Oct 19, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission

[00:00:08]

>> THE TIME IS 6 O'CLOCK AND WE ARE ABOUT TO BEGIN THE CITY OF

[Call to Order and Determination of Quorum.]

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. MS. ANGELA STEVENS AND A REGULAR CHAIR MR. OSBORNE ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND THIS EVENING.

TO START OFF WITH CITIZENS TO BE HEARD, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INVITES CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY TOPIC NOT ALREADY SCHEDULED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK TO COMPLETE A CITIZENS PARTICIPATE IN FORM AND PRESENTED TO CITY STAFF PRIOR TO MEETING THE COMMISSION CAN ACT ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. AT THIS TIME ARE THERE ANY CITIZENS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NONE, MOVING FORWARD ITEM NUMBER TWO. CONSIDER THE MINUTES FROM

[002 Consider the minutes for the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting dated: • September 21, 2021]

2021. >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? UNANIMOUS MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE.

[003 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of Jordan Meadows, being ± 150.809 acres of land, situated within the J Smith Survey, Abstract No. 963; the J. Johnson Survey, Abstract No. 558; and the JP Sewell Survey 1027, being in the City of Midlothian’s ETJ. The property is located east of Norrell Road, south of FM 875 (Case No. PP27-2021-200).]

THE J JOHNSON SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 558 AND THE JP SEWALL SURVEY 1027, BEING IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S TJ, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF NORRELL ROAD SOUTH OF FM 875.

>> THIS IS 99 RESIDENTIAL LOT DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED IN THE EDITORIAL JURISDICTION IT MEETS ALL REGULATIONS IN SECTION 212 OF TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. [INAUDIBLE] WE DID RECEIVE ONE FINAL COMMENT FROM THE COUNTY THAT THEY WANT US TO READ OUT LOUD SO IS ON THE RECORD, THEY'RE AWARE OF THIS FINAL COMMENT THIS IS THE CONNECTION FROM JORDAN MEADOWS -- SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE PLANS AND FINAL PLAT AND DEDICATED AT LEAST AS A 60 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT WOULD NEED TO BE ADDED TO THAT DOCUMENT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

IT DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

>> CAN I GET A MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. IS IT OKAY TO MENTION ITEM NUMBER 14 AT THIS TIME? JUST TO MAKE SURE?

>> YES SIR. >> I LIKE TO MENTION ITEM NUMBER 14, IS WITHDRAWN FROM THIS EVENING.

IF YOU ARE IN ATTENDANCE, FOR THAT ITEM, I DO KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE TO STAYFOR THE WHOLE EVENING , IT IS LAST ITEM ON GEODETIC CASE THE Z502021202 ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON THE AGENDA

[004 Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of Lone Star Ranch, being ± 213.421 acres of land, situated within the MT Castor Survey, Abstract No. 236; GL Williams Survey, Abstract No. 1179; and the JN Witherspoon Survey, Abstract No. 1137. The property is located south of FM 875, along Plainview Road, and directly abutting Stout Road to the east and the west (Case No. PP28-2021-201).]

>> THANK YOU. THIS CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATE

[00:05:02]

DISTRICT NUMBER 75 KNOWN AS LONE STAR DEVELOPMENT.

THE PROPOSED PLAT IN FRONT OF YOU DOES MEET ALL OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS WITHIN SECTION 212 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND REGULATIONS.

AS PART OF THE PULMONARY PLAT AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THEY HAVE REQUESTED THAT PHASING PLAN BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. A REQUEST PHASE 1 WHICH CONSISTS OF 278 LOTS, THAT YOU CAN SEE WITHIN THE DOCUMENTS WITHIN THE AGENDA WHERE THE LINES ARE.

SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE BY DECEMBER 22. PHASE 2 158 LOTS PER DECEMBER 2023. AND PHASE 3 64 LOTS WHICH WILL BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF DECEMBER OF 2024.

THIS IS A VERY COMMON PRACTICE WITH A PHASING PLAN IT DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. AND OF THE PLAT AS IT MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT

THIS TIME. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DOES THE APPLICANT WANT TO SPEAK FIRST WORK -- IF SO.

>> I AM SURE THAT THEY WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS MAY BE AT

THE END OF THE PRESENTATION. >> WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC NOTICE AHEAD OF TIME BUT IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER AT THIS TIME.

SEEING NONE. WAS THERE ANYBODY THAT WANTED TO SPEAK THAT HAD NOT FILLED OUT A FORM PRIOR ON THIS MATTER? IT'S NOT? SORRY. ANYBODY HAVE A MOTION AT THIS

TIME? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

[005 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a secondary dwelling unit on Lot 38, Block 3, Lake Grove Addition (commonly known as 1038 Lakegrove Loop), presently zoned Single-Family One (SF-1) District (Case No. SUP25-2021-191).]

PRESENTLY ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY ONE, SF ONE DISTRICT.

>> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT.

OCATED WITHIN THE MODULE SINGLE-FAMILY ONE DISTRICT AT 1038 LAKE GROVE LOOP.N 2.04 SINGLE UNITS ARE NOT PERMITTED BY RIGHT. AS LONG AS THEY CAN MEET ALL OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 3.5700 ZONING ORDINANCE. SECTION 3.5700, THERE IS THE 11 ITEMS THEY HAVE TO MEET IN ORDER TO HAVE A SECONDARY DWELLING BY RIGHT. ONE OF THOSE ITEMS IS SECONDARY DWELLING, THEY HAVE TO SHARE ONE ELECTRIC METER.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SECOND METER FOR THE SECONDARY DWELLING. THEY DO MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 3.5700.

THEY INITIALLY APPLIED FOR A PERMIT BUT THEY FOUND IT DIFFICULT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF HAVING THE SECONDARY OF NOT HAVING THE SECONDARY ELECTRIC METER DUE TO HOW THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED. ON THE LOT.

THEY HAVE REQUESTED FOR THAT REASON TO COME THROUGH THE PROCESS IN ORDER TO HAVE THE SECOND METER PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY. ONE CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

[00:10:02]

THEY MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS EXCEPT FOR THE SECONDARY METER. THERE REQUESTING THE SECONDARY METER TO DO THAT. T.

>> IF THERE ARE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD, HAVE THEM COME UP.

WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE ONES THAT WE RECEIVED.

VIRGINIA BURKE? >> MY NAME IS VIRGINIA BURKE, 1034 LAKE GROVE LOOP WHICH IS SOUTH WEST SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY. AT 1038, AND WE ARE IN OPPOSITION OF THIS. FOR SEVERAL REASONS.

ONE MAINLY BEING THAT THIS BUILDING IN OUR DEVELOPER WE HAVE AN HOA AND IT STRICTLY PROHIBITS YOU HAVING A SECONDARY RESIDENCE. THE HOMEOWNER AT THE TIME THAT SUBMITTED THE PAPERWORK ON THIS TO THE ACC WHICH IS OUR ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE, IT WAS SUBMITTED AS A POOL HOUSE. SO AS AN OUTBUILDING.

NOT A SECONDARY RESIDENCE. AND SO WE ARE IN OPPOSITION OF HAVING THE SECONDARY RESIDENCE. I KNOW SHE'S ALREADY RENTED THE BUILDING AND EVERYTHING IS THERE.

THE ONLY THING SHE DOESN'T HAVE IS SEPTIC.

SHE STOPPED TO GET A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM I GUESS TO TIE INTO AND ELECTRIC. BUT WE ARE AGAINST IT.

WE BELIEVE THAT BY HAVING A SECONDARY RESIDENCE, AND HAVING IT RENTED OUT THAT IT WILL OPEN UP THE WHOLE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH IS COUNTRY LIVING, LARGER STATES, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND IT JUST OPENS EVERYTHING UP FOR EVERYONE TO START PUTTING SECONDARY RESIDENCES IN AND

RENTING THEM OUT. >> THANK YOU MA'AM.

>> I APOLOGIZE IF I BOUGHT YOUR NAME -- ED --

>> MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

>> MR. BILLY ELDER. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS, PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS BILLY ELDER, 1015 -- THIS PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

AS APPROVED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AS AN OUTBUILDING AND EVERYONE KEEPS SAYING RENT, RENT, RENT.

THERE IS NOTHING HERE ABOUT RENT.

THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS IF SHE EVEN ATTEMPTED TO RENTED OUT WHICH THEY COULD GET A INJUNCTION AGAINST HER IF THAT WERE THE CASE.

THIS IS TWO OUTBUILDINGS THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY, THE ONLY REASON WE ARE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE IS UNDER THE CITY GUIDELINES FOR HARDSHIP. THE BUILDINGS ARE THERE, THEY ARE GOING TO BE THERE AND IF SHE EVER ATTEMPTED TO TRY TO USE THEM IN A MANNER WHICH IS IN VIOLATION OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THAT COULD BE STOPPED.

IT IS FOR HER DAUGHTER AND HER SON, THEY LIVED ON THE PREMISES WITH HER. AND THE COST OF RUNNING THROUGH HER EXISTING ELECTRICITY ON THE HOME SHOULD HAVE A LETTER FROM THE ELECTRIC COMPANY IN THE PACKET AND IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO READ THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT IT GOES, HAS SAID UP TO 320 AMP AND YOU CANNOT RUN IT THROUGH THE HOUSE.

BECAUSE IT IS ONLY 200 AMP. IT WILL COST AN ADDITIONAL $20,000 PLUS FOR HER TO BE ABLE TO CONNECT THESE TWO BUILDINGS TO HER PERSONAL RESIDENCE JUST BECAUSE OF THE GOING FOR ME 200 AMP TO 320 AMP TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH HER HOUSE, HAS TO BE REWIRED PLUS HAVING WIRING TO THE NEW BUILDINGS.

[00:15:02]

IF IT WAS INTENDED TO BE RENTAL PROPERTY, I WOULD NOT BE APPEAR EVEN REPRESENTING HER BECAUSE IT IS NOT WHAT IS GOING TO BE.

AND SHE MAY PASS ON SOONER OR LATER AND SOMEONE WILL OWN THE HOUSE, IT DOESN'T MATTER, THE POINT IS THAT WE ARE HERE FOR A VARIANCE ON WHAT HAS ONE METER OR TWO METERS AND THE REASON FOR THE SECOND METER HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TWO BUILDINGS THE REASON FOR THE SECOND METER IS FOR THE HARDSHIP CAUSED FOR HAVING TO RUN THROUGH THIS SINGLE METER AND THAT IS IT THE ONLY REASON. WE ARE ASKING THAT THE VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO ALLOW HER TO SET A SEPARATE METER SO SHE CAN RUN ELECTRICITY DIRECTLY TO THE TWO BUILDINGS RATHER THAN HAVE TO GO THROUGH HER HOUSE AND REWIRE HER HOUSE IN ORDER TO GET THAT DONE AND IT IS A HARDSHIP. AND THAT IS WHAT WE FEEL LIKE IT FALLS UNDER THE CITY ORDINANCES.

AND THE GUIDELINES AND IT CAN BE APPROVED AS A VARIANCE.

BUT THIS IS A SINGLE-FAMILY STILL.

IT IS JUST A SEPARATE OUTBUILDING.

>> THANK YOU SIR. ANYBODY ELSE WHO HAD NOT SIGNED UP FOR A PARTICIPATION FORM? IF YOU COULD APPROACH AND STATE YOUR NAME AND PLEASE IF YOU COULD, FILL OUT A FORM AFTERWARDS BEFORE THE END OF THE MEETING.

>> MINIMUS DAVID MARTIN, 1034 LAKE GROVE LOOP WITH MY DAUGHTER. AND WE SEE EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE THIS WAS BUILT BEFORE SHE EVEN N GOT PERMISSION TO BUILD IT T NUMBER ONE.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THE WOULD LIE AND DO THAT BUT ALSO THE STATE OF TEXAS IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SEWAGE PERMIT FOR NEW SEPTIC TANK BEFORE THAT WAS GIVEN A PERMIT FOR THAT WHICH AS FAR AS I KNOW SHE DOESN'T HAVE. AND IF YOU LET THAT GO IN A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS, A LOT OF NICE HOMES THERE, PEOPLE COULD PUT SHIPPING CONTAINERS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND AS A SEPARATE RESIDENT AND HOW COULD YOU STOP THEM? YOU KNOW BECAUSE ALL OF THE PRE-EXISTING STUFF THERE BEFORE THAT, IF YOU BUILD A SECOND DWELLING, IT SHOULD MATCH THE

HOUSE AND HERS DOESN'T. >> THANK YOU SIR.

YES MA'AM? >> HI I AM JANE -- JANUARY 2, 2006 LAKE GROVE LOOP A FEW DOORS DOWN.

I, WHY IS THERE A ULE THAT YOU HAVE ONE ICAL METER? PER PROPERTY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

I JUST AM CURIOUS WHY THERE IS THE RULE.

AND THEN I'M WONDERING IF THERE IS A RULE, THEN MY FEELING IS THAT THAT IS THE LAW AND THAT'S THE RULE.

CAN YOU ANSWER MY QUESTION? DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ANSWER?

>> I BELIEVE THE ANSWER WOULD BE TYPICALLY, WHEN YOU HAVE TWO METERS, IT CAN PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR IT TO BE SEPARATION WHICH WOULD THEN PRESENT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR

RENT OUT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WILL BE MY ASSUMPTION, STAFF CAN CORRECT ME BUT FROM WHAT I

REMEMBER THAT IS THE PURPOSE. >> I FIGURED THERE WAS A LAW FOR A REASON. THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE AT THIS TIME? >> I WOULD LIKE A MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? PASSES.

>> REAL QUICK IN SECTION 3.5700 NUMBER 10 THE REQUIREMENTS STATES -- CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL FILE A DEED RESTRICTION STATING THAT THE DWELLING UNIT CANNOT BE COMMERCIAL RENTAL PROPERTY.

THAT WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO THIS BEING ISSUED.

EVEN IF A SECOND METER IS APPROVED.

>> A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. OBVIOUSLY IT'S AN SUP.

IT WOULD FOLLOW WITH POINT-OF-SALE.

>> YES. >> IF WE RENT THE OPPORTUNITY WITH A SEPARATE METER AS A HARDSHIP, AS I UNDERSTAND WE

[00:20:01]

>> IT SAYS THEY HAVE TO ISSUE VOLUNTARY DEED RESTRICTIONS AND HAVE THEM BEFORE THIS WAS ISSUED THEY WOULD HAVE TO FILE DEED RESTRICTION NOT ALLOWING FOR COMMERCIAL RENTAL PROPERTY.

>> LET ME KIND OF CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT.

THE WORDING IS THAT SHE CANNOT RENT TO SOMEONE WHOM YOU ARE NOT RELATED. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULD RENT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OUT. TO A FAMILY AND THAT IS WHERE I THINK THAT IS THE ISSUE THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO.

YOU BUILD TOM HOMAN HOUSES, WE CAN KNOW MORE REALLY PREVENT SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE RENTAL WITH TOWNHOMES OR A TWO-STORY 5/3 TYPE THING. IT IS DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE.

IT IS A LITTLE EASIER TO ENFORCE RENTING OUT DIFFERENT PERSONS IN A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND A SECONDARY DWELLING. AS ONE SPEAKER REQUESTED WERE ASKED AND WE POINTED OUT, ONE OF THE REASONS WE PUT SOME OF THESE RESTRICTIONS REGARDING SEPARATION OF METERS, SEPARATION OF SERVICES ON WATER AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

AND TO PROHIBIT THAT UNLESS OTHERWISE GRANTED, IS TO KIND OF PUT IN INHIBITION ON THE ABILITY TO DO THAT SEPARATE SO EVERYTHING IS SEPARATELY OR SINGLE METERED SO IT IS TREATED AS IF IT IS A SINGLE PROPERTY EVEN THOUGH THE SECONDARY DWELLING MAY BE OCCUPIED BY SOMEONE ELSE IN THE FAMILY.

SO IN GENERAL WE CAN PREVENT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY FROM BEING RENTED OUT BUT WE COULD PREVENT IT FROM BEING, PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT FAMILIES, DIFFERENT RELATIONSHIPS BEING IN THE MAIN

HOUSE VERSUS THE SECONDARY. >> HOW DO YOU PREVENT THAT?

>> THAT IS JUST IT! LIKE ANY OTHER CODE ENFORCEMENT

ISSUE WE DEAL WITH SOMETIMES. >> THE ONLY WAY YOU WOULD KNOW IS IF THE NEIGHBOR REPORTED THEM.

>> PRETTY MUCH. >> IS A PERMIT PULLED? THERE IS ONE OF THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

>> WAS THERE ONE PULLED WHEN THEY STARTED THE WORK?

>> I DON'T RECALL. >> ANYTHING FOR INSPECTION WITH

THE WORK ONGOING? >> YES, DURING THE PROCESS THERE WERE VARIOUS INSPECTIONS DONE FOR ALL STRUCTURES.

WHICH TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE FOLLOWED THROUGH AND DID THE

INSPECTIONS. >> IN OTHER WORDS ALL THE PROTOCOL WAS FOLLOWED FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE END OF ALL OF THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY?

>> I CANNOT ANSWER FOR ALL THE STRUCTURES.

>> THERE IS NOT A CONCERN. THIS IS ONLY MY TAKE ON THIS.

I DON'T FEEL EVERYTHING HAS BEEN FOLLOWED AS IT SHOULD BE.

AND I HAVE A HARD TIME BELIEVING THAT IF WE GRANT TWO METERS, AND THIS IS AN SUP. WE KNOW THAT TROUBLES WITH THE PROPERTY. AT SOME POINT IN TIME THE INDIVIDUAL MAY DECIDE TO SELL THE PROPERTY.

WHEN THEY DO THEY HAVE A SUP TO KEEP TWO METERS.

WHAT'S REALISTICALLY ANOTHER SECONDARY RESIDENCE ON THE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING. AND SO, WE ARE OPENING PANDORA'S BOX. THIS IS JUST MY VIEW.

>> THE DEED RESTRICTION WILL TRAVEL WITH THE PROPERTY.

>> IT CAN TRAVEL BUT UNLESS YOU HAVE TRAVEL INSPECTION FOLKS ON THE STREET WHO WANT TO BE PLAYING GESTAPO, YOU DON'T HAVE A WAY TO POLICE THAT. AND YOU JUST OPEN, I DO KNOW THIS TO ME OPENS A BIG CAN OF WORMS.

THAT IS JUST ME.>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

[00:25:07]

CAN I GET A MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION AS

PRESENTED. >> I WILLSECOND .

>> CAN WE GET A ALL IN FAVOR MOTION? ALL OPPOSED? PASSES FOUR ÃONE.

