Jul 20, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission

[Consent Agenda]

[00:01:05]

>> DO WE HAVE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK? OKAY.

WE'LL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT

AGENDA? >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ALL IN FAVOR AYE. >> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 007 UNDER

[007 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of the Oaks at Shiloh, being +/-13.5468 acres out of the John Crane Survey, Abstract No. 246. The property is generally located west of Shiloh Road. (Case No. PP18-2021-149).]

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WESTURV. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WEST OF SHILOH ROAD.

>> THANK YOU. THE PLAT IS FOR APPROXIMATELY 13 ACRES WHICH WILL HAVE TEN RESIDENCE DENTAL LOTS. THIS IS ORIGINALLY REZONED FROM AGRICULTURAL TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 140 MARCH OF 2021 IN CORN TO SECTION 212 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

NO APPLYING -- NO PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> IF NOT, CAN I HAVE A MOTION? >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANYBODY OPPOSED? IT'S UNANIMOUS.

[008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a drive-thru service on Lot 2, Block A, Walnut Grove Center North Addition, presently zoned Commercial (C) District; adopting conditions for development and use of the property. The property is located at 2450 Presidential Parkway (SUP19-2021-133).]

SERVICE ON LOT 2 BLOK O CK A. . >> THANK YOU, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A TENANT BUILDING WITH A DRIVE-THRU WINDOW. I HAVE THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS WITH THAT DRIVE-THRU WINDOW. WE FEEL THAT THE PROPOSED USE WOULD CONFORM TO THAT PLAN.

THE PLAN SHOWS AN INITIAL 35 PARKING SPACES. THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO BREAK THIS UP INTO TWO PHASES. SECOND PHASE WOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES.

42 PARKING SPACES WOULD STILL ADHERE TO OUR REGULATIONS. THE INGRESS EGRESS POINT WOULD ALLOW FOR VEHICLES TO CUE [INDISCERNIBLE] PHASE ONE SHOULD INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DRIVEWAY STUPP TO THE SOUTHEAST FOR THE FUTURE CONNECTION. PHASE TWO SHOULD ALSO INCLUDE THE FUTURE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 7 PARKING SPACES. THAT ACROSS ACCESS EASEMENT, WE

[00:05:05]

HAVE. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? DOES THE APPLICANT PRESENT WISH

TO SPEAK? >> YEAH, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION THAT SHE

WOULD LIKE TO SHARE. >> OKAY, SURE. >> MY NAME IS CLIFF PARKER AND WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FROM KEN PRICHET. WE LEARNED THERE WAS A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THERE FOR A COMMUNITY OF 2000 HOMES BY HANNOVER AND IN LOOKING AT THAT, WE WERE APPROACHED BY SOMEONE THAT WANTED TO PUT IN A COFFEE SHOP.

ONE OF THE PREREQUISITES HE ASKED ABOUT IS A DRIVEWAY. FOR THE DRIVE-THRU WE NEEDED TO

COME TO THIS MEETING. >> WHICH ONE? >> IT'S THE BOTTOM ONE.

JUST GO TO THE NEXT PICTURE THERE. THIS SHOWS THE PROPERTY RIGHT THERE NEXT TO THE WHATABURGER ON 287. GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

BEGINNING THAT CONSTRUCTION TO EXTEND BACK UP TO WALNUT GROVE AND THAT SHOWS OUR OFFICE THERE WHERE IT WOULD BE COMING ONTO 287 THERE. NEXT SLIDE, IF YOU WOULD.

THIS IS JUST PART OF THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS WHERE PEOPLE WILL BE WALKING. THIS SHOWS A CLOSE-UP OF THAT INTERSECTION WHERE THEY HAD HOMES THERE AND NOW ONE OF THE REASONS FOR GETTING THIS PROPERTY WAS GOING TO BE A CORNER LOT THERE AND THEN THE LAST PHOTO, THIS IS OUR BUILDING.

THAT'S REALLY IT. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FOR ME ABOUT THE PROPOSAL

OR THE DRIVE THROUGH. >> OKAY. QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS. FIFRL, FIRST OF ALL, VAN GUS. YOUAN GUS.

YOU DDAN GUS. YOU DO HAVE 3 MINUTES. >> MY NAME IS DAN GUS AND I'M THE COUNSEL FOR [INDISCERNIBLE] WE'RE HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

THE PARKWAY HAS BECOME SOMEWHAT TREACHEROUS WITH THE OPENING OF THE OVERPASS.

WE JUST HAVE THE TRAFFIC LIGHT UP THE ROAD WHICH SLOWED TRAFFIC DOWN.

NOW IT'S LIKE A GAME OF FROGGER TO EXIT OUR FACILITY RIGHT NOW. WITH THE ADDITIONAL HOUSING GOING IN BEHIND IT, WE ENVISION FICHE CONGESTUTURE CONGESTIOON D OFF OF 287.

WE'RE CONCERNED WITH A COFFEE SHOP THERE. IT WOULD BE THE SECOND DRIVE-THRU ON PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY T FIRST ONE BEING THE WHATABURGER.

WE'RE CONCERNED THIS IS GOING TO DRAW MORNING TRAFFIC AWAY FROM THE WALNUT DROVE AND TOWARD THE PRESIDENTIAL WAY ACCESS WHICH WE THINK IS THE WRONG THING TO DO BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTY OF INGRESS AND EGRESS ONTO 287 WITH THE HIGH SPEED OF TRAFFIC THERE. WE THINK ADDING MORE DRIVE-THRU TRAFFIC IS ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG IDEA AND IT'S GOING TO INTERFERE WITH OUR BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND OUR EMPLOYEES' BUILT TO GET TO WORK IN THE MORNING AT THE SAME TIME PEOPLE ARE GETTING THEIR COFFEE AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY LEAVING IN THE EVENING. WE THINK THIS IS -- WHILE WE'RE OPEN TO THE OFFICE, WE THINK IT'S THE WRONG IDEA FROM THAT AND JUST WITH THE HIGHER SPEED OF TRAFFIC ON 287 WITH THE OPENING OF THE OVERPASS, THE LAST THING WE NEED IS MORE TRAFFIC COMING INTO THE AREA. WE HAVE BEEN THERE FOR ABOUT 17 YEARS NOW AND WE JUST THINK

[00:10:11]

IF IT HAS BEEN, I'M NOT AWARE OF IT. AT A MINIMUM, I THINK ANY APPROVAL SHOULD BE CONDITIONED ON FIRST HAVING A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TO SEE WHAT THAT WILL BE IN LIGHT OF THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE.

I THINK THIS IS A BIG ISSUE. FOR THAT REASON, WE WOULD RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUESTED SUP. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT OUR

PERSPECTIVE ON THIS. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> RON GRAHAM? STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS,

SIR. >> I'M RON GRAHAM AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING NS INC, 2441 PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN. MR. GUS PRETTY MUCH SAID EVERYTHING I WOULD SAY TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL. I HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 20 YEARS AND WE HAVE HAD NOTHING BUT A LOT OF HEADACHES BECAUSE THE WHATABURGER THING, THE INGRESS AND EGRESS IN THE MORNINGS AND PEOPLE PULLING OUT IN FRONT OF OUR PLEA EMPLOYEES TRYING TO GET TO WORK AS WELL AS THE DIFFICULTY OF EMPLOYEESWORK AS OF EMPLOYEES LEAVING IN THE EVENING. THE MORNING TIME IS TREACHEROUS. AS YOU KNOW, THEY IMPROVED THE 287 WITH THE OVERPASS, BUT THEY DID NOT INCLUDE ANY OFF LANE THERE COMING FROM THE SOUTH.

IN THE MORNINGS, IT'S REALLY DANGEROUS TO TRY TO GET INTO PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY.

WE WARN OUR OFFICE STAFF WEEKLY ABOUT THE DANGERS OF PULLING OUT.

WE WERE QUITE PLEASED THAT BAYLOR DECIDED TO BUILD THEIR FACILITY, IT IMPROVED THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO TO SPEAK, AND THAT INCREASED THE TRAFFIC BECAUSE PEOPLE COMING IN FOR THIS EARLY MORNING APPOINTMENTS BUT THAT'S ON THE ROAD RIGHT IN FRONT OF US AND IT'S NOT QUITE AS CRITICAL TO US BECAUSE PEOPLE DO TEND TO LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE THEY PULL IN THERE.

WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE DRIVE-THRI BECAUSE IT'S G BECAUSE IT'S GU BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THAT MORNING TRAFFIC AND IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE TRAFFIC THERE ON PRESIDENTIAL. WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT WE WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC GAIN FROM THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING PUT IN THERE RIGHT NOW, SO THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. >> I THINK THAT'S ALL THE PEOPLE WE HAVE TO SPEAK.

ARE WE MISSING ANYBODY? WE DO HAVE TWO FORMS SUBMITTED, ONE IN FAVOR, DUSTIN AND SLAYTON AND ONE OPPOSED FROM MR. GRAHAM WHO JUST SPOKE TO US. DID WE MISS ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A

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

HEARING. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED?

UNANIMOUS, PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

WHAT CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT -- I WOULD ASSUME THE RECENT OVERPASS CONSTRUCTION AT WALNUT GRAVE WILL BE PHASE ONE AS TX-DOT WILL REVIEW IT ON FUTURE ASPECTS AND I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION.

IT'S ALMOST AS THOUGH THERE'S A SLIP STREET OR A FRONTAGE ROAD. IS THAT ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF OR DOES THAT FEATURE TIME IN IN SOME FORM OF AN AGREEMENT IN A DEVELOPMENT STAGE IN EARLIER

[00:15:02]

SITUATION WHERE IT HAS TO BE DONE, CORRECT? >> RIGHT.

THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT AND I WILL LET ANYONE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT BRIDGEWATER WILL BE WORKING TO INCLUDE THIS FRONTAGE ROAD.

AT ONE POINT, AS SOON AS THIS OTHER AREA WHERE WE HAVE THAT GRADE SEPARATION, THE NEXT PHASE WOULD BE TO INCLUDE A FRONTAGE ROAD IN THIS AREA. I BELIEVE THAT ROAD THAT COMES OFF OF PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY WHERE YOU CAN SEE WHERE MY CURSER IS, THAT IS A PRIVATE ROAD. LET ME TAKE THAT BACK. I THINK THAT'S A PUBLIC

EASEMENT. >> RIGHT, WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH BRIDGE WATER, WHEN BRIDGE

WATER STARTS CONDUCTING THE INITIAL PHASES UP HERE. >> I'M NOT GOING TO HOLD YOU TO ANYTHING BUT WHAT PERIOD OF TIME DO YOU THINK THAT MIGHT START TIEING IN?

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> THEY'RE MOVING FAST. >> [INAUDIBLE] 95% DONE.

>> SO THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME RELIEF AS FAR AS INGRESS AND EGRESS AT THAT POINT.

>> YES, SIR. AND PART OF BRIDGEWATER'S DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THOSE GUYS AND IT'S JUST OFF THIS PICTURE BUT YOU CAN SEE THE FRONTAGE ROAD THAT'S BEGINNING AND THEY UTILIZE THAT AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF TRAFFIC C CONTROL.

IF YOU DRIVE ON THE EXIT RAMP, YOU CAN SEE THE SERVICE ROAD THAT'S PARALLEL TO BOTH THE

FREEWAY AND THE PRIVATE ROAD COMING BACK TO PRESIDENTIAL. >> NOT ONLY WILL IT BE A SERVICE ROAD BUT AS THERE IS ACROSS THE STREET. THERE WILL ALSO BE A PRIVATE

SLIP STREET THAT'S USABLE FOR TRAFFIC TO MOVE. >> ACROSS THE STREET I THINK

IT'S ONLY A PRIVATE STREET, YEAH. >> BUT THIS PARTICULAR SLIP STREET I WOULD CALL IT A SLIP STREET WILL STAY EVEN AFTER THE SERVICE ROAD IS DONE ALSO TO

SERVE AS A DUAL CAPACITY. >> YEP. YES, SIR.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? DISCUSSION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION?

ALL IN FAVOR AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED IT IS UNANIMOUS.

[009 Conduct a public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the development and use of 168.65± acres out of the A.R. Newton Survey, Abstract No. 809, the W.M. Lick Survey, Abstract No. 620 and the J.R. Beauchamp Survey, Abstract No. 1201, described in Exhibit “A” hereto, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to Planned Development District No. 145 (PD-145) for residential and office/warehouse uses. The property is located east of the Longbranch Road and Daniel Road intersection, and is directly northwest of the Mid-Way Regional airport. (Case No. Z35-2021-148).]

NEXT ITEM IS 009. CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF -- ABINSTRUCT NORM 1201 BY CHANGING THE ZONING TO PLAN DEVEL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF 168.65 ACRES OUT OF THE A.R. NEWTON SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 809, THE W.M. LICK SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 620 AND THE J.R. BEAUCHAMP

SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1201, DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” HERETO, >> THANK YOU, A PORTION LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE FOR OFFICE WAREHOUSE.

I WILL TALK ABOUT THE OFFICE WAREHOUSE FOR LESS THAN 30 SECONDS.

WE HAVE THIS WRITTEN AS ONCE THIS PORTION IS DEVELOPED, THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO GO GO THROUGH AND GET A DETAILED SITE PLAN. THE REMAINDER OF IT, THEY WILL LEAD INTO THE HAYES CROSSING DEVELOPMENT RIGHT HERE. THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS BROKEN UP INTO VARIOUS PHASES. THE FIRST WILL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS INTO HAYES CROSSING.

THE LATER PHASES WILL BE INITIATED ONCE HAYES ROAD EXTENDS DOWN INTO THE

[00:20:03]

THROUGHOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT, THERE'S VARIOUS AREAS THAT ARE TREE PRESERVATION AREAS TRYING TO PRESERVE THE TREES AND SURROUNDING AREA. AS YOU COME DOWN HAYES ROAD, INSTEAD OF THAT MASONRY WALL THAT WE HEARD A LOT AGAINST, WE ENCOURAGED THEM TO USE THE EXISTING TREE LINE IN THE SCREENING AND FOCUS ON THAT TREE PRESERVATION AREA TOO A ACT AS THEIR WALL THERE. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THEY ARE DOING THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. NOT ONLY ARE THEY INCLUDING TREES FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT AS WE ARE REQUIRED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUT THEY'RE HAVING TREES ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY, HAVING STREET TREES, ROUND ABOUTS, THEY'RE INCORPORATING THE LAKE INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT.

ALLOT OF THEIR AMENITIES WILL BE BASED AROUND THE LAKE, THAT THEY HAVE A WHITE CONCRETE TRAIL THROUGHOUT OPEN SPACE, ACCESSING THE LAKE AND MAKING THE LAKE ACTIVE.

