May 18, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission

[Call to Order and Determination of Quorum.]

[00:00:14]

>>> IT'S 6:00, AND AT THIS TIME I'LL CALL THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MIDLOTHIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BEGIN.

[001 Citizens to be heard-The Planning & Zoning Commission invites citizens to address the Commission on any topic not already scheduled for a Public Hearing. Citizens wishing to speak should complete a “Citizen Participation Form” and present it to City Staff prior to the meeting. In accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, the Commission cannot act on items not listed on the agenda.]

FIRST ITEM IS PUBLIC COMMENT. CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK SHOULD FINISH A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION FORM AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY STAFF PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPENS MEETING ACT, THE COMMISSION CANNOT ACT ON ANY ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. SO DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM OTHER THAN WHAT IS ALREADY LISTED ON THE AGENDA. IF YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM WE'LL GET YOU AT THAT POINT.

[Consent Agenda]

NEXT ITEM IS THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE HAVE MINUTES AMENDED MARCH 16, 2021, AND MINUTES OF APRIL 20, 2021.

ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

ALL IF FAVOR AYE. >> AYE.

>> OKAY. AND BEFORE WE ACTUALLY GET INTO REGULAR AGENDA, WE DO HAVE COMMISSIONER STEPHENS BACK WITH US. GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK.

>> THANK YOU, IT'S GREAT TO BE BACK.

[003 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of the Shady Valley, being +/-55.567 acres out of the Benjamin G. Garvin Survey, Abstract No. 396. The property is generally located at the intersection of Mt. Zion Road and Ledgestone Lane (Case No. PP15-2021-122).]

>> OKAY WE'LL NOW MOVE TO THE REGULAR AGENDA.

ITEM 003, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE SHADY VALLEY BEING PLUS OR MINUS 55.567 ACRES OUT OF THE BENJAMIN G. GARVIN SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 398.

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MT. ZION ROAD AND LEDGESTONE LANE.

>> SINCE JUNE 15TH, THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE AMENDMENTS TO THIS IN 2006 AND 2016, THE MOST RECENT AMENDMENTS TOOK PLACE.

THERE'S GOING TO BE APPROXIMATELY 115 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, TEN COMMON AREA LOTS. THEY MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS. WE DID WANT TO NOTE WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW, THEY WILL HAVE MORE THAN 39 LOTS.

THEY'LL HAVE ONE PERMANENT POINT OF INGRESS EGRESS, BUT AS THE DEVELOPMENT AROUND SHADY VALLEY CONTINUES TO GROW, A SECOND POINT OF INGRESS/EGRESS WILL BE PROVIDED.

AT THIS POINT THEY HAVE A TEMPORARY INGRESS/EGRESS POINT MEETING THE CODE FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS.

THIS MEETS THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> QUESTIONS?

>> QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION?

>> I'M CURIOUS, IS THIS LEDGESTONE LANE WHERE IS THAT PROPOSED TO COME OUT EVENTUALLY GOING NORTH THERE I GUESS?

>> AFTER SHADY VALLEY? >> YES.

>> THERE'S ONE OTHER DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF THAT THAT WILL GO THROUGH THAT SECOND DEVELOPMENT TURNING ONTO A FRONTAGE ROAD I

BELIEVE ONTO 287. >> SO THEY'RE GOING TO CROSS THE

CREEK AND THE RAILROAD TRACKS? >> EVENTUALLY.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> IN THE EVENT THINGS CHANGE, THAT ALIGNMENT CAN CHANGE BASED OFF OF ENGINEERING AND PLANNING ONCE WE GET FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.

>> I WANT TO ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT QUESTION JUST POSED. OBVIOUSLY ANY TIME YOU'RE CROSSING A RAILROAD AND ACCESSING HIGHWAY 287, DO THEY ALREADY HAVE, HAVE THEY ALREADY COVERED THIS WITH RAILROAD TO

GET THIS ACCESS POINT? >> THIS WON'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO THE RAILROAD OR THE 287. HE'S TALKING ABOUT FUTURE

DEVELOPMENT. >> SO THIS ISN'T GOING TO AFFECT

THEIR --. >> NO, WHEN FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS COME IN, THEY'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROPER REQUIREMENTS.

>> OKAY I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DISCUSSION?

[00:05:05]

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR AYE?

>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED?

[004 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance to amend and restate in its entirety Urban Village Planned Development District No. 114 (UVPD-114), on Lot 2, Block 52 in Original Town. The property is located at 101 South 3rd Street (Case No. Z30-2021-126).]

PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 101 SOUTH 3RD.

>> THANK YOU. THIS ITEM WAS ORIGINALLY, THIS PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED FROM RESIDENTIAL 3 DISTRICT ON JULY 10, 2018, TO UVP NUMBER 114.

PROPOSED USE AT THE TIME WAS A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND TO HAVE A WALK UP ICE CREAM COUNTER LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE LOT.

SINCE THE ORIGINAL INDIVIDUAL WHO ORIGINALLY PURCHASED THIS, THEY DECIDED TO SELL THE BUILDING TO THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND THEY'VE ACTUALLY MOVED FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.

IT'S ACTUALLY RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

UVDP NUMBER 114 IT SHOWS TWO OPTIONAL PARKING FOR ON STREET PARKING. THE DEVELOPMENT IS DEVELOPED AS SHOWN RIGHT HERE. IT HAS ALL OF THE PARKING IN THE REAR. THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN CLOSED OFF, IT MEETS ALL OF THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, ET CETERA. AND IN THE UVPD ORDINANCE IT SAYS TWO OPTIONAL PARKING SPACES WERE PERMITTED ON 3RD STREET.

TO OFFER SIX DIAGONAL PARKING SPACES.

WITH THIS AMENDMENT, WITH THIS UVPD AMENDMENT, THERE WILL BE A REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT, WHAT THAT DOESN'T ALLOW IS THE OWNER TO ENCROACH INTO OUR EXISTING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND CONSTRUCT THIS ON STREET PARKING. THIS IS VERY COMMON IN THE ORIGINAL TOWN. THERE'S VARIOUS DEVELOPMENTS THAT UTILIZE VARIOUS PROCESSES. AMONG MAIN STREET THERE'S OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEIR ON STREET PARKING ENCROACHES INTO RIGHT-OF-WAYS. FOUNDERS ROW IS PROBABLY THE MOST COMMON ONE WHERE A LOT OF YOU HAVE HEARD LATELY WHERE WE'VE GONE THROUGH ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS.

ALTHOUGH THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS REQUEST, I WANT TO GO AHEAD AND INFORM YOU OF SOME OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS. THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT WAS AN OLD WHITE HOUSE. THEY'VE COME IN AND MADE ALL OF THE CORRECTIONS AND CHANGED IT, THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS, THEY'VE RECONSTRUCTED IT, REVITALIZED THIS PROPERTY.

AND ONCE AGAIN THE PROPERTY HAS ALREADY RECEIVED THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THE USE.

SO RIGHT NOW THE RED LINE SHOWS WHAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ENCROACHMENT WOULD BE FOR THAT LAST STALL AT THE EDGE OF THE LINE IT'S APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION.

RIGHT NOW IN OUR CODE IT STATES 100 FEET.

TYPICALLY STAFF HAS A RECOMMENDATION OF 50 FEET.

BUT MOST OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE RECEIVED WITH FOUNDER'S ROW CAN BE ANYWHERE FROM 25 TO 30 FEET. WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF 30 FEET. THIS IS ONE OF THE ONLY PROPERTIES ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF MAIN STREET THAT ACTUALLY HAS A SHOULDER BUILT INTO IT. ALL OTHER PROPERTIES ON MAIN STREET DON'T HAVE THE SHOULDER BUILT INTO IT.

IF YOU WERE TO MEASURE FROM THAT LAST PARKING SPACE TO THE EDGE OF THE SHOULDER IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET.

IT WOULD ALLEVIATE PARKING ON SOUTH 3RD STREET.

EVEN WITHOUT THIS USE BEING THERE, PEOPLE ARE PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD. THIS WILL ALLOW SOME OF THAT CONGESTION TO BE MITIGATED ALLOWING THIS ON STREET PARKING.

THEY'RE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING TO HELP OFFSET THE NEED FOR THIS STRUCTURE. ONE CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION, 0 CAME BACK IN FAVOR. PRIOR TO THIS MEETING STARTING, WE DID RECEIVE A PETITION OF PROPERTY OWNERS AROUND THE PROPERTY THAT WAS SIGNED IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT.

WE HAVE NOT HAD THE CHANCE TO GO THROUGH AND VET THAT INFORMATION SO I CAN'T RELATE HOW MANY SIGNATURES THERE ARE AND HOW MANY OF THEM ARE CORRECT. ONCE AGAIN WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

>> QUESTIONS, STAFF? >> I JUST WANT TO VERIFY WHEN YOU MENTIONED THE SIDE EASEMENT ALONG MAIN STREET, THE PURPOSE BEHIND THIS REQUEST IS WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW PARKING ALONG

[00:10:03]

MAIN STREET. >> NO.

>> THAT'S THE PURPOSES TO KEEP THAT FROM HAPPENING AND TO ALLOW IF WE HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING ON 3RD?

>> CORRECT. AND WHAT I'VE SEEN, THEY ACTUALLY HAD A GRAND OPENING. I MEAN I'M SURE THEY WANT THIS TO BE THEIR BUSINESS EVERY SINGLE DAY.

IT IS WIDELY BEING USED. WHEN I DROVE BY, I DIDN'T SEE ANY PARKING ALONG MAIN STREET AT ALL.

THERE'S QUITE A FEW CARS IN HERE AND ALL ALONG THAT STREET.

PEOPLE STARTED PARKING IN THE PARKING LOT IN THE OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DOWN THERE. BUT THIS IS TO HELP MITIGATE SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC ALONG HERE FOR REGULAR BUSINESS, NOT THEIR GRAND OPENING, BECAUSE GRAND OPENINGS ARE KIND OF A RARE COMMODITY IF YOU WERE TO GENERALIZE IT.

BUT IT'S TO PREVENT MAIN STREET PARKING, HOPEFULLY NO ONE DOES

THAT. >> SO REFRESH ME ON ONCE WE HAD THIS PARKING, WHAT KIND OF VOLUME OF ATTENDANCE WILL IT

HAVE? >> RIGHT NOW THEIR PD ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE TWO PARALLEL PARKING SPACES I HAVE RIGHT HERE SHOWING. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS TRULY THE SCALE IF THAT'S TRULY 20 FEET RIGHT THERE.

SORRY, KEVIN, IT'S RIGHT BY YOUR EYE LINE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRULY TO SCALE.

BUT WE APPROXIMATE THIS TO BE AT 765 SQUARE FEET.

AND THEY'RE POTENTIALLY A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN HALF OF IT, THEY'RE INCREASING THAT TO ALLOW FOR FOUR ADDITIONAL CARS BEING DIAGONAL PARKING INSTEAD OF PARALLEL PARKING.

>> SO IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE GOT ABOUT 14 SPACES INCLUDING

HANDICAP? >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT HERE.

>> I'M TRYING TO GET AN IDEA, MY CONCERN IS THIS IS ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL. AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT THIS WAS ZONED COMMERCIAL MANY YEARS AGO. SO WE'RE ALREADY GETTING A LITTLE PRESSURE. I KNOW COUNCIL DIDN'T PASS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA, BUT I'M TRYING TO GATHER IN MY MIND, WHAT KIND OF VOLUME CAN THESE FOLKS HANDLE AND I'M TRYING TO WRAP IN MY BRAIN, I FEEL AS THOUGH THEY ARE GOING TO NEED ADDITIONAL PARKING.

THAT'S MY TAKE. SO WE TRY TO GUARD AGAINST FOLKS STARTING TO PARK IN FRONT OF OTHER RESIDENCES ON THAT STREET AND WE START GETTING SOME COMPLAINTS.