>> FOR CLARIFICATION THAT WAS RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL THAT

WAS APPROVED. >> THE THREE OF US AND MR. ROGERS. [INAUDIBLE]

YES MA'AM. >> MR. CHAIR, YOU RECOGNIZE FOUR VOTED IN FAVOR AND ONE VOTED AGAINST.

>> YES SIR.

>> THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE CHAIR.

MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE AGENDA.

[006 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) of a 1,330± square foot portion of a building located on lot 2R-A, Block 1, Walnut Grove Center South Addition (commonly known as 4470 East U.S. Highway 287 Ste. 1000) and presently zoned Commercial (C) District, by granting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a restaurant exceeding 1,000 square feet) (Case No. SUP26-2021-195).]

>> THANK YOU. IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.04 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE RESTAURANT EXCEEDING 1000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, IS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. WE DO HAVE A PROPOSAL REQUEST FOR A RESTAURANT TO BE LOCATED AT THIS LOCATION THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN. US HIGHWAY 287, 4470 E. US HIGHWAY 287, SUITE 1000. WHICH IS RIGHT HERE.

FORMALLY THERE WAS A BAKERY AT THIS LOCATION.

HOWEVER, UPON IT SEASON TO OPERATE FOR LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS, IT LOST ANY NONCONFORMING RIGHTS.

ALSO WHEN STAFF DID ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH ON THE PROPERTY WE COULD NOT FIND ANY SORT OF PERMISSIONS OR PERMIT THAT ALLOWED FOR A RESTAURANT TO BE LOCATED AT THIS LOCATION.

FOR THAT REASON THE APPLICANT HAS COME BEFORE US TO REQUEST A RESTAURANT TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT THIS LOCATION.

GOING THROUGH THE ANALYSIS, THEY WILL NOT BE ANY ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION GOING ON IN THE OUTSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

THE CURRENT STRUCTURE WILL NOT BE CHANGED IN ANY WAY.

IT IS SIMPLY THEM COMING TO OCCUPY A VACANT SUITE.

THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE WHAT THEY WILL MEET REGULATIONS AND NOT REQUESTING ANY ADDITIONAL PERMISSIONS FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

WHEN THEY DO COME IN FOR SUNDAYS WILL BE REQUIRED TO

MEET ALL REGULATIONS IN 4.6017 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.>> PROPOSED PARKING IN THE CENTER IS CONSIDERED MULTITENANT RETAIL CENTER. THE CURRENT CENTER MEET ALL THE CURRENT PARKING REGULATIONS. STAFF DOES FEEL THE PROPOSED WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND -- STAFF DID NOT KNOW THIS WAS ALL WITHIN 200 FEET ZERO CAN BACK IN FAVOR, ZERO K-9 IN OPPOSITION I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. IT DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC

HEARING. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE NO FORMS, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE NO FORMS FOR PUBLIC SPEAKERS.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THIS EVENING THAT

[00:30:01]

TO CLOSE? >> MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUS.

IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MAKE A MOTION

ON THIS? >> I MOVE TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUS. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON THE AGENDA

[007 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 506.6± acres out of the M.E.P & P Railroad Company Survey, Abstract No. 761, John Chamblee Survey, Abstract No. 192, J. Stewart Survey, Abstract No. 961, Cuadrilla Irrigation Company Survey, Abstract No. 262 and Cuadrilla Irrigation Company Survey, Abstract No. 1204, described in Exhibit “A” hereto, by changing the zoning from Planned Development District No. 18 (PD-18) to Planned Development District No. 146 (PD-146) for a mixed-use development; adopting development regulations and a site plan. The property is located approximately +/- 1400 feet west of U.S. Hwy 67 interchange, between U.S. Hwy 287 and Old Fort Worth Road (Case No. Z40-2021-160).]

ADOPTING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND THE SITE PLAN.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY B1 1400 FEET WEST OF US HIGHWAY 67 INTERCHANGE, BETWEEN US HIGHWAY 287 AND OLD

FORT WORTH ROAD. >> THANK YOU.

IN FRONT OF YOU THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST GOING FROM PD 18 20 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 146.

WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED IN 2004, SINCE THAT TIME IT WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED FOR MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL, WELL DRILLING ALSO NONCOMMERCIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, RETAIL, ENTERTAINMENT USES.

SINCE 2004 THERE BEEN VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE.

SOME OF THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN CHALLENGING.

GOING THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS WHEN WE, WHEN THE DEVELOPER COMES TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS GO TO THE AMENDMENTS AND TRY TO PIECEMEAL IT TOGETHER.

STAFF, CONSULTANTS DEVELOPERS, WE'VE HAD MANY CHALLENGES INTERPRETING THIS ORDINANCE. AND ITS MANY AMENDMENTS, THERE BEEN MANY THINGS CONFLICTING, MANY PIECES IN PD 18 THAT CURRENTLY EXIST WITHIN THE DOCUMENT THEY GENERALLY WOULD NOT HAVE IN A ZONING ORDINANCE. WHAT UPON STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THE DEVELOPMENT WITH REASON THE PROPERTY TO A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, THIS IS SOMETHING WE ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPER TO APPLY FOR AND THE REASON FOR THIS WAS THAT WE HAD A CLEANER DOCUMENT, WE CAN ELIMINATE THE CONTRADICTIONS, WE CAN REMOVE ALL OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THEY GENERALLY DO NOT HAVE AN ZONING ORDINANCES THAT ARE MORE APPLICABLE FOR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WERE DEALING WITH CIVIL PLANS. THINGS THAT NECESSARILY DO NOT NEED TO BE IN THE ZONING REGULATIONS.

UPON CLEANING UP THE ORDINANCE, WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, I BROKEN DOWN SOME OF THE MAJOR CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WERE BOTH ATTACHED AND DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS.

I WANT TO SAY ATTACHED AND DETACHED INCLUDING TOWNHOMES.

A TOWNHOME IS CONSIDERED A SINGLE-FAMILY PROJECT.THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE WENT FROM 7000 SQUARE FEET TO 5000 SQUARE FEET. THAT IS JUST THE MINIMUM SIZE.

WITH COMMERCIAL RETAIL BONE FROM HUNDRED 62 ACRES DOWN TO 56 ACRES. WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED, THE RETAIL IN THE EARLY 2000 WAS GEARED TOWARD BIG BOX RETAIL. WE'VE SEEN A HUGE SHIFT IN CHANGE AS THE ECONOMY CONTINUES TO CHANGE AND THE TYPE OF RETAIL WE ARE NOW SEEING. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS DID INCREASE FROM 787 UP TO 980.

THE TOTAL NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS AT TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS WITHIN PD 18 THAT ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY PIER 1 SECTION WAS TRANSFERRED TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS PERMITTED BY RIGHT WHICH

[00:35:01]

AND ALLOWED FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT ME TO HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS TO HAVE THE ENGINE 81 ADDITIONAL UNITS PERMITTED THROUGH THE ORDINANCE FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. PROPOSED BY THIS AMENDMENT THEY ARE REQUESTING 312 UNITS BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT.

YOU WILL SEE THAT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AS THEY GO FURTHER ON IN THIS PRESENTATION FOR ALL OF YOU.

THEY ARE REQUESTING 302 UNITS BE PERMITTED SO THE NUMBERS BEING BROUGHT DOWN. TOTAL NUMBER OF TOWNHOMES, NONE WERE PERMITTED. THEY ARE REQUESTING 97 AS PART OF THIS. WHEN YOU COME BY THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS, MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT YOU SEE ARE PERMITTED THROUGH PD 18, 683 UNITS TOTAL.

YOU COULD COMBINE THESE TWO, 614.

MULTIFAMILY WILL DECREASE. HOWEVER, A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE ABOUT TOWNHOMES AND ASSOCIATE WITH SOME SORT OF MULTIFAMILY INVESTOR PEOPLE GENERALLY THINK A TOWNHOME IS EVEN THOSE NOT CLASSIFIED AS MULTIFAMILY. -- HERE'S A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE EXISTING PD 18. CURRENTLY HAS BEEN APPROVED.

MAJORITY OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY IS LOCATED JUST WEST OF THIS PROPOSED THOROUGHFARE. THERE'S A MIXTURE OF LOTS RANGING IN SIZES. COMMERCIAL LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE THOROUGHFARE AND FRONTING ALONG HIGHWAY 287.

THE DARK PURPLE SECTION IS LONG FRONTAGE ROAD.

THAT A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY TO BE MULTIFAMILY OR RETAIL BASED OFF OF HOW THE MARKET IS DRIVEN IN THE ORDINANCE.

THAT HASN'T CHANGED SO THESE UNITS RIGHT HERE WOULD BE LOCATED RIGHT HERE THE 302 UNITS.

ONCE AGAIN IT WOULD BE SUSCEPTIBLE, THEY HAVE NOT OPTIONED IT EITHER. -- BOTH PD'S IS LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT TO SEE, YOU CAN SEE THE PACKET A LITTLE CLEARER.

PAGE 46 OF THE PACKET, I NUMBERED IT DUE TO HOW LARGE THE PACKET IS. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE A MORE IN-DEPTH LOOK OF THIS UP CLOSE. IT IS MORE DIFFICULT TO SEE ON THE PRESENTATION. A LOT OF THE MULTIFAMILY IS LOCATED IN THE SAME LOCATION. ONE THING YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THIS EXISTING SITE WAS THAT THERE IS A LOT OF, THERE IS WORD TOPOGRAPHY, WATER FEATURES, VARIOUS TREES.

THAT THEY WANT TO TRY TO PRESERVE.

ACTUALLY EXPANDED THE MULTIFAMILY AREA MORE WEST, THAT LOT. ALTHOUGH THE NUMBER OF UNITS IS NOT INCREASING. THE LAND AREA INCREASED BUT THE NOT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS. RIGHT HERE IN THE LIGHT PURPLE, YOU CAN SEE THIS IS SINGLE-FAMILY TYPE III RESIDENTIAL LOTS. WHICH IS A MIXTURE OF DIFFERENT TYPES SIZE LOTS. DIRECTLY NEXT TO IT ARE TOWNHOMES, THEY ARE PROPOSING THIS IS THE PROPOSED 97 TOWNHOMES, WHERE THEY WILL BE LOCATED.

THERE ARE REGULATIONS WHEN THEY COME ABOUT VARIOUS DESIGN, REGULATIONS ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE ORDINANCE.

WHEN THEY ARE DEVELOPED TO REQUIRE DETAILED SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL PROCESS THAT WILL GO BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL.

HERE IS AN UP CLOSE LOOK AT THE PREVIOUS CONCEPT SITE PLANS YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE MORE CLEAR. HERE IS THE PROPOSED.

ONE THING THAT HAS NOT CHANGED IN THE SITE PLAN IS WHERE THERE IS CURRENTLY -- SITES ARE SOME LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY.

RIGHT HERE IS A BREAKDOWN. THESE TWO ARE THE SAME.

THIS SHOWS YOU THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF LOTS, HOW THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, BASICALLY THREE DIFFERENT PHASES OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL THOSE ARE THE TYPE I, TYPE II AND TYPE III LOTS. WITHIN EACH OF THOSE TYPES OF LOTS, THEY ARE BROKEN DOWN INTO DIFFERENT LOT SIZES.

I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NOT.

MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE WILL BE PART OF THIS PD IS THE DETAILED SITE PLAN THEIR SUBMITTING AS PART OF THE PROCESS WHICH THEY ARE PROPOSING 312 UNITS.

WORKING WITH THEM ONE THING WE WANTED TO FOCUS ON WAS AS 287

[00:40:03]

WHAT WE ALWAYS TRY TO DO WITH THE DEVELOPERS IS WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE IT BETTER? WHAT CAN WE DO TO BRING THE BEST PRODUCT FORWARD? WE HAD TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING THAT HAD AROUND TO CREATE A BUFFER ALONG 287.

TO MAKE SURE THE ARTICULATION AND DESIGN OF THE BUILDINGS WERE HEIGHTENED ALONG 287. ONE THING WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT ESPECIALLY MULTIFAMILY THAT THESE RESIDENTS WILL BE ABLE TO BE SERVED BY AMENITIES AND THEY WILL BUILD HAVE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE PROPERLY SERVED BY AN ADEQUATE SIZED SWIMMING POOL AMENITY CENTER, THERE IS A TRAIL THAT EXISTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND GOES THROUGHOUT. IT LEAVES OUT TO A GATE THAT CONNECTS THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

THEY WILL HAVE A TRAIL GOING THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. THEY WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS AND RESIDENCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT TRAIL THROUGHOUT. HERE'S A LANDSCAPE PLAN.

GENERALLY ONLY REQUIRE ONE TREE EVERY 40 FEET.

-- THERE INCREASING OVER STORY, OVER STORY TREES AS WELL AS ORNAMENTAL TREES THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT.

INCREASE THAT AS WELL. ONE THING, TYPE OF GARAGE IS THAT THEY HAVE, HAVING A MIXTURE OF PARKING ON SERVICE PARKING, CARPORT COVER AS WELL AS GARAGE COVER PARKING.

FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. HERE IS THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS. ORIGINALLY THEY CAME IN WITH YOUR TYPICAL PERMITS WE TRY TO WORK ON WITH THEM, TO BREAK UP THE FAC'ADE USING ALTERNATE MATERIALS EVEN THOUGH WE CANNOT REGULATE, -- WE ESPECIALLY FOCUSED ON THE ELEVATIONS THAT WILL BE FACING THE PUBLIC VIEW. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ENHANCE. THIS IS WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE ON SITE. HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE CLUBHOUSE AND OF WHAT SOME OF THE GARAGES LOOKLIKE .

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. TWO CAME BACK IN FAVOR AND ZERO CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT

THIS TIME. >> I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO JUST TO BREAK THIS DOWN QUICK. ON THE NEW AMENDED OR PROPOSED AMENDED PD HAVE 300 AND SOME MULTIFAMILY UNITS.

WHERE THE SITE PLAN WAS PROPOSED, AND THEN ANOTHER 300 THAT ARE UP ON THE NORTH NORTHWEST OF THE SITE.

IN THAT AREA.R COULD BE COMMERCIAL DOWN THE ROAD.

>> YES, SIR. >> THE ONE THEY ARE PRESENTED ON THE SITE PLAN, DOES IT MEET ALL THE CURRENT MULTIFAMILY

STANDARDS? >> NO, IT DOESN'T.

IT DOES NOT MEET THE PARKING STANDARDS.

-- PARKING REGULATIONS, ALL OTHER ASPECTS THE AMENITIES GO ABOVE WHAT THE MINIMUM IS REQUIRED.

IT MEANS ALL THE LANDSCAPING. ONE THING IT DOESN'T MEET HIS HEIGHT REQUIREMENT ONLY TO HAVE STORIES THE REQUESTED THREE STORIES. THAT IS ONE THING THEY HAD REQUESTED. OTHER THAN THAT WE DID FEEL IT WAS IN THE PARAMETERS OF THE ORDINANCE.

WE DO FEEL THAT WORKING WITH THEM WE WILL GET THE BEST PRODUCT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED.

>> WHAT WAS THE VARIATION FOR PARKING?

>> PARKING HAD TO DO WITH ENCLOSED PARKING.

GENERALLY DOES NOT ALLOW FOR CARPORTS WOULD BE ALL ENCLOSED GARAGES. AND SO THEY DID AFTER SOME CARPORTS BUT WE FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THE PERCENTAGES THEY WERE ASKING FOR GARAGE VERSUS CARPORT.

>> OKAY. >> ANYONE ELSE OF QUESTIONS FOR

STAFF? >> DO WE HAVE ACCESS TO WHAT THE DENSITY OF THIS PROPOSAL WAS PRIOR? AND WHAT THE DENSITY IS ON THE CURRENT PROPOSAL?

>> ARE TALKING THE OVERALL DENSITY INCLUDING SINGLE-FAMILY

AND MULTIFAMILY? >> THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE.

>> I WOULD NEED TO REFER AND DO CALCULATIONS.

ORIGINALLY PD THERE IS NONE -- >> I GUESS I'M CONFUSED.

[00:45:06]

I AM ACCUSTOMED TO VIEWING AND LOOKING AT WAYS TO REDUCE DENSITY. NOW WE KNOW HOW MANY LOTS DO WE

HAVE THAT ARE 7000 SQUARE FEET? >> IN THIS DEVELOPMENT.

>> IN THE CITY. 8000 OF THEM?

>> I DON'T HAVE THAT FRENEMY. >> IT'S A LOT.

WHAT I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE BACKSIDE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT, WE ARE REVISITING AN OLD DEVELOPMENT.

BY MY CALCULATIONS, 787 TOTAL NUMBER OF SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, WE'VE INCREASED THAT 25 PERCENT ON THIS ONE PROJECT.

THEN ON TOP OF THAT, WE'VE ALLOWED FOR 97 TOWNHOMES.

AND I BELIEVE WE PRESENTED AS A LOT OF TIMES, TOWNHOMES ARE VIEWED AS MULTIFAMILY WHEN REALLY KIND OF THEY ARE NOT.

BECAUSE I HAD A MINDSET BEFORE THAT TOWNHOMES WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA BUT WHERE RUNNING INTO A PROBLEM AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH LEGAL A MOMENT AGO.

WE HAVE A WAY OF REGULATING TOWNHOMES.

AND WHAT I MEAN, I LIKE TO SEE OWNERSHIP.

INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP. BUT WHAT WE ARE FINDING IN THE TOWNHOMES WERE PUTTING IN, HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE SINGULAR

OWNED THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW? >> I WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER

THAT. >> PRACTICALLY NONE THAT I KNOW OF. I COULD BE WRONG BUT I DON'T THINK. I'M HAVING A REALLY TOUGH TIME WHEN I KNOW THAT EVERYTHING WE ARE WORKING SO HARD TO DO HERE, IF WE GOT 8000, 7000 SQUARE-FOOT LOT COMING OR WHATEVER, IT IS A HUMONGOUS NUMBER.

THAT IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DROPPING THIS FROM 7000 SQUARE-FOOT TO 5000 IS A MINIMUM.

WHAT ARE WE THINKING? >> A TOTAL NUMBER OF LOSSES SEEMS 5000 HOW WE WROTE IN THE ORDINANCE, WE ACTUALLY HAVE IF YOU OPEN UP THE ORDINANCE SECTION OF IT, IT DOESN'T QUITE DETAILED HOW MANY LOTS THEY CAN HAVE AT THE CURRENT SIZE.

IT ONLY COVERS A TOWNHOME LOTS AND TO MAKE IT EASIER THE PRESENTATION COULD HAVE BROKEN OUT AND SHOW WITH THE SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED MINIMUM LOT SIZE WOULD HAVE BEEN.