THEY WANTED TO MAKE THAT A MAJOR PART OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT. NOT ONLY ARE THEY PRESERVING THE TREES, PRESERVING THE LAKE FRONT BUT THE TREES AROUND IT AS WELL. ALL THEIR AMENITIES AND THOUSAND THEY'RE DESIGN SECOND-DEGREE AROUND THISE SECOND-DEGREE AROUND THD SECOND-DEGREE AROUND TH SECOND-DEGREE AROUND THI SECOND-DEGREE AROUND TH SECOND-DEGREE AROUND THIS OVEAROUND THIS OVERALL THEME OF THE DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE PHASE ONE, NO MORE THAN 39 LOTS, THIS GO INTO HAYES CROSSING DEVELOPMENT RIGHT HERE. SUBDIVISION, ONCE HAYES ROAD IS EXTENDED, THE REST, PHASES TWO AND THREE CAN BE CONSTRUCTED. COMING UP WITH THE LOT SIZE IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE WORKED ON.

THIS WILL ALL BE SEWERED. THE LOTS, WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO BLEND INTO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH. THE LOT SIZE WILL BE SIMILAR SIZES TO THE HAYES CROSSING SUBDIVISION. WE HAVE SIMILAR LOT SIZES RANGING FROM 12600 SQUARE FEET TO HALF AN ACHOR IN SIZE. THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE EXCEEDING 165 RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. WE DID NOTIFY ALL RESIDENTS WITHIN 200-FEET.

ZERO TAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZERO CAMEAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZERO CAMECAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZERO CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION. WE WANT TO DEVELOP THIS AS HAVING THE LEAST IMPACT ON PROPERTIES IN THE AREA. YOU HAVE THE MIDWAY REGIONAL AIRPORT RIGHT HERE.

YOU HAVE A LOT OF OTHER PROPERTIES FURTHER SOUTH. THIS WHOLE AREA IS COOPERATE MODULE WHICH INVITES, ENCOURAGES DEVELOPMENT TO BE OFFICE RELATED, THINGS YOU WOULD FIND IN A CORPORATE LANDSCAPE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE USES THAT WOULD BE SUPPORTING THE AIRPORT IF THIS AREA. WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO USE THIS DEVELOPMENT AND HAVE IT ACT AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS TO THE NORTH.

WE FEEL THAT THROUGH THE AMENITIES, NOT JUST YOUR TYPICAL AMENITIES OF HAVING A PLAYGROUND AND THROWING IT OUT THERE AND SAYING, OKAY, WE HAVE YOUR CHECKLIST, WE WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THEY WORKED WITH US IN TRYING TO MAKE THESE AMENITIES UNIQUE TO THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE GONE DOWN TO PROPOSED DESIGNS OF THE BUILDINGS, THESE RESIDENTIAL HOMES, THAT THE ELEVATIONS MEET OUR OTHER STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE IN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS BUT REALLY THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT IS PLANNED AND GEARED TOWARDS THE AMENITIES, HAVING A UNIQUE PD AND WE WENT TO THE DEVELOPER AND TRIED TO HAVE THEM BE UNIQUE IN THAT

[00:25:02]

ONCE AGAIN, WE TRIED TOO GET THEM TO HAVE THE TRAIL LEAD INTO HAYES GET THEM TO HAVE THE TRAIL LEAD INTO HAYES CROSSING SUBDIVISION. ONE OF THE ISSUES DOING THAT, THAT TRAIL DOES NOT HAVE A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT AND SO THEY FELT THERE WOULD BE ISSUES, HOWEVER, THE TRAIL DOES GO UP INTO THE SIDEWALK THAT LEADS INTO THIS AREA.

IT'S AN 8-FOOT TRAIL THAT ME ANDERSMEANDERS ALL THROUGHOUT T DEVELOPMENT.

STREET TREES, ROUNDABOUTS AND THEY HAVE THAT OPEN SPACE, THAT GREEN SPACE, TO GIVE IT MORE OF AN OPEN FEEL WITH TREES AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT. PRETTY MUCH THAT'S IT.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. WE RECEIVED NO LETTER IN OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT AND I CAN

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> WHERE'S THE STREETS GOING INTO THE SUBDIVISION? >> HERE'S HAYES CROSSING.

THIS IS AN EXISTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. RIGHT NOW HAYES CROSSING IS UNDER PHASE ONE. THEY'RE FINISHING UP THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PHASE 1 AND THIS ROAD RIGHT HERE WILL LEAD INTOOAD RIGHT HERE WILL LEAD IROAD RIGHT HERE WILL LEAD INTO HAYES CROSSING. THERE'S A GAS LINE AS WELL AS AN EASEMENT.

THERE ARE CERTAIN RULES AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING HOW YOU CROSS THESE EASEMENTS.

WITH THAT WE CAN DESIGN AROUND THOSE VARIOUS EASEMENTS. THAT'S WHY YOU SEE A DIFFERENT

PATTERN. >> SO RIGHT NOW THE ONLY ONE THE FOR HAYES.

>> PHASE ONE WILL CONNECT UP HERE. PHASES TWO AND THREE, THE PRIMARY INGRESS AND EGRESS POINT WILL BE OFF HAYES ROAD AFTER ITS EXTENDED.

THERE'S FUTURE CONNECTIVITY TO ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THAT GETS DEVELOPED ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

>> WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR HAYES ROAD? >> RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER, HOWEVER, THE CITY HAS NO CURRENT PLAN TO EXTEND THAT ROAD.

THAT WOULD BE DEVELOPMENT DRIVEN. I'M SURE IF THEY DECIDE TO MOVE

FORWARD, THERE WOULD BE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> ACCORDING TO THEIR PLAN RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD GO ALL THE WAY DOWN AND CONNECT TO THE ROAD EVENTUALLY.

>> OKAY. THAT PART -- [INAUDIBLE] >> CORRECT.

HAYES ROAD, I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK. I BELIEVE HAYES ROAD IS ON

THOROUGHFARE ROAD. >> AND THE OFFICE WAREHOUSE IS IN THE NORTH FLIGHT PATTERN OF

THE AIRPORT? >> RIGHT, THE AIRPORT IS DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH RIGHT HERE. SORRY. THERE YOU GO.

HERE'S THE AIRPORT RIGHT HERE, SO IT'S THE SOUTHEAST, I APOLOGIZE.

>> AND THAT'S THE SAME BODY OF WATER THAT THE MASTER PLAN TO BRIDGEWATER SHARES?

>> CORRECT. AND THIS IS ZONED FLIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

>> IS THE PROPORTION OF HAYES ROAD THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED, IS THAT THE PORTION FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME THAT THERE WAS A PORTION OF THAT IN THE COUNTY AND A PORTION IN THE

CITY? >> THERE ARE ROADS THAT BLEED OFF HAYES ROAD THAT GO INTO THE

COUNTY. >> THERE WAS A PERIOD OF TIME AS WE GET BACK UP TOWARDS 1387, THERE WAS A STRIP THERE IN THE COUNTY BUT I GUESS THAT'S BEEN CLEANED UP SINCE SO WE WON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT. SO THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO HAVE ONE PRIMARY ENTRY POINT INTO THE S SUBDIVISION AND NOT TWO. ARE WE ABLE TO DO THAT BECAUSE

YOU'RE GOING TO HOLD THEM TO A CERTAIN PERCENTILE OF LOTS? >> RIGHT, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO

EXCEED 39 LOTS IN THE FIRST PHASE. >> SO DO WE KNOW IF THIS VOID

[00:30:01]

KNOW OF? >> WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING COME THROUGH AT LEAST ON OUR

STAGE. >> OKAY. SO IT COULD BE THAT THERE WOULD BE NO TRUE BENEFIT INTO THROWING THAT KIND OF INVESTMENT INTO HAYES ROAD TO FINISH OUT SECOND

PHASE REALISTICALLY. >> RIGHT, THEY WOULD NEED TO CONNECT TO THE NORTH UNLESS THEY WANTED TO FIND SOME WAY OF CONNECTING ALL THE WAY TO THE SOUTH WHICH IS A LOT FURTHER OF

A DISTANCE. >> I GUESS THAT WAS MY THOUGHT. HOW LONG DOES THIS STAY

STAGNANT? >> YEAH, IT DEPENDS ON DEVELOPMENT.

>> OKAY. >> IS THE PLAN FOR THE MIDDLE SECTION OF HAYES, IS THAT RIGHT

OF WAY ACQUIRED AND ALL -- >> FOR THIS PART? >> YEAH.

>> WHEN THEY PLAT THE PROPERTY, THAT'S WHEN WE'LL ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY OR IF THE DEVELOPER HAS SOME KIND OF AN AGREEMENT. AT THIS TIME, THE CITY HAS NO INTEREST, WE HAVE NO CURRENT

OWNERSHIP OR LEGAL RIGHT TO ANY AREA RIGHT HERE. >> ACCORDING TO THEM RIGHT NOW, IT IS SECURED AND THEY'RE APPROVED TO PUT THAT WHERE IT'S AT?

>> RIGHT HERE? THIS IS A FICTIONAL ROAD RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S A GAP. >> SO THE HAYES CROSSING PROVIDES THE SEWER CONNECTIVITY?

>> CORRECT. THE SEWER CONNECTIVITY THROUGH HAYES CROSSING.

>> OKAY. OTHER QUESTION OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> YES, SIR. >> MY NAME IS TERRY WEAVER. I'M WITH STIRING DEVELOPER COMPANY. I RECOMMEND THE HAMMOND FAMILY TRUST THAT OWNS THE PROPERTY AND THE PERSON LOOKING TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. I GOT ANSWERS FOR EVERY QUESTION

Y'ALL HAVE ASKED IF YOU WANT TO HEAR THEM. >> SURE.

>> THERE IS A ROAD THAT COMES FROM LONG BRANCH ABOUT 25% TO 30% UP THAT HAYES ROAD CONNECTS IN, WHICH COULD BE ACCESSED FROM LONG BRANCH TO A PORTION OF HAYES ROAD THAT'S NOT ON OUR PROPERTY THAT WOULD CONNECT IN THE FUTURE. ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR TONIGHT IS ZONING AND THEN WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH ALL THIS OTHER PLATTING. WE REALIZE THERE'S ONLY 39 LOTS THAT CAN BE DONE OFF THE FUTURE HAYES CROSSING CONNECTION AND WE'RE WILLING TO INVEST TO BUILD THOSE 39 LOTS THINKING THAT SOMEONE WILL ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY NORTH OF US AND BUILD THAT ROAD THROUGH THERE OR WE CAN UTES THE LONG BRANCH POSSIBILITY, WORK WITH THE CITY.

I'MUSED THE LONG BRANCH POSSIBILITY, WORK WITH THE CITY. I'M IN CURRENT TALKS WITH THE AIRPORT, WITH DARYL PHILLIPS, THE DIRECTOR WHO IS VERY INTERESTED IN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. THE AIRPORT NEEDS MORE PROPERTY FOR THINGS THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT COULD BE ON THE AIRPORT OR OFF THE AIRPORT. I TALKED TO THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SEALS TRUST, THE CHILDREN'S TRUST TO THE SOUTH OF US, THEY'RE VERY INTERESTED.

OF COURSE WE ALL KNOW BRIDGEWATER IS SOUTH OF THEM AND THEY'RE WORKING WITH THE CITY ON THE OFFICE WAREHOUSE PART OF THEIR MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY SO THEY'RE INTERESTED AND THE SEALS ON THE PROPERTY FROM THE BRIDGEWATER TO 287 SO THERE'S A LOT OF EXCITEMENT ABOUT HAYES ROAD NOW ESPECIALLY AFTER THE INTERSECTION HAS BEEN DONE AT 1387 AND IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE ON UP TO MOCKINGBIRD. WE THINK WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME WE CAN WORK OUT A FINANCIAL SITUATION TO WHERE I HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE HAYES PROPERTY ON SOME PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF US AND COULD TIE IN AND MAYBE PARTICIPATE WITH THEM TO BUILD A LITTLE BIT OF HAYES ROAD THERE AND CONNECT OVER TO LONG BRANCH. THAT'S A POSSIBILITY OR SOMEBODY DEVELOPS THAT. WHAT WE WILL HAVE TO DO IS SIT ON THE BALANCE OF OUR PROPERTY UNTIL SOMETHING DOES OCCUR. EVERY HOME IN HERE WILL BE SIDE ENTRY GARAGE.

THAT WASN'T MENTIONED BUT I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. NO FRONT ENTRY GARAGES.

MINIMUM LOTS 90-FOOT WIDE, SOME ARE 100, 110-FOOT WIDE. WE'RE ONLY A LITTLE OVER WIN LOT TO THE ACRE DENSITY ON THE 133 ACRES WE'RE PUTTING INTO LAGO VISTA, THE RESIDENTIAL

[00:35:06]

WE BELIEVE THIS IS SOMEWHAT SIMILAR TO A DEVELOP I WAS INVOLVED IN CALLED TWIN CREEKS, ALL HALF ACRE LOTS. THIS IS GOING TO HAVE THE SAME FEEL, EVEN THOUGH IT'S GOT SOME SMALLER LOTS, IT WILL HAVE THAT SAME FEEL OF FEELING LIKE YOU'RE IN THE COUNTRY EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE NOT DOING 1 ACRE LOTS. AS FAR AS THE SEWERS, THE SEWERS ARE ALREADY IN ALL ALONG THE LAKE. WE HAVE ADEQUATE WATER TO THE DEVELOPMENT, THERE WILL HAVE TO BE LOOPING OF WATER DONE EVENTUALLY WHEN WE GET INTO FUTURE PHASES AND WE'RE EXCITED WHAT THE TAX BASE COULD BE ON THIS FUTURE OFFICE WAREHOUSE. AS YOU'RE AWARE, THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN HAS AN AIRPORT OVERLAY ORDINANCE THAT TALKS ABOUT BUILDING HOUSES NEXT TO THE AIRPORT AND SO WE'RE BUFFERING IT WITH 31 ACRES THERE.

ALL THE BUILDINGS THERE HAVE TO BE LOW RISE BUILDINGS TO WORK WITH THE AIRPORT.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE PLANNED IN A NUTSHELL. WE'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? >> I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION, MR. WEAVER, AND I PROBABLY DIDN'T PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER EARLIER.

WE DID DECIDE AND THIS IS BETWEEN YOURSELF AND STAFF, WE DID DECIDE EASTRLIER THAT HAYES

ROAD IS ALONG -- [INAUDIBLE] >> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. >> IT'S ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN

BUT THERE'S NOT RIGHT OF WAY PROVIDED. >> NO, THAT OWNER WOULD HAVE TO

DO SOMETHING WITH THAT RIGHT OF WAY. >> I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF THE RIGHT OF WAY WAS ALREADY THERE BECAUSE THAT'S A WHOLE 'NOTHER OR DEAL.

>> YEAH, THAT ALWAYS HAPPENS DURING PLATTING AND THAT SORT OF STUFFMENT

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

THANK YOU, SIR. >> SORRY. WOULD YOU PLAN ON BUILDING THE

AMENITY ALONG THE LAKE WITH PHASE ONE? >> SURE.

I'M GOING TO BE OUT THERE SELLING REAL EXPENSIVE HALF ACRE LOTS AND THEY WILL WANT TO SEE THAT PAVILION WITH THAT OUTDOOR KITCHEN AND THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO SEE THAT TRAIL THROUGH THERE. I CAN'T BUILD THE TRAIL PAST WHERE WE'RE DEVELOPING, OF COURSE, AND MORE THAN LIKELY THE PLAYGROUND. SO, YES.

THAT WILL BE DOWN THE WAY WHEN WE COME BACK FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT ON THE FIRST PHASE, BUT, YES, THIS IS A CUSTOM HOME DEVELOPMENT, IT'S NOT A VOLUME BUILD HOME DEVELOPMENT.

THE VOLUME BUILDERS WON'T BE INTERESTED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. THIS WILL BE REGIONAL AND LOCAL

CUSTOM BUILDERS THAT WILL BE BUILDING. >> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANYTHING ELSE FROM STAFF?

>> THIS LOT IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL RIGHT HERE AND THE LOT RIGHT HERE IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IF NOT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION

TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR AYE. >> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION.

>> I KNOW GARAGES HAVE BEEN A TOPIC LATELY. HE SAID THEY WOULD BE SIDE ENTRY GARAGES. THIS WILL ALLOW FOR REAR OR SIDE ENTRY, PREVENTING ANY J SWINGING

AS WELL. >> OKAY. >> I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION.

I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND A TO APPROVE. ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? IT'S UNANIMOUS.

[010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending and restating the use and development regulations of Urban Village Planned Development District No. 55 (UVPD-55), as adopted by Ordinance No. 2009-24. The property is located at 103 North 1st Street (Case No. Z36-2021-150).]

[00:40:01]

>> THANK YOU, IN THAT ORDINANCE IT WAS VERY SPECIFIC ON THE USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND SOME OF THE USES PROHIBITED WERE RETAIL. WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR USE SECTION, A NAIL SALON FALLS UNDER OUR RETAIL USE SECTION. FOR THAT REASON, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITIONAL USE OF A BARBER/NAIL SALON AT THIS LOCATION. THE REMAINDER OF THE PD WILL REMAIN THE STATEMENT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS.

WE DON'T FEEL THAT THIS WILL TRIGGER, DUE TO THE SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE STRUCTURES, WE DON'T FEEL LIKE THIS WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE ZONING REGULATIONS. RIGHT NOW THERE ARE SEVEN EXISTING PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE. THEY DO NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE POTENTIAL PARKING SPACES ALONG THE DRIVEWAY IN THIS LOCATION AND THE FUTURE, ANY PARKING THAT COULD BE LOCATED ON ON STREET PARK IFFING THEY CAME FORWARD. IF THEY FEEL THEY NEED ADDITIONAL PARKING, THEY COULD COME BEFORE AND REQUEST FOR ON STREET PARKING TO BE APPROVED WE RECEIVED 147 LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM INDIVIDUALS LOCATED OUTSIDD OUTSIDE THAT 200-FEET. THE MAJORITY OF THOSE LETTERS SAID IT WAS A GOOD BUSINESS AND THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT BEING RELOCATED HERE.

>> DID ANY SOME IN AGAINST IT? >> NOT ONE. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> STAFF HAS NO CONCERN WITH THIS BEING ON A CORNER LOT ON A MAIN STREET THOROUGHFARE RIGHT

UP FROM THE HILL? >> NO, SOME OF THE THINGS WE LOOKED AT PERTAIN TO THE EXISTING USE THAT WAS HERE BEFORE, CONTRACTOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.

WE LOOKED AT THE PARKING, THE POTENTIAL FOR PARKING. WE TALKED TO THE APPLICANT QUITE A BIT, THE A MYPCPCLCICANT AND TENANT. THE TENANT LIVES NEAR HERE SO THEY WALK THERE AND IT'S JUST THE OWNER AND HER DAUGHTERS AND THEY ALL LIVE THERE.

ALL THE SESSIONS ARE BY APPOINTMENT ONLY. DUE TO THAT, DUE TO THE POTENTIAL, IF THERE NEEDED TO BE MORE PARKING FOR ON STREET, THERE COULD BE AND THE

ADDITIONAL PARKING, WE FEEL THAT'S ADEQUATE. >> THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME. OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY, SIR, COME UP AND

IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> SURE. I'M STEVEN AND I LIVE AT 5650 MONTGOMERY ROAD MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. THIS IS THE SECOND PROPERTY I BOOTH IN MIDLOTHIAN BACK IN 1997. WHEN WE STARTED UVPD, THAT WAS THE SECOND PROPERTY I EVER ZONED THAT. SINCE THEN, WE HAVE REZONED MANY PROPERTIES IN THAT UVPD. WE EVEN HAVE ANOTHER SALON AT 203 SOUTH 5TH STREET AND IF YOU DRIVE BUY IT, IT LOOKS AMAZING. THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1908 AND I OFFICED THERE MYSELF.

I OWNED IT 24 YEARS NOW, SUPER PROUD OF THE PROPERTY, I THINK WE TAKE A LOT OF PRIDE IN OUR PROPERTIES. IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER

THOSE. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> I DON'T HAVE ANYONE WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK BUT I HAVE THE PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP TO SUPPORT. WE CAN GIVE YOU A BRIEF SCENARIO. [LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT.

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

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED

[00:45:01]

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? IT'S UNANIMOUS. NEXT ITEM IS 011. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND

[011 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance to change relating to the use and development of 50.46± acres in the M. Pogue Survey, Abstract No. 852 described in Exhibit “A” hereto, by changing the zoning from Agricultural District to Planned Development District No. 143 (PD-143) for residential uses. The property is located ±1,600 feet south of the Plainview Road and Stout Road intersection commonly known as 4440 Stout Road (Case No. Z37-2021-151).]

>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THE PROPERTY IS SOUTH OF PLAINVIEW ROAD AND IS ZONED WITH AN AGRICULTURAL DESIGNATION. IT SHOWS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN WHAT WE CALL THE RURAL MODULE. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IS INTENDED AS A GUIDE FOR OUR FUTURE GROWTH. THE RURAL MODULE WOULD CONSIST OF LARGE LOT DEVELOPMENTS.

THAT IS TO PRESERVE A MORE RURAL AESTHETIC. THE PROPERTY DOES BORDER THE URBAN MEDIAN DENSITY MODULE AND IS IN VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE URBAN LOW DENSITY MODULE AND THESE URBAN MODULES GENERALLY CORRESPOND WITH SMALLER, SINGLE LOTS AND COULD INCLUDE SMALL APARTMENTS OR TOWN HOME COMPLEXES. HERE IS THE PROPOSED LAYOUT.

THE SITE DOES INCLUDE LOTS RANGING FROM 3/4 ACHE E RE TO 1 IN SIZE.

WITH THAT SAID, THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT CONFORM TO OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.

OVERALL THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD CONTAIN 34 NEW RESIDENTIAL LOTS. IT WILL HAVE ONE EXISTING HOME ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL, OR WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT AND THERE'S ONE COMMON LOT, LOT 35, AND THAT IS FOR FLOODPLAIN AND TRAINAGE POND PURPOSES. THIS SECTION OF STOUT ROAD IS NOT WITHIN OUR FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. STOUT ROAD IS DEEMED A 50-FOOT WIDE RIGHT OF WAY. THE SITE DOES CONTAIN TWO ACCESS POINTS BUT THE APPLICANT OPTED TO NOT INCLUDE ANY ROAD STUBS. RIGHT OF WAY LESS THAN 80-FEET WIDE IN WHITST DOES REQUIRE SOME SORT OF FENCING AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT DOES [INAUDIBLE] WHAT I HAVE SHOWN UP HERE ON THE SCREEN, A SPLIT RAIL WOOD FENCE TO BE INSTALLED ALONG STOUT ROAD, SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN, THAT WOULD BE A 15-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND WITHIN THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFER, YOU WOULD HAVE STREET TREES PLANTED EVERY 40-FEET.

THERE'S A TREE LINE OR BUFFER AREA THAT'S GOING TO RUN ALONG THAT EASTERN BONDRY AND THAT SOUTHERN BOUNDARY. THOSE EXISTING TREES WOULD BE PRESERVED THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT A FLOOD STUDY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IS UNDERWAY AND THIS WOULD BE SUBMITTED DURING THE CIVIL SET PROCESS. DETENTION POND WITHIN THIS EXISTING FLOODPLAIN WOULD BE DESIGNED AND REVIEWED BY A THIRD PARTY DURING THE CIVIL REVIEW PROCESS. WE DID SEND OUT A TOTAL OF 16 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200-FEET OF THE SITE AND TO DATE, WE HAVE RECEIVED 8 LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.

THOSE EIGHT LETTERS ARE WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BOUNDARY. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEET THE GUIDELINES BUT THE PROPERTY DOES BORDER THAT URBAN MODULE.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT ALL LOTS AT A MINIMUM CONTAIN AN AREA OF NOT LESS THAN 1 ACRE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY

HAVE. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> THE LOTS BELOW 1 ACRE, WHAT

ARE THOSE? WHAT VOLUME ARE THEY? >> SURE.

THE MINIMUM SIZE IS 3/4 OF AN ACRE. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ALL EXACTLY 3/4 OF AN ACRE. I WILL DEFER TO THE APPLICANT OR THEIR ENGINEER TO GIVE US A

GENERAL IDEA BUT THEY RANGE BETWEEN 0.75 TO 0.99. >> AND THOSE ARE?

[00:50:04]

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> EVERYTHING IN THIS LIGHTER BROWNED.

>>. >> OKAY, GOT YOU. >> [INAUDIBLE]

>> YES, SIR. >> AND THEN LOT NUMBER 34, WHERE WOULD THEY ACCESS THEIR HOME FROM? OFF THAT ASPHALT DRIVEWAY TO THE PRIVATE RESIDENCE OR FROM SOUTH

ROAD? >> LOT 34 WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO ACCESS DIRECTLY ONTO STOUT ROAD.

WE WOULD HAVE AT LEAST ONE DRIVEWAY LEADING ONTO STOUT ROAD UNLESS GOING BACK TO GERALD, IF THERE'S -- IT WOULD BE GOING ONTO STOUT ROAD, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WOULD FIND IN PLAINVIEW MANOR. WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT, THEY HAVE A FEW LOTS THAT ACCESS MCALPINE MANOR. SO IN THIS CASE, YES, BUT STOUT ROAD IS NOT ON OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND IT'S LESS THAN AN 80-FOOT WIDE COLLECTOR. IT'S JUST YOUR TYPICAL RURAL

CROSS SECTION. >> ON THE WEST SIDE, IS THAT BORDERING PLAINVIEW? OKAY, I'M SEEING IT NOW. STOUT ROAD, THEN, THE HOUSE THAT LOT 34, THAT HOUSE COULD FACE

STOUT ROAD? >> YES, SIR. IT WOULD NEED TO.

>> AND POSSIBLY EVEN WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE YET BUT 33 AND 22 MAYBE EVEN FACE -- IN OTHER WORDS, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE SOME SITE FACING OR THOSE ALONG THAT THOROUGHFAIR, WOULD THEY FACE STOUTR, WOULD THEY FACE STOUT RR, WOULD THEY FACE STOUT RER, WOULD THEY FACE

STOUT ROAD OR DO WE KNOW? >> I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

THEY WOULD BE ACCESSING OFF THE NEW LOCAL ROAD. THE HOME COULD EASILY FACE DIRECTLY ONTO STOUT ROAD AND HAVE A SIDE ENTRY, WHICH THAT BRINGS UP ANOTHER POINT.

THERE ARE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS THAT GO ALONG WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT AND ONE OF THOSE STANDARDS IS, FIRST OFF, YOU CAN'T HAVE THE SAME FACADE COPIED THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT SO THAT CREATES THAT CUSTOM LOOK BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, EVERYTHING WILL HAVE A

SIDE ENTRY. >> THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> GOOD EVENING, JAMIE WOODCLIFF, 1600 CREEK WOOD DRIVE REPRESENTING THE MAYS FAMILY, THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT DEVELOPER GERALD.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO SPEAK TONIGHT AND THANKS FOR YOUR TUESDAY NIGHT SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU TAKE TIME AWAY FROM YOUR FAMILY TO LISTEN TO THESE THINGS AND WE DO APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB EXPLAINING TO YOU WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. IT'S A 50-ACRE PARCEL, 34 LOTS.

THE LOTS RANGE FROM 3/4 OF AN ACRE. THERE'S A BREAK DOWN IF YOU CAN SEE THAT SMALL ON THERE, THOSE 3/4 TO 0.99 LOTS I THINK ARE NUMBERED ON THE DETAIL.

THE THINGS WE HAVE ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER IS TO CONSIDER THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TRACK AND THE LOCATION, TO CONSIDER THAT THE PROPERTY BORDERS AN URBAN MODULE.

THAT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS THE 648 LOTS, DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY PROXIMATE. OUR GOAL WAS TO CREATE A TRANSITION FROM A REALLY DENSE DEVELOPMENT TO LARGER PARCELS. CONSIDER THAT WHILE THE FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN DOESN'T INCLUDE ANY OF THE STREETS NOTED HERE, STOUT ROAD, IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST IS A THOROUGHFARE AND ONE OF THOSE AGRICULTURALLY DESIGNATED LOTS THAT'S ON THIS DRAWING IS ALSO OWNED BY THE MAYS FAMILY AND GOING TO BE CUT BY A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE SO THE CONCEPT OF WHAT IS THERE TODAY AND WHAT IS GOING TO BE THERE I THINK SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHEN CONSIDERING THE FUTURE LAND USE.

CONSIDER THE LOT SIZES BECAUSE WE HAVE TRIED TO INCORPORATE, TO THE LARGER END OF THE LOTS INCLUDING ONE AT LEAST THAT'S A 6-ACRE LOT AND COURTESY TO NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE LARGER ACREAGE HOLDINGS. CONSIDER THE BUFFER AND THE NATURAL FEATURES THAT WE'VE TRIED TO BE SENSITIVE TO RATHER THAN LOOKING AT THIS COLORED DRAWING, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS OVERLAID ON AN AERIAL, YOU WILL SEE WE TRIED TO CREATE LOTS THAT THE LINE WERES NOT PLACED IN

[00:55:09]

WE SPENT MANY HOURS IN THE HAY FIELDS OUT THERE. WE CARE ABOUT THE PRODUCT THAT'S GOING ON THE GROUND FOR SOMETHING MORE THAN JUST A BUNCH OF NEW ROOFTOPS.

WE WANTED TO HONOR THEIR LEGACY, WE WANTED TO HONOR THEIR LONG STANDING IN THIS COMMUNITY AND WE WANTED TO BE SOD T TO BE SOM THEY WOULD BE PROUD OF. WE WANT TO CREATE A SMALL, UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE PEOPLE KNOW EACH OTHER. THE MAYS FAMILY WANTS TO SELL THE LAND. IT'S NOT GOING TO STAY A WHOLE PARCEL.

THE PROPOSAL WAS DESIGNED TO CREATE SENSITIVITY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERATION THAT YOU HAVE. WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? >> MR. ROGERS, AS IT RELATES TO ANSWERING WHICH WAY WILL THE HOUSE FACE, WE HAD NOT REALLY CONTEMPLATED EXCEPT THAT IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD CONFORM IF THE HOUSE IS FACED STOUT ROAD BUT WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IS BE SENSITIVE TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE WOULD PROPOSE SOMETHING EARN THAT BUT THE HOUSE FACING STOUT ROAD DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE THE DRIVEWAY OUT ON THE TO THE

STOUT >> I BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE I LIKE TO SEE HOMES WHERE THEY'RE STILL FACING THE THOROUGHFARE. IT STILL GIVES IT THAT COUNTRY FEEL, AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT

INSTEAD OF HAVING A WOOD FENCE RUNNING DOWN. >> ABSOLUTELY AND I AGREE WITH YOU. FROM A CONFORMITY STANDPOINT, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT THEY

MIGHT FACE THAT DIRECTION. >> THANK YOU. >> WAS IT EVER CONSIDERED, JUST BECAUSE OF THE NONTYPICAL ACCESS FROM THE EXISTING RESIDENCE TO TAKE THAT PROPERTY STRAIGHTFORWARD INSTEAD OF ADDING LOT 34 AND HAVING THAT LOT FRONTING THE ROAD?

>> ONE OF THE REASONS LOT 34 FROM THE DEVELOPER'S PERSPECTIVE, NOT NECESSARILY THE LAND OWNER'S PERSPECTIVE BUT FROM THE DEVELOPER'S PERSPECTIVE WAS LEFT THAT WIDE IS BECAUSE THERE WAS CONVERSATION WITH THE FAMILY ABOUT WHETHER THE COUPLE OF ACRES LEFT IN THE HEART, IF YOU WILL, THAT'S THE FAMILY HOME, MIGHT WANT SOMETHING BIGGER SO WE WERE TRYING TO LEAVE SOME CONNECTIVITY POSSIBILITY THAT THAT WOULD BE MORE WHINE UNIFORUNIFORM IN IT.

THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THE PURPLE IS BEING RETAINED BY THE FAMILY BUT THERE'S CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BUFFER, THAT THEY MIGHT BE A PROPONENT FOR A LOT WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT PIECE OF REAL ESTATE TO BE A BIGGER PARCEL.

>> ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY, WE DO HAVE SOME PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

SALLY WHITWORTH IN OPPOSITION. AND, AGAIN, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. >> HELLO.

MY NAME IS SALLY WHITWORTH. MY HUSBAND, RICK GONZALES AND I LIVE ON THE 32 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE SELLER'S PROPERTY. TO BE CLEAR, THE OPPOSITION WE POSE IS STRICTLY THE REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CHANGING THE MINIMUM SIZE LOTS REQUIRED.

THOSE LOTS ARE MUCH SMALLER THAN THE AG ZONING REQUIRES 4 ACRES IN MINIMUM AND FAR LESS THAN THE

[01:00:04]

WE HAD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, WE SUBMITTED OVER 30 OPPOSITION NOTES TO PNZ.

THE FIRE MARSHAL TOLD A NEIGHBOR THERE ARE AROUND 24 HOMES WITHIN THE STOUT ROAD ACCESS, SO THE CONSENSUS AMONGST THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS OF ONE MIND. WHY DO WE OPPOSE THIS? 34 LOTS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE MORE TRAFFIC THAN WE HAVE IN OUR ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.

STOUT ROAD IS SHORTER AND NARROWER THAN A NORMAL ROAD AND IS ONLY ONE WAY IN AND OUT.

AT THE DEAD END, THERE IS NO REAL OPTION TO TURN AROUND. THE ROAD IS IN DISREPAIR THERE.

THEN ADD TRAFFIC FOR UTILITY AND CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TO CLEAR AND DEVELOP THE LAND, BUILD THE HOMES FOR YEARS. FEWER LOTS WOULD REDUCE TRAFFIC AND LESSEN THE DUST AND POLLUTION DEVELOPING THIS LAND WILL EMANATE. DRAINAGE.

WHEN HEAVY RAIN AND FLOODING ARE PRESENT, A LOT OF WATER RUNS FROM THAT PROPERTY TO MINE SINCE I'M DIRECTLY DOWNHILL AND CONTINUES FLOWING FOR STANDARD PERIODS.

IN THIS LOW AREA IS OUR SMALL ROAD TO GET TO THIS HOUSE. OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG THE CREEK THAT FOLLOWS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES INTO A VERY SHALLOW LAKE HAVE SEEN WATER CONTINUALLY RISING HIGHER ONTO THEIR PROPERTIES EVEN IMPEDING ACCESS TO HOMES.

I ADMIRE THE DEVELOPER'S STANDARDS IN LEAVING SOME TREES AND ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS DESCRIBED ARE LAUDABLE. WITH THREE OR 4-ACRE LOTS WOULD BE A SHOWCASE TO MIDLOTHIAN.

LARGER LOTS WOULD BALANCE THAT THERE ARE NO COMMON AREAS, PLAYGROUND AND TRAILS.

SAYING NO TO YES. WE WANT TO PRESERVE OUR RURAL LAND AND TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE LEFT OF IT. WE LEARNED ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE ON STOUT ROAD AND ALONG PLAINVIEW WILL BE MASSIVE IN VOLUME OF HOMES COVERING SEVERAL HUNDRED ACRES.

WE WANT IT TO STOP THERE. NOT SAYING YES WHEN REZONING REMOVES THE BORDERLINES BETWEEN ZONES DEEPER INTO THE RURAL MODULE IS IMPORTANT TO OURS AND FUTURE GENERATIONS IN OUR TOWN.

>> I NEED YOU TO SUM UP AND CLOSE. >> I HAVE TWO SENTENCES.

SORRY. OTHERWISE WHEN DOES IT STOP? WHEN IT'S GONE? IN CONSIDERATION OF OUR UNIQUE LITTLE DOT ON THE MAP, WE ASK THE LOT SIZE BUILD TO REMAIN

WITHIN THE CURRENT ZONING, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> SORRY I RAN OVER. >> NO PROBLEM. NEXT, MICHAEL IRIAM.

IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> MICHAEL I'M AT 4860 STOUT ROAD.

I'M AT THE END OF THE ROAD WHERE THE ROAD IS FALL AWING PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THEREI AWING PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE N AWING PART.

EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE G AWING PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE AWING PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE A AWING PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE AWING PART.

EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE PART. EVERYONE TURNS AROUND RIGHT THERE WHICH I DON'T MIGHT.

THE ISSUE TO ME IS THE LACK OF RURAL ISLAND. I WAS IN DESOTO AND YOU SEE WHAT'S HAPPENED THERE. AND WAXAHACHIE, NOW YOU CAN'T EVEN DRIVE THROUGH THERE.

AND I BOUGHT A HOUSE IN MIDLOTHIAN AND WE DO NEED THE GROWTH, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE IDEALISM OF WHAT MIDLOTHIAN IS, TO ME, THAT'S WHAT IMPORTANT, THAT'S WHAT SELLS IT.

MY PLACE IS 5 ACRES AND I WOULD LOVE THAT ON THE OTHER END OF THE STREET WITH 3 OR 4 ACRES.

IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF PERSON WHO LIVES ON 4 ACRES, NOT THE SAME PERSON WHO LIVES ON 3/4 OF A LOT. I UNDERSTAND THE TRANSITION BUT WOULDN'T IT BE BET TORE HAVE THIS RURAL AND HAVE A PIECE OF MIDLOTHIAN FOR THEM TO SEE, TOO, THAT'S BEAUTIFUL.

I'M SORRY, BUT I LOVE MIDLOTHIAN. I HAVE ONLY BEEN HERE TWO-AND-A-HALF YEARS. I LOVE THE LAND, THE PEOPLE, THE HOUSES.

LIKE WHERE SHE'S TALKING ABOUT AS FAR AS THE ADDITIONS OVER TO THAT, GOING TOWARDS MIDLOTHIAN,

[01:05:03]

DEVELOP IT BUT IT'S BEEN ZONED THAT WAY, SHOULD IT CHANGE, NO. DO I THINK IT'S MORE DESIRABLE LEAVING IT THAT WAY? MAYBE NOT THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR BUT WHAT DO YOU HAVE FOR THE KIDS LIVING IN MIDLOTHIAN? I WANTED TO LEAVE DESOTO AND WAXAHACHIE IS GETTING SO PACKED.

LOOK AT CEDAR HILLS? IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THEY WANTED THE TAX MONEY.

WE COULD USE THE TAX MONEY IN MIDLOTHIAN. I PAY MORE TAXES THAN I HAVE EVER PAID ANYWHERE ELSE BUT I DON'T MIND IT BECAUSE MIDLOTHIAN, TO ME IS DIFFERENT THAN ALL SURROUNDING, IS DIFFER THAN ALL SURROUNDING AREAS. I DO WANT MAYS TO GO AHEAD WITH

WHAT HE WANTS TO DO BUT ALONG THE GUIDELINES THAT EXIST TODAY. >> SIR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION,

YOU DID NOT MARK ON YOUR FORM IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION. >> OPPOSITION.

>> OKAY. NEXT, MIKE MAYS? >> I DECLINE.

>> OKAY. ALSO, SIR, YOU'RE NOT MARKED. ARE YOU IN SUPPORT OR

OPPOSITION? >> I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

SO I SUPPORT. >> OKAY. WE WILL NOTE THAT, SIR.

DAN RAYFIELD. >> GOOD EVENING, I WANT TO SECOND WHAT JAMIE SAID, I

APPRECIATE YOU FOLKS WHAT YOU'RE DOING. >> IDENTIFY YOU'RES.

>> MY NAME IS DAN RAYFIELD. I LIVE AT 3232 INSTITUTE ROAD. IRSELF.

>> MY NAME IS DAN RAYFIELD. I LIVE AT 3232 INSTITUTE ROAD. I OWN THE 80 ACRES SOUTH OF THAT. I'M GOING TO PUT ON MY READERS BECAUSE I WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE Y'ALL ANYMORE. I WANT TO REEMPHASIZE THAT STOUT ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY UNIQUE. IF ANY OF YOU HAVE DRIVEN IT OR LOOKED AT THE MAPS, YOU WILL KNOW THAT. WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT, BASICALLY TWO THINGS.

DOWN NOT WEEDS, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE SOMETHING. WE ONLY HAVE ONE POINT OF ACCESS TOO PLAIN VIEW ROAD. I SPOKE WITH YOUR FIRE MARSHAL ABOUT THIS IN AN EARLIER PRESENTATION I HEARD IT ALLUDED TO, BUT THERE'S A RULE ON THE BOOKS THAT SAYS FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS PURPOSES, THAT THERE'S A MAXIMUM OF 39 LOTS. WHEN THE MAYS PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED, AND I KNOW IT WILL BE, AND I'M FOR THAT, BUT I'M IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE. WHEN IT IS DEVELOPED, THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE IN THAT DEVELOPMENT ARE GOING TO BE MY NEIGHBORS AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE NEIGHBORS TO STOUT ROAD NEIGHBORS. IT'S A COMMUNITY. AFTER IT'S DONE, IF IT FOLLOWS THROUGH THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY PLATTED, THERE'S GOING TO BE 58 RESIDENTS ON STOUT ROAD AND AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S MORE THAN THE 39 THAT IT CALLS FOR. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS INTERNAL DEBATE IN THE CITY ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE, ABOUT THE FACT THAT WHETHER IT COUNTS OR WHETHER IT DOESN'T AND IT APPEARS IT WAS INTERPRETED NARROWLY. WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT WAS COMPLETED, THERE'S STILL ONLY GOING TO BE ABOUT 3/10 OF A MILE, ONE WAY IN AND OUT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. EVEN IF SOMEONE INTERPRETED THAT VERY NARROWLY, I WOULD SIB MITT TO YOU THAT'S A DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE WHETHER IT APPLIES TO THEYOU THAT'S A DISTT A DIFFERENCE WHETHER IT APPLIES TO THE DTO YOU THAT'S A DISTINC WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE WHETHER IT APPLIES TO TWITHOUT A DIFFERENC APPLIES TO TDISTINCTION WITHOUTE WHETHER IT APPLIES TO THE DEVELTO YOU THAT'S A DISTINCTIO WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE WHETHER IT APPLIES TO TYOU THAT'S A DISTINT A DIFFERENCE WHETHER IT APPLIES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OR TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UNDERSTAND THE INTEND TO THAT IS TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO EMERGENCY SERVICES. IT'S JUST SELF-EVIDENT THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKED AT AS A NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHOLE. I WANT TO MAKE ONE OTHER POINT AND IT'S BEEN ALLUDED TO BY MIKE AND SALLY, TOO. WE'RE CURRENTLY ZONED AG BUT WE RECOGNIZE WE'RE IN THE RURAL MODULE AND I'M FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT I WANT IT TO STAY IN THAT 3-ACRE MINIMUM. I DID SOMETHING THAT I'M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVEN'T DONE HERE.

I READ ENVISION MIDLOTHIAN AS I WAS PREPARING FOR THIS. IT WAS A PRETTY DARNED IMPRESSIVE PIECE OF WORK. I'M SURE THERE'S HUNDREDS OF HOURS THAT WENT INTO IT.

[01:10:05]

I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY, LIKE SALLY SAID, MAKE IT STOP HERE.

FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE ZONING THAT YOU HAVE. IT'S THERE FAR REASON.

I GIST ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO SAY IT'S ENOUGH AND THOSE 3-ACRE LOTS SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

NEXT WE HAVE DAVID DAY. COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> MY NAME IS DAVID DAY, I LIVE AT 4851 STOUT ROAD, RIGHT AT THE END OF THE MAINTAINED ROAD SO I HAVE A SHARED DRIVEWAY WITH 4841 STOUT ROAD AND THE OTHER ROAD GOES OFF BY THE LAKE. CAN'T SAY MUCH MORE THAN WHAT THEY MY NEIGHBOR HAVES SAID ABOUT THIS. WE WANT TO TRY TO KEEP IT AT THE CURRENT LOT SIZE ADD 3 TO 4 ACRES. THE ROAD'S GETTINGT4 ACRES.

THE ROAD'S GETTING CORN UP AS IT IS. IT'S NOT A WELL MAINTAINED ROAD.

THE TRASH TRUCK COMES ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT. HE TURNS AROUND IN FRONT OF MY ROAD AND THAT ROAD IS BARELY AS WIDE AS MY PICKUP TRUCK, NOW. AND WITH ALL THE RAIN WE HAVE HAD AND ALL THE RUN OFF, I TELL PEOPLE I HAVE A HOUSE ACROSS THE ROAD FROM A LAKE, THIS YEAR I HAD LAKE FRONT PROPERTY. THE LAKE OVERFLOWED THIS YEAR. IT OVERFLOWED BACK INTO THE FLOOD PLANE THAT'S RIGHT ADJACENT. WE HAVE A REALLY NICE NEIGHBORHOOD, ENOUGH SPACE OUT THERE THAT YOU STILL FEEL LIKE YOU'RE IN THE COUNTRY.

I MOVED DOWN HERE 4 YEARS AGO FROM GRAPEVINE BECAUSE I HAD TO GET OUT OF THE CITY AND HAD TO GET MORE OF A RURAL AREA. I MOVED TO TEXAS FROM TENNESSEE WHERE I HAD 2 ACRES THAT LOOKS A LOT LIKE WHAT I LIVE ON RIGHT NOW. IF WE KEEP BUILDING HOUSES, IT'S NOT GOING TO LOOK THAT WAY. MY WIFE WANTED TO MOVE BACK TO TENNESSEE UNTIL WE FOUND THIS ACREAGE SO NOW SHE'S HAPPY OUT HERE. IF WE HAD THIS MANY LOTS OUT THERE, IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE GETTING IN AND OUT FOR THOSE OF US AT THE END OF

STOUT ROAD. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

RICHARD GONZALES. >> I'M RICK GONZALES AND YOU LISTENED TO MY WIFE SALLY.

I'M AT 4640 STOUT ROAD AND I HAVE OTHER CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE WILDLIFE.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS OPPOSED TO THE SHIFT THAT WILL BE IMPOSED ON THE WILDLIFE.

THEY'RE UNDER SIEGE FROM ALL DRECKS SIR ROUNDING US. WE SEE BALD EAGLES CYCLE THROUGH AND RETURN ALONG WITH OTHER MIGRATING SPECIES. THE WILDLIFE IS COUNTLESS.

THE IMPACT FROM CONSTRUCTION ON WILDLIFE HABITAT AND THEIR ABILITY TO FIND WATER AND FOOD IS INCREASING EVERYWHERE. LARGE LOTS WOULD REDUCE LOSS OF TREES AND GRASS LINE.

RATIONALIZING CHANGING THE RURAL ZONING BECAUSE OF ITS BORDERS, THE FUTURE LAND MAP USE CONTAINING A DIFFERENT ZONING ISN'T COGNATE. IF YOU LOOK AT A PIECE OF LAND WE'RE DISCUSSING AND THE AMOUNT OF RURAL ZONING THAT BORDERS IT, THE RURAL MODULE CLEARLY OUT WEIGHS THE URBAN. IF OUR TRUSTED ELECTED OFFICIALS SAYIF OUR TRUSTED ELECTED OFFICS SAY YES BECAUSE IT MAY [INAUDIBLE] MAY BE SOME DAY, WHEN DO THEY SAY NO? IT APPEARS THAT ZONES AND BOUNDARIES BE NOTHING IF THEY AREN'T UPHELD AND NOT BASED ON WHAT SOMEONE ELSE IS DOING. RETAINING RURAL LAND WAS PART OF THE ENVISION COMMITTEE.

THE LEADERS OF THE MIDLOTHIAN NOW MAY MAKE SOME GOOD DECISIONS TO GROW THE TOWN AS WELL AS MAKE IT ATTRACT I HAVE TO PEOPLE FROM ALL AROUND WITH DIFFERENT CHOICES.

[01:15:03]

CONVENIENCES IN A SMALL TOWN. WHO DOESN'T WANT THAT? >> OKAY, SIR, AND I INTENDED TO ASK YOUR WIFE A QUESTION AND I DIDN'T. I WILL ASK YOU AND IF YOU CAN'T ANSWER IT, WHILE ASK HER. SHE MENTIONED SUBMITTING 30 LETTERS OF OPPOSITION.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> IT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY?

>> YES. >> OKAY. I DON'T SEE THAT.

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND THE COMMISSION HAD A COPY OF IT AND I DO HAVE THEM UP HERE. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S EVERYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> MEIGS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

AND/OR ACTION. >> I WOULD LIKE IF STAFF COULD LOCATE A GOOGLE MAP TO WHERE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE -- A BETTER VIEW OF HOW FAR THIS IS DOWN STOUT ROAD AND WHERE IT LAYS AS IT SITS WITH PLAIN VIEW SO WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THAT AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION. MARCOS, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER MY QUESTION.

DO WE HAVE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS IN MIDLOTHIAN THAT HAVE BEEN RECENTLY APPROVED THAT YOU CAN POINT ME TO THAT SET DOWN A ROAD SITTING IN MIDTH AND ROAD WOULD LIKE THIS WITH ONE POINT OF ENTRANCE THAT'S BEEN MENTIONED. DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SETTING LIKE THIS THAT'S BEEN APPROVED RECENTLY? LIKE WITHIN THE LAST 5 YEARS?

>> NOT WITHIN THE LAST 5 YEARS. NOT THAT ONLY HAS ONE ACCESS POINT.

>> WE WOULD HAVE TO DO A STUDY BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT WAS THE CONDITION OF EACH ROAD IN WHEN EACH DEVELOPMENT WAS APPROVED. THERE ARE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS, YOU CAN EVEN ARGUE LAGO VISTA THAT WAS JUST APPROVED MINUTING AGO. DEPENDING ON THE ROAD CONDITION, I CAN'T SAY YES.

>> I'M JUST THINKING OF STOUT ROAD. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ROAD

CONDITIONS WERE AT THE TIME. >> APPLE LANE IS PROBABLY -- APPLE LANE ENDED UP BEING ABOUT FOUR LOTS, I THINK, ULTIMATELY. ONE EXISTING HOME AND THREE NEW LOTS BUT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE

THE LAST -- >> THAT POINT I GUESS. THIS IS HOW MANY LOTS IN THIS

DEVELOPMENT? >> 34 NEW RESIDENTIAL, 35 WITH THE EXISTING ONE THERE.

>> SO POINT ME ON THE GOOGLE SO I CAN GET IN MY MIND WHERE THIS SITS IN RELATION TO HOW THE OLD PLAIN VIEW ROAD RUNS. WHERE DOES STOUT ROAD START ON PLAIN VIEW?

>> RIGHT THERE. SO STOUT IS GOING TO TRAVEL SOUTH AND THEN IN THE EAST AND WEST DIRECTION. PLAIN VIEW IS GOING TO COME DOWN STOUT AND IT MAKES THAT

90-DEGREE TURN. >> THAT'S THE OLD FLOW? >> YES.

>> OKAY, GO AHEAD. SO PLAIN VIE, AGAIN, W, AGAIN, T 90-DEGREE TURN.

[INAUDIBLE] THIS AREA HERE IS GOING TO BE REALIGNED AND IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE DOWN.

[01:20:07]

I'M ASSUMING WE CALL THAT PLAIN VIEW ROAD. >> YES.

>> THE NEW EXTENSION OF PLAIN VIEW ROAD IS IN THAT DIRECTION. THIS WOULD STILL BE STOUT

ROADMENT >> AND WHERE DOES THIS PROPERTY LIE WITHIN>> AND WHERE DOES THI

LIE WITHIN WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? >> RIGHT THERE.

>> IN REALITY, THIS PROPERTY WOULD DO REAL WELL IF DIAMOND J WAS DEVELOPING OUT AT THIS POINT. [INAUDIBLE] ONCE DIAMOND J COMES IN, THAT WOULD CHANGE THIS AREA HERE. THAT'S BEEN AN ANGST, IF YOU WILL, ON THE PART OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE THERE IS A BIG QUESTION ABOUT WHAT STOUT ROAD BECAUSE THERE IS A BIG QUESTION ABOUT WHAT STOUT ROAD IS CLASSIFIED. WHOSE IS IT? THE FAMILY BELIEVES THEY DEDICATED IT TO THE COUNTY A LONG TIME AGO AND THAT IT MET COUNTY STANDARDS AT THE TIME.

THERE'S NOT A CLEAR LINE OF SIGHT AS IT RELATES TO THE HISTORY OF THE FILING OF PROPER FORMS AT THE TIME BUT THAT'S PART OF THE COMPLICATIONS OF THE PIECE OF REAL ESTATE WHICH EXIST AND HAS EXISTED PROPER DURING A LOT OF THE SUBDIVISION. IN FACT, THE MAZES SOLD SOME OF

THESE PARCELS TO SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS. >> THE CITY SAYS STOUT ROAD --

>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK, YOU NEED TO COME UP AND SIGN A FORM. PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

>> YEAH, IT IS A CITY ROAD. ONCE WE ANNEXED THAT AREA, THIS ROAD IS CONSTRUCTED BY THE COUNTY AND WHEN THIS AREA CAME INTO THE CITY, THE CITY OVERTOOK UP TO ABOUT THIS POINT RIGHT HERE. AFTER THAT, IT BECOMES PRIVATE. THE COUNTY CONSTRUCTED IT.

20-FOOT WIDE ASPHALT. OUR STANDARD TYPICALLY IS 28. WITH THE DIAMOND J, I CAN ADD THAT IN THERE -- [INAUDIBLE]. THIS SOUTH SIDE IS STILL CONSIDERED [INDISCERNIBLE] PROPERTY. THIS SIDE RIGHT HERE, THERE ARE PLANS TO HAVE ENTRANCES COMING OFF. ONCE THEY DO REDEVELOP THIS AREA HERE, THEY WILL REALIGN AND REDEVELOP THAT ROAD SECTION AND THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL ENTRANCES.

WE HAVE SEEN SOME VERY PRELIMINARY DRAWINGS. WE HAD A PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTED TO US BUT IT'S NOT GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

>> WE'RE STILL UNDER REVIEW. THERE'S AN ECOM PORTION, IS THAT GOING TO GO TOGETHER OR IS IT

ALL ECOM? >> IT'S ALL ECOM. THE PD THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY

REFERRING TO -- >> SHOW ME WHERE STOUT ROAD ENDS AT THE LAKE.

I HAVE BEEN DOWN THERE, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A VISUAL. I'M TRYING TO ENVISION IN MY

[01:25:08]

MIND -- >> SIR, SIR, I'M SORRY, PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

I'M NOT TRYING TO BE RUDE TO YOU, I'M JUST FOLLOWING THE RULES.

>> I GUESS WHY I'M HAVING A TOUGH TIME ON THIS ONE, HONESTLY, I'M THINKING BACK EVEN ABOUT LAPAZ. THEY WERE LOCKED IN WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF WE WANTED THEM TO FINISH POPPY? WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THEY HAD TWO ACCESSES GOING IN?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND. >> IF YOU LOOK AT LAPAZ, WHEN IT WAS APPROVED WE TOOK INTO

ACCOUNT THAT RULE AS WELL. >> I DIDN'T MEAN FOR Y'ALL TO HAVE TO PULL IT UP, I'M JUST

THINKING OF OTHER CASES. >> RIGHT HERE, IF YOU -- [INAUDIBLE]

>> THAT'S WHERE I WAS HEADED NEXT. WE HAVE A LOT BARRIER WHICH IS

39. >> 39 LOTS >> AND THIS IS BELOW THAT SO IT

MAKES A SLIGHT ALLOWANCE. >> THAT RULE GOES -- IF YOU WERE TO APPLY THAT RULE RULE AS IT'S APPLYING TONIGHT, LAPAZ NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. THERE ARE MULTIPLE DEVELOPMENTS THAT IT NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED BUT PHASE THREE, 39 LOTS WAS PERMITTED BUT IF YOU'RE TAKING THAT RULE TONIGHT, THAT WOULD HAVE EXCITED THAT 39 LOT REQUIREMENT.

>> SO BECAUSE THIS IS AN EXTENSION, THE ONE ENTRY IS LOOKED AT AS PERMISSIBLE.

>> CORRECT, THAT'S THE LEGAL INTERPRETATION. >> AND THAT IS THE

INTERPRETATION, I GET IT. >> SIR. I'M TRYING TO READ INTO ALL

THIS. >> CAMPUS EXCUSE ME, CAN I SAY SOMETHING --

>> NO, PUBLICEXCUSE ME, CAN I S SOMETHING -- >> NO, PUBLIC RULING IS CLOSED.

SIR, I'M SORRY, BUT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED >> FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION FOR THE COMMISSION, I WAS ASKED TO REVIEW THE ORDINANCES AND THE FIRE CODE IN RELATION TO THIS QUESTION. THE WAY THE LANGUAGE SPEAKS, THESE PROPERTIES, THE ADDITIONAL LOTS AND PARCELS WHICH ARE NOT -- THEY'RE PARCELS, MANY OF THEM ARE NOT PLATTED LOTS, ARE NOT PART OF THE SAME DEVELOPMENT NOR ARE THEY PART OF THE SAME SUBDIVISION.

THE WAY SOME MAY VIEW THAT AS A NARROW WAY OF VIEWING IT.

THAT'S THE THE WAY READS AND THAT'S THE LANGUAGE USED IN THE ORDINANCES AND THE CODES.

WHILE I FIND MYSELF HAVING TO DISAGREE WITH OUR FIRE MARSHAL, THAT'S HOW I, AS THE CITY

ATTORNEY, INTERPRETED IT. >> ONE OTHER QUICK THING. WITHEN THE RULES THAT WE MUST APPLY IN OUR MEETINGS FORMAT SO THE GALLERY UNDERSTANDS. IT'S NOT THAT OUR CHAIRMAN IS NOT WANTING YOU TO SPEAK. WE HAVE VERY STRICT GUIDELINES WE HAVE TO FOLLOW AND WHEN THE PUBLIC FORMAT IS CLOSED, WE CAN'T LEGALLY ALLOW FOLKS TO COMMENT FROM THE GALLERY.

>> WELL, I WILL LEAVE THAT UP TO THE CHAIR AND THE COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THE DECORUM BUT TYPICALLY, MOST MEETINGS, IF THEY RUN IN AN ORDERLY FASHION, DON'T ALLOW BLURTING OUT FROM THE AUDIENCE. IF THEY WISH TO BE RECOGNIZED, IF THE CHAIRMAN AT THAT POINT WISHES IN HIS DISCRETION TO RECOGNIZE HIM AND THE BOARD WISHES TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU HAVE THAT DISCRETION, BUT YOU HAVE TO DEFER TO THE CHAIR AS THE OPERATOR, THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE MEETING TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT RULE IS GOING TO BE

>> AND I APPRECIATE THAT, COUNSEL, AN TO YOU FOLKS OUT THERE.