I'M NEEDING TO KNOW HOW MANY THEY CAN HANDLE.

>> ORIGINALLY THERE'S TEN PARKING SPACES THAT WERE APPROVED IN THE PD. THIS WOULD INCREASE THAT UP TO 14 PARKING SPACES APPROVED IN THE PD.

ACCORDING TO OUR USE TABLE AND IT'S VERY HARD TO GO OFF OUR USE TABLE BECAUSE THIS IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL.

IT'S A WALK UP COUNTER FOR ICE CREAM, THEY HAVE SOME OUTDOOR SEATING. BUT AS WE'RE SEEING THEY REQUIRE ONE SPACE FOR THE RESTAURANT, THE ICE CREAM SHOP.

THE OFFICE WOULD ALSO BE HANDLED BY ALL OF THIS PARKING.

SO THIS IS DEFINITELY OVERFLOW PARKING FOR ANY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THIS MAY CAUSE ON REGULAR BUSINESS.

I WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT BASED OFF OF THEIR REQUEST THAT IT IS NEEDED AND IT WOULD HELP MITIGATE PARKING ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY FROM THEIR

HOUSE. >> SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY CAN

HOLD ROUGHLY 25 TO 30 PATRONS? >> 1 TO 2 PEOPLE PER CAR.

RIGHT HERE, I THINK THERE'S TWO OFFICES, ONE WALK UP COUNTER.

>> IF THIS EVOLVES INTO MORE, I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY BRAIN

AROUND IT. >> THE PD LIMITS THE SIZE OF THE ICE CREAM SHOP. I BELIEVE IT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL PD, I THINK IT'S LIKE 152 SQUARE FEET.

171 SQUARE FEET. THEY CAN'T EXPAND THAT UNLESS THEY COME BEFORE ALL OF YOU TO EXPAND THAT RESTAURANT ICE CREAM SHOP USE. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH A WHOLE UVPD AMENDMENT PROCESS. IT'S PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.

I BELIEVE ONE IS A REAL ESTATE OFFICE, BUT I'LL LET THE APPLICANTS BE ABLE TO ANSWER WHAT OTHER TYPES OF OFFICES.

BUT EVERYTHING THAT'S ALLOWED IN THERE FALLS UNDER PROFESSIONAL OFFICE USES. IT'S LIKE CONSULTANTS, ENGINEERS, ET CETERA. THE DEPTHS OF THESE STALLS THEY

WERE -- >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE

STALLS ARE DEEP ENOUGH. >> WHEN THEY ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTED THIS PROPERTY, THE SIDEWALK WIDTH WAS FOUR FEET AND THEY ACTUALLY INCREASED IT, PART OF THE PD INCREASED THE SIDEWALK WIDTH. THE STALLS ARE 18 FEET DEEP

[00:15:07]

DIAGONAL. >> WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO

COME UP AND SPEAK? >> SURE.

>> IF YOU WOULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SIR.

>> MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION I'M BROOKE RAWLINGS, ONE OF THE PART OWNERS OF 101 SOUTH 3RD STREET THE PETITIONER HERE.

WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARKING AS WELL.

THE TENANT WE HAVE THAT OCCUPIES THE BACK OF THAT PROPERTY IS A WALK UP ICE CREAM SHOP. SO WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS A HIGH TURNOVER OF GUESTS. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF TIME TO HANG OUT AND EAT. THERE'S A COUPLE OF PLACES TO SIT DOWN BUT IT'S NOT DESIGNED FOR A HANG OUT AND STAY.

WE ARE SEEING QUICKER TURNOVER AS VEHICLES AND THAT IS SOMETHING WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WITH PARKING ON MAIN STREET. EVEN DURING THE LARGE OPENING EVENT WE HAD JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO, NOBODY PARKED ON MAIN STREET, BUT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE ARE ADJACENT TO. WE DIDN'T WANT TO CLOG UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH PARKING IN PEOPLE'S RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS.

SO FAR SO GOOD, I RECOGNIZE YOU HAVE TO VET THE SIGNATURES THAT WE RECEIVED BUT THAT WAS THE FIRST PLACE WE STARTED WAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE WERE OCCUPYING TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO.

WHAT I'LL ALSO TELL YOU IS THAT PROPERTY OPERATES ITS ICE CREAM SHOP AFTER 6:00 ON MOST DAYS EXCEPT FOR FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.

SO THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE INSIDE THE STRUCTURE NOW ARE MOSTLY SINGLE OFFICES, AN INSURANCE AGENT, A REAL ESTATE AGENT, AN ICE CREAM SHOP. THEY DESIGNED THEIR HOURS PURPOSEFULLY SO THEY WOULD NOT OVERLAP PURPOSEFULLY, KNOWING PEOPLE WOULD BE DRAWN IN TO HAVE ICE CREAM.

THEY'RE TRYING TO THINK ABOUT THAT AS THEY'RE LOOKING AT LOAD

OF PATRONS AND VEHICLES. >> OKAY.

QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> DID I UNDERSTAND THE PETITION

YOU HAD WERE IN FAVOR? >> YES, SIR.

AND I HAVE A COPY. IT HAS NOT BEEN VETTED YET.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO SUBMITTED COMMENTS. THE FIRST ONE I HAVE KEVIN COX, ARE YOU HERE? DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK, SIR OR YOU JUST TURNED IN A FORM IN OPPOSITION?

>> OPPOSITION. >> LET THE RECORD SO NOTE THAT MR. COX DID SUBMIT A FORM IN OPPOSITION AND THEN TINA WARD.

>> 104. >> IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 005, THAT'S AN ERROR. ON THE AGENDA IT SHOWS 004, BUT

THEY'RE REFERENCING 005. >> SO DO WE NOT HAVE ANY FOR FOUR THEN? WE DO HAVE ONE? THESE OTHER TWO THAT ARE MARKED FOUR SHOULD BE FIVE?

>> THEY HAVE 004 ON THEM. OKAY.

>> SO THESE SHOULD BE FIVE NOT FOUR, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. THAT WAS STAFF'S FAULT, THERE'S TWO FOURS ON THE AGENDA SO I APOLOGIZE.

I WANT TO KEEP THEM ON THE EDGE OF THEIR SEAT.

>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. WE GOT THAT CORRECTED.

WE HAVE YOU OVER ON FIVE. WE DO HAVE ONE FORM THAT IS TURNED IN FROM A JOHN ASHLEY. AND THEY HAVE TWO CONCERNS.

ONE WAS THE INSTALLATION, THEY FEEL LIKE THE INSTALLED LIGHTING IS IN VIOLATION. SO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT,

TRENTON? >> SO ACCORDING TO THAT NOTICE THEY'RE REFERENCING, SO WHEN THIS WAS CONSTRUCTED, THEY HAD THESE LED, THE ONLY THING I CAN RELATE IT TO IS CHRISTMAS LIGHTING EMBEDDED INTO THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE ITSELF.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN OUR CODE NOT ALLOWING THIS OR DENYING THIS. GENERALLY THE SECTION OF CODE THAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO OR THE SECTION OF THE PD THEY'RE REFERRING TO IS TALKING ABOUT PARKING LOT LIGHTING, POLE LIGHTING WHERE IT HAS TO BE ALL DOWNCASTED AND SHIELDED.

OUR ORDINANCE ONLY REGULATES PARKING LOT LIGHTING.

[00:20:05]

SO I DON'T FEEL IT'S APPLICABLE TO THE ORDINANCES THAT WERE

REFERENCED. >> OKAY.

AND THE SECOND CONCERN THEY HAD WAS ABOUT THE PARKING, I THINK

WE COVERED THAT. >> CORRECT, SIR.

I CAN ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

>> SO THAT IS THE ONLY ONE WE HAVE ON THAT.

IS ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMISSION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? IF NOT I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO

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

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL IN FAVOR AYE?

>> AYE. >> ANYBODY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS. WE'RE READY FOR A DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE

COMMISSION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION?

IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR AYE. >> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS.

[005 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 3.00± acres in the Martha Brenan Survey, Abstract No. 43 described in Exhibit “A” hereto by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) Zoning District to Planned Development District No. 143 (PD-143) to allow for a “Commercial Communication Tower, Type 2” use. The property is generally located at 751 Apple Lane (Case No. Z23-2021-102).]

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT 751 APPLE LANE.

>> A PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD BACK IN APRIL.

FROM THE LAST TIME STAFF PRESENTED TO NOW, NOTHING REALLY HAS CHANGED REGARDING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS LISTED IN YOUR REPORT.

WE ARE STILL RECOMMENDING DENIAL BASED OFF OF THOSE REASONINGS.

I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS SHORT SO I CAN GIVE TIME TO THE AUDIENCE AS WELL AS THE APPLICANTS TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OR MAKE ANY COMMENTS THEY FEEL NECESSARY. THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO ADDRESS WAS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS THERE'S A PROVISION THAT IF A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF LAND AREA THAT WE RECEIVE OPPOSITION IN EXCEEDS 20%, IT REQUIRES A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE BY CITY COUNCIL. THAT HAS NO IMPACT ON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DIRECTLY. BACK IN APRIL, WE RECEIVED A PETITION AND VARIOUS LETTERS IN OPPOSITION THAT SEVEN OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE WITHIN 200 FEET, THIS PROPERTY DID REQUIRE THAT SUPER MAJORITY VOTE OF 20.72%.

HOWEVER PRIOR TO THE DEADLINE OF PUBLIC HEARING, WE RECEIVED ANOTHER PETITION IN FAVOR. THERE WERE SOME SIGNATURES ON THE PETITION IN FAVOR. THERE WAS A SIGNATURE ON THE PETITION IN FAVOR THAT WAS ALSO ON THE SIGNATURE OF OPPOSITION SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT MOST RECENT DATE.

IT BROUGHT THAT OVERALL PERCENTAGE DOWN TO 18.94%.

SO IT NO LONGER REQUIRES SUPERMAJORITY VOTE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. SO WE DID 12 NOTICES TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. SIX CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION THAT WERE WITHIN THAT PETITION. TWO CAME BACK IN FAVOR.

THE TWO IN FAVOR I JUST DECIDED TO GIVE YOU THE PERCENTAGE WAS 5.38% OF THE LAND AREA THAT WAS IN FAVOR.

WE RECEIVED OUTSIDE OF THE 200 FEET, 17 LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.

THOSE NAMES ARE ALL ON THE PETITION.

SOME OF THOSE WERE MULTIPLE PEOPLE FROM THE SAME HOUSEHOLD OR FURTHER OUT AND THEN WE RECEIVED THREE IN FAVOR, KIND OF A SIMILAR SITUATION. ONCE AGAIN STAFF DOES RECOMMEND IT NOW. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. IT DOES REQUIRE A CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE LAST MEETING, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.

>> QUESTIONS TO STAFF? >> I WASN'T HERE FOR THE LAST MEETING. WHAT KIND OF POWER IS THIS?

>> I CAN GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW, ONLY BECAUSE IT'S YOU MS. STEPHENS. I'M JUST KIDDING I'D DO IT FOR ANY OF YOU GUYS. IN SECTION 2.4, A COMMUNICATION TOWER TYPE TWO IS ONLY PERMITTED IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS UNDER A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. UNDER THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT IT DOES NOT ALLOW THIS USE BY A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT DOES NOT ALLOW THE USE. HOWEVER IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS AN APPLICANT HAS THE ABILITY TO REQUEST A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IF GREATER THAN THREE ACRES AND GO THROUGH THE PD PROCESS OF REZONING THEIR PROPERTY AND ALLOW FOR CERTAIN USES, ALLOW FOR VARIOUS THINGS

[00:25:01]

THERE'S NO REALLY OTHER OPTION UNLESS THEY DO A STRAIGHT ZONE AND IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS AND STAFF RECOMMENDED GOING THROUGH A PD PROCESS. WITH THAT, IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A TOWER TO BE NOT GREATER THAN 35 FEET IN HEIGHT.