THIS IS INCORPORATING ATTACHED AND DETACHED WITH THE TOWNHOME HE GENERALLY WOULD HAVE A SMALLER LOT SIZE FOR A TOWNHOME. THAT'S WHERE THE NUMBER CAME

FROM. >> I GUESS I WANT TO LOOK AT THE VOLUME OF APARTMENT BASE. IT'S CHANGED ABOUT 87 UNITS?

>> IF YOU LOOKED ACTUALLY MULTIFAMILY IT ACTUALLY

DECREASED. >> IT DECREASED BY WHAT?

>> PROBABLY 60? >> THAT IS NOT EVEN A BUILDING.

I DON'T SEE ANY BIG NET GAIN WITH WHAT I'M ALWAYS OUT TO ACHIEVE. WHICH IS LESS DENSITY.

WE ARE GAINING IT HERE. AND I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, WHAT ABOUT OVER HERE ON THE OVERVIEW THE CONCEPT PLAN.

TELL ME MORE ABOUT THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN WITH THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ZONING. WHAT ALL USAGE WOULD THAT ALLOW

FOR UNDER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN? >> ANYTHING PERMITTING COMMERCIAL AND COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICTS.

I THINK IT HAS SOME PROHIBITIONS AGAINST SUCH USES AS -- SHOPS, BUT REALLY PRIMARILY RETAIL.

>> ALL COMMERCIAL COMMUNITY RETAIL.

THE MOST INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.

>> WHAT WOULD YOU RECOGNIZE THAT COULD HAPPEN THERE? I MEAN HERE'S MY THINKING. WOULD IT NOT BE BETTER FOR THAT TO POTENTIALLY BE A FORM OF, BECAUSE MY FLIP THIS BACK AND FORTH, THE PORTIONS THAT I SEE, THE APARTMENT BASE, I DON'T SEE CHANGES REALLY MUCH. I SEE WHERE WE GOT RID OF SOME COMMERCIAL TO MAKE IT BE RETAIL SIDE.

AND I WONDER IF THAT WOULD BE A BETTER CHOICE THAN WHAT WE ARE GAINING. AND I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF DROPPING LOT SIZE AT ALL. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE DROPPING DOWN TO THE 5000 SQUARE FOOT RANGE.

I REALIZE I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY FROM I REALIZE SOME OF THIS IS TOWNHOMES BUT I'M KIND OF LOSING MY CONFIDENCE IN TOWNHOMES AT THIS POINT. BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT

[00:50:03]

I APPRECIATE THE STAFF PRESENTATION.

>> THANK YOU. >> AND WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION ABOUT THE TOWNHOME. ARE THE TOWNHOMES THEN TO BE CONSIDERED, IT WAS VERY CLEAR AND OBVIOUS THE MULTIFAMILY HAD ITS OWN AMENITY. BUILT AROUND WITH IT, ARE THE TOWNHOMES JUST PART OF THE REST OF THE RESIDENTIAL?

>> CORRECT. THEY SHARE THE SAME AMENITIES, THE BE PART OF THE SAME -- REQUIRED TO PAY THE SAME FEES AS THE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT.

>> AND THERE WAS NO OFFER OF EXPANDING THE AMENITIES AT THE TIME? WITH ADDING ALL THE ADDITIONAL

LOTS? >> THEY ACTUALLY ADDED ADDITIONAL PARK, THE OLD ONE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE AN AMENITIES IN THE PD. THIS MOM ACTUALLY SPELLED OUT WHAT AMENITIES WERE REQUIRED. IT WAS ONE THING WE ACTUALLY CLEANED UP, THE WHOLE PD DIDN'T SPEAK THIS ONE NOW DOES.IT HAS TIMING OF WHEN THEY HAD TO BE COMPLETED FOR THIS TOWNHOMES AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. I WILL SAY PORTION IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, IT'S ALREADY BEEN PERMITTED.

YOU CAN SEE THE SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED I WANT TO MAKESURE

THAT WAS CLEAR . >> OKAY.

NO MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. >> AT THIS TIME WE DO HAVE ONE

PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. >> MY NAME IS TERRENCE JOE, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TONIGHT.

WE HAVE ENJOYED WORKING WITH THE STAFF ON THIS AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IT ALMOST A YEAR NOW.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THE STUFF FROM SOME OF THE THINGS I'VE HEARD FROM A COUPLE OF COMMISSIONERS AND THAT I WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

BUT IF YOU DON'T MIND ME GIVING A QUICK NARRATIVE.

WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS PROJECT, IF YOU LOOK AT IT RIGHT THERE, THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PD.

THAT END OF THE PD HAS GONE DOWN SLIGHTLY IN DENSITY BECAUSE WE HAVE GONE -- I'M NOT VERY TECHNICAL.

RIGHT THERE, WE ARE PUTTING IN A SCHOOL SITE.

WE DID DROP SOME LOTS. TO PUT IN THE SCHOOL.

THOSE LASTED NOT GETTING SMALLER.

THEY ALL STAYED IN FACT SOME GOT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER.UT LET'S JUST FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES, SAY IT IS CLOSE TO THE SAME. NOT A LOT OF DENSITY SO WE STARTED WORKING THIS DURING THE COVID ERA, AND HAD TO BRING THAT UP BUT IT'S A REALITY. THAT BROUGHT IN WHAT WAS ALREADY BEING CRUSHED BY AMAZON.

AND I'M AS GUILTY AS THE NEXT PERSON WHEN I WANT TO BUY SOMETHING, I BITE OFF AMAZON I HATE MYSELF EVERY TIME I DO IT BUT SOMETIMES I GET IT THE SAME DAY.

162 ACRES OF RETAIL, WE DIDN'T FEEL WE COULD MARKET IT SO WE DO HAVE AN INDUSTRIAL USE WE TALK TO STEPH ABOUT IT AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO GO INDUSTRIAL ON THAT SIDE.

EFFECTIVE IN SOME OF THE PEOPLE HE MIGHT'VE BEEN TALKING TO MIGHT BE HERE TONIGHT, I DON'T KNOW BUT PERHAPS IT WASN'T APPROPRIATE FOR THAT EITHER. WE TRIED TO WORK ON DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WOULD WORK, WE ARE ASKING FOR A HIGHER DENSITY ON WHAT WAS RETAIL. WE ARE NOT LOWERING THE DENSITY ON WHAT WAS ALREADY PLANNED. I'M TRYING TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT WAY INSTEAD OF SAYING WE TOOK THE SUBDIVISION LOWERED THE DENSITY, EVERYTHING WEST OF WHAT WE ARE CALLING WESTSIDE BOULEVARD WAS FORMERLY WARD BROOK ROAD.

THE DENSITY WENT DOWN SLIGHTLY. THE MULTIFAMILY DENSITY WENT DOWN SLIGHTLY. THE ONLY THING WE HAVE ADDED ARE THE LOTS ABOUT SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, 97 TOWNHOME LOTS. SPEAKING TO THE TOWNHOME LOTS, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS, MR. ROGERS HAS PROBLEMS WITH AND UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM. I'VE SEEN SOME OF THEM IN TOWN AND I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEM PERSONALLY.

ANYWAY THEY ARE NOT THAT GREAT I DON'T MEAN TO BE PERSONAL WITH ANYONE THAT MIGHT BE HERE TONIGHT BUT WE WANT TO DO BETTER THAN WHAT IS ALREADY BEEN THERE.

THERE ARE WAYS TO DO THAT AND ONE IS THAT IT'S AN SUP YOU

[00:55:01]

NUMBER TWO, THIS IS SOMETHING I DON'T KNOW THAT THE CITY WILL AGREE TO. BUT IN ANOTHER CITY I'VE WORKED IN, WE RESTRICTED NO OWNER COULD OWN MORE THAN TWO UNITS.

NO SINGLE OWNER. AND THE REASON THEY RESTRICTED, WE AGREED TO DO THAT, IT WAS, THIS IS, I GUESS IT'S OKAY FOR ME TO SAY WAS MANSFIELD. CAMINO ALLEN, SPEAKING TO THE ATTORNEY OVER HERE. AND SO PERHAPS, THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT. WE HAVE DONE IT IN THAT WAY THAT ONE PERSON CANNOT TURN IT ALL INTO A RENTAL.

IT WOULD MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT.

THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS, IT CAME DOWN TO WHERE WE WANTED -- IF WE HAD A FAMILY MEMBER AND I WANTED TO BUY ONE FOR MY ELDERLY PARENT OR MY KIDS OR WHATEVER, THAT WAS THE THOUGHT PROCESS. AND WE DID DO IT AND WE HAVE DONE IT AND THEY HAVE BUILT AND THEY ARE SINGLE-FAMILY.

THEY ARE OWNED BY RESIDENTS AND THEY ARE DIFFERENT.

WHEN PEOPLE OWNED THEM VERSUS RENTING THEM THEY ARE DIFFERENT. WE ARE IN AN ERA NOW WHERE MY BUILDERS SINCE WE STARTED THIS IN DECEMBER, OF LAST YEAR, THE AVERAGE HOME PRICE GONE UP $100,000, IT IS UNBELIEVABLE.

IT'S TERRIBLE! TOWNHOMES ARE REALLY A HOT COMMODITY BECAUSE HOMES ARE GETTING SO EXPENSIVE ONE OF OUR SUBDIVISIONS BY KROGER AVERAGE HOME PRICE TWO YEARS AGO WAS 380,000. THE VERY SAME HOME ON THE MARKET NOW IS 500. THEY ALREADY TOLD US THAT THE STARTING PRICE. THEY PROBABLY ARE GOING TO GO UP FROM THERE. A TOWNHOME WILL EVEN BE EXPENSIVE. BUT IT WILL BE MORE AFFORDABLE THEN 500 OBVIOUSLY. I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THAT.

IF YOU WOULD, AS FAR AS AMENITIES GO.

THE ORIGINAL PD DIDN'T SAY WHAT AMENITIES WE HAD TO DO.

WE ARE COMMITTED TO A VERY NICE AMENITY CENTER.

OUR BUDGET ON IS ALMOST $2 MILLION.

THAT IS JUST THE AMENITY CENTER PROPERTY.

WE ARE BUILDING THREE PLAYGROUNDS, OUR BUDGET ON EACH ONE IS $150,000. AND WE ARE PUTTING WORKOUT EQUIPMENT ALONG THE TRAIL THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION, I DO REMEMBER HOW MANY FEET BUT WE AGREED TO A CERTAIN NUMBER OF THEM. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING A BUT IT IS QUITE A FEW. WE ALSO ARE INTENDING TO MAKE THE TRAIL WIDER AND PAVE IT, LIVE ALMOST 2 MILES OF TRAILS, ALMOST 100 ACRE OF GREEN SPACE IN THE SUBDIVISION.

AND FOR THE RETAIL WHERE WAS GOING TO GO OR STILL IS, WE THOUGHT 56 ACRES OF RETAIL. TO GIVE YOUR COMPARISON, KROGER THE WHOLE COMPLEX IS 40 ACRES. PLUS OR MINUS.

THE WHOLE THING! WE HAVE 56 ACRES.

JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH RETAIL WE STILL HAVE TO CHEW UP, IT IS NOT A SMALL AMOUNT I ASSURE YOU.

THE BIG BOX, WE JUST DO NOT SEE THEM COMING BACK.

BUT THEY MIGHT. I'M KIND OF RAMBLING.

I DON'T MEAN TO, I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE SOME.

I AM SURE YOU DO. >> ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR INSIGHT.

I'M ANXIOUS TO HEAR FROM YOU IN A MOMENT.

ON THE TOWNHOMES I LIKE THE IDEA.

>> I'M HERE IF YOU NEED ME. [INAUDIBLE]

>> IS THERE ANYBODY WHO DID NOT FILL OUT A FORM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? SEEING NONE, I WILL TAKE A

MOTION TO CLOSE. >> MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUS.

>> I WANT TO GET CLARITY, THAT WAS FOR THE TYPE III LOT 5000 SQUARE FEET TOWNHOMES WERE 4000 SQUARE FEET I APOLOGIZE I

MISSPOKE. >> AS I'M FLIPPING THIS BACK AND FORTH, I MEAN I LIKE WHAT I JUST HEARD.

IF WE CAN GET THAT ACCOMPLISHED.

>> ONE THING -- >> I'VE BEEN ASKING ABOUT THIS

FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. >> I WOULD SAY THE INITIAL --

>> DO YOU THINK IT IS BECAUSE DEED RESTRICTION, POSSIBLY

INVOLVE CHANGES TO THE MATTER? >> THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO

[01:00:01]

DO THAT THAT'S FINE. >> I CAN KIND OF GET A LITTLE MORE ONBOARD BUT SO, THAT I GET MY MIND RIGHT FROM THIS, IT APPEARS AS THOUGH MAY BE THE, BECAUSE THEY ARE TAKING UP SOME COMMERCIAL SPACE, WITH THE TOWNHOMES AND THE APARTMENTS, THAT'S THE PROBLEM I'M HAVING WITH THIS CONCEPT AND WHAT IS PRESENTED, I CANNOT DIFFERENTIATE WITH IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY SIDE -- IT IS ALL STILL ONE PACKAGE.

I CANNOT TELL IF THE LOT SIZES ARE STILL ABOUT THE SAME OVER THERE, WHICH I KIND OF GATHERED THAT A LITTLE BIT FROM -- THAT ON THAT END OF THE PROJECT, IT HASN'T CHANGED A WHOLE LOT IN DENSITY. BUT THE DENSITY THAT IS JACKING IT BACK UP IS WE'VE TAKEN UP SOME COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH TOWNHOMES AND IF WE CAN GET TOWNHOMES UNDER THAT SINGLE OWNERSHIP, THAT IS A NEW BALLGAME.

>> ONE THING I MENTIONED, IN THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW TOWNS ARE PERMITTED WITHOUT -- SO WHEN YOU DO MAKE A MOTION YOU

NEED TO ADD THAT PER WITH SUP. >> THAT WAY EVERY TIME THEY CHANGE OWNERSHIP, IS THAT THE PURPOSE?

>> NO, SPECIFIC USE FOR THE TOWNHOMES.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR.

ORDINANCE DOESN'T HAVE THAT RIGHT NOW.

>> AND OF COURSE WE OPERATE AS AN ADVISORY REALISTICALLY, COUNSEL, SO I MEAN CAN WE ALSO INCLUDE WHATEVER ADVICE WE WOULD OFFER? I WOULD ASSUME THAT STAFF SOMEHOW WILL REVIEW LEGAL THE POTENTIAL OF MAXIMUM OWNERSHIP

OF UNITS. >> I WILL LEAVE THAT TO LEGAL.

BECAUSE WE CAN'T PLACE IT AS A DEMAND IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR SOMETHING FOR WHICH WE DON'T KNOW YET BUT WE DON'T MAKE THE FINAL DECISION ANYWAY COUNSEL DOES.

>> WE CAN GENTLY REVIEW. >> IT IS A REVIEW REQUEST.

>> I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE MOTION.

AS FAR AS THAT GOES. >> OKAY BECAUSE IT IS UNKNOWN.

>> IT IS DEFINITELY UNKNOWN AND ALTHOUGH I WOULD SAY THERE IS LACK OF ENFORCEABILITY TO REALLY BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT AGAIN, I MAY NEED TO HAVE A CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND SEE HOW HE LEGAL JUSTIFIES.

>> MY PROBLEM IS WITHOUT THAT I WOULDN'T APPROVE IT.

SO I'M GOING TO TAKE A BIG CHANCE ON THIS ONE.

>> I WILL SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE.

YOU KNOW WE'VE WORKED EXTREMELY HARD AND JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND, THE EXISTING PD 18 ORDINANCE IS AN ABSOLUTE MESS.

AND I WILL RESERVE FOR MORE PRIVATE SETTING, HOW I REALLY FEEL. OKAY? [LAUGHTER] AND SO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE DID HAVE EARLY ON WAS THEY COULD PROCEED UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE BUT THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS IN THE ORDINANCE A NEGOTIATION.

AS WITH MANY OF THESE OLDER PD 'S THIS ORDINANCE AS A LEGAL DOCUMENT, FAR BETTER, FAR MORE UNDERSTANDABLE.

FAR MORE ENFORCEABLE THAN WHAT WE'VE HAD IN THE ONES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST. I UNDERSTAND MR. ROGERS CONCERNED, I WILL SAY I THINK IN THE LONG RUN WHEN I'M INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT WITH THE CITY, I OFTEN HAVE TO REMEMBER MY NAME OR MY PARTNER'S NAMES WILL BE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ORDINANCE 20 YEARS FROM NOW WHEN SOMEONE IS LOOKING BACK. SOMETIMES I VIEW THIS -- I GREATLY FEEL SETTING ASIDE THE SUBSTANCE OF THE MIX OF THE DEVELOPMENT THE ORDINANCE WILL BE FAR MORE BENEFICIAL IN THE LONG TERM, WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET, WE KNOW WHAT WE CAN ENFORCE. THAT STANDPOINT, YOU KNOW WE'VE

[01:05:04]

[INAUDIBLE] >> ANY OF THE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'M SORRY COULD YOU REPEAT AGAIN AND EXPLAIN BECAUSE I DID NOT CATCH WHAT YOU SAID.

THE TOWNHOME LOTS AND THE MINIMUM LOT AREA.

>> YEAH, SO THE TOWNS ARE, MENTIONED EARLIER 5000 THEY ARE 2400 SQUARE-FOOT LOT. THEY ARE PERMITTED IF YOU APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN TODAY, THERE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE REGULATIONS OF THE ORDINANCE. I WAS SAYING IF YOU DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION AS THE DEVELOPER MENTIONED TO ADD THE CONDITION OF TOWNS REQUIRED A PERMIT.

>> THANK YOU. >> MY LAST QUESTION, THE SECOND MULTIFAMILY OR COMMERCIAL SPACE DOWN THE ROAD WILL REQUIRE A SUP AS WELL AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS?

>> YES. >> OKAY WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

WITHOUT ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS CAN I GET A MOTION? [INAUDIBLE] I WANT TO MAKE SURE IF ANYBODY HAS ANY THOUGHTS. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IS PRESENTED BY STAFF WITH THE ADDITION OF REQUIRING AN SUP

FOR THE TOWNHOME SECTION. >> I WILL SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS.

>> THANK YOU. MOVING ONTO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT

[008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending and restating in their entirety the development and use regulations of Planned Development District No. 120 (PD-120). The property is located at the northeast corner of FM 663 and FM 875 (Z43-2021-182).]

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FM 663 AND

FM 875. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO AMEND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR PD 120.

THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN SHOWS THIS IS LOCATED IN A SUBURBAN LOW-DENSITY MODULE. WHICH DOES INCLUDE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 20,000 SQUARE FEET OR LARGER.