I'M NOT TRYING TO BE RUDE OR CUT ANYBODY SHORT BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME ORDER TO THE MEETING

[01:30:03]

KEEP ORDER IN THE MEETING. >> SO GETTING AWAY FROM THE SAFETY POINT FOR A MOMENT,

[INDISCERNIBLE] WITH ECOM, THE ECOM PROPERTY IS WHAT I MEANT. >> RIGHT.

>> ARE THE ROADS GOING TO HANDLE THIS TRAFFIC? >> THAT'S OUR INTERPRETATION,

THE ROAD WILL HANDLE THIS, YES, SIR, AT THIS POINT. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I GOT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? IF NOT, THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION.

TRENTON, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID THERE WERE 16 NOTICES SENT OUT.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> 16 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT. AND THAT'S ONLY WITHIN THE 200-FOOT BUFFER AND FROM THERE, WE DID RECEIVE SOME LETTERS IN FAVOR THAT THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE TO US BUT WE ALSO RECEIVED A PETITION IN OPPOSITION AS WELL AND A LOT OF

THOSE FOLLOW OUTSIDE THE 200-FOOT BUFFER. >> BUT THOSE WITHIN THE 200-FEET

OUT OF THAT 16, THERE WERE 8 OF THOSE THAT WERE IN OPPOSITION? >> YES, SIR, AND THAT TAKES UP WITHIN THAT BUFFER AREA, THAT'S ABOUT 75% IN OPPOSITION, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A SUPERMAJORITY

TYPE OF SITUATION. >> THAT WAS MY QUESTION. >> YES, SIR.

>> THAT WAS MY QUESTION BECAUSE OF THE PERCENTAGE, IT DOES TRIGGER A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE,

RIGHT? >> YES, SIR. >> AND THAT'S ONLY A SUPERMAJORITY IN A COUNCIL SETTING BECAUSE WE'RE ADVISORY, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> SO NOT HERE?

JUST A MAJORITY VOTE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> OKAY. >> SO ALL CIVIL REVIEW AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF, THE ROADWAY AT THAT TIME COULD BE REVIEWED AND BE DEEMED NECESSARY FOR IMPROVEMENT IN ORDER FOR THIS TO

GO THROUGH ONCE IT REACHES CIVIL REVIEWS? >> THAT'S COMPLETELY UP TO THE CIVIL REVIEW AT THAT POINT. JUST FROM A ZONING STANDPOINT, ARE THEY MEETING THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS? ARE THEY MEETING OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE? THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FROM THAT STANDPOINT BUT REALLY JUST FROM A PLANNING ORDINANCE STANDPOINT. THIS HAS TO GO THROUGH CIVIL REVIEW.

THEY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DRAINAGE. ROADWAY, FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM OUR ENGINEERS AGAIN, THEIR CONCERN WAS THAT INTERSECTION OF PLAINVIEW AND STOUT ROAD.

THAT SEEMED TO BE THE CONCERN. >> NO, SIR, I'M SORRY. NO.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. I'M SORRY, SIR. >> MARCOS, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, EVEN IF IT GOES THROUGH CIVIL AND THAT'S WHY I POSE THE QUESTION THAT STAFF'S CONSIDERATION AND VIEWS THAT THIS ROAD WILL HANDLE THE TRAFFIC, IT DOESN'T SOUND TO ME THAT THERE WILL BE ANY OBLIGATION, EVEN WITHIN CIVIL, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF STAFF FEELS THIS WAY, YOU TALK WITH ENGINEERING SO THERE'S A HIGH LIKELIHOOD THAT THERE WILL BE NO NEEDED ROAD IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH CIVIL SIDE. AM I MISSING SOMETHING?

>> LOOKING AT THIS STAGE, ENGINEERS HAVE NOT SEEN THE FULL TIA, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. [INDISCERNIBLE] ALL DEVELOPMENTS THAT COME THROUGH THE PROCESS, THERE COULD BE A REQUIREMENT OF CERTAIN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ONCE IT GOES THROUGH THE CIVIL ENGINEERING PHASE ONCE THEY START PULLING OFF THE TIA REPORTS, ETC., THE DEVELOPERS KNOW THERE MIGHT BE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE ROADS. SMILIE THEY SEE THOSE MORE

[01:35:05]

DETAILEDL THEY SEE THOSE MORE DETAILED REPORTS, WE DON'T KNOW. >> MY HANG UP IS THE ROAD.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE. I CAN'T. I HAVE BEEN ON THE ROAD.

>> UNDERSTANDABLE. >> AND I CAN'T MOVE FORWARD UNLESS I KNOW SOMETHING FACTUALLY ABOUT THE ROAD. THAT'S MY PROBLEM. I LIKE THE SUBDIVISION.

I KNOW WHO THE DEVELOPER IS, DOES OUTSTANDING WORK, BUT THE ROAD HAS ME DEEPLY CONCERNED.

>> FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WE HAVE THE ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT IN THE AUDIENCE WHO COULD ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE FROM THE CITY ENGINEERING OFFICE.

>> OKAY. WHILE YOU PONDER THAT, ALMOST SAY TO YOU FOLK WHO IS HAVE ASKED TO SPEAK. WE HAVES WHO IS HAVE ASKED TO SPEAK.

WE HHAVE ASKED TO SPEAK. WE HAVE AN ADVISORY BODY.

WE JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. THE DECISION THAT AFFECTS YOU WILL COME FROM THE COUNCIL SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING HERE TONIGHT THAT CAME UP AFTER PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSE THAT HAD YOU FELT LIKE YOU NEEDED TO SPEAK, I WOULD THRONINGLY ENCOURAGE YOU WHEN THIS GOES TO COUNCIL,STRON WHEN THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, GO TO THAT MEETING AND BRING UP WHAT YOU

WERE NOT ABLE TO SPEAK TONIGHT SO YOU CAN HAVE YOUR WORD, OKAY? >> I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO

DENY. >> I SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DENY. ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AYE?

>> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED? OKAY.

[012 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the development and use regulations of Planned Development District NO. 69 (PD-69); as adopted by Ordinance No. 2014-26 and amended by Ordinance No. 2021-43; adopting a site plan, elevations and landscape plan for Lot 2, Block B of Midlothian Business Park. The property is located on the north side of U.S. Hwy 67, between Miller Road and Discovery Street (commonly known as 3090 and 3200 Challenger Drive) (Case No. Z38-2021-156).]

2014-26 AND AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2021-43; ADOPTING A SITE PLAN, ELEVATIONS AND LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR LOT 2, BLOCK B OF MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF U.S. HWY 67, BETWEEN MILLER ROAD AND DISCOVERY STREET (COMMONLY KNOWN AS 3090 AND 3200

CHALLENGER DRIVE) >> CAN WE GIVE IT A MINUTE FOR THE ROOM TO CLEAR OUT?

THE MICS PICK UP ERG. >> SURE.. >> V.

>> ER. >> YT. >> I.

>> N. >> G. >> SURE..

>> SURE.. >> SURE.. >> HI.

>> N. >> G. >> SURE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. SO THE REQUESTED CHANGING PERTAIN TO THREE ITEMS SPECIFICALLY, VERTICAL ARTICULATION OF THE BUILDING, THE ENTREE AREA, THE ENROACHMENT OF PARKING IN AN EASEMENT AND ALSO THE SHIFTING OF AN ACCESS EASEMENT ESTABLISHED BY PLAT. AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT RIGHT NOW, COMMISSIONERS, WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET, THE APPLICANT PROVIDED US A NEW, READVISED ELEVATION SHEET AND YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT AT YOUR SEAT RIGHT NOW. ORIGIN FALLY WE WERE LOOKING AT ABOUT 123-FEET BETWEEN THE TWO FOOL VERTICAL OFFSET SEPARATIONS.

FOR BUILDING ONE, THEY'RE LOOKING AT 286. IT WAS A MISTAKE ORIGINALLY FROM WHAT THEY PROVIDED TO US. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS AWARE THAT THE 2-FOOT OFFSET, YOU WOULD HAVE THAT FLAT WALL CONTINUE ALL THE WAY DOWN FOR ABOUT 286-FEET AND THEN ANOTHER 2-FOOT OFFSET. IT ALSO DOES STATE THAT THE ENTRANCES SHALL CONTAIN TWO OF THE FOUR LISTED ON THE SCREEN, WHAT I SHOW DOWN HERE, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THE FRONT ENTRANCE AREAS, THE WAY THE ORDINANCE READS RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE TO ACCOMPLISH TWO OF THESE

[01:40:02]

THEY WERE LOOKING AT TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH NUMBER FOUR. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION OF WHAT NUMBER FOUR ULTIMATELY MEANS. FORMLINER IS SOMETHING THAT'S USED TO CREATE MORE ATTRACT I H WALLS.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT INDICATES THAT FORMLINER SHOULD CONSIST OF THE ENTIRE AREA.

THEY'RE WANTING TO USE IT AS MORE OF A WAINSCOT AROUND THE FEATURE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY WILL BE SEEKING, LOOKING FOR. THE LAST REQUEST WOULD ALLOW PARKING TO ENCROACH WITHIN AN EXISTING 45-FOOT LANDSCAPE YOU TILT EASEMENT.

YOU CAN SEE THE AREA HERE THAT I SHOWED IN GREEN. THIS IS WHERE THEY WOULD BE ENCROACHING AND THEN OVER ON BUILDING TWO, YOU'VE GOT THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.

ULTIMATELY, BOTH OF THOSE COMBINED TOGETHER COMES OUT TO ABOUT 1300 SQUARE FEET.

ONE ADDITIONAL ITEM IS THAT THAT EXISTING 30-FOOT ACCESS EASEMENT, THAT WOULD BE SHIFTED FROM THE LOCATION FURTHER UP ALONG WHAT THEY'RE DEEMING NOW A 26-FOOT WIDE FIRE LANE.

IT WOULD GO FROM A 30-FOOT WIDE EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT TO A 26-FOOT WIDE STILL EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT, IT WOULD JUST SHORTEN UP A LITTLE BIT. WE DID SEND EIGHT LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY WRITTEN RESPONSES FROM PROPERTY OWNERS.

BEING THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ENCOURAGE DESIGN STANDARDS, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL AT

THIS POINT AND WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> AND LET ME ADD ONE ADDITIONAL EYE TIM ALSO. THIS DOES NOTITEM ALSO.

THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE NUMBER OF TREES PLANTED AS WELL. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TREES TO BE PLANTED AS WELL AND THAT'S TO CREATE THAT BUFFER BETWEEN THE HIGHWAY AND THESE INDUSTRIAL

USES. >> YOU SAID STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL?

>> STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? >> YES. >> SIR, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK?

>> YES, SIR. >> COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SIR.

>> THE APPLICANT HAS A SMALL PRESENTATION THEY WOULD LIKE TO SHOW ALSO.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> DO YOU WANT TOO GO AHEAD AND PLAY THAT AND I CAN TALK AFTER

THAT? >> HELLO, MY NAME IS JOHN BUNTON.

I LIVE AT [INDISCERNIBLE] IN DALLAS, TEXAS. WE'RE A DEVELOPER THAT DOES PRIMARILY INDUSTRIAL -- WELL, WE HAVE ALL SORTS OF BUSINESSES, DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE DO, APARTMENTS, RETAIL, I REPRESENT THE INDUSTRIAL SIDE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REALTY.

WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF PURCHASING THE REMAINING LAND IN MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK FROM THE EDC, ALL 55 ACRES. THAT WOULD BE THE VERY TOP CORNER ON MILLER ROAD.

THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT AND THEN THE LAND COMING UP ON THAT SIDE RIGHT THERE AS WELL. WE'RE SCHEDULED TO CLOSE ON THE LAND IN TWO PART CLOSING, ONE AFTER WE RECEIVE A PERMIT OR APPROVAL FOR THE ZONING HERE ON THE FIRST SECTION, THE 20 ACRES HERE, AND THEN WE CLOSE IN NOVEMBER ON THE OTHER TWO SECTIONS.

IT WAS JUST A TWO STAGE CLOSING BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF LOANS, ONE IS A LAND

[01:45:01]

THE FIRST BUILDING ON THE LEFT IS 189,000 AND THE SECOND IS 160.

WE'RE TRYING TO CATER TO TENANTS IN THE 22,000 TO 25,000 RANGE UP TO TAKING ONE WHOLE BUILDING IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT, 189, WE THOUGHT TALKING TO THE POSSIBLE TENANTS AND THE BROKERAGE PEOPLE REPRESENTING RAIL PORT AND OTHER AREAS AROUND TOWN THAT THE 189 WOULD BE A GOOD DIVISIBLE BY THREE. THAT'S WHY THAT 3WI8DING WAS DESIGNED WITH THREE ENTRIES INT DESIGNED WITH THREE ENTRIES INTO IT.

THE NEXT WAS DESIGNED WITH MULTIPLE ENTRIES TO CATER TO 22,900 WHICH WOULD BE THE SMA SMALLEST DIVIDED INTO SIX DIFFERENT TENANTS IN HOW YOU GO ACROSS. THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO.

AS I SAID, THE BUILDINGS WOULD BE MULTITENANT GOING AFTER SMALLER TENANT USE WHICH WE FEEL IS THE PERFECT COME PAINPANION L PORT ACROSS THE STREET. YOU HAVE MALOOF WHICH REPLACED TOYS R US. YOU HAVE TARGET, GOOGLE AND QUIK TRIP.

WE'RE TRYING TO CATER TO THE SMALLER TENANTS. WE THINK THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF DEMAND IN TENANTS BETWEEN SOUTH DALLAS, MID CITIES, GRAND PRAIRIE AND ARLINGTON WHO LIVE DOWN HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN AND THEY DRIVE EVERY DAY UP NORTH AND WE THINK A LOT OF THEM WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEIR BUSINESSES IN THIS PART BACK IN THEIR HOMETOWNS AND THEN SEND WORKERS OR PEOPLE LIKE THAT FOR WHATEVER THEY'RE DOING BACK TO THE NORTH SO WE THINK WE WILL BE VERY SUCCESSFUL IN TRYING TO CATER TO THE LOCAL OWNERS AND BUSINESSES. AS STAFF SAID TO YOU, WE'RE SEEKING THREE CHANGES IN THE ZONING. FIRST IS THE LANDSCAPE, BEING ABLE TO PARK IN THE LANDSCAPE EASEMENT. WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED, YOU COULD NOT PARK ON THE SIDE CLOSEST TO 67. WHEN WE LAID THE BUILDINGS OUT, IT DIDN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE FOR US TO NOT BE ABLE TO PARK ON SIDE OF THE ROAD.

BASED ON HOW WE LAID THE BUILDINGS OUT, TO HAVE PARKING IN THE BACK YOU WOULD HAVE LARGE LANDSCAPED AREAS WITHIN THE BUILDING THAT WOULD NOT BE UTILIZED AND THEN TO MAKE THE LAND HAVE A BETTER LAND USE FOR US IN GETTING AS MUCH AS WE COULD.

WE THOUGHT THE CHANGING ENDEAVOR IN MOVING IT NORTH A LITTLE BIT HWOUWOULD BE BETTER SO WHEN YOUK AT THIS, AS STAFF SHOWED YOU, WE'RE PARKING IN ABOUT 1400 SQUARE FEET OF THE EASEMENT. BUT WE'RE GIVING BACK 14,000 FEET IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

THE SECOND HAS TO DO WITH THE VERTICAL ARTICULATION. AS YOU SAW IN WHAT WE'RE DOING ON THE VERTICAL ARTICULATION IS THAT SEVERAL PANELS WE'RE BUMPING THOSE PANELS OUT SO YOU DON'T HAVE A STRAIGHT LINE ACROSS AND I TOTALLY GET THAT AND UNDERSTAND THAT.

WE'RE BUMPING THEM OUT ON THE SAME PIER SO THEY'RE OFFSET AND AS YOU SAW ON THE VIDEO THAT WE SHOWED, YOU COULD SEE HOW THE PANELS WERE BUMPED OUT A LITTLE BIT.

WE DON'T DO THAT IN THE CENTER OF THE BUILDINGS BECAUSE IT JUST GETS TOO BUSY.

[01:50:07]

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THE LOOK AND THE LANDSCAPING. WHEN YOU DO THOSE TWO THINGS, BECAUSE THEY BRING THEIR STAFF, A MIX OF MEN AND WOMEN, IT NEEDS TO BE LIT NICELY AND LOOK GOOD OR THEY WON'T COME AND THAT'S OUR INTENTION IS TO MAKE THE BUILDINGS LOOK GOOD.

FROM THE HIGHWAY, WE THINK THIS WILL LOOK REALLY GOOD. THIS IS A SIMILAR SIGN UP IN PLANO AND I'M NOT SAYING PLANO IS SOME GREAT PLACE BY IT'S A TYPE OF BUILDING THAT WE HAVE DONE FOR SMALLER TENANTS THAT LOOKS GOOD AND ATTRACTS THE TENANTS THAT WE WANT TO COME INTO THE SPACE. ON THE OWN TENTRIES, WE THOUGHT WAY THAT READS WHEN WE HAD OUR DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, WE THATH WAINSCOT WAS THE WORDTHOUGHT WA USED IN THAT AND WE THOUGHT THE WAINSCOT WOULD HAVE A BREAK IN THE ARTICULATION SO THAT'S WHY WE PUT THE FORM LINER IN AT THE ENTRANCES. WE PROVIDED A LOT OF WINDOWS IN THIS SPACE SO WE CAN HAVE THE OFFICES UP FRONT AND THEN HAVE ALL THE AREA IN THE BACK FOR THEM.

SO THOSE ARE THE THREE THINGS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

I'M OPEN FOR QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR.

>> YES, SIR. >> KYLE? I CAN'T MAKE YOUR LAST NAME OUT.

>> JUST KYLE. >> THAT KYLE. OKAY.

HELLO, KYLE, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF MIDLOTHIAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WE SUBMITTED OUR LETTER IN SUPPORT, HOWEVER, IT WAS I GUESS TODAY AFTER OUR BOARD MEETING YESTERDAY, SO AS JOHN SAID, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A VERY GOOD PROJECT FOR THE PARK AND, ONE, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PARK, THE PARK WAS PUT IN PLACE OVER 5 YEARS AGO.

AT THAT TIME, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS WERE DEVELOPED AND I THINK THE PARK WAS DEVELOPED OUT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY OVER THE 5 YEARS AS WE INITIALLY PUT IN THE PARK AND ULTIMATELY BUILD IT OUT. THE PARK IN ADDITION TO THE ZONING ALSO HAS RESTRICTIVE COVE COVE NANCE THAT WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT AND HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS THAT WE WOULD DO. RATHER THAN TAKING AND CHANGING THE CCNRS BEFORE APPROVAL OF COUNCIL, WHAT WE DID INSTEAD IS WE'VE TAKEN THESE ITEMS TO THE PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOCIATION BOARD SO THEY COULD GO THROUGH AND DO A PRELIMINARY REVIEW AND ALSO HAD SUN RIDER, THE OWNER OF 51% OF THE PARK, HAD THEM GO THROUGH AND REVIEW. IN THAT REVIEW, THERE WERE REALLY A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT CAME UP. ONE, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS STILL SAFE, THAT ROAD IN THE REALIGNMENT AND THOUGH IT ADDED MORE OF A DESIGN ELEMENT IN CHANGING IN ALIGNMENT, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS STILL SAFE BECAUSE OF THAT SECONDARY ACCESS EMERGENCY EGRESS THAT WE HAVE AT THAT LOCATION OF WHICH IS CONFIRMED THAT IT WAS STILL SAFE. THE OTHER ONE REALLY HAD TO DO

[01:55:03]

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

>> SURE. >> IN YOUR OPINION, THE ELEVATIONS MEET THE REMAINDER OF

THE PARK? >> THEY DON'T MEET THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE THERE.

IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, AND I WASN'T HERE WHEN THE PARK WAS ORIGIN FALLY PLANNED AND PUT TOGETHER. I TRIED TO GO BACK AND FIND GOOD INFORMATION ON WHAT WAS THERE.

I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS THE INTENTION OF HAVING MULTIPLE SMALLER BUILDINGS OF WHICH WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS, THEY MAKE MORE SENSE, RIGHT? ESPECIALLY THAT SPAN OF HAVING A SMALLER BUILDING AND THE BREAKUP, THAT IT WORKS.

MY PERSONAL OPINION, WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S BEING BUILT BEHIND AND WITH THIS BUILDING, THE MATERIALS OF THE BUILD ARING THE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE VERY DIFFERENTARING THE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE VERY DIFFRING THE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE VERY DIFFING THE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE VERY DIFFATHE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE V DIFFRTHE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE V DIFFETHE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE VY DIFF THE SAME, THEY WILL HAVE VERY DIFFERENT COMPONENTS TO THERE. THEY WON'T BE UNIFORM ALL ALONG BUT ULTIMATELY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ATTRACT IS CLASS A INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND

THAT'S WHAT THESE BUILDINGS ARE. >> OKAY. KYLE, FOLLOWING FURTHER ON THAT

QUESTION, THOSE OTHER BUILDINGS DON'T FRONT HIGH 67, DO THEY? >> THEY'RE NOT DIRECTLY ON 67

BUT THEY FACE -- >> THIS BUILDING IS BUILT, IF YOU'RE IN A CAR, IT WILL BE

BLOCKING THOSE BUILDINGS. >> CORRECT. >> SO MY ISSUE IS HOW I'M LOOKING AT THIS, THIS SETS THE TONE FOR THE PROFESSIONALISM OF WHAT MIDLOTHIAN REPRESENTS.

THAT WHERE MY LITTLE BIT OF A -- I LOOK FORWARD TO BEING ABLE TO TALK WITH THE PRESENTER AGAIN, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR HIM, BUT I PERSONALLY CAN GET PAST THE EASEMENT ENROACHMENT.

IT'S NOT A VISIBLE ISSUE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND ON A PROJECT OF THIS MASSIVE SCOPE HOW TO BYPASS THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS, WHICH, ONCE AGAIN, SET THE TONE OF WHO WE ARE I

CAN'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT'S A HANGUP. >> I THINK THE CHALLENGE HERE WITH THIS ONE AND I HAD NOT SEEN THE VIDEO FLY THROUGH BEFORE. I'M ALSO NOT AN ARCHITECT AND KIND OF HAD DISCUSSIONS OF GOING BACK AND FORTH, THE ARTICULATION, HAVING MORE ARTICULATION, I DON'T KNOW WHICH IS BETTER. ARE THOSE ARTICULATION OF OUR STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE ON PRINT? THIS ISN'T THE LAST OF THE HIGHWAY 67 FROHN TONAL BUILDINGS. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE. IF WEFRONTAGE BUILDINGS.

[02:00:02]

I WOULD JUST HATE FOR US TO PUT STAFF IN A POSITION WHERE THEY GOT THINGS IN PRINT.

I'M WILLING TO WORK WITH THE DWOERP IDEVELOPER IF THEY CAN W US.

HOW DOES STAFF FEEL ABOUT GIVING ON THE EASEMENTS A LITTLE BIT, I GET THAT PART, BUT CAN WE WORK A LITTLE BIT ON THE ARTICULATIONS WHICH THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WOULD BE MY QUESTION TO THE GENTLEMAN

WHO SPOKE BEFORE. >> THE QUESTION WOULD BE I DON'T THINK IT'S NEEDED AND THE REASON I SAY IT'S NOT NEEDED IS FIRST OFF, THIS BUILDING IS GOING TO LOOK TEN TIMES BETTER THAN ACROSS MILLER ROAD WHICH IS JUST STRUCTURAL STEEL LAYING OUT ACROSS THE GROUND.

ACROSS THE RAILWAY, THEY'RE A LARGER BOX WITH CORNER ENTRIES WITH A LITTLE MORE GLASS RIGHT AT THE ENTRY BUT YOU HAVE NO ARTICULATIONS THERE. YOU HAVE BREAKUP LIKE WE HAVE IN THE WINDOWS TO PROVIDE NATURAL LIGHT AND UNDER THAT, WE HAVE FORM LINERS TO BREAK UP SO THE LONG SPANS THAT THE ORIGINALAL ARTICULATION OR WHAT I BELIEVE WAS THE ORIGINAL ARTICULATION CODE PUT IN IS TO BREAK UP THAT LONG SPAN. WE'RE PUT LEA IN A MILLION ONE FOOTERS THAT LOOK GOOD BECAUSE YOU HAVE WINDOWS, FORM LINERS OR WHAT WE CALL REVEALS AND THELIN AND TYOU HAVE WINDOWS, FORM LINR WHAT WE CALL REVEALS AND THE FORM LINE NURSE THERE.

AND THAT BREAKS IT UP SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ONE SOLID BLOCK.

>> I'M IN FULL AGREEMENT BUT I ALSO KNOW IN DEALING WITH THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, FIRST OF ALL, MIDLOTHIAN IS DOING A LOT OF THINGS DIFFERENT, MAYBE THAT'S GOOD, MAYBE IT'S BAD.

I ALSO THINK IT'S THE HELLATHIE APPROACH TO GIVE IN SOME, THIS WOULD COST A LITTLE MORE MONEY.

WHAT WAS THERE BESIDES THE CHANGES IN FRONTAGE ARTICULATION? WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STANDARDS?

>> NO, IT WAS THIS SECTION HERE AND THERE WAS, AGAIN, IT'S ALL ABOUT INTERPRETATION OF HOW WE DEFINE IF IT'S GOING TO BE A FORM LINER PATTERN THE ENTIRE FEATURE.

HERE THEY'RE JUST DOING THE BOTTOM PART. IS THE ENTIRE FEATURE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SOMETHING MINUS THE WINDOWS AND DOORS? THAT WAS JUST MORE OF AN INTERPRETATION. WHEN I START LOOKING AT HAVING THAT BREAKUP, YOU'RE RIGHT, 123 STILL DOESN'T MEET OUR STANDARD BUT WHO IS TO SAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DOOR HERE, JUST HAVING THIS OFFSET WITH 2-FEET AND HAVING WINDOWS STILL GIVES UTE PROBABLY THE LOOK THAT COUNCILI PROBABLY THE LOOK THAT COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR WHEN THEY APPROVED THIS ORDINANCE.

AGAIN, THEY WERE DOING IT ON A MUCH NARROWER SCALE, WANTING TO SEE BUMPOUTS.

THE HORIZONTAL SIDE OF IT, THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY MEETING, IT'S JUST THAT VERTICAL SIDE.

THIS IS ALL SO SUBJECTIVE. BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER.

IT JUST DEPENDS ON -- I HAVE A CODE THAT'S WRITTEN, I HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS IT HAS TO BE THIS. SO I THINK FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE GOING TO FALL

BACK ON THE ORDINANCE >> AND THE ORDINANCE CALLS FOR EVEN MORE THAN THE 123S.

THEY WILL BE CALLING FOR LIKE A 62-FOOT. >> THERE WOULD BE MORE BUMPOUTS.

>> BUT NOT NECESSARILY DOORS AND WINDOWS. >> YES, SIR, YOU COULD NOT HAVE

ANY WINDOWS AND STILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. >> IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE

[02:05:06]

>> THE 286. THE 286 IS EXISTING ON THE BIGGER BUILDING.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT IS ON THE LARGER BUILDING >> IT SHOULD BE THE 123.

LET ME SEE IF I HAVE ANOTHER ONE. I'M SHEING 123.

SOING 123. SO TOING 123. SO TWING 123.

SO THIS IS LOOKING BACK AT -- LET'S TAKE IT FROM THIS LOCATION RIGHT HERE.

I CAN'T SAY THAT THESE, WHEN I MEASURED THEM, THEY WERE ABOUT 123 IN SEPARATION.

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN? THE BIGGER PLAN?

>> EACH OF THOSE BAYS ARE 54-FEET, SO IT'S 100. SO BETWEEN THE ENTRANCES, SO THIS IS AN ENTRANCE, THIS IS AN ENTRANCE. SO 880-FEET RIGHT THERE BETWEEN

THOSE PANELS, A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT SIDE. >> FROM THIS POINT TO THIS POINT. WHEN I WAS MEASURING IT WITH OUR MEASURING TOOLS, I WAS FINDING THAT IT WAS ABOUT 123-FEET STILL FROM THIS POINT TO THIS POINT GENERALLY SPEAKING.

MAYBE A LITTLE LESS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON A MORE MULTITENANT BUILDING WHICH HAS MORE ENTRANCES IN IT. WHEN YOU GET INTO THE BIGGER BOX --

>> SO THAT I FOLLOW YOU, THE MULTITENANT BUILDING IS GOING TO CONFORM MORE TO THE 123 RANGE? BUT WHEN YOU GET TO THE BIGGER BUILDING, IT'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT FRONTAGE STYLE.

>> CORRECT. >> I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GO ALONG WITH THAT.

>> I WILL GIVE YOU COST ESTIMATES. RIGHT NOW IT'S COSTING US $57 A SQUARE FOOT TO BUILD TODAY THIS RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW ON THE SITE, CONSTRUCTION COST.

ADD IN LAND COST AND TENANT APPROVEMENT COST. WE'RE BUILDING THIS TO A 7 CAP MAYBE A 6 AND 3 QUARTER TAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RE LUCKY, 5 ANDT QUARTER MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RE LH QUARTER CAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RE LR QUARTER CAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RE QUARTER CAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RE QUARTER CAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RQUARTER CAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'R-QUARTER CAB, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SELL IT AT 5.5, IF WE'RE LUCKY, 5 AND A QUARTER.

WHEN YOU TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT, NOW I'M STARTING TO LOWER MY SQUARE FOOT RETURN.

MY RETURN GOES DOWN TO A NUMBER THAT I MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DO IT IF STEEL AND CONCRETE AND EVERYTHING ELSE KEEP GOING THROUGH THE ROOF IN THE NEXT TWO AND A HALF MONTHS.

OUR INTENTION WAS TO START THIS BY SEPTEMBER 15TH. >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT MY PICTURE SPECKTIVE IS GOING EPETIVE IS G. I NEED TO SEESPECTIVE IS GOING . I NEED TO SEE MATING FACADE THE.

I'M WILLING TO WORK WITH YOU ON THE EASEMENT, TOTALLY GET IT. I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO HOLD YOU TO WHAT A LOT OF FOLKS WOULD CONCEDE AS WHAT'S NEEDED, WHICH IS EVERY TIME YOU SEE ONE OF THOSE COLOR CHANGES, I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO HOLD YOU TO THAT, BUT THOSE BUILDINGS NEED TO SOMEWHAT ACROSS THE WHOLE FACADE. I'M TRYING TO WORK WITH YOU BUT

THAT'S MY REQUIREMENT. >> SO MY QUESTION BACK TO YOU IS YOU WANT THIS TO BE AN ENTRY POINT IN THE CITY, WHY IN THE SAME CODE ON THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET OR THE BUILDING NEXT

DOOR? WE WILL OWN 50% OF THE PARK. >> I DO APOLOGIZE TO YOU.

I DID NOT VOTE ON THE BUILDINGS ACROSS THE STREET. I CAN ONLY DEAL WITH WHAT'S IN FRONT OF ME TODAY. I SHOULD NOT BE LIKE THAT. AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS, ALSO.

I DO KNOW THAT SOME -- I SERVED ON COUNCIL FOR THREE TERMS AND I HAVE BEEN ON PLANNING AND

[02:10:01]

WE'RE TRYING TO TALK THE ISSUE THAT IO YEARS. WE'RE TRYING TO TALK THE ISSUE THAT IUR YEARS. WE'RE TRYING TO TALK THE ISSUE THAT IS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> I HAVE ONE OTHER PERSON SIGNED UP. PATRICK CASSER.

COME AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> >> I'M TI'M THE PROJECT ARCHITER THIS. DO YOU HAVE THE OVERALL ELEVATION? RIGHT NOW YOU'RE ONLY LOOKING AT AN ELEVATION OF ONE OF THE TWO BUILDINGS AND HALF THE ELEVATION. WHAT JOHN WAS TRYING TO SAY, THERE YOU GO.

THE BOTTOM ELEVATION ON THE SHEET THERE. WE'RE TRYING TO CAREER HIERARCHY WITH THOSE ENTRANCES. WHEN WE HAD THE ORIGIN KNOLL PLAN PRESENTED LAST WEEK, WE TALKED ABOUT DOING FIVE TENANTS WITH THE BUILDING AND THAT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE WITH THE MARKET IT STARTED LOOKING LIKE WE DIDN'T FINISH THE BUILDING. WHEN WE BROUGHT IT DOWN, IT MADE MORE SENSE. I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN ABOUT BUILDING ONE AND TWO NOT BUILDING THE SAME. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE THE SAME.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A THREE TENANT BUILDING, THAT'S 184,000 SQUARE FEET, A SIX SEN NINETY BUILDINGTENANT BUILDING THAT'S 160000 SQUARE FEET.

THEY'RE DIFFERENT HEIGHTS.,000 FEET. THEY'RE DIFFERENT HEIGHTS.

BUILDING ONE. IS 32-FEET. >> SO THERE'S A 4-FOOT

DIFFERENCE? >> AND THIS BUILDING IS ALSO DEEP SORE IT'S MORE THAN 4-FEET ONCE YOU GET TO THE FACADE AT HIGHWAY 67. THAT'S WHERE THE WHOLE THING DERIVED FROM. THE HIERARCHY OF CREATING THE ENTRANCES.

>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DO UNDERSTAND I'M NOT ASKING THAT EACH ONE OF THESE FACADE CHANGES THAT IT WOULD NEED ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS AND ENTREE POINTS. I'M ONLY SAYING IT PRESENTS A FACADE TO WHERE IT ROLLS THE SAME AS YOU'RE DRIVING THROUGH THE AREA.

>> I UNDERSTAND BUT RIGHT BELOW THE 286, WHEN WE KEPT THAT PANEL AS HIGH AS THE OUTSIDE PANELS, THE ENTREE PANELS, IT LOOKED INCOMPLETE. SO WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT MAKES THE BUILDING LOOK INCOMPLETE TO MEET A RIERM OF A PDREQUIREMENT OF A PD THAT WAS SET FOR A BUSINESS PARK THAT FROM EVERYTHING WE HAVE UNDERSTOOD WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE A BUSINESS PARK AS IT'S BEING DEVELOPED.

IT WAS INTENDED TO BE SMALLER, OFFICE WAREHOUSE, MAYBE 50 THOUSAND SQUARE FOOD BUILDINGS.

MY PROJECT ARCHITECT SENT THE ELEVATION OUT TO JOHN. I DIDN'T EVEN SEE IT.

JOHN CALLED ME UP AT 8:00 BECAUSE HE LIKES TO CALL ME AND SAID WHAT THE HELL IS THIS? THIS LOOKS LIKE THE TEXAS HALL AND I SAID IT'S WAY TOO MUCH. WE MET THE REQUIREMENT OF THE

CODE BUT IT LOOKED GOOFY. I'M NOT SAYING THE PD IS GOOFY. >> BUT YOU CAN'T GET RID OF THE FACADE ON THE SMALLER BUILDING BECAUSE YOU NEED THE ACCESS POINTS.

>> EXACTLY. THEY CREATE THAT ELEVATED PIECE FOR THE SIGNAGE, FOR WAY FINDING

TO HELP A PERSON FIND THAT TENANT. >> THOSE AND POINTS OF ACCESS WILL BE THERE REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY TENANTS JOIN. SAY YOU'VE GOT ONE TENANT IN A SMALL BUILDING. YOU STILL HAVE ALL THOSE FAY SALTS AND ENTRANTS FOR THE ONE

TEN NAPPED. >> RIGHT, AND BACK TO WHAT JOHN TALKED ABOUT, THE ONE IN PLANO, FIVE ENTRANCES. A TENANT TOOK THREE OF THE ENTRANCES, WE STILL USE TWO ENTRANCES. THE OTHERS ARE UTILIZED FOR STAFF, ONE HAS A BREAK ROOM OR SOMETHING SO THEY'RE STILL UTILIZED BUT WE WANT TO CREATE THE HIERARCHY OF HERE'S THE ENTRY AND SOME OF THESE TENANTS, WE'RE SIGNING FOUR, FIVE, 10-YEAR LEASES.

[02:15:05]

>> YEAH, 7 TO 10-YEAR LEASES IN EACH SPACE. TO KEEP THE RATES AS LOW AS POSSIBLE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THOSE EXTENDED LONG TERM LEASES BASED ON COST.

IT COSTS TOO MUCH TO MOVE A COMPANY FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER.

>> THANK YOU >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> OKAY THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY. THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE SIGNED UP, SO IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE,

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

AND/OR ACTION. >> I WANT TO SPEAK HERE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THAT YOU WANT TO BE CONSISTENT, BUT HONESTLY I DON'T SEE THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE.

I REALLY DON'T. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I THINK IT LOOKS GOOD.

I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION DOWN THERE, SO I WILL LISTEN TO WHAT Y'ALL HAVE TO

SAY. I THINK IT LOOKS GOOD. >> PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION, WHATEVER YOU MAKE, IF YOU CAN BE CLEAR ON WHAT ELEVATIONS YOU'RE RECOMMENDING IF IT'S FOR

APPROVAL. >> I GUESS MY POINT WAS THAT I THINK A LOT OF THINGS THAT LOOK GOOD, WHETHER IT BE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR BUILDING STANDARDS AND ORDINANCES, I THINK A LOT OF THINGS LOOK GOOD BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE CONSISTENCY, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO STAFF AND HOW TO INTERPRET AND HOW TO DEAL WITH DEVELOPMENT. WHILE WE HAVE MORE DEVELOPMENT TO DO OUT THERE, MY MAIN POINT IN ALL THIS, WHICH IS USUALLY WHY IT'S HARD FOR ME TO FALL FAR OFF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SIDE IS ON BUILDING STANDARD SIDE ALSO TO TRY TO STAY AND WORK WITH STAFF ON WHAT THEIR ADVICE IS AND THAT'S MY CONTENT ON THIS.

I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT FAR OUT TO ADD SOME CHANGES IN FACADE TO KEEP THAT ROLLING THROUGH THE SAME BUT TO EACH HIS OWN AND I THINK THE DEVELOPER HAS VERY GOOD INTENTIONS, SO I TOTALLY

UNDERSTAND. >> OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? OKAY. WHAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE COMMISSION?

FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION. >> I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE WITH THE AMENDED ELEVATIONS.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> WAIT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THE ONE ON THE BOTTOM? >> THE ONE ON THE BOTTOM.

>> OKAY, SORRY. THANK YOU. >> I'LL SECOND IT.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION -- LET'S DO IT BY A RAISE OF HANDS.

RAISE YOUR HANDS IF YOU'RE IN FAVOR. THREE.

OKAY. OPPOSED? FOUR.

IT FAILS. 4-3. OKAY.

IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT AS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION YOUR HAND.

FOUR, OPPOSE. OPPOSED OPPOSED, T? TH THREE, THAT PASSES.

[013 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 10.79± acres out of the Alexander Jenkins Survey, Abstract No. 554, Ellis County, Texas, as described in Exhibit “A” hereto to adopt the initial zoning of said parcel as Planned Development District No. 34-A (PD-34-A)The subject property is generally located south of Mt. Zion Road and east of Ledgestone Lane (Case No. Z39-2021-158).]

[02:20:03]

ZION ROAD AND EAST OF LEDGESTONE LANE. >> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUESTING APPROVAL TO ANNEX THIS PROPERTY ON AUGUST 10TH AND ADOPT THE INITIAL ZONING AS PD34A KNOWN AS THE RESERVES OF SUMMER CREST AT THE SAME TIME.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED COMPLETELY BY PD34. THE AREA IS WITHIN WHAT WE CALL THE SUBURBAN MODULE SO THAT CALLS FOR HALF ACRE SIZED LOTS. THE PROPOSAL CALLS FOR ALL GARAGES TO BE SIDE ENTRY AS WELL. THE PROPOSAL APPEARS TO BE ABSOLUTELY COMPREHENSIVE WITH OUR PLAN. HERE'S THE SITE PLAN SHOWING -- I THINK THAT SHOT T UT OFF. SORRY ABOUT THAT. THOSE LOTS WILL RANGE FROM 23,000 TO 27,000 SQUARE FEET. HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THOSE DETAILS.

HOMES WILL BE 2400 SQUARE FEET. YOU WILL HAVE VARYING FRONT YARD SET BACKS, 25 TO 30-FOOT SET BACK DIFFERENCES, MINIMUM GARAGE SIZE 300 SQUARE FEET. YOU'RE LOOKING AT PRETTY CUSTOM DEVELOPMENT. WE DID SEND 22 LETTERS OUT TO PROPERTY LETTERS.

TO DATE WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY WRITTEN RESPONSES. ULTIMATELY, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST AN EXTENSION OF PD34 AND WHERE THE PROPOSED LOTS AND DESIGN ELEMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST AND I CAN TAKE

ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> I'M TRYING TO READ HOW MANY LINEAR FEAT OF THE CUL-DE-SAC IS.

>> IT'S 800-FEET. THAT DOES EXCEED OUR 600-FOOT. IF YOU APPROVE THIS, IT WOULD ALSO APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF 200-FEET FOR THAT CUL-DE-SAC. AGAIN, THERE ARE NO STUBS LEADING FOR FUTURE CONNECTIVITY. GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE LOT, ESSENTIALLY THIS IS WHAT THE

APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT TO US. >> ARE THERE QUESTIONS? OKAY.

MARCUS, THANK YOU. WOULD YOU LIKE TO S, THANK YOU. WOULD YOOS, THANK YOU.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK, SIR? >> SURE. MY NAME IS SHAWN JACKSON AND I LIVE AT 3830 SKINNER ROAD HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN AND I WILL SAY LADY AND GENTLEMAN.

I'M JUST GOING TO PUT THAT OUT THERE,N. I'M JUST GOING TO PUT THAT OUT THEEN. I'M JUST GOING TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, I SAW YOUR RESPONSE.

WHEN WE DID SUMMER CREST, THE ESTATES OF SUMMER CREST WAS THE FIRST.

THERE WERE 44 LOT THAT IS WE DID, NEVER KNEW THIS PIECE WAS GOING TO BE PART OF IT BUT THE ESTATES OF SUMMER CREST ALL OF A SUDDEN HAS GOTTEN -- WE HAD NO MORE LOTS IN THERE.

EVEN THE HOME BUILDERS HAVE LOTS IN THERE AND I'VE GOT THE SAME BUILDERS BUILDING IN THAT ARE ALREADY PRESOLD TO THEM. LIKE YOU SAID, THESE ARE LARGER LOTS THAN THE ESTATES.

THESE WILL ALL BE AT LEAST 120 BY 200, PRETTY CLOSE. SO WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT NAME. WE GAVE IT THE RESERVES OF SUMMER CREST BECAUSE I HAD TO UP DO THE ESTATES. WE'LL DO A LITTLE MORE ON THE ENTRY WAY EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB ALREADY WITH THE ENTRIES, THIS WILL PROBABLY STEP IT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE. DID IT A LITTLE BIT, THERE'S ONLY 16 LOTS IN THERE.

WE DID MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT JUST A STRAIGHT ROAD FOR A CUL-DE-SAC, MADE SURE THE ENGINEER, THERE'S AN OVERSIZED CIRCLE AT THE END SO WE CAN DO A LITTLE LANDSCAPE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE THE MAILBOX WE WS WILL GO WELL.

I THINK THAT'S IT UNLESS YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR AYE.

[02:25:01]

>> AYE. >> ANY OH POISED? FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

AND/OR ACTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR AYE. >> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? IT'S UNANIMOUS. THAT TAKES CARE OF THAT.

STAFF, ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS, QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS? IF NOT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> MOTION. >>

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.