HOWEVER THERE'S PROVISION IN OUR COMMUNICATION TOWERS THAT IF THE TOWER IS SET BACK SO MANY FEET, THEY CAN GO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT.

THEY'VE MET THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND THEY'RE ALLOWED TO GO, THE PROPOSED TOWER IS ALLOWED TO GO HIGHER.

AND I BELIEVE IT'S 124 FEET IS WHAT WE HAVE IT LISTED AS WHICH IS AN ADDITIONAL 79 FEET. THEY MEET ALL OF THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW FOR THAT TYPE OF TOWER.

ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY IF THEY WERE REQUESTING A TOWER GOING THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO SHOW THE SAME THING, HOW MANY FEET IS IT SETBACK.

THERE'S VARIOUS REASONS WE HAVE THOSE PROVISIONS IN THE ORDINANCE. TYPICALLY WHEN YOU SEE A COMMUNICATION TOWER, YOU SEE IN NONRESIDENTIAL AREAS.

THEY HAVE SCREENING RIGHT HERE, THIS IS THE TYPE OF FENCE THAT THEY WILL HAVE. WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT, AND I WILL SAY HE WAS GOOD TO WORK WITH.

IT WAS VERY EASY TO WORK WITH HIM.

WE WORKED ON TRYING TO, WHAT COULD WE DO IN ANY CASE EVEN IF STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A PROJECT.

WE DO EVERYTHING IN OUR ABILITY TO BRING THE BEST PROJECT FORWARD. AND SO WE WORKED ON THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SKIP ALL OF THESE, I'LL GO BACK TO THEM TO THE SITE PLAN THAT'S NOT IN HERE FOR SOME REASON.

I APOLOGIZE THAT'S MY FAULT. IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR SITE PLAN THAT'S ATTACHED TO THE ORDINANCE, THE APPROVED SITE PLAN, YOU'LL SEE LANDSCAPING THAT WE'RE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AROUND THE FENCING TO COVER UP THE GROUND EQUIPMENT THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH TOWERS, GENERATORS, OTHER MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. SO THE EQUIPMENT WILL BE BEHIND THE FENCE, THE SCREENED FENCE, AND THERE WILL ALSO BE ADDITIONAL VEGETATION AROUND THE FENCING TO TRY TO SCREEN THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. WE TALKED TO THEM AND THEY TRIED TO SET IT BACK AS FAR POSSIBLE AS THEY COULD.

WHAT WE ALSO SUGGEST THAT EVERY APPLICANT THAT COMES IN, IF ANYONE COMES IN, WHENEVER A PROJECT COMES IN, ONCE AGAIN EVEN IF WE'RE RECOMMENDING NOW, WE DO THIS FOR ALL CASES.

WE TELL THEM YOU NEED TO COME INTO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. WHAT THEY DID IS THEY WENT AROUND THE OTHER AREAS WHERE OTHER PARTS OF TEXAS, I BELIEVE THESE ARE OTHER PARTS OF TEXAS OR IN DALLAS WHERE THERE'S EXISTING TOWERS IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THEY TOOK PICTURES TO SHOW YOU THE POTENTIAL EXISTING CONDITIONS WHERE TOWERS HAVE BEEN PERMITTED.

THEY SUBMITTED IT TO STAFF SHOWING DIFFERENT EXAMPLES.

WHERE THE PROPERTY ARE, THE TYPE OF TOWER, HOW HIGH IT IS.

THE TYPE OF TOWER IS NOT A GUIDE TOWER, IT'S A SELF-SUPPORT TOWER. THEN WHAT THEY DID WAS, I APOLOGIZE, WHAT A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS WILL DO WHEN IT'S SOMETHING UNIQUE, THEY WILL ACTUALLY PHOTOSHOP THE PROPOSED TOWER INTO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS TO SHOW WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THIS IS WHAT THE TOWER WOULD LOOK LIKE ON THE PROPERTY IF IT WAS BUILT TODAY.

>> THIS IS A CELL PHONE TOWER? >> I BELIEVE SO, YES.

IT'S A COMMUNICATION TOWER, THAT'S WHAT WE IDENTIFY IT AS.

>> SO WOULD IT IMPROVE CELL PHONE RECEPTION IN THAT AREA?

>> I WOULD LEAVE THAT UP TO THE APPLICANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY IF IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE. I ASSUME THAT'S ONE OF THE GOALS THEY HAVE. I CAN'T ANSWER THAT ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. AND THEY DID SUBMIT OTHER ITEMS. ONCE AGAIN VARIOUS ITEMS YOU CAN SEE THE VEGETATION OUT HERE WILL LOOK LIKE FROM VARIOUS ANGLES IN THAT AREA.

THERE'S OTHER RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE TOWERS LOCATED ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, WE HAVE ATTORNEYS IN THE ROOM THAT COULD BETTER ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS THAN I WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER.

WE'LL LEAVE THAT FUN TO THEM. THE APPLICANT WILL BE ABLE TO

[00:30:05]

SOME OF OUR CONCERNS ARE THAT THAT IS IN THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR A CERTAIN MODULE AND WE FEEL THIS IS CONTRARY TO THAT MODULE.

OTHER ITEMS WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL THAT IT'S NOT PERMITTED IN ANY OTHER DISTRICT WITHOUT AN SUP AND THEY'RE GENERALLY NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE BASIS OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT I'D ALSO RECOMMEND YOU GOING BACK AND READING THROUGH THAT IF YOU'D LIKE.

IT'S ON PAGE 32 OF THE STAFF REPORT OF THE PACT.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO COME

SPEAK? >> I THINK EVERYTHING WAS THERE.

GOOD EVENING. STEVE WOODY, 497 RIDGE POINT DRIVE. I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING DAVID SCHWARTZ WHO IS THE LANDOWNER.

AT&T WIRELESS AND TILLMAN INFRASTRUCTURE.

I'M HERE TONIGHT TO DISCUSS WHY AT&T NEEDS THE COMMUNICATION TOWER IN THIS PARTICULAR SPOT, EVERYONE WANTS TO KNOW WHY IT HAS TO BE THERE. THE DESIGN OF THE TOWER, HOW WE'VE TRIED TO MINIMIZE IT TO NOT IMPACT THE COMMUNITY, BECAUSE WE ARE AWARE OF THIS. THESE ARE OUR CUSTOMERS WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO. THE SAFETY OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TOWERS IN GENERAL, THAT ALWAYS COMES UP.

IS IT SAFE FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO I WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE THREE THINGS. THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THE COMMUNICATION TOWER IS TO PROVIDE ANTENNA PLATFORM THAT WILL ALLOW AT&T TO SERVE THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN.

THAT'S ALL THIS IS ABOUT, WITH THEIR EXCEPTIONAL WIRELESS COVERAGE NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE.

AS TECHNOLOGIES GROW, WE NEED TO BE CLOSER TO OUR CUSTOMERS.

THE FACILITY WILL ALLOW SUPERIOR 5G WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES AND ACCESS TO FIRST NET WHICH IS A NATIONWIDE PUBLIC SERVICE INTEROPERABLE NETWORK SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. SITING EACH INDIVIDUAL TOWER TAKES INTO ACCOUNT POPULATION DENSITIES, CUSTOMERS, TOPOGRAPHY, ALL OF THESE THINGS. SO HAVING SAID THAT, I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE COVERAGE MAPS AND I'LL TRY TO EXPLAIN THESE AS BEST I CAN. THESE WERE CREATED BY AN RF ENGINEER FROM AT&T WIRELESS THAT WORKS IN THIS LOCAL MARKET.

SO THIS RIGHT HERE IS SHOWING AT&T'S, THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE AT THE SCHWARTZ PROPERTY. THESE SITES WITH COLOR ARE ON AIR, THESE SITES. THIS SITE OVER HERE IS PROPOSED FOR LATER POSSIBLY THAT THOSE ARE AREAS OF NEED.

BUT THESE ARE CURRENTLY ON AIR. SO THIS IS THE SITE.

THIS IS SHOWING WHAT THE CURRENT COVERAGE IS.

IF YOU COULD IGNORE THIS ONE AND THIS ONE RIGHT NOW.

THOSE ARE JUST FICTITIOUS TOURIST I'LL TALK ABOUT IN A MINUTE. BUT THE LEGEND OVER HERE, THE HOTTER THE COVER -- COLOR, THE BETTER THE COVERAGE.

AS IT GOES DOWN TO BLUE YOU GET ZERO COVERAGE.

THERE'S NO PERFECT TOWER. EVERY TOWER GIVES OFF A CERTAIN LEVEL DEPENDING ON HEIGHT, THE CUSTOMER SATURATION.

SO RIGHT HERE AS YOU CAN SEE, THE BIG OBJECTIVE IS TRYING TO FILL THIS GAP RIGHT HERE. THIS TOWER IS ACTUALLY UP BEHIND KROGER, AND THIS TOWER IS DOWN OFF OF 2705 WEST FM ROAD.

AND AT&T IS ON THOSE TOWERS BASICALLY.

AS YOU CAN SEE, I SHOULD PROBABLY TALK ABOUT THE LEGEND A LITTLE MORE. RED AND ORANGE, GOOD COVERAGE.

THAT'S GOING TO BE IN BUILDING, ONCE YOU GET COOLING OFF INTO THE YELLOW AND DOWN HERE INTO THE GREENS AND THE BLUES, YOU START LOSING IN BUILDING COVERAGE PRETTY QUICKLY.

YOU MIGHT HAVE IT ON ONE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE, YOU MAY NOT HAVE IT ON THE OTHER. THAT'S THE KIND OF THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. ONCE YOU GET TO THESE LIGHTER OR COOLER COLORS, YOU'RE DEGRADING THE COVERAGE AND THEY CAN'T

[00:35:03]

ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS FILL THIS GAP PLUS CONNECT HERE. THIS IS A HIGHLY TRAFFICKED AREA. WE CAN OFFLOAD SOME OF THIS TRAFFIC WITH THIS TOWER AND THAT'S A BIG PROBLEM BECAUSE IN PEAK HOURS THIS TOWER IS NOT PROVIDING ALL OF THE COVERAGE YOU NEED RIGHT THERE. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, THAT'S A VERY HIGHLY TRAFFICKED AREA. WHAT THIS CAN DO IS OFFLOAD SOME OF THAT. AS YOU CAN TELL WE'RE A LITTLE CLOSER TO THIS ONE FOR THAT REASON.

BUT THIS ALSO AS YOU CAN SEE PROVIDES ALL OF THIS SEAMLESS COVERAGE. ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WAS 663 WHICH IS RIGHT THERE, HIGHWAY 663, LET ME GO BACK TO THE LAST ONE. AS YOU CAN SEE REALLY BAD COVERAGE ALONG 663 WHICH IS HIGHLY TRAFFICKED.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG OBJECTIVES NOT ONLY TO FILL THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS AS YOU KNOW IT'S A LOT OF RESIDENCES OUT HERE. THOSE ARE OUR CUSTOMERS.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STAFF ASKED WAS ARE THERE OTHER PLACES YOU COULD LOOK TO PUT A TOWER BECAUSE THIS IS RESIDENTIAL.

IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE ZONING MAP, YOU WOULD SEE THAT PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THIS IS RESIDENTIAL. IT'S ALL ZONED RESIDENTIAL.

IF YOU KNOW THE AREA, YOU KNOW IT'S ALL ZONED RESIDENTIAL.

SO WHAT WE DID IS I LOOKED ON THE MAP, TRIED TO FIND WHERE THERE'S SOME COMMERCIAL AREAS CLOSEST TO THIS.

AND WHAT I FOUND WAS THESE THREE SPOTS, THIS ONE OVER HERE.

NOW THAT ONE IS ACTUALLY ON THE CONCRETE PLANT.