IN ADDITION THE MODULE DOES TALK ABOUT HAVING ACCESS TO SMALL-SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AS A SECONDARY COMPONENT. THEREFORE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS PROPOSED INCOME IN COMBINATION WITH PROPOSED RETAIL SERVICES DOES APPEAR TO CONFORM TO OUR PLAN.

HERE IS THE CURRENT SITE PLAN FOR PD 120 AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, WAS CURRENTLY APPROVED RIGHT NOW IS TO HAVE A ONE ACRE MINIMUM LIGHT LAYOUT WITH A MAXIMUM OF 35 LOTS.

THIS RIGHT HERE IS WITH THE APPLICANT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, THIS WILL REDUCE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FROM ONE ACRE DATA 20,000 SQUARE FEET PER LOT.

THIS WILL ALSO INCREASE THE LOT COUNT TO 53 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THERE IS ONE SMALL CORRECTION THAT YOU WILL FIND INSIDE YOUR STAFF REPORT IN THE ORDINANCE.

THE ORDINANCE DOES TALK ABOUT THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE BEING 21,780 SQUARE FEET. THAT IS EXACTLY HALF ACRE.

WHEN WE ORIGINALLY RECEIVED THIS PLAN, ALL OF THESE LOTS WERE EXACTLY 1/2 BASICALLY HALF AN ACRE OR LARGER.

AT THE TIME, THE APPLICANT HADN'T TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION THAT WAS NEEDED ALONG 875 SO WHEN THAT OCCURRED, IT ACTUALLY THEY HAD TO REDUCE SOME OF THE LOTS STILL ABOVE 20,000 SQUARE FEET WHICH STILL IS IN CONFORMING WITH FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. BUT WE DO HAVE SOME LOTS THAT

[01:10:01]

THIS IS A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF BOTH DEVELOPMENTS JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW IT CURRENTLY STANDS AND WHAT THE APPLICANTS BASICALLY PROPOSING.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SIX FOOT TALL ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE WITH STONE COLUMNS. IN COMBINATION ALSO WITH A SIX FOOT TALL VEGETATIVE SCREEN WALL.

ALONG 875 SO WE WILL NOT HAVE MASONARY WALLS ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE. SHORT OF THAT ACTUALLY WE WILL HAVE ONE MASONARY WALL IT WILL ACTUALLY BE LOCATED ON THE BACKSIDE OF WHERE YOU GOT THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.

THAT IS THE ONLY AREA YOU WILL HAVE MASONARY WALLS OTHER THAN THAT IT'S FENCES, VEGETATIVE SCREENING ESSENTIALLY.

THERE WILL BE A PLAYGROUND. THERE WILL BE MONUMENT SIGNS AT THE ENTRANCE, THERE WILL BE STAMP STAINED CONCRETE AT THE ENTRANCES THEY ALSO PLAN TO BUILD A SIX FOOT WIDE TRAIL ALONG THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THIS AREA.

THE ONLY WILL THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS RUNNING THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT, THERE WILL BE A SIX FOOT TRAIL THAT RUNS ALONG 875 AND ALSO ALONG 663. MOUNT PEAK IS A PROVIDER WATER SERVICES IN THE AREA AND LOTS WILL HAVE CITY SEWER.

THE PREVIOUS PLAN AS THESE WERE ALL ONE ACRE, THEY WOULD ALL HAVE ON-SITE SEPTIC SYMPTOMS BUT WITH THEM BEING LESS THAN ONE ACRE THEY WILL RUN SEWER IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

STAFF DOES HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING LOT TWO THROUGH FIVE.

THIS SLIDE RIGHT HERE, LET ME GO BACK TO THE OVERALL PLAN.

THESE LOTS HERE WHERE I HAVE MY CURSOR, THESE ARE THE LOTS OF CONCERN. THIS RIGHT HERE IS A CLOSE-UP.

THESE LOTS TO CONTAIN AN OPEN CHANNEL FOR DRAINAGE FLOW.

AND DURING EVENTS, RAIN EVENTS, WATER WOULD FLOW ALONG THE FRONT OF THESE RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

ACCESS TO LOT TWO THROUGH FIVE WILL BE VIA A DRIVEWAY.

THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND THE TYPE OF CULVERTS THAT WILL BE INSTALLED IN THE AREA WOULD BE SIZED TO HANDLE WHAT IS CONSIDERED A 100 YEAR EVENT.

THE APPLICANT OR JUST THE CULVERTS DO REQUIRE MAINTENANCE SINCE THE CHANNELS CAN BECOME BLOCKED WITH DEBRIS, VEGETATION ALSO AS WELL AND COULD OBVIOUSLY HOLD WATER.

SO THESE ARE ALL CONCERNS THAT STAFF HAS ABOUT HAVING AN OPEN CHANNEL RUNNING THROUGH RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

IF APPROVED THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO EXECUTE A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. WE DID SEND OUT 20 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS ALL WITHIN 200 FEET TO DATE, STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THE OPEN CHANNEL ALONG THE FRONT OF THESE RESIDENTIAL LOTS BE COMPLETELY AVOIDED.

AND BE FULLY ENCLOSED OR IF THE OPEN CHANNEL IS TO REMAIN, THESE LOTS ACTUALLY JUST CONVERT INTO OPEN SPACE.

AND WE JUST ADD MORE TRAILS IN THE AREA.

ALSO, THE IDEA OF CONSTRUCTING A REQUIREMENT TO CONSTRUCT EASTBOUND LEFT TURN LANES ALONG 875 AT BOTH ACCESS LOCATIONS, WE WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN AS WELL.

DO YOU KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY WANT TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON THIS, BUT I'M OPEN TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. >> ONE QUESTION I HAVE, OBVIOUSLY STAFF HAS CONCERNS AS WELL, BUT THE POSITION ON THE DRAINAGE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THE LOTS IS TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN IT AS IS FROM THE APPLICANT PERSPECTIVE, BUT PROVIDE A WAY FOR IT TO FLOW CLEARLY THROUGH THE FRONT OF

THE LOTS? >> I THINK THE WAY WE DEFINITELY WOULD WANT THE HOA TO MAINTAIN THAT, WE DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT TWO YEARS, FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD IF THE HOA DOESN'T TAKE CARE OF IT OBVIOUSLY, THE CITY WILL GET THE CALL OBVIOUSLY. THE IDEA OF JUST HAVING IT ENCLOSED AND NOT HAVING ANY TYPE OF ISSUES WHERE A LOT OF

[01:15:02]

IT JUST SEEMS ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES FOR THE LOTS.

WHEREAS YOU CAN JUST ENCLOSE IT AND HAVE A DRIVER -- DRIVEWAY GO RIGHT OVER IT IT SEEMS LESS OF A HASSLE FROM OUR

PERSPECTIVE. >> OKAY.

MY QUESTION WRAPPED AROUND IS A LOOK AT THE LOCATION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, -- THE ONE ACRE LOTS.

OBVIOUSLY THE ONE ACRE LOTS FELL WITHIN THE PLANNING PROCESS FOR MANY YEARS. IT WAS START OUT WITH THE CENTER OF THE CITY AS THE INNER NUCLEUS AND AS WE TRAVELED OUTWARD, TO 875, ESPECIALLY HUNDRED 75 TO THE SOUTH WHICH IS BASICALLY THE BOTTOM BOUNDARY.

I THINK WE MIGHT BARELY GO ACROSS THE ROAD A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEN THAT IS TRULY THE END OF OUR DOMAIN, CORRECT?

>> YES SIR. YOU KNOW THE WAY WE'VE ALWAYS SEEN IT, YOU KNOW ANYTHING SEDUCTIVE, 875, WE DEFINITELY NEVER WANT TO SEE THINGS WITH SEWER I THINK WE WANT TO SEE SEWER CAPACITY ONLY EXIST TO THE NORTH OF 875.

>> I'M SPEAKING FROM A DENSITY PERSPECTIVE.

I CAN'T EVEN REMEMBER GOING BACK INTO THE MID-2000, 2005 THROUGH 2007. THE LONG-TERM THIRD PROCESS IS THAT THE LOTS BORDERING 875 WOULD PERHAPS BE 2 TO 5 ACRE LOTS. ESPECIALLY SINCE WE ARE BORDERING 875 AT THIS POINT. TO DO HALF-ACRE LOTS WHICH I KNOW WILL NEVER RECEIVED TO BE PASSED ROUGHLY ASHFORD WE'VE KIND OF DROPPED DOWN AT THIS POINT WITH SOME HALF-ACRE MIXES. NOW WE ARE LOOKING AT AN ENTIRE SUBDIVISION THAT WAS SLIGHTED BY COUNSEL TO BE ONE ACRE LOTS.

WHEN WAS THIS APPROVED? MAYBE A YEAR AGO?

>> THE ORIGINAL ONE. >> TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO?

>> KEEP IN MIND I THINK BEFORE PD 120, THERE WAS I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY REZONED TO HALF-ACRE AND THEN IT WENT TO ONE ACRE AND NOW ESSENTIALLY THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR HER TO GO BACK TO HALF-ACRE. I'M TRYING TO RECALL WHATEVER OLD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I KNOW WHEN WE DID THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF 2018, AS A COMMUNITY WE OBVIOUSLY FOUND THE AREA WOULD BE SUITED FOR SUBURBAN MODULE WHICH IS 20,000 SQUARE FEET OR LARGER SO IT LENDS ITSELF FOR HALF-ACRE STYLE LOTS BUT YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED, THEY WERE FROM THE HALF-ACRE AND WENT

DIRECTLY TO THIS ONE ACRE. >> HOW MANY HAVE A COLOSTOMY

HAVE ON PAGE 75? >> PAGE 75 ACRE LOTS?

I WOULD SAY NONE. >> EXACTLY.

>> ESTHER. >> FOR ME PERSONALLY IT WAS NEVER MY INTENTION. I NEVER ENVISIONED IT BECAUSE BASICALLY THE VISION WAS WHEN YOU HIT THE OUTER BEND, AS YOU GO TO NUCLEUS TO GET THE DENSITY.

SO I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO THINK.

AND I GUESS ON THE OPEN SPACE, WE WENT FROM 2.71 ACRES DOWN TO ONE POINT EIGHT WHICH IS 33 PERCENT DROP ON GREEN SPACE

OPEN WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? >> IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THEY ARE LOOKING AT TRYING TO UTILIZE SOME OF THE AREA FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL. THIS WAS AGAIN, JUST THEIR REQUEST TO REDUCE THE OPEN SPACE AND ACTUALLY HAVE A RETAIL COMPONENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT.

SO AGAIN, THAT WILL PROBABLY EAT INTO THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO OBTAIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF LOTS OBVIOUSLY.

AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS ALSO LEADING INTO, EATING INTO THE OPEN SPACE. STAFF PERSPECTIVE ON THIS, IF THE OPEN DRAINAGE IS GOING TO STAY, WE ABSOLUTELY WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE OPEN SPACE. BRING THAT OPEN SPACE BACK AND INCLUDE ADDITIONAL TRAILS TO THE AREA ALSO.

AGAIN, WE'RE FALLING BACK ON THE COVER HAS A PLAN.

THE COMPANY HAS A PLAN DOES TALK ABOUT 20,000 SQUARE FEET OR LARGER, IT DOES TALK ABOUT HAVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL COMPONENT ASSOCIATED WITH IT. WE FIND THAT LOOKING AT THE COMPANY HAS A PLAN, IS IT ADHERING TO IT? FOR THE MOST PART YOU KNOW WE STILL VENTURE TO SAY YES.

BUT AGAIN, WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT SAID ALSO THAT COUNSEL MADE A CONSCIOUS DECISION TO GO FROM HALF-ACRE TO ONE ACRE.

>> OUGHT TO TRY TO WORK WITH FOLKS AND I CAN SUPPORT A

[01:20:05]

>> I CAN UNDERSTAND. >> UNDERSTAND YOU WANT TO DROP IN HALF-ACRE LOTS ON THE NORTH END AND KEEP THE ONE ACRE WIDER COUNTRY APPEARANCE ON THE SOUTH END, HONESTLY I HAVE MY OWN ISSUES WITH RETAIL WHICH I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF THAT, WHERE SOME FOLKS DON'T LIKE TO DRIVE ON THE WAY INTO TOWN FOR RETAIL OPPORTUNITY SO I GET THAT ALSO.

THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING WHAT STAFF THOUGHTS ARE.>> SO THE COMMUNITY RETAIL I GUESS THIS IS KIND OF A BUFFER THAN ON THE FAR CORNER? FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE?

>> ABSOLUTELY. IT WOULD JUST FOLLOW THE BASE COMMUNITY RETAIL REQUIREMENTS. LET'S SAY FOR INSTANCE SOMEBODY WAS TO COME IN FOR DRIVE-THROUGH OR RESTAURANT OVER 1000 SQUARE FEET THERE WILL STILL BE SUP REQUIREMENTS THIS IS BY NO WAY GETTING A BLANKET APPROVAL FOR A WHOLE SLEW OF DIFFERENT USES. IT HAS TO ABIDE BY WHATEVER THE COMMUNITY RETAIL REQUIREMENTS ARE.

>> THE OTHER QUESTION I WOULD HAVE I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP. ARE THEY GOING TO ACCESS ALL THE COMMUNITY RETAIL FROM THE INTERIOR OF SUBDIVISION?

>> NO, SIR THEY DO HAVE TWO ACCESS POINTS THE FIRST ACCESS POINT YOU DO HAVE TWO ENTER INTO THE COMMUNITY FOR A FEW FEET AND YOU HAVE THIS ACCESS POINT HERE, THERE ARE NO RESIDENTIAL HOMES ADJACENT TO IT OR ASSOCIATE IN THE AREA THE OTHER ACCESS POINT WILL BE OFF OF 875 AND AGAIN IS WHERE WE ARE LOOKING FOR SORT OF THE LEFT TURN LANE ON 75 AS WELL.

>> IT'S RIGHT ON THE CORNER? OF 875 AND 663?

>> YES SIR. IT'S PROBABLY --

>> WITHIN REASON. OR WITHIN 500 FEET.

>> PROBABLY YES, WITHIN THAT. >> I WILL SAY ABOUT 500 FEET.

>> IF THOSE BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO FRONT THE ROADS THE BACK OF HOUSE IS THE RESIDENTIAL THAT WOULD BE MY BIGGEST, UNLESS THERE IS ACCESS FROM BOTH SIDES.

>> I'M SORRY SAY THAT AGAIN, COMMISSIONER?

>> THE BACK OF HOUSE OF ALL THE BUSINESSES.

IF THEY'RE FACING THE MAIN THOROUGHFARES, NOT THE SUBDIVISION. THE BACK HOUSE OF ALL THE BUSINESSES BEING INTERNAL TO THE SUBDIVISION.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> AND THAT WILL GET

COMPLAINTS. >> APPLICANT, LET ME SEE IF I HAVE THE -- I THOUGHT I MIGHT HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF THE LANDSCAPE. YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS PHRASE IS WHERE MY CURSOR IS, THAT IS A COMMUNITY RETAIL LOT.

AGAIN, THEY DO PROPOSED EIGHT FOOT TALL MASONRY WALL AND THERE WILL BE LANDSCAPING BEHIND THAT ALSO AS WELL.

JUST FOR EVERYONE'S INFORMATION.

>> I DIDN'T CATCH THAT ON THE FIRST TIME.

>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO SPEAK?

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> JUST A CRACK AT 3441 PLAINVIEW ROAD IN MIDLOTHIAN. -- THEY'VE BEEN HELPING US A SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS WORKING ON THIS.

TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

ONE QUICKIE WE DID FOR THE RECOMMENDATION GO WITH THE SOLID MASONRY WALL AND WE DID ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING BEHIND THAT RETAIL ON THE CORNER. HE ALSO DESIGNED WHERE THE ROAD BACKED UP TO IT INSTEAD OF THE HOUSES.

JUST TO GIVE IT AN EVEN LARGER BUFFER.

WITHOUT THAT LOOK GOOD HAVING THE ROAD GO THROUGH LIKE THAT.

AND TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT DENSITY THE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY, THE GERMAN I'M PERCHING THE FROM THE ORIGINALLY HAD IT ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THIS WOULD BE THE LEAST DENSE PROPERTY GOING DOWN ALL OF 663, 20,000 FOOT PLUS AS A HOMEBUILDER, WE HEAR WHAT PEOPLE WANT AND NOT EVERYONE CAN ACRE, BUT THEN THE ONLY OTHER CHOICE IS RELATIVELY SMALL LOTS. THERE'S REALLY NOT ANYBODY DOING THESE HALF-ACRE SIZED LOTS.

IN MIDLOTHIAN AND SEE A LOT -- THEY TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER END, NICER NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE FEEL LIKE THAT IS WHAT THE DEMAND IS FOR. ORIGINALLY THESE UNDER FOR SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR TO COVENTRY, AND ALL THE NEIGHBORS, THEY WERE NOT EVEN TRULY, ANNA PEOPLE WILL CALL HIM HALF-ACRE LOTS. THEY WERE ACTUALLY MUCH

[01:25:02]

THERE IS A REASON THAT PREVIOUS DEVELOPER, THE GENTLEMAN I WAS TALKING TO, HIM AND HIS PARTNER WENT BACK AND HE WAS ON THE FINEST SIDE BUT THEY CAME BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND HE ACTUALLY SAID THAT SOME FRICTION TRYING THE ONE ACRE LOT BECAUSE IT COULDN'T GET THE SEWER THEY NEEDED AND SO THEY DECIDED WE WILL GO WITH SEPTIC. SO THEY ACTUALLY CHANGE IT FROM SOMETHING MORE LIKE COVENTRY TO THE ONE ACRE LOTS.

AND THEN THEY RAN INTO SOME AFFORDABILITY ISSUES.

AND UNFORTUNATELY THE GOD WAS DOING IT PASSED AWAY LAST YEAR.

SO WHEN I CAME AND WE STARTED WORKING AND REALIZED THE NORTHEAST CORNER, THERE'S A FUTURE PUMP STATION THAT WILL START FAIRLY SOON AT THE BACK AND WE WERE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT LOGISTICALLY, WE COULD FEASIBLY SEWER THE PROPERTY.

JUST SOME NEW IDEAS. WE CAME IN, I WANTED TO BE AN ACE NEIGHBORHOOD I WANTED TO LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE ASKING US FOR WHEN THEY COME INTO MIDLOTHIAN AND THEY WANT TO BUILD A CUSTOM HOME. REALLY NO THERE IS DEMAND FOR THESE. I THINK 20,000 FOOT PLUS.

THERE ARE 30 SOME ODD THOUSAND FOOT LOTS IN THERE.

WE FELT LIKE THAT MET THE DEMAND OF WHAT WE ARE HEARING.

AND I KNOW THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH THE DENSITY, WITH HOW DENSE IT IS AND NOT HAVE A BIGGER LOTS THAT FAR SOUTH.

ONCE AGAIN IT WOULD BE LARGEST LOTS ANYWHERE DOWN THAT CORRIDOR. 20,000 SQUARE FEET PLUS AND WE WANT SOME CHARACTERS THAT CAME IN.

I'M THE ONE THAT THROUGH MY EXPERIENCE OF COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPING WE'VE WORKED WITH A LOT OF DEVELOPERS AND OTHER CITIES. AND OTHER CITIES THEY WOULD NOT LET THEM CUT DOWN THE TREES ALONG THE CREEK AND I AM A TREE GUY SO I WANTED, I LIKE THE FLOW OF THE ROAD AND IT KIND OF GAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD MORE JUST BECAUSE I GET TIRED OF SEEING DEVELOPERS COME IN AND CLEAR CUT EVERYTHING AND MAKE IT A PERFECT GRADE.S LOOKING FOR A WAY TO GIVE IT CHARACTER.

I REALLY LIKE THE WAY THE STREET FLOWS AND THAT KIND OF GOES IN THE CREEK DISCUSSION. ORIGINALLY, THE FIRST IS ALL ABOUT WE ARE FREE PEOPLE HAVE AN ACROSS THE CREEK.

A COUPLE OF THINGS TO POINT OUT HOW THESE GUYS DO A STUDY ON IT. IT ORIGINATES RIGHT OVER IN THE CORNER OF THE PROPERTY IT IS NOT A BIG CREEK AND HAS A SOLID ROCK BOTTOM, MAYBE A FEW FEET DEEP.

AND IT NEVER HAS WATER IN IT. IF IT RAINS REALLY HARD IT COULD HAVE WATER FOR DAYS. WE HAD THE IDEA FOR COMING ON THE CORRIDOR AND YOU LEAVE THIS BEAUTIFUL TREE LINE INTACT, JUST HAVE A FEW CROSSINGS, A REALLY AS YOU'RE DRIVING IN IS ALMOST ALL GREEN SPACE HALFWAY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE ARE GIVEN GREEN SPACE ON BOTH SIDES.

SO I REALLY LIKE THE COSMETICS OF THAT COMING IN.

THAT IS ALWAYS STUCK WITH THAT PLAN AND WENT WITH IT.

AND SO AS WE MOVED ON IN ORDER TO TRY TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS, AS THESE GUYS DO A FULL DRAINAGE STUDY ON THE LITTLE CREEK AND THEN WE CAME BACK AND DESCENDED AS A DEVELOPER IF WE WOULD DO CROSSINGS WITH THEIR RESPECT TO A 100 YEAR FLOOD. JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH PEOPLE ACCESSIBILITY.

AND SO THAT IS WHERE WE ARE COMING FROM AS A DEVELOPER.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THE COMMENTS.

>> I CAN ADJUST THE CONCERNS WITH THE CHANNEL JUST BRIEFLY.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS BASICALLY TWOFOLD.

ONE IS THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE CHANNEL AND THE OTHER IS MAINTENANCE. LIKE HE SAID, IF WE DESIGN THOSE CULVERTS AND DRIVEWAYS TO CONVEY THE 100 YEAR EVENT WITHOUT OVERTOPPING THE DRIVEWAYS, AND THEN THROUGH MODELING OF THE CHANNEL, BUT AS PART OF THE 100 YEAR FLOW IN AN EASEMENT WHERE NOTHING CAN BE BUILT IN THE EASEMENT, THE EASEMENT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED, THAT ADDRESSED FUNCTIONALITY AND THEN BY MAKING MAINTENANCE AS PART OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THE HOA RATHER THAN THE CITY, THEN BASICALLY THAT REMOVES THE MAINTENANCE LIABILITY FROM THE CITY AND IS A BIG ENOUGH PREFERENCE OF THE DEVELOPER TO ASSUME THE COST AS THE HOA TO, HE THINKS IT'S WORTH IT TO SAVE THE TREES AND PROVIDE THOSE PREMIUM LOTS ALONG THE SIDE. I'M VERY HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS THAT YOU WANT TO ASK. >> WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING THEN IS ALL THE DRAINAGE OBVIOUSLY DESIGNED FOR THE FLOW OF

[01:30:04]

>> CORRECT, ONE OF THE OPTIONS WAS TO DO THE ENTIRE DRAINAGE UNDERGROUND BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE TAKING OUT THIS TREE LINE WHICH I'M TRYING TO DO STUFF OPPOSITE OF THAT.

WE WOULD PUT AT EACH CROSSING, WE WOULD HAVE CULVERTS DESIGNED

FOR THE 100 YEAR FLOOD. >> AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THE CULVERTS AND THE DRIVEWAYS AND THE TREES ALL IN THE AREA WOULD

BE OF THE HOA? >> CORRECT.

>> BUT THE LOT TECHNICALLY, WOULD GO ALL THE WAY TO THE STREET? IT WOULDN'T START AFTER

EASEMENT. >> YES.

ANDREW KNEW THEY HAD CONCERNS SO WE DECIDED TO HELP ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. THE HOA COULD HELP.

I WANT TO PROTECT THE TREES AND THE NATURAL FEEL WHERE IT IS NOT JUST A COOKIE-CUTTER WITTED NEIGHBORHOOD IS CLEAR CUT.

>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

THANK YOU SIR. >> THANK YOU ALL.

>> WE DO HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

ALISHA -- PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

>> -- 206 BACK TO WHERE THIS WILL BUTT UP AGAINST.

WE WERE HERE, MY HUSBAND CAME AND WHEN WERE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE ACRE LOTS AND AT THAT POINT WE WERE ARGUING OVER THE FENCE LINE BEING BECAUSE WE DO OWN FOUR FEET FROM BEHIND THAT WHERE OUR TREE LINE IS FROM THE CREEK.

AT THIS POINT NOW WITH THE RETAIL SPACE COMING AND WERE GOING FROM THE ONE ACRE LOTS TO THIS HALF ACRE LOT.

SO YES, DENSITY IS GOING UP AND IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR WILL BECOME ON -- I'VE LIVED THERE FOR FOUR YEARS. JUST TO GET OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TAKING TWICE AS LONG THERE.

875 GOING DOWN THERE AND YOU'LL END UP LATER DOWN THE ROAD HAVING TO PUT A LIGHT IN THERE. IT IS JUST, IS A ONE STOP SIGN 805 DOES NOT STOP SO IT'S REALLY SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AS FAR AS THAT. ADDITIONALLY, WE LOOK AT TAKING THE ONE ACRE LOTS DOWN AND NOW GOING TO HALF ACRE LOTS, ADDING THE COMMERCIAL RETAIL SPACE. WE CANNOT SAY WITH THAT COMMERCIAL RETAIL SPACE IS GOING TO BE AT THIS POINT.

875 YOU HAVE STORAGE UNITS GALORE.

WE HAVE DOLLAR GENERAL AND THE NOTHING MUCH OUT THERE THERE IS MY BEHAVIOR-BASED CLINIC -- WHAT WE DO NOT NEED IS A GAS STATION, A DONUT SHOP, NAIL SALON, THINGS LIKE THAT GOING IN. THAT'S WHY WE GO INTO THE TOWN VERSUS FARAWAY ONE OF THE BIG DRAWS MOVING TO MIDLOTHIAN WAS THE FACT THAT THE ZONING WAS SEPARATE LIKE THAT.

I ORIGINALLY COME FROM THE HOUSTON AREA AND WE SEE A LOT OF CROSS OVER IN THERE. THE POPULATION BECOMES SO INCREDIBLY DENSE TO THE POINT WHERE THE SCHOOLS CANNOT KEEP UP. HERE THE SCHOOLS ALREADY CANNOT KEEP UP. HERITAGE IS TOO SMALL FOR THE TIME IT WAS FINISHED. EVERY OTHER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL GOING UP OF 14TH STREET. ALL HOUSES WILL BE ZONED AT MOUNTAIN PEAK FDOT THE LAST THREE YEARS AND WE ARE OVERWHELMED. WE NEED TO CONSIDER THE AMOUNT OF DENSITY WE ARE PUTTING OUT THERE AS WE DID.

MY NEIGHBOR AT 210 IRIS DRIVE, WANTED TO COME AND OPPOSE US AS WELL. I'M ALSO REPRESENTING -- AND IRIS DRIVE IN OPPOSITION OF THIS AS WELL.

AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THERE WAS AN IMAGE ON HERE WITH THE YELLOW LINE GOING AROUND IT.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT BUTTS UP TO COVENTRY CROSSING.

CAN YOU BRING UP THE IMAGE? SO I WOULD BECOME A THERE'S A BIG CORNER LOT COUNT ONE, TWO, THAT IS WHERE MY HOUSE RESIDES OUT THERE. IT APPEARS IT COMES RIGHT UP TO OUR FENCE ON WHICH THERE IS THAT CREEK THAT IS RIGHT BEHIND THERE AS WELL. LIKE I SAID, FOUR FEET IS

ACTUALLY MY PROPERTY AS WELL. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND ME ASKING, WHAT SIZE LOT DO YOU LIVE ON? > IT IS RIGHT UNDER HALF AN

ACRE. >> SO THOSE ARE HALF ACRE LOTS?

>> YES ON IRIS DRIVE IT IS THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IT IS

NOT. >> JUST SO YOU NO SOMETHING ELSE WOULD YOU LIKE 663 WIDENED? IT'S A STATE HIGHWAY -- THE CITY REQUESTED FOR THE ROAD TO

[01:35:08]

STOPLIGHT THERE. >> AS FAR AS THE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE GOING IN THIS SITE. THERE WAS REALLY NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THAT. WHY THE COMMERCIAL SPACE NOW? WHY WAS IT NOT BROUGHT UP BEFORE? WE BEEN ARGUING ABOUT HALF ACRE LOT LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S NOTHING UNDER AN ACRE OF 875 OVER THERE.

YOU WILL BRING THE CITY OUT TO THE COUNTRY.

THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE]

>> MA'AM, WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE PLEASE FILL OUT A FORM.

AFTERWARDS, STATE YOUR NAME AND ACTRESS.

>> AMANDA -- 617 LEE -- LEANDER WAY. ROSEBUD.

-- HE'S RIGHT THERE'S NOT A LOT OF HALF ACRE PROPERTIES JUST OVER HALF ACRE PROPERTIES. IT MAKES SENSE TO ME HAVE SEEN IT A LOT IN MY INDUSTRY. THE ONLY THING HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ON IS THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

NOT ONLY FOR BEING KIND OF IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND BRINGING THAT OUT BUT ALSO FOR THE TRAFFIC SPECIFICALLY, 663

AND 875. >> SIR? WOULD YOU LIKE TO APPROACH THE PODIUM? STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

FILL OUT A FORM AFTERWARDS. >> SURE, I DIDN'T KNOW I HAD A QUESTION UNTIL I CAME HERE. MY NAME IS JESSE KITCHENS, LIT 214 214 -- I DON'T KNOW THE LADY LIMIT 206 BUT I JUST LOST MY PARTNER AND WITH MY OTHER NEIGHBORS WE ARE AGAINST IT.

YOU HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

SOME OF IT WHERE YOU HAVE TO DRIVE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET TO THE COMMERCIAL AREAS. IT SEEMS TO BE VERY MUCH OF A CONFLICT. THE TRAFFIC ITSELF IS NOT VERY GOOD ESPECIALLY THAT CORNER, IT IS HARD TO GET OUT WHEN IT GETS

REALLY BUSY. >> ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE I WOULD LIKE A MOTION.

>> MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED?

PASSES. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, CHOICE HOMES TO THE WEST.

HILLCREST. WHAT SIZE ARE THOSE LOTS?

>> THOSE ARE HALF ACRE ACTUALLY, SOME ARE --

>> THEY ARE HANDLED THROUGH SEWER.

>> YES SIR THEY ARE HANDLED THROUGH SEWER.

ALL OF THIS OFF TO THE WEST, YOU WILL FIND 6/10 OF AN ACRE, YOU'LL FIND HALF ACRE, IT'S WHEN YOU GO EAST, WHEN YOU GO

TOWARDS -- >> IN OTHER WORDS IN MY MIND, EVERYTHING BORDERING 875 IS LARGER THAN, IT'S LIKE --

>> ON 875 GOING, EXACTLY, GOING TO THE EAST.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE HALF ACRE LOT I JUST DID NOT LIKE SEEING THEM ON 875.

I REALLY AM HAVING A HARD TIME BACKING OFF ON THE COMMERCIAL.

THE WISDOM OF THAT IS GREAT. BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DO NOT WANT TO DRIVE ALL THE WAY TO TOWN SO I COULD SEE LIKE WE'VE GOT A DOLLAR STORE OUT THERE NOW.

AND THAT'S YOU KNOW ON 875. >> THAT IS OUTSIDE THE CITY.

>> YES. THAT PLACE IS JUST GOING ALL THE TIME. BUT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE CORNER ON THE COMMERCIAL. YOU BROUGHT UP SOME I'D NOT THOUGHT OF WITH THE BACKS OF THE BUSINESSES POTENTIALLY, EVEN IF YOU HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT WALL THERE, THAT FACING INTO AND POTENTIALLY DEPENDING ON WHAT TYPE OF BUSINESS WENT IN AND HOW LATE AT NIGHT THEY OPERATE WITH LIGHTS AND LIGHTING AND ALL THAT ALSO. IT THROWS A LITTLE BIT OF A RED

[01:40:06]

FLAG. >> UNDERSTOOD.

>> MYSELF, I WOULD SUPPORT IT IF IT WAS A ONE ACRE LOT ON TH SOUTH END. THE COMMERCIAL , I REALLY MIXED ON THAT AND HOW WE HANDLE THE ON THE CORNER TO WHERE IT IS SAFE. I COULD SEE WHERE IT MIGHT WORK BECAUSE ESPECIALLY IF YOU COULD COME IN ON THE NORTHWEST ENTRANCE AND IT WAS HANDLED INTERIORLY.

BUT I'M ALSO THINKING IF YOU HAD WIDENING OF 663 AT THE NORTHWEST ENTRANCE, FOR YOUR TRAFFIC COMING SOUTH BOUND ON 663 AND THEN WANT TO TURN INTO THE BUSINESS AND THEN CARS HITTING THE SHOULDER TRYING TO GO AROUND THEM IN OTHER WORDS TO GET TO THE STOP SIGN. THERE'S A LOT GOING ON AT THAT CORNER. THINK WE HAVE SEVERAL PRETTY GOOD ACCIDENTS

THERE AS IT IS. >> I AM NOT SURE IF THERE IS A

-- [INAUDIBLE] >> THERE IS A DIESEL LANE COMING OFF OF 663. THERE IS A MIDDLE LANE.

>> THEY WOULD BE A WAY FOR THEM TO SAFELY GET IN.

>> THAT'S WHAT WERE NOT RECOMMENDING IMPROVEMENTS HERE.

IT WILL NOT STOP THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC SOUTHBOUND.

THEY HAVE A WAY TO TURN IN. 875 OBVIOUSLY IS A BIG CONCERN OF OURS. GOING BACK TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS, WOMAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT OUR FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING WE MAY KNOW TO LOOK AT WITH COUNSEL. BUT WE HAVE THE REGIONAL -- WHICH DOES CALL FOR BELIEVER NOT COMMERCIAL, GENERAL, PROFESSIONAL, COMMUNITY RETAIL USES.

WHEN YOU HAVE THE SUBURBAN MODULE ALSO CALLING FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, THAT'S WHERE STAFF, STAFF ALWAYS FALL BACK ON THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WE WILL ALWAYS LOOK AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUT THAT'S THE POINT OF THIS MEETING RIGHT NOW.

TO GET THE FEEDBACK FROM YOU GUYS ALSO THAT THIS IS SOMETHING Y'ALL ARE COMFORTABLE WITH.

>> THERE NEEDED TO BE SOME RETAIL APPLICATIONS BUT THIS IS A TOUGH SITUATION IN THIS PARTICULAR CORNER.

>> UNDERSTOOD. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE HALF-ACRE LOTS. BUT THE COMMERCIAL IS DEFINITELY A CONCERN RIGHT THERE.

>> YES SIR. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU.

DOES ANYONE HAVE A MOTION? >> I'M GOING TO MOVE TO DENY.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. IF YOU COULD GET RID OF THE COMMERCIAL COMMUNITY RETAIL, I WOULD VOTE.

I WOULD NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HALF-ACRE LOTS.

I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE COMMERCIAL THERE.

I JUST DON'T THINK THAT, I THINK IS TOO DANGEROUS ON THAT CORNER. AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.

>> I CANNOT SPEAK FOR THE REST OF THE MEMBERS BUT I DO PREFER THAT WE, SINCE 2011, LOOKING AT THESE AND LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR ONE BECAUSE I VOTED ON IT.

I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE TRY TO CONTINUE TO OFFER -- ESPECIALLY ON THE OUTERBORO LIMITS WHICH WE'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO DO. AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FOLKS WHO WANT TO PURCHASE HALF-ACRE ROCK AND 5000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS AND ZERO LOT LINE LOTS.

THE MARKET IS OUT THERE YOU HAVE TO DRAW THE LINE SOMEWHERE TO PRESERVE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, WHICH IS OFFER THESMALL TOWN FEEL . WHILE YOU HAVE HIGHER DENSITY TO OFFER. I'M NOT VOTING AGAINST IT BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT TO SUPPORT IT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIVERSITY IN IT ALSO.

I AM ALL FOR THE HALF-ACRE LOTS.

I WILL TELL YOU POINT BLANK THAT I DEAL WITH SERVICES AS YOU DO. WE GO ON A LOT OF ONE ACRE LOTS WHERE YOU SEE WHAT I SEE WHICH IS THE BACK CORRIDOR OF THE LOT AND THEY HAVE JOHNSON GRASS GROWING IN IT.

THERE'S DEFINITELY MARKET FOR HALF AND THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS ALSO. I CANNOT SUPPORT THE RETAIL FOR SURE. OR THE COMMERCIAL ON THAT

CORNER. >> SAME FOR ME.

[01:45:03]

I THINK IT IS A NICE FINISH OFF ON 663.

BUT I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH THE COMMERCIAL RETAIL.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED?

DENIED UNANIMOUS. >> WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS. DO I HAVE TO CLOSE ANYTHING OR

-- WE WILL >> THE TIME IS 7:52 PM.

ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE BACK. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM

[009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the development and use regulations of +/-351.4 acres in the Chamblee Survey, Abstract No. 192; W.W. Eavin Survey, Abstract No. 932; S.D. Sutton Survey, Abstract No. 1015; and the L. Newton Survey, Abstract No. 792, by changing the zoning from Single-Family One (SF-1) District, Agricultural (A) District, and Planned Development District No. 7 (PD-7) to Planned Development District No. 147 (PD-147) for Commercial and Heavy Industrial uses. The property is generally located north of the intersection Highway 67 and east of Ward road (Case No. Z46-2021-192).]

FOR COMMERCIAL AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES.

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 67 AND EAST OF WARD ROAD.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN FRONT OF YOU IS 356 ACRE -- REQUESTED TO BE READ ZONED TO DEVELOPMENT 167 FOR NONRESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. WITH BASIC ZONING OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THIS IS LOCATED BETWEEN OLD FORT WORTH ROAD AND HIGHWAY 67. WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DO IS NONRESIDENTIAL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT.

INDUSTRIAL USE. AS A GO TO THE PRESENTATION I'LL EXPLAIN THE PROCESS FOR THIS PD.

I WILL TALK ABOUT THE USES. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PROPOSED OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL IS MORE OF THE MOST INTENSE ZONING DISTRICT. HOWEVER WITH IN THIS PD IS A FURTHER EXPLAIN, YOU'LL NOTICE THIS IS A TRUE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THE CURRENT PROPERTY DESIGNATIONS REGIONAL MODULE. ALL PROPERTY LOCATED TO THE WEST AND SOUTH IS IN THE INDUSTRIAL MODULE.

TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY SOUTHWEST OF THE PROPERTY IS A SOLAR FARM THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR.

IT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AS WE SPEAK.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT THIS IS THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN, WILL TALK MORE ABOUT THE CONCEPT PLAN LATER IN THE DEVELOPMENT. WE MENTIONED THE USES.

WHEN THIS FIRST CAME BEFORE US, BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL IN A WORKSHOP. ONE OF THE CONCERNS OF CITY COUNCIL HAD WAS OVER THE PERMITTED USES THAT ALLOWED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE STAFF CONCERNS AS WELL SOME CONCERNS WITH USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT, HE SAID PERMITTED -- AND CONCERNS ABOUT USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND THE SIZE OF PROPERTY ALLOWED MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. WHAT WE DID WAS FIRST WHILE THE APPLICANT WENT THROUGH THE USE TABLE AND IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE, I NUMBERED THE PAGE IN THE PACKET FOR A REASON.

PAGE 117 OF THE PACKET. HE GIVES YOU A DIFFERENT TYPE OF USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT, PERMITTED THROUGH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT AND SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED ANY OTHER USES THAT ARE NOT LISTED BUT PERMITTED IN THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WILL STILL BE PERMITTED AS IT STATES IN SECTION 2.04 OF THE ORDINANCE. A LOT OF THE USES ARE THE ONES THAT WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT PERTAINING TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL

[01:50:02]

SOME OF THE THINGS WE ARE PROHIBITING OUR LARGE PLANT, FIRE AND SHOOTING RANGE, OUTDOOR, FACILITIES, LET-- LANDFILL, REFINERY, TOBACCO MANUFACTURING, ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS, -- AS YOU GO THROUGH THE LIST, THERE ARE VARIOUS USES THAT ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE CONCERN.

THEY ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE NUISANCES REGARDING POLLUTANTS IN THE AIR AND THEY HAVE TO STAY WITHIN PARTICULAR PARTICULATE MATTER. THE USE IS GENERALLY TRIGGER THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN A TRUE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION I WOULD NOT SAY THIS IS A TRULY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL BASE ZONING THAT WE HAVE AFTER WENT TO THE USES. VARIOUS REGULATIONS IN THE ORDINANCE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR AND I ENCOURAGE YOU LOOK AT THE PERMITTED USES BY RIGHT.

HOSE USES PERMITTED THROUGH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT ONCE AGAIN, ANYTHING THAT IS IN HERE THAT STATES SUP WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COME BACK TO ALL OF YOU AND CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

I WOULD FOCUS ON PROHIBITED USES, NO MATTER WHAT IS STATED IN 2.04, THESE WILL BE PROHIBITED.

SOME BIG ONES ARE NUMBERS 17 DOWN TO NUMBER 34, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE MAIN WAS A HAD US CONCERNED.

AND I FEEL LIKE WE GOT IN A GOOD PLACE, FOR HIGH-QUALITY DEVELOPMENT AND STILL ALLOW THEM SOME FLEXIBILITY REGARDING THE USES. BUT STILL PROTECTING THE CITY LONG TERM. ONE OF THE CONCERNS OF WHY WE LIMITED THE USES IN THE WAY WE DID IS SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU ALL RECOMMENDED EARLY TONIGHT WITH RESIDENTIAL.

RIGHT HERE UP TO THE WEST, EVEN THOUGH IT IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS IT IS ALSO CURRENTLY RESIDENTIAL.

THOSE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS BY RIGHT SOMEONE COULD COME IN AND DO ANYTHING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT BY RIGHT. THAT WE CANNOT REGULATE.

WITHIN THIS PD AS WE WENT ALONG THERE WERE CERTAIN USES THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.F THEY COME IN AND THEY ARE HAVING OUTSIDE STORAGE, THERE'S ADDITIONAL SCREENING REQUIREMENTS ROUTE THAT PD THAT ARE REQUIRED.

THERE IS AN ARTICULATION ZONES, LOVE THE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE IS MIRRORED AFTER THE MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK FURTHER DOWN ON 67. MAYBE SOME OF YOU RECALL IT WAS A OLDER ORDINANCE THEY'VE ARTICULATION ZONES TO PAY UPON WHERE THE BUILDING IS FACING THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PAIRED WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN, ONE THING THEY WORKED DILIGENTLY ON WAS CONCERNED THAT COUNCIL HAD THE STAFF HAD, REGARDING TRUCK CUEING, PARKING, THAT WILL BE CONTAINMENT IN THE SET ONE MAJOR CONCERN WAS YOU SEE A LOT OF FACILITIES OF LARGER WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION USES WHERE IT BLEEDS ONTO THE FRONTAGE ROADS. IT WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS AND ONE THING WE WORKED WITH THEM ON, ONE THING COUNSELS CONCERNED ABOUT WAS HOW TO CONTAIN THAT WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF. WE FEEL THAT THE CONCEPT PLAN TO SHOW THAT. ANY CHANGES TO THE CONCEPT PLAN, MAJOR MODIFICATIONS WILL BE REQUIRED AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY GOING BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.

THOSE WOULD NEED MODIFICATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, THEY HAVE APPROXIMATE 3.4 ACRE SITE IT WILL ALLOW MORE OF THE COMMERCIAL USES. AND THE COMMERCIAL USES WILL BE REGULATED BY THE REGULAR ZONING ORDINANCE SUCH AS ARTICULATION DESIGN SUCH AS WE ALL HAVE A BETTER FLOW WITH LESS SITE DEVELOPMENT JUST TO THE NORTH. ONE THING WE ARE ALSO WORKING ON WAS INCREASE IN LANDSCAPING THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT.

WE ALL LIKE OUR LANDSCAPING AND WE LIKE QUALITY LANDSCAPING.

WE WORKED ON THE TYPES OF OVER STORY TREES, 60 PERCENT ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAYS AND FOR THE SCREENING, TO ALLOW FOR A MIXTURE OF OVER STORY, OTHER VEGETATION, AND DECORATIVE TREES TO BE ABLE TO ORNAMENTAL TREES.

THERE IS A NICE, IT CREATES A TRUE SCREENING METHOD.

[01:55:05]

THIS WOULD BE REQUIRED. ONE THING WE REALLY DID TRY TO FOCUS ON WAS HOW COULD WE HAVE THE MOST MINIMAL IMPACT WITH THE PUBLIC WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT? THAT IS WHERE YOU WILL SEE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, WE TALKED ABOUT ADDITIONAL SCREENING, WHY CERTAIN HAVE TO BE LOCATED IN A CERTAIN WAY. ONE THING, AND ARTICULATIONS AND YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE THREE ZONES ON THE MAP.

TWO OF THEM ABUTTING 67 WHICH WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE BUSINESS PARK, SOMETHING THEY DID -- WITH HIGHER ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS, HIGHER DESIGN STANDARDS.

WE ALSO HAVE -- FOR THE ARTICULATIONS ON.

WHEN WE HAVE A WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION CENTER, RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT STANDARDS FOR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL IS VERY LIMITED IN THE DESIGNS. THERE IS VERY LITTLE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS STRAIGHT ZONED INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY.

WE ARE REQUIRING MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK, CERTAIN IN THE FRONT, SIR MATERIALS, I WANT YOU TO KEEP IN MIND THESE ARE INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE DRAWN FOR THEIR BASICALLY SQUARES. I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO SAY IT! TO BE MORE KIND.

IT IS HARD TO COMPARE THEM TO LIKE METHODIST HOSPITAL OR THE NEW BUILDINGS BEING BUILT BY THE KROGER DEVELOPMENT.

IT WILL NOT BE THAT TIGHT. I FEEL WITH THE REGULATIONS WE HAVE IN THE ORDINANCE, WE WILL GET A HIGHER QUALITY INDUSTRIAL BUILDING. IT STILL NOT BE THE PRETTIEST BUT IT WILL BE BETTER THAN THE OTHER DISTRIBUTION CENTERS THAT YOU SEE. HOPEFULLY I SAID THAT OKAY.

ADDITIONALLY, ONE THING I WANTED TO NOTATE IS THE PARKING. A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU SEE HERE ARE RESTATED THEY SAY DO CHANGE OR HAVE VERBIAGE THAT THESE WILL CHANGE AS WELL BUT THINGS SUCH AS PARKING, WE MENTIONED THERE IS PLAIN PARKING REGARDING A TRAILER PARKING OR WHAT TYPE OF TRAILER WOULD BE THERE WHAT TYPE OF VEHICLE, THERE WOULD BE PLENTY OF PARKING THERE AND IT WAS A PARKING SECTION IS REALLY DESIGNED TO HELP ACCOMMODATE ON-SITE CUEING, PARKING, LONG-TERM STORAGE.

THAT IS THE ORDINANCE. TO CONTAIN A LOT OF WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE INSIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

FINALLY, THE MAJORITY OF THE SIGNS YOU WILL SEE THE MOST INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS WE HAVE LOCATION SIGNS.

THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. MAJORITY OF THE OTHER SIGNAGE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH REGULATIONS AND SECTION 4.6017 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. ONE THING WE DID ADD IN THREE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE SPECIFIC ON THE LOCATION. GAS WELL DRILLING SITES.

SAME THINGS WE HAVE IN WEST SIDE PRESERVE DISTRICT.

THEIR EXISTING SITES, THEY ARE ALSO PROPOSING A GAS WELL SITE FOR FUTURE USE IF NEEDED. ONCE AGAIN, PRIOR TO THEM GETTING THIS DEVELOPED FOR THE SITE AFTER COMING THROUGH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. IT IS PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 2.04 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THIS IS ANOTHER VARIANCE CONSISTENT WITH THESE DISTRICTS. ALLOWING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE ENTRY SIGN TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT THE BUSINESS PARK NAME IS, -- HAS A SIMILAR SIGN. A TALLER MONUMENT WITH MULTIPLE TENANTS. THEY ARE REQUESTING TO BE ALLOWED TO HAVE AN ENTRY SIGN TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

WE ARE REQUESTING THAT NOT BE DETERMINED AT THIS POINT FOR THE SITE PLAN. DUE TO THE VARIOUS ISSUES WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST. IT SHOWS IN A SPECIFIC SPOT WIND UP HAVING TO REOPEN THE PD JUST TO MOVE.

IN THE ORDINANCE AND WE ARE REQUESTING THAT FINAL LOCATION OF THAT SIGN BE APPROVED BY THE CITY STAFF.

WE DID NOT NOTICE THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

A TOTAL OF 12 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET THAT WERE LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS.

[02:00:02]

WE DID RECEIVE TWO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION FROM PROPERTY OWNERS LOCATED OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. -- IS ALSO HERE TO SPEAK.

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN? 43. IS THAT RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH THEIR NORTH-SOUTH, IS THAT ACCESSIBLE AND USABLE BY THE PUBLIC. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN MEANING THESE BUILDINGS THIS IS ONLY CONCEPT WILL HAVE A CONTRACT ON THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS NOT A CLOSE TO FIXED POTENTIAL PLOT LAYOUT.

WE CAN HAVE ALL OF THESE CONCEPT PLANS AND MAKE IT LOOK REAL NICE BUT THIS COULD GET SOLD TO ONE BUYER AND THEY CAN PUT A HUMONGOUS SINGLE BUSINESS FACILITY ON THIS, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT THEY CAN MAKE THE REQUEST.

IF IT IS A MAJOR CHANGE TO THE CONCEPT WE WOULD REQUIRED TO GO BACK TO CITY COUNCIL. THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN.

IT IS TIED TO THE ORDINANCE FOR FUTURE TENANTS.

>> I WOULD EXPECT THEM TO SAY ALL OF THAT BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN OUR LANGUAGE, AS WE HAVE TALKED WITH OTHER FORMS OF CONTROL MECHANISMS. WE CANNOT GO DICTATE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER HOW THEY ARE GOING TO SELL THEIR PROPERTY SO

I GET ALL OF THAT. >> ABSOLUTELY. APOLOGIZE.

YOU MENTIONED FLOW THAT'S ONE OF OUR MAJOR CONCERNS.

WE HAVE BROUGHT UP TIME AND TIME AGAIN, I'VE HAD HOURS AND HOURS OF CONVERSATION, STAFF HAS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM ABOUT THE FLOW. IT'S BEEN A MAJOR CONCERN OF OURS. ESPECIALLY THE USES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THE LANGUAGE OF CONCEPT PLAN. IT'S WRITTEN THE WAY IT IS.

ALSO ONE THING THAT WE DID GENERALLY AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE DON'T HAVE A FULL -- DONE THEY HAVE DONE THAT ON THE SITE AFTER REVIEWING AND EXAMINING THE TIA, AND I HAVE OUR CITY ENGINEER TO ANSWER SOME OF THE JARGON BECAUSE HE'S MORE VERSATILE THAN I AM, THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ISSUED A MEMO REGARDING THAT TIA AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE END OF YOUR STAFF REPORT ON PAGE 111, YOU WILL SEE THE MAIN POINTS OF WHAT ENGINEERING PERMIT HAS CONCERNS WITH AND CONDITIONS PART OF THE ORDINANCE.

AND THEN THERE'S A COPY OF THE ACTUAL MEMO WHICH IS ATTACHMENT TWO OF THE ORDINANCE. IF YOU WANT TO READ WORD FOR WORD, IT IS, IT CLEARLY SPELLS OUT THE SAME RECOMMENDATION.

AND WE FEEL THAT IF THIS RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF WITH THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS ARE MET, WE FEEL COMFORTABLE THE DEVELOPMENT MOVING FORWARD. MIKE COULD COME ANSWER ANY

QUESTION SPECIFICALLY. >> ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER, THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY FROM THERE DOWN TO ONE THIRD OF THE WAY, THAT IS THE MAJORITY, IF NOT ALL OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET RIGHT THROUGH THAT STONE ONLY.

>> CORRECT THAT IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

>> SO I SEE THEY HAVE GOT THAT BLOCKED OFF WHERE LOOKS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SPEAK FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER BUT DO YOU KNOW IF POTENTIALLY, THAT COULD BE PLANNED, THAT FRONTAGE COULD BE USED FOR A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT USAGE? NOT AS HIGH IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY OWNERS ACROSS THE STREET.

>> YOU ARE A FRIEND OF THIS RIGHT HERE.

>> YES SIR.> I NEED TO REFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT.

>> IS THIS ZONING PROCESS THEY ARE APPLYING FOR OPEN TO LOW

IMPACT? >> GENERALLY IS MORE INDUSTRIAL RELATED USES BUT WE WILL MAKE SURE WE EXPAND THAT THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. BUT IT IS A POSSIBILITY.

>> ALL RIGHT THANK YOU. >> I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE

CHAIR. >> AUSTIN REYNOLDS, 3000 TURTLE

[02:05:05]

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE DETAIL.

I'M GOING TO FLIP QUICKLY TO THE SITE PLANS THAT TRANSFER HAD UP. BY THE WAY TRENT MENTIONED A BIT AGO HOW HE SPENT SEVERAL HOURS ON THIS.

TRULY HASSAN IS PROBABLY AN UNDERSTATEMENT.

DAYS WORTH OF HOURS WITH HIM, CLYDE AND MIKE, THEY'VE BEEN TREMENDOUS WORK WITH AND RELATE PLEASURE.

YOU GUYS ALREADY KNOW THAT. ANYWAY, I'M HERE WITH A FEW OF MY COLLEAGUES SO HOPEFULLY PREPARED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS HAVE. WHAT I WANT TO START OFF, REALLY JUST TALKING GENERALLY ABOUT IT.

AS TRANSIT IS 250 ACRES. IT IS LARGE, COMPLICATED.

THERE IS WETLANDS IMPACT, THERE ARE TWO FAIRLY LARGE, ONE IS FAIRLY LARGE PIPE THAT IMPACTS THIS.

THERE ARE SIX DIFFERENT SELLERS SO IS OBVIOUSLY AN ASSEMBLAGE.

YOU CAN IMAGINE IT IS QUITE AN ORDEAL TO BRING ALL OF THIS TOGETHER. YOU KNOW, PART OF THE ELEMENT WE THINK IS COMPETITIVE FOR US ABOUT THIS, WE LIKE LARGE COMPLICATED THINGS. WE CAN BRING THEM TOGETHER.

WE HAVE THE MANPOWER AND THE CAPITAL TO DO IT.

THINGS EASIER ON THE CITY THE NEGOTIATING WITH SIX DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS. WE ARE HOPEFUL WE CAN BRING THIS TOGETHER. REAL QUICKLY ON THE SITE PLANS, TRENT SHOWED YOU TWO DIFFERENT SITE PLANS THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL ONE. AND IT CLEARLY SHOWS OLD FORT WORTH ROAD, 67, SORT OF A SPINE ROAD IN BETWEEN THAT MEANDERS AROUND THE WETLANDS, THE CREEK THAT KIND OF GOES ON DIAGONAL THROUGH IT. AND THEN BASED ON THE DIRECTION FROM CITY STAFF, WE'VE MOVED TO THIS SITE PLAN.

WE ARE AGREEABLE TO EITHER ONE, WE THINK THAT THERE ARE ADVANTAGES, PROBABLY BETTER TO THIS ONE.

BUT WE ARE OPEN TO Y'ALL FEEDBACK.

BUT I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS. LIKE I SAID, I HAVE PEOPLE FROM OUR FIRM TO ANSWER. [INAUDIBLE]

>> YES SIR. IT'S PROBABLY BETTER FOR Y'ALL.

>> YES. >> SIMPLY BECAUSE WERE COGNIZANT OF THE ROAD AND ALTHOUGH THERE WERE RESIDENTS ON THAT RIDE ARE NOT PART OF THE CITY WE FELT LIKE BEING --

>> LESS IMPACT. >> YES SIR.

>> WHAT'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE WHITE OBLONG NORTHWEST CORNER? IS THAT POTENTIAL BUILDING OR

SET ASIDE FOR SOMETHING? >> THIS IS A RETENTION POND.

>> OKAY I APOLOGIZE. IT WILL LESSEN SOME IMPACT

THERE. >> YES SIR.

>> AND OBVIOUSLY, WE YOU GOT THE EXTENSION OF THAT ROAD, IN THIS PARTICULAR DRAWING AS YOU COME SOUTH, ABOUT THE POINT IT SAYS -- ANGLES OFF TO THE SOUTHEAST.

YES, GO ON UP, UP TO THE WEST, DUE WEST RIGHT THERE.

RIGHT THERE, YES. ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD THERE WILL HAVE TO POTENTIALLY BE KIND OF JUST LIKE GREEN SPACE THAT YOU HAVE ON THE PAPER? YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW YET AND THE ROADS ARE JUST HYPOTHETICAL.

WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON WITH WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT?

>> YES SIR GOOD QUESTION. RIGHT HERE IN HERE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF BUILDABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE ABLE TO BE BUILT THIS DOTTED LINE THAT YOU'RE SITTING RIGHT HERE, OUR INTENT WAS YOU KNOW WARD ROAD UP TO 287, AS YOU WELL KNOW THIS IS PART OF THE PLAN TO COME DOWN HERE AND -- WHICH THE SITE PLAN MIMICS THAT. OUR INTENT WAS LET'S GIVE, LET'S BUILD IT THIS WAY BUT LET'S GIVE THE CITY AN EASEMENT FOR THE CONTINUATION OF WIRED AND CONTINUATION OF THIS ROAD.

SO THAT IF IN 10 YEARS OR 20 YEARS 100 YEARS, YOU DECIDE AT SOME POINT YOU DO WANT TO BUILD THAT.

YOU HAVE THAT. THAT WAS THE THOUGHT PROCESS THERE. BUT GENERALLY THIS WILL STAY GREEN SPACE. YOU DID SEE ON ONE OF THE SITE PLANS, A DRILL SITE RIGHT HERE THAT OF COURSE HAS TO BE COME

THROUGH YOU AND CITY COUNCIL. >> SO WHAT IS YOUR MAXIMUM BUILD TIME? WHAT DO YOU ANTICIPATE?

>> ANTICIPATES THE CURRENT SITE PLAN 55 FEET.

WE ARE ASKING FOR 70 FOUR SUMMER BASED ON WHAT IT LOOKS

[02:10:07]

LIKE. >> YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY OR ABILITY THROUGH ENGINEERING PROGRAMS TO MORE OR LESS MAP OUT YOUR BUILDING HEIGHT AND IMPACT UPON HIGHWAY, FRONTAGE VIEW AND ALSO BORDERING PROPERTY OWNERS AND WHAT THEY MIGHT BE LOOKING AT. I KNOW I'M KIND OF GOING OUT THERE BUT I'M TRYING TO THINK ABOUT SITE IMPACT.

NOT ONLY FROM A WE WILL SEE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD BUT ALSO FROM, BECAUSE I LIKE WHAT I'M SEEING WE HAVE THE CONTAINMENT POND AND YOU KIND OF BACKED OFF OF THAT, THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS OVER THERE BUT WE STILL GOT POTENTIAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT UP. WHAT'S THE THOUGHT BEHIND THAT?

>> YES, A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS. AND HOPEFULLY I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY BUT THIS IS CERTAINLY AWAY FROM 287. IT'S HUGE SO YOU CANNOT SEE IT FROM THERE. THERE IS A GREAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OLD FORT WORTH ROAD AND THIS BUILDING DROPPING DOWN A LITTLE BIT. I WILL NOT PROMISE YOU IT IS 55 FEET BUT IT IS A MEANINGFUL SLOPE THAT BRINGS IT DOWN.

AND THEM RIGHT HERE WE HAVE, I WILL SHOW YOU.

THIS IS A STREET VIEW OF HIGHWAY 67 LOOKING AT THAT BUILDING. AND THIS IS A STREET VIEW OF OLD FORT WORTH ROAD LOOKING SOUTH.

AT THE BUILDING. OBVIOUSLY, WE WILL HAVE MORE BUT THIS IS A GREEN SPACE IN FRONT OF IT TOO.

>> AND YOU CONTEMPLATE ALL OF THE TREES YOU JUST KIND OF SHOWED IN THE STREET VIEW SLIDE AND THIS GOES TO STAFF FOR QUICK ANSWER. OUR LANDSCAPING POLICIES CONTAINED WITHIN ARE GOING TO PROVIDE FOR QUITE A BIT OF THE GREEN SCAPE ESPECIALLY ON THE ROAD FRONTAGE SIDE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> YES SIR.

[INAUDIBLE] >> THANK YOU.

>> THERE ARE A FEW MORE PEOPLE THAT ARE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS. CASEY JOHNS.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> MY NAME IS CASEY JOHNSON. 615 N. WARD ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION. I APOLOGIZE FOR THE ATTIRE JUST CAME STRAIGHT FROM WORK. I'VE LIVED THERE MY ENTIRE LIFE. MY GRANDFATHER BOUGHT THAT FARM IN 1967. AND WE HAVE ENJOYED COUNTRY LIFE. YOU KNOW THE PEACEFULNESS OF THE COUNTRY LIFE. NOT TOO MUCH SOUNDS OF IT THAN WHAT WE GET FROM -- I BELIEVE WITH AN INDUSTRIAL PARK THAT COMES IN, THAT CLOSE TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PEACEFUL LIFE WILL GO AWAY. YOU KNOW, WE WILL NO LONGER HAVE THAT RURAL COUNTRY LIFE THAT WE HAVE COME ACCUSTOMED TO, MY GRANDFATHER MOVED FROM GRAND PRIX WHICH WAS YOU KNOW, VERY BUSY. I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY, MOST OF WHICH CAME FROM GRAND PRAIRIE.

SEEM LIKE EVERYBODY MOVED TO MIDLOTHIAN BECAUSE OF THE NICE COUNTRY AND PEACEFUL LIFE. IF WE CONTINUE TO PUT BIG INDUSTRY RIGHT INSIDE THE CORE AREA OF THE TOWN, IT WILL LOSE THE APPEAL OF PEOPLE THAT MOVED TO MIDLOTHIAN.

YOU JUST PUT UP THAT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IS SUPPOSED TO GO RIGHT THERE ALONG THE ROAD, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BACK OUT OF BUYING HOMES IF AN INDUSTRIAL PARK GOES RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET? WHAT IS IT GOING TO DO TO OUR PROPERTY VALUES? WE LIVE RIGHT THERE ACROSS THE STREET. IT MIGHT HELP PAYING LESS TAXES BUT IN THE LONG RUN YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO LIVE NEXT INDUSTRIAL AREA HOW WE GOING TO MOVE IF THE PROPERTY VALUES GO DOWN? WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE THE STARS ANYMORE NIGHT. YOU KNOW WITH THE BIG BRIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.

YOU KNOW WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE THE FIREWORKS IN TOWN ON 4 JULY FROM OUR PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE BUILDINGS IN THE WAY.

YOU KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE WILL LOSE AS A COMMUNITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE INDUSTRIAL PARK.

[02:15:01]

INSTEAD OF AN INDUSTRIAL PARK. YOU KNOW BUT THAT IS MY PEACE.

>> THANK YOU SIR. >> NEXT SPEAKER --

MIC] >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS RAY -- MY OFFICE ADDRESS IS 201 MAIN STREET.

FORT WORTH TEXAS 76102. I'M LAND-USE COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT HERE TONIGHT AND MR. CHAIRMAN WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING. THAT WE DID MISSPEAK ON, THE NEXT PROPOSED HEIGHT IS 110 FEET AND THAT'S THE FUTURE MANUFACTURING IS, THE FUTURE OF WAREHOUSING AND INDUSTRIAL USES GOING VERTICAL. YOU'RE STARTING TO SEE PEOPLE UTILIZE VERTICAL SPACING FOR THEIR WAREHOUSING MUCH MORE THAN YOU ARE SEEING HORIZONTAL ESCAPING.

DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S WHAT WILL HAPPEN BUT I DO WANT YOU KNOW THAT IT IS THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 110 FEET.

I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

>> GREAT, THANK YOU. >> NEXT SPEAKER WE HAVE HOLLY -- PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS. >> -- LITERALLY RIGHT AT THE CORNER WHERE THE SECOND HOME IN.

WE RECEIVED THE NOTICE BECAUSE WE ARE 200 FEET AWAY.

MY HUSBAND AND I ARE BOTH IN OPPOSITION TO THIS.

I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERN LIVING NEXT TO THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. I KNOW THAT THEY STATED THAT THE MAIN PERMIT IS NOT ACTUAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL BUT YOU CAN ALSO ALLOW THE SPECIAL PERMITS USE WHICH DOES INCLUDE CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING, GAS STATIONS. I LOOKED UP A STUDY, RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY TO ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND ADVERSE HEALTH OUTCOMES. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF 94 STUDIES AND IT SHOWED THAT HOMES NEXT TO OR PEOPLE LIVING NEAR HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES INDUSTRIAL SITES, GAS STATIONS, IS RELATED TO INCREASE IN ADVERSE HEALTH OUTCOMES.

NCLUDING ADVERSE PREGNANCY OUTCOMES, CHILDHOOD CANCER, BRAIN CANCER, TUMORS, NON-HODGKIN'S LYMPHOMA -- I THINK THE SPECIFIC USE PERMITS REALLY NEED TO BE LOOKED AT AGAIN. I THINK THERE IS SOME VERY WILL -- WORRISOME CONCLUSIONS AS WAS STATED.

I ALSO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT NOISE POLLUTION, AIR POLLUTION, LIGHT POLLUTION. AS YOU STATED, WE HAVE A PROPOSED 110 FEET WHICH IS 11 STORIES, SO WE WILL HAVE NOT ONLY OUR LITTLE RESIDENTIAL ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKING AT THAT, BUT THIS HUGE PLANT DEVELOPMENT THAT Y'ALL JUST APPROVED. AND I KNOW OUR HOME VALUES WILL PROBABLY NOT BE AS MUCH BUT I KNOW THEY'RE LOOKING AT SOME VERY HIGH DOLLAR HOMES AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A BIG DETERRENT. TO THAT COMMUNITY.

I KNOW Y'ALL STATED THERE WAS LANDSCAPING.

I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT -- HANG ON.

THE ARTICULATION, THE BUILDING ARTICULATION STANDARDS WOULD ONLY APPLY TO HIGHWAY 67 AND OLD FORT WORTH ROAD SO IT WOULD NOT HELP THE HOMES THAT ARE LOCATED ON WARD ROAD OR SIMI VALLEY. GARAGEBAND LOADING DOCK DOORS AND ALL OF THE ORIENTED TO BE VISIBLE FROM HIGHWAY 67.

POTENTIALLY, GARAGE BASE COULD BE VIEWED FROM OLD FORT WORTH

[02:20:01]

ONLY APPLICABLE TO HIGHWAY 67 AND OLD FORT WORTH ROAD.

AGAIN, NOT APPLICABLE TOWARD THE RESIDENCE.

ON WARD ROAD I-- YOU COULD SAY WE COULD HELP THAT WITH FENCING. FASTING MONTHS WE PROPOSE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT THERE IS A BLACK VINYL CHAIN-LINK FENCE YOU CAN LOOK AT PAGE 132. THAT IS NOT GOING TO STOP YOUR VIEW OF MUCH. IT MIGHT PROVIDE SAFETY FOR THE PROPERTY, BUT AESTHETICALLY IT WILL NOT DO ANYTHING.

THE TRAFFIC GROWTH. THE TRAFFIC THAT THEY PROPOSED I KNOW THAT THEY LOOKED AT TRAFFIC ON OLD FORT WORTH ROAD.

I WANT TO SAY THEY DID NOT LOOK AT TRAFFIC FROM -- WE HAVE A PROPOSED ROAD GOING INTO THE DEVELOPMENT I GUESS IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE. BUT THEY ONLY LOOKED AT A TWO PERCENT GROWTH FOR THE AREA. I'M GOING TO SAY THAT IS NOT INCLUDING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU ALL INCLUDED. I KNOW OLD FORT WORTH ROAD IS ALMOST A ONE LANE ROAD. I KNOW WHEN LARGE TRUCKS GO THROUGH IT, THEY TAKE UP ONE LANE AS IT IS.

SO I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE ONCE THIS HUGE INDUSTRIAL PARK COMES IN. PLUS THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

SO I WOULD SAY IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE MORE THAN TWO PERCENT AND I KNOW THAT WAS INDICATED IN THE REPORT.

IT WAS A VERY LOW NUMBER AND NOT ACCURATE.

>> MA'AM, WE ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

>> ONE MORE THING. >> JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW.

>> ANOTHER MENTIONED THE BUSINESS PARK OFFICE 67.

I THINK IT'S A MORE APPROPRIATE USE FOR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

THE PLANNED ZONES FOR THIS AREA, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INDICATED THIS WOULD BE REGIONAL COMMUNITY RETAIL GENERAL PROFESSIONAL AND COMMERCIAL.

THAT IS I THINK A BETTER USE THEIR OTHER PLACES HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CAN BE LOCATED, NOT WHERE PEOPLE LIVE.

THANK YOU. >> THOSE ARE ALL OF THE SPEAKER FORMS THAT I HAVE, IS OUR NEIGHBOR ALSO DID NOT SIGN UP THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE.

CAN WE GET A MOTION TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING?

>> MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSE? SEEING NONE, PASSES TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? LET'S TALK A MINUTE ABOUT WHERE WARD IS GOING TO RUN TO THE NORTH. AND TIES INTO OLD FORT WORTH ROAD. WHAT IS GOING TO KEEP TRAFFIC FROM TURNING LEFT? AND IF THEY DECIDE TO TURN RIGHT WHICH WILL BE THE ONLY WAY I'D WANT TO SEE THEM GO, IS THIS DEVELOPER IMPROVING THE STREETS ALL AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION TO THE HIGHWAY 287?

>> YES SIR, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD SEE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG OLD FORT WORTH ROAD.

WE ARE SEEING IT ON THE NORTH SIDE AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF WESTSIDE RESERVE ALSO LOOKING AT LOOKING IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SOUTH SIDE. WHETHER IT IS TO THE DEVELOPING OR SOME MEANS TO GET THE IMPROVEMENTS FROM WARD ROAD ALL THE WAY TO 287 FOUR IMPROVEMENT.

>> WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF IMPROVEMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR

APPLICATION? >> AT LEAST TWO LANES.

MINIMUM OF TWO LANES. TWO LANES OF CONCRETE LOOKING AT BUILDING OUT THIS SECTION. RIGHT NOW OLD FORT WORTH ROAD IS DESIGNATED AS A MINOR ARTERIAL.

IT'S A FOUR LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY.

IT IS SLATED TO BE FOUR LANE. 90 FEET BETWEEN BOARD --

>> DID YOU SAY 90? >> YES SIR.

>> ALL RIGHT VERY GOOD. TRENTON, WHAT ABOUT THE, WHERE

[02:25:06]

ELSE TO HAVE 110 FOOT HEIGHT? >> EVERY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT HAS NO MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.

>> NONE? >> NO.

HEAVY AND MEDIUM DO NOT HAVE HEIGHT.

>> WHERE ELSE TO HAVE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL THAT ABUTS

RESIDENTIAL? >> I'D NEED TO GO BACK TO THE

ZONING AND LOOK. >> I CAN'T THINK OF ANYMORE.

>> CAN ONLY THINK OF FURTHER SOUTH, IS ALSO OUTSIDE, IT'S FAMILY HOMES AND MODULAR HOMES. IT IS BY ONE OF OUR PLANTS.

IT'S ANOTHER LOCATION I COULD THINK OF.

>> BUT NOT SINCE, I MEAN IT IS KIND OF PRELUDE TO WHERE WE'VE COME TO THIS POINT. AS FAR AS APPROVED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, I THINK IT IS SOMETHING WE TRY TO AVOID.

>> RIGHT, WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS I CANNOT RECALL A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL PROJECT WITHIN STATE LIMITS NEXT TO A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.ONCE AGAIN, I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK. --

>> MATTER-OF-FACT, IS IT MEDIUM STILL AT LEAST? SO THAT, THE MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK WOULD BE MEDIUM,

CORRECT? >> IS A MIXTURE OF MEDIUM AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. DEPENDING WHERE YOU ARE IN THE

PARK. >> OKAY.

>> I HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE GAMMA BASE ZONING IN THERE. CAN YOU RECALL? [INAUDIBLE] I STAND CORRECTED.

>> LIMITED HEAVY? >> YES.

>> SIMILAR TO THIS ORDINANCE. WHAT ALSO DOES THE VERBIAGE WITHIN WAS PRESENTED ALLOW FOR AN SUP REQUESTER APPLICATION FOR BUSINESS TO BE USED PER SITE? OR IF THOSE PROPERTIES SHOULD BE OWNED FOR THOSE TO BE APPLIED FOR HIS POSSIBLE USE CHANGES.

>> HOW THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN IS THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT. NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE ON THE PROPERTY AND THEIR OTHER USES PERMITTED THREE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT AND OTHER USES PROHIBITED COMPLETELY.

BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE STATING THAT IF YOU CHANGE OWNERSHIP WHICH IS BECAUSE LET'S SAY CHANGE FROM A GAS STATION TO A RESTAURANT, EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU CHANGE IT YOU HAVE TO COME BACK. IF YOU ARE MEETING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS LIKE THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND IT DOES NOT STATE YOU HAVE TO GO BACK FOR SUP PROCESS YOU WOULDN'T BE

REQUIRED TO. >> IF YOU HAVE A SUP, FROM MIC] VERY SIMILAR TO THIS USED TYPE OF PROVISION. AND THAT USE WOULD CEASE AND THE SUP TERMINATES IF THAT IS GRANTED ALSO TERMINATES FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. WE ALSO ALLOW PROVISIONS FOR IF THERE IS A TORNADO THAT WIPES OUT, THEN WE EXTEND THAT RESTART TIME FOR REBUILDING BUT THIS EVEN GOES BACK TO THE.

