Mar 04, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER?

[003 Consider and act upon a request for a Final Plat of Stone Hollow, being ± 71.026 acres out of the E.A. Braly Survey, Abstract No. 184; Moses Davis Survey, Abstract No. 278. The property is located east of McAlpin Road, between F.M. 875 and Mission Court/Timber Rock Lane (approximately 2891 McAlpin Road) (Case No. FP04-2021-64).]

>> AYE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: UNANIMOUS.

NEXT ITEM IS 003, TO ASK FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF STONE HALLOW BEING PLUS OR MINUS 71.2 OUT OF THE BRAYLAY SURVEY.

MOSES DAVIS SURVEY ABSTRACT 278. PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF THE MCALPIN ROAD ROAD BETWEEN F.M. 875 AND THE MISSION COURT TIMBER ROCK LANE. WHICH HAVE IS P.M. 2891 MCALPIN ROAD ROAD. WITH THAT, STAFF?

>> THIS IS A FINAL PLAT FOR 2891 MCALPIN ROAD ROAD.

THE FINAL PLAT DOES MEET THE MINIMUM REGULATION, FOURTH THE SUBDIVISION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

WE CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

PUB LUCK HEARING IS NOT REQUIRED -- A PUBLIC HEARING IS

NOT REQUIRED. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I'LL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE. SECOND?

>> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. WE'LL VOTE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WHISTER CAVES?

COMMISSIONER LEE? >> AYE.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE REGULAR AGENDA BUT WE'LL MOVE AROUND A LITTLE BIT HERE. SINCE WE HAVE FOLKS HERE THAT WANT TO SPEAK. AS I STATED, CASE NINE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO CASE 10.

[010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 9.74± acres in the M. Brenan Survey, Abstract No. 43 described in Exhibit “A” hereto by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) Zoning District to Planned Development District No. 141 (PD-141) for single-family residential uses. The property is generally located at 1120 Apple Lane (Case No. Z17-2021-071).]

[00:05:11]

ITEM 010, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 9.74 ACRES IN THE M. BRENAN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 43 DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" HERETO BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 141 FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1120 APPLE LANE.

>> MARCOS: THANK YOU. IT'S ALONG APPLE LANE AND IT CONTAINS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON 9 ACRES OF LAND.

THE CONCEPT PLAN SHOWS HOW IT WILL BE DIVIDED TO THE THREE LOT SIZES RANGING FROM THE 1.3 ACRES TO FOUR ACRES IN SIZE.

THE PROPERTY IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY AGRICULTURAL ZONING. THIS DOES FALL WITHIN OUR COUNTRY MODULE OF THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

THIS MODULE CALLS FOR THE LOT RANGES FROM 1-3 ACRES IN SIZE.

THIS SHOWS THE SURROUNDING TRACTS AND THE SIZES THAT WILL AGAIN SURROUND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

PROPOSED LOT SIZES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT FORTH.

HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF THE BASE REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH LOT.

AND WHAT EACH LOT MUST ADHERE TO.

YOU CAN SEE AGAIN THE FIRST LOT IS 1.3 ACRES AND THE OTHER WILL BE 3 AND THE LAST ONE WILL BE 4. HOMES GOT TO BE AT LEAST 2,600 SET FEET. MINIMUM SET-BACK ARE 50-FOOT SETBACK. HOMES HAVE ARTICULATED FRONT ENTRANCES, FRONT HEIGHT PLATE VARIATIONS TO BE REQUIRED.

SO THERE ARE ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS INCLUDED WITH THAT.

NO ARCHITECTURAL STYLE CAN BE REPEATED OR MAY BE REPEATED ON ANY LOT IN THE SUBJECT AREA. SO YOU ARE GETTING THE TRUE CUSTOM HOMES FOR EACH LOT. IN ADDITION, ALL HOMES HAVE CONTAIN SIDE-ENTRY GARAGES AS THE PRIMARY GARAGE ORIENTATION.

16 LETTERS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT WERE MAILED. WE HAVE RECEIVED QUITE A FEW FROM FOLKS WHO LIVE UP AND DOWN APPLE COURT, APPLE LANE.

BUT FOUR OF THOSE LETTERS THAT WERE IN OPPOSITION DID COME BACK WITHIN THE 200 FOOT. THAT ACTUALLY PUTS US OVER THE 20% THRESHOLD WHICH WILL REQUIRE SUPER MAJORITY WHEN WE TAKE THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL. AS THE PROPOSED MINIMUM LOT SIZES IN COMBINATION WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS I TALK ABOUT ADHERE TO THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONE REQUEST AS PRESENTED.

I'LL CONTINUE TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK?

COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS JORDAN REINUS, 7460 DILLON CIRCLE, MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. I THINK MOST OF YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER WHEN WE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO.

THERE MIGHT BE A COUPLE OF NEW FACES.

THE PRIMARY CHANGE THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE SINCE WE WERE HERE LAST WHEN WE WENT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL LAST TIME, THEY INDICATED PRETTY BROADLY THAT THERE WAS NOT LARGE SUPPORT FOR ANY MORE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS AREA THAN TOTAL OF THREE LOTS.

WE DECIDED AT THAT MEETING NOT TO MAKE A CHANGE.

TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD RECOUP THE MONEY BACK OUT OF IT.

THINGS LIKE THAT. SO WE WENT AWAY AND WE DREW UP THIS PLATFORM. WE WERE ABLE TO TALK TO A FEW PEOPLE. WE HAVE PERSPECTIVE BUYERS THAT WILL MAKE IT WORTHWHILE FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, WITH A DESIGN AND A LAYOUT LIKE THIS. THE REASON THE LOTS ARE LAID OUT EXACTLY THAT WAY IS THAT IT WILL UTILIZE THE EXISTING WATER TAPS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE WITH MOUNT PEAK ON THAT LINE.

THAT IS A FOUR-INCH LINE. I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE WATER PRESSURE AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE THOUGHT IT MADE SINCE TO DRAW IT UP IN A WAY THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE ADDITIONAL WATER TAP. THE EXISTING HOME UTILIZES ONE THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR SOME TIME.

BUT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL TAPS IN PLACE FOR THE OTHER TWO LOTS.

OTHERWISE I THINK IT'S PRETTY SPEAK FOR ITSELF UNLESS YOU HAVE

QUESTIONS. >> SO YOU DROPPED ONE HOUSE,

RIGHT? >> YES, SIR.

SO IT WOULD BE TWO ADDITIONAL HOMES IN ADDITION TO THE CURRENT

STRUCTURE. >> OKAY.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> COMMISSIONER: YOU SAID THERE WAS TWO ADDITIONAL TAPS.

WHAT ARE THEY THERE FOR RIGHT NOW?

>> YES, SIR. WE HAVE THEM PUT IN AS A -- WHEN

[00:10:01]

WE MET WITH MOUNT PEAK, WE WERE TIGHT ON WATER.

SO WE WENT AHEAD TO PUT ADDITIONAL TAPS IN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD SECURE OUR FUTURE INTEREST IN BEING ABLE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL WATER FOR THE PROPERTY.

>> COMMISSIONER: THIS PHYSICALLY BEEN TAPPED?

>> YES, SIR. THEY HAVE PHYSICALLY BEEN

TAPPED. >> COMMISSIONER: THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OTHER QUESTIONS?

THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. WE'VE HAD SOME RESPONSES TO THIS. WE HAVE SOME SPEAKERS AND SOME NONSPEAKERS. THE FIRST ONE I HAVE HERE IS A NONSPEAKER. IS IT COLONA, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANTHONY COLONA IS IN OPPOSITION. HE IS SAYING ONE HOUSE ONLY.

HE LIKES HIS PRIVACY. HE IS AGAINST THAT.

DONNA -- IS IT WINDSOR? OKAY.

IF YOU COULD COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS TO THE

RECORD, PLEASE, MA'AM. >> MY NAME IS DONNA WINDSOR AND I LIVE AT 910 APPLE COURT, WHICH IS ON THE CORNER OF APPLE COURT AND APPLE LANE. OUR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT HAS TWO STREETS. APPLE LANE, APPLE COURT.

THAT IS IT. WE HAVE ONE WAY IN TO THE DIVISION AND ONE WAY OUT OF THE DIVISION.

THE SAME ONE. SO WHAT BOTHERS ME IS IF THING BECOMES SO OVERPOPULATED, IF FOR ANY REASON WE HAD TO LEAVE BECAUSE OF SOME KIND OF EVACUATION WE WOULD ALL BE STUCK BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY OUT. YOU ONLY HAVE ONE WAY ON TO 663.

WE HAVE LIVED THERE FOR 34 YEARS.

WE HAVE 9 1/2 ACRES. A YEAR AGO I CAME UP BECAUSE MY DAUGHTER WANTS TO PURCHASE HALF OF THE LAND.

WE WERE TOLD THAT IN NOVEMBER OF 2018, THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN REQUIRES THAT ALL AGRICULTURE IS FOUR-PLUS ACRES SO THAT IS HOW WE DIVIDED IT. FOUR ACRES FOR HER AND WE HAVE THE OTHER FIVE AND A HALF. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAVE TO PUT THE 1.3 ACRE THERE. THERE ARE NOT 1.3 PIECES.

MOST OF THEM ARE TWO-PLUS BECAUSE TWO WAS THE REQUIREMENT BEFORE THE 2018. I AM SOLELY AGAINST IT.

I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC GOING IN THIS AREA AND WE DON'T NEED A LOT OF SMALL LITTLE LOTS HERE.

IT'S AGRICULTURAL. PEOPLE HAVE HORSES, CATTLE, GOATS AND SO FORTH. I'M TOTALLY AGAINST IT.

LET ME SAY FIRST THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN HERE THREE TIMES ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

THEN PLUS WHAT WE HAD TO DEAL WITH.

I HAVE A -- YOU GUYS REALLY DESERVE A PAT ON THE BACK.

THIS IS NOT FUN. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THANK YOU, MADAM. CAN WE PUT AN AERIAL UP HERE OF THE AREA THAT SHOWS THE ROADS AND STUFF? OR A MAP, ONE OR THE OTHER? I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL AS

WE -- >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

WHILE HE IS DOING THAT, JORDAN AND JORDAN, SORRY.

RENISS? >> THAT WAS ME, SIR.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. APPLICANT.

OKAY. I HAVE ANOTHER NONSPEAKER.

CYNTHIA SHANNON. OKAY.

THEN I HAVE A SPEAKER DEBRA O'ROURKE.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE, MA'AM.

>> I'M DEBRA ROURKE MEYERS, 1131 APPLE LANE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE PROPERTY. I WROTE A BIG LONG LETTER SO I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS SHORT. I JUST, THIS AREA, THE TRAFFIC IS THE ROADS ARE NOT BUILT TO HAVE THIS MANY HOUSES OUT THERE.

I MEAN WE ARE RURAL. WE'RE AGRICULTURAL.

WE HAVE HORSES, CHICKENS, GOATS BEHIND ME.

WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO STAY IN OUR LITTLE PEACEFUL AREA.

AND KEEP IT ZONED AG. THAT IS WHAT WE JUST PLEASE THAT

WE KEEP OUR LITTLE SANCTUARY. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THANK YOU.

CYNTHIA SHANNON WAS OPPOSED FOR THE RECORD.

NEXT SPEAKER. DIANA KUYKENDAHL.

[00:15:08]

>> HELLO. I'M DIANA KUYKENDAHL.

I LIVE AT 720 APPLE LANE. I'M NOT IN THE 200-FOOT THING BUT I THE RESIDE IN THAT AREA. THEY PRETTY MUCH KIND OF SUMMED UP WHAT I WANTED TO SAY EXCEPT FOR THE TRAFFIC, IF THEY ALLOW MORE HOUSING THEY WILL HAVE TO RIDEN OUR ROAD I THINK.

IF -- WIDEN OUR ROAD, I THINK. IF THEY DO THAT AS A TAXPAYERS I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR A NEW ROAD.

WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. WE ARE OLD FOLKS.

WE HAVE BEEN THERE 28 YEARS. AS FAR AS THE WATER GOES, I THINK WHAT THEY DID WAS PREMATURE SINCE SOMETHING HAD NOT BEEN APPROVED YET. I HAVE HEARD FROM MY NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE WAY BACK DOWN AROUND THE CORNER AND THE END THEY CAN'T RUN BOTH OF THEIR SHOWERS AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH WATER PRESSURE.

SO WE ADD THREE HOUSES TO THIS, WHAT IS THAT GOING TO DO? I KNOW THAT WON'T BE ENOUGH WATER PRESSURE.

SO AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE PAY TAXES TO HAVE THE WATER DEPARTMENT COME OUT AND REINSTALL BIGGER WATER LINES.

BUT WE HAVE HORSES. THERE ARE COWS DOWN THE STREET FROM US. CHICKENS.

IT'S JUST GREAT LIVING OUT THERE IN THE COUNTRY ATMOSPHERE.

I WOULD LIKE IT TO STAY THAT WAY.

THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

WE HAVE ANOTHER NONSPEAKER. RANDY REED.

AND RANDY IS IN OPPOSITION. AM I MISSING -- I THINK THAT'S IT. I'M SORRY.

HERE WE GO. I GOT A WHOLE STACK UP HERE.

JUNIOR GRIFFITH AND VIRGINIA MELBOURNE ARE IN OPPOSITION.

HAROLD AND LINDA MCQUIRK ARE IN OPPOSITION.

I DO BELIEVE THAT'S ALL RIGHT THERE.

OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK THAT HAS NOT SIGNED UP? THAT'S EVERYBODY? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? Y'ALL HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, TRENTON? STAFF?

OKAY. >> CHAIRMAN YOU HAVE TO CLOSE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTION.

IF NO ONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> COMMISSIONER: SO MOVED.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOVE AND SECOND. ALL IN FA FAVOR, AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR ACTION.

>> COMMISSIONER: QUESTION FOR STAFF.

PARDON ME, I MIGHT HAVE MISSED THIS.

DO WE HAVE ANY WATER ALIGNMENTS OR DO WE HAVE PICTURES OF THE WATER MAIN FOR THIS STREET? DOES IT LOOP? DOES IT DEAD END? WAS THERE ANY PRESSURE TESTING DONE IN BETWEEN THE LAST TIME THAT THE APPLICANT WAS HERE AND NOW? I MIGHT HAVE MISSED THAT.

I DON'T KNOW. >> MARCOS: FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WE CONTACTED RANDY KIRK.

HE OVERSEES MOUNTAIN PEAK. THE LAST INFORMATION WE HAD WAS THAT THEY, THAT THE, THEY DID A HYDRAULIC TEST AND THEY WERE PERMITTED TO HAVE TWO MORE TAPS. NOW WE DON'T REALLY DEAL SO MUCH -- AGAIN, WE DEAL MORE ON THE ZONING SIDE.

NOT SO MUCH HOW MOUNTAIN PEAK ADDRESSES WHO GETS A TAP AND WHO DOESN'T GET A TAP. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WAS IT PREMATURE? IT MIGHT BE.

AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO ZONING YET.

BUT THERE WAS A TEST DONE FOR TWO ADDITIONAL TAPS.

THAT IS THE LAST WE HEARD FROM MOUNTAIN PEAK ON THAT.

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

THEN ACCORDING TO IT LOOKS AS THOUGH IT DOES LOOP.

>> IT DOES LOOP. >> MARCOS: TO THE NORTH.

>> COMMISSIONER: I DID TALK TO RANDY KIRK BECAUSE SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT WERE SAYING IT WAS A TWO-INCH WATER LINE.

IT IS A FOUR-INCH, ACCORDING TO THEM IT IS A FOUR-INCH LINE.

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER: ALSO I ASKED, THERE WERE COMMENTS ABOUT LOW WATER PRESSURE WHICH WAS

[00:20:03]

CONCERNING. AND HIS RESPONSE TO THAT WAS THAT THAT AREA RIGHT THERE IS UP ON THE HILL ON THE UPPER END BY THE TANKS. AND THAT IS WHERE THE LOW PRESSURE IS GOING TO BE FOR THE SYSTEM COMING DOWN WHEN YOU GET FOURTH TOWARD 663, THE PRESSURE GOES UP.

I KNOW THAT DON'T HELP ANYBODY WHO HAS LOW WATER PRESSURE.

IF YOU HAVE LOW PRESSURE, YOU'VE GOT LOW WATER PRESSURE.

BUT THE SAME ITEMS WERE CONCERN TO ME IN THE COMMENTS THAT THE PEOPLE MADE, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT AFFECTING THE

WATER PRESSURE. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER: THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS RIGHT THERE WHERE APPLE LANE TURNS, YEAH, RIGHT THERE.

THOSE TWO HOUSES, ARE THEY ON ACREAGE OR ARE THEY ON LOTS?

DO WE KNOW? >> MARCOS: LET'S SEE --

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THOSE TWO RIGHT THERE.

>> MARCOS: THESE TWO HOUSES RIGHT HERE? LET'S SEE. CAN YOU BRING -- CAN YOU CLICK ON THAT?

>> MARCOS: YEAH. SO THIS WOULD, THIS AREA HERE -- CAN YOU UNCHECK THAT? ACTUALLY, CLICK THIS ONE HERE.

I THINK IT'S THE ONE -- IS THAT THE ONE WE ARE LOOKING AT,

CHAIRMAN? >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: YES.

>> MARCOS: YEAH. THAT IS KNOWN AS LOT TWO.

YES, SIR. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: AND WHAT

SIZE? >> MARCOS: IT'S PLATTED.

THE SIZE OF IT IS EXACTLY ONE ACRE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: SO WE HAVE TWO HOUSES ON ONE ACRE?

>> MARCOS: APPARENTLY -- CAN YOU ZOOM IN TO THAT FOR ME?

>> IT'S ONE HOUSE. IT'S A MOTHER-IN-LAW HOUSE FOR A MOTHER TO LIVE IN. IT'S ONE HOUSE.

IT'S JUST GOT TWO -- >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> MARCOS: SECONDARY DWELLINGS ARE PERMITTED.

YOU DON'T KNOW IF THE SECONDARY DWELLING WENT THROUGH THE CITY'S REVIEW. THAT WAS PROBABLY BEFORE.

THAT WAS BEFORE ANNEXATION. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: CAN WE BRING THAT DOWN THIS WAY? NO.

SIDEWAYS. GO TO YOUR LEFT.

THE OTHER WAY. I'M SORRY.

KEEP GOING. KEEP GOING.

KEEP GOING. RIGHT THERE.

OKAY. THOSE ARE WHAT SIZE LOTS ARE

THOSE THERE? >> MARCOS: THESE FALL JUST UNDER AN ACRE. THEY ARE .7 OF AN ACRE EACH.

BUT THOSE LOTS WERE AGAIN, THAT WAS BEFORE ANNEXATION.

BEFORE THOSE WERE BROUGHT -- >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: I UNDERSTAND. AND THEN IF WE COME BACK TOWARD THE CORNER WHERE THE PROPERTY IS, THE SUBJECT SITE.

OKAY. RIGHT HERE ON THE CORNER ABOUT WHERE GOOGLE EARTH. IF I'M READING THAT CORRECTLY, IS THAT THE BACK SIDE OF SIR LANCELOT?

CAMELOT ESTATES? >> MARCOS: I THINK CAMELOT

ESTATES IS DOWN HERE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

LAND TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY AT THIS POINT IS

VACANT, RIGHT, FARM LAND? >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: SO IF THAT ACREAGE WERE TO DEVELOP, ARE THEY GOING TO ACCESS THROUGH CAMELOT ESTATES?

>> MARCOS: CAN YOU ZOOM OUT FOR ME, TERA? PULL IT SO YOU CAN -- THERE YOU GO.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: YEAH. THAT BIG SQUARE RIGHT THERE.

>> MARCOS: IF THIS WERE TO DEVELOP -- ACTUALLY, CAN YOU GO SO WE CAN SEE FURTHER SOUTH ALSO.

SO THIS LOT HERE ACTUALLY DOES HAVE, I BELIEVE, IT'S ACCESS OFF OF TOWER ROAD. THIS IS TOWER RIGHT HERE.

SO EVERYBODY HERE HAS LIKE A SHARED DRIVE EASEMENT THAT RUNS THROUGH HERE. NOW THIS AREA WAS TO DEVELOP, UNLESS THE LOTS, THE HOMES WERE PURCHASED, THAT IS THE ONLY WAY A ROAD WILL GO THROUGH THE AREA. IF SOMEBODY WAS TO BUY THIS LOT HERE, AND THEY PURCHASED THIS, THERE IS MULTIPLE WAYS TO HAVE CONNECTION. YOU PROBABLY COULD CONNECT TO APPLE LANE. THAT IS A POSSIBILITY.

WE DON'T KNOW. >> THE HOMES ARE PRIVATE

DRIVEWAYS. >> MARCOS: RIGHT.

OR IF THIS WHOLE ENTIRE AREA PURCHASED IT COULD ABSOLUTELY CONNECT DOWN HERE ALSO AS WELL. I'M SAYING IF THE PERSON WHO PURCHASES THIS AND PURCHASES THIS LAND ALSO, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DRAW UP CIVIL PLANNING. ULTIMATELY WE WOULD HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW ACCESS WILL OCCUR.

THE NUMBER OF LOTS DETERMINES HOW MANY ACCESS POINTS YOU NEED.

AFTER 39 LOTS YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS.

[00:25:05]

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: YOU WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE MORE THAN THAT

IN THAT SQUARE? >> MARCOS: 39 LOTS? WELL, TARA, CLICK ON THIS LOT FOR ME WHERE MY POINTER IS? THAT IS 37 ACRES. POINT ON THIS ONE BELOW IT.

THAT IS 37 ACRES ALSO. SO YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE ROUGHLY -- SURE. ABSOLUTELY.

>> YOU COULD DEFINITELY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT REQUIRES TWO

ENTRYWAYS. >> MARCOS: THAT ISN'T TO SAY YOU COULDN'T HAVE TWO ENTRANCE WAYS OFF OF TOWER RIGHT TO LINE UP WITH EITHER ENTRANCE WAY THAT GOES IN TO ROSEBUD ALSO AS WELL.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: I WOULD JUST BE CONCERNED IF I LIVED ON APPLE LANE THAT SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD SOMEBODY DOESN'T BUILD A ROAD ON UP TO APPLE LANE AND DEVELOP HOUSES DOWN THERE TO PUT TRAFFIC ON MY ROAD. THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING

ABOUT. >> MARCOS: YEAH.

WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT -- AGAIN, THIS ROAD IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE 60-FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY.

THAT IS CONSIDERED A RURAL SECTION.

WOULD OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS BE WARRANTED AT THAT POINT? YOU WOULD LOOK AT WIDENING THE ROAD TO 28-FEET WIDE.

RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY 12 FEET WIDE.

IT'S A VERY NARROW ROAD. WE STILL MAINTAIN THAT ROAD.

WE JUST OVERLAID IT MAYBE A YEAR AGO OR SOMETHING.

BUT THE ROAD IS EXTREMELY NARROW.

ABSOLUTELY. IF MORE DEVELOPMENT WAS TO OCCUR AND ACCESS WAS TO OCCUR, I JUST DON'T SEE HOW OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS WOULDN'T BE WARRANTED AT THAT TIME.

>> WHAT WOULD WARRANT IMPROVEMENT OF THE ROAD?

MORE HOUSES? >> MARCOS: YEAH.

IT TYPICALLY DOES. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANYONE ELSE? OKAY.

IF I UNDERSTAND STAFF CORRECTLY, THEY DO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. THEY MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS BEFORE. BUT THEY DEFINITELY STILL MEET

ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: RIGHT. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? WHAT IS THE PLEASURE?

I HEAR A MOTION? >> COMMISSIONER: I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE ON

THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND?

>> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE. WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL.

COMMISSIONER KOEHLER? >> VICE-CHAIRMAN KOEHLER: AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER HILL?

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER LEE?

>> AYE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER OSBORN, AYE. IT'S UNANIMOUS.

OKAY. WE'LL MOVE TO CASE 11.

ITEM 011, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING T --

>> TRENTON: WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU START AT THE REGULAR

AGENDA WITH ITEM NUMBER 4. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: GO BACK TO

THE TOP? >> TRENTON: CORRECT.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. ITEM 004, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON

[004 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of MidTowne Phase 8, Lots 1-4, and 5X Block 32, and Lots 1-5 and 6X, Block 33, being 6.384± acres out of the William Hawkins Survey, Abstract No. 465, in the City of Midlothian, Ellis County, Texas. The property is located along a future extension of Shelby Place, approximately 155 feet north of Cody Hunter Lane (Case No. PP08-2021-65).]

A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MIDTOWNE PHASE 8, LOTS 1-4, AND 5X BLOCK 32, AND LOTS 1-5 AND 6X, BLOCK 33, BEING 6.384 ACRES OUT OF THE WILLIAM HAWKINS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 465, IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG A FUTURE EXTENSION OF SHELBY PLACE, APPROXIMATELY 155 FEET NORTH OF CODY HUNTER LANE.

>> TRENTON: THANK YOU. THIS IS WITHIN PHASE EIGHT OF THE MIDLOTHIAN DEVELOPMENT. PROPOSING NINE RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

TWO COMMON AREA LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 6.384 ACRES.

PROPOSED REQUEST DOES MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. AS WELL AS THE SUBDIVISION AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS.

IN ACCORDANCE TO SECTION 2.12 OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. NO PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF? DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

[00:30:03]

NO? OKAY.

>> I CAN REPRESENT IF I NEED TO. >> TRENTON: WE HAVE THE ENGINEER IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE ENGINEERING TO ANSWER

FOR THE PLAT. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. IF NOT, WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL? I WOULD MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND A SECOND. WE'LL TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE.

>> COMMISSIONER SKI SKINNER? >> AYE.

[005 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of Hidden Lakes of Mockingbird, being 224.883± acres out of the J. Smith Survey, Abstract No. 971, R Graham, Abstract 421 and the E. Lay Survey, Abstract 665, in the City of Midlothian, Ellis County, Texas. The property is located on the north side of Mockingbird Lane, between Walnut Grove Road and North Mockingbird Lane (approximately 2,000 feet east of the intersection of Walnut Grove Rd. and Mockingbird Lane) (Case No. PP09-2021-66).]

WE MOVE TO ITEM 5. ITEM 005, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HIDDEN LAKES OF MOCKINGBIRD, BEING 224.883 ACRES OUT OF THE J. SMITH SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 971, R. GRAHAM, ABSTRACT 421 AND THE E. LAY SURVEY, ABSTRACT 665, IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, ELLIS COUNTY, TEXAS.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MOCKINGBIRD LANE, BETWEEN WALNUT GROVE ROAD AND NORTH MOCKINGBIRD LANE.

>> TRENTON: THANK YOU. THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MOCKINGBIRD SPRINGS. THEY ARE REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT 129 LOTS AND FIVE COMMON AREA LOTS.

IN 2020, THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 132. PER SECTION 6.11.4.B OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, CUL-DE-SAC LANE SHOULD NOT EXCEED 600 FEET IN LENGTH. ON A PLAT, THERE IS A NOTE THAT DOES MENTION THAT THERE ARE TWO CUL-DE-SACS THAT DO EXCEED THE LENGTH. HOWEVER, IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THE CUL-DE-SAC LENGTHS WERE APPROVED AS PART OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS. IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE TO 2.12 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT OF CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN.

WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS

TIME. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ALL RIGHT.

ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY.

FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. DO I HEAR A MOTION? IF NOT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: I'M SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE. DO ROLL CALL.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER SKINNER?

>> COMMISSIONER: AYE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER OSBORN, AYE. UNANIMOUS.

[006 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of the Crocker Addition, Block A, Lots 1-4, being +/-16.158 acres out of the D. Weaver Survey, Abstract No. 1138 and the C. Phipps Survey, Abstract No. 861. The property is generally located south of U.S. Hwy 287 and 2,000± feet west of Rex Odom Drive (Airport Drive) (Case No. PP10-2021-73).]

NEXT IS ITEM 006, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE CROCKER ADDITION, BLOCK A, LOTS 1-4, BEING 16.158 ACRES OUT OF THE D. WEAVER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1138 AND THE C. PHIPPS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 861. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF THE U.S. HIGHWAY 287 AND 2,000 FEET

WEST OF THE REX ODOM DRIVE. >> TRENTON: THANK YOU.

THIS IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR NO. 50.

IF YOU RECALL FROM THE LAST PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THIS CAME BEFORE YOU. IT COULD CONSIST OF FOUR NONRESIDENTIAL LOTS ON 16 ACRES. THIS PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE 2,000 FEET OF THE CITY OF THE MIDLOTHIAN SANITARY SEWER LINE.

HOWEVER, DUE TO THE LOCATION, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE REZONING REQUEST, THEY DID ASK A WAIVER TO NOT HAVE TO CONNECT ON TO THE CITY SEWER DUE TO THE VARIOUS HARDSHIPS THAT DO EXIST.

WITH THAT SAID, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND IT DOES MEET REQUIREMENTS IN 2.12 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. IT MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS IN THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REGULATIONS AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THE TIME. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL.

THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF? QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

[00:35:05]

DID WE HAVE ANY SUBMIT -- I THOUGHT I SAW ONE ON CASE FIVE.

DID WE NOT HAVE ONE? >> TRENTON: I DON'T RECALL ONE

FOR THIS CASE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> TRENTON: I DON'T SEE ONE FOR THIS CASE, SIR.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ALL RIGHT. THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. THIS IS ON SITE SEWER.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> TRENTON: CORRECT.

THEY'LL BE HAVING A SEPTIC SYSTEM TO SERVE THE SITE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WHERE IS THE CLOSEST?

>> TRENTON: ACROSS 287 WOULD BE THE CLOSEST FOR THEM TO CONNECT. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO BURROW

UNDER 287 TO GET SEWER. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION.

>> COMMISSIONER: I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION.

IS THERE A SECOND? >> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND A SECOND.

DO ROLL CALL. COMMISSIONER HILL?

COMMISSIONER KOEHLER? >> VICE-CHAIRMAN KOEHLER: AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER CAVES?

COMMISSIONER SKINNER? >> COMMISSIONER: AYE.

ITEM 007, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO SECTION 4.5602 (OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS) TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES OVER THE MAXIMUM NUMBER PERMITTED, FOR A NEW DEVELOPMENT FOR MEDICAL OFFICES INCLUDING AN OPTICAL CENTER AND URGENT CARE FACILITY. THE PROPERTY IS ON 1.683 ACRES OF LAND SITUATED ON LOT 1A-R, BLOCK 1, OF THE MESSIAH LUTHERAN CHURCH. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF F.M. 663 AND ROUNDABOUT DRIVE.

IT IS UNANIMOUS. OKAY.

[007 Consider and act upon a request for a special exception to Section 4.5602 (Off-Street Parking Requirements) to allow for additional parking spaces over the maximum number permitted, for a new development for medical offices including an optical center and urgent care facility. The property is on 1.683± acres of land situated on Lot 1A-R, Block 1, of Messiah Lutheran Church. The property is located on the northwest corner of FM 663 and Roundabout Drive. (Case No. M10-2021-70).]

>> TRENTON: THANK YOU. IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR PARKING REGULATION, NONRESIDENTIAL PARKING REGULATIONS SECTION 4.5602, WE HAVE WITHIN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN STANDARDS WE HAVE A MINIMUM AND A MAXIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT.

THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR MEDICAL OFFICE WHICH IS THE PROPOSED USE IS ONE SPACE PER 400 SQUARE FEET.

THERE IS A PROVISION WITHIN THAT PARKING STANDARD THAT THEY CAN DO A MAXIMUM OF 25% ADDITIONAL PARKING, WHICH WOULD BRING THEM TO 45 SPACES. THEY ARE REQUESTING 76, WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE MAXIMUM REQUIREMENT.

THEY ARE REQUIRED TO COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO ASK FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS ANYTIME THEY EXCEED THE MAXIMUM THRESHOLD. THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT DUE TO THE PROPOSED USE, THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN IT WILL CONSIST OF THE TWO MEDICAL OFFICES.

ONE OF THOSE BEING OPTICAL CENTER AND URGENT CARE FACILITY.

DUE TO THE TYPE OF MEDICAL OFFICES, IN THEIR FINDINGS AND THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENTS THEY HAVE FOUND ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES HAVE BEEN TRIGGER AND THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SPACES THAN THE TYPICAL DOCTOR'S OFFICE.

SO FOR THAT REASON THEY HAVE COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO REQUEST THIS ADDITIONAL, THESE ADDITIONAL SPACES. AS I PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, STAFF IS WORKING ON GOING THROUGH OUR PARKING RATIOS.

THE LAST COUPLE OF SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE PARKING HAVE BEEN BASED AROUND VARYING TYPES OF MEDICAL OFFICES.

RIGHT NOW OUR MEDICAL OFFICES IS VERY, IT'S BROAD.

IT ISN'T SPECIFIC ON THE TYPE OF MEDICAL OFFICES.

WE ARE COMPARING THAT TO OTHER CITIES AND WHAT THEY ARE DOING, SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. THAT IS SOMETHING WE'LL BRING FORWARD TO YOU FOR THE WORKSHOP ITEM COMING UP.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST.

WE DO FEEL THAT THEY DO FIT THE KNEADS OF THE ADDITIONAL PARKING. AND IT'S SIMILAR TO OTHER TYPES OF USES THAT RECENTLY HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN. I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC

HEARING. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS

OF STAFF? >> COMMISSIONER: ARE WE STILL GETTING ALL THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS?

>> TRENTON: THEY WILL STILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS. BUT THE TREE, LANDSCAPE ISLANDS AND TREE IN SO MANY FEET OF EVERY PARKING SPACE AND CAPPED AT HOW MANY SMALLER SPACES THEY CAN HAVE, PARKING SPACES SO THERE ARE STILL VARIOUS PROVISIONS THEY HAVE TO MEET.

>> COMMISSIONER: WE'RE NOT GIVING ANYTHING UP BY GIVING

THEM FOR PARKING SPACES? >> TRENTON: NO.

>> COMMISSIONER: WE'RE STILL HELD TO --

>> TRENTON: CORRECT. >> COMMISSIONER: OKAY.

>> COMMISSIONER: JUST MORE CONCRETE.

[00:40:04]

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? >> TRENTON: THEY'RE IN THE VERY BACK IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THEM.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: YEAH. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES HERE. I KNOW I READ THE LETTERS THAT WERE SUBMITTED. BUT IF THE ENGINEER COULD COME UP OR WHOEVER WILL REPRESENT THE APPLICANT.

MAYBE YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO ME A LITTLE BETTER WHY YOU NEED SO MANY PARKING SPACES BETWEEN YOU AND THE OTHER BUSINESS?

>> SURE. MY NAME IS PRIA, 2201 EAST LAMAR BOULEVARD. SUITE 200, ARLINGTON, TEXAS.

SO, OUR CLIENT IS INTENDING ON HAVING AT LEAST TWO MEDICAL USES IN THERE. ONE OF THEM IS TEXAS STATE OPTICAL. THE OTHER ONE IS EXPEDIENT URGENT CARE. THEY HAVE MULTIPLE FACILITIES IN THE D.F.W. METRO PLEX. BASED ON THEIR EXPERIENCE AND THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF PATRONS COMING TO THEIR FACILITIES, THEY UNDERSTAND THE NUMBER OF THE PARKING SPACES THEY REQUIRE.

SO THAT IS THE REASON WE ARE HAVING TO PROVIDE EXCESS PARKING

TO MEET THEIR DEMAND. >> COMMISSIONER: WHERE IS THE NEXT CLOSEST FACILITY TO MIDLOTHIAN?

>> I BELIEVE THEY HAVE ONE IN MANSFIELD.

THAT IS AT LEAST FOR THE TEXAS STATE OPTICAL.

I'M NOT SURE ABOUT EXPEEPEDIENT INSURGENT CARE.

>> DO YOU -- EXPEDIENT URGENT C? >> DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PARKING SPACES THEY HAVE AT THAT FACILITY?

>> NO, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER: OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

IF THERE IS NO OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF, FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR A MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION?

MOTION? >> COMMISSIONER: MAKE A MOTION

TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND A SECOND.

TO APPROVE. DO ROLL CALL.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER SKINNER?

>> COMMISSIONER: AYE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER OSBORN, NO. IT DOES PASS.

OKAY. WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM 8.

[008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of property generally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Fields Addition (commonly known as 1600 Chuckwagon Drive), as depicted and shown in Exhibit A, by changing the zoning from Single-Family Residential Two (SF-2) District and Planned Development District No. 4 (PD-4) to solely Single-Family Residential Two (SF-2) District (Case No. Z20-2021-079).]

ITEM 008, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1, BLOCK 1, FIELDS ADDITION (COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1600 CHUCKWAGON DRIVE), AS DEPICTED AND SHOWN IN EXHIBIT A, BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO DISTRICT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 TO SOLELY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO

DISTRICT. >> TRENTON: THANK YOU.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST OFF OF CHUCKWAGON DRIVE.

WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING TO DO IS CHANGE THEIR ZONING.

HERE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AT THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC.

THEY ARE REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY 2 DISTRICT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOUR TO SINGLE FAMILY TWO DISTRICT. AT ONE POINT THE PROPERTY OWNER DID ACQUIRE THIS PORTION OF THIS, THAT WAS WITHIN THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR.

THEY ACQUIRED IT FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

RECENTLY WHEN THEY WENT TO GET IT APPRAISED DUE TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER FOUR THE APPRAISER SAID THEY WERE APPRAISING IT FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY AS THE NONRESIDENTIAL.

BECAUSE IT'S SPLIT ZONED. SO THEY CAME IN THE OFFICE TO APPLY FOR REZONING REQUEST TO MAKE IT SINGLE FAMILY TWO DISTRICT. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOUR IS ACTUALLY, THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS LOCATED IN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOUR OVER THIS WATER FEATURE HERE. IT'S EXCELLENTLY OVER THIS WATER FEATURE. STAFF DID SEND NOTICES TO 200 FEET. ZORE RAE CAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZERO IN OPPOSITION. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

WE DO FIND THAT ALTHOUGH THIS WOULD BE ADDING ACREAGE TO THE PROPERTY, DUE TO THE MINIMUM FRONTAGE YOU HAVE ON THE CUL-DE-SAC AND DUE TO THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY BEING LOCATED WITHIN THE WATER FEATURE, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP MORE THAN JUST ONE LOT.

MORE THAN ONE DEVELOPING ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

WE DO NOT FIND ANY ISSUES WITH THE ADDITIONAL ACREAGE BEING ADDED TO THE SINGLE FAMILY TWO DISTRICT.

[00:45:02]

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> TRENTON: THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS? DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK?

ANY QUESTIONS OF IF APPLICANT? >> COMMISSIONER: QUESTION FOR

STAFF. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: SURE.

>> COMMISSIONER: IS THE ONLY ACCESS TO THE LOT THROUGH THAT CUL-DE-SAC OR IS THAT A ROADWAY BEHIND IT OR A PRIVATE DRIVE?

>> TRENTON: I BELIEVE THIS IS A PRIVATE ENTRY BUT I CAN LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

CURRENTLY THE ONLY DIRECT ASSESS TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OFF

OF CHUCKWAGON. >> SIR, COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND ADDRESS THAT IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.

>> MY NAME IS CHAD FIELDS. I LIVE AT 508 TRAIL LAKE PLACE AT THE TIME. THIS IS MY PROPERTY.

THERE IS TWO ENTRANCES. THIS IS RUGGED TRAIL ON BACKSIDE OF THIS PROPERTY. THAT IS AN EASEMENT GOING TO A PRIVATE HOUSE UP THERE, BUT THERE IS ACCESS TO THAT THERE IF

YOU NEED IT. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANY OTHER

QUESTIONS? >> STAFF INDICATED THEY COULD ONLY PUT ONE MORE HOUSE ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, CORRECT?

>> DUE TO THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN THERE.

>> COMMISSIONER: THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OTHER QUESTIONS. ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER: MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: SECOND? >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND SECOND CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. >> AYE.

>> TRENTON: I BELIEVE THERE WAS SOMEONE --

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: I DO HAVE ONE IN OPPOSITION THAT WANTS TO

SPEAK. >> TRENTON: SO PRIOR TO

CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING -- >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: CAN'T WE LET THEM SPEAK UNDER THE REGULAR DEAL?

>> TRENTON: YEAH. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. MICHAEL O'NEIL.

IF YOU WOULD COME AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: I'M MIKE O'NEIL 1870 COTTON CREEK TRAIL IN MIDLOTHIAN. IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWED THE OVERVIEW. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. WE ARE NOT REALLY SURE THAT WE HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO THE FIELD'S REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING. BUT WE DID HAVE A COME OF QUESTIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CLARIFIED, IF WE COULD.

ON PAGE OH OF THE MEETING. IT SAYS THAT THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND THE TRANSPORTATION, IT SAYS IT IS PART OF A LOCAL STREET.

BECAUSE WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY, ALL OF OUR STREETS ARE PRIVATE. THE CITY HAS TOLD US THAT THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THE MAINTENANCE ON THE STREETS.

SO I WANTED TO JUST HAVE A CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

IF IT SAYS IT'S A LOCAL STREET AND IT'S ACTUALLY A PRIVATE

STREET, IS THAT A MATTER? >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: TRENTON?

>> TRENTON: THAT JUST GENERALLY RELATES TO THE WIDTH OF THE STREET. THE TYPE OF THE ROAD IT IS.

WE WOULD JUST NEED TO PUT THE WORD "LOCAL PRIVATE STREET."

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: JUST AFTER THAT, IT SAYS ALL REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATED FOR CHUCKWAGON DRIVE.

AGAIN, IT'S A SECURED THROUGH EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH COTTON CREEK RANCH THAT PLACES RESTRICTIONS ON THE OWNERS OF THAT LAND. IT SAYS IT'S A RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT HAS BEEN DEDICATED. BUT IT'S BEEN DEDICATED THROUGH

AN EASEMENT. >> TRENTON: THAT IS FINE.

WE CAN CHANGE THAT. WE CAN RELOOK AT THAT.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: WITH THAT, BINDING DEED RESTRICTION COMES WITH THAT.

A FEE. ANNUAL FEE.

>> LET ME MENTION THIS. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS JUST CHANGING OF THE ZONING. A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT HE IS ADDRESSING REALLY RELATE TO SOMETHING THAT WOULD TIE IN DEVELOPMENT THAT A PROPERTY TO REPLAT, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND ALL OF THAT. AT THIS TIME, YOU KNOW, THE CHANGING OF THE ZONING DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF WHAT HE IS TALKING

ABOUT. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: OKAY.

IT'S JUST THE VERBIAGE WE WERE CONCERNED WITH IN THE PUBLIC

MEETING NOTES. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: OTHERWISE WE HAVE NO OBJECTIONS.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THANK YOU. >> PUBLIC SPEAKER: ALSO, AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE A COMMON AREA FOR DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S THE PROPERTY THAT IS JUST NEXT TO THE FIELD'S LOT.

[00:50:07]

THIS SECTION HERE. THAT WAS DEDICATED AS A PARK FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT SAYS THAT EVERYONE WAS NOTIFIED BUT WE WEREN'T NOTIFIED.

SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT, HOW WE GET NOTIFIED IF WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE NOTIFIED. BUT WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS

MEETING A WEEK AGO. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THAT IS THE ONLY CONCERN THAT WE HAD, WE

WEREN'T NOTIFIED. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> PUBLIC SPEAKER: THAT IS IT. THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.

AND/OR A MOTION. >> COMMISSIONER: MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE THE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE DONE FOR THE CLARIFICATION AS THE GENTLEMAN WAS SPEAKING ABOUT.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT?

>> COMMISSIONER: RIGHT. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: IF I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO

DO WITH -- >> COMMISSIONER: OKAY.

>> TRENTON: HAVE THE REPORT CHANGED TO REFLECT THAT IT IS PRIVATE LOCAL ROAD. FOR THE STAFF REPORT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AND WE DUD MAIL OUT NOTICE TO THE, LOOKS LIKE THE COUNTRY SOUTH ELLIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT. THE ADDRESS THAT IS LOCATED ON

THAT. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

THANK YOU, TRENTON. >> MAYBE THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

WE HAVE A BIG RANCH -- >> TRENTON: SORRY.

COTTON CREEK RANCH. I MISSPOKE.

MY APOLOGY. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ALL RIGHT.

THE APPLICANT RAISED HIS HAND. DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING SIR

BEFORE WE -- >> SO I'M HERE JUST TO GET MY REZONING TO MAKE THIS -- I'M TRYING TO CLEAR UP THE LAND TO MAKE IT A CLEAN PIECE OF PROPERTY.

I HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH ARREST YEAR TRYING TO GET VARIANCES AND REZONINGS AND EVERYTHING. ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS GET THIS PROPERTY LOOKING CLEAN. THAT WAY IT'S NOT ZONED MORE THAN ONE WAY. WHAT MR. O'NEILL IS TALKING ABOUT IS AN H.O.A. ISSUE. IT'S NOT AN ISSUE WITH THE REZONING ISSUE. THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE. HE IS TALKING ABOUT CHANGING AN EASEMENT TO SOMETHING ELSE, WHICH I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF.

BUT THE REASON IS FOR H.O.A. DUES AND FEES.

SO, MY GOAL HERE IS JUST TO GET THE PROPERTY REZONED ONE WAY AND JUST TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY ITSELF.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR.

DO I HEAR A MOTION? IF NOT I MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: SECOND. WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER?

>> COMMISSIONER: AYE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER OSBORN, AYE. OKAY.

[011 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the development and use of Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Ludewick Addition (commonly known as 818 North 9th Street) presently located in a Residential Three (R3) Zoning District by rezoning said property to Urban Village Planned Development District No. 139 (UVPD- 139) for a place of worship (Case No. Z03-2021-034).]

WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO ITEM 11. ITEM 011, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF LOTS 17 AND 18, BLOCK 1, LUDEWICK ADDITION (COMMONLY KNOWN AS 818 NORTH 9TH STREET) PRESENTLY LOCATED IN A RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONING DISTRICT BY REZONING SAID PROPERTY TO URBAN VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 139 FOR A PLACE OF WORSHIP.

>> TRENTON: IN ACCORDANCE TO 2.04 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE A PLACE OF WORSHIP IS PERMITTED IN THE SINGLE FAMILY, IN THE RESIDENTIAL THREE DISTRICT BY RIGHT.

HOWEVER, THEY STILL ARE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. THE EXISTING -- ON THE PROMPT THERE IS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO CONVERT THAT IN TO A PLACE OF WORSHIP.

FOR THAT REASON DUE TO THE VARIOUS ISSUES THEY HAVE WITH THE LOT, THE LOT CONFIGURATION, THEY DON'T MEET THE TYPICAL REQUIREMENT THAT A CHURCH WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO; SUCH AS, PARKING. SOME SETBACK REQUIREMENTS THEY DON'T MEET DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT.

AND THE SHAPE OF THE LOT. SO THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR A UVPD. THE MAIN PURPOSE FOR UPDP IS REDEVELOPMENT. THIS IS WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL MODULE. MAJORITY OF THE -- THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES SURROUNDING THEM.

HOWEVER, ALSO TO THE SOUTH, THERE IS NONRESIDENTIAL USES.

[00:55:04]

TO THE WEST AND TO THE EAST. THERE IS ADDITIONAL NONRESIDENTIAL USES. THIS AREA IS REALLY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. THERE IS VARIOUS USES WHICH IS COMMON THROUGHOUT THE ORIGINAL TOWN.

THROUGH VARIOUS MEETINGS AND VARIOUS REVISIONS WITH THE APPLICATION, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO -- THEY WERE ABLE TO REVISIT THE SITE PLAN AND BE ABLE TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL PARKING ON IT FOR THE CHURCH. THEY ARE A SMALL CONGREGATION.

SO THE PROPOSED PARKING WOULD MEET THEIR NEEDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT THEY HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST.

ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED PARKING LOT WILL MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION STANDARD DETAILS.

STAFF DID NOTICE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

ZORE RAE CAME BACK IN -- ZERO CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION AND ZERO CAME BACK IN APPROVAL. WE PUT UP THE SIGN RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE RECOMMEND THEY IMPACT SIGNAGE WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY. THAT HAS BEEN CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER UVPD REZONING REQUEST. THEY WOULD BE PERMITTED TO HAVE A MONUMENT SIGN THAT IS NOT INTERNALLY LIT.

IT HAS TO BE EXTERNALLY LIT. THE MONUMENT SIGN CANNOT BE GREATER THAN FIVE FEET TALL WITH A SIGN AREA OF NOT GREATER THAN 20 FEET IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO ONE.

IT WILL ALLOW SIGNAGE. THEY WOULD BE PERMITTED TO HAVE THE SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING. IT SHALL NOT EXCEED 10% OF THE FRONT FACADE AREA OF THE BUILDING IN WHICH IT WAS INSTALLED. EVERYTHING TO SCALE TO THE BUILDING AND WAY IT IS DESIGNED. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

WE CAN ANSWER NE ANY QUESTIONS T THIS TIME.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMITTEES OF STAFF? APPLICANT PRESENT? WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK, SIR?

>> NO, I'M FINE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTION I'LL ENTERTAIN MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> COMMISSIONER: I MAKE THE MOTION.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THOSE OPPOSED?

IT'S UNANIMOUS. >> FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.

IF THERE IS NOT ANY AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO GO IN TO

EXECUTIVE SECTION IF WE WOULD. >> IF YOU WOULD, READ THE PAGE 3 OF THE AGENDA. READ THE LANGUAGE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WILL GO IN TO EXECUTIVE -- MAY GO IN CLOSED MEETING AT ANY TIME

PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT >> (2 TENNESSEE TO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE FROM COUNTY OR CITY ATTORNEY THAT IS ENGAGED BY THE CITY REGARDING ANY ITEM APPEARING ON THE AGENDA.

SO, WITH THAT, I'LL -- >> THE TIME IS --

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN:

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY, WE WILL RECONVENE IN REGULAR SESSION. IT'S 7:10.

THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION AND/OR DISCUSSION.

>> COMMISSIONER: I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL. COMMISSIONER HILL?

COMMISSIONER KOEHLER? >> VICE-CHAIRMAN KOEHLER: AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER CAVES?

COMMISSIONER SKINNER? >> CCOMMISSIONER SKINNER: AYE.

IT'S UNANIMOUS. >> TRENTON: THANK YOU.

[012 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the use and development regulations of Planned Development District No. 98 (PD-98), as amended, by reapportioning the amount of open space, common area, and residential uses; by amending the site plan. The property is generally located on the northeast corner of Walnut Grove Road and FM 1387 (Case No. Z14-2021-063).]

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM 012, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 98, AS AMENDED, BY REAPPORTIONS THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE, COMMON AREA, AND RESIDENTIAL USES; BY AMENDING THE SITE PLAN.

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WALNUT GROVE ROAD AND F.M. 1387.

>> MARCOS: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF WALNUT GROVE ROAD AND F.M. 1387. I'LL COVER THIS CHART VERY

[01:00:01]

QUICKLY THAT I HAVE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN.

ULTIMATELY THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE ASKING TO ADD A COUPLE OF ACRES OF OPEN SPACE TO WHAT THE CURRENT OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT ALREADY HAS. THEY WILL REMOVE TWO LOTS BUT THEY WILL ADD A VERY LARGE ONE 15-ACRE OUT PARCEL.

THEY ARE GOING TO BE SLIGHTLY REDUCING THE DENSITY FROM THE 2.46 TO 2.44. THIS WILL ROW MOVE THE 20 FOOT WIDE LOTS AND ADDS 70-FOOT WIDE AND ADDS A 72-FOOT WIDE LOT AS WELL. SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF THE EXISTING SITE LAYOUT VERSUS PROPOSED LAYOUT.

THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING THE CHANGES SO THAT THE SAME NUMBER OF APPROVED LOTS CAN STILL BE CONSTRUCTED OUTSIDE OF THE ELLIS PRAIRIE CONSERVATION DISTRICT INUNDATION EASEMENT.

ELLIS COUNTY CONDUCTED A BREACH ANALYSIS OF RELATED TO CHAMBERS CREEK DAM A WHILE BACK. AND WHEN THE FOLKS GOT THEIR PLAN DEVELOPMENT, THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT A REASSESSMENT OF THE EXISTING BREACH ANALYSIS HAD TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ANY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

BASED ON THIS MORE DETAILED REASSESMENT, THE APPLICANT IS STILL LOOKING TO TRY TO BUILD AND KEEP THE SAME NUMBER OF LOTS BUT ALSO KEEP LOTS OUTSIDE OF THAT BREACH ANALYSIS AREA.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITHIN THE SUBURBAN MEDIA AND LOW DENSITY MODULE. THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. MEDIUM DENSITY CHARACTERIZED BY THE LOTS THAT ARE 14,000 SQUARE FEET OR LARGER.

LOW DENSITY CHARACTERIZED BY THE LOTS THAT ARE 20,000 SQUARE FEET OR LARGER. THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO REDUCE THE LOTS FROM THE TYPE "C," TYPE "D" TO THE TYPE "A" TYPE "B" IS ABSOLUTELY NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

ALTHOUGH THIS MODIFICATION DOES CONFLICT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THAT INUNDATION AREA. SO KEEPING LOTS OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING AREA IS OBVIOUSLY IDEAL.

REVISED SITE PLAN DOES EXCEED THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT.

IT DOES PROVIDE AN EIGHT-FOOT WIDE CONCRETE TRAIL DOWN TO THE F.M. 1387 AS WE KNOW. 1387 IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING WIDENED. YOU WILL HAVE THE SIDEWALKS THAT RUN ALONG THE AREA SO THERE IS A CONNECTION DOWN THERE.

IT ALSO MAINTAINS THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE LIMITATIONS THAT ARE ESTABLISHINGED BY THE P.D. -- ESTABLISHED BY P.D. 98.

IT WILL BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT 1387.

THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN OF OURS WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT TO YOU FOLKS A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. APPLICANT WAS LOOKING TO TRY TO ADD ANOTHER DRIVEWAY ON TO 1387. WHICH THEY HAVE NOW AGREED TO HAVE THE ACCESS THROUGH EXISTING MASSEY MEADOWS.

SO STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO PD-98. WE DID SEND OUT 238 NOTIFICATION LETTER TOES THE PROPERTY OWNER WITNESS THE DEVELOPMENT.

200 FEET OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

TO DATE WE RECEIVED TWO LETTERS IN RESPONSE.

BOTH IN OPPOSITION FROM PROPERTY OWNERS.

WITH THAT, I CAN STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> COMMISSIONER: LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE A PARCEL MAP UP.

DID YOU HAVE A PARCEL MAP UP OVER THE AERIAL?

>> MARCOS: LET'S SEE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THE WHITE

LOT LINES ON TOP OF THE AERIAL. >> MARCOS: CORRECT.

THESE ARE ALL INDIVIDUAL PARCELS IN THIS AREA HERE.

YES, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER: I THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENT ONE. A DIFFERENT SLIDE.

>> MARCOS: LET'S SEE. THE INUNDATION?

>> COMMISSIONER: YEAH, THIS ONE.

I KNOW THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, THE LAST TIME WE SAW THIS A LOT OF THE CONCERN WAS THE PURCHASE LOTS THAT HAD ONE SIZE OPEN SPACE BEHIND THEM. WHICH NOW HAS A DIFFERENT SIZE

OPEN SPACE BEHIND THEM. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER: WAS THAT OPEN SPACE LOT, IS IT A LOT OR WAS IT PLATTED WITH THE ORIGINAL PHASE CONSISTENT WITH THE SHAPE THAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW, THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING?

>> MARCOS: NO. THIS AREA, THE -- WHERE MY LIGHT

IS RIGHT THERE? >> COMMISSIONER: YES.

>> MARCOS: THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PLATTED IN THERE.

EXACTLY. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN PLATTED WITH THIS AREA HERE. EVERYTHING ELSE WOULD NOT HAVE

BEEN. >> COMMISSIONER: OKAY.

THAT IS AS IT IS SHOWN IT IS PLATTED AND STAYING CONSISTENT WITH HOW IT IS ORIGINALLY PLATTED.

WE'RE MOVING PROPOSED LOTS UP TO THE PLATTED LINE INSTEAD OF

[01:05:03]

ADDING EXISTING OPEN SPACE TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE OPEN SPACE. CORRECT?

>> MARCOS: CORRECT. WHEN THIS WAS PLATTED, IT WOULDN'T HAVE INCLUDED THE WHOLE TRIANGLE HERE.

>> COMMISSIONER: CORRECT. >> MARCOS: YES, SIR.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK?

>> IF YOU WOULD LIKE US TO. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT? OKAY.

WE DO HAVE -- >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: GO AHEAD. SIR, IF YOU WOULD COME UP AND

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> I'LL TAKE IT OFF.

I'M DAVIDHURST. 2205 SOME EVERY SETH IN MIDLOTHIAN. I AM THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER OF THE LAND AND BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: EXCELLENT. SO I KNOW ORIGINAL THROUGH YOU WERE TRYING TO, TRYING TO DO SOMETHING OR SELL OFF THE 15 ACRE PARCEL? NOW KEEPING IT AS SEPARATE

PARCEL PARK LAND? >> WE ARE GOING TO OFFER IT FOR SALE AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. NOT FOR ANY OTHER USE.

A LOT OF EXCESS LAND. THE BEST THING WE COULD COME UP WITH TO USE IT FOR TO LET SOMEONE BUILD A RANCH, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT WILL ALWAYS BE JUST A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. JUST A LARGE ONE.

>> COMMISSIONER: THERE WERE DIFFERENT IDEAS PREVIOUSLY SO THAT IS -- OKAY. I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

AND NO ACCESS THROUGH YOUR COMMUNITY.

>> THAT IS WHAT STAFF REQUIRED. WE AGREED TO DO THAT.

>> COMMISSIONER: OKAY. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT?

THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE DO HAVE TWO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION.

ONE FROM JEN AND KENNY OTT. 4441 MASSEY MEADOWS WAY.

IT SAYS WE PAID EXTRA DOLLARS FOR THIS LOT TO BE TREES AND HAVE NO ONE BEHIND US WITH PRIVACY.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE TREES ALONG THE CREEK AND THE WALKING PATHWAY ARE NOT REMOVED, WHICH MEANS THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS TO BE FURTHER THAN 200 FEET BEHIND US.

THEN A LETTER OF OPPOSITION FROM TIMOTHY KLEINMAN, WAS TOLD WHEN BUILDING THAT THE AREA WOULD NOT BE DEVELOPED FOR SEVEN YEARS.

WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK THAT HASN'T SIGNED UP? OKAY. IF NOT, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> COMMISSIONER: MOVE TO

CLOSE. >> COMMISSIONER: SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. >> AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: ANYBODY OPPOSED?

>> NO AU

OR MOTION. >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION TO APPROVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? >> COMMISSIONER: I'LL SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MOTION AND SECOND.

DO THE ROLL CALL. COMMISSIONER HILL?

COMMISSIONER KOEHLER? >> VICE-CHAIRMAN KOEHLER: AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER STEPHENS? SHE'S NOT HERE. COMMISSIONER CAVES?

COMMISSIONER SKINNER? >> CCOMMISSIONER SKINNER: AYE.

MOVE TO ITEM 13. ITEM 13, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RESTATING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 74 AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 3 OF ORDINANCE NO. 2015-03. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF MCALPIN ROAD, AND NORTHEAST OF F.M. 875.

UNANIMOUS. OKAY.

[013 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending and restating the development and use regulations of Planned Development District No. 74 (PD-74) as set forth in Section 3 of Ordinance No. 2015-03. The property is generally located south of McAlpin Road, and northeast of FM 875 (Case No. Z15-2021-067).]

ITEM 014, CONDUCT A PUBLI -- NORTHEAST OF F.M. 875.

>> MARCOS: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

WHAT I HAVE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN, THIS IS THE LOCATION OF P.D. 74, F.M. 875. RUNS JUST SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY. HERE IS AN IMAGE OF THE CURRENT APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR LA PAZ. ON THE SCREEN.

PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED.

THIS IS REALLY FOCUSED MORE ON THE PHASE THREE AREA.

THIS IMAGE HERE I HAVE UP ON THE SCREEN, THIS LAYS OUT THAT AREA THAT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE ASKING ABOUT HERE FOR PHASE THREE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS. I'VE GOT -- I WILL SHOW A FEW HERE. REDUCE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FROM THE ORIGINAL 15.9 ACRES DOWN TO THE 3.4 ACRES.

[01:10:02]

15.9, 2.7 OUTSIDE THE FLOODPLAIN.

THE FLOODPLAIN LINE DELINEATED IN BLUE.

THE APPLICANT WANTS IT TO REDUCED 3.4 TO LEAVE AN ACRE OUTSIDE THE FLOODPLAIN. ONE ACRE MINIMUMS WITH A NEW LOT OF 3-7 ACRES IN SIZE, THEY ARE SAYING THIS BE APPROVED.

AND THEY ARE REDUCING THE LOT COUNT FROM 126 TO 125.

HE IS MISSING ONE LOT. AN ADDITIONAL ITEM THAT DID NOT SHOW IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO EXCEED THE BLOCK LENGTH ON THIS ALSO AS WELL.

TYPICALLY THE BLOCK LENGTH IN THE SUBDIVISION RECOMMENDATIONS LIMIT THE BLOCK LENGTHS NOT TO EXCEED 1,320 FEET.

IF YOU GO BACK TO HOW LONG THE BLOCKS ARE GOING TO BE, THIS BLOCK IS 8. THIS BLOCK IS 7.

SO IN ESSENCE THE BLOCK LENGTH FOR BLOCK 7 WILL BE 1,800.

BLOCK LENGTH IS 3,898. IT SEEMS PRETTY EXCESSIVE.

THAT IS ABOUT 2,578 FEET MORE THAN THE 1,320 WE REQUIRE.

BLOCK EIGHT DOES CONTAIN MULTIPLE 90-DEGREE TURNS.

THIS CREATES KIND OF AN INTERSECTION LIKE AREA AS OPPOSED TO A STRAIGHT LINE. SO WITH THAT, STAFF IS LOOKING TO GET BEHIND THEM. WE SENT OUT 105 LETTER TOES THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF SUBJECT AREA.

TO DATE, STAFF RECEIVED THREE LETTERS IN OPPOSITION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. I BELIEVE WE DID RECEIVE A COUPLE MORE TODAY AS WELL. BASED ON THE PREVIOUS CASES INVOLVING ONE-ACRE DEVELOPMENTS MOST LARGE LOT DEVELOPMENTS HAVE BEEN PERMITTED TO OMIT THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT AND THE BLOCK LENGTH EXCEED 1320 BUT 90-DEGREE TURN AGAIN MOVES AWAY FROM THE STRAIGHT SHOT EFFECT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PD-74 AS PRESENTED. I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY

HAVE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? >> I'LL ANSWER QUESTIONS.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMITTEES OF THE APPLICANT FROM ANYONE? OKAY. WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS.

FIRST ONE I HAVE IS VALERIE SMITH.

IS VALERIE HERE? >> SHE IS NOT HERE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. I'LL READ THIS OPPOSITION OF THE START OF THE DEVELOPMENT PHASE THREE OF LA PAZ UNTIL A SECONDARY ENTRANCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT IS TOTALLY COMPLETED. WHEN THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS ORIGINALLY SLATED, ALONG WITH THE NEIGHBORS, WE WERE TOLD ONLY 38 HOUSES COULD BE BUILT IN WHAT IS NOW KNOWN AS PHASE ONE.

EXTENSION OF POPPY LANE AND PHASE THREE COULD NOT BE STARTED UNTIL THE SECONDARY BUILT. OUR UNDERSTANDING ONE REASON TO LIMIT NUMBER OF THE HOUSES WAS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAD OBJECTED DUE TO LIMITED ACCESS. WE WERE TOLD EVENTUALLY A SECOND OUTLET WOULD BE BUILT TO CONNECT LA PAZ WITH THE 14TH STREET END OF CREEK. FURTHER MORE, MANY HOMEOWNERS OF THE COUNTRY SOUTH ESTATES PARTICULARLY ON THE COUNTY SOUTH LANE AND POPPY LANE IN ABUNDANCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE ROLLING PAST THE HOUSES TO LEAVE MUD AND DEBRIS ON THE ROADWAYS IN ADDITION TO THE ADDED TRAFFIC.

OFTEN WELL OVER THE SPEED LIMIT. NUMEROUS TIMES.

NOT ONLY HAVE THE HOMEOWNERS WITNESSED CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS SPEEDING BUT IT'S BEEN WITNESSED BY CITY EMPLOYEES.

I KNOW THESE ARE PUBLIC ROADS MANY FEEL WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO ENDURE THE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT. ERIC WEISNER 5831 COUNTRY SOUTH LANE. I OPPOSE THIS.

I APPRECIATE THE LAND AND WILDLIFE BEHIND MY PROPERTY.

TO SEE MORE HOUSES AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO EXTEND 875 WOULD BE CAUSE FOR CONCERN FOR ANY HOMEOWNER.

THOMAS STANLEY. 1071 875.

TO SUPPOSED. SUPPOSE -- IS OPPOSED.NO STATEM.

[01:15:01]

ANGIE DICKERMAN. ANGELA DICKMAN.

5641 SWEATWATER DRIVE. I'M WRITING AS A CONCERNED RESIDENT THAT CURRENTLY RESIDES AT 5641 SWEETWATER DRIVE MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. ATTACHED LETTER RECEIVED BY THE COUNTRY SOUTH H.L.O.A. I'M SECRETARY ON THE BOARD.

I ALSO NOTICED ON THE PROPERTY I AM WRITING TO VOICE CONCERN ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES THAT WILL BE DRIVING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PASSING OF PHASE ONE THE LA PAZ DEVELOPERS WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED TO COMPLETE SO MANY HOMES PRIOR TO CREATE ENTRANCE FROM 875 OR 14TH STREET. FOR THEIR CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.

CONTRACTORS AND THE VEHICLES ARE OFTEN DRIVING FAST AND NOT LOOKING FOR CHILDREN PLAYING OR RIDING BIKES.

WE HAVE NO SIDEWALKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO IT LEAVES THE STREET FOR US TO WALK AND THE KIDS TO PLAY.

THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH THERE NOW IS EXCESSIVE.

AND FURTHER INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND THE LARGE VEHICLES WILL INCREASE SAFETY CANCERS FOR ME AND MY NEIGHBORS.

THERE HAS BEEN AN ADDITIONAL STOP SINE PUT IN COUNTRY SOUTH TO SLOWED THEM DOWN BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO HELP.

I AM ASKING THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE DEVELOPER, REQUEST THAT THE DEVELOPER CREATE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE FROM 875 OR 14TH STREET. SEAN RICHARDSON?

IF YOU WOULD COME UP. >> CAN MY WIFE COME UP AND TALK?

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: CERTAINLY. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR

ADDRESS. >> SEAN RICHARDSON.

860 SAN SALVA EAST IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS.

>> I'M SAKARI RICHARDSON. >> , I THINK, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE SEEN THIS PARTICULAR PHOTO.

OUR BIGGEST CONCERN WAS THE CUL-DE-SAC ON PHASE TWO.

ON THE EAST SIDE. WE WANT TO KEEP THE CUL-DE-SAC BECAUSE OF THE CONGESTION, THE TRAFFIC THAT EVERYONE, THAT THE OTHER LETTERS WERE MENTIONING. SO THIS DISPLAYS THAT CUL-DE-SAC IS STAYING. IS THAT CORRECT?

IS THAT A QUESTION FOR THE -- >> ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTELY STAYING. THE ORIGINAL DESIGN DID SAY THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE -- THAT THERE WOULD BE A CROSSING THERE.

>> CAN THE APPLICANT COME SPEAK AT THE MIC.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> IT ORIGINALLY SAID IT WOULD GO ACROSS AND IT WAS GOING TO CONNECT WITH A BRIDGE.

WE TRIED TO THE A TEMPORARY DRIVE TO FIX THAT PROBLEM WITH THE SECOND PLAN ACCESS. IT WAS, IT DIDN'T PASS THROUGH THE BEGINNING STAGES. WE HAVE DEFINITELY NOT

THAT. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO, IS IT GOING TO CONNECT DOWN 14TH STREET? WE KNOW RIGHT NOW WHERE THE END OF 14TH STREET IS A PRIVATE

PROPERTY. >> YES.

RIGHT HERE? >> YES.

>> SO I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE Y'ALL WERE PLANNING TO POTENTIALLY ANNEXING THAT AND BUILD A BRIDGE THERE.

THAT WOULD BE WHATEVER WE TALK ABOUT A NATURE PARK.

GO UP TO THE CREEK AND COME OVER AND WE WERE GOING TO BUILD OUT THE OTHER PIECE OF POPPY THERE AFTER WE GOT THIS APPROVED.

THEN GO BACK AND SAY OKAY, CAN I GET PERMISSION, WHICH I GOT PERMISSION TO BUILD A ROAD TO MAKE IT KOSHER AND THERE IS NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC GOING ON EVERYBODY AND ALL THAT STUFF.

>> SO WHEN YOU BUILD THAT OUT IS IT GOING TO AFFECT PHASE TWO,

BACK END OF PHASE TWO HERE? >> THERE WILL BE TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH HERE. BUT Y'ALL HAVE BEEN ON THE OTHER PART OF 14TH. THERE ARE A LOT OF STOP SIGNS.

IT WILL BE THE SAME WAY THROUGH. IT'S NOT LIKE 636 WHERE PEOPLE

ARE BLAZING PAST. >> RESIDENTIAL AS WELL?

>> RIGHT HERE? >> YEAH.

>> NO, MA'AM. THAT WILL BE FROM WHAT I BELIEVE

IS. >> YEAH.

AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT WE ARE NOT, WE ARE NOT SURE WHO IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO BUILD THIS SECTION HERE 14.

TH STREET GOES THROUGH DOVE CREEK AND TERMINATES AT THE SOUTH PRONG. AT THIS AREA HERE.

THIS IS PRIVATE OWNED. IT MAY BE BUILT BY A DEVELOPER OR THE CITY. WE DON'T KNOW.

YES, MA'AM. IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.

WE DON'T KNOW. WE JUST KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE A GAP IN 14TH STREET GOING FROM DOVE CREEK TO LA PAZ AT

THIS POINT IN TIME RIGHT NOW. >> OKAY.

[01:20:03]

>> THE REMAINING LOTS IN CUL-DE-SAC ON SAN SABA EAST IS

THIS THE PARK FOR THEM? >> WHERE DO YOU LIVE AT?

>> 860. >> CAN YOU POINT IT AT ME?

>> YEAH. >> I THINK WE ARE RIGHT HERE.

>> CALEB? >> YEAH.

>> GOOD GUY. THE TWO BIG LOTS.

THIS IS COOL. IT LOOKS LIKE THESE ARE THREE DOCTOR FRIENDS. HE IS GOING TO BUILD.

HE IS GOING TO BUILD. THEY HAVE OWN ID IT FOREVER.

THERE IS NO TIMELINE WHEN THEY HAVE TO BUILD.

YOU CAN'T FORCE THEM. THEY COULD RESELL IT BUNCH THEY CAN'T SPLIT IT UP ANY FURTHER. THEY CAN'T PUT MORE HOUSES.

>> OKAY. >> MARCOS: IT WILL ALWAYS REMAIN A CUL-DE-SAC. THAT IS NOT MEANT TO EXTEND AT ALL. YOU ARE PROBABLY GETTING CONFUSED WITH THIS. THIS WAS THE TO --

>> THAT IS WHAT WE SAW. >> MARCOS: WE TOOK THIS TO COUNCIL A FEW YEARS BACK. WE WENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

THEY TERMINATED THIS. THEY ALLOWED FOR A CUL-DE-SAC.

>> OKAY. >> MARCOS: IT'S NOT MOVING FORWARD EVER. PRETTY MUCH.

>> OKAY. >> SO WE ARE ACTUALLY IN FAVOR

OF THIS. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

>> THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: KATHRYN WRIGHT? DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK, MA'AM?

>> YOU ARE THE DEVELOPER? >> YEAH.

WE SPOKE THAT DAY. >> YOU ARE BOBBY?

NO BOBBY'S SON. >> I'M BOBBY'S SON.

>> I'M KATHRYN. I JUST DIDN'T KNOW --

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MA'AM, IF YOU NEED TO SPEAK YOU NEED TO COME UP TO THE MIC, SORRY, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> KATHRYN WRIGHT. 491 EAST F.M. 875, MIDLOTHIAN.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: YES, MA'AM.

>> I WAS NOT SURE WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED.

SO I NEEDED TO COME SEE. I COULDN'T SAY IF I'M GOING TO

SPEAK UNTIL I SAW WHAT IT WAS. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: SURE.

>> I HAVE MET YOU AND YOUR DAD. Y'ALL JUST RESPECT MY FENCES.

I KNOW WE HAD ISSUES OVER HERE ON PHASE TWO.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: MA'AM, ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

>> WE HAD ISSUES WITH PHASE TWO AND 14TH STREET PUT IN.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: YES, MA'AM.

>> AND WHAT THEY DIDN'T FIX I FIXED.

WE HAD ISSUES WITH SOMETHING OVER THERE, WHICH ISN'T LA PAZ BUT IT'S SOME OTHER HOUSES. THAT I HAD TO GO IN AND REPAIR FENCES THAT PEOPLE CLEARING LAND.

YEAH, THE FENCES ARE OLD BUT THEY WORK.

BUT YOU RUN BRUSH AND STUFF THROUGH THEM.

IT BREAKS THEM. I NEED WHOEVER IS DOING THAT TO FIX THE FENCES. I KNOW STUFF HAPPENS.

BUT I CAN'T LOSE ANY MORE COWS AND BABIES.

14 MAMAS AND TEN BABIES IS TOO MANY FOR MY POCKETBOOK.

Y'ALL HELP ME WITH THAT, PLEASE. THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: THANK YOU, MA'AM.

WILLIS S. PATRICK SR. NOT HERE.

IN OPPOSITION. WE OPPOSE THIS NEW COMMUNITY OR DEVELOPMENT TO THE EXISTING LA PAZ.

THOMAS STANLEY IS IN OPPOSITION. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WE HAVEN'T CALLED THAT SUBMITTED OR WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK THAT HASN'T FILLED OUT A FORM? OKAY.

IF NOT, UNLESS WE HAVE QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR APPLICANT.

I'D ENTERTAIN MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. >> AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OPPOSED? UNANIMOUS. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION. MARCOS, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND.

YOU POINTED OUT EXCEEDING THE BLOCK LENGTH.

YOU GUYS ARE BECAUSE OF THE CONFIGURATION ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? DID I UNDERSTAND THAT RIGHT?

>> MARCOS: YES, SIR. YES, SIR.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. >> COMMISSIONER, AGAIN, CLARIFICATION FOR FOLKS WHO ARE HERE ON THIS ITEM, THIS PROPERTY IS ALREADY ZONED TO ALLOW ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THIS ZONES CASE LARGELY JUST DOES A LITTLE BIT OF REARRANGEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

[01:25:03]

IT DOESN'T CHANGE NUG AS FAR AS THE EXISTENCE OF THE NUMBER.

IF ANYTHING STAFF POINTED OUT THERE IS ACTUALLY REDUCTION OF AT LEAST ONE LOT. IT JUIT JUST CHANGES THE CONFIGURATION OF THE OUT LOT. WHAT YOU ARE DEALING WITH NOW HAS BEEN APPROVED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNSELOR.

>> COMMISSIONER: MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTION? IF NOT, ROLL CALL.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER

>> VICE-CHAIRMAN KOEHLER? >> VICE-CHAIRMAN KOEHLER: AYE.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: COMMISSIONER CAVES?

COMMISSIONER SKINNER? >> CCOMMISSIONER SKINNER: AYE.

MOVE TO ITEM 014, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF 13.5468 ACRES OUT OF THE JOHN CRANE SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 246 DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" HERETO BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 140 FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SHILOH ROAD NORTH OF SHILOH

UNANIMOUS. OKAY.

[014 Conduct a public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the development and use of 13.5468± acres out of the John Crane Survey, Abstract No. 246 described in Exhibit "A" hereto by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to Planned Development District No. 140 (PD-140) for residential uses. The property is generally located on the west side of Shiloh Road north of Shiloh Court. (Case No. Z16-2021-068).]

COURT. >> MARCOS: THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEAR FOUR TREES ESTATE. THIS IS OFF OF SHILOH ROAD.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSING TEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND COMMON AREA. THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY AGRICULTURAL ZONE PROPERTIES. IT'S ADJACENT TO THE P.D.-15 KNOWN AS ASHFORD PRAIRIE. ASHFORD PRAIRIE BEING ONE-ACRE MINIMUM SIZE LOTS. HERE ARE THE BASIC STANDARDS THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. THIS INCLUDES ONE ACRE LOTS WITH THE SIDE ENTRIES. NO FRONT ENTRY PERMITTED.

OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES SHOW THAT THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE COUNTRY MODULE. SO WITH LOTS RANGING BETWEEN 1-3 ACRES IN SIZE. MORE OR LESS CHARACTERISTICKIC WE EXPECT IN THE COUNTRY MODULE. IT WOULD CONFORM TO OUR PLAN.

HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN.

TEN HOMES WITH A ROAD STUB HEADING SOUTH.

THIS ONE-ACRE STYLE P.D. WILL CONTAIN ONE H.O.A. MAINTAINED OPEN SPACE TRACT FOR THE RESIDENTS.

APPLICANT WILL ALSO INSTALL SIX-FOOT TALL ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE AT THE ENTRANCE. THAT IS ALSO GOING TO INCLUDE SIX-FOOT TALL EVERGREEN VEGETATION WALL AS WELL.

ADJACENT TO THAT ROD IRON FENCING.

ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS WILL BE INCLUDED AS WELL.

ARTICULATED FRONT ENTRANCES. FRONT LIGHT PLATE VARIATIONS.

ALL OF THIS IS REQUIRED. IN ADDITION ALL HOMES SHALL NOT REPEAT THE SAME EXTERIOR ON THE SAME SIDE OR OPPOSITE SIDE OF ANY STREET. IN THIS CASE, EVERYTHING IS SINGLE LOADED SO ANYTHING ON THE SAME SIDE STREET CANNOT BE REPEATED. WE DID SEND OUT 15 LETTERS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS. TO DATE.

WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES FROM ANY OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AT THIS TIME.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONE REQUEST.

I'LL STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> RIGHT HERE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: DO YOU

WISH TO SPEAK? >> NOT IF I DON'T NEED TO.

>> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OKAY. QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT FROM COMMISSIONERS? IF NOT I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I'LL SECOND.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

>> AYE. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: OPPOSED? IT'S UNANIMOUS. THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

AND/OR ACTION. >> COMMISSIONER: YOU SHOULD ASKED EARLIER WERE THERE LETTERS OF OPPOSITION?

>> MARCOS: NO. NO, SIR.

>> COMMISSIONER: MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> COMMISSIONER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN OSBORN: AND SECOND. ROLL CALL.