THIS ONE IS, WHERE IS THIS ONE? POSITION ONE.

MACK ALPINE ROAD. >> I'M SORRY THAT'S NOT IT.

I'LL GET TO IT. SO THIS ONE RIGHT HERE IS ASHFORD LANE. NOW THAT'S NOT A TOWER, THAT'S A COMMERCIAL AREA THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY PUT.

IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE COUNTY. THESE ARE THE CLOSEST WE COULD GET. THIS IS PLAINVIEW ROAD AND IT WAS IN THE COUNTY, A LITTLE POCKET THAT WAS IN THE COUNTY.

AND THIS WAS THE TXI CEMENT PLANT RIGHT THERE.

THESE ARE AREAS WE LOOKED AT AS A REPLACEMENT FOR THIS.

SO THE FIRST ONE AS YOU CAN SEE THE COVERAGE OBJECTIVE, WE DON'T FILL THIS GAP, WE DON'T FILL THIS HIGHWAY AND THIS IS JUST LEAVING WAY TOO MUCH OF A GAP IN HERE FOR IN BUILDING COVERAGES.

SO THAT WAS THE FIRST ONE WE LOOKED AT.

HERE'S THE SECOND ONE. STILL LEAVING A HUGE GAP, EVEN GETTING WORSE. AND LIKE I SAID THESE ARE HEAVILY TRAFFICKED AREAS. AND THE LAST ONE WAS A CEMENT PLANT. AS YOU CAN SEE WE'RE STILL LEAVING A LOT OF GAP OVER HERE ALONG THIS HIGHWAY, A LOT OF YELLOW. IT JUST DIDN'T WORK, THOSE ARE NOT GOING TO FILL THE GAP THAT WE NEED TO FILL LIKE THAT.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS.

EVERYWHERE AROUND HERE IS GOING TO REQUIRE A REZONE.

WE THOUGHT THAT THIS PROPERTY BEING 15 ACRES, PLENTY OF SPACE TO GET AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORS, WE THOUGHT IT MADE A GOOD LOCATION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S A LOT. BEFORE I GO ON, IF YOU WANT TO TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE COVERAGE MAPS?

>> DOES IT HAVE TO BE A DIRECT LINE OF SIGHT FROM POSITION A TO

POSITION B? >> NO, THIS RADIATES.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A MICROWAVE DISH.

THIS JUST RADIATES OUT. IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SAME.

WELL 5G, THE OLD CELLULAR IS LIKE THIS.

EVERYBODY IS WATCHING TV ON THEIR PHONES.

SO IT IS MORE CRITICAL FOR 5GS TO BE CLOSER TO THEIR CUSTOMERS.

USED TO MOST TOWERS WERE 300-FOOT TALL.

THIS IS 120-FOOT, SO THEY DO WANT TO BE CLOSER.

>> SO THE HEIGHT, WHEN YOU'RE CONSIDERING DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, DOES HEIGHT OF THE ANTENNA MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

>> IT ABSOLUTELY DOES, YES. IF THERE'S NO MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, I'LL GO ON TO TALK ABOUT THE TOWER ITSELF.

[00:40:01]

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. >> YES, SIR?

>> SO LOOKING AT A GOOGLE MAP, TXI COVERS QUITE A BIT OF PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF THERE, LITERALLY PUSHING ON DOWN ABOUT

50% OF THE WAY TOWARDS I-75. >> IT DOES.

>> I CALL IT TXI, IT'S MARTIN MARIETTA NOW.

ARE THEY NOT ENTERTAINING AT ALL ANY CONVERSATION ON THIS SUBJECT BECAUSE THAT'S A PRETTY DESOLATE AREA?

>> IT IS. AND WHAT I LOOKED AT WAS TRYING TO GET AS CLOSE AS I COULD BACK HERE AND STILL NOT BE I MEAN IN THEIR ACTUAL QUARY. ALL OF THIS DOWN HERE, IT'S

ACTUALLY BEEN MINED. >> THE QUARY EXTENDS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO TOWER ROAD. AND I MIGHT ALSO ADD THERE IS AN EASEMENT WHERE THEY HAVE A BURN THAT WAS REQUIRED BY THE CITY THAT EXTENDS BACK OFF OF THAT ROAD.

A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF AREA THAT WOULD ACTUALLY INCREASE THE HEIGHT. AND I KNOW ALSO THERE'S ACTUALLY AND I THINK WE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF INFO ON THAT, SOME OTHER FOLKS TURNED SOMETHING IN. THERE IS ANOTHER TOWER DOWN THERE ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THAT QUARY.

>> SO TOWER ROAD IS DOWN HERE. THAT'S GOING TO BE TOO FAR SOUTH FOR US. IT'S NOT GOING TO CONNECT BACK

UP HERE. >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION, IS THE OPTIMUM OR THE DESIRED PLAN OF ACTION HERE, I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU COULD STILL REACH THE SAME CONCLUSION OF CONNECTIVITY WITH TWO TOWERS INSTEAD OF ONE BUT WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT DONE WITH ONE TOWER, RIGHT?

>> YOU COULD PROBABLY DO IT WITH TWO.

I THOUGHT THAT QUESTION MIGHT COME UP.

I THINK MAYBE IF YOU CAME OVER HERE SOMEWHERE AND YOU'RE OVER HERE SOMEWHERE, IF THESE PEOPLE WOULD EVEN LET US DO IT, WE DON'T KNOW. YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO IT, I CAN'T SAY. BUT NOW YOU'VE GOT TWO TOWERS AS OPPOSED TO ONE. TYPICALLY MOST COMMUNITIES WANT YOU TO DO IT WITH AS FEW AS POSSIBLE AND THAT'S WHAT WE TRY

TO DO. >> I'M THINKING ONCE YOU START EASING OUT TO THE WEST YOU'RE GETTING OUT OF THE CITY LIMITS TOO, YOU'VE GOT A LOT MORE FREEDOM OF ACTIVITY.

>> LIKE I SAID, WE NEED TO BE AS CLOSE TO THE CUSTOMERS AS POSSIBLE. SO THIS IS THE BEST WAY FOR AT&T TO PROVIDE THEIR CUSTOMERS. COULD YOU DO IT FIVE OTHER WAYS? YEAH, ANYTHING COULD BE DONE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU COULD PUT SOMETHING HERE AND WAY OVER HERE AND IT FILL THAT GAP.

THE WAY THAT 5G TOWERS WORK, I'M GOING TO GUESS NO BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO BE A LOT CLOSER. 5G HAS ACTUALLY INCREASED TOWERS AND CELL SITES A LOT BECAUSE THE FREQUENCIES.

A WAY TO EXPLAIN IT IS TEN YEARS AGO THE RED ON THIS TOWER PROBABLY EXTENDED OUT HERE, NOW IT'S HERE.

EVERY G THAT THEY COME UP WITH, IT ALL SHRINKS.

THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT WORKS. BECAUSE AGAIN, THESE ARE THE CLOSEST PLACES WE COULD GET THAT AREN'T RESIDENTIAL.

IF WE'RE HERE, WE'RE ASKING FOR THE SAME THING JUST IN ANOTHER LOCATION. IF WE'RE OVER HERE, YEAH WE'RE IN A QUARRY AND I DON'T KNOW HOW CLOSE, WOULD THEY ALLOW US TO GO

THERE? >> HAVE Y'ALL APPROACHED THEM?

>> I HAVEN'T APPROACHED THEM. I WANTED TO GO THIS ROUTE AND TELL YOU THE COVERAGE THAT'S AS CLOSE AS WE'RE GOING TO GET AND IT'S NOT GOING TO REPLACE THAT. SO WE WOULD ASK TO GO TO THE CLOSEST COMMERCIAL LOCATIONS WE COULD.

FOR EXAMPLE, YOU CAN PUT FOUR TOWERS UP, YOU COULD COVER THAT I'M SURE WITH FOUR TOWERS, BUT WHO WANTS THAT? SO THE IDEA IS TO TRY TO DO IT WITH AS LITTLE IMPACT AS POSSIBLE. WE KNOW THE TOWERS ARE NOT IDEAL. POWER LINES, PLUMBING, ALL THE STUFF THAT REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE THESE SYSTEMS, THEY REQUIRE THIS. IF THIS WASN'T A REQUIREMENT TO COVER THEIR CLIENTS, WE WOULDN'T BE ASKING.

>> ONE OTHER QUICK QUESTION FOR MY LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THE TOWERS WORK, CAN YOU INCREASE A TOWER DENSITY BUT LOWER THE HEIGHT AND GET THE SAME APPLICATION? I'M CURIOUS AS TO LOWER HEIGHTS MAYBE IN MORE NUMBERS, BUT MAYBE YOU'RE RUNNING 40 TO 60 FEET INSTEAD OF 130 FEET IF YOU'VE GOT 2 OR 3 TOWERS. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT

THIS, I'M JUST CURIOUS. >> IT'S KIND OF A GIVE AND TAKE.

>> CAN IT BE DONE? >> ANYTHING COULD BE DONE, YOU COULD PUT 15 TOWERS OUT THERE AND COVER IT.

COULD THAT BE DONE? IS AT&T PROBABLY GOING TO DO THAT FOR THE AMOUNT OF CUSTOMERS THEY HAVE, PROBABLY NOT, NO.

AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT IT COMES TO.

YOU'VE GOT CUSTOMERS THERE, BUT ONLY A FINITE AMOUNT OF MONEY AND YOU'VE ONLY GOT X NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS HERE.

YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT'S FEASIBLE.

[00:45:02]

>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO.

>> YEAH, BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY CALL A MACRO TOWER, SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S A RESIDENTIAL AREA IT'S LESS CONDENSED.

>> AND I'M ASSUMING THAT Y'ALL ARE ALREADY UTILIZING ALL OF YOUR CONNECTIONS WITH THE CITY HERE TO ATTACH AND MAKE GOOD USE OF. I KNOW I'VE SEEN INVOLVEMENT IN SOME OF THIS WITHIN OUR WATER TOWERS.

I KNOW WE'VE EVEN ALLOWED SOME OF THE TOWERS IN SOME DOG PARKS AND WHATNOT IN THE AREA. BUT Y'ALL ARE UTILIZING ALL OF

THAT? >> ABSOLUTELY.

THE FIRST THING WE TRY TO DO IS TO COLOCATE ON ANYTHING THAT'S EXISTING, THAT'S OUT OF THE BOX. WE DON'T TRY TO APPLY FOR THESE THINGS UNLESS WE HAVE TO. YOU BROUGHT UP THE TOWER, THERE IS A GUIDE TOWER THAT IS A UNION PACIFIC TOWER TO THE SOUTH OF US A LITTLE BIT. IT'S A 300-FOOT TOWER, IT'S AT 98.8% CAPACITY. IT'S GOT LIKE 8-FOOT MICROWAVE DISHES ON IT, THERE'S NO WAY WE COULD PUT OUR ANTENNAS ON IT.

WE WOULD NEED IT AT 40% TO 50% CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE OUR EQUIPMENT. THAT'S ONE THING.

AND I DID SUBMIT THE EMAIL. >> YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT.

>> I DO. ARE THEY HERE TONIGHT, A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION AT ALL?

>> I'M SURE THEY'RE NOT. ANYMORE QUESTIONS?

>> NO. >> SO NEXT I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DESIGN OF THE TOWER.

LET'S SEE IF I CAN GO THE RIGHT WAY.

THERE IT IS. THIS IS A ENGINEERED PHOTO.

THEY PUT THE 120-FOOT TOWER ONTO THE PHOTO.

IT'S JUST A SINGLE POLE. YOU SEE THESE ALL OVER RESIDENTIAL AREAS AROUND DALLAS. IF YOU DRIVE AROUND AND LOOK ON THE FRINGES, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE THESE.

IT IS THE LEAST OBTRUSIVE TYPE OF TOWER.

THERE'S NO LATTICE WORK, IT'S JUST A CYLINDER.

SO IT HAS A VERY SMALL IMPACT ON THE HORIZON.

THERE'S NO LIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO PUT SOME TREES DOWN HERE. BUT THIS TOWER IS DEAD CENTER OF MR. SCHWARTZ PROPERTY. SO WE HAVE REALLY LARGE SETBACKS ON EITHER SIDE, ALL SIDES. BUT WE'RE STILL GOING TO PUT SOME LANDSCAPING HERE SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE ANY OF THE EQUIPMENT ON THE GROUND. SO THIS IS ANOTHER ANGLE, THIS IS ON APPLE COURT IT'S ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MR. SCHWARTZ PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU'VE GOT BUILDINGS ALL AROUND IT. SAME THINGS.

THESE WERE THE PHOTOS STAFF ASKED ME TO SHOW SOME EXAMPLES OF RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT HAVE TOWERS AROUND THEM.

THESE ARE OBVIOUSLY A LOT UGLIER THAN THE ONE WE'RE DOING.

I WOULD POINT OUT THAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE TOWERS WAS BUILT PRIOR TO THESE HOMES GOING THERE.

SO THESE HOMES WERE DEVELOPED AFTER THE TOWER WAS ALREADY THERE. THESE ARE ALL AROUND DALLAS, DIFFERENT PLACES, WILEY, GARLAND, I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THEM. THIS IS OVER IN HEATH.

THAT WASN'T ALL OF THEM. BUT YOU GET THE POINT.

WE TURNED IN SEVERAL MORE. THIS IS KIND OF SOME SLATS THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN ON TOP OF THE TREES TO REALLY SHIELD THE EQUIPMENT BACK HERE. I THINK I WAS GOING THE WRONG WAY. THAT'S ABOUT IT THEN.

THE CITY REQUIRES 208-FOOT ON THE FRONT AND WE ARE 325 FEET.

THEY REQUIRE 183 FEET ON THE EAST SIDE AND WE'RE 630 FEET.

THESE ARE SETBACKS TO THE TOWER. IT REQUIRES 183 FEET ON THE WEST AND WE'RE 375. 183 FEET ON THE REAR AND WE'RE 275. TYPICALLY WHEN I GO TO COMMUNITIES, I SEE WHAT THEY CALL FULL TOWER FALL ZONE, THIS IS LIKE MOST ORDINANCES SAY THIS.

SO IF YOU'RE 120-FOOT, YOU'RE 120-FOOT BACK FROM SETBACKS FROM PROPERTY LINES. WHICH WE EXCEED THAT BY A GREAT DEAL. FINALLY I WANTED TO DISCUSS SAFETY. I TURNED IN IN THE PACKET A HANDOUT THAT TALKED ABOUT TOWERS.

SO I'M GOING TO READ A LITTLE BIT OF THAT HANDOUT.

AND THIS IS DIRECTLY FROM THE FCC'S OFFICE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY. WIRELESS TOWERS AND PHONES COMMUNICATE BY RF WAVES WHICH ARE A FORM OF ENERGY IN THE ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM BETWEEN FM RADIO AND MICROWAVES.

THE ENERGY OF RF WAVES GIVEN OFF BY CELL PHONE TOWERS IS NOT ENOUGH TO BREAK CHEMICAL BONDS IN DNA MOLECULES WHICH IS THE

[00:50:02]

A GROUND LEVEL NEAR THE TYPICAL CELL PHONE TOWER, THE AMOUNT OF RF ENERGY IS THOUSANDS OF TIMES LESS THAN SAFE EXPOSURE THAT THE FCC SAID. THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION SAYS THERE IS NO CONVINCING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT THE WEAK RF SIGNALS FROM WEIGH STATIONS AND TOWER SIGNALS CAUSE ADVERSE EFFECTS. THERE WAS AN INTEROPERABLE SYSTEM ALL PUBLIC SAFETY AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE GOING TO BE USED, AT&T IS A PARTNER IN THIS. THEY'RE THE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP IN THIS. IT BASICALLY ALLOWS ALL OF YOUR COMMUNICATIONS, YOUR POLICE, YOUR FIRE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER.

SO THIS IS A BIG IMPORTANT STEP IN COMMUNICATING BETWEEN PUBLIC SAFETY ENTITIES. SO IN CLOSING, WE ASK THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE OUR PETITION SO THAT AT&T CAN PROVIDE THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN WITH A LEVEL OF WIRELESS SERVICES THE COMMUNITY NEEDS FOR NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.

IF THE PETITION IS DENIED, IT WILL SEVERELY LIMIT AT&T'S ABILITY TO SUPPLY YOUR CITIZENS WITH THE LEVEL OF WIRELESS SERVICES THEY DEMAND. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M

HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. >> THE PICTURE YOU SHOWED OF THE TOWER, THE CONCEPT, YEAH. WILL IT ALWAYS LOOK JUST LIKE THAT OR WILL YOU ADD OR WILL THEY ADD TO THAT TOWER?

>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. THIS IS AT&T'S EQUIPMENT RIGHT THERE. THAT'S WHAT THEY'LL HAVE UP THERE. IF LET'S SAY SPRINT OR VERIZON CAME IN, THEY MIGHT PUT THE SAME THING RIGHT HERE.

THAT'S POSSIBLE. >> SO THAT'S THE BEST CASE

SCENARIO. >> THAT'S THE BEST CASE

SCENARIO. >> IT COULD LOOK A LOT WORSE

THAN THAT. >> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT WORSE.

IT'S STILL ALL THE CABLES ARE INSIDE OF IT.

THEY'RE NOT ON THE OUTSIDE. THE ANTENNAS COULD BE RIGHT

THERE. >> YEAH OKAY.

>> AND THIS IS STRICTLY A CELL PHONE TOWER.

>> STRICTLY A CELL PHONE TOWER. >> SO THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THAT AREA, IF THEY HAVE AT&T THEY'RE GOING TO GET MORE BARS?

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> THAT'S IT.

>> THAT'S IT. >> SO IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE

THEIR INTERNET IN THEIR HOMES? >> NO, THIS IS STRICTLY FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SO IT WOULD BE YOUR CELL PHONE.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE

APPLICANT? >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> OKAY. SO KEVIN, YOU'RE GOING TO DEFER, IS THAT CORRECT, SIR? AGAIN WE'LL LET THE RECORD SHOW YOU ARE IN OPPOSITION. TINA WARD IN OPPOSITION.

IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE

MINUTES, MA'AM. >> AM I ABLE TO USE THE CLICKER

TOO? >> SURE.

>> MY NAME IS TINA WARD. >> SORRY, THREE MINUTES PER

PERSON. >> MY NAME IS TINA WARD, I LIVE AT 1321 APPLE COURT WHICH IS IF YOU LOOK OUT MY FRONT DOOR I SEE DIRECTLY INTO THE BACKYARD OF THE HOMEOWNER.

SO WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THIS, I WOULD LOOK OUT MY FRONT DOOR AND SEE THIS TOWER. BUT ALSO AS I'M LOOKING OUT MY FRONT DOOR AND I LOOK TO THE SIDE SOUTH OF ME IS ANOTHER TOWER WHICH IS PROBABLY THE SAME HEIGHT.

AND ALSO WHEN THEY'RE STATING THERE'S 124 FEET IS WHAT THIS IS ORIGINALLY GOING TO BE AT, WELL THERE'S ALSO A SECTION I THINK IT'S SECTION 69.08, SECTION 64.09A WHICH STATES YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE COMMUNITY APPROVAL TO DO ANOTHER 20 FEET.

SO THEY CAN COME BACK AND DO 20 WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BACK AND GET ANYONE'S APPROVAL. SO THEY SELECT THIS NOW, BUT THEN THEY COULD GO HIGHER. THE AREA THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, YOU DON'T SEE THE OTHER HOUSES THAT ARE IN THE LOCATION. SO, SORRY.

I'M LOOKING FOR THE MAP THAT SHOWS THE OUTLINE.

SO IF YOU LOOK RIGHT HERE, I'M SORRY.

RIGHT HERE IS THE LOCATION IT'S GOING TO BE AT.

THERE'S A HOUSE HERE AND AT THIS HOUSE THERE'S AN ARENA HERE AND THEY HAVE TWO ROPING HORSES HERE.

HERE IN THIS SECTION I HAVE A COUPLE OF MINI HORSES AND A DONKEY AND A COUPLE OF GOATS ALSO.

LAST WEEK DURING THE STORM, ONE OF THESE HORSES BROKE THROUGH, WENT THROUGH MY YARD AND BROKE THROUGH THE FENCE.

NOW IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT AND THERE'S SOME ELECTRICAL POLES HERE THAT THEY HAVE AND IF THEY HAVE A TOWER HERE, IF THAT HORSE HAD GONE THE OTHER WAY, THEY COULD HAVE RAN INTO THAT AREA AND THEY COULD HAVE PROBABLY MOST LIKELY DIED BECAUSE THERE'S

[00:55:02]

ALSO THERE ARE SEVERAL HORSES AROUND THIS AREA.

THERE'S PEOPLE WHO HAVE 3 TO 15 ACRES IN THIS AREA AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DO HAVE ANIMALS. WE ARE ZONED I THINK IN THE FUTURE FOR THE COUNTRY MODULE THAT THE CITY HAS ENVISIONED.

AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE PUTTING IN A CELL TOWER THERE.

WE DO HAVE A CELL TOWER IN THIS LOCATION PROBABLY RIGHT IN THIS AREA. AND IT'S ONLY A QUARTER MILE FROM MY HOUSE RIGHT HERE. AND SO WE DID HAVE SERVICE HERE THROUGH ANOTHER WIRELESS COMPANY, BUT THE CELL TOWER GOT TOO CROWDED SO THEN THEY WANTED TO MOVE US TO THE ONE THAT WAS OVER HERE BY THE KROGER AREA. SO THE GUY THAT I TALKED TO TOLD ME ONCE THIS KROGER AREA GETS FULL, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE TO ANOTHER LOCATION. SO YES, THIS MAY BE AT&T AND WHOEVER HAS THAT MAY GET BETTER COVERAGE IN THAT AREA, I DON'T HAVE AT&T BECAUSE I'VE NEVER GOTTEN GOOD COVERAGE WITH THEM.

SO I USE ANOTHER PROVIDER AND EVEN IF I DID GET BETTER BARS HERE, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANY GOOD ONCE YOU HAVE 5, 6, 7, 8 OTHER PEOPLE GET ON THAT ONE. SO ORIGINALLY I WAS HERE ON THIS TOWER. THE PEOPLE CAME IN AND SAID LET'S MOVE YOU TO KROGERS, THAT WASN'T GOING TO DO US ANY GOOD EITHER BECAUSE WE WEREN'T GETTING THE LINE OF SIGHT THAT WE NEEDED. AGAIN THIS LOCATION RIGHT HERE, YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE HOUSES HERE.

THERE'S DONKEYS OVER HERE, THERE'S HORSES OVER HERE, THERE'S THE WATER TOWER RIGHT HERE, THERE'S HORSES DOWN ON THIS SIDE. THIS IS ONE WAY IN, ONE WAY OUT.

SO IF YOU HAVE TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH THERE TO CHECK ON THIS, TO BRING BIG EQUIPMENT THROUGH THERE.

WE BARELY HAVE ENOUGH ROOM TO GET TWO CARS THROUGH THERE.

SO TO HAVE ALL OF THIS EXTRA INFRASTRUCTURE HERE, IT'S NOT GOOD FOR OUR LOCATION. I DON'T THINK IT'S WHAT THE CITY ENVISIONED FOR OUR AREA WHEN IT WAS BROKEN UP INTO THE DIFFERENT MODULES. AND I HAD A WHOLE LONG OTHER LIST OF THINGS TO TALK ABOUT. BUT WHEN HE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENT INFORMATION, I MEAN THE HEALTH CONCERNS I FIND KIND OF INTERESTING BECAUSE ON THE APPLICATION OF THE TWO PREVIOUS FOR MARCH AND APRIL, IT DID NOT LIST ANYTHING ABOUT HEALTH CONCERNS. BUT THEN AT THE LAST MEETING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY A RESIDENT.

AND SO I GET THE FEELING THAT THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO TAKE BITS AND PIECES OF INFORMATION TO TRY TO MAKE THEIR APPLICATION GO THROUGH AND NOT REALLY TAKING INTO CONCERN WHAT IT COULD BE SO YOU'RE PUTTING THE BURDEN ON THE OTHER PERSON TO OKAY IF SOMETHING HAPPENS YOU'VE GOT TO PROVE THAT IT WAS THE CELL TOWER. OKAY THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE YOU'RE BEING VERY NEIGHBORLY. THERE ARE FIVE COMMENTS IN THE WHOLE SECTION THAT SAID YOU CANNOT DENY BASED ON REGULATING THE MANNER TO EFFECTIVELY PROHIBIT THE PROVISION OF WIRELESS CELL PHONE IN THE CITY. THE CITY IS NOT PROHIBITING PERSONAL WIRELESS CELL PHONE TOWERS BECAUSE THERE'S TOWERS ALL OVER. IN THREE MILES OF THAT LOCATION, THERE ARE 14 CELL TOWERS, THERE'S EIGHT THAT ARE REGULATED AND SIX THAT ARE NOT. SIX MEANING THEY'RE PROBABLY PERSONAL TOWERS, THEY'RE PROBABLY SMALLER LOCATIONS, SMALLER BUSINESSES. BECAUSE THERE WAS RIGHT IN THIS AREA, RIGHT DOWN IN HERE, THERE'S A LITTLE RETAIL SECTION AND THEY DID HAVE A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS CENTER THERE.

>> MA'AM, I'M SORRY. YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP SO I

NEED YOU TO WRAP UP PLEASE. >> SO BASICALLY I AM IN OPPOSITION TO THE CELL TOWER NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.

IT REALLY IS NOT GOING TO BENEFIT THIS AREA BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO CONNECT FROM THIS AREA TO ANOTHER TOWER TO ANOTHER TOWER. THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE HAVING IS DOWN 663 AND 875 AND THAT AREA SOUTH.

I'VE GOT TONS OF FRIENDS WHO LIVE DOWN THERE THAT WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HAVE A TOWER OUT THERE DOWN IN THE COUNTY.

I'M MORE WORRIED ABOUT OUR ANIMALS THAT ARE AROUND THERE BECAUSE WE DO HAVE KIDS THAT ARE SHOWING ANIMALS.

THESE ANIMALS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE AND I'M PRETTY SURE THEY HAVE CATTLE THAT THEY'RE RUNNING THERE TOO WHICH I'M SURE THEY CAN MOVE. BUT THERE IS CATTLE ON THAT PROPERTY. THERE'S ANIMALS THERE.

OKAY, I AM IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. SO MR. COX, SINCE WE COULDN'T GIVE HER YOUR THREE MINUTES, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME SPEAK. ALICIA? I'M SORRY, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK OR YOU JUST WANT TO RESERVE?

>> I'D LIKE TO RESERVE. >> OKAY.

STEVE WOODY? THAT'S GOOD.

DONNA WINDSOR. IF YOU WOULD MA'AM, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>> YES, I'M DONNA WINDSOR, I HAVE LIVED FOR 39 YEARS ON 910 APPLE COURT WHICH RUNS THE ENTIRE DISTANCE DOWN THE ROAD

[01:00:02]

AND IN THAT PROPERTY MY DAUGHTER AND MY FOUR GRANDCHILDREN ARE GOING TO BUILD A HOUSE THERE. AND SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE EXPOSED TO WHATEVER RADIATION OR EMISSIONS COME OFF OF THESE TOWERS. DID YOU GET THE, YOU GOT IT? OKAY I'VE GOT ONE, I'M SHOWING YOU THE CELL TOWERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY THERE. DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM WHERE THIS ONE IS SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT, EXACTLY ONE STREET, 1 CITY BLOCK. TO THE LEFT THAT IS A UNION PACIFIC TOWER. TO THE RIGHT THAT IS A 5G CELL TOWER THAT'S BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC WHICH IS SPRINT.

SO IT'S A 5G TOWER. THEN THE WATER TOWER RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE HAS LEGACY ON TOP OF IT.

THESE ARE DIRECTLY IN LINE. SO EVIDENTLY THEY WANT TO FACE THEM ONE RIGHT AT EACH OTHER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

THAT 5G CELL TOWER THERE, LOOK AT WHAT IT'S GOT ON IT.

WHATEVER THAT'S EMITTING IS KIND OF DANGEROUS.

ANYWAY, THE MAIN THING I HAVE IS HEALTH ISSUES.

I GAVE YOU GUYS AN ARTICLE THAT SAYS THAT FOR HUMANS IT CAUSES DIZZINESS, HEADACHES, DEPRESSION, AND EVEN CANCER.

I HAVE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE ACROSS THE STREET.

BOTH THE HUSBAND AND THE WIFE ARE SUFFERING FROM CANCER AND THEY HAVE LIVED THERE FOR QUITE SOMETIME.

AS FAR AS ANIMALS IT CHANGES THE DNA CELLS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF EXPOSURE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF ANIMALS WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I TALKED TO SOME REAL ESTATE AGENTS IN MIDLOTHIAN, BOTH OF THEM SAID THEY WOULD NOT SELL A HOUSE THAT HAD A TOWER BY IT BECAUSE HE SAID NOBODY WANTS TO LIVE BY A TOWER.

WE WERE ANNEXED IN 2008 BY THE CITY.

THE CITY COUNCIL SAT ON THE STAGE TELLING US WE WOULD BE BENEFITTED BY BEING IN THIS CITY BECAUSE THEY WOULD PROTECT US FROM BULLIES LIKE AT&T THAT THEY WOULD TAKE CARE OF US AND MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITY, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD REMAINED THE SAME AND THAT EVIDENTLY THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.

ALSO THE CITY CODES CURRENTLY SAY NOT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'VE GOT TO CHANGE OUR CODE SO THAT IT'S STRICT, NO NEIGHBORHOODS. DID YOU GET THE OTHER ONE WITH THE GOOGLE MAP? THE PICTURES THAT THEY SHOWED YOU OF HIS PROPERTY DOES NOT SHOW THE OTHER HOUSES THAT ARE RUNNING DIRECTLY. I WILL SAY THAT I WENT AROUND AND GOT SIGNATURES FOR JUST THE PROPERTIES THAT CAME AROUND IT.

I SUBMITTED THOSE SIGNATURES A MONTH AGO.

TODAY FIVE MINUTES BEFORE HE LEFT HIS OFFICE HE GOT THE THING FROM AT&T FOR PEOPLE WHO AGREE. THAT'S NOT THE GOOGLE MAP.

>> THAT IS THE GOOGLE MAP. >> THAT'S NOT THE ONE I

SUBMITTED TO HIM. >> THEY'RE GOING TO FIND IT.

>> OKAY. >> RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE.

>> SO I AM DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.

THERE ARE HOUSES COMPLETELY AROUND HIM.

APPLE COURT IS ON HIS WEST SIDE. ON THE EAST SIDE IS APPLE LANE, AND EVERYTHING SOUTH OF US GOES DOWN TO APPLE LANE AND APPLE COURT. THERE ARE HOUSES EVERYWHERE.

ON MY PROPERTY ALONE I'VE GOT MY HOUSE AND THEN I'M GOING TO BE BUILDING ON THE NEXT ONE FOR MY DAUGHTER.

AND THERE'S ONE DIRECTLY NEXT TO US.

THERE ARE HOUSES COMPLETELY AROUND THIS.

WE'RE GOING TO BE STUCK BETWEEN TWO TOWERS.

SO WHAT WORRIES ME IS WE'RE IN THE CEMENT CAPITAL OF TEXAS, SOME DAY WE'RE GOING TO BE THE CELL CAPITAL OF TEXAS.

THE ARTICLE I GAVE YOU RECOMMENDS THEY BUILD 1/3 OF A MILE FROM SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS, AND NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DENY SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT CELL PHONE

TOWERS. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

DAVID SHORT. IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS. >> I'M KIND OF THE REASON YOU'RE HERE TODAY. WHERE DO I START? WHEN TILLMAN FIRST CAME TO ME I WAS REALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF A TOWER. BUT ONCE I RESEARCHED AND SAW THE LACK OF TOWERS OF CELL SERVICE I SAW THAT THERE IS A NEED IN THE TOWN. THAT OUR SCHOOLS WHERE THE KIDS HAVE TO GO TO THIS SCHOOL THEY GO TO NOW THE VIRTUAL SCHOOL, THEY DO NOT HAVE AMPLE CELL SERVICE TO GO OR HOT SPOTS WHATEVER THEY CALL IT TO GO THE FULL CLASS.

THEY HAVE TO STOP AND REDO WHATEVER THEY DO.

SO THAT'S NOT FAIR TO THESE KIDS THAT HAVE TO GO TO SCHOOL ON

[01:05:03]

GO OUT TO YOUR CELL PROVIDER TO GET IT FIXED.

THAT WAS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER WHO SAID DON'T BLAME THE CITY. WHEN I WALK OUT MY FRONT DOOR AT MY NORTH FENCE OR MY EAST FENCE I SEE MOUNTAIN PEAK'S WATER STORAGE TOWER, A GREAT BIG WATER STORAGE TOWER, I SEE THEIR PUMPING STATION. I COME ON MY PROPERTY AND THERE'S THREE GIGANTIC TRANSFORMERS.

I SEE THESE AS LIFELINES TO THE CITY AND THEN TO THE PEOPLE.

I DON'T SEE THEM AS NEGATIVE, I SEE THEM AS POSITIVE.

AND I THINK A CELL TOWER ALSO NEEDS TO BE POSITIVE BECAUSE THE WHOLE WORLD HAS GONE TO CELL PHONES AND WE DO SO MUCH STUFF ON THEM NOW THAT IT'S NOT LIKE WE USED TO JUST CALL MOM AND DAD ON A PHONE. PEOPLE DO BUSINESS, THEY DO BANKING, AND THEN THE TECHNOLOGY IS GOING TO EVEN HAVE FURTHER DEMAND FOR CELL TOWERS. I WENT TO EVANT TEXAS TODAY AND ON MY ROUTE I COUNTED OVER 130 CELL TOWERS.

SOME OF THEM WERE IN RESIDENTIALS.

SOME OF THEM WERE BY CHURCHES. SOME OF THEM WERE BY SCHOOLS.

SOME OF THEM WAS IN BUSINESSES. SOME OF THEM WAS OUT NOWHERE.

BUT I SEE OTHER TOWNS ARE PUTTING THEM WHERE THEY ARE NEEDED. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO. AND I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO WORK WITH TILLMAN SO WE GET BETTER CELL SERVICE IN OUR TOWN.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK THAT I DIDN'T HAVE THEIR FORM HERE? IS THAT EVERYBODY? YES, SIR. COME ON UP, I'LL LET YOU SPEAK, SIR. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND

I'LL GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES. >> KEVIN COX.

I GREW UP OUT THERE ON THAT HILL.

I MOVED OUT THERE ON 1969. TXI WAS OUT THERE, IT WAS WHEN THEY USED TO BLAST OUT THERE AND STUFF AND IT WAS NICE UNTIL ABOUT 12:00 IN THE AFTERNOON IT WAS REALLY QUIET.

I DON'T KNOW, Y'ALL REMEMBER WHEN TXI AND EVERYBODY USED TO BLAST. IT WAS REALLY QUIET.

I REMEMBER WHEN THE BARKERS LIVED THERE, AND THIS LADY HERE, I HELPED JERRY BUILD THAT HOUSE. AND ALL OF A SUDDEN ALL THAT STUFF CAME IN THERE AND Y'ALL ALL KNOW HOW MIDLOTHIAN GREW UP.

THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN STUFF STARTED BEING FORCED ON US.

I KNEW ALL OF THEM PEOPLE OUT THERE, EVERY ONE OF THEM HOUSES, I GREW UP IN EVERY ONE OF THEM PEOPLE'S HOUSES OUT THERE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN PEOPLE STARTED GETTING TOWERS AND THEN GET MONEY PUT IN THEIR POCKET FOR STUFF LIKE THAT.

THERE'S ONE PLACE OVER THERE, I THINK THERE'S LIKE TOWER ROAD AND TXI GOT THOSE PLACES WHERE TOWER ROAD AND THEY COULD PUT THAT TOWER AWAY WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT KIND OF STUFF. WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT KIND OF STUFF. I GOT THAT PROPERTY THERE, BUT I'VE GOT SOME OTHER PROPERTY. YOU GUYS THERE COULD HELP US OUT, WE COULD GET AWAY FROM STUFF LIKE THAT.

EVERYTHING IS BEING FORCED ON ALL OF US ABOUT EVERYTHING.

I WORK FOR COSTCOS AND I SEE STUFF AND YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT OF CHILDREN AND ALL OF THIS CUTE THINGS WE WENT THROUGH IN OUR LIVES AND ALL OF THAT STUFF.

I THINK Y'ALL GUYS CAN HELP PUT THAT TOWER SOMEWHERE ELSE LIKE TINA SAID SO SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO LOOK AT IT OUTSIDE HER DOOR.

THAT LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD, I GREW UP OUT THERE.

MY GRANDMOTHER WORKED FOR EL WEBB AND ALL OF THESE OTHER GUYS. MY WIFE'S OVER HERE, HER DAD WAS ONE OF THE MAYORS HERE IN TOWN, JOE HILL, A BUNCH OF OTHER GUYS THAT HELPED BUILT THIS TOWN TO WHAT IT IS.

WE NEED TO MAKE THIS TOWN BACK WHAT IT IS, AND WE NEED TO FIX STUFF LIKE THIS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT STUFF LIKE THIS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. JUST HIDING THAT STUFF LIKE SHE WAS SHOWING, THEY'VE GOT THIS STUFF ON THE TOP THEN THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO SHOW WHAT ELSE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT ON THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT STUFF LIKE THIS.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO LEAVE THAT IN Y'ALLS MIND AND I'M GOING TO THANK Y'ALL FOR MY TIME. SO THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH.

[01:10:02]

>> THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY, SIR?

>> COULD I HAVE THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE?

>> I'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE HERE IN JUST A MINUTE.

LET ME GO AHEAD AND GET THESE INTO THE RECORD.

WE HAVE AN EMAIL SUBMITTED BY JOSE SANDOVAL THAT IS IN OPPOSITION. SO WE'LL ENTER THAT INTO THE RECORD. ALSO IF DEBORAH ROARK-MILES IN OPPOSITION. AND THEN LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT WE HAVE TWO PETITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED SO WE'LL ENTER THOSE AND THEN WE HAVE AN EMAIL, I'M NOT SURE IS THIS THOMAS MCGOVERN WITH UNION PACIFIC.

IT'S SHOWING THE UNION PACIFIC TOWER IS NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE OF CAPACITY. WE WILL ENTER THAT IN RECORD.

AM I MISSING ANYBODY OR ANYTHING? OKAY, I'M SORRY JUST A MINUTE. YES, SIR?

DID YOU FILL OUT A FORM, SIR? >> I DID NOT.

>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT THIS MINUTE.

IF YOU WOULD BEFORE YOU LEAVE, FILL ONE OUT FOR US, I'D

APPRECIATE IT. >> MY NAME IS ABEL WINDSOR.

I AGREE WITH MR. COX, WE CAME OUT HERE AND IT WAS A PURISTIC TYPE LOCATION TO HAVE KIDS GROW UP AND RAISE A FAMILY.

>> YES, SIR. >> AND I APPRECIATED MIDLOTHIAN FOR THE VALUES THAT IT HAS CREATED FOR EVERYBODY TO LIVE IN. BUT I THINK WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE IS THEY NEED TO HAVE SOME ORDINANCE IN PLACE TO HAVE THESE TOWERS COME IN AND BE ERECTED IN A NONRESIDENTIAL AREA AND HAVE AREAS WHERE THE TOWERS CAN BE CONNECTIVITY. THIS GENTLEMAN HAD A VERY GOOD IDEA ABOUT PUTTING IT INTO A RURAL AREA AND WHERE THE TWO TOWERS CAN COEXIST WITH EACH OTHER, BUT NOT IN THE BACK OF SOMEONE'S YARD OR IN THE FRONT OF SOMEONE'S YARD THAT THEY'RE LIVING AT. I DIDN'T BUY THIS BEAUTIFUL PLACE OUT THERE TO LOOK AT A BEACON LIGHT LOOKING UP AT THE SKY AND WAKING US UP OR KEEPING US UP AT NIGHTTIME.

AND THAT'S REALLY ALL I'LL SAY. I'VE GOT AN IPAD AT THE HOUSE WHICH IS SUPPLIED BY THE COMPANY.

IT'S GOT 4G AT&T AND I GET FOUR BARS ON IT.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS GENTLEMAN IS TALKING ABOUT ABOUT NOT HAVING GOOD RECEPTION, I GET GREAT RECEPTION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

ANYBODY ELSE? MAKING SURE I DIDN'T MISS ANYBODY. OKAY, MR. WOODY, IF YOU WOULD

COME BACK UP. >> I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THINGS, THE 20-FOOT WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE CITY AND ASK FOR PERMISSION ABOUT.

THAT'S NOT ANYTHING WE COULD DO WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION.

THE UTILITIES ARE GOING TO BE 99% UNDERGROUND, WE'RE GOING TO BRING A POLE ACROSS APPLE COURT TO THE NORTH SIDE AND THEN GO UNDERGROUND. THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT ANIMALS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A VERY NICE FENCE OUT THERE SO THERE'S NO WAY ANIMALS ARE GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THAT.

VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, ONCE THE TOWER IS BUILT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A GUY IN A PICKUP EVERY FEW MONTHS.

SO IT'S COMPLETELY NEGLIGIBLE. THE HEALTH ISSUES, I PUT THE FCC INFORMATION BACK IN THE PACKET BACK IN APRIL SO THAT WAS THERE.

I DIDN'T SNEAK THAT IN THERE. YES, FIBER RUNS THROUGH THE TOWER AND THAT'S HOW THE SIGNAL, ALL TOWERS HAVE TO HAVE FIBER TO THEM THESE DAYS, BUT IT'S A CELLULAR TOWER, THE FIBER IS WHAT'S IN THE GROUND. SO WHEN YOU CALL SOMEBODY AND IT THE GROUND AND INTO THE SWITCH AND IT BECOMES A LANDLINE WHEN IT'S PICKED UP. SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE FIBER.

THE TOWERS SHOWN EARLIER, THAT WAS THE UNION PACIFIC ONE I TALKED ABOUT. THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER WIRELESS INTERNET ONE THERE I COULD NEVER FIND THE OWNER.

IT'S EXTREMELY SCREENY BUILT FOR WIRELESS INTERNET, THERE'S NO CELL PHONE -- SCRAWNY BUILT FOR WIRELESS INTERNET, THERE'S NO CELL PHONE SIGNAL ON THAT. I GET IT, AT&T IS NOT TRYING TO MAKE ENEMIES OF ANYBODY. WE'RE HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE CUSTOMERS. FOR EVERYBODY WHO SHOWS UP WHO SAYS THEY DON'T WANT IT THERE'S PROBABLY 10 TO 100 PEOPLE WHO NEED THE COVERAGE. WE WOULDN'T BE HERE IF THERE WASN'T A REASON, WE DON'T PICK FIGHTS WITH COMMUNITIES.

TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. THERE'S NO LIGHT ON THIS, I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY SOMETHING ABOUT LIGHT, THERE'S NO LIGHT ON

THIS. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

ANYONE ELSE? STAFF, YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE?

[01:15:09]

>> NO. >> YES, MA'AM? IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> OF COURSE. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

I'M ALICIA. I DO REPRESENT TILLMAN.

I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS TONIGHT SOME OF THE STAFF ASSERTIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE LAW HERE.

I WAS REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THAT THE LAW WAS PUT IN HERE SO THAT WE CAN KIND OF SEPARATE THE LEGITIMATE VERSUS THE ILLEGITIMATE REASONS HERE AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EVERYONE HAS CONCERNS BUT THERE'S ALSO THE LAW ABOUT WHAT CAN ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED HERE. SOME OF THE ASSERTIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT ESSENTIALLY SAY THAT THIS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING REGULATIONS. AND I JUST WANT TO STAND BEFORE YOU TO SAY THAT WE WOULD ASSERT RESPECTFULLY THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING REGULATIONS.

THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL AND IT IS THE FUTURE LAND USE COUNTRY MODULE AND THERE'S NOT ANYTHING COUNTRY MODULE THAT ACTUALLY PROHIBITS OR PREVENTS A TOWER LIKE THIS.

THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION WOULD REMAIN SUBJECT TO THE AGRICULTURAL SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OTHER THAN THE HEIGHT WE TALKED ABOUT. BUT WE ARE STILL WELL WITHIN THE LIMITS BASED ON OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF.

WE MEET THE APPROPRIATE SETBACKS AND DON'T POSE A HAZARD TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.

THERE'S NOTHING HERE THAT WE ARE INTENDING TO DO TO CHANGE THE RURAL FEEL OF THE COMMUNITY. SECONDLY, WE WOULD ASSERT ALSO THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING REGULATIONS WITH THE PROPOSED DISTRICT, THE PD DISTRICT IS A CUSTOMIZED ZONING DISTRICT. IT ALLOWS FOR CUSTOMIZATION FOR A MIX OF USES, THIS WOULD BE A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL IN ADDITION TO THE TOWER AND AGAIN WE DO MEET THE SETBACKS AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND SO WE DO NOT INTEND TO CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT THE RURAL FEEL OF THIS RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. AND ONE OTHER THING I WANT TO ADDRESS IS JUST THE LAW AND WE BELIEVE THE LAW WAS NOT COMPLETELY AND ACCURATELY STATED IN THE STAFF REPORTS, SPECIFICALLY WHERE IT SAYS CITY COUNCIL CANNOT REGULATE IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO PROHIBIT THE PROVISION OF PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY, IE PROHIBIT ALL CELL TOWER FACILITIES AND POOR SERVICE DOES NOT EQUAL NO SERVICE.

WE BELIEVE THE LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE A BLANKET BAN OR PROHIBITION OF ALL CELL TOWERS TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW AND THAT IF COUNCIL PROHIBITS THE CARRIER FROM ADDRESSING A GAP IN SERVICE, IE POOR SERVICE, THAT THERE COULD BE A POTENTIAL VIOLATION OF THE LAW. THE 5TH CIRCUIT HAS GIVING DEFERENCE TO A RULING THAT WHEN ONE OR MORE CARRIERS GIVEN GEOGRAPHIC MARKET HAVE ENGAGED IN UNLAWFUL REGULATION.

IN CONCLUSION, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY WE RESPECTFULLY ASSERT THAT THE APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN COUNTRY MODULE, THE REQUESTED ZONING, AND THE SURROUNDING USES AND DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY ZONING PROVISIONS OR LAND USE REGULATIONS THAT WOULD PROVIDE A BASIS FOR DENIAL.

GAPS IN SERVICE ARE LEGITIMATE REASONS TO PURSUE A CELL TOWER AND SHOULD BE VIEWED IN LIGHT THAT LOCAL REGULATION SHOULD NOT PROHIBIT PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY.

WE BELIEVE WE HAVE MET OUR BURDEN TO PRESENT YOU EVIDENCE THAT DENIAL WOULD HAVE AN AFFECT ON THE PROVISION OF WIRELESS SERVICES BASED ON THE MAPS OF POTENTIAL LOCATIONS AND THE LACK OF AVAILABILITY OF EXISTING TOURIST.

THANK YOU. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

TRENT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING? >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE

UNLESS OUR LEGAL COUNSEL DOES. >> COUNSEL?

>> NOT UNLESS YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR ME.

>> I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

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

ALL IN FAVOR AYE? >> AYE.

>> ANYBODY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS.

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

>> HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OTHER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO THE LAND THAT TOWER IS GOING TO ON ARE FOR? OTHER THAN THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE WHERE THE TOWER MIGHT BE, WHO

ELSE -- >> ALTOGETHER INCLUDING EVERYONE

[01:20:02]

>> IS THAT HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE IN THE AREA OR HOW MANY PEOPLE

COMMENTED? >> THIS IS IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH

ME ADDRESSING THAT COMMENT? >> YES.

>> THIS IS EVERYONE THAT WAS, WHEN I REPORT NUMBERS REGARDING HOW MANY NOTICES RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION OR IN FAVOR, THOSE ARE EITHER EMAILS SENT TO US, LETTERS DIRECTLY SENT TO US, OR PETITIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH HOW OUR ZONING REGULATIONS DICTATE A PETITION NEEDS TO BE FILLED OUT.

WE RECEIVED TWO PETITIONS, ALL OF THOSE THAT WERE IN FAVOR SIGNED ONE PETITION, THAT WERE FIVE PEOPLE ALL TOGETHER.

AND TWO OF THOSE HAPPENED TO BE WITHIN THE 200 FEET.

>> GO AHEAD. >> AND YOU SEND NOTIFICATIONS TO

EVERYONE WITHIN 200 FEET? >> ONLY WITHIN 200 FEET IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS.

>> SO IN A BIG NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS --

>> WE DO NOT, THE 200 FEET, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE POWERPOINT, PLEASE. THIS GOES WITH EVERY ZONING CHANGE. THE 200 FEET, SO THIS IS THE SURVEY THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT.

AND WHAT WE DO IS WE GO 200 FEET OUT AND CREATE A BUFFER THROUGH OUR GIS SYSTEM, AND ALL PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHT HERE YOU SHOW THE DIFFERENT LAND AREA WITHIN 200 FEET.

IT INCLUDES THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT HERE COMING UP LIKE THIS.

THIS IS THE SHAPE OF THE SURVEY. >> WAS THAT REPLATTED?

>> NO. THERE'S NOTHING IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO REPLAT DUE TO ZONING.

THEY GAVE US A SURVEY DONE BY A SURVEYOR THAT WAS STAMPED AND SEALED THAT SHOWED THIS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.

>> AND THE PD BEING REQUESTED IS JUST FOR --

>> THIS BLACK AREA. >> JUST THAT SURVEYED AREA?

>> CORRECT. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO

UNDERSTAND. >> YES.

>> SO WHAT WAS THE ADDITIONAL COVERAGE AREA, EDGE TO EDGE

ROUGHLY? >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THOSE

COVERAGE MAPS? >> YEAH.

>> I WOULD HAVE TO REFER BACK TO THE APPLICANT.

I'M NOT AN EXPERT REGARDING COVERAGE, THAT'S WHERE I WOULD HAVE TO REFER TO HIM REGARDING THE COVERAGE, I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ACCURATELY ANSWER COVERAGE ON THAT.

I DON'T HAVE THAT DATA OR THE TECHNOLOGY TO DO THAT.

>> CIRCLING BACK ON MY ORIGINAL QUESTION, SO WOULD WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF ZONING THEN ON THE LOTS IF IT'S NOT GETTING

REPLATTED? >> CORRECT.

SO A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE ZONED PD AND I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NAME I GAVE, 143. AND THE REST OF THE LOT WOULD KEEP THE EXISTING ZONING WHICH WAS AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT.

>> THIS IS CONFUSING. >> THAT WOULD ALL STILL LIVE WITHIN THE ONE DOCUMENT THOUGH? WHERE I THINK THIS GETS A LITTLE CONFUSING IS FOR FUTURE, IF THEY'RE TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY.

>> THIS IS GOING SO MUCH TO AN SGP, YOU'LL HAVE AN SGP WITHIN

AN EXISTING DISTRICT. >> SO THAT I UNDERSTAND, THERE'S NO SGP INVOLVED IN THE CURRENT PROCESS NOR ANY CURRENT THOUGHT PROCESS WITHIN AN SGP NEEDED IN FUTURE APPLICATION?

>> THIS REQUEST DOES NOT INCLUDE THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

IT'S A PD. >> IS IT CUSTOMARY, I'M TRYING

[01:25:06]

>> A LOT OF PDS GO TO THE BOUNDARY LINES.

THERE ARE SOME PDS THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT CARVING DUE TO OWNERSHIP OR HOW THEY WANT TO RETAIN THE LAND.

THE PROPERTY OWNER MIGHT NOT WANT THE REST OF IT REZONED FOR VARIOUS REASONS AND IN THE FUTURE THEY MIGHT WANT THE ABILITY TO SEPARATE IT. AND SO WHEN IT COMES TO, STAFF IS FINE WITH HOW IT WAS SEPARATED WITH THE SURVEY FOR THIS TYPE OF REQUEST. IT IS MORE COMMON WHERE IT

ENCOMPASSES THE WHOLE -- >> YOUR BOUNDARIES TEND TOR MORE -- TO BE MORE REGULARLY SHAPED. AGAIN I'VE SEEN STUFF THAT'S

WEIRD ABOUT STRANGE -- >> IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THIS PD FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION WOULD IT BE GUARDED WITH ONLY THE ALLOWANCES, THE GUARANTEE OF ONLY ALLOWANCE OF ONE TOWER?

RIGHT NOW BUT -- >> YOU HAVE TO AMEND THE PD TO GET A SECOND TOWER. IT'S ONLY SITE PLAN FOR ONE

TOWER. >> AND THE APPLICANT IS ONLY REQUESTING THE ONE TOWER AND THEY'RE VERY WELL AWARE.

>> I'M THINKING THROUGH, IF THEY WANTED A SECOND TOWER, ARE THE SETBACK VARIANCES IN PLACE TO POSSIBLY ALLOW FOR A SECOND TOWER BECAUSE MY THOUGHT PROCESS WOULD ROLL WITH THIS, IF YOU HAVE A PD THAT ALLOWS FOR ONE TOWER, I'M WONDERING IF YOU'RE OPENING A LEGAL CAN OF WORMS TO ALLOW FOR A SECONDARY TOWER.

>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. >> OKAY.

>> I CAN READJUST THE SETBACKS THAT I MENTIONED OR THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED. LET'S SAY THE PROPERTY IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL AND THE TOWER WAS ALLOWED ON IT, THE SETBACKS WOULD BE 50 FEET FROM THE FRONT, 50 FEET FROM THE REAR, OR 100 FEET FROM THE REAR AND I BELIEVE IT'S 25 ON EACH SIDE.

THE SETBACKS THAT YOU SEE IN THE ORDINANCE ARE BASED OFF OF SOLELY DUE TO THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER.

THEY WANTED MORE HEIGHT SO THEY SET IT BACK EVEN MORE.

WHAT I DID ON PAGE 29 OF THE STAFF REPORT SO EVERYONE COULD HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED, FOR THE HEIGHT OF THEIR TOWER, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 208 FEET FROM THE FRONT YARD.

SO 208 FEET FROM THIS WAY. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SET BACK 183 FEET FROM THE WEST SIDE AND 183 FEET FROM THE REAR YARD.

I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT, IT'S THE FALL OF THE CELL TOWER, THAT'S WHAT IT'S DEALING WITH.

AND THEY'RE EXCEEDING ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT OUR MINIMUM WOULD BE BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER.

THEY COULD ACTUALLY DECREASE THAT TO 208, 183, 183 IF THEY WANTED TO. ON THEIR SITE PLAN THEY'RE SHOWING 325, 630, 275, 275. BECAUSE THEY'VE SAID I BELIEVE IN THE ORDINANCE WE HAVE IT REFERENCED AS 325, 630, 375, AND

275. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> I GUESS A CONCERN THAT I HAVE, WHAT REALLY BOTHERS ME ABOUT THIS, IF THE TOWER WAS THERE AND WE WERE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE BUILDING HOUSES AROUND IT, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN OUT THERE FOR YEARS, THAT'S THEIR LIFE INVESTMENT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE CHANGING THEIR ENVIRONMENT AESTHETICALLY AND MAYBE OTHERWISE, I'M NOT AN EXPERT AT THAT. BUT THAT CONCERNS ME THAT IT DOESN'T CONFORM AND ACTUALLY YOU ARE AFFECTING THAT.

AND EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY HAVE TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER 20 FEET, WHO KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO BE PUT ON THERE ADDITIONAL NESTS OR ANTENNAS OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM AND WHAT'S THAT GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND WHAT THAT GENERATES AND

I JUST HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. >> ONE LAST QUESTION, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MY MEMORY IS CORRECT IN THE PRESENTATION.

[01:30:04]

>> ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION AS PROVIDED, IT LOOKS LIKE MOSTLY TOWERS WERE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO ANY OF THE HOMES BEING

CONSTRUCTED, THAT'S CORRECT. >> THANK YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I REMEMBERED THAT PROPERLY.

>> THERE'S A LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE ON THE PROPERTY FOR THE EXISTING RESIDENTS THAT THEY HAD APPLIED FOR PRIOR TO ANNEXATION, THEY WERE IN THEIR LEGAL RIGHT TO DO LEGAL NONCONFORMING FORMS.

>> IS THERE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSIONS? WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL?

OR THE COMMISSION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR OF THE

MOTION AYE. >> AYE.

>> LET'S DO IT BY RAISE OF HANDS.

RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR.

1, 2, 3, AND OPPOSED? OKAY MOTION TO DENY CARRIES.

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

[MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION]

ANNOUNCEMENTS. >> THE ONLY ANNOUNCEMENT WE HAVE, ONCE AGAIN WE'RE STILL DOING WORKSHOPS PRIOR TO MEETINGS, THESE WORKSHOPS ARE GEARED TOWARDS HOW TO MAKE OUR ORDINANCES BETTER. THE NEXT WORKSHOP WE STILL PLAN ON HAVING IS EVERY P&Z BEFORE THE MEETING AT 5:00 TO GO OVER A PROPOSED CHANGE OR TO BRAINSTORM IDEAS WITH ALL OF YOU.

WE APPRECIATE YOU GUYS COMING OUT THOSE WHO CAN, I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE CONFLICTS WITH WORK AND ET CETERA.

FOR THOSE WHO COULDN'T MAKE IT TO TODAY'S WORKSHOP, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND EMAIL YOU THAT INFORMATION.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW.

>> WE APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING THIS TOGETHER FOR US LIKE THAT AND GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET INTO SOME OF THAT STUFF.

THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE STARTING AT 5:00?

. >> GENERALLY WE START AT 5:00 TO 5:30, JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MUCH STUFF TO TALK ABOUT WE'VE BEEN STARTING AT 5:00. COME IF YOU CAN, IF YOU CAN'T, COME TO THE P&Z ACTUALLY AGENDA ITEMS. ONCE AGAIN WE'LL EMAIL EVERYTHING WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE WORKSHOP SO YOU DON'T FEEL LEFT OUT FOR THOSE WHO COULDN'T

MAKE IT. >> WE APPRECIATE YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> APPRECIATE STAFF.

ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO DISCUSS OR BRING UP? IF NOT, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION WE ADJOURN.

>> I MAKE A MOTION WE ADJOURN. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADJOURN. ALL IN FAVOR

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.