[INAUDIBLE] DOES EVEN HAVE A TERMINATION PROVISION.

USUALLY UP TO I THINK 180 DAYS. >> HAS THAT CHANGED RECENTLY?

>> WE BEEN DOING IT FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

>> IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. BEFORE IT WAS JUST

TRANSFERRING. >> IT WOULD JUST STAY WITH THE PROPERTY. THE USE NEVER CHANGES IT DIDN'T HAPPEN FOR THAT PURPOSE BUT NOW WE DO TERMINATE THAT USE.

I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT QUALIFIER IN THERE ABOUT YOU KNOW, IF THE SUP IS GRANTED AS A CONTINUUM? IT DOES. IF THEY WERE TO SELL TO SOMEBODY ELSE THEY WILL CONVERT THE SAME USE.

>> I AM NOT ADVOCATING THAT SUP SHOULD BE APPLIED IN LOOKING

[02:30:01]

ALL THIS PROPERTY AND ALL THESE BUSINESSES ARE OWNED BY ONE MANAGEMENT GROUP. ON PAPER AND THEN THEY'RE RENTING THEM OUT AND THEN OVER YEARS WE SEE CHANGES IN USAGE.

FROM MIXED CHEMICALS TO WHO KNOWS WHAT.

AND WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO TRACK IT OR SAY NO, WE DON'T REALLY WANT THAT THEY ARE. THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.

>> THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF IS DOCUMENTS IF THEY CHANGE OWNERSHIP IN THE COMMUNITY CHANGE USE THEIR CERTAIN CHECKS AND BALANCES WE GO THROUGH WHEN THEY TRY TO OBTAIN -- THEORISTS CHECKS AND BALANCES WE GO THROUGH TO MAKE SURE IS A LAND PROPERLY ZONED AND IS USED PERMITTED? AND IF SO IF THERE'S REQUIRED A SUP.

THAT SOMETHING COULD THINK OF AT THE TOP OF MY HEAD OF A SYSTEM IN PLACE CURRENTLY USING TO TRACK THIS.

THE CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITY.

>> I GUESS THE ONLY THING I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT, I GET THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY LIKE THIS.

BUT WE ARE KIND OF, WHAT WE DID BEFORE THE SOLAR PANEL, THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY A LOW IMPACT. AS FAR AS INTRUSION.

AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT YOU SEE IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY.

AND SO WE ARE KIND OF FLOATING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ON THE NORTH SIDE NOW. OR EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT NOT BE IN THE CITY LIMITS THESE ARE PEOPLE WITH HOMES.

SO I AM A LITTLE MIXED ON HOW I SHOULD FEEL ABOUT THIS.

>> THAT IS THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS PROCESS.

>> I UNDERSTAND, BELIEVE ME I KNOW.

BUT I'M TRYING TO VERBALIZE I'M AN OUTWARD THINKER.

>> IF I CAN MAKE ONE COMMENT. IN TERMS OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND JUST IMPACT IN GENERAL.

FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES THE ROAD CONSTRUCTED FOR THIS USER JUST USED FOR THIS USE. AND I DON'T THINK YOU WILL SEE MUCH IF ANY IMPACT OUTSIDE OF --

>> I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT TRAFFIC.

>> OKAY. >> AND WORRIED ABOUT HEIGHT AND INTRUSIVE AT 110 FEET. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE GENTLEMAN THAT WOULD ONLY BE WISE ESPECIALLY FOR COMMERCIAL STORAGE TO GO UP, MAKING BETTER USE OF FOOTAGE BUT I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT MIXING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL WITH AT LEAST ABUTTING HOMES, AND THE POTENTIAL DRAFT OF THINGS THAT JUST HAPPEN WITHIN WIND FLOW. THESE THINGS MAKE ME NERVOUS.

IT IS DIFFERENT WHEN IT IS ACROSS THE ROAD BUT WE ARE

ABUTTING PEOPLE NOW. >> YEAH.

>> AND THE WAY YOU HAVE A RUN UP IS THE WAY THAT YOU DID IT FOR IT TO BE 110 FEET. YOU CANNOT DROP THAT DOWN IN THE 50 TO 75 FOOT RANGE, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING YOU ARE FLUID

ON. >> I THINK THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION INTERNALLY WITHIN OUR TEAM BECAUSE WE ARE AGREEABLE TO GO BELOW 100 FEET. THE COMMUNICATION DIDN'T -- YES SIR. I WILL PUT THAT IN PD.

>> AND WHAT DO YOU PERCEIVE THE USAGE OF THE PROPERTIES, OR YOU

HONESTLY HAVE NO IDEA? >> AT THIS POINT WE HAVE NO IDEA. AND SO THE FLEXIBILITY IS OBVIOUSLY IMPORTANT. BUT GENERALLY FOR BUILDING LIKE THIS WILL BE FORTUNE 500, FORTUNE 50, FORTUNE 100 TYPE COMPANIES. THE SMALLER BUILDING ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE WILL PROBABLY BE MORE LIKE YOUR 10, 20,000 SQUARE FEET LIKE AIR CONDITIONING, POLLS, THOSE KIND OF GUYS. BUT GENERALLY, OTHER BUILDINGS

WILL BE LARGER USERS OF COURSE. >> I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR STAFF WOULD BE, MY HANG UP ON THIS IS POTENTIAL USAGE THAT IS NOT WISE TO MIX WITH PEOPLE. SO I'M NOT AGAINST THE PROJECT, CONCERNED WITH HEIGHT. THAT IMPACT AND I'M CONCERNED WITH USAGE AND IMPACT FROM MANUFACTURING OF PRODUCTS THAT ARE NOT GOOD FOR PEOPLE. OTHER WAYS FOR US, I UNDERSTAND YOU NEED SOME HEAVY INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS TO GET SOME THINGS

[02:35:05]

>> YES SIR. AND I WOULD SAY MANY OF THOSE FROM A HEAVY STANDPOINT ARE LIMITED, NOT BARTHA HAVE TO GO THREE A SUP PROCESS. YOU WOULD MAKE A DETERMINATION WHETHER IT'S GOOD OR BAD FOR THE COMMUNITY AT THAT TIME.

I WOULD SAY FROM A FLOW OF MIX BETWEEN PEDESTRIAN AND TRUCKS AND THE INDUSTRIAL, WE'VE SEEN IT WORK REALLY WELL IN ALLIANCE. FORT WORTH, 26,000 ACRES AND SIGNIFICANT OUTLET JUST ANOTHER MIXED-USE PRODUCT.

>> THE OUTFLOW WOULD BE -- POTENTIALLY GOING, I KNOW Y'ALL WOULDN'T BE IN CONTROL THAT BUT WE POTENTIALLY COMMON SENSE WE HAVE ROOM FOR MORE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> STAFF, IF YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT ABOUT YOUR PREFERENCE OVER THE SITE PLAN VERSUS THEIR PREFERRED SITE

PLAN? >> SO, IT CALLS FOR -- AS THE APPLICANT HAS STATED, THAT WOULD BE OUR PREFERENCE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN. IT'S ONE THING WE DISCUSSED WITH THEM AND LET THEM KNOW IT WAS ALL PREFERENCE EVERYONE'S CONCEPT THAT WAS SUBMITTED. WE HAVE BETTER CONDUCTIVITY, -- > AND IT'S OBVIOUSLY ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN WHICH IS A 90

FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> 80?

>> IT'S 120 THERE. THAT WOULD CREATE A BUFFER THERE. I AGREE WITH STAFF HAVING MORE GORDON THERE FOR THE BUFFER THINK IT CREATES THE GOOD SEPARATION ON TOP OF WHAT THEY ARE SHOWING US OUTSIDE AS WELL.

>> THERE IS A PARCEL OF LAND WHY THIS LOCATION, ARE WE HAVING HOMES BEING BUILT IN THE AREA WHY NOT SOUTH OF TOWN?

>> I DON'T WANT TO ANSWER ON BEHALF OF -- THERE MANY THINGS THAT GO IN THE PROCESS OF PARTIAL ACQUISITION.

UTILITIES ETC. THERE MANY DIFFERENT THINGS THEY LOOK AT.

SURROUNDING USE AND I WOULD TURN OVER TO THEM WHY THEY CHOSE THIS PARCEL INSTEAD OF A PARCEL FURTHER SOUTH.

>> YES SIR, GOOD QUESTION WE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

ON THE EAST SIDE YOU HAVE -- WE LIKE TO SPEND TIME ON LARGER PROJECTS, IT TAKES LONGER, YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME ON A 30 ACRE TRACT POTENTIALLY AS YOU WILL ON A 300 IN TERMS OF MOVING THROUGH THE CITY IN THE PROCESS. AND FOR NEGOTIATION.

MIGHT AS WELL BE BIGGER PLUS EXEC COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE FOR US. THINGS ARE MORE COMPLICATED.

REAL PORT DID NOT HAVE TRACTS OF THAT SIZE.

ON THE OTHER SIDE NOW IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING IS FILLED OUT AND A PROJECT IS GOING DOWN THERE. IF THERE'S ANYTHING LEFT, PARTICULARLY ON THE EAST SIDE OF 67, YOU HAVE TO CROSS THE RAIL TO ACCESS THE PARK WHICH IS NOT AS IDEAL.

[INAUDIBLE] >> YES SIR.

WARD ROAD EXPANSION. WILL YOU INTRUDE INTO OUR PROPERTY THAT WE CURRENTLY OWN? WILL THEY BE EXPANDING INTO THE PROPERTY AND ARE THEY GOING TO ACTUALLY MAKE EACH PERSONS DRIVEWAY WHERE IT IS ACCESSIBLE TO THE ROAD?

>> I WILL LET STAFF TAKE THAT ONE.

[02:40:01]

>> -- IT IS MORE DIFFICULT, WE GO THROUGH AN ACQUISITION PROCESS AND WE ARE TRYING TO OBTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WHICH MIKE HAS MORE KNOWLEDGE ON.

THIS PROJECT SPECIFICALLY, A FULL RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL NOT BE EXPANDED THIS TIME WITH THIS PROJECT IT WILL BE ACCORDING TO THE SITE AND WAS REQUIRED BY THE SITE.

YOU CANNOT REQUIRE THEM TO DO MORE IF THEY DO NOT NEED MORE

AND THE REST IS NO REQUIREMENT. >> TYPICALLY WHAT YOU LOOK AT IS THE HALF OF THE ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING DEDICATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONE-SIDED ULTIMATELY GET THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE OTHER SIDE. AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.

ON THIS ONE WOULD BE LOOKING IF YOU'RE TALKING 126 IF YOU CAN BUILD TWO LANES ON THE EAST SIDE.

YOU HAVE TO MAKE PROVISIONS TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE LOTS WHETHER THEY EXIST, WARD ROAD STAYS IN PLACE WHICH WOULDN'T MAKE MUCH SENSE BUT YOU HAVE THE ACCESS.IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT OTHER PLACES.WE HAVE A LOT OF DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE ACCESSING A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE THAT WILL GET BUILT IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE WHICH WE ARE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW. I THINK THERE ARE 60 DRIVEWAYS

AS A MINOR ARTERIAL. >> I THINK JUST TO KIND OF DOUBLE ANSWER THAT QUESTION. FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD, WITH ONLY TAKING THE 60 FEET FROM THE DEVELOPMENT THAT 60 FEET WILL COME FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.

>> YES SIR. >> BECAUSE THERE'S A THOROUGH

FARE PLAN -- >> WE ARE LOOKING AT FUTURE BUILDOUT NOT THE NEXT SEVEN YEARS WILL HAVE A SIX LANE ROAD

OUT THERE. >> THE OTHER QUESTION WAS IF THE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTED HIS DRIVE ENTRANCE, WITH THOSE REPAIRS OR WHATEVER -- AM ASSUMING THAT WAS YOUR OTHER QUESTION. OKAY GOOD WE'RE GOOD.

[INAUDIBLE] >> WE STILL MAINTAIN ACCESS.

YOU CANNOT CUT OFF ACCESS TO THE HOMES.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I GUESS MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE IF WE WERE TO TRY TO APPROVE THIS THAT WE HAVE ISSUES WITH HEIGHT AND I GUESS THAT WAS KIND OF THE MAIN ONE. WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? WHAT PROCESS WOULD WE GO THROUGH OR -- I AM TRYING TO KEEP THE DEVELOPER, THE APPLICANTS FROM GETTING KNOCKED

BACK ANOTHER 30 TO -- >> THOSE SUBMITTED TO A SUP PROCESS WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS A TERMINATION CLAUSE IN THERE. AND IT WOULD JUST, --

>> OF COURSES HAS TO GO TO COUNSEL.

SO WE ARE NOT MAKING A FINAL DECISION.

IT IS ADVISORY. >> THE RECOMMENDATION.

>> THE RECOMMENDATION AND HIGH CONSIDERATION.

>> WE NEED A RECOMMENDATION ON RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU. THE HIKE FROM THE ORDINANCE HAS 110 FEET, IF YOU LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO EITHER APPROVE OR DENY YOU CAN CHANGE THE HEIGHT IF THERE ANY USES WANT TO ADD, TAKE OUT OR MOVE ETC., YOU NEED TO ADD THAT AS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION AS WELL.

TO MOVE ON TO COUNSEL. >> OKAY THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME SIR. >> SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE ON THEIR ABOUT THE HEIGHT THOUGH. I AGREE WITH YOU, 110 FOOT IS

OUT OF -- >> I GUESS THE THING WE NEED TO DETERMINE IS WHAT IS THE HEIGHT? [LAUGHTER] I MEAN COUNSEL WILL MAKE, I'M GOING TO SAY WE CAN RECOMMEND MAYBE THE 55 RANGE AND LET COUNSEL APPROVE AND GO BEYOND THAT. AS A STARTING POINT?

>> YOU HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE. YOU ORIGINALLY ASKED A QUESTION AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. TRENTON?

[02:45:01]

>> IF WE COULD AGREE WITH ROOM TO 70 THAT WAS OUR INTENT AND I'VE BEEN SOCIALIZING THAT ILLITERATE.

COMMUNICATION PROBABLY NOT COMMUNICATING IT THOROUGHLY BUT

IT WOULD BE OUR IDEAL. >> WE COULD RECOMMEND ASSUMING COUNSEL WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION.

>> YES SIR. >> I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM.

TRENTON, DO YOU WANT TO SHARE THE LIST WITH OUR VP AND HE CAN

GET IT ROLLING? >> YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THE LIST.

>> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE REVISIONS YOU MENTIONED THAT WE MIGHT GET WITHIN THE RECOMMENDATION.

>> IT IS AN STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

>> PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE HAVE ASKED FOR ANYWAY.

>> IF IT IS YOUR MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE BASED ON STAFF PRESENTATION AND WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO INCLUDE EVERYTHING IN THE ORDINANCE. AND STAFF CONDITIONS WHICH ARE LISTED THERE. AND THEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF CHANGING THE HEIGHT FROM 110 FEET TO 75 FEET. THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE --

>> TRYING TO PUT THIS TOGETHER. WITHIN THE RECOMMENDATIONS IS

THE SUP ON THERE? >> NO, PAGE 117 OF THE

ORDINANCE -- >> NO PROBLEM.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. WITH THE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTION OF 70 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 110.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> SORRY, PARDON ME.

ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED?

PASSAGE UNANIMOUS. >> GIVE ME A FEW MINUTES.

TRYING TO FIGURE OUT ITEM NUMBER 10.

[010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the zoning of +/-1.1957 acres on Lots 1-10, Block 21, of the Original Town Addition, and Lots 11-15, Block 16, of the Original Town Addition of Midlothian from Commercial (C) District to Planned Development District for a mixed-use development consisting of residential and non-residential (commercial) uses. The property is generally located at 211 and 301 West Main Street (Case No. Z47-2021-193).]

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING OF B1 ONE POINT 1957 ACRES ON LOT 1 THROUGH 10 GLOCK 21 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN ADDITION AND LOT 11 THROUGH 15, BLOCK 16 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN ADDITION OF MIDLOTHIAN FROM COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL USE.

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT 211 AND 301 W. MAIN

STREET. >> THANK YOU.

THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THE LOSS IN DISTRICT LOSS IN BUILDINGS.

CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT TO GO SELL THE PROPERTIES.

WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING THE LAST FEW MONTHS, WE WERE WORKING WITH THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY.

ONE INITIAL, ONE COUNSEL INITIAL DESIRES MONTHS AGO, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WAS TO ADOPT A PLAN FOR THE DOWNTOWN.

TO ENCOURAGE REDEVELOPMENT. WE HAD MANY PUBLIC WORKSHOPS IN MANY MEETINGS AND WE ALWAYS HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE LOSS IN BUILDINGS. THE CITY WAS ABLE TO TAME THEM AS PART OF THE PROCESS WE ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE THEM.

IS CURRENTLY CAN -- COMMERCIAL. WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE BUILDERS

[02:50:03]

WHEN CREATING THIS UVPD WE WERE GOING TO THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL, ONE CONCERN WAS HOW DO WE REACTIVATE DOWNTOWN? WHAT CAN WE DO TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO COME TO DOWNTOWN? WE HAVE A GREAT DOWNTOWN, GREAT DESIGN, GREAT HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.

WONDERFUL ARCHITECTURE. THESE ARE TWO OF THE BUILDINGS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE DOWNTOWN.

THE UVPD HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO ALLOW FOR USES SUCH AS RETAIL, ENTERTAINMENT, RESTAURANTS, USES BY RIGHT.

A LOT OF THE TIMES AND ALL THE OTHER ADDICTIONS WE DON'T ALLOW RESTAURANTS BY RIGHT OVER 1000 SQUARE FEET.

PART OF THE PROPOSAL REQUESTING RESTAURANTS BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AMOUNT OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

THE REASONING FOR THIS IS WE ARE PROVISIONS WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE TO PREVENT THESE BUILDINGS DESIGNED CHANGING THE OVERALL DESIGN IN THE STRUCTURE IF THEY WERE TO DO THAT THEY BE REQUIRED TO COME BACK IN. ONE THING WE ARE ACQUIRING AS PART OF THE AUDIENCE IS TO REQUIRE ANY STOREFRONT ALONG HERE, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE WAS ANOTHER THING. WE HAVE GREAT BUILDINGS BUT THEY ARE ALL PROFESSIONAL OFFICE.

ANYTHING ABUTTING A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, IS REQUIRED TO BE ENTERTAINMENT, RESTAURANT OR SOME SORT OF RETAIL.

WITH THIS GOING THROUGH THIS PROPOSAL WITH THE DEVELOPER WHO IS, WILL BE REDEVELOPