WE'RE GOING TO SLOW UP A LITTLE.

WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS? IS THAT CORRECT?

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. >> MAYOR RENO: I'LL TAKE A

MOTION TO CLOSE THE OPEN PART. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

GOT A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> MAYOR RENO: DO WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WHAT IS PROPOSED?

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I THINK THIS IS PRETTY EASY.

I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD INSECURE ANY UNDUE STRESS ON THE BUILDING OWNERS, WHY WE WOULD TRY AND MAKE ANY -- I CAN UNDERSTAND IF WE WERE GOING FOR THE WHOLE BUILDING, WE ARE GOING TO RESIGN THE WHOLE THING. THEY ARE MAKING THE BUILDING BIGGER TO MAKE THEM MORE MONEY, WHICH IN TURN MAKE CITY MORE MONEY AND IN TURN SPINS THE WHEELS.

>> MAYOR RENO: ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? [INAUDIBLE] WE DIDN'T VOTE, DID WE? PLEASE VOTE ON CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I WAS SO WRAPPED UP. THANK YOU, TAMMY.

CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING 7-0. NOW DISCUSSION.

I TAKE THERE IS NO MORE DISCUSSION.

SO WE HAVE A SECOND. MOTION FOR THE PROPOSAL.

>> I MAKE A MOTION -- >> CAN WE MAKE A MOTION.

>> APPROVING WHAT P&Z WANTS? >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS

PRESENTED BY THE CITY. >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND.

AS PRESENTED. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

PLEASE VOTE. OKAY.

PASSES 7-0. OPEN ITEM 2021-014, CONDUCT A

[2021-014 ]

>> MARCOS: THE APPLICATION REQUESTING S.U.P. FOR NEW 3,000 SQUARE FOOT MIDDLE ACCESSORY BUILDING.

THE ORDINANCE STATES THAT THE LOT LARGER THAN ONE ACRE AND SMALLER THAN TWO REQUIRE THE ACCESSORY BUILDING NOT TO EXCEED 75% OF THE FIRST FLOOR OR 4% OF THE LOT AREA WHICH IS LESS.

IN THIS CASE WITH THE 3,000 SQUARE FEET STRUCTURE IT WOULD EXCEED THE AMOUNT BY 979 SQUARE FEET.

THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSING BUILDING ON THE LOT.

IT MEETS SET-BACK REQUIREMENT AND MEETS THE REGULATIONS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA.

WE SENT NOTIFICATIONS OUT. 19 NOTIFICATIONS WENT OUT AND TO DATE WE RECEIVED TWO LETTERS OPPOSING THE REQUEST.

THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 7-0 FOR THE AGENDA ITEM AS PRESENTED BY STAFF WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. THAT THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY BUILDING USED FOR THE NONBUSINESS PURPOSES ONLY.

WITH THAT I'LL STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> WHAT IS IT TO BE USED FOR? >> MARCOS: STORAGE.

>> AND THAT'S IT. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: OPPOSING BENEFIT, DO WE KNOW WHERE THEY CAME FROM? DIRECT NEIGHBORS?

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. >> COUNCILMEMBER: I KNOW THEY ARE WITHIN 200 FEET BUT ARE THEY DIRECT NEIGHBORS?

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. THEY'RE ADJACENT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: AND THIS IS, I WANT TO GET THE ADDRESS RIGHT.

[00:20:07]

2201 ASHFORD. >> MARCOS: 2201 ASHFORD.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: SO THEY WOULD HAVE RIGHT TO DO THIS?

>> YES, SIR. THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE

COUNTY. >> COUNCILMEMBER: SO COULD WE NOT MAKE THE ARGUMENT IT'S NONCONFORMING USE AND THUS WE

SHOULD NOT STAND IN THEIR WAY -- >> MARCOS: ONLY IF THEY HAD AN ACCESSORY BUILDING PRIOR TO ANNEXATION CAN IT HAVE THE LEGAL

NONCONFORMING PROTECTION. >> COUNCILMEMBER: I LIVE IN THAT AREA. EVERY OTHER HOUSE HAS ABOUT THE SAME THING. AND COULD IT ALSO BE SAID THAT MAYBE THIS WOULD ALSO BE UNDUE STRESS ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT FOR US TO NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO WHAT THE OTHER

NEIGHBORS HAVE DONE? >> MARCOS: I GUESS IT COULD BE SAID. OBVIOUSLY WE STILL FALL BACK ON OUR CURRENT RULES AND REGULATIONS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: IF I LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I DID THE AERIAL SEARCH ON IT, THAT BUILDING WILL BE 11 FEET OR 12 FEET TALLER THAN THE MAIN RESIDENCE.

THERE IS NOT ANOTHER STRUCTURE OF FIVE LOTS ANY DIRECTION THAT IS GOING TO BE THAT BIG. THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT 19-FOOT EAVES. WHICH MAKES THE TOTAL STRUCTURE OVER 28 FEET TALL BASED ON THE REGULAR 412 PITCH.

THAT IS A MONSTER OF A BUILDING. THAT IS NOT A LITTLE SHED TO PARK YOUR BOAT IN. THAT IS BIGGER THAN THE HOUSE BY

900 SQUARE FEET. >> THEY MIGHT HAVE AN R.V.

>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT IS FOR.

>> I KNOW BUT IT STILL DOESN'T -- IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE, THERE IS NOT A SINGLE BUILDING OUT THERE THAT IS THAT

BIG. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: FROM LOOKING AT THE HOUSE FROM THE ROAD.

THAT IS UNDUE HARDSHIP AGAINST THE NEIGHBORS.

FIND A PLACE TO MARK IT. >> I WOULD SAY NOBODY ON THIS DAIS WHO HAS A METAL BUILDING ON THEIR PROPERTY SHOULD VOTE

AGAINST THIS. >> COUNCILMEMBER: I DO AND I

VOTE AGAINST IT. >> GO AHEAD, MAYOR.

I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK IF THE APPLICANT WAS GOING TO SPEAK.

>> MAYOR RENO: WHAT WAS THE BASIS FOR THE OPPOSITION?

>> MARCOS: ONE OF THE FOLKS IN THE OPPOSITION, THEY REALLY WANTED TO KNOW MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BUILDING.

WHAT IT WAS GOING TO BE USED FOR.

WHAT IT ULTIMATELY IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST GIVEN THE MERE FACT THAT THIS RIGHT HERE DOESN'T GIVE IT FULL JUSTICE AS FAR AS THE FACADE MATERIAL BUT IT'S A METAL FACADE. THAT WAS ONE ITEM WE HAD.

WE ALSO HAD PROPERTY VALUES EXCEEDING MAXIMUM SIZE ALLOWED.

AESTHETICS OF EVERYDAY LIFE. AEROBIC SYSTEM.

SPRINKLER AND DRAINAGE. THAT WAS THE COMMENT PROVIDED.

BUT AGAIN, THEY WERE BOTH ASKING FOR OPPOSITION.

OR SIDING WITH THE OPPOSITION. >> COUNCILMEMBER: NOT TO INTERRUPT BUT ALL OF THOSE CONCERNS AS FAR AS THE SPRINKLER AND THE DRAINAGE AND THE SEPTIC AND ALL THAT, THAT WOULD ALL BE HANDLE WITHIN INSPECTIONS AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL OR THE COUNTY OR THE STATE LEVEL. YES?

>> MARCOS: SURE. YES.

ABSOLUTELY. WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE ON SITE SEPTIC AND AEROBIC SYSTEM AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT COVERING ANYTHING, IT SHOULD BE FINE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

>> MAYOR RENO: DO YOU WANT THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD?

>> SINCE THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE FROM THE

PUBLIC -- >> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. BUT DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO COME FORWARD? YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

OKAY. ANY MORE QUESTIONS OF MARCOS? SO I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 7-0 TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS WAS

FOR AN R.V. >> R.V. AND A BOAT.

>> MAYOR RENO: AND A BOAT. >> AND WHATEVER ELSE THEY HOUSE.

I MEAN -- >> TO GET STUFF OUT OF SIGHT.

>> IT'S WHEN YOU BUY A CAMPER THAT BIG, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO HAVE A PLACE TO PUT IT OR YOU RENT A SPACE.

12 FEET WIDE AND UP TO 50 FEET LONG.

>> BUT IF WE DON'T -- I'M LOOKING AT -- I'LL BE 100% HONEST. I'M TORN RIGHT NOW.

IF WE DON'T DO THIS AND HE PARKS HIS R.V. THERE, THE NEXT THING THAT WILL HAPPEN IS THE CITY WILL SEND OUT CODE ENFORCEMENT

[00:25:05]

>> NOT ON THE EXCESS OF ONE ACRE.

>> NOT ON EXCESS OF ONE ACHIER? >> IT WHAT TO BE BEHIND OFFENSE.

>> HE HAS OFFENSE ACROSS THE FRONT.

>> SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSE TO THE RIGHT, IT HAS R.V.

PARKING. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF CAMPERS ON

THE RIGHT. >> HOW LONG HAS THE OWNER

OCCUPIED THIS HOUSE? >> MARCOS: WE COULD PROBABLY FIND THAT OUT THROUGH THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

IT WOULD SHOW THE DEEDED. >> CAN WE LOOK THAT UP REAL QUICK? WHAT I'M GETTING AT IF THEY WERE THERE BEFORE 2017, I FIND IT STRANGE THAT TO HAVE ALL THIS LAND TO BE, YOU KNOW, TO LOOK AT AND THEN YOU BUY AN R.V. AND A BOAT AND YOU CAN'T PUT IT ON YOUR PROPERTY.

TWO YEARS AGO YOU COULD, THREE YEARS AGO YOU COULD.

I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR RENO: WHY ISN'T 2,000 SQUARE FEET ENOUGH FOR AN R.V.

AND A BOAT? >> THAT IS 3,000.

>> MAYOR RENO: I KNOW BUT THEY COULD DO 2,000.

AND BE COMPLIANT. >> I DON'T THINK WE DECIDE WHAT IS ENOUGH FOR A PROPERTY HOMEOWNER.

WHAT GIVES US THE RIGHT? THEY HAVE LOTS OF LAND.

PLENTY OF LAND. I HAVE MORE BUILDINGS AND MORE COVERED SQUARE FOOTAGE AREA ON MY ONE ACRE THAN THEY ARE ASKING FOR THERE. I WOULDN'T LET ANYONE TELL ME

OTHERWISE EITHER. >> MAYOR RENO: WELL, WE DO HAVE OUR REGULATIONS. IN THIS CASE, SOME COUNCIL DECIDED 75% OF YOUR -- IS SUFFICIENT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I AGREE. BUT WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THIS RESIDENT WAS HERE PRIOR TO THE CITY BEING ABLE TO TELL THEM

ANYTHING. >> 2004.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: OKAY. SO THAT CARRIES WEIGHT IN MY OPINION. YOU KNOW, IF THIS RESIDENT JUST MOVED IN LAST MONTH, OR LAST YEAR OR SINCE 2017, THAT IS A

DIFFERENT CONVERSATION. >> MAYOR RENO: I COULD ARGUE THEY HAVE HAD 16 YEARS TO HAVE ALREADY DONE THIS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I COULD ARGUE NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES DON'T WANT IT. IT'S JUST LIKE A CHICKEN FARM OR A PIG FARM. YOUR NEIGHBORS FIGHT YOU ON IT.

BOTH NEIGHBOR ON EACH SIDE FIGHTING AGAINST IT.

YOU AND I DON'T LIVE THERE. IT DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF REGULAR BUILDING, LIKE YOURS DOES.

IT'S JUST, IT IS WHAT IT IS. WE GOT TO LOOK OUT FOR THE 35,000 PEOPLE. WE ARE NOT JUST CARRYING ABOUT THE ONE LADY LIVING ON ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY.

>> MAYOR RENO: COUNCILMAN WICKLIFFE?

>> COUNCILMAN WICKLIFFE: I'LL TELL YOU, I AM TORN ON THIS.

I SEE THE PROPERTY OWNER RIGHTS. HE HAS A RIGHT AS A PROPERTY OWNER TO BUILD WHAT HE WANTS. TED BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE HARDSHIP. HE WAS INVOLUNTARILY ANNEXED, I GET THAT. WE AS A CITY SAY AS PART OF THE SERVICES SAY WE'LL CONTROL THINGS LIKE THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING DOES A HARDSHIP TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

THAT IS WHY I'M TRYING TO WEIGH OUT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT ARGUMENT FOR A GROUP OR AN AREA GROUP OR RESIDENT GROUP INVOLUNTARILY

ANNEXED. >> COUNCILMAN WICKLIFFE: THAT IS THE PART WHERE I'M STRUGGLING.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: YOU CAN SAY IF YOU LIVE IN THE CITY AND THE CITY IS TAKING PROPERTY IN FROM WILLFUL PARTICIPANTS.

THEN SURE, YEAH. THE ARGUMENT WE ARE PROTECTING VALUES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. THAT WHOLE SIDE OF TOWN IS NOTHING BUT THE SAME EXACT THING.

>> I BELIEVE IN CASES LIKE THAT WE NEED TO GO WITH WHAT IS MATCHING, WHAT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES HAVE.

I LOOK AT THIS ON GOOGLE EARTH AND I AM SEEING PROBABLY 80% OF THE HOMES HAVE OUTBUILDINGS. GRANTED NOT TO THIS SCALE OR THIS SIZE. DO WE HAVE ORDINANCE BY RIGHT THEY CAN COME IN AND BUILD A CERTAIN SIZE BUILDING?

>> SMALLER. >> DO YOU KNOW THE SIZES OFF THE

TOP OF YOUR HEAD? >> ABSOLUTELY.

2,000 SQUARE FEET. >> THIS IS 3,000.

>> THAT IS WHAT BOTHERS ME THE SIZE OF IT.

IT GOES TOGETHER A LITTLE BIT. >> SO THE 2,021 BY RIGHT.

THEY CAN JUST DO THAT. AND NOT COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THEY GIVE US THE PERMIT.

WE SIGN OFF ON IT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT MEETS THE SETBACKS.

>> IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HEIGHT.

IF THEY WANT TO DO 2,021 AND 19 FEET TO THE EAST THEY CAN DO SO.

>> THEY CAN. >> IT'S THE HEIGHT OF THE

PRIMARY HOUSE. >> YEAH.

>> WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY HOUSE?

TALLER THAN 19 FEET. >> I WOULD IMAGINE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> FIVE MORE FEET ON TOP.

[00:30:05]

>> IT'S PITCH THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

>> SO WE ARE LITERALLY TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING DO THE MATH IN THEIR HEAD. WHAT IS THAT? 79 -- 100 -- 979 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS DIMENSIONALLY, HOW MUCH

IS THAT? >> THIRD.

>> DIMENSIONALLY, ANYBODY? TEN FEET BY --

>> 22% OR SO. >> WELL, THAT IS 10X9.

I DON'T THINK WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A WHOLE LOT OF SPACE.

WE WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IF IT WAS 2,021 SQUARE FEET. WE ARE TALKING DOES THIS PROPERTY HAVE ENOUGH PROPERTY TO ADD 979 ADDITIONAL SQUARE FEET OUTSIDE OF THE ORDINANCE IN A PROPERTY THEY HAVE OWNED SINCE 2004 IN AN AREA WITH OUTBUILDING OF SIMILAR SIZE, SIMILAR MAKEUP AND SIMILAR PLACEMENT? THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT'S NOT IN MIDTOWN.

IT'S NOT IN ROSEBUD. IT'S OFF ASHFORD.

I THINK WE CAN'T FORGET THAT. >> WE HAVE ONE IN THE MIDLOTHIAN MEADOWS THAT IS A TWO-STORY OUTBUILDING.

I THINK IT'S PROBABLY WORTH NOTING THAT THE CITIZEN LED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 7-0.

I'M ASSUMING THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS NO ON THIS ONE

BECAUSE OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE? >> MAYOR RENO: THEY ARE OBLIGATED. [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR RENO: I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE POINT IF I UNDERSTAND, COUNCILMEMBER DARRACH CORRECTLY. WE DO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENFORCE ALL THE ORDINANCE EVEN ON PEOPLE FORCIBLY ANNEXED.

WITH THAT SAID, I CAN SEE HAVING LENIENCY AND MITIGATION TO APPROVE EXCEPTIONS. WHICH I GUESS IS WHAT WE ARE ASKED HERE. I, TOO, AM TORN.

IF THEY COULD MAKE IT SMALLER I THINK IT WOULD MAKE MY LIFE

EASIER. >> EVEN THE HEIGHT.

DO WE KNOW THE HEIGHT? >> 19 FEET EAVES.

>> DO WE KNOW THE HEIGHT OF THE HOUSE?

>> HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

>> MARCOS: WHAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THE WAY THE RULES ARE WRITTEN WHEN YOU HAVE A LOT THAT IS BETWEEN 1-2 ACRES -- I WILL READ THIS DIRECTLY FROM THE ORDINANCE -- SHALL NOT EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING MEASURED FROM THE GROUND TO THE ROOF PEAK. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ROOF PLATE. IT'S THE ROOF PEAK.

19 FEET WAS DETERMINED THAT THE RESIDENTIAL HOME IS MORE THAN 19 FEET TO THE ROOF PEAK. AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE ACTUAL COVERAGE AREA.

THIS 979 SQUARE FEET. NOTHING THE HEIGHT.

THE HEIGHT WOULD STILL, EVEN IF THEY KEPT IT AT 19 FEET --

>> THAT IS THE QUESTION. DO WE FEEL THIS PROPERTY OWNER HAS ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE LOT TO ALLOW 979 SQUARE FEET ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THEY ARE ALREADY ALLOWED TO DO.

THE HEIGHT IS NOT A FACTOR. THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING IS NOT A FACTOR. IT'S LITERALLY JUST A LITTLE BIT TOO BIG IN AREA. HEIGHT SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THIS CONVERSATION. BECAUSE THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO

MAKE IT THAT HEIGHT. >> SO BY RIGHT, THE HEIGHT WOULD

BE CONFORMING. >> YES, SIR.

ABSOLUTELY. >> THAT IS AN INTERESTING TWIST.

>> MAYOR RENO: I QUIBBLE WITH THE WORD "LITTLE." I DON'T THINK IT'S A LITTLE VARIANCE.

>> BUT THAT IS WHAT AN S.U.P. IS FOR.

>> MAYOR RENO: I KNOW. QUIBBLING FOR WORDS.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? I'M STILL -- WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE ARE NOW DISCUSSING -- WELL,

WE ARE GOING TO NEED A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE

APPROVE AS PRESENTED. >> MAYOR RENO: NOW WE'RE GOING TO PAUSE BEFORE WE SECOND. OKAY.

I'M SLOW HERE, MARCOS. WHAT IS THE PEAK? WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF PEAK OF THE ROOF?

>> MARCOS: WE ASSUME, WE DEFINE PEAK AS THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE ROOF. OF THE HOUSE.

OF THE HOME. >> MAYOR RENO: OF ANY

STRUCTURE? >> MARCOS: RIGHT.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE PEAK.

>> MAYOR RENO: THERE. >> MARCOS: RIGHT THERE.

>> MAYOR RENO: ON THE DIAGRAM OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING, IT IS

BIGGER, MORE THAN 19. >> MARCOS: RIGHT.

[00:35:04]

IT HAS A LOW-PITCH ROOF. >> MAYOR RENO: I UNDERSTAND

THAT. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE HOUSE?

>> MARCOS: YOU KNOW. >> 36 FEET.

>> MAYOR RENO: WELL ABOVE. OKAY.

MM-HMM. THAT IS THE POINT I MISSED.

I'M A LITTLE SLOW HERE. GIVE ME TIME TO CATCH UP.

WELL, WE HAVE A MOTION. AHEART OF THE MOTION I'M STILL TROUBLED BY THE OVERALL SIZE OF --

>> READY TO MAKE A SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: I KNOW HE IS.

I'M NOT READY TO VOTE. OKAY.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. THE ITEM PASSES 5-2.

IT'S AS PRESENTED. IT'S NICE TO HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE.

[2021-015 ]

TRENT? >> TRENTON: THANK YOU.

SECTION 2.04 FOR A TANKER, TO STORE TANKER CARS, IT REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE MEDIUM AND THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY OWNER BUCKLEY PROPERTY OWNER APPLIED FOR AN S.U.P. AND HAD IT APPROVED.

THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPOSED LOT HERE.

WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING TO DO IS EXPAND THE USE TO THE NEIGHBORING LOT. WHAT THE EXPANSION WILL ALLOW THEM TO DO IS ALLOW THEM TO ADD IN A SPUR LINE FOR THE RAILROAD.

GO ACROSS THIS PROPERTY ON TO THIS LOT RIGHT HERE.

THEY DO NOT PLAN TO STORE ANY ADDITIONAL STORAGE TANKS, TRAIN CARS ON THIS LOT. IT WILL BE FOR TRANSFER ONLY TO MOVE THAT RAIL SPUR ACROSS THE PROPERTY.

THEY WILL BE EXPANDING THEIR FENCE LINE THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THIS STRUCTURE, WITH THIS PROPERTY HERE.

ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

THEY WILL HAVE THE SAME SECURITY FENCING IN THE REAR OF THE ONE AT THE END OF THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT OF THE THREE STRAND BARBED WIRE. THIS PROPOSED USE WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 2020.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND 7-0 OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST. WE DID NOTIFY PROPERTY IN 200 FEET. ZERO CAME IN FAVOR AND ZERO CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION. I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR RENO: ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS? YEP. YEQUESTIONS FOR TRENT?

>> THIS IS A RAIL SPUR AND ALSO SOME SORT OF FACILITY?

>> TRENTON: THEY ARE NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME THEY ARE NOT REQUESTING TO EXPAND ANY OF THE STRUCTURES ON THIS.

THIS IS JUST THE RAIL SPUR GOING ACROSS THE PROPERTY.

ALL THE OTHER EXHIBITS IS INSTEAD OF WHAT WE DID WE RESTATED THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE THAT HAD ALL THE EXHIBITS, ALL THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FROM THE ALREADY DEVELOPED PROPERTY. JUST INCLUDED THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE. IF IN THE FUTURE THEY ADD ANY STRUCTURES IT WOULD REQUIRE TO COME BACK THROUGH THE PUBLIC

HEARING PROCESS. >> MAYOR RENO: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO CLOSE.

SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. ITEM IS CLOSED.

7-0. DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS AMONGST

COUNCIL? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0.

[2021-016 ]

DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 50. >> MARCOS: THANK YOU.

THE 16-ACREED PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF THE TOWN OFF OF U.S. HIGHWAY 287.

[00:40:02]

THE AMENDMENTS THAT THE APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING WOULD REMOVE THE GOLF COURSE TRAINING USE AND INSTEAD ALLOW FOR A GYM FACILITY. AS WELL AS RESTAURANT, RETAIL, OFFICE USE AS WELL AS A FUTURE PLANT NURSERY WITH THE CONTRACT BUSINESSES. BASED ON THE SITE PLAN THE APPLICATION PROPOSING FOUR BUILDINGS.

BUT THOSE SPECIFIC DETAILS FOR THE FUTURE PHASES INCLUDING PLANT NURSERY WILL BE SUBMITTED AT A LATER DATE.

AT THIS POINT RIGHT NOW, WE REALLY ONLY FOCUS ON THE BUILDING FURTHER WEST. THIS SHOWS THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE REGIONAL MODULE.

THIS MODULE EXPECTS MIXTURE OF OFFICE, SHOPPING, COMMERCIAL USES AND CLOSE PROSIMILARITY TO FREEWAY OR CORRIDOR.

SO WE DO FEEL THAT THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE INITIAL PHASE DOES INCLUDE 14,000 SQUARE FOOT ATHLETIC COMPLEX WITH THE 8,000 PRACTICE TURF FIELD AND THE BASKETBALL COURTS, OUTDOOR BASKETBALL COURTS. THE EXTERIOR FACADE DOES INCLUDE THE METAL, STONE SIDING MATERIALS.

OTHER ELEMENTS INCLUDING VARIOUS ROOF HEIGHTS, STEEL CANOPIES, DECORATIVE UP-DOWN LIGHTING WILL ALL BE INCLUDED AS WELL.

THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS INTENDED TO HAVE A MORE CONTEMPORARY DESIGN WITH A LOWER-PITCHED ROOF.

ONLY ONE DRIVE CUT TO U.S. HIGHWAY 287 WILL BE ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY. T.I.A. WILL BE REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF A DECELL LANE OR TURN LANE IS WARRANTED.

THE NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS PLANNED FOR THE REGIONAL TRAIL SYSTEM ALONG THIS PARTICULAR CORRIDOR.

WHICH MAY IMPACT THE PROPERTY. AND REQUIRE PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT.

THE APPLICANT IS AWARE OF THIS. THEY ARE VERY OPEN TO INCLUDING THAT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT. ONCE THAT TRAIL IS FIGURED OUT.

THE APPROPRIATE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE EASEMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE DEDICATED IN THE PLATTING STAGE.

SO PER OUR ZONING ORDINANCE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING REQUIRES MASONRY SCREENED WALLS. IN LIEU OF A MASONRY WALL, THE APPLICANT REQUESTING TO PRESERVE THE EXISTING TREE LINES ON THE WEST, EAST, SOUTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.

IN ADDITION TO PRESERVING THOSE EXISTING TREE LINES, THE APPLICANT WILL INSTALL A SIX-FOOT TALL EVERGREEN ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY. THAT IS WHAT YOU SEE HERE SHOWN IN RED. THIS SITE HERE CLOSEST TO WHERE THE ATHLETIC GYM IS PROPOSED. YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING TREE LINE THAT IS THERE. AGAIN, THAT WILL BE PRESERVED.

THEN THE APPLICANT WILL ALSO INCLUDE SOME EVERGREENS IN THAT AREA. THE DRAINAGE CHANNEL ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WILL ACT AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE NONRESIDENTIAL USE AND THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USE.

THIS IS SHOWING YOU HOW THAT AREA LOOKS ON THE EAST SIDE.

SO THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS OR ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT MUST CONNECT TO THE CITY SEWER SYSTEM. IF THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN 2,000 FEET OF OUR SYSTEM. PROPERTY IS OBVIOUSLY WITHIN 2,000 FEET, SO SEPTIC WAIVER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ALLOW FOR THE INDIVIDUAL ON SITE SEWAGE FACILITIES.

WE DID SEND NOTIFICATIONS OUT WITHIN 200 FEET.

TOTAL OF 11 WENT OUT. TO DATE STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES. THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 7-0.

OF THIS AGENDA ITEM. TO AMEND THE P.D. AND THE GRANT, SEPTIC WAIVER AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

WITH THAT, I CAN STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: WHAT LINE DID WE HAVE TO ADD FOR FIRE FLY? FRESH WATER LINE? REMEMBER FIRE FLY PUT IN A NEW

LINE ALONG THE HIGHWAY THERE? >> MARCOS: RIGHT.

THAT WAS AN EXTENSION -- >> FOR WATER LINE, WASN'T IT?

>> CORRECT. I THINK THE WATER LINE -- THAT IS CORRECT. I BELIEVE THE WATER LINE DID EXTEND. PROBABLY SOMEBODY FROM ENGINEERING OR PUBLIC WORKS MIGHT CORRECT ME ON THAT BUT THAT IS TRUE. I THINK THERE WAS A LINE EXTENDED ACROSS THE PROPERTY TO GET UP TO THE FIRE FLY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: ACCESS THEY WILL HAVE IS THE ONE THEY HAVE NOW? WE ARE NOT MOVING IT LEFT OR RIGHT? WE LEAVE IT WHERE IT IS?

>> MARCOS: CORRECT. THAT ACCESS POINT IS THE SAME

ACCESS POINT HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WHAT IS THE

RED LINE FOR? >> MARCOS: OKAY.

THAT IS THE EXISTING -- LET'S SEE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I COULDN'T READ IT EARLIER.

TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT WAS.

>> MARCOS: UNDERSTOOD. THEY WILL BUILD OUTSIDE THE

FLOOD LINE. >> THEY RAISED THE PROPERTY UP

[00:45:02]

15 FEET. >> YES.

>> SETBACKS ON THE BUILDING ARE SIMILAR TO WHAT IS FURTHER WEST WITH THE MEDICAL CLINICS ALONG THERE?

>> MARCOS: OKAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER: IT LOOKS LIKE A SIMILAR FEEL THERE PULL STRAIGHT OFF THE HIGHWAY TO A

PARKING LOT. >> MARCOS: THE SETBACKS FOR THE ONES THAT ARE A LITTLE FURTHER NORTHWEST, I GUESS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: BACK TOWARD MIDLOTHIAN.

>> MARCOS: THOSE ACTUALLY HAVE, THOSE ACTUALLY HAVE A STREET IN FRONT, A DRIVE SEPARATING WHERE THE

RIGHT-OF-WAY IS. >> COUNCILMEMBER: YOU ARE

RIGHT. >> MARCOS: LIKE A SLIP STREET.

THEY ARE SET BACK A LITTLE FURTHER.

I WOULD SAY THIS WOULD BE SOMEWHAT CONSISTENT WITH THE SWFA. A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN.

AGAIN, FIRE FLY, THAT HOME WAS ALREADY PREEXISTING.

THEIR BUILDING DID SET BACK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OBVIOUSLY.

THIS IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE SEE TO THE EAST.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: OKAY. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.

WALTER WAS BRINGING IT UP. IF SEWER GETS CLOSE ENOUGH ARE WE GOING TO MAKE THEM HOOK UP TO IT?

>> MARCOS: PER THE CODE. YES.

THE REQUIREMENT IS WITH THE SEPTIC WAIVER IT WILL ALLOW THEM TO HAVE ON-SITE SEWAGE. ON-SITE SEPTIC.

IF THAT ON-SITE SEPTIC FAILS AND OUR LINE IS, YOU KNOW, WITHIN A CERTAIN RANGE THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO CONNECT.

THEY ARE ALREADY WITHIN SO IT'S NOT UNTIL SOMETHING FAILS CAN WE ACTUALLY GO IN AND SAY HEY, NOW YOU NEED TO CONNECT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: ONE REASON THE STAFF SUPPORTED THE WAIVER IS JUST A REQUIREMENT.

I THINK INSTEAD OF ADDING THE STATION, WE ARE ASKING A LINE TO OUR LINE. SO THAT IS REALLY NOT WHAT WE --

[INAUDIBLE] >> TO GET FROM WHERE THEY ARE NOW TO THE LIFT STATION ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE TO GO UP AND OVER THE HILL.

>> RIGHT PAST FIRE FLY WE HAVE A LIFT STATION ALREADY.

BUT IT JUST, YOU GET UP AND OVER A HILL RIGHT THROUGH THERE.

SO IT WOULD BE PUMPING IT FROM THE GYM UP OVER THE HILL.

TO OUR LIFT SECTION. WE WOULD ADD AN EXTRA ONE FOR

LIMITED USE. >> I DON'T LIKE TO MOVE SEWER AREA. IT ALWAYS CHANGES THE USE OF THE AREA. RIGHT NOW IT'S AG.

I WANT TO KEEP IT AG. IS THE PDIC IN HERE? FUTURE STRUCTURES WILL HAVE TO AESTHETICALLY MATCH THE FIRST

STRUCTURE? >> MARCOS: WELL, YEAH.

WHAT WE WOULD -- ORIGINALLY WHAT WE HAVE IN THE ORDINANCE, WHAT WE ORIGINALLY PUT IN THE ORDINANCE IS ANY TIME A NEW BUILDING OR A NEW SITE PLAN OR THE ELEVATION IS BROUGHT TO US WE BRING IT THROUGH THE PROCESS. WE BRING IT TO P&Z.

WE TREAT IT AS AN AMENDMENT ESSENTIALLY.

WHAT THE APPLICANT DID ASK IS IF THEY DO PROVIDE NEW ELEVATIONS, LANDSCAPE PLANS, OR ANYTHING FOR ANYTHING ELSE THEY PLAN TO DO ON THAT, IT BE DONE MORE AT AN ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL.

AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS AND CODES.

>> THE CURRENT REQUIREMENT OF THE P.D. NOT OUR CURRENT

REQUIREMENTS, CORRECT? >> MARCOS: LIKE STRAIGHTING IT AS A STRAIGHT ZONE. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING STRAIGHT ZONED AND THEY ARE TRYING TO GET A SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION APPROVED WE DON'T NECESSARILY BRING IT TO THE COMMITTEE.

WE MAKE SURE IT'S ADHERING TO THE REQUIREMENTS.

WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS UNLESS THEY SEEK SPECIAL VARIANCE DO THEY BRING IT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

ORIGINALLY WE WROTE THE ORDINANCE THAT WE TREAT EVERYTHING AS AN AMENDMENT. WHEN WE DID TAKE IT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THEY OPTED FOR THIS TO GO THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS.

MEANING WHEN THEY BRING THE ELEVATIONS OR THE FUTURE SITE PLAN FOR THIS AREA OR LANDSCAPING THAT IT JUST GO THROUGH THE STAFF. UNLESS WE SEE SOMETHING TO REQUIRE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR VARIANCE WOULD WE BUMP IT TO THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION AND ULTIMATELY THE

CITY COUNCIL. >> MAYOR RENO: SO AS PRESENTED, ELEVATION, LANDSCAPE WON'T COME TO US.

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. IT WILL NOT COME TO YOU.

THE BUILDINGS WILL NOT COME TO YOU EITHER.

NO, SIR. NEW ONES WILL NOT COME TO YOU.

UNLESS WE FIND THEY ARE SEEKING VARIANCE OR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

THAT IS HOW THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN.

>> MAYOR RENO: IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE CONTINUITY AMONGST THE

BUILDINGS? >> MARCOS: YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN.

[00:50:01]

SO THAT MINES IT HAS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO SHOW Y'ALL.

>> WOULD IT BE LIKE WHAT BUCKLEY JUST DID?

>> MARCOS: YES. >> YOU ARE RESTATING THE INITIAL -- WOULD YOU WANT JUSTIN TO TALK ABOUT THIS?

>> THAT IS WHO I WAS ABOUT TO ASK.

>> GET JUSTIN UP HERE. >> ABSOLUTELY.

I DON'T MIND IT GOING THROUGH THE STAFF BUT I'M TRYING TO PICTURE WHATEVER YOU ARE PICTURING.

>> IT'S YOUR OPTION TO WEAR OR NOT WEAR A MASK.

>> SO YOU CAN HEAR ME CLEARLY. I'M JUSTIN CROCKER AND I LIVE IN MIDLOTHIAN. SO THE FIRST PROJECT IS OBVIOUSLY THE ATLEDGE GYM. WE DON'T PLAN TO DO ANYTHING.

WE WANT CONTINUITY THROUGH THE REST OF THE BUILDING.

I DON'T MIND IF I NEED TO COME GET APPROVAL.

I DON'T PLAN TO DO ANYTHING EXTREME FOR BUILDING.

THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION IS IF WE TWEAK THE SITE PLAN AS WE GET THE BUILDING DOES IT HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH.

I WANT THEM TO HAVE THE CONTINUITY.

I'M PRETTY OPEN TO WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT.

ANOTHER COMMENT ON THE SEWER. MR. MILLER IS CORRECT.

IT'S JULY HILL THE ENTIRE RUN AND THE HIGHWAY.

SO IT SEEMS UNREASONABLE BECAUSE OF THE CREEK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF US. I THINK THE CREEK IS THE LOWEST POINT IN ANY DIRECTION. WE ARE BUILDING ON THE LOWEST POINT YOU CAN BUILD ON THE HIGHWAY.

SO THAT WAS TO TALK ABOUT THAT. THAT IS WHY WE DID THAT.

I KNOW MARCOS ANSWERED YOUR QUESTIONS BUT I'M OPEN TO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THE PROJECT.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY, SIR. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: READY. DO I HAVE A MOTION CLOSE THE

OPEN? >> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. >> I HAVE TO GET USED TO THAT.

I'M SORRY. >> MAYOR RENO: CLOSED 7-0.

DISCUSSION, COUNCIL? I THINK STAFF CAN DETERMINE IF THE CONTINUITY IS THERE. OR JUST LEAVE IT FOR STAFF

DISCRETION? >> I'M WORRIED ABOUT -- MARCOS AND JUSTING BEING HERE DOESN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL.

IF IT'S IF NEITHER IS HERE WHEN THE BUILDING IS BUILT.

>> WE STILL HAVE DESIGN AND ARTICULATION STANDARD REQUIREMENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF Y'ALL DECIDE TO GET RID OF ME, SOMEBODY WOULD COME IN AND STILL ENSURE THAT VERTICAL, HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION IS BEING LOOKED AT. I MEAN WE DO HAVE A HANDFUL OF

DESIGN REQUIREMENTS. >> MAYOR RENO: CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PICTURE? THOSE ALL LOOK THE SAME.

THEY GO TOGETHER. >> THAT IS THE SAME BUILDING.

>> IT'S THE SAME BUILDING? >> YES.

DIFFERENT SIDES. >> MAYOR RENO: MY BAD.

OKAY. WHEN YOU DO THEY ALL LOOK THE

SAME. >> THE QUESTION HAS TO BE ASKED WHY? IF IT MEETS THE DESIGN STANDARD, AND I'M SURE WHETHER IT'S THIS INDIVIDUAL OR FUTURE INDIVIDUAL I CAN'T IMAGINE DRASTIC OR THE RADICAL OR HORRIFIC CHANGE THAT WOULD BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO OVERALL PROFITABILITY.

>> IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THEN IT WILL HAVE TO COME BACK. IF THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS NORMALLY IN ANY FUTURE BUILDINGS ALLOW WITHOUT COMING BACK TO YOU

PROVIDED THEY MEET REQUIREMENTS. >> I WANT TO CLARIFY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LOOKING THE SAME AND I ASKED FOR THE CONTINUITY.

IT'S MORE I DON'T MIND IF THEY VARY A LITTLE.

I DON'T WANT SOMETHING DRAMATIC NEXT DOOR.

I KNOW THE APPLICANT AND I DON'T BELIEVE HE WOULD DO THAT.

THAT IS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION.

>> ONE REASON I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT IT, THAT IS A GATEWAY TO MIDLOTHIAN. EVENTUALLY IT WILL BE BUILT OUT AND WE'LL KNOW WHEN WE COME TO TOWN THE BETTER BUILDING COMING

FROM THE OTHER SIDE. >> MAYOR RENO: MY REACTION IS

COMFORTABLE -- COMPARABLE PARTS. >> HAVE WE EVER ALLOWED STAFF THE DISCRETION TO SEE OUT THE FINISH OF A P.D. AND ARCHITECTURAL CONTINUITY?

>> IF IT DOESN'T IT NEEDS TO COME BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS.

AS STATED. >> SLAM DUNK.

[00:55:01]

>> THE OWNER CAN CHANGE, TOO. HE COULD SELL A PROPERTY.

WE CAN'T RELY ON THE STAFF BEING THE SAME OR THE OWNER BEING THE SAME. WE CAN RELY ON THE CONTINUITY.

OR IT HAS TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.

>> JUSTIN HAS TOO MANY TREES TO MOVE TO SELL IT.

MAY I MAKE A MOTION? >> YES.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> AS PRESENTED. >> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 7-0. ON THE NEXT ITEM WE HAVE ONE

[2021-017 ]

>> TRENTON: THIS IS ONE YOU HAVE MOST SEEN IN SEVERAL MONTHS. THE PROPERTY OWNERS BROUGHT FORTH A SIMILAR PROJECT, SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THAT ITEM EVENTUALLY WENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL HAD SOME CONCERNS.

PRIOR TO DECISION BEING MADE THE APPLICANT WITHDREW THE APPLICATION. THEY CAME BACK AND RESUBMITTED THE APPLICATION THAT WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION. THEY MADE CHANGES ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTION THEY RECEIVED FROM COUNCIL THAT EVENING.

WHAT THEY ARE ASKING TO DO IS BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 81. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 81 EMCOMPASSES BOTH SIDES OF THE 14TH STREET.

RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT USES ARE ALLOWED NONRESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL USES. COMMUNITY RETAIL.

WHAT THEY ARE ASKING TO ADD A USE, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEIR OWN PROPERTY.

AND DIRECTLY NORTH OF HAWKINS RUN ROAD.

THE PROPOSED REQUEST IS THE LOT ORIGINALLY THAT THEY HAD WERE ALL REAR-ENTRY. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PREVIOUS PLAN THAT IF YOU REMEMBER THERE WERE THE LOTS LINED UP AGAINST THIS PROPERTY LINE.

LIKE DUE TO THAT MEETING THEY WENT AHEAD AND CHANGED THE PLAN AND HOW EVERYTHING WAS LAID OUT. EVERYTHING IS FRONT ENTRY.

THEY PUT A PARK UP AGAINST THIS TO HAVE A LIMITED IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. PLAIN ABUTTING THE PROPERTY LINE ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A SIX-FOOT WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE REQUIRED TO BE CONSTRUCTED THERE. BEING BOARD ON BOARD WITH A TOP CAP AND KICK PLATE ON THE BOTTOM.

FOR A BETTER LOOKING FENCE. THE NEIGHBOR CAME TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND THEY INCREASE THE HEIGHT. THE HEIGHT, THE DEVELOPER IS FINE TO INCREASE THAT TO 7 FEET. IN ACCORDANCE TO WHAT THE NEIGHBORS REQUEST. SOME OF THE CHANGES FROM THE LAST TIME YOU SAW IT. ORIGINALLY THE OPEN AREA WAS HERE. IT GOT MOVED NORTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. ONE THING THEY DID TRY TO DO WITH THIS, HAVE REARRANGE THE LOT.

REMOVING THE ALLEYS. REPOSITIONING THE OPEN SPACE.

THEY DID MAKE SURE WE HAD WORKED WITH THE MISD QUITE A BIT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS ENTRANCE WILL DIRECTLY LINE UP WITH THE PROPOSED ENTRANCE TO THE SOUTH. ALSO ONE OF THE GOALS IS DUE TO THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY, THEY WANT TO MAKE THIS PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. FURTHER WEST IS THE KROGER DEVELOPMENT. FURTHER NORTH METHODIST HOSPITAL. WHAT THEY DID RIGHT HERE, THEY HAVE THE SIDEWALKS ON 14TH. HAWKINS RUN ROAD.

IT WILL TIE IN THIS NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

GO OUT THERE AND HAVE A TRAIL SYSTEM WITHIN THE OPEN SPACE.

AREAS FOR THE PUBLIC TO SIT. YOU CAN SEE IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, A LOT OF LANDSCAPING. THEY PROVIDE PARKING FOR THE VISITORS. ALONG THE OPEN SPACE.

ONE OF THE STAFF CONCERNS THEY ADDRESSED AND THEY CORRECTED WAS THE CONNECTION FROM THIS PORTION OF THE OPEN SPACE AND THIS PORTION OF THE OPEN SPACE. INSTEAD OF HAVING TO WALK ALL THE WAY AROUND HERE. THEY ADDED A TRAIL TO CONNECT FROM HERE TO HERE. TO INCREASE THE CONNECTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ADDITIONALLY, THEY ARE STILL PLANNING AS PREVIOUSLY, IN THE PREVIOUS VERSION, THEY ARE

[01:00:02]

VARIOUS FEATURES WILL BE INCLUDED.

PROPOSED SIGNAGE AND MASONRY WALL AND THE ROD IRON FENCE, THEY WILL HAVE THE FEATURE ON 14TH STREET.

WITHIN THE OPEN SPACE THEY WILL HAVE STRUCTURES; SUCH AS, SIGNING FOR THE AREAS FOR PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY TO SIT DOWN IN.

WHEN THIS WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THE LAST TIME AROUND IT WAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A 6-1 VOTE. ONE OF THEIR CONDITIONS THEY SEEN IN THE STAFF REPORT TO INCREASE THE FENCE HEIGHT ON THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE FROM 6 FEET TO 7 FEET.

WE NOTIFIED THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION.

I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE A COUPLE.

ARE WE STILL REQUIRING IRON ROD FENCING ADJOURNING GREEN SPACES?

>> TRENTON: YES. >> THE ONLY REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE AND I WANT TO CLARIFY. WE TALK ABOUT THIS ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY BEFORE. IS THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE, AND THAT PROPERTY RIGHT THERE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT IRON ROD FENCES? THAT IS HAWKINS RUN ROAD. I THINK HERE IS 14TH.

THIS IS THE SAME AS THOSE LOTS. WHEN YOU COME IN ON MAJOR THOROUGHFARE YOU LOOK IN THE PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS VERY ATTRACTIVE.

>> TRENTON: RIGHT HERE ON THE EXHIBIT -- THEY CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M MISTAKEN. RIGHT HERE, IT'S A MASONRY WALL

RIGHT HERE. >> WHAT ABOUT THE -- IS THAT ALONG 14TH? YEAH.

>> TRENTON: ON 14TH. MASONRY.

>> OKAY. >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS THE

HEIGHT OF THE MASONRY WALL? >> TRENTON: IT'S SIX FEET.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: IT'S LANDSCAPE FROM THE ROAD?

>> YEAH. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WHAT HAPPENS IF HAWKINS RUN ROAD DOESN'T GET BUILT?

>> TRENTON: PART OF THE PLATTING PROCESS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE TWO POINT OF INGRESS AND EGRESS BECAUSE OF THE FIRE CODE THAT REQUIRES ANYTHING MORE THAN 39 LOTS WITH TWO POINT OF EGRESS

AND INGRESS. >> DOES HAWKINS RUN ROAD

CURRENTLY GO THAT FAR? >> TRENTON: RIGHT NOW IT -- IT JETS OUT A BIT. BUT THEY WILL BE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND PART OF THE SCHOOL.

MEET TO THE END OF THE PROPERTY LINE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I'M CURIOUS AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF ROADS THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS SO FORGIVE ME.

I THOUGHT AT ONE POINT WE TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO DO LIKE A LEG OFF OF THE 14TH STREET THROUGH THIS PROPERTY.

I MEAN WERE WERE GOING TO TALK TO MR. JOE.

NOT JUST GO DO THIS. IS THAT STILL THE PLAN? OR DID WE DECIDE THAT IS NOT A GOOD USE? IN A

WE WERE DOING IT THROUGH HERE. >> TRENTON: THAT IS NORTH OF

THIS. >> HE HAS A LOT OF PROPERTIES OVER THERE. I'M GETTING CONFUSED.

>> YEAH. >> MAYOR RENO: HAWKINS RUN ROAD HAVE TO BE EXTENDED BEFORE THEY CAN --

[INAUDIBLE] >> THAT SCHOOL IS GOING STRAIGHT

ACROSS HAWKINS RUN ROAD, RIGHT? >> CORRECT.

>> I'M ASSUMING WE WILL HAVE TO, WE WILL HAVE TO PUT UP A FOUR-WAY STOP AT HAWKINS RUN ROAD AND 14TH IN ORDER TO FACILITATE CHILDREN CROSSING THAT?

>> THIS IS KROGER RIGHT HERE. THERE IS AN EMPTY LOT HERE.

>> FOUR-WAY STOP SIGN? WE PROBABLY HAVE TO HAVE A LIGHT WITH A CROSSWALK, I'D ASSUME. I GUESS, THE REASON I BRING THAT UP, I HAVE CONCERNS FROM THE KIDS CROSSING HAWKINS RUN ROAD WITH THE SECONDARY POINT OF ACCESS.

ONCE THE SCHOOL IS OPEN. BUT I'M SURE WE WILL FIGURE THAT OUT AS WE GO. I GUESS THAT BRINGS UP THE POINT OF THE SIDEWALKS. SO WE'LL HAVE THE SIDEWALK HERE.

RIGHT? SCHOOL IS DOWN HERE, RIGHT?

>> TRENTON: RIGHT. THERE ARE EXISTING SIDEWALK ALL

RIGHT HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER: EXISTING

SIDEWALK HERE? >> TRENTON: NO BUT IT WILL BE

REQUIRED ACROSS THE PROPERTY. >> COUNCILMEMBER: DO WE KNOW

WHO OWNS THIS? >> TRENTON: TERRY JOE OWNS THIS AS WELL. WHEN THIS DEVELOPS THEY ARE

REQUIRED FOR SIDEWALKS. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WE DON'T WANT A KID LIVING HERE RUNNING ACROSS HAWKINS RUN ROAD TO THE SCHOOL. WE WANT THEM WALKING UP AND CROSSING. JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

>> DOES STAFF HAVE AN OPINION NOT TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT ON THE FACT THAT EVERY WHICH WAY AND NONE OF THIS PLACE IS A

[01:05:04]

>> TRENTON: WE DID LOOK AT IT. IT MEETS ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LENGTH OF THE CUL-DE-SACS.

IT DOESN'T EXCEED ANY OF OUR SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH CUL-DE-SAC. BUT THE SIZE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, IT'S A SMALL DEVELOPMENT. WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS.

>> SMALL IN LAND AREA, LARGE IN LOTS.

YES? NUMBER OF LOTS.

>> TRENTON: YES. FOR THIS AREA I WOULD SAY IT'S HIGHER DENSITY THAN THE TYPICAL ONE-ACRE LOTS THAT YOU WOULD SEE. FEATURE LAND AREA CALLS THIS NEW TOWN MODULE AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> I FEEL LIKE THE WHOLE AREA AT SOME POINT IS THE HIGH DENSE.

THE CONFERENCE CENTER, 1,000 FEET FROM IT.

2,000 CENTER. >> YEAH.

APPROXIMATELY RIGHT HERE. >> MAYOR RENO: HOW LARGE IS

THE NORTHEAST BLOCK THERE? >> TRENTON: NORTHEAST? NO, DOWN. LEFT.

DOWN. GO DOWN.

GO DOWN. THAT ONE.

THE EMPTY -- THAT ONE. HOW LARGE?

>> TRENTON: HOW LARGE IS THAT LOT?

>> MAYOR RENO: YEAH. IT'S LIKE TINE OR TEN LOTS WIDE -- NINE OR TEN LOTS WIDE. SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> HOW IS THAT ZONED? >> TRENTON: THAT IS ZONED FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES. WHEN IT'S DEVELOPED THIS PORTION WILL COME BEFORE YOU, TOO. PART OF THE P.D. REQUIREMENTS.

>> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE A SPEAKER.

TAKE A BREAK HERE. LEE --

>> I NEED TO MAKE A CORRECTION. I APOLOGIZE.

I STATED THIS IS A MAT MASONRY . IT'S NOT A MASONRY WALL.

IT'S OPEN. IT WOULD BE ROD IRON FENCE.

THE MASONRY WALL STOPS HERE AND CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT HERE.

>> MAYOR RENO: ROD IRON FENCE WILL ALWAYS BE SEVEN FEET?

>> SIX FEET. >> MAYOR RENO: SIX.

>> WHAT IS THE DENSITY RATIO? >> THE PROPOSED DEN DENSITY IS 8

DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. >> THAT IS THE MATH I GOT, TOO.

[INAUDIBLE] >> ONE QUICK QUESTION TO GO WITH THAT. I MARINE NO DISRESPECT IN THIS QUESTION. WHAT IS THE DENSITY RATIO OF

WICKLIFFE MANOR? >> LEE WHITEDHEAD, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK COME ON UP. WE WILL SLIDE YOU IN HERE WHEN WE CAN. GIVE ME YOUR NAME.

IF YOU'RE A LOCAL RESIDENT. YOU MAY WEAR YOUR MASK OR TAKE IT OFF. YOUR CHOICE.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. LEE WHITEHEAD, 1080 MILE ZION IN MIDLOTHIAN. A FEW BRIEF PREPARED COMMENTS.

MY WIFE DEBRA AND I LIVE IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE ARE THE RESIDENTS THAT CAME BEFORE THE P&Z MEETING BEFORE. WE HAVE LIVED AT THIS HOUSE IN MIDLOTHIAN OVER TEN YEARS. WE FINISHED RAISING OUR KIDS HERE. NO GRAND KIDS YET.

BUT MAYBE SOME DAY. THIS HOME HAS BEEN OUR OASIS.

AS MIDLOTHIAN HAS GROWN WE HAVE BEENER THE BRING CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THE PROGRESS IS GOING TO IMPACT OUR DWELLING.

WE CONSIDER OURSELVES LUCKY. WE ARE LUCKY BECAUSE TERRY JOB HIT PAUSE BUTTON A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN WE EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH THE FIRST PLAN FOR THE DENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO US. WE ARE LUCKY BECAUSE THE P&Z COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL AGAIN HIT THE PAUSE BUTTON A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO WHEN THEY PROPOSED A MUCH IMPROVED BUT STILL CONCERNING TO US SCENARIO. WHICH HAD NINE HOUSES ADJACENT TO US AT THE TIME. FINALLY WE ARE LUCKY THAT TERRY AND HIS TEAM HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PUT REAL AND THE OBVIOUS EFFORT TO CRAFT THE PLAN BEFORE YOU NOW WHICH DOES MINIMIZE THE IMPACT TO THE PROPERTY. AND OUR WAY OF LIFE IN A NUMBER OF WAYS. DO WE FEEL A SENSE OF LOSS AT OUR IDYLLIC SETTING? SURE WE DO.

INESCAPABLE. BUT WE BELIEVE THIS PROPOSAL IS THE BEST AND THE FAIREST SCENARIO WE ARE LIKELY TO ACHIEVE. WE FULLY UNDERSTOOD THEY WANT TO PROFIT FROM THE INVEST IN THE THE PROPERTY.

ONLY NATURAL AND FAIR. FROM THEIR ACTIONS WE BELIEVE THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE DIDN'T BUY A HOUSE HERE ON FIVE ACRES IN LITTLE OLD MIDLOTHIAN TEN YEARS AGO JUST TO WIND UP

[01:10:03]

COUNCILMEMBERS, MAYOR, THANK YOU.

WE HAVE ONE LAST LITTLE BIT OF INPUT ON THIS PROPOSAL.

IN ORD EVERY TO MINIMIZE DISRUPTION FROM THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT WE ASK THAT THE FENCE ALONG THE COMMON PROPERTY LINE BE ORDERED AS ONE OF THE FIRST ORDERS OF BUSINESS.

WE HAVE COUNTRY DOGS. THEY ARE NOT USED TO THE STRANGERS WITH BIG AND LOUD MACHINES BEING RIGHT NEXT DOOR.

IT WILL ALSO HELP WITH THE DEBRIS, WHICH IS A NATURAL BYPRODUCT OF CONSTRUCTION. AND KEEP IT ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE FENCE SO THE SPEAK. WITH DUE CONSIDERATION THAT REQUEST, DEBRA AND I URGE YOU THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU. COUNCIL HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MR. WHITEHEAD SPEAK ON EVERY ISSUE GOING FORWARD. [LAUGHTER]

>> MAYOR RENO: YOU HAVE A REQUEST FOR A RETURN APPEARANCE THERE. ALL RIGHT.

BARRING NO MORE QUESTIONS WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE?

>> WAIT TO SEE IF TRENTON IS GETTING ANSWER TO THAT.

>> 3.54 DEVELOPING UNITS PER ACRE.

>> SIGNIFICANTLY MORE. >> MAYOR RENO: YES.

>> OUT OF CURIOSITY, THAT IS REFERRING TO WICKLIFFE MANOR?

>> YES. >> DOES IT INCLUDE THE CLUBHOUSE? I KNOW I WAS INVOLVED IN THAT.

>> IT WOULD INCLUDE JUST THE RESIDENTIAL.

>> RESIDENTIAL LOT. OKAY.

>> CURIOUS IF IT WAS COUNTED AS A LOT.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO CLOSE THE OPEN PORTION?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. COUNCIL, DISCUSSION?

COMMENTS? >> I VAGUELY REMEMBER IN DETAIL THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THE DISCUSSION WE HAD LAST AUGUST, I BELIEVE IS WHEN YOU SAID IT WAS TRENTON.

I HAVE SLEPT MANY TIMES SINCE THEN.

DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE MR. JOB MADE THE ADJUSTMENTS DISCUSSED AT THAT MEETING AND BROUGHT BACK SOMETHING THAT REFLECT WHAT IS THE COUNCIL WAS AFTER ON THAT DATE? I KNOW THAT IS A DIFFICULT QUESTION.

>> TRENTON: IT IS A DIFFICULT QUESTION.

I BELIEVE THERE WAS VARIOUS THOUGHTS EXPRESSED IN THE MEETING REGARDING WHAT THEY WERE TO BRING BACK.

I BELIEVE THEY DECREASED THE LOT AND INCREASED MINIMUM LOT SIZE FROM 40 TO 50 FEET INTERPOOR YOUR AND 55 FEET FOR THE CORNER LOT. THEY DID ALSO CHANGE THE LAYOUT.

THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT THE REAR ENTRY.

THEY CHANGED THE FRONT ENTRY. WHICH WAS ODD BECAUSE WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SAYING NO FRONT ENTRY.

I WANT TO MAKE ANOTHER CORRECTION.

IT'S MASONRY WALL HERE AND HERE. I APOLOGIZE.

THEY DID GO AHEAD AND TRY TO MAINTAIN -- ONE THING FROM WHAT I HEARD THAT PEOPLE LIKED ABOUT IT IS DESIGN AROUND THE PEDESTRIAN RATHER THAN VEHICLE. DUE TO THE USES AROUND IT.

TRIED EVERYTHING THEY COULD. IN THE REDESIGN TO KEEP THAT DESIGN STILL TOGETHER. STILL MAINTAIN ATTRIBUTES OF THE P.D. THAT EXISTED. SO FROM ALL THE THINGS I HEARD, I DO THINK THEY MADE POSITIVE CHANGES BASED ON WHAT WAS SAID.

I CAN'T TELL YOU IF THEY MADE EVERY CHANGE THAT COUNCIL DIRECTED THAT NIGHT. THERE WERE SOME CONFLICTING

COMMENTS. >> ONE THING TO MAKE SURE OF THIS IS NOT MIDTOWNESQUE. ROADS ARE WIDER.

>> RIGHT. THEY MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS.

>> TAKE TWO PICKUPS AND GO THIS WAY.

>> I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE GARAGES.

I KNOW WE'VE GOT FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES.

MY POSITION BACK THEN WAS IF THE GARAGE IS FIVE FEET BEHIND THE

HOUSE -- >> THAT IS SOMETHING IN THIS, DUE TO THE DESIGN AND THE WAY THE LOTS ARE LAID OUT THEY KEPT THIS, THEY ARE REQUESTING GARAGES FLUSH WITH THE PRIMARY

[01:15:02]

THEM TO BE OFFSET. >> THE WAY WE HAVE OUR SETBACK ON 100-FOOT LOT. THAT IS US.

WE SET THE SETBACK. WE DIDN'T GIVE THEM MUCH CHOICE THERE. IF YOU HAVE TO BE 20 FEET OFF

THE REAR, I BELIEVE. >> I MIGHT BE NEW AROUND HERE.

BUT I'M NOT NEW IN SOME OF THE OTHER BOARDS.

I FEEL LIKE SOME -- I DON'T WANT TO BE DIRECT IN HOW I SAY THIS AND MAKE SURE I SAY IT PROPERLY. SOME PROJECTS COME FORTH IN DIFFERENT MANNERS BUT ALWAYS SEEM TO SHARE SOME OF THE SAME CONCERNS. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE ADDRESSED SOME THINGS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, IT HAS THE SAME CONCERNS TRENDING IN THE WAY OF A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD FROM THE SAME APPLICANT. I THINK WE ARE SQUEEZING BLOOD OUT OF TURNIP ON THIS THING. TIGHT.

VERY TIGHT. WE GOT RID OF ALLEYWAYS.

CONGRATULATIONS. WE GOT ALL FRONT ENTRIES.

WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FRONT-ENTRIES FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE BEEN SITTING OUT THERE. NOW WE ARE POTENTIALLY ABOUT TO APPROVE SOMETHING WITH ALL FRONT-ENTRIES.

WE HAVE FLUSH GARAGES TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDINGS.

AGAIN, IN STARK CONTRAST TO EVERYTHING WE SAID.

I MEAN NO DISRESPECT TO THE APPLICANT.

IT JUST DOESN'T FIT. IT GOES AGAINST TOO MANY THINGS.

SURE MAYBE WE ADDRESSED A FEW THINGS.

STILL NOT THERE. >> MAYOR RENO: WILL THERE BE A

HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION? >> YES, IT'S REQUIRED.

>> MAYOR RENO: REQUIRED BY THE P.D.?

>> TRENTON: IT'S REQUIRED BY THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. CORRECT.

>> MAYOR RENO: COUNCIL, COMMENTS OR RESPONSE TO THOUGHTS

THAT WALTER HAS? >> I PREFER MR. JOB'S LAST DRAWING. I LIKE THE REAR ENTRY BUT I KNOW WHY WE DIDN'T DO IT. COUNCIL EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE DENSITY. TO ME IN MY BACKGROUND I TRY TO LOOK AT A PROPERTY TO THINK WHAT IS HIGHEST AND THE BEST USE? I DON'T KNOW -- COUNCIL CAN PUSH.

YOU HAVE BEEN ARGUING AGAINST HUGE LOTS FOR A WHILE NOW.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE YOU PUT HERE.

I ADMIT 40 WAS INTENSE. THEN 55.

MIKE WAS SITTING THERE WHEN WE SAID 55.

THEN 60. THEN 65.

THEN 70. I WAS GOING TO SA SAY THE LOT SE IS 50. I UNDERSTAND THAT IS NOT THE CITY'S ISSUE. BUT WHAT IS A 65-FOOT LOT SUBDIVISION GET YOU? LESS GREEN SPACE.

THEN I MEAN AS FAR AS THE -- >> LESS DENSITY RATIO.

>> IT DOES. IT DOES.

BUT IT GETS YOU LESS PARK AND GREEN SPACE FOR THE

NEIGHBORHOOD. >> WHY DO YOU SAY? WHY NOT TAKE TWO LOTS OUT OR HOWEVER MANY LOTS YOU NEED TO

GET FROM -- >> FROM THE DEVELOPER POINT OF VIEW. YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO.

>> BUT WHY IS GREEN SPACE THE FIRST THING TO GET CUT DOWN?

>> WELL, THIS IS WHERE I'VE ALWAYS ARGUED AGAINST THE BIG LOTS. I WOULD RATHER HAVE GREEN SPACE IN PARKS THAN SOMEONE'S BACKYARD.

>> 4.7 DENSITY RATIO IS A HIGH DENSITY RATIO.

THAT IS VERY HIGH. >> IT IS HIGH.

>> THAT ASIDE, I MEAN WE HAVE GOT -- NOW GRANTED I DO NOT KNOW THE DIMENSION OF THE CUL-DE-SACS.

OR AS I WILL CALL THEM THE DEAD END.

THAT IS WHAT IT IS. DEAD END.

I KNOW IT'S PROBABLY TEN FEET OR LESS FROM THE REQUIREMENT.

TO ALLOW IT. FINE, IT'S ALLOWED.

YOU I THINK IF -- BUT I THINK IF WE APPROVE THIS AS PRESENTED IT WILL GO AGAINST THE PRECEDENT, THE CONVERSATION, THE DELIBERATION, THE HOURS, EVERYTHING THAT WE TALK ABOUT ON MULTIPLE LEVELS THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR THE LAST YEAR OR

BETTER. >> DUE TO THE DENSITY PRIMARILY?

>> NO. DENSITY IS ONE THING.

FRONT-ENTRY IS ANOTHER. SETBACK FOR GARAGES VERSUS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE FACES IS ANOTHER.

I MEAN, GRANTED THERE IS THE NEIGHBOR HERE THAT SAYS THEY ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAKE CHANGES THEY DID.

SURE THAT SOLVES THAT ONE ISSUE. BUT THIS WILL SET A PRECEDENT TO

[01:20:04]

>> MAYOR RENO: TRENT, DO YOU HAVE A SCREEN THAT SHOWS A

LARGER AREA? >> WE CAN GET ON THERE.

PULL IT UP. THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS. IF POSSIBLE.

>> I JUST HAVE ONE MORE THING TO SAY.

>> THE APPLICANT IS HERE. >> I'LL PULL IT UP.

>> WE HAVE HAD APPLICANTS HERE WHO ARE LITERALLY ASKING FOR INSTEAD OF THE 100% REAR ENTRY, THEY ARE ASKING FOR 80%.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE 100% FRONT ENTRY HERE.

>> THAT WAS ON THE COUNCIL. >> I UNDERSTAND.

BUT AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CONSISTENCY.

>> THIS IS WHERE I HAVE GOTTEN FRUSTRATED WITH THIS COUNCIL MULTIPLE TIMES. EVERY KNOWS THAT I BEAT THAT HORSE. WHEN WE WENT AND RAISED THE STANDARDS UNTIL I WAS BLUE IN THE FACE.

STILL WAS THE ONLY ONE TO VOTE AGAINST IT.

THE WHOLE THING EVERYBODY GET TELLING ME, CLARK, RAISE THE STANDARD TO GIVE A LITTLE. WE NEVER GIVE.

WE GO THAT IS OUR STANDARD. THEN WHY RAISE IT? WE SHOULD HAVE LEFT WHERE IT WAS.

>> WE DO GIVE. BUT I'M SAYING WE HAVE HAD HOURS OF DELIBERATION FOR 5%, 10% OVER PROPOSAL FOR THE FRONT ENTRY.

WE HAVE A P.D. WITH THE 85% FRONT ENTRY AND P.D. WITH THIS SETBACK. ALL I WANT IS FIVE FEET.

4% MORE. WE SPENT HOURS TALKING ABOUT IT AND HERE WE ARE THROWING IT OUT THE WINTER.

>> MAYOR RENO: DOES MR. JOB, YOU WANT TO SPEAK?

>> SURE. >> RIGHT HERE IS THE AREA WE ARE

LOOKING AT. >> WHAT DOES P&Z RECOMMEND?

>> RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 6-1. >> MAYOR RENO: MR. JOB.

>> TERRANCE JOB, 2415 SUMMERFIELD.

MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. THANKS FOR EVERYONE'S COMMENTS TODAY. JUST TO RECAP COMMENTS AND TRENT'S PRESENTATION, WHICH WE APPRECIATE.

THE LAST PLAN WE BROUGHT IN WERE 40-FOOT WIDE LOTS WITH THE REAR ENTRY GARAGES. CLOSER TO 100 LOTS.

THIS PARTICULAR PART OF TOWN IS, HAS THE COMP PLAN FOR A MIXED USE OR THE HIGHER DENSITY. THERED IS A CONFLICT ON WHAT IS HIGHER DENSITY. WE DISCUSSED IT WITH FOLKS PERSONALLY ON THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS WITH THE STAFF.

WHEN WE WERE IN BEFORE, WE HAD UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM P&Z. I BELIEVE WE MIGHT HAVE SOME COUNCILMEMBERS THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ON THE S&P P&Z AND UNANIMY RECOMMENDED IT. WE GOT TO COUNCIL.

WE DON'T STRAW VOTE BUT WE COULD SEE IT WASN'T GOING TO GET APPROVED IN OUR OPINION BECAUSE THE LOTS WERE 40 FEET.

THERE WERE SOME FOLKS THAT REALLY HAD SERIOUS CONCERN ABOUT THE DENSITY AND THE 40-FOOT LOT. WE GOT THE OPINION AFTER GOING BACK TO DRAWING BOARD IF WE WOULD CHANGE THE PLAN WHERE WE DIDN'T IMPACT THE NEIGHBOR, OR IF WE GOT RID OF THE ALLEYS AND WE GOT THE LOTS UP TO 50 FOOT, LOST TEN LOTS WE WOULD HAVE A PRETTY GOOD CHANCE OF GETTING THIS APPROVED.

P&Z DID RECOMMEND IT 6-1. SPEAKING ON THE ALLEYS, WE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS 35 YEARS. AND MY OPINION DOESN'T REALLY MATTER BUT I DO HAVE ONE. I LIKE THE WAY A HOUSE LOOKS.

IT DOES NOT HAVE A FRONT-ENTRY GARAGE.

IT'S MORE PLEASING. I HATE ALLEYS.

ALLEYS RUIN THE BACKYARDS. THEY HAVE THE TRASH TRUCK RUMBLING DOWN THE BACK, DISTURBING THE NEIGHBORS.

THEY ARE DANGEROUS. THEY COULD PROMOTE CRIME.

IT'S POSSIBLE. THERE HAS BEEN STUDIES DONE SAYING THEY DO. PEOPLE CAN SNEAK IN FROM THE BACK. A LOT OF REASONS WHY I DON'T LIKE ALLEYS. I ALSO DON'T LIKE FRONT ENTRY

[01:25:04]

WE PRESENTED TWO PLANS. ONE WITH REALS, THAT I DON'T LIKE. THAT HAVE PREFRONTS AND NOW ONE WITH THE FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES AND NICE BACKYARDS.

IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT DECISION. THE DECISION IS YOURS.

WE RESPECT WHATEVER YOU DECIDE. WE WORKED VERY HARD TO TRY TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEIGHBORS. TRY TO COME UP WITH A PLAN WE FEEL IS REALLY GOOD FOR THE CITY.

I LIVE HERE. I LIVE DOWN THE STREET.

NOT JUST BECAUSE I LIVE HERE BUT I AM A RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPER.

I ADDS MORE WHEN WE LIVE HERE. MY OFFICE IS DOWN THE STREET.

MY HOUSE IS DOWN THE STREET. WHEN ARE PART OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE WANT SOMETHING GOOD AND WE WANT TO DRIVE THROUGH THERE WITHOUT PEOPLE SHAKING THEIR FIST AT ME.

I WANT TO BE SEMI LIKED AT LEAST.

NOT HATED. SO WE ARE TRYING TO BE RESPONSIBLE. I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF I CAN. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN GET A 100% ON ANYTHING. BUT WE ARE TRYING.

IF I COULD ANSWER QUESTIONS, I'D LOVE TO.

>> TERRY, AS YOU HEARD ME SAY, THE FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES KILL ME, TOO. I CAN ACCEPT THEM IF THEY ARE BEHIND THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. BUT WHEN THEY STICK OUT IN -- ONE OF THE FIRST THING YOU SEE GOING DOWN THE STREET, IT TEARS

UP A NEIGHBORHOOD TO ME. >> CAN YOU GO TO THE ELEVATIONS THAT WE PROVIDED IN THE PRESENTATION?

I WANTED TO -- >> YOU HAD THREE HOUSES I THINK SHOWING YOUR FRONT-ENTRY GARAGE. IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE THE GARAGE

IS -- >> THESE ARE THE ACTUAL BUILDER WE IT HAVE UNDER THE CONTRACT WITH.

THESE ARE NOT JUST SYMBOLIC. THEY COULD BE IF HE BAILED ON US. SO I CAN'T GUARANTEE THIS.

BUT THESE ARE THE PRODUCT OF THE BUILDER THAT IS UNDER CONTRACT.

I HEAR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. I THINK THEY LOOK GOOD.

>> THEY ARE ALMOST THERE. >> THEY DON'T LOOK BAD AT ALL.

>> IF YOU MOVE THE GARAGE BACK OR THE HOUSE FORWARD YOU WILL BE

THERE. >> WE HAVE DISCUSSED WITH HIM WOULD YOU DO THAT IF WE MOVE THE SETBACK CLOSER TO THE HOUSE? THE BUILDER IS THEY ARE WILLING TO SET -- HE REQUESTED IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN AND THAT WERE THE DEAL-BREAKER LET'S SAY THAT PERHAPS WE COULD DO A PERCENTAGE OF THEM SO THEY WOULDN'T ALL LOOK THE SAME. THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO BUILD A GOOD PERCENTAGE OF THE GARAGES SETTING BACK FIVE FEET.

IT'S UNION MAIN. A NEW COMPANY BUT OWNED BY TIM GUILLEN WHO OWNED THE GUILLEN HOMES FOR A LONG TIME.

A VERY RESPONSIBLE, WELL-TO-DO BUILDER.

THIS IS NOT SOMEDY THAT ARE NOT A FLAKY BUILDER.

THEY WILL DO WHAT THEY SAY. >> I COULD LIVE WITH ALTERNATES.

>> YOU GUY WANT TO PROPOSAL I THINK WE COULD DO THAT.

BUT PERHAPS WE CAN GET, WE CAN EVEN DO VARIED SETBACKS.

I HAVE SOME OTHER SUBDIVISIONS FOR INSTANCE IF YOU DID A J-SWING WE COULD MOVE IT 15 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE 25 FOOT.

THERE WERE DIFFERENT SETBACKS FOR THE DIFFERENT HOUSES.

SOME PEOPLE LIKE THAT AGAIN. SOME PEOPLE DON'T.

I PERSONALLY LIKE IT. I DON'T LIKE TO DRIVE DOWN A STREET THAT SEES EVERY HOUSE JUST LINED UP THE SAME.

IT LOOKS LIKE AN OLD NEIGHBORHOOD TO ME.

IT MAKES THE LANDSCAPING LOOK DIFFERENT.

SO I'M JUST THROWING OUT A HAIR, WINGING IT.

IF WE WERE TO SET BACK SOME OF THE GARAGES FIVE FEET ON -- PICK A NUMBER. 40%, 50%, WHATEVER NUMBER OF THE HOUSES PERHAPS THE SETBACK COULD BE 15 FEET OR SOMETHING, WHATEVER IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE COUNCIL.

IT WOULD GIVE IT SOME VARIETY. I LIKE VARIETY.

I DON'T THINK THE HOST HOUSES LOOK BAD BUT IF WE LOOK ALL LIKE THAT, THEY WILL START TO LOOK FLAT.

ALL THE SAME SETBACK. I GET THAT.

I SAID I'M NOT WILD ABOUT IT. >> I SEE ALL GARAGE DOORS.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> THAT IS WHAT HURTS ME.

>> WE WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT.

>> I COULD L WITH A PERCENTAGE OF SETBACK.

>> A MIX MIGHT BE BETTER THAN THEY ALL SITTING BACK.

THEN THEY ALL START LOOKING THE SAME THAT WAY AS WELL.

>> YOU CAN'T DO J-SWINGS HERE? >> NO, SIR.

NOT ON THE 50 FOOT. >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS THE --

[01:30:05]

CLOSE TO ITSELF? >> WE WERE MEETING THE ORDINANCE. WHAT IS IT? IS IT EVERY FIVE OR SEVEN REPEAT?

>> SIX. >> SIX.

I SAID FIVE AND SEVEN. IT WAS SIX.

EVERY SIX HOUSES. EACH SIDE OF THE STREET.

>> MAYOR RENO: ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR

MR. JOB? >> I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT IS THE SAME BUILDING, THE SAME HOUSE IT'S JUST THROWING THREE DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS. THAT IS NOT THREE SEPARATE

HOUSES. >> MAYOR RENO: SURE.

IT'S THE SAME BASIC. WHEN YOU DO THAT, DOES IT

COUNT -- >> OUR ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW THAT SAME BUILDING JUST TO HAVE THE THREE SEPARATE FACADES, CORRECT? [INAUDIBLE]

>> MAYOR RENO: THEY WOULD COUNT AS YOU CAN'T HAVE THEM IN FIVE OR SIX HOUSES OF EACH OTHER?

>> YEAH. >> ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STREET.

>> MAYOR RENO: HOW ABOUT THE TOP ONE?

I CAN SEE WHERE THE -- >> IT'S NOT THE SAME --

>> THAT IS A DIFFERENT PLAN. [INAUDIBLE]

>> THEY'LL HAVE PLENTY OF FLOOR PLANS.

THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A REPEAT ISSUE.

>> TERRY, I HATE TO BE HARD TO GET ALONG WITH BUT THE GARAGE THING IS A KILLER ON ME. LIKE I SAY, IF YOU COME AND ALTER IT, STAGGER IT. SOME WITH THE HOUSE OUT AND SOME WITH THE GARAGE OUT, I CAN GO WITH THAT.

>> OKAY. YES, SIR.

IF YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE WITH THAT CONDITION WE

WOULD DO THAT. >> I DIDN'T LIKE 40 FOOT LOTS.

I DON'T THINK I LIKE 50 FOOT LOTS IN THIS SITUATION.

THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE PROPERTY IS PUTTING PRESSURES ON YOU.

YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN.

WE CAN'T CHANGE THAT AS IT SITS RIGHTS NOW UNLESS YOU TRY TO BRING IN MORE OF THE OTHER GROUND IN TO THIS AND YOU CAN CHANGE THE LAYOUT. AS IT'S PRESENTED NOW, I THINK THERE ARE TOO MANY HOUSES FOR IT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBORHOOD IN

THIS END. >> WHAT IS THE WIDTH OF THE

HOUSES? >> 40 FEET.

>> THAT IS FIVE-FOOT SETBACK ON EITHER SIDE.

SETBACK HOW FAR FROM THE ROAD? IT'S IN HERE.

25 FEET. 20 FEET! BASICALLY THESE HOUSES ARE TEN FEET APART FROM EACH OTHER.

FLAT FACED. THERE IS 90 OF THEM.

18.5 ACRES OR 18. -- WE'LL CALL IT 19 ACRES AND DENSITY RATE OF 4.7. WHEN YOU ADD SIZE AND SHAPE OF THAT PLOT OF LAND, THAT IS A LOT TO MAKE WORK.

WHICH IS WHY YOU SAID YOURSELF YOU'RE NOT HAPPY WITH THE PRODUCT THAT HAS COME FORTH. IF YOU ARE NOT HAPPY, I'M NOT

REAL HAPPY. >> I DIDN'T SAY THAT.

I'M VERY HAPPY WITH IT. I'M NOT PARTICULARLY HAPPY WITH A FRONT ENTRY GARAGE OR REAR ENTRY ALLEY.

NEITHER PRODUCT AM I WILD ABOUT. BUT THIS AREA IS IN THE COMP PLAN FOR THE HIGHER DENSITY AND MIXED USE.

WE THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT USE. IT WILL PROMOTE RETAIL.

RETAIL HAS TAKEN A BEATING WITH COVID.

IT WILL BE YEARS BEFORE IT COMES BACK.

AMAZON ALREADY HAD IT ON THE ROPES BEFORE THAT.

I'M AN OPTIMISTIC. I'M DEVELOPER AND WE OWN LAND.

RETAIL HELPS THAT WHEN WE GET BACK TO NORMAL AGAIN AND WE WILL DINE OUT AND HAVE RESTAURANT EXPERIENCES.

WE ARE SO BLESSED TO LIVE IN MIDLOTHIAN WHERE WE ACTUALLY CAN DO THAT. WE STILL GO TO BELLA LUCCI AND WE ENJOY LIFE A LITTLE BIT HERE AND SOME PARTS OF THE COUNTRY CAN'T. WE THINK THIS IS AN EXCELLENT PLAN TO PROMOTE RETAIL AND GROWTH.

IT'S CLOSE TO THE HOSPITAL. IT'S CLOSE TO THE HIGHWAY.

EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A HIGH DENSITY THEY ARE NOT DRIVING THROUGH MILE SUBDIVISION TO GET TO THE HIGHWAY.

IT'S ON THE HIGHWAY. THERE IS NOT A BIG IMPACT.

>> 663 ANYWAY. >> IT'S ALL ON 663.

14TH STREET AND 27 RIGHT THERE.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> MAYOR RENO: TERRY, WHAT IS YOUR AVERAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE HOUSE?

AND WHAT IS YOUR LARGEST? >> YOU HAVE THAT, DON'T YOU,

[01:35:02]

TRENT? >> TRENTON: 1,500.

>> MAYOR RENO: MINIMUM 1,500. >> AIR CONDITIONING SPACE.

>> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS YOUR LARGEST YOU WILL PUT OUT THERE?

>> BUILDER WILL BUILD UP TO 2400, 2600.

THE AVERAGE HOME IN THE OTHER SUBDIVISIONS ARE AROUND 2400

SQUARE FEET. >> MAYOR RENO: THAT IS AVERAGE. THE LARGEST --

>> THEY HAVE THEM UP HIGHER THAN THAT.

SOME OF THE HOUSES WILL BE ON -- >> 50-FOOT LOTS.

>> YES, SIR. >> SINGLE STORY?

>> THEY ARE ALLOWED TO BUILD TWO STORIES.

TWO STORY AND THREE STORY. THESE ARE NOT DESIGNED -- THESE ARE EXECUTIVE HOUSING. NOT DESIGNED FOR FAMILIES

PARTICULARLY. >> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION.

WHO IS YOUR TARGET MARKET? >> EXECUTIVE HOUSING.

THEY ARE EXPENSIVE HOMES. THEY BUILD THESE IN VERIDIAN.

AVERAGE PRICE IS LOW $300S. THEY ARE NOT INEXPENSIVE.

THEY ARE NOT DESIGNED FOR LARGE FAMILIES.

>> ARE YOU SAYING YOU EXPECT THESE TO BE AT THE LOW 300S?

>> YES, SIR. I THINK THAT IS AN EXPENSIVE

HOME. >> NOT FOR MIDLOTHIAN RIGHT NOW

I WOULDN'T SAY. >> TERRY, I WANT TO --

>> WE TALK ABOUT THE J-SWING GARAGES.

PERSONALLY, THEY SUCK. >> I THINK SO, TOO.

I DON'T DISAGREE. I DON'T LIKE THEM ANY MORE THAN THE FRONT-ENTRY. I LIKE THEM LESS.

>> THE FRONT-ENTRY WITH THE HOUSE SITTING OUT.

THAT LOOKS GOOD. BUT J-SWING, AS FAR AS I'M

CONCERNED. >> RIGHT.

>> THROWING MY TWO CENTS OUT THERE.

>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU AT ALL ON THAT.

>> TRENTON QUICK QUESTION. I APOLOGIZE TERRY, I HAVE TO SIDE STEP YOU HERE. HOW MANY SUBDIVISIONS DO WE HAVE MIDLOTHIAN WITH DENSITY RATE OF 4.7?

>> I HAVE NO IDEA. >> NOT MANY I DON'T THINK.

>> THIS IS MORE LIKE A MIDTOWN PRODUCT.

>> NOT A LOT. USUALLY THEY ARE GOING TO BE TOWARD EITHER IN THE NEW TOWN MODULE OR THE ORIGINAL TOWN MODULES THAT YOU FIND DENSE DEVELOPMENTS.

>> THIS IS CURRENTLY IN. >> NEWTOWN MODULE.

>> ANYTHING ELSE FROM ME? >> NO.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU.

>> STAFF GOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE ABOUT ADDING DIVERSITY AND THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES REGARDING THE GARAGES. WE CAME UP WITH AN IDEA OF OFFSETTING THE 60% OF THE HOMES BE ALLOWED A FRONT SETBACK AT 15 FEET AND THE GARAGE SET BACK ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET BEHIND THE PRIMARY FACADE. THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE DEVIATION AND ALLOW FOR MORE HOMES TO HAVE A FIVE-FOOT GAR RAN SETBACK BUT STILL OFFER SOME GARAGES FLUSH.

NET DEVIATION OF THE SETBACK. >> 65%?

>> 60%. >> WE DIDN'T TALK TO THE

DEVELOPER OBVIOUSLY. >> TURN AND ASK HIM REAL QUICK.

>> WHAT STOPS THE NEXT APPLICANT AT THE NEXT MEETING TO SAY YOUR LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING YOU GUYS APPROVED 100% FRONT-ENTRY

GARAGES? >> I TELL THEM WE APPROVE THEM

CASE BY CASE. >> NOTHING IS GOING TO STOP

THAT. >> TURN THEM DOWN, TOO.

>> IT'S 60% A GOOD NUMBER? >> THAT WOULD WORK.

YES. >> 60%.

>> MAYOR RENO: COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE LARGER MAP?

>> THE GOOGLE MAP. >> MAYOR RENO: WELL, WALTER BRINGS UP SOME VERY INTERESTING POINTS.

MY ANSWER IS THE LOCATION. I COULD ENTERTAIN AN ARGUMENT THIS IS A GOOD PLACE FOR EXECUTIVE HOMES.

THE LOCATION. WE HAVE TO DRAW A LINE THERE TO SAY THIS IS NOT GOING TO OPEN THE DOOR FOR OTHER PEOPLE.

THIS IS A ONE OFF BECAUSE IT'S NEAR THE HOSPITAL, IT'S NEAR KROGER. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE OFFICES GOING

IN. >> ACROSS THE STREET.

>> MAYOR RENO: ACROSS THE STREET.

SO GIVEN THIS IS 90 ACRES, I MEAN I DON'T -- I THINK I HAVE BEEN HOPEFULLY I HAVE BEEN CLEAR.

I DON'T LIKE THE DENSITY. BUT I CAN SEE THIS BEING A ONE OFF. NOT, HOPEFULLY COUNCIL WILL BE ABLE TO SAY THIS IS A ONE OFF AND HOPEFULLY WE ARE NOT, THIS

[01:40:03]

CLARK IS RIGHT. THERE IS A CASE BY CASE ARGUMENT

HERE. >> I THINK WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT. I'M SURE WE WILL CONTINUE TO

TALK ABOUT IT WHEN THEY COME UP. >> YEAH.

>> ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE LOTS. I KNOW I HAVE MY TWO CENTS WORTH IN THERE. I'VE GOT TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE, THOUGH. I KNOW, I THINK SUMMER CREST.

I TALK TO SOMEBODY AT SUMMER CREST.

I SAID IT LOOKS LIKE THE WATER RUNS OFF THE ROOFER TO THE FENCE ON THE STREET. "NO, IT DOESN'T.

WE HAVE EIGHT FOOT OF THE BACKYARD." THEY ARE PUTTING ASTROTURF ON IT BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO MOW IT. BUT THIS IS EXECUTIVE.

WE MENTION EXECUTIVE HOUSING. I UNDERSTAND THAT.

IT IS NOT FOR ME. BUT I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WANT AS BIG A HOUSE THEY CAN GET ON THE SMALL LOT THEY CAN GET WITH LITTLE YARD AS THEY CAN GET.

PEOPLE WITH KIDS, THEY WANT SOME YARD.

THAT IS UNDERSTANDABLE. BUT TO THROW THE TWO CENTS OUT THERE. WHAT TERRY TALKED ABOUT THERE, GO WITH 60% OF THE HOUSES, GARAGES SET-BACK.

I CAN GO WITH THAT. I CAN VOTE FOR THAT.

>> NOT SETBACK. JUST MOVING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE UP, SO THEY ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THE ROAD.

>> THEY ARE GETTING LESS BACKYARD.

>> MAYOR RENO: DO WE CLOSE -- >> MOVING THE HOUSE UP FIVE

FEET. >> MAYOR RENO: WE COULD HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION -- I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE OPEN

HEARING. >> I THINK WE NEED TO GET IT

CLARIFIED. >> MAYOR RENO: WE'LL HAVE A

CHANCE -- >> WE ARE MOVING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE UP FIVE FEET REDUCING THE FRONT SETBACK FROM 20 TO 15.

>> WE ARE NOT CHANGING FRONT SETBACK.

>> THAT IS WHAT EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DOING.

>> THAT IS THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO IT?

>> AND STILL MAINTAIN 25-FOOT ON THE GARAGE AND THE STREET.

THE HOUSE IS 15 FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.

GARAGE BACK. SO IT JUST GOT CLOSER TO THE

ROAD. >> I HEARD SOMEONE SAY IS THAT THE ONLY WAY TO DO IT? NO.

THAT IS NOT THE ONLY WAY WE CAN DO THAT.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT, WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.

I WAS OFFERING IT AS A VARIETY SO WE WOULD HAVE THE HOMES WITH WE'LL CALL THEM FLAT, I DON'T LIKE THAT BUT FLAT FRONT GARAGE, WHICH IS THE 40%. IT WOULD BE 20 FEET OFF THE FRONT SETBACK. IF WE SET UP GARAGE BACK FIVE FEET WE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO MOVE THEM UP TO 15 FEET.

IT'S NOT A DEAL BREAKER FOR ME. WE COULD LEAVE THEM ALL AT 20 FEET. I WAS OFFERING THAT TO GIVE A VARIETY AS YOU DRIVE DOWN THE STREET.

I LIKE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE STREETSCAPE.

BUT AGAIN MY OPINION IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT HERE.

I'D LIKE TO GET APPROVED. IF THE COUNCIL DOESN'T LIKE

THAT, IT'S OKAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER: TO STATE THIS RESPECTFULLY, WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IF YOU CAN'T MOVE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE UP FIVE FEET THEN WE STAY WITH A FLAT FACE.

>> NO, SIR. >> THAT IS WHAT YOU SAID.

>> NO. I'LL LEAVE THEM ALL 20 FOOT SETBACK AND SET BACK 50% OF THEM FIVE FEET IF THAT IS WHAT YOUR

WILL IS. >> THAT IS NOT WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FIRST. SO NOW THAT IS --

>> I OFFERED THAT AS AN IDEA. AGAIN, IT'S PERSONAL.

I DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT WHAT I THINK.

TO ME I LIKE THE VARIATION OF THE INS AND OUTS.

IF SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE IT THAT IS OKAY.

WE COULD SET THEM ALL AT 20 FEET AND 60% OF THEM WITH THE GARAGE FOOT SETBACK. PERFECT LOY KAY.

>> THAT IS WHERE I AM COMING FROM.

>> ALL RIGHT. YOU WILL LET ME KNOW WHAT WE LIKE. WE CAN WORK WITH IT.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU, TERRY.

>> THANK YOU. >> YES.

>> MAYOR RENO: TRYING TO MOVE ON HERE.

LIKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MAYOR RENO: SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. >> WE ALREADY DID.

>> MAYOR RENO: I ASKED THAT BEFORE.

>> WE'VE CLOSED. >> IT'S BEEN A LONG

CONVERSATION. >> MAYOR RENO: ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE ALREADY -- THE CORE ISSUE TO ME IS THE DENSITY OR THE LOT WIDTH. EVERYTHING DOMINOES FROM THERE.

SO. >> I WOULD JUST LIKE COUNCIL TO VIEW AS A CITY PLANNER, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING.

PLANNING THE CITY FOR THE FUTURE TO LOOK AT THE OVERVIEW.

IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE CONFERENCE CENTER.

RIGHT NEXT TO ANOTHER MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.

THIRD AND A FOURTH. WE ARE PLANNING TO BRING HAWKINS RUN ROAD, MAJOR THOROUGHFARE DOWN TO CONNECT.

[01:45:02]

IF WE TALK ABOUT THIS PROPERTY, LET'S SAY WE WANT TO PUT RETAIL THERE. DO YOU REALLY WANT RETAIL ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL? DO YOU WANT MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL? ALL I'M SAYING IS I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCIL DOESN'T LIKE DENSITY.

WE HAVE DENSITY HERE. WE HAVE DENSITY HERE.

AT SOME POINT -- >> THE APPLICANT JUST SAID IT WON'T BE A FAMILY, THIS IS EXECUTIVE HOUSING WITH NOT A LOT OF CHILDREN. SO THEN THE FACT THAT IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM A MIDDLE SCHOOL OR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS, WHAT YOU SAID BUT THAT WOULD BE

INCONSEQUENTIAL. >> MAYOR RENO: THAT IS WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE THERE INSTEAD. IF YOU DON'T DO THIS CLARK'S POINT IS YOU COULD GET RETAIL, AND WE DON'T WANT RETAIL.

>> NO ONE IS SAYING YOU CAN'T BUILD HOUSES THERE.

I'M SAYING 4.7% DENSITY ON THAT SQUARE OF LAND IS CREATING ISSUES FOR THIS APPLICANT. WE CAN PUT HOUSES THERE.

>> IF DENSITY IS AN ISSUE, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUGHT THIS PROPERTY SEVERAL YEARS AGO WITH THE IDEA OF STUDENT HOUSING.

WHICH WE NEVER GOT PLANS BUT NOW YOU THROW IN THE DENSITY HERE.

THAT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPERTY.

I MEAN THE MAYOR IS RIGHT. AT SOME POINT THE CITY HAS TO PUT ITS FOOT DOWN AND SAY WHERE IS THE CUTOFF ON THE DENSITY.

I'M NOT ARGUING THAT. AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO SAY THIS IS THE LINE. I'M SAYING FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY, WHAT DO YOU WANT? 70 FOOT LOTS? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO PUT THAT? IF WE DO 770, WHAT IS THE LOT WIDTH ON THIS SUBDIVISION? I BET IT'S NOT 70.

I BET IT IS CLOSER TO 60. >> USING PREVIOUS BAD DECISIONS FOR DECISIONS MOVE FORWARD IS A LOSING GAME.

>> THAT IS ACUMING IT'S A BAD DECISION.

>> MAYOR RENO: THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS BEST USE FOR THIS 90 ACRES? WHAT IS OUR CHOICES TO PUT IN THERE? I'M PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE ARGUMENT YOU WON'T GET 70-FOOT LOTS IN THAT 90 ACRES.

I DON'T THINK -- I THINK THAT COMPARED TO WHAT ELSE -- I TOLD TERRY THIS. I DON'T LIKE THE DENSITY.

WE HAVE HAD NICE FRIENDLY DISCUSSIONS.

BUT I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY THE BEST USE FOR THE 90 ACRES.

>> MAKE A MOTION. >> MAYOR RENO: WITH THAT BEING SAID, SOMEBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AS PRESENTED WITH THE 60/40% SPLIT THAT TERRY RECOMMENDED AND WAYNE SECONDED ON THE FRONT GARAGE 60/40. SOME FORWARD AND SOME BACKWARD

AND SOME FLAT. >> WOULD YOU ADD IN ADD IN THE

FENCE LINE WITH THE NEIGHBOR? >> IF I ADD IN THAT FENCE LINE IS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION IT WILL GET TORN UP.

IN THE DIRT WORK AND THE HOUSE BUILDING, THAT FENCE LINE WILL GET TORN UP. YOU WILL HAVE TO BUILD THE FENCE TWICE. THAT IS WHY I WOULD LIKE TO

LEAVE IT OUT. >> IF YOU WOULD FOR THE RECORD

THE 60/40% SPLIT FOR GARAGE. >> 60% IS SET BACK.

>> YES. >> MAYOR RENO: 40% WILL BE --

>> YES. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

[INAUDIBLE] >> YES.

>> ANYTHING ELSE WE FORGET? >> I THINK THAT REGARDLESS OF MY POSITION I THINK THAT TERRY HAD ALREADY EXPRESSED TO THE NEIGHBOR THAT HE WOULD BE ACCEPTING OF BUILDING THE FENCE BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION. IS THAT, DID I CATCH THAT RIGHT

OR WRONG? >> GO AHEAD, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: COME ON UP, ALL THE WAY UP.

LEAVE THE MASK OFF. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET COVID

BETWEEN HERE AND THERE. >> THINKING OFF THE CUFF WE MIGHT RECOMMEND TO BUILD A TEMPORARY FENCE IN THE U.C. C.

CONSTRUCTION. WE SHOULD REPLACE IT.

IT WILL GET TORN UP AND LOOK BEAT UP AND NOT.

NO ONE WOULD LIKE IT. >> TEMPORARY FENCE TO THE FINAL

FENCE. >> THE THEN WE WILL REPLACE IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> THAT IS MY MOTION.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT AS IS WITH THE 60% SETBACK FROM THE GARAGES.

40% THERE. FENCE WILL BE TEMPORARY DURING CONSTRUCTION. 40-FOOT FRONT.

THANK YOU. THAT IS THE MOTION.

SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE.

[01:50:03]

TERRY, THANK YOU. THAT WAS 17.

HOW ARE WE DOING? IS EVERYBODY OKAY?

>> 18. >> MAYOR RENO: IS EVERYBODY --

[2021-018 ]

>> THANK Y'ALL. >> THE APPLICANT REQUESTING THIS REZONE FOR 33 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. SUBJECT PROPERTY CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL. IT'S SURROUNDED, MOST OF THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY PROPERTIES THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY. EXCEPT THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST WHICH IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL. OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN SHOWS THAT THE PROPERTY IS WHAT WE CALL THE COUNTRY MODULE.

THE COUNTRY MODULE EXPECTS THE LOT SIZES BETWEEN 1-3 ACRE TO PRESERVE THE OPEN AESTHETIC. IT DESIGNATES WEST WEST HIGHLAND ROAD AS A MAJOR COLLECTOR AND IT CONTAINS THE ROAD STUB THAT LEAD TO THE WEST FOR THE FUTURE CONNECTIVITY ON THE SCREEN.

THEY WILL INSTALL THE SIX-FOOT HIGH IRON FENCE WITH THE VEGETATIVE SCREENING OR SIX-FOOT MASONRY LONG WITH LANDSCAPING ALONG THE WEST HIGHLAND ROAD. EXISTING TREE LINE ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OUTLINED ON THE SCREEN AND SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OUTLINED ON THE SCREEN. THOSE SHALL BE PRESERVED.

ALL HOMES SHALL CONTAIN THE ARTICULATED FRONT ENTRANCES.

HEIGHT PLATE VARIATIONS AND THE HOMES SHALL NOT REPEAT THE SAME EXTERIOR DESIGN OR THE SAME OR THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET.

THIS WILL ADD VARIETY TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

SINCE THE PROPERTY ONLY CONSISTS OF THE 33 LOTS, ALL THE LOTS ARE ALL OVER ONE ACRE. TYPICAL AMENITIES PLAYGROUNDS, TRAILS, PLAY AREAS, THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. SO THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN 2,000 FEET OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CONNECTING TO A SEWER LINE, YOU CAN SEE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN, THERE ARE 1400 FEET AWAY.

THE APPLICANT ASKING FOR SEPTIC WAIVER.

PROVIDING SEWER SERVICE FOR THE LARGER LOT SIZES IS NOT TYPICAL.

LIKELY COST PROHIBITIVE. IT'S SOMEWHAT INDIRECTLY IN CONFLICT WITH THE CITY'S FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

IN ADDITION, THE SEWER LINE ALONG F.M. 387 CORRIDOR NEARING THE CAPACITY AND REQUIRE MAJOR OFFSET IMPROVEMENTS.

FOR THE REASONS WE SUPPORT A SEPTIC WAIVER FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. LETTERS HAVE BEEN SENT TO OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. WE RECEIVED RESPONSES OPPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT. BUT THE OPPOSITION LETTERS CAME FROM COUNTY RESIDENTS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.

NONE WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER THAT FALLS WITHIN THE CITY LIMIT. THE COMMISSIONERS DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL 4-3 OF THE AGENDA ITEM FOR REZONING AND GRANTING THE SEPTIC WAIVER. WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE QUESTIONS

THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE NEGATIVE RESPONSE?

>> YOU KNOW WHEN WE HAD DISCUSSION, THEY DID RAISE CONCERNS ABOUT THE SCREENING WALL THAT IS PROPOSED ON THE NORTH SIDE. THE IDEA THAT THE PROPERTIES ON EITHER SIDE OR ACROSS THE STREET DON'T HAVE THE MASONRY WALLS.

THAT WAS OF CONCERN FROM SOME OF THE P&Z COMMISSIONERS.

ANOTHER WAS THE DRAINAGE IMPACTS ALSO.

SO THE PROPERTY DOES CURRENTLY DRAIN.

WE COULD HAVE THE CITY ENGINEER COME UP AND SPEAK ABOUT THIS.

BUT THE PROPERTY DOES DRAIN TO THE WEST.

I BELIEVE THE FOLKS THAT DID SPEAK IN OPPOSITION HAD CONCERNS

ABOUT DRAINAGE TO THE SOUTH. >> COUNCILMEMBER: I GOT ONE QUICK QUESTION. HOW COME IT ONLY HAS ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT? YOU SAID EVERYTHING HAS TO HAVE

TWO. >> MARCOS: RIGHT.

ONCE YOU GET TO 39 LOTS. THAT IS WHERE THE TWO POINTS OF

ACCESS. >> A WAY AROUND IT.

>> MARCOS: WITH ONLY 33 LOTS THEY REALLY DON'T EVEN NEED -- WELL, WE DO WANT TO SEE THE CONNECTIVITY.

THAT IS WITHIN OUR REGULATIONS. SO ANYTIME WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT WE ALWAYS WANT TO SEE THE FUTURE CONNECTIVITY.

BUT EVEN WITHOUT THIS CONNECTION CONNECTING IN TO BASICALLY A FIELD, THEY ABSOLUTELY CAN DO THIS WITH 33 LOTS.

[01:55:01]

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I LIVED NEXT TO ONE OF THOSE CONNECTIONS.

THOSE ARE FUN. >> MAYOR RENO: DRAINAGE ON THE BOTTOM CUL-DE-SAC, WAS THERE ANY RESOLUTION OR ADDITIONAL

FEEDBACK? >> MARCOS: SURE.

YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS THE WATER SHEDDING AND DRAINING

SOUTH? >> MAYOR RENO: YEAH.

THAT WAS A HUGE, A BIG ISSUE. AT THE P&Z.

>> YEAH. BASED ON WHAT OUR ENGINEERS HAVE LOOKED AT AND ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEER PLANS THAT I BELIEVE DAVIDSON AND MCDEAL HAS DRAWN THESE UP.

THAT WAS NOT GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

IT WASN'T GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEER AND

PLANNING. >> ISN'T THERE ALREADY REGULATIONS TO PROHIBIT EXCESSIVE DRAINAGE LEAVING THE PROPERTIES DUE TO THE DEVELOPMENT?

>> MARCOS: ABSOLUTELY. >> COUNCILMEMBER: SO WOULDN'T IT BE AN ARGUMENT NULL AND VOID BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT TO PROPERTY IT FORWARD TO ANOTHER PROPERTY

OWNER'S PROPERTY? >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

REGARDLESS IF THEY ARE IN THE CITY OR OUTSIDE THE CITY.

>> MAYOR RENO: WELL, SOUGHT NOT TO BE A PROBLEM NOW BUT LATER IT BECOMES A PROBLEM, THEN WHAT WOULD THE CITY DO?

>> MARCOS: THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

ODDS OF IT BECOMING AN ISSUE -- I'M SORRY.

I WILL LET THE ENGINEER EXTRAORDINAIRE ANSWER THAT.

>> WHOEVER THAT PERSON IS. BUT THE ANSWER YOUR QUESTION THAT THE WAY THE PLAN SHOWS AND EVERYTHING IS FALLING THROUGH HERE, THROUGH THE CUL-DE-SAC AND GOING THIS DIRECTION.

IT WILL GO THROUGH AN AREA DRAINING TO.

THE ONLY THING THAT MAY GET TO THE SOUTHERN PROPERTIES, MAYBE A BACK PART OF THE LOTS GOING THERE NOW.

IT SHOULD BE MINIMAL. WHEN THEY SUBMIT THE PLANS THE FINAL CIVIL PLANS IT WILL GET REVIEWED.

ONCE IT'S DONE AND SET AND CONSTRUCTED IT WILL HAVE DESIGNATED AREA AND THE DIRECTION IT WILL GO.

IT SHOULDN'T CONTINUE TO GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION LATER ON UNLESS SOMEBODY COMES IN TO CHANGE IT UP.

THEN WE HAVE ABILITY TO GO AND ENFORCE AGAINST THEM.

>> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: MARCOS, IS THERE ANY REASON GIVEN FROM OPPOSITIONS FOR COMMISSIONERS? THREE THAT OPPOSED?

>> MARCOS: TOTAL OF THREE THAT DID OPPOSE.

THEY DID NOT GET IN THE SPECIFICS AT THE END SO CLARIFY WHY. I JUST DO RECALL THERE BEING SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE MASONRY FENCE AT THE NORTH SIDE.

AGAIN, NO OTHER DEVELOPMENT HAVE THE MASONRY IN THAT AREA.

YOU WOULD DRIVE DOWN THE NORTH HIGHLAND ROAD AND COME ACROSS A MASONRY WALL AND NOT SEE A MASONRY WALL WHEN YOU GET TO THE OTHER SIDE. OTHER THAN THAT IT WAS MORE ABOUT THE DRAINAGE. I SHOULD INCLUDE THERE ARE NO FRONT-ENTRY GARAGES. [LAUGHTER] EVERYTHING IS 100% SIDE-ENTRY. THEY ARE NOT REAR ENTRY.

ALL SIDE. >> MARCOS, AGREED WITH IT SITTING BACK THERE THAT DAY. MASONRY WALL, IT'S IGNORANT.

>> IT'S OUT OF PLACE. >> IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE.

I THINK IF WE DO THIS AND THEY ARE THE ONE-ACRE LOTS IF WE DID THE BERM AND THE TREES IT WOULD HELP THE SIGHT LINE.

IF IT FLIP-FLOPS ON NEXT PIECE OF THE PROPERTY PROBABLY IN SOMEBODY'S FORECAST, THAT IT WOULD HAVE A NICE, PRETTY FRONT

ON BOTH OF IT. >> MARCOS: YEAH.

IF THEY GO THIS ROUTE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A SIX FOOT WROUGHT IRON FENCE AND BERM AND SIX-FOOT H.O.A. LOT IN FRONT.

WE WOULD REQUIRE THERE BE AN EVER GREEN, NELLY STEPHEN OR SOMETHING TO CREATE A SCREEN WALL.

NOT NECESSARILY A TREE EVERY OH FEET.

>> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I AGREED WITH AND WHY IT WAS VOTED AGAINST BECAUSE OF THE WALL. I THINK WE GO AHEAD AND DO THE BUFFER. MIKE WOULD ARGUE THE WALL.

HE HATED THE WALLS. IN HIS DEFENSE I'LL TAKE HIS SIDE. I THINK THE WALL IS A BAD IDEA

RIGHT THERE. >> UNDERSTOOD.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO GET RID OF THE WALL. DO THE BERM STUFF.

REASON WHY THEY WANTED A MASONRY WALL? WE USUALLY TRY TO TELL THEM TO PUT THE MASONRY WALL.

>> MAYOR RENO: I THINK WE REQUIRED IT.

>> WE USUALLY GIVE AN OPTION. >> I'M CHRIS, THE APPLICANT.

MY FIRST TIME IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

>> MAYOR RENO: WELCOME. >> I'M ALSO A BROKER IN TOWN.

[02:00:02]

IF YOU PUT IN A WROUGHT IRON FENCE, THEY WILL SET A CEDAR FOOT INSIDE. THE CITY CAN'T STOP THEM FROM DOING THAT. THE NEIGHBOR DOESN'T DO THAT BUT ANOTHER NEIGHBOR DOES IT. IT JUST, IT DOESN'T LOOK THE SAME ALL THE WAY ACROSS. SO WE ARE OPEN TO THE BERM.

I KNOW MIKE TALKED ABOUT AT THE P&Z MEETING.

WE WEREN'T OPPOSED TO THAT AT ALL.

IT'S JUST THAT THE MASONRY KILLED TWO BIRD WITH ONE STONE IN MY OPINION. A HOMEOWNER WILL WANT TO PUT SOME PRIVACY THERE. I WILL SAY THIS, TOO.

THE PEOPLE THAT OPPOSED IT LAST TIME.

IT WAS ABOUT THE DRAINAGE. WE HAD SUBMITTED PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT FAR YET TO KEEP THE HOMEOWNERS HAPPY. I'LL SAY THE HOMES WILL BE 500-PLUS AT THE END OF THE DAY. WHAT WE DID WITH THE MOCKING BIRD SPRINGS TO THE WEST, WE WILL BUILD OFF OF THAT IS THE PLAN ON THIS NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT HERE.

>> THIS IS JUST IT'S JUST 850 FEET OF THE ROAD FRON DAMAGE

THERE. >> RIGHT.

>> I MEAN IF THE GUY WANTS TO PUT A CEDAR FENCE INSIDE OF HIS WROUGHT IRON FENCE THAT IS HIS RIGHT.

I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF THE MASONRY FENCE FOR THE 800 OR 50 FEET THERE. THAT IS FINE.

WE ARE OPEN TO THAT. >> I AGREE WITH YOU.

>> I KNOW YOU DO. >> MAYOR RENO: CHRIS?

>> CHRIS, YES. >> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

MOTION? >> I MOVE WE CLOSE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO CLOSE.

SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 7-0. COMMENTS, COUNCIL?

SOMEBODY HAVE A MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH THE CHANGE OF THE MASONRY FENCE TO THE OTHER

ONE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.

>> YOU ARE GOING TO WRITE IT PRETTIER THAN I'LL SAY IT.

>> TO THE BERM. LANDSCAPING.

>> YES, SIR. >> MAYOR RENO: ALL RIGHT.

>> 40-FOOT BERM. >> CONFIRM THE BERM.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0.

[2021-019 ]

OPEN ITEM 2021-019, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 24 A SECTION "B." TRENT?

>> TRENTON: THANK YOU. PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 24 DOES NOT OFFER OUTDOOR STORAGE OR THE DISPLAY OF THE MERCHANDISE OR OTHER ITEMS. DUE TO CODE VIOLATION, STAFF WENT OUT THERE AND NOTICE SHIPPING CONTAINERS ALONG THIS AREA. YOU HERE AND HERE.

WE KNOW THE MARKET HAS CHANGED AND THE TYPE OF THE COMMERCE CHANGING. DUE TO THAT, THE WAY THEY STORE MATERIAL AND HOW QUICK IT COMES IN, IN CERTAIN SEASONS SOMETHING THEY NEED MORE OF. THEY ARE REQUESTING TO CHANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO ALLOW SHIPPING CONTAINERS LOCATED ON SITE. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO HOW WE HAVE WRITTEN THE ORDINANCE AND TALKING WITH THE APPLICANT, WE REQUIRED THAT THE STORAGE UNIT BE LOCATED FIRST OF ALL IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY OUTSIDE THE FIRE LANE.

IN THIS SECTION OF THE PARKING LOT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTY FROM 67 OR THIS AREA, OR ALONG AVENUE "F," SHIPPING CONTAINERS ARE NOT VISIBLE IN THESE AREAS.

ALSO IN THE ORDINANCE WE HAVE LIMITED THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS THEY CAN ONLY BE THERE IN CERTAIN TIME OF THE YEAR AND THEN REQUIRED TO BE REMOVED. THE TIME FRAME WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE FOR THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS IS OCTOBER 1 TO DECEMBER 31 TO ADDRESS THE BUSY TIMES OF THE YEAR WHEN THEY NEED THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS IS 20 ON THIS SITE. WE DID GO OUT AND WHEN WE DID

[02:05:05]

IF THERE IS A PROPERTY IN THE VIOLATION AND THEY ARE GOING THROUGH A ZONING PROCESS INSTEAD OF MAKING THEM FIRST CONFORM TO THE ORDINANCE WE TRY TO WORK WITH THEM TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF WHICH METHOD CAN WE BRING THEM TO COMPLIANCE SO WE ALLOWED THEM TO LEAVE THEM THERE UNTIL THE ZONING CASE WAS

DETERMINED. >> ARE THESE ON THE GROUND OR ON

TOP OF EACH OTHER? >> TRENTON: ON THE GROUND.

STACKED SIDE BY SIDE. >> ALL ON THE GROUND?

>> TRENTON: CORRECT. IN THIS AREA AND THEN OVERFLOWS IS IN THE AREA. NO MORE THAN 20 IN THE REQUIRED ARE TAKEN OFF. SO THEY ARE NOT PERMANENT.

TEMPORARY FROM OCTOBER 31 TO DECEMBER 31.

>> 20-FOOT OR 40? >> 20-FOOT.

40. >> DIDN'T WE DISALLOW LOVES FROM

A SHIPPING CONTAINER? >> THE DIFFERENCE IS LOVES WAS PERMANENT. THOSE WERE PERMANENTLY THERE.

THESE ARE ONLY HERE DURING SEASONAL.

>> SEASONAL IS ALL YEAR LONG. >> NO IT STATES OCTOBER 31 TO DECEMBER 31 THEN REMOVE THEM ALL.

IT'S OCTOBER 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31.

THEN THEY HAVE TO BE BE REMOVED BY THE NEXT DAY.

>> THEY CAN'T EXCEED 20. >> NO.

>> MAYOR RENO: THERE IS NO STATEMENT ABOUT HOW ANY ONE CAN

SIT? >> WHAT IS THIS?

>> MAYOR RENO: IS THERE A STATEMENT HOW LONG A PARTICULAR CONTAINER CAN SIT? IT CAN SIT THERE THE WHOLE TIME?

>> YES. >> NO MORE THAN 20.

>> RIGHT. >> LOVES WERE BESIDE A TIRE SHOP. THAT IS WHY IT CAME UP.

>> I'M WITH YOU ON THAT. I RAISED OBJECTIONS ON P&Z WITH THE USE OF THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS TO INCREASE YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE AREA FOR ANY REASON.

THIS IS WALMART. IF THEY WANT TO BUILD A WHOLE NOTHER BUILDING NEXT TO IT, THEY COULD DO IT.

ASKING FOR SHIPPING CONTAINERS IN AN AREA -- THIS ISN'T DOWNTOWN. IT'S NOT BIG "D" BARBECUE.

NOT ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THIS IS JUST ADDING TO SQUARE FOOTAGE THE CHEAPEST POSSIBLE WAY YOU CAN.

>> HEY, TRENTON. ARE THESE STRICTLY CONTAINERS?

NO TRACTOR TRAILERS? >> NO.

JUST CONTAINERS. >> OKAY.

SO STAFF CAN GO OUT AND GET ANOTHER COUPLE OF BOXES.

>> IN THE RED AREA WHERE CONTAINERS MAY BE.

>> YES, SIR. >> I HAVE SEEN THEM PARKED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING ON THE OIL CHANGE SIDE BEFORE.

IN PREVIOUS YEARS. BLACK FRIDAY.

>> WE HAD THEM REMOVE THEM. >> OKAY.

>> WE HAVE NEW MANAGEMENT AT WALMART AND HE IS MORE PARTICULAR ABOUT HOW HIS STUFF IS LAID OUT THERE.

PREVIOUS MANAGEMENT DIDN'T KEEP UP ON IT.

>> I WILL SAY HE HAS BEEN PROACTIVE ANYTIME WE BROUGHT A CONCERN OR AN ISSUE UP HE HAS ADDRESSED IT BEFORE IT'S BEEN A LONG PROCESS. HE HAS BEEN QUICK.

HE IS HERE TODAY TO ANSWER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

>> MAYOR RENO: THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MOTION.

>> APPLICANT IS HERE. >> YOU WANT THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD? IF THE APPLICANT WOULD COME

FORWARD. >> HE GAVE A GOOD SPEECH AT

>> I WILL HAVE A QUESTION. >> PLEASE.

>> THE MANAGER AT WALMART? >> YES, SIR.

GOOD AFTERNOON, OR GOOD EVENING. I'M GREG HARDEN.

STORE MANAGER AT THE WALMART HERE AT THE 400 U.S. 67 IN MIDLOTHIAN. COUPLE OF THINGS.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, TAKE A MINUTE TO APPRECIATE BEING PART OF THE COMMUNITY. MAKE SURE THAT THE PRIORITY IS VERY CLEAR THAT WE WANT TO BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY.

GROW WITH THE COMMUNITY. I HAVE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF RUNNING A STORE IN FRISCO, PLANO, FARMERS BRANCH IN DALLAS.

FARMERS BRANCH WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU THE GROWTH AND THE CHANGE IN MIDLOTHIAN I SAW THE LAST COUPLE YEARS IS UNPRECEDENTED.

COUPLE THAT WITH THE THINGS THAT WE ENCOUNTER THIS YEAR HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING. YOU KNOW ALL KNOW ABOUT THAT.

BUT CONTAINERS AUNT JUST FOR SHOW OR ANOTHER WAY TO GET ANOTHER BALLOT. THE BIGGEST THING FOR ME COMING IN THIS YEAR, JUST TRYING TO GET CHRISTMAS TO THE KIDS THIS HOLIDAY. THINK ABOUT THE DIGITAL OMNI CHANNEL PIECE OF THIS AND HOW TO GET THE CENTRAL NEEDS AND HOW TO CATER TO THE COMMUNITY. SHOPPING PATTERNS CHANGED

[02:10:03]

THEY SHOP DIFFERENT. WE HAVE TO STORE THINGS LONGER AND CHANGE WITH THE SHIPPING PATTERN AND HOW WE DO THINGS.

ULTIMATELY WE HAD A GOAL WITH THE CONTAINERS.

WE DON'T HAVE THEM OFTEN. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE LOW PART OF GETTING THEM PICKED UP THIS YEAR THE CONTAINERS WERE ALL EMPTY BY THE 9TH OF DECEMBER.

WE ASK FOR THE TIME TO ALLOW US TO PICKUP.

NOT JUST MERCHANDISE CAUSING ANY ISSUES.

MOST IS SIMPLY TO MAINTAIN THE LEVEL OF THE, YOU KNOW, MERCHANDISE AND THE AVAILABILITY TO CUSTOMERS IN MIDLOTHIAN.

WE TALK ABOUT THE GROWTH. SITTING HERE WATCHING THE GROWTH IN THE COMMUNITY AND HOW IT IS CHANGING.

I BELIEVE WALMART FILLS A LOT OF THAT.

THIS ISN'T THE SAMAL WALMART FOUR YEARS AGO WERE NINE CONTAINERS IN THE HOLIDAYS. NOW IT'S DIFFERENT.

THE SAME TIME THE LEVEL URGENCY TO GET IN AND OUT AND MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAN AND PRESENTABLE. ANY ISSUES WE HAVE WE WILL COMMIT TO TAKE CARE OF THAT AND BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY IN A POSITIVE WAY. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS

YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE. >> I HAVE ONE.

IT'S ONLY FOR THE SEASONAL. >> YES, SIR.

>> YOU HAVE OFFENSE. SORRY, MY DEAL IS NOT WORKING.

ON THE BACK PART OF WALMART YOU HAVE OFFENSE.

LIKE THIS NOW? HERE? AND AGAIN HERE. ON THE CORNERS.

>> IT'S A MASSIVE RETAINING WALL.

>> I KNOW THE RETAUNING WALL. BEHIND WALMART DON'T THEY HAVE OFFENSE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC GOING BACK THERE?

>> NO. ALL THE WAY AROUND.

>> WELL THAT CHANGES THINGS FOR ME.

>> ALL THE CONTAINERS TOADS FIRE LINE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. YES, SIR.

>> WHEN Y'ALL OPENED UP THE TRAINING ACADEMY THERE IT TOOK UP SOME OF THE STORAGE FACE INSIDE THE FACILITY?

>> YES. THE SECOND G.M. BACK ROOM WE USE FOR THE EDUCATIONAL PIECE OF THE WALMART.

>> OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY SQUARE FEET

THAT IS? >> 30, 26,000 SQUARE FEET OF THE

BACK ROOM SPACE. >> 26,000?

26,000? >> YES, SIR.

BUILDING 208,000. WE LOST HALF OF THE RECEIVING AND POTENTIAL FOR THE MERCHANDISE WHEN WE ADDED ACADEMY. THREE YEARS AGO.

>> GOOD DEAL OF THE STORAGE WAS TAKEN UP BY THE TRAINING ACADEMY. YOU WENT TO THE AUTOMATED

UNLOADING SYSTEM. >> YES.

TO MAKE IT EFFICIENT FOR TO US UNLOAD AND GET THE MERCHANDISE IN AND OUT. AND MORE ACCURACY.

WE DON'T GET INVENTORY THAT TAKES UP THE NEEDED SPACE.

>> IT TOOK UP SOME STORAGE AREA AS WELL?

>> YES, SIR. NOT AS MUCH AS THE BACK ROOM.

WE DID LOSE THE STEEL HOLDING POWER.

YES, SIR. >> WHEN YOU ADDED THE GROCERY

PICKUP AREA THAT TOOK UP -- >> YES.

THAT ONE IS SPECIAL. ABSOLUTELY.

WE LOST SPACE THERE TOO, AS WELL.

>> OKAY. >> SAFE TO SAY THAT IF NOT FOR THE THREE ITEMS TAKING A HUGE AMOUNT OF THE STORAGE YOU WOULD

HAVE ENOUGH SPACE. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> WE LOST THINGS THAT DIDN'T HAVE THIS YEAR.

WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE THE FALSE PROMISES TO THE CUSTOMERS.

>> WHAT DO OTHER STORES DO THAT RUN IN TO THIS SCENARIO?

DO YOU KNOW? >> SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE I RAN IN TO FIVE OR SIX WALMARTS NOW.

THEY HAVE TRAILERS OR RENT WAREHOUSE.

BEING IN DALLAS, A LOT OF TIMES WE COULD GET OFF-SITE WAREHOUSES THAT WERE CLOSER. WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THOSE AND TALKED A FEW THINGS LIKE THAT. YES, SIR.

>> IS THERE EVER A TIME THAT WALMART ENLARGES THE FOOTPRINT

OF THE STORE? >> NOT NECESSARILY.

WE GO THROUGH THE REMODELS, RENOVATIONS BUT MOST IS INTERIOR. EVERYBODY IF IT WAS A CHANGE INSIDE THE BUILDING IT WOULD BE INSIDE THE FORMAT.

NOT OUTSIDE OF IT. YES, SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> ESY. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: APPRECIATE IT. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> SORRY, GUYS.

I HAD TO GO OUT. IS THIS STORAGE UNITS OR TRAILERS? ON HERE IT SAYS TRAILERS.

>> CONTAINERS. >> JUST MAKING SURE.

HOLD ON NOW. >> BEHIND THE LOCATION.

BEHIND THE STORE. OPEN AREA THAT ARE PALLETS THAT USED TO HAVE OFFENSE IN FRONT OF IT.

DO WE KNOW IS IT PART OF THIS? >> WE CALL RETENTION THE BONE

[02:15:05]

>> PLEASE COME UP TO THE MIC. >> IF I'M REFERRING TO THE AREA DIRECTLY BEHIND THE BUILDING. SEPARATE FROM THE BUILDING.

WHERE PALLETS ARE. >> YES, SIR.

ENCLOSED UP AROUND IT. >> NO.

THESE ARE OUT IN THE OPEN BEHIND THE BUILDING.

>> YES, SIR. IN THE FRONT OF IT IS OPEN.

>> THAT IS IT. >> LOOKS LIKE IT USED TO BE --

>> PHARMACY DRIVE THROUGH SIDE. NOT THE DIRECT BACK OF THE

BUILDING. >> CAN WE GET A GOOGLE MAP.

>> THAT IS AN OLD TRASH CAN AREA WE DUD NOT USE ANYMORE.

>> RIGHT THERE. >> LOOKS LIKE THIS FENCE HERE.

>> IT'S ACTUALLY NOT REMOVED. IT'S STILL THERE.

BUT IT IS OPEN ON ONE SIDE. I THINK YOU ARE REFERRING TO WHERE THE BALES ARE. ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING

THERE. >> DIRECTLY BEHIND THE BUILDING RETENTION AREA FOR THE PALLETS AS WELL.

LEFT SIDE. PICTURES THROUGHOUT THERE.

>> PHARMACY DRIVE-THRU. >> REQUESTING 20 OF THE BOXES TO BE THERE. DO YOU EXPECT THAT THERE WILL BE 20 EVERY YEAR. ARE WE SETTING A MAX NUMBER AND YOU WILL ORDER AS MUCH AS YOU NEED?

>> I THINK 20 WAS TO BE SAFE. IN THE PAST WE HAVE DONE NINE AND 13 IS WHAT WE CAPPED AT LAST YEAR.

THIS YEAR IS DIFFERENT. WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE NEEDED.

WE CUBED OF SET THE STABLING OFF OF THIS YEAR MOVING FORWARD.

ESPECIALLY WITH THE DIGITAL ASPECT.

BUT AT NO POINT IN TIME WOULD YOU NEED MORE THAN 10.

WE NEVER EVER WENT OVER 20. ESPECIALLY WITH THE INVENTORY AND HOW EFFICIENT IT IS NOW. YOU SHOULDN'T NEED 20 TRAILERS

EVEN FOR A REMODEL. >> IS THIS ECOMMERCE ITEMS?

>> WELL, EVERYTHING IS ECOMMERCE.

EVERYTHING IS ONLINE NOW. IT WON'T BE GROCERY OR NO CHEMICALS AND NO ELECTRONICS ON THE TRAILERS.

IT'S ONLY HOUSE WEARS, TOYS. THAT LATE SEASON STUFF.

SEASONAL MERCHANDISE. CHRISTMAS TREES.

>> LAWN FURNITURE. >> FURNITURE OUT THERE.

ABSOLUTELY. NOTHING THAT WOULD CAUSE ANY ISSUE. OUTSIDE THE NORM.

>> GO AHEAD. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? DREW?

>> GREG. >> MAYOR RENO: GREG.

THANK YOU, GREG. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: NO OTHER QUESTIONS HERE, HAVE A MOTION TO

CLOSE THE OPEN. >> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. >> ITEM PASSES 7-0.

COMMENTS, COUNCIL? >> TRENT, ARE YOU HAPPY WITH EVERYTHING GETTING DONE AND EVERYTHING BEEN SAID SO FAR?

>> SO FAR. YES.

>> THERE IS NO REASON WE SHOULDN'T JUST SAY YES?

>> I MEAN, ORIGINALLY OUR CONVERSATIONS WERE, THEY HAD THEM RIGHT HERE. BUT I WENT DOWN AND WE VIEWED IT FROM HERE TO SEE THEM. WE WERE TRYING TO, WE WERE AUTOMOBILE TO GET THEM TO PUT THEM IN THE LOCATIONS HOPEFULLY YOU COULDN'T SEE THEM FROM A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

BUT ARE YOU HAPPY WITH EVERYTHING THEY HAVE DONE TO MAKE ALL OF THESE THINGS GO AWAY?

>> YES. ABSOLUTELY.

>> WHAT DO YOU NEED FROM US? >> RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OR

DENIAL. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> WHOA. IF WAYNE SAYS APPROVE.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> MAYOR RENO: OKAY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH WALMART.

20 CONEX BOXES FOR THE OUTDOOR STORAGE FOR WAL WALMART SETS A PRECEDENT TO MAKE SURE IF A RESIDENT OR SMALLER DEVELOPER OR A SMALLER LAND HOLDER OR WHAT HAVE YOU COME FORWARD THEY CANNOT MAKE A CLAIM WE ARE DOING FOR A LARGE CORPORATION WE WHAT WE ARE NOT WILLING TO DO FOR THEM.

WE SHOULD BE WEARY OF THAT. >> CONNEX BOXES RIGHT NOW ON PRIVATE PROPERTY BASED ON THE SQUARE ACREAGE.

YOU CAN ONLY HAVE ONE PER FIVE? >> TEN ACRES.

>> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL.

I'M TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL. >> NONRESIDENTIAL USES.

>> WE HAVE ONE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> WE HAVE TWO OF THEM.

>> YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE. I HEAR YOUR POINT.

>> I'M JUST SAYING LET'S SAY THE SAME THING I BROUGHT UP WITH THE

[02:20:04]

BE IT FOR NEW REASON. STORAGE OR OTHERWISE BY THE USE OF A CONNEX BOX. IN THAT INSTANCE I COULD UTILIZE MORE OF MY BUILDING INSIDE BECAUSE YOU'LL JUST COME HERE AND SAY WELL I NEED A CONNEX BOX FOR STORAGE BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE

SPACE IN MY BUILDING. >> I MADE AN ASSUMPTION HERE --

>> WE SAY YES OR NO. >> ALWAYS UP TO US.

I'M JUST SAYING. >> MAYOR RENO: I MADE AN ASSUMPTION HERE THAT WHAT PARTIALLY STARTED HERE WALMART CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING OUTSIDE OVERNIGHT.

>> CORRECT. THE P.D. DOESN'T ALLOW FOR

OUTDOOR STORAGE. >> THEY HAVE A GARDEN CENTER.

ISN'T THAT OUTSIDE? >> NO.

IT'S INSIDE. THEY CAN'T LEAVE THE LAWNMOWERS

OUT THERE. >> THEY HAVE 20 OR 30, LARGE CARDBOARD BALES AROUND BACK AND IT HAS BEEN LIKE THAT FOR A WEEK. I DRIVE PAST THIS EVERY NIGHT ON THE WAY HOME. YOU CAN SEE, EVERYONE WITH THE LIMITED CONTAINERS THEY HAVE BACK THERE NOW YOU CAN SEE IT FROM THE HIGHWAY. FORGET PARKING LOT.

FROM THE HIGHWAY. THERE IS THE OPEN DUMPSTER AREA.

AND THE BALES, 20, 30. HUGE BALES.

>> IS THAT CORRECT THAT WHAT STARTED THIS IS THE AGREEMENT THEY CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING OUT OVERNIGHT?

>> THE INITIAL STORAGE -- >> MAYOR RENO: BUT OUR ENFORCEMENT. WERE WE ENFORCING BECAUSE OF

THAT AGREEMENT? >> WE ENFORCE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE STORAGE BOXES.

>> MAYOR RENO: OR ANYTHING. >> APPLICANT RESPOND TO THIS.

>> WANT TO SPEAK ON THE BALES REALLY QUICK.

I GET WHY YOU THINK THE WALL IS THERE.

WE ALLUDED TO THIS A SECOND AGO. THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR IT.

WE ARE HAPPY TO SUBMIT EMERGENCY PICKUP.

THE BALES ARE THERE TWICE A WEEK BUT THEY HAVEN'T PICKED UP SINCE CHRISTMAS. THEY CAME ON AN EMERGENCY FROM A DIFFERENT SIDE WE NEVER HAD TO PICK UP ON.

OUTSIDE THE NORM. THE LAST YEAR WASN'T NORMAL.

COMING OUT OF THE HOLIDAYS IS REALLY HARD TO GET RESPONSES EVEN FROM A TRAILER PICKUP NOW. THAT IS OUR STRUGGLE.

THINGS WE HAVE TO WORK ON TO MAKE SURE WE EXPEDITE KNOWING WHAT WE FACED WITH THIS YEAR. WE'LL BE READY FOR SOME OF THE BLIND SIDE THINGS AND THE HICCUP AND THE BASIC TRANSPORTATION NO MATTER WHAT IT IS. THOSE BALES WOULD NOT BE THERE HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR A FEW THINGS THAT ARE SLOWING DOWN THE BASIC TRANSPORTATION AND PICKUPS. SAME THING WITH THE PALLETS.

IF YOU LOOK IN FRONT YOU CAN SEE THAT.

THAT WALL IS STILL THERE. BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S PROBABLY THREE WEEKS WORTH OF THE BALES NORMALLY IT'S JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS. IT LOOKS OUTSIDE THE NORM.

JUST TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION THERE.

>> DO WE KNOW WHAT IS INSIDE THE LARGE FENCED IN AREA ON NORTH SIDE. CONNEX THERE.

CAN THEY FENCE IN ANYTHING AROUND THE CONNEX ABOUT THE

BACK? >> LARGE FENCED IN AREA.

>> THIS IS RIGHT HERE, THEY ARE ACTUALLY PART OF THAT, THEY ARE DOING RENOVATIONS. THEY ARE ALLOWED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION STORAGE CONTAINER. TO HOLD EQUIPMENT AND THE SUPPLIES. THAT IS WHAT IS GOING ON.

>> SO THE BACKSIDE TO MY QUESTION IS UNDER WHAT PRETENSE IF WE DO APPROVE UNDER WHAT PREMISE ARE WE APPROVING? WHAT REASON WOULD WE APPROVE THIS BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE TO APPLY MOVING FORWARD FOR OTHER PEOPLE?

>> YOU MAKE EXCEPTIONS FOR THE COMPANIES OR THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN GOOD STEWARD OF MAINTAINING WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG.

YOU DON'T SEE THAT HAPPENING HERE.

OVER EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. >> MAYOR RENO: SAY THAT AGAIN,

PLEASE. >> IF YOU MAKE AN EXCEPTION FOR ANYBODY BUILDER OR A BUSINESS, I THINK A LOT OF THE LEEWAY WE MIGHT GIVE THEM IS THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING BY THE RULES ALL ALONG. NOT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN VIOLATING THE CITY ORDINANCE AND NOW THEY WANT AN EXCEPTION TO IT. I FEEL LIKE THAT IS THE CASE

HERE. >> YOU ARE SAYING THAT IS A NEGATIVE STATEMENT. BASICALLY THEY HAVE BEEN IN VIOLATION FOR A LONG TOMB AND ASKING TO CONTINUE THE VIOLATION

WITH OUR BLESSING. >> PRETTY MUCH.

>> ARE YOU MANAGEMENT? >> FOUR YEARS.

[02:25:01]

>> YES, SIR. DID YOU JUST TAKE OVER THIS

WALMART? >> I TOOK OVER THIS STORE FOUR YEARS AGO FEBRUARY 2. YES, SIR.

OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHY -- BECAUSE AS THE CITY GROWS AND WE'LL GET MORE OF THESE AND TAKE MORE INVENTORY I CAN SEE THE NEED FOR ANY BIG BOX STORE NEEDING MORE STORAGE.

OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHY WOULD ANYONE BE OPPOSED, I DON'T KNOW IF WE DO THIS, BUILD A SCREEN FENCE, A SCREENING FENCE TO FENCE OFF THE BACK OF YOUR STORE AND STORE EVERYTHING BACK THERE?

>> IT'S A FIRE ISSUE. EVERYBODY POLICE ISSUE.

THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE BACK THERE AND CATCH SOMEBODY IF

THEY ARE RUNNING. >> LET MCCOYS.

I'M NOT ARGUING. I'M ASKING A LEGIT QUESTION.

>> THAT IS ACROSS THAT BUILDING. IT'S LARGE.

>> IF WE SET -- I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE GROCERY STORES. IF WE TAKE NOTE OF THIS, DOES IT RAISE THE COST OF THE PRODUCTS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO NOW HAVE TOOFF SITE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE TO BRING IT IN?

>> OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A FINANCIAL IMPACT, SURE.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BUILDING A SCREENING THAT IS SOMETHING WE ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE TO DO AND GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE INVOLVED IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF.

>> I MIGHT BE WRONG. I'M HEARING FROM COUNCIL WELL, AGAINST IT BUT IF IT'S SCREENED ARE YOU AGAINST IT? I GUESS THAT IS ULTIMATUM, RIGHT?

>> THE PROBLEM IS TEMPORARY STORAGE.

YOU HAVE BEEN HERE FOUR YEARS. FOUR CHRISTMASS?

>> YES, SIR. THIS IS MY FOURTH CHRISTMAS.

>> MAYOR RENO: THE LAST THREE CHRISTMASES HAS THIS PROBLEM

EXISTED? >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: SO THIS A. >> WE ENDED UP WITH MORE TRAILERS THAN WE NORMALLY DID BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTIES AND

THE YEAR MORE SO THAN ANYTHING. >> MAYOR RENO: DO YOU EXPECT THIS TO BE TRUE THE NEXT YEAR, NEXT CHRISTMAS?

>> TO STILL NEED TRAILERS? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> MAYOR RENO: SO WALTER YOUR ISSUE IS WE ARE ALLOWING WALMART

TO HAVE TEMPORARY STORAGE? >>

>> COUNCILMAN DARRACH: ON A LARGE SCALE POTENTIALLY UNAVAILABLE TO THE AVERAGE BUSINESS OWNER IN TOWN.

YES. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WHAT BUSINESS WOULD HAVE THIS KIND OF SCALE?

>> COUNCILMAN DARRACH: THAT IS THE THING.

IS IT FOR TO US JUDGE WHAT IS THE NEED OF A SMALL BUSINESS VERSUS THE LARGE CORPORATION? IF A SMALL BUSINESS COMES FORTH AND SAYS I NEED ADDITIONAL SPACE I WANT TO USE A CONNEX BOX WHO ARE WE TO SAY IT DOESN'T QUALIFY? AT THAT POINT YOU GET IN THE WEEDS.

SO YOU HAVE TO STAY ABOVE. I GO TO WALMART ALL THE TIME.

I NEVER CONSIDERED IT UNTIL IT COMES FORTH.

I SAID WELL, THE USE OF THE CONEX BOXES IS A SLIPPERY SLOW.

20 IS NOT TWO. IT'S NOT NINE.

20 IS 20. THAT IS A BIG, THAT IS A LOT OF BOXES. IN THE WE DID MAKE THIS FOR SMALL BUSINESS. WE MADE THEM DRESS IT UP.

I GUESS WE ARE REALLY HEADED DOWN IS COUNCIL OPPOSED TO IT IF IT'S SCREENED? I'M NOT SAYING I AGREE OR DON'T.

IS A SCREEN ISSUE, THE WAY IT LOOKS?

>> KIND OF SCREEN? >> I GUESS THE QUESTION IN THE END FOR ME THERE IS IF WE CAN INCREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING, UTILIZING TEMPORARY STORAGE WHY CAN'T WE MOVE A WALL? WHY CAN'T WE BUILD THE BUILDING BIGGER? GIVE THEM BACK THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WAS LOST IN YOUR RESTRUCTURING OF THE STORE ITSELF? I MEAN IF THIS IS GOING TO BE FORESEEABLE, FORESEEABLE REPEAT ISSUE, POTENTIALLY AND PROBABLY IT IS. WE ARE ONLY GETTING LARGER AROUND HERE. THIS IS A BAND AID THAT MIGHT REPEAT ITSELF YEAR OVER YEAR AS WE INCREASE IN POPULATION.

ECOMMERCE GETS BIGGER. WE NEVER LEAVE OUR HOUSES AGAIN OR COVID OVER WHATEVER ELSE COMES AFTERWARDS.

THAT IS MY POINT. >> AGAIN IF THE NUMBER OF TRAILERS, THAT IS MORE SO, AGAIN, IT'S A DIFFERENT YEAR.

FOR US TO EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED WAS PREMATURE. MOVING FORWARD, I MEAN I SPEAK MY EXPERIENCE I CAN RUN A BUSINESS OFF A FEW LESS TRAILERS. I ASSURE YOU THAT.

[02:30:02]

WHETHER IT'S SCREENED OR NOT SCREENED.

IT'S SO WE CAN GET SOME KIND OF THE BASELINE FOUNDATION GROUNDS BUILT THERE TO USE FOR THE 90 DAYS IF WE NEED BE.

>> MAYOR RENO: ARE YOU USING TRAILERS AND CONTAINERS INTERCHANGEABLY OR IS THERE A DISTINCTION?

>> THERE IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO.

NOT NECESSARILY TWO. A LOT OF TIMES THEY ARE SIX DIFFERENT TYPES. IT'S DEPARTMENT BASED MORE SO THAN ANYTHING. THERE MAY BE FOUR TRAILERS FOR

TOYS. >> HE ARE ASKING IF YOU ARE USING 18 WHEELERS OR CONEX BOXES.

>> BOXES. NOT 18 WHEELERS.

>> YOU ARE USING BOTH TERMS. I WANT TO KNOW THE RELEVANCE.

>> ORDINANCE SAYS CONTAINERS. >> MAYOR RENO: YEAH.

>> WHAT ARE THE TWO TRAILERS BACK THERE NOW?

>> I APOLOGIZE FOR SAYING, "TRAILERS."

>> MAYOR RENO: I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

>> THERE ARE SEVERAL TRAILERS BACK THERE NOW.

WHAT ARE THOSE USED FOR? >> WAITING TO BE PICKED UP.

NOTHING IN THEM. FIVE TO BE EXACT.

NOTHING IN THEM. >> QUESTION FOR STAFF.

THIS IS INCONVENIENCE FOR WALMART.

IS THIS AN ISSUE WE COULD EVALUATE YEARLY TO CONSIDER YEARLY? I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF GIVING

20 CONEX BOXES IN PERPETUITY. >> RIGHT NOW THE ORDINANCE WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR IT. IT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR ANY

STORAGE. >> WE COULDN'T PUT A TIME LIMIT

ON THIS. >> THAT IS WHAT THE TIME LIMIT.

WE HAVE TIME LIMIT. >> YEARLY.

BUT I'M SUGGESTING WE EVALUATE IT YEARLY.

GIVE PERMISSION FOR 2021. GET PERMISSION FOR 2022.

>> LIKE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. >> S.U.P.

>> THE PROBLEM IS YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW, THE TOOL YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU HAVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR YOU. IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

S.U.P.S YOU CAN PUT A TIME LIMIT ON THOSE.

BUT YOU DON'T HAVE AN S.U.P. BEFORE YOU.

>> THE REASON -- >> COME BACK WITH IT.

>> THE REASON I BRING IT UP IS BECAUSE OF THE UNKNOWN GOING ON WITH THE COVID THIS WASN'T AN ISSUE IN PREVIOUS YEARS.

IF THE NEED PROVES OUT I IMAGINE WALMART WOULD PROACTIVELY PURSUE A MORE PERMANENT SITUATION. I'M SUGGESTING WE PURSUE THAT ROUTE TO GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO RE-EVALUATE YEARLY.

>> KEEP IN MIND. I DON'T BELIEVE YOU HAVE AN S.U.P. -- YOUR CODE DOES NOT ALLOW FOR S.U.P. FOR CONSENT -- FORCONTAINERS. IT WOULD BE CREATED.

SO INSTEAD OF DOING IT THROUGH ZONING YOU ARE CREATING A MECHANISM THROUGH THE S.U.P. PROCESS ALL RETAILERS CAN COME BEFORE YOU AND REQUEST AN S.U.P. FOR THIS USE OPPOSED TO DOING IT

THROUGH LAND USE CHANGE. >> COULD YOU ALSO NOT SAY THAT THAT MAY BRING US IN TO A MORE CENTRAL COMPLIANCE OF REVIEWING THE CASES AS WE HAVE SAID WE WANT TO DO?

>> AGAIN, S.U.P.S AGAIN, JUST LIKE ZONING.

IT'S DISCRETIONARY. BASED ON THE BEST USE, SCREENING, ET CETERA. PLACING CONDITIONING ON IT.

TO ALLOW SHORTER PERIOD. THE NUMBER OF BOXES.

>> MIGHT IT ALSO BE SAID APPLICANT HIMSELF STATED NO PERISHABLE GOODS WILL BE STORED IN THE CONTAINERS.

THUS ALL THE THINGS THAT FLEW OFF THE SHELVES DURING THE COVID LOCKDOWNS, THE MILK, THE BREAD, THE MEATS, EVERYTHING RATIONED AND WEREN'T IN THOSE -- THEY ARE NEVER IN THOSE BOXES.

CHRISTMAS TREES AND NO ELECTRONICS HOME.

GOODS. SEASONAL.

DO WE REALLY NEED 20 BOXES OF SEASONAL STUFF IN THE BACK OF

THIS BUILDING? >> I DON'T THINK IT HAS TO DO WITH THE COVID. THAT IS THE YEAR IN QUESTION.

IT'S SEASONAL ITEMS THAT TYPICALLY SELL AT CHRISTMAS.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR DISTINCTION. THIS DOES NOT IN MY OPINION PUT THE COMMUNITY IN A BETTER POSITION TO FURTHER OUTLAST OR TO RESPOND TO CRISIS THROUGH LACK OF SUPPLY.

BECAUSE NONE OF THOSE ITEMS IN THAT BOX CRISIS RELATED.

>> PERMISSION TO SPEAK? >> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. YOU ARE RIGHT.

YES, SIR. ABSOLUTELY.

BUT WHAT HAPPENS IS THE STUFF THAT YOU SAID THAT DOESN'T MAKE THE IMPACT NECESSARILY, SIR, IN THE COMMUNITY WHICH IS THE TOYS, HOUSEWARES. THAT STUFF GOES OUTSIDE TO THE TRAILERS TO ALLOW MORE SPACE FOR INSIDE.

SO THEN WE ADD PERISH GOOD, WATER AND THE PAPER.

IT TAKE OVER THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE AND THE FOOD STILL

[02:35:04]

ALL OF THOSE THINGS STILL MATTER THIS YEAR.

BUT THAT MERCHANDISE WE MOVE IT OUTSIDE.

I GAVE THE BACK ROOM TO ESSENTIAL NEEDS ONLY.

SO YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. IN A SENSE.

BUT AT THE SAME TITE TIME IT'S A TWO-WAY STREET.

I GET MORE SPACE INSIDE FOR STUFF THAT I NEED THAT IS IMPACTFUL RIGHT NOW. ONLINE GROCERY WAS HUGE.

TOOK OFF. I COULDN'T PUT IT OUTSIDE.

>> I GET WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> BUT THIS IS A CONDITIONAL TIME FRAME OF OCTOBER TO

JANUARY? >> DECEMBER.

>> OCTOBER TO DECEMBER. THAT DOESN'T HELP US IN MARCH.

>> IT GROWS EVERY YEAR AT THE SAME TIME.

THE 90 DAYS, THE FOOD WILL SPIKE.

THANKSGIVING WILL HAPPEN. BACKROOM GROWS.

>> CAN WE CONTINUE THIS UNTIL LATER? IS THIS SOMETHING WE NEED TO ANSWER TONIGHT?

>> LET ME ASK A QUESTION AND MAKE A COMMENT.

>> IN THE BEGINNING OF WALMART COMING IN HERE THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT FOR 18,000 SQUARE FEET OF OUTSIDE SALES.

THE CITY SAID NO. WE'LL GIVE YOU SIX.

AFTER LONG DISCUSSION, THE HEAD GUY FROM WALMART SAYS I CAN SETTLE THIS. WE'LL PUT DOWN WE'LL HAVE ZERO OUTSIDE SALES. OKAY?

>> YES, SIR. >> YOU GOT OUTSIDE SALES BUT YOU GOT THE WALLS AROUND IT. ON THE SOUTH END OF THE BUILDING. I THINK THAT IS GREAT.

YOU'VE GOT WHAT YOU NEEDED. BUT WE STILL GOT A BUILDING INSTEAD OF A PARKING LOT FULL OF CRAP.

>> YES, SIR. >> MY QUESTION IS, OKAY.

YOU WANT OUTSIDE SALES? WE SAID NO.

YOU BUILT A BUILDING. NOW YOU WANT SOME OUTSIDE STORAGE. WE SAY NO.

GO BUILD YOU MORE BUILDINGS. THAT IS WHERE I'M COMING FROM.

>> MAYOR RENO: ALL RIGHT. GENTLEMEN, GENTLEMEN.

WE ARE ALMOST HALFWAY THROUGH THE AGENDA.

I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE OR TABLE?

>> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING FOR THE FURTHER DISCUSSION, DO THAT.

>> MAYOR RENO: DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS?

>> MOTION TO CONTINUE. >> MAYOR RENO: SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT STAFF TO WORK ON IN THE MEANTIME? OR CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION? ANY DIRECTION FOR STAFF?

>> WANE BROUGHT UP A GOOD QUESTION.

WHEN THEY SAID NO, THEY BUILT PERMANENT STRUCTURE.

>> MAYOR RENO: WHAT IS THE ORDINANCE THAT CAUSED THIS PROBLEM? I HEARD TWO THINGS.

P&Z I HEARD YOUR PROBLEM WAS YOU COULDN'T GET THE TRAILERS OR THE CONTAINERS MOVED OUT QUICKLY. YOU COULDN'T GET THE SEMIS, THE TRACTORS. NOW I'M HEARING THAT YOU ARE

USING THESE TO STORE THINGS IN. >> THE INITIAL PROBLEM WE HAVE TRAILERS ON THE PARKING LOT, PERIOD.

THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENED RECENTLY NORMALLY THEY WILL BE GONE BY NOW. THIS YEAR THEY JUST HAVEN'T BEEN PICKED UP. IT'S FIVE NOW.

THEY ARE PICKING THEM UP BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN GONE.

>> MAYOR RENO: I HEARD AT P&Z, THEY ARE THERE BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T GET THEM MOVED OFF. NOT BECAUSE YOU USE THEM TO

STORE STUFF. >> THEY ARE EMPTY NOW.

EMPTY SINCE DECEMBER 9 OR 10. >> STAFF JUMP IN IF I'M INCORRECT. THE CURRENT ORDINANCE -- NOT THIS ORDINANCE BUT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE FOR ANY TYPE OF THE BUSINESSES DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THAT TYPE OF THE OUTDOOR STORAGE PERIOD. IT'S BEEN ALLOWED OVER THE YEARS BUT TECHNICALLY IT'S NOT ALLOWED PER ORDINANCE.

SO THIS WOULD ALLOW 20 OF THEM TO BE PLACED OUT THERE.

>> YOU COME TO WALTER'S QUESTION HOW DO WE APPLY IT TO OTHER

PEOPLE? >> THIS IS A ONE OFF EXCEPTION.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO ASK FOR AN AMENDMENT, P.D. OR REQUEST FOR S.U.P. AND WE'LL GO THROUGH THE PAINFUL DISCUSSION

AGAIN. >> MAYOR RENO: STAFF, CAN WE DO WHAT JUSTIN SUGGESTED TO HAVE IT TIME BOUND SOMETIME?

>> ONLY WITH THE S.U.P. >> YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE S.U.P. PROCESS. SEE IF IT ALLOWS.

WE HAVE TO CHANGE USES THAT THE S.U.P. IS ALLOWED.

>> IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE TO GO BACK.

GO BACK TO THE PANDEMIC PANDEMIC P&Z AND THEN BRING ITBACK HERE.

[02:40:06]

>> IT WOULD TAKE LONGER. >> WELL, WE HAVE MOVED TO NEXT

MONTH. >> I DON'T SEE URGENCY OF

ADDRESSING THE PROCESS. >> WE NEED TO KNOW BY OCTOBER 1 NEXT YEAR. THERE WE HAVE TIME.

>> HE WANTS TO KNOW. I'M SURE HE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW

SOONER. >> MAYOR RENO: WE WANT TO GET

THIS RESOLVED QUICKLY. >> NOT UNTIL SEPTEMBER.

>> SOME OF US NEED A BREAK RIGHT NOW.

>> WE ARE GOING TO TALK A BREAK NEXT.

SO, WHERE ARE WE? WHAT DO WE NEED NOW?

>> I'M NOT SURE WHERE YOU ARE EITHER.

DOES COUNCIL WANT TO TAKE A VOTE? SEE IF IT PASSES OR GETS DENIED? I COULD GUESS WHERE IT WOULD GO.

>> PREJUDICE TO ALLOW WITHOUT HOLDING --

>> HE CAN COME BACK. >> WITH PREJUDICE COME BACK SOONER. THEY WANT FOR STAFF TO COME ONE A METHODOLOGY TO ALLOW CONTAINERS OUTSIDE OF THE

WALMART ISSUE. >> THAT IS NOT THROUGH A P.D.

>> THE REQUEST WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE. I THINK THAT WHAT THE COUNCIL IS GOING TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO DO IS RESEARCH THIS.

AND HOW TO ALLOW THE CONTAINERS -- OR NOT ALLOW THEM.

OR ALLOW THROUGH AN S.U.P. >> STATED THAT WAY I WOULD ASSUME WE DON'T WANT TO APPROVE THIS UNTIL YOU FIGURE IT OUT.

NO OFFENSE. WE ARE GOING TO WITHOUT PREJUDICE. WE FIGURE THERE IS AN ANSWER.

THAT WE'LL FIND, FIND THE ANSWER IN A MORE GENERAL.

>> MAKE A MOTION. >> I THOUGHT WE SAID WE WERE

GOING TO GO -- >> WE HAVE A MOTION.

>> NEXT MONTH. >> THERE HAS BEEN A MOTION TO

TABLE. >> IT'S BEEN MADE.

>> WE CAN APPROVE THAT OR DENY IT.

>> JOE? DRIFTED IN TO A.

>> I HAVE SIX PEOPLE TALKING AT ONE TIME.

>> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE A MOTION AND SEPTEMB SECOND ON TH,

TO TABLE IT. >> THEY MADE THE MOTION BEFORE

YOU TOLD US TO DENY IT. >> DOES ANYBODY WANT TO REMOVE THAT? ANYONE WANT TO REMOVE MOTION?

OR MOVE FORWARD WITH IT? >> IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE

MOTION -- >> IT'S COMING BACK AT THE NEXT

MEETING. >> WE COULD DENY THE MOTION AND THEN MAKE ANOTHER MOTION. IF I MAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TABLE AND EVERYBODY VOTES IT DOWN WE'LL NEED ANOTHER MOTION.

>> WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION. >> I WITHDRAW MY SECOND.

>> SO THE MOTION WITHDRAWN. NOW, --

>> IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? >> MAYOR RENO: ANOTHER MOTION.

WE ARE GOING TO GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO COME ONE A GENERAL SOLUTION. GIVEN THAT WE ARE GOING TO TURN THIS DOWN WITHOUT PREJUDICE. AND THEN WHEN WE HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR STAFF. GO FORWARD FROM THERE.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE CASE.

TO THE STAFF TO BRING BACK TO THE P&Z AND THE CITY COUNCIL OTHER METHODS FOR ADDRESSING OUTSIDE STORAGE.

>> MAKE A MOTION. NOT THROUGH THE PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. >> CORRECT.

MAKE A MOTION FOR WHAT JOE SAID. WE'LL DENY.

>> DON'T MAKE ME SAY IT AGAIN. >> MAYOR RENO: WE ARE GOING TO DIRECT STAFF P&Z AND STORAGE FOR THE COMMUNITY.

>> SECOND. >> CLOSE ENOUGH?

>> IT'S CLOSE. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> WE'RE THERE. >> STAY WITH THE COMMERCIAL.

>> COMMERCIAL. >> LOOK FORWARD TO OUR RETREAT.

[LAUGHTER] WE HAVE A MOTION AND SEPTEMBER .

I HOPE WE DON'T HAVE TO REPEAT IT.

>> I'M HAPPY. >> MAYOR RENO: COUNCIL KNOWS

[02:45:01]

WHAT THEY ARE VOTING ON. >> I VOTE.

>> MAYOR RENO: OKAY. 6-1 -- THE RESOLUTION PASSES 6-1. THANK YOU.

THERE THANK YOU, SIR. >> MAYOR RENO: GOOD LUCK.

WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK HERE UNTIL 9:00.

WE'LL PICK UP WHERE WE LEFT OFF.

[2021-020 ]

>> MAYOR RENO: WELCOME BACK. WE WILL NOW CONTINUE OUR COUNCIL SESSION WITH THE LAST OPEN ITEM. OPEN ITEM 2021-020, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING NEXT 4.6017 "SIGNS LOCATED IN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL, COMMUNITY RETAIL, OR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS" TO INCLUDE THE LIGHT INDUSTRIA DISTRICT. TRENT?

>> TRENTON: THANK YOU. TO MAKE THE CENTERS FOR STRONG AND ADD CONSISTENCY THROUGH THE DISTRICT.

WE HAVE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL MIXED WITH THE COMMERCIAL, AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.

AND AREAS YOU WOULD SEE THE COMMERCIAL USES.

WE'LL BE REQUESTING TO TAKE THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OUT OF 4.0620 AND ADD IN 4.6021 TO HAVE GENERAL STANDARDS FOR COMMUNITY GENERAL AND RETAIL PERTAINING TO THE SIGNS.

A P.D. COMES IN AND THEY HAVE FOR THE TIGHT AND INDUSTRIAL USES WE PUT THE PROVISION ACE TACHED -- ATTACHED TO THE LIGHT USES SO WE WANT IT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE DO IN A LOT OF THE P.D.S. I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> THIS PAPERWORK CLEAN UP TO

MAKE IT FLOW EFFICIENTLY? >> YES.

AS A BETTER STANDARD. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: HAVE A MOTION? >> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR TO COUNCIL? MOTION.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 7-0.

THERE THANK Y'ALL. >> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU.

[2021-021 ]

ALLEY. >> TRENTON: THE PROPERTY IS 815 TAYMAN DRIVE. THEY HAVE VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED TO THE CITY LIMITS. WHEN THEY DID, THEY DECIDED TO PLAT THE PROPERTY. WHEN THEY PLATTED THE SURVEYIER PUT THE EASEMENTS ALONG -- UTILITY EASEMENTS ALONG THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY NO ONE WAS USING AND THEY ARE REQUESTING TO ABANDON THE EASEMENT, VACATE THEM DUE TO THE STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN THE EASEMENTS. THE SURVEYORS DIDN'T CATCH IT WHEN THEY WERE PLATTING AND THEY PUT IT ON THERE.

WE DON'T HAVE A USE FOR THE UTILITIES.

THEY DID RECEIVE LETTERS FROM THE UTILITY PROID VIEWERS.

OKAYING THE VACATION OF THE EASEMENTS.

THE SECOND PORTION THEY ARE CAN BEING TO ABANDON THE ALLEY.

STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE PROPOSAL.

IN THE EVENT WE HAVE A FUTURE USE.

WE DON'T TYPICALLY DO ALLEY ABANDONMENT.

WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR EASEMENT OF THE UTILITY AND DENIAL FOR THE ALLEY ABANDONMENT.

I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS. NO PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN A MECHANISM FOR THEM TO -- BEFORE THEY VOLUNTARILY ANNEXED IN THE CITY TAKE POSSESSION OF THE ALLEY? THAT THEY MISSED PERHAPS?

>> TRENTON: IT WAS A COUNTY, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE COUNTY SIMILAR PROCESS IN THE CITY OFFER PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO GET IT APPRAISED. IT'S SIMILAR PROCESS TO WHAT WE

DO IN THE CITY. >> WHY DOES STAFF NOT WANT TO

GET RID OF THE ALLEYWAY? >> THE CURRENT PRACTICE WE KEPT

[02:50:05]

IF WE NEED TO USE IT FOR UTILITIES OF SOME SORT.

WE CAN ALWAYS PUT IT IN THE ALLEY, CITY UTILITIES.

>> MAYOR RENO: HOW BIG IS THE LOT?

WHAT IS AROUND IT? >> THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING THE LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

TO EAST AND WEST. FURTHER DOWN IS THE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY. CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN WATER TREATMENT FACILITY. THE LOT IS APPROXIMATELY -- I APOLOGIZE. ONE SECOND.

>> IT'S .63 OF AN ACRE. >> TRENTON: .63 OF AN ACRE.

>> MAYOR RENO: COUNCIL ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

NO SPEAKERS. >> THIS IS REGULAR AGENDA?

>> YES. NO SPEAKERS.

>> MAYOR RENO: YOU CAN STILL HAVE SPEAKERS.

>> THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY HAVE THE SAME 15-FOOT EASEMENT?

>> ALLEY? >> YES.

YEAH, THE ALLEY GOES ALL THE WAY ACROSS.

NEIGHBORING PROPERTY ARE COMING IN HERE NEXT CYCLE.

TO ABANDON THEIR UTILITY EASEMENT AS WELL.

THEY CAME IN AT THE SAME TIME AND THE SURVEYOR DID IT FOR

THEIR PROPERTY. >> MAYOR RENO: THEY ARE ASKING

FOR THE EASEMENT NOT THE ALLEY? >> ORIGINALLY THEY TALKED ABOUT THE ALLEY BUT THEY MIGHT TAKE OFF THAT REQUEST.

>> MAYOR RENO: THE ALLEY WOULD GO.

>> CAN'T GET THE POINTER TO WORK.

>> PULL THIS UP OBGOOGLE EARLY IF POSSIBLE.

>> I CAN'T GET MINE TO COME UP EITHER.

>> 26%. >> THAT IS THE OLD STYLE BE PART

OF TEXAS -- >> THIS IS AT THE STATE FAIR.

>> YOU COULD BUY A PART OF TEXAS.

>> THE ALLEY GOES ALL THE WAY. >> FOR LIKE $25 A MONTH YOU COULD BUY A PART OF TEXAS. THEY HAD THAT ALL DEVELOPED IN

TO LOTS. >> ACRES.

>> SKYLINE ACRES IN THE '80S. SOME PEOPLE BOUGHT THREE AND FOUR. LAST YEAR WE HAD SOMEBODY THAT HAD FIVE LOTS AND COMBINED THEM TO ONE.

>> MAYOR RENO: I SEE NO REASON TO NOT GO WITH THE COUNCIL --

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. >> IS THAT A MOTION?

>> MAYOR RENO: I AM MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 7-0. >> THAT IS JUST TO CONFIRM FOR THE VIEWING AUDIENCE THAT IS THE APPROVAL OF THE RECORDING OF THE APPAN DONEMENT OF THE -- ABANDONMENT OF THE USEMENT BUT

DENYING VACATING THE ALLEY. >> EXACTLY WHAT STAFF HAD.

[2021-022 ]

>> MAYOR RENO: YES. ITEM 2021-022, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR DIRECT RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY ACCESS ONTO F.M. 875 RELATING T DEVELOPMENT.

>> THANK YOU. THEY ARE REQUESTING ACCESS TO PARKWAY FOR THE FUTURE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME.

AS WE SEE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN. EARLIER TODAY THE APPLICATION DID PROVIDE A LETTER FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION GRANTING ACCESS TO F.M. 875.

OUR SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE STATES THAT THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS WITH THE DIRECT DRIVE ACCESS TO ANY ARTERIAL ROAD MUST NOT ONLY BE 150 FEET SEPARATED FROM EXISTING DRIVES BUT OBVIOUSLY NEEDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL TO GAIN ACCESS AS WELL.

HAVING THE LETTER FROM TXDOT IS ONE STEP FORWARD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR THEM TO GET THE ACCESS.

ONCE A PERMIT IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY, THE STAFF WILL ENSURE THAT THE DISTANCE IS MET. YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT THERE IS

[02:55:01]

INSIDES OR SIDES THE 150 FEET WE SHOULD BE GOOD.

WE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH TWO CONDITIONS.

IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT IT MEET STANDARD CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND THAT THE DRIVEWAY PLACEMENT, THAT BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT OF ANY HOME.

WITH THAT I'LL STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> MARCOS, THAT IS WITH THE 25-FOOT APPROACH.

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. GUTTER, THE WHOLE --

>> RIGHT. WELL, YEAH.

>> STATE APPROVED -- >> MM-HMM.

>> THE STATE APPROVED EVERYTHING?

>> YES, SIR. THE STATE DID APPROVE THEM HAVING THE ACCESS. AS FAR AS LOCATION WISE THAT IS WHERE WE WILL MORE OR LESS COME IN PLAY.

WE HAVE THE 150-FOOT SEPARATION REQUIREMENT.

>> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE 25-FOOT.

>> CONCRETE -- >> YEAH.

>> THAT IS -- WE DON'T HAVE A DESIGN YET.

WHEN THEY USE, WHEN THEY PROVIDE US WITH THE ACTUAL BUILDING PERMIT, IT SHOULD INCLUDE DESIGN FOR THE DRIVEWAY.

THAT DRIVEWAY IF THEY DO SOMETHING LONGER THAN 100 FEET WE TALK ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVE DRIVE MATERIAL.

AS LONG AS IT CAN WITHSTAND THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES, FIRE ENGINES

WE SHOULD BE GOOD. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MARCOS: SIR. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION, PLEASE?

>> COUNCILMEMBER: MOVE APPROVE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 7-0. ITEM 2021-023, CONSIDER AND ACT

[2021-023 ]

>> MARCOS: THANK YOU. THE APPLICANT PROPOSAL LAYOUT WILL EXCEED MAXIMUM LENGTH OF 1320.

YOU CAN SEE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN.

THE APPLICANT STATED THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO MINIMIZE THE ROAD CROSSINGS THAT WOULD IMPACT WATER ELEVATION THROUGH EXISTING CREEK THAT WILL RUN THROUGH THE PROPERTY.

BASED ON OUR REGULATIONS, IT MAY WARRANT SPECIAL CONSIDERATION.

IF COUNCIL SO CHOOSES. SO ON THIS CASE, BLOCK "D" AND BLOCK "E" ARE COMING OUT WITH A FULL BLOCK LENGTH OF 1,880 LINEAR FEET. FAR EXCEEDING THE 1320.

YOU HAVE GOT THE TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURE TO ACT AS A BUFFER.

415 FEET. THE PLANNING AND THE ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED REQUEST. WITH THAT, I COULD TAKE ANY

QUESTIONS. >> COUNCILMEMBER: WHY IS IT 1800? WHY THAT LENGTH? BLOCK LENGTH. WHY IS THERE A BLOCK LENGTH?

>> MARCOS: JUST GOOD PLANNING PRACTICE.

YOU DON'T WANT LENGTHS THAT JUST RUN FOREVER WITH HOMES.

ORIGINALLY I THOUGHT IT WAS A FIRE OR AN EMERGENCY REASONS BUT IN THE ACTUALITY IT'S MORE OF, IT'S GOOD PLANNING PRACTICE.

>> JUST A NUMBER. >> YEAH.

RANDOM NUMBER. YEP.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: SO EVEN WITHOUT THE 415 FEET, LET'S SAY YOU TOOK THAT OUT. THE BLOCK IS STILL 465, WHICH IS THAT? 140 MORE.

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. >> HOW WIDE IS THAT LOT TWO OVER THAT SEEMS TO BE DARKER? TO THE LEFT OF THE CIRCLE?

>> MARCOS: RIGHT HERE? THESE LOTS THAT RUN ALONG BLOCK "D," THEY HAVE 100-FOOT MINIMUM. THEY SHOULD ALL BE 100-FOOT MINIMUM WIDE. LARGER LOSS THAT ARE PART OF THE COVENTRY CROSSING. SMALLER LOTS ARE LOCATED TO THE NORTH. THESE SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM OF

100 FEET EACH. >> COULD YOU PUT A CROSS STREET

THERE I WOULD THINK? >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

ACTUALLY, ORIGINALLY THE CROSS STREET DID COME DOWN IN TO THIS LOCATION. BUT THIS IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. THIS DID HAVE A ROAD BREAKING

THAT INTERSECTION UP. >> I UNDERSTAND.

THEIR COMMENTS WAS TOBOGRAPHICAL HARDSHIP BASICALLY.

RIGHT? >> SURE.

YES. >> CAN WE ASK THEM TO MOVE THE

[03:00:05]

>> SURE. I BELIEVE THE LOTS ARE ALREADY

BUILT. >> OH, OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. IT WOULD BE TAKING OUT A HOME, I GUESS. BUT YOU KNOW, HONESTLY SPEAKING, WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO AND I'M NOT SHOWING THIS ON THE SCREEN. BUT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE BUILDING A TRAIL SYSTEM THAT RIGHT NOW THE SIDEWALKS CONNECT ALONG THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ALONG THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY OF WELL.

ONE THING WE WANTED TO SEE, IF WE WEREN'T GOING TO SEE A ROAD CONNECTION, WE WANTED TO SEE A TRAIL CONNECTION.

APPLICANT AGREED TO THE A SIX-FOOT WIDE CONCRETE TRAIL TO CONNECT THIS SIDEWALK THROUGH THIS.

WHAT THEY CALL A NATURAL AMENITY AREA.

>> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: DID THEY EVER HAVE LAYOUT COMPLIANT? MY QUESTION IS HOW DO THE HOMES

GET BUILT? >> MARCOS: THESE HOMES HAVE

NOT BEEN BUILT YET. >> MAYOR RENO: YOU SAID THREE LOTS THERE IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY ARE ALREADY BUILT.

>> MARCOS: THOSE HOMES SHOULD BE BUILT.

THAT IS IN THE PHASE ONE. THANK YOU.

THAT IS IN THE INITIAL FIRST PHASE.

LOTS TO THE SOUTH SHOULD BE BUILT AS WELL.

>> MAYOR RENO: DID YOU EVER HAVE A LAYOUT WITH THE ROADS

COMPLIANT? >> THEY DID.

THE ROAD WAS COMPLIANT BEFORE. THEY USED TO HAVE A ROAD THAT BROKE THIS, THAT RAN RIGHT THROUGH THIS AREA.

I'M PROBABLY POINTING IN THE WRONG SPOT.

I SHOULD BE POINTING OVER HERE ON THIS SIDE.

NONE OF THIS OVER HERE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED.

HOMEWISE. THERE WAS A ROAD BREAKING THAT

UP. >> MAYOR RENO: OVER THE CREEK.

>> YES, SIR. >> COUNCILMEMBER: IF YOU DENY IT, OR IF COUNCIL DENIES IT THEY HAVE TO PUT A ROAD ACROSS THE CREEK. WHERE THE TRAIL IS.

>> YES. >> IS THE WHOLE SUBDIVISION, THE

STREETS ARE POURED? >> NOT TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE

DRAWING. >> ACTUALLY I'M NOT SURE IF THIS TURN-AROUND IS THERE. THIS TURN-AROUND IS HERE.

>> THAT IS REMOVED ONCE THE STREET COMES THROUGH.

>> YES, SIR. >> MINUS 450 FEET.

NOT AS FAR OVER. >> IT IS STILL EXCEEDING.

>> IT'S STILL EXCEEDING. I THINK YOU COULD MAKE AN

ARGUMENT -- >> 60 FOOT WIDE OF GREEN SPACE FROM ONE END TO THE OTHER. EXTENSIVE RIDGE.

>> I DIDN'T HAVE AN OBJECTION TO IT.

I WAS JUST QUESTIONING. >> CURIOUS, THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE

COMPLIANCE. >> IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HERE BUT IT DID SHOW A ROAD ORIGINALLY.

>> MAYOR RENO: SO COUNCIL DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR

SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? >> I'D LIKE TO MOVE APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> THIRD.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES AS PRESENTED 7-0.

[2021-024 ]

>> TRENTON: THANK YOU. INSTEAD OF THE TWO SEPARATE DRIVEWAY ACCESS POINTS ON THE MCALPIN ROAD TO ONLY HAVE ONE BETWEEN THE LOTS. RIGHT HERE.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF IT.

WE ARE ELIMINATING AN ADDITIONAL INGRESS/EGRESS POINT OFF OF MCALPIN ROAD ROAD. SO WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE DRIVE APPROACH MEETS THE REQUIREMENT OF THE MIDLOTHIAN STANDARD DETAIL AND THE FINAL LOCATION BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT

THIS TIME. >> MAYOR RENO: WHO OWNS THE

DRIVEWAY? >> TRENTON: PROPERTY 3061 AND 3070. IT'S A SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT

BETWEEN THE TWO. >> MAYOR RENO: WHAT HAPPENS

WHEN SOMEBODY SELLS? >> TRENTON: THEY WILL BOTH, THEY WILL STILL HAVE ACCESS TO IT.

>> MAYOR RENO: HALF. >> TRENTON: THROUGH A SHARED

ACCESS EASEMENT. >> WHICH ONE OF THEM OWNS 15

FEET OF IT. >> TRENTON: CORRECT.

>> MAYOR RENO: COUNCIL? >> THAT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM.

[03:05:03]

>> MAYOR RENO: RIGHT. I'M JUST CURIOUS.

DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND INCLUDE RECOMMENDATIONS SET FORTH BY THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN STANDARD CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY

ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. >> MAYOR RENO: SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. WITH THE ENGINEER AND THE P&Z REQUIREMENTS. CORRECT? AND SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 7-0. THANK YOU, JUSTIN.

[2021-025 ]

ASSOCIATES. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

COUNCIL THIS IS AN AGREEMENT WITH PETTY AND ASSOCIATES AND WE OUTIZE THEM WITH THE REDDEN FARM P.I.D.

THEY WERE THE 3P. BUT FOR THE TIRZ THEY WANT TO USE THE PETTY ASSOCIATES. SAME PLAYERS BUT A VALUABLE RESOURCE. THEY HAVE BEEN GOOD ALD VO KATES -- ADVOCATE WITH JOE AND KEVIN, ENGINEERING TEAM, BOND COUNCILS. 15 OTHER PEOPLE ON CONFERENCE CALLS. THEY KEEP EVERYBODY OUT OF THE DITCHES AND THE LINES. AND THEY ARE VERY VALUABLE FOR THE CITY. SO, WITH THAT I'D ASK YOU TO

APPROVE THE AGREEMENT. >> MAYOR RENO: QUESTIONS?

>> NO, SIR. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 7-0. >> THIS IS BEST PART OF THE

[2021-026 ]

TO PAY FOR SERVICES WE APPROVED THROUGH THE PETTY ASSOCIATES.

THIS IS MERELY, WE ARE ACTING AS A CONDUIT.

PETTY AND ASSOCIATES SERVE ON OUR BEHALF AND THEY WILL BUILD US. KNOX STREET STREET CREATES ESCROW AND WE WILL PULL MONEY FROM THE ACCOUNT TO PAY FOR PETTY AND ASSOCIATES AND PUT IN $10,000 SO WHEN THE ESCROW ACCOUNT FALLS TO 3,000 OR BELOW THEY WILL REUP THAT UNTIL THE CREATION OF THE TIRZ COMPLETED. WITH THAT I WILL ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> MOTION, PLEASE.

>> MOVE APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: PASSES 7-0. THANK YOU.

[2021-027 ]

>> WE ARE HERE FOR A SALE OF THE FRONT CORNER PROPERTY.

WE HAVE A SLIDE THAT YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS AT THE FRONT OF THE BUSINESS PARK.

MCIVER PROPERTIES WILL BE THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THEY WILL CONSTRUCT A 30,000 SQUARE FEET INDUSTRIAL SPACE.

SO WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A DEMAND FOR NEW INDUSTRIAL SPACE IN THE COMMUNITY. THEY ARE PURCHASING THE PROHIBIT AT MARKET RATE $3 SQUARE FOOT. IT'S STRUCTURED THE SAME AS THE OTHER AGREEMENTS TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THE TIME TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT. IF THEY DON'T, WE WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXERCISE REPURCHASE OPTION.

WITH THAT, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THE PROJECT? ABOUT THE SALE?

>> COUNCILMEMBER: WHERE THERE THEIR ACCESS BE?

>> THEIR ACCESS PRIMARILY OFF OF CHALLENGER.

AN ENDEAVOR LANE THE BACK AREA. CURRENTLY THEY DO NOT HAVE ACCESS ON THE NORA ROAD, WHICH IS THE MAIN STREET GOING INTO

THE PARK. >> MAYOR RENO: WE DO HAVE A

SPEAKER. >> KIM WAYNE.

3800 STEEPLECHASE. I THOUGHT MANY MOMENT WOULD NEVER COME TONIGHT. NO, JUST I AM THE BROKER THAT HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS TO BRING INDUSTRIAL, GOOD LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT TO

[03:10:03]

I TOOK THEM TO EIGHT DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES.

IMMEDIATELY THEY HAVE DECIDED MIDLOTHIAN WAS THE NUMBER ONE CHOICE. I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW WE ARE APPRECIATIVE WORKING WITH KYLE. AND THE E.D.C. AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR SUPPORT AS WE PLAN TO DEVELOP THE SITE.

ONE OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER, I'D LIKE TO VOLUNTEER BACK TO THE WALMART STORAGE DEAL.

I'M INVOLVED IN THE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING AND THE RETAIL REAL ESTATE HERE, I WOULD LOVE TO VOLUNTEER COME OVER HERE AND SHARE A COUPLE OF IDEAS IF YOU WOULD LIKE THAT.

NO CHARGE. CUP OF COFFEE.

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU.

COUNCIL, QUESTIONS FOR KYLE? MOTION?

>> COUNCILMEMBER: MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER: SECOND. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 7-0. THANK YOU, KYLE.

SLED DOG EFFECT I THINK. ITEM 2021-028, CONSIDER AND ACT

[2021-028 ]

WE ARE ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE A GRANT REQUEST FROM THE CHRISTIAN LEARNING CENTER. MCDONMCDC APPROVED IT 6-0.

WE HAD ONE PERSON THAT WASN'T ON THE BOARD AT TIME.

WE HAVE A VACANT SPOT THAT HAS BEEN FILLED.

WE HAVE A NEED FOR DAYCARE IN THE COMMUNITY.

WHEN WE FIRST GOT IN TO THE DEAL ABOUT THE DAYCARE IT WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE AS YOU GO AND YOU TALK TO MORE AND MORE PEOPLE, THEY WILL TELL YOU HOW DESPERATE THEY ARE FOR DAYCARES.

TODAY I GOT TO SPEAK WITH A FRIEND OF MINE.

HE OWNS A LOT OF DAYCARES. NONE IN MIDLOTHIAN.

BUT HE OWNS DAYCARES IN MANSFIELD AND CEDAR HILL, WAXAHACHIE. HE WILL TELL YOU HOW MANY PARENTS DROP THEIR KIDS OFF BECAUSE THERE IS NO DAY CARE AND THEY CAN'T GET IN DAYCARE IN MIDLOTHIAN.

THIS DAYCARE WILL HOLD AROUND 100 KIDS.

EMPLOY 25 PEOPLE. IT WILL HELP US GOING FORWARD AND WE GROW AS THE CITY AS A NEED FOR THE DAYCARE.

WE CAN'T GET ENOUGH DAYCARE. LIKE A SIT-DOWN RESTAURANT.

QUESTIONS? >> COUNCILMEMBER: I HAVE A CONCERN. THIS DAYCARE CAME BEFORE US A WHILE BACK. THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS AGAINST IT.

WE APPROVED IT. NOW WE COME BACK FOR $89,000 TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF WHEN WE

APPROVED IT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

A BIG PART IS TO MOVE SEWER LINE UNDERNEATH THE FREEWAY.

THE OTHER IS OTHER FEES AND IMPACT FEES.

>> SO THIS WILL FALL UNDER AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT?

>> IF WE DON'T DO IT, THEY WILL CLOSE.

THEY ARE MOVING TO A NEW LOCATION AND THEY'LL EMPLOY 25 PEOPLE. FOR FIVE-YEAR --

>> IS THERE CERTAIN NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES?

>> YES. THE BUILDING HAS TO BE VALUED $1.20 MILLION AND MAIN TANNING 25 EMPLOYEES FOR FIVE-YEAR

PERIOD. >> WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT THEY SIGN THAT WILL HAVE THE CONDITIONS IN IT TO BE PART OF

RECEIVING THE GRANT. >> MAYOR RENO: PART OF THE CONDITIONS IS FOR WHAT SIZE CITY?

>> WHAT? >> MAYOR RENO: TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING, I HAVE HEARD THAT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT --

>> YEAH. THIS PROVISION, THE PROVISION THAT THE GRANT IS BEING PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE ALLOWS FOR ALLOWS FOR A CITY OF A CERTAIN SIZE.

THANK YOU. IT'S LATE.

20,000. BASED ON THE LAST S CENSUS.

WE ARE STILL ABLE TO DO THESE TYPE OF GRANTS AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODES, THE CENSUS HAS NOT COME OUT.

WE CAN LEGALLY STILL DO THESE GRANTS.

>> AS SOON AS THE CENSUS COMES OUT WE WON'T DO THIS?

[03:15:02]

>> WE CAN'T DO THESE GRANT WITH THE NEW CENSUS BECAUSE WE WILL

BE OVER THE 20,000 MARK. >> SO IF WE APPROVE THIS ONE, DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE.

ONCE THE CENSUS POST THE OPPORTUNITY GOES AWAY.

>> I'LL SAY MY PEACE AND LET EVERYONE ELSE HAVE AT IT.

I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE. I WILL TELL YOU WHEN THIS CAME UP BEFORE, I WAS AGAINST IT. IN FACT EVERYONE HAD ALREADY VOTED AN TAMMY WAS ASKING ME TO VOTE BECAUSE I WAS SO TORN ON WHAT TO DO. BACK THEN IT WAS WITH WAYNE, I DID NOT WANT NEIGHBORS TO DO THAT.

THEY CAME BACK TO ASK FOR THE $89,000, I WAS CONCERNED OTHER COME ASK FOR $89,000. WHY WOULDN'T YOU COME ASK FOR $89,000 FOR IMPACT FEES IF YOU WERE A BUSINESS? I STRUGGLED FOR A LONG TIME. BUT THE NEED STILL IS THERE IS NO DAYCARES IN MIDLOTHIAN. I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION ALMOST TO HELP WITH THE NEED AS A CITY.

THIS IS MY TWO CENTS ON IT. >> ALONG ABOUT THE SAME NIGHT I HAD THE DEFINITE IMPRESSION I WANTED TO VOTE AGAINST IT.

I HAVE TWO REGRETS IN THE SERVING ON COUNCIL FOR SEVEN YEARS NOW. TWO VOTES I WISH I COULD TAKE BACK AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM. SO, I TOLD --

>> DID YOU VOTE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT?

>> I VOTED FOR IT. BUT ONE PERSON AND ALL I HAD TO DO WAS VOTE AGAINST IT. I REGRET IT EVERY DAY SINCE THEN. I HAVE ONLY DONE IT TWICE IN SEVEN YEARS. REGRET ONE OF MY VOTES.

THE COST OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE. BIG PART OF THE $89,000 IS GOING UNDERNEATH THE HIGHWAY. GETTING READY TO DO IT HALF A MILE DOWN THE STREET. I DON'T SEE IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM IT WILL COME OUT AS $1.2 MILLION.

WE JUST SOLD A PROPERTY DOWN THE STREET THAT WAS $1 MILLION.

IT WAS BIGGER, A LOT NICER AND A LOT MORE PARKING.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE TAKING OUR TAX MONEY, ESPECIALLY -- YOU AND I HAVE BEEN FRIENDS A LONG TIME.

I'M GOING TO PREFACE THIS. IF I GET OUT OF LINE, PLEASE SLOW THINK THEY WENT TO THE 4A D THEY WENT TO THE 4 -- AT THE SAME TIME. TRYING TO GET MONEY FROM ANYBODY. I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE WAY WE SHOULD SPEND OUR TAX MONEY. YES, IT'S A NEED.

IF IT'S A GREAT NEED THERE IS SOMEBODY OUT THERE WITH ENOUGH MONEY TO START BUILDING IT TOMORROW.

>> THEY WOULD. HAVE YOU MET OUR RESTRICTIONS?

>> BUT THERE IS ON THE OTHER -- OTHER SIDE IS STILL COUNTY.

THAT GETS ALL THAT OUT. I'M JUST SAYING THAT THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT. I APPRECIATE IT.

IT'S YOUR JOB TO BRING STUFF LIKE THIS TO US.

I APPRECIATE IT. I DON'T SEE ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM I WOULD SAY YES TO THIS. MY OPINION.

HIS TWO CENTS. THIS IS MINE.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A FORM.

IT SHOWS SOME ROAD IMPACT FEE COMPARISONS.

I GUESS THIS IS MORE FOR STAFF. HAVE OUR IMPACT FEES FOR THIS SPECIFIC USE JUST DRAMATICALLY INCREASED?

>> SERVICE -- [INAUDIBLE] YOU CAN LOOK BACK AT SOME OF THE DAYCARES THAT THEY BUILT, THEY

WERE DIFFERENT MULTIPLIER RATE. >> YEAH.

THAT IS SUBSTANTIAL. YEAH.

>> LET'S THE DEVELOPER. >> I GET IT.

I DO. ESPECIALLY FOR A FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION. NON-PROFIT STRIVING TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. I DON'T KNOW.

Y'ALL KNOW, I'M A LONG-STANDING BIG ADVOCATE FOR MCDC AND WHAT THEY ARE ALL ABOUT AND THE ORGANIZATION ITSELF.

IT'S A BOARD OF NONELECTED, APPOINTED CITIZENS WHO HAVE BEEN TASKED WITH DIRECTING FUNDS. I TYPICALLY IT 99.9% WILL STAND BEHIND WHAT THE BOARD SUGGESTS. I DON'T HAVE A HUGE ISSUE WITH IT. THAT IS MY TWO CENTS.

>> MAYOR RENO: SO THEY ARE A NON-PROFIT.

WHY ARE THEY A NON-PROFIT? WHO ARE THEY ASSOCIATED WITH?

WHICH CHURCH? >> FREE STANDING NON-PROFIT

501(C)(3). >> CORRECT.

[03:20:01]

>> MAYOR RENO: SO, I AGREE. I WOULD REVERSE MY VOTE IF I COULD DO IT AGAIN. THEY WERE WARNED ABOUT GOING TO THIS PLACE AND WHAT THE COST WOULD BE.

THEY KNEW IT UP FRONT. THEY ARE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH ANY OFFICIAL CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATION I'M AWARE OF.

THEY ARE SELF-STANDING CHRISTIAN.

MY GRANDDAUGHTER HAS NOT HAD TROUBLE FINDING A DAY CARE PLACE. I THINK SOME OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DIFFICULTY IS OVERSTATED.

LEGALLY YOU ARE RIGHT. WE COULD DO THIS.

BUT THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW IS THIS TYPE OF FUNDING IS FOR THE SMALL COMMUNITIES. WE HAVE 23,000 REGISTERED VOTERS. WE HAVEN'T SEEN 20,000 CITIZENS IN ALMOST TEN YEARS. WE WERE JUST BARELY UNDER IT TEN YEARS AGO. THE CENSUS SHOULD HAVE BEEN OUT BY NOW. IT'S NOT.

I JUST, I CAN'T SEE GOING FORWARD WITH IT.

>> WE ARE SPENDING THE CITIZEN SALES TAX DOLLARS FOR CITIZENS

TO USE. >> MAYOR RENO: TRUE.

>> IT'S NOT LIKE THEY ARE USING THE DAYCARE.

>> I DON'T USE IT. >> YOU DON'T USE MY STREET BUT

YOU PAY FOR IT. >> I DON'T USE THE SCHOOL THAT YOUR KIDS GO TO BUT I PAY FOR THAT.

BUT NOT GOING TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT IT.

>> MAYOR RENO: OTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE?

DO WE HAVE A MOTION? >> MAY I MAKE A COMMENT?

>> MAYOR RENO: YES, YOU MAY. THE APPLICANT MAY COME FORWARD.

THERE >> THANK YOU, ALLEN.

>> I'M TOM. LIVE AT 531 BLUEBONNET LANE MIDLOTHIAN. REGARDING THE COST AND THINGS, WE WERE APPROVED LAST SEPTEMBER. OBVIOUSLY BEFORE THE PANDEMIC AND SO THAT HAS SUBSTANTIALLY IMPACTED OUR COST FOR BUILDING AND DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY. THE MONEY WE ARE ASKING FOR IS ENTIRELY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND CITY FEES.

IF THIS GRANT IS APPROVED I WILL BE WRITING A CHECK TOMORROW OR THIS WEEK TO THE BACK TO THE CITY FOR I WANT TO SAY $45,000 FOR ROAD IMPACT FEES AND THE SEWER IMPACT FEES.

IT'S JUST MONEY GOING RIGHT BACK.

I HAVE SOME SLIDES. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE ABLE TO DO THAT. THE SEWER COMES UNDER THE HIGHWAY AS MR. MILLER SAID IT WAS EXPENSIVE.

THERE ARE TWO OR THREE OTHER LOTS TO THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO TIE IN TO THAT SEWER WITHOUT HAVING TO GO IN THE HIGHWAY. SO IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

WE ARE AN INDEPENDENT CHRISTIAN 501(C)(3).

SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL THE CHILD CARE WAS PART OF THE MIDLOTHIAN BIBLE CHURCH FOR 30 YEARS. THEY DIDN'T WANT A CHILD CARE IN THEIR FACILITY ANY LONGER SO WE INCORPORATED AND ARE HOPING TO MOVE OUT. THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO CLOSE.

THERE REALLY IS NOT OTHER PROPERTY.

IT'S SO EXPENSIVE. IT IS NON-PROFIT BECAUSE WE DO OFFER THE SCHOLARSHIPS TO THE SINGLE PARENTS.

AND THE FAMILIES THAT FOSTER AND ADOPT.

THAT IS NOT A LOT OF OUR CENSUS. BUT WE DO OFFER THOSE.

WE HAVE A HANDFUL THAT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT.

WE TRY TO KEEP OUR COSTS LOW TO PAY THE STAFF WELL.

IT'S NOT A LUCRATIVE BUSINESS. IT PROBABLY IS FOR IN SOME CASES. THAT WOULD BE A SMALL SCHOOL.

IT DOESN'T MAKE A TON OF MONEY. I CAME TO THIS FINDING THE BOARD THROUGH OUR ACCOUNTANT WHO WHEN I TOLD HIM ABOUT $45,000 IN IMPACT FEES, HE SAID THAT HE THOUGHT THAT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COURT WAS SPECIFICALLY TO HELP PAY FOR SOME OF THOSE THINGS. SO WE WENT DOWN THAT ROAD AND GOT APPROVAL AT THE BOARD IN NOVEMBER.

THIS IS WHAT IT COST US AND THE BANK APPRAISED IT AT $1.20 MILLION SO WE HAD TO AMEND THE AGREEMENT.

THAT IS WHY WE WAITED UNTIL JANUARY TO GET HERE.

I APPRECIATED YOUR CONSIDERATION.

IT IS NEEDED. WE GET CALLS SEVERAL TIMES A DAY AND WE CAN'T TAKE THEM. YOUR GRANDDAUGHTER IS FORTUNATE

[03:25:01]

THIS IS A SERVICE JUST LIKE THE SCHOOL SYSTEM PEOPLE MOVE HERE FOR THAT. AND WITHOUT CHILD CARE IT WILL IMPACT THE DESIRABILITY OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE ARE TRYING TO DO A GOOD THING BUT WE NEED HELP IN THIS CASE.

WE ARE A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION IN TEXAS.

SO ANY OF THE ASSETS OF THE CHILD CARE WOULD GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST IF WE DON'T SURVIVE FOR SOME REASON OR WHATEVER. WE ARE A 501(C)(3).

THERE ARE RULES ABOUT THE BENEFITS ENTERING US TO AS DIRECTORS OR THE OWNERS. WE ARE NOT GOING TO -- YOU ARE NOT PUTTING $89,000 IN MY POCKET.

WE ARE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING IN THE COMMUNITY.

I'M SORRY TO HEAR THAT YOU TWO GENTLEMEN REGRETTED YOUR VOTE.

I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD THING FOR OUR CITY.

AND I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF PRESSURE.

IT WITH WAS A TIGHT ONE. BUT WE OPEN TO IMPROVE AND CONTINUE TO DO A GOOD THING IN THE COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU. >> MR. MAYOR? IF I COULD MAKE A FEW COMMENTS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STRUCK OUT TO ME. I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. ONE THINGS THAT STRUCK OUT TO ME SPECIFICALLY JUST IN THE WORDING OF THE AGENDA ITEM IS THE TERM "CHRISTIAN." I'M A CHRISTIAN MAN.

THERE IS NO RELIGIOUS LITMUS TEST IN THIS COUNTRY.

SO WHETHER OR NOT TREEHOUSE IS A CHRISTIAN LEARNING CENTER OR A LEARNING CENTER FOR CHILDREN, I DON'T THINK IT MUCH MATTERS.

AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE OUR DECISION BASED OFF OF THAT. WE DO ALL KIND OF ECONOMIC INCENTIVE AND DIFFERENT AVENUES FOR SOLUTIONS FOR THE BUSINESSES THAT ADD TAXABLE VALUE TO OUR CITY.

WE ARE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT WHAT IT FEELS LIKE TO LIVE HERE.

WHAT MAKES MIDLOTHIAN WHAT IT IS.

I DIDN'T VOTE ON THE DAYCARE. I WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THE DAYCARE. I HAVE SIX KIDS.

NONE OF THEM EVER WENT TO A DAYCARE FACILITY BUT I UNDERSTAND THE NEED. WHILE WE IDENTIFY THE NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE ECONOMICALLY BASED OR ROOTED IN THE ECONOMIC FOUNDATIONS, THE INABILITY TO FIND CHILD CARE OF A HIGH CALIBER FOR YOUR CHILD COULD DICTATE WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE HERE, COULD DICTATE THE FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF THE INDUSTRIES WE ARE BRINGING HERE. I DON'T THINK THAT IT CAN BE OVERLOOKED. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN OVERSTATE THE IMPORTANCE OF BRINGING EVERY AVAILABLE OPTION TO AN ORGANIZATION THAT IS TRYING TO DO WHAT THE GUYS ARE TRYING TO DO. I KNOW THERE IS PLUSES AND MINUSES FOR THE LOCATION AND PLUS AND MINUS FOR THE OPINION AND THE IMPACT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBORS.

BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS CHILD CARE IS SHORT SUPPLY MIDLOTHIAN, GRAND PRAIRIE, GRAPEVINE, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HELP A BUSINESS HERE.

A RESIDENT HERE. CONTINUE TO HELP OTHER RESIDENTS HERE. I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY. ONE LAST THING I WILL SAY -- I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS YOU OR WHOEVER IT WAS, SOMEBODY SAID MAYBE SOMEONE WITH SOME MORE MONEY SHOULD COME IN AND MAKE THIS BUSINESS HAPPEN. A OWN A BUSINESS.

A LOT OF US IN THE PAST OR CURRENTLY OWN BUSINESS.

I SAID IF IT'S SO EASY YOU START IT AND I'M CONTROL WORK FOR YOU.

IT'S NOT EASY. IT TAKES UP YOUR LIFE.

IT'S 24/7. OFTEN TIMES IT'S A PASSION.

SOMETIMES YOU NEED A LITTLE BIT OF HELP.

THAT IS WHERE I'M AT. I AM IN FAVOR OF IT.

>> DO WE HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD?

>> MAYOR RENO: NO CITIZENS TO BE HEARD.

I'M SORRY. PLEASE.

I OVERLOOKED YOU. >> NO PROBLEM.

>> GOT TO MAKE IT BRIEF. I'M ALAN.

1717 MILLBROOK. I HAD TO WRITE DOWN MY NEW ADDRESS. I RECENTLY MOVED.

I'M A MEMBER OF THE MCDC BOARD. WITH ALAN.

I WANT TO ECHO THE SENTIMENTS HE SHARE AND BRING UP A COUPLE OF

[03:30:06]

IN THE CONVERSATION YOU ARE HAVING ONE THING THAT IS RAISED IS THERE REALLY A NEED OR IS THERE REALLY A SHORTAGE OF THE CHILD CARE IN THE CITY? WE ACTUALLY LOOKED INTO THAT.

ALAN MADE COMMENTS TO THAT IN THE MEETING.

I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT SPECIFICS BUT HE CALLED ALMOST EVERY DAYCARE IN TOWN AND EVERY ONE OF THEM DID HAVE A CURRENT WAITING TIME FRAME RIGHT NOW. IT WASN'T LIKE HEY WE COULDN'T GET YOU IN THIS WEEK, IT WOULD BE A FEW WEEKS.

WE ARE TALKING MONTHS. SOME OF THEM 12 MONTHS.

HEY, I WOULD PROBABLY BE LATER IN TO NEXT YEAR.

SO THE NEED AND THE SHORTAGE IS A REALITY.

BY SIMPLY PICKING UP THE PHONE AND CALLING.

THAT PARTICULAR SIDE OF IT IS PRETTY STRONG.

ONE REASON I SUPPORTED THIS WHEN WE HEARD FROM TOM AT MCDC WHEN I PERSONALLY MOVED TO MIDLOTHIAN, AND I CAME HERE TO START A BUSINESS. AND CURRENTLY EMPLOY FOLKS HERE IN THIS TOWN, ONE OF THE FIRST THING THAT ANY SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND ENTREPRENEUR ASK WHEN THEY DECIDE WHAT CITY THEY WILL MOVE TO START THE BUSINESS IN THE GENERAL AREA IS WHAT ARE THE SCHOOLS LIKE? IF THEY'VE GOT KIDS.

THE SECOND QUESTION IF THEY HAVE SMALLER KIDS WHAT IS THE DAYCARE, THE CHILD CARE LIKE? RIGHT NOW IF THE ANSWER IS IT WILL TAKE A YEAR TO GET THEM IN SOMEWHERE THEY WILL TAKE THE BUSINESS TO MANSFIELD OR SOMEWHERE ELSE.

IF THIS DOES NOT GET APPROVED THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION IS 25 PEOPLE LOSE THEIR JOB, RIGHT HERE IN THE CITY.

WE WILL LOSE ANOTHER DAYCARE SO WAITING PERIODS WILL GROW.

IT WILL FURTHER DELAY SMALL BUSINESSES COME IN HERE AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THROUGH THE YOUNG FAMILIES THAT ARE GOING TO GROW A BUSINESS. OTHER REPERCUSSIONS THAT WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT. SO JUST WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU WHY I SUPPORTED IT AND SOME THOUGHTS I HAD.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR RENO: COUNCIL, COMMENTS?

QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE ONE LAST COMMENT.

I KNOW WE ARE ALL TIRED. BUT WE ARE REALLY JUST SWITCHING MONEY FROM ONE POCKET TO ANOTHER.

AT THE END OF THE DAY IT'S FROM ONE POCKET TO A DIFFERENT POCKET. IT DIDN'T LEAVE THE CITY.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? MOTION, PLEASE.

>> I MOVE APPROVE. >> MAYOR RENO: MOTION TO

APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR RENO: PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-2.

OUR LAST AGENDA ITEM. >> THANK YOU, ALAN.

[2021-029 ]

CHIEF, HOW ARE YOU DOING? >> I'M WELL, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: YOU HAD TO WAIT FOR A WHILE BUT IT'S GOOD TO END

WITH YOU. >> WELL WORTH THE WAIT, SIR.

>> SEE YOUR BEARD. >> YOU SHAVED YOURS OFF.

COUNCIL, THIS IS A CONTINUATION GRANT.

YOU APPROVED THE GRANT LAST YEAR.

WITH COVID AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAPPENED OVER THE LAST YEAR, THE STATE HAS DROPPED THE 25% MATCH.

SO THEY APPROVED NEARLY $32,000 TO HELP FUND A PART-TIME ADVOCATE FOR VICTIMS OF CRIME. WE HAVE BENEFITED, IN FACT WE OUTSTRETCHED OUR ORIGINAL GOAL WITH THE STATE.

THAT IS ONE REASON WHY IT WAS APPROVED THIS YEAR.

BY MAKING 100% OF THE CONTACTS FOR THE VICTIMS OF THE FAMILY VIOLENCE AND VIOLENT ASSAULT. OUR ADVOCATE IS ACTIVE AND VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT WHAT SHE IS DOING.

THIS BENEFITS THE CITIZENS IN THOSE, GETTING THEM GRANT FUNDING FOR COSTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE VIOLENT CRIME. SO THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO CONTINUE A GOOD PROGRAM.

I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> MAYOR RENO: YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? ANYBODY ELSE COMMENTS OR

QUESTIONS? >> NO, SIR.

>> MAYOR RENO: MOTION, PLEASE. >> IT'S A GOOD ITEM.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> MAYOR RENO: WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS TO APPROVE. SECONDED.

[03:35:04]

>> THAT IS RIGHT. >> MAYOR RENO: THANK YOU, CHIEF. IT IS 9:47.

WE STAND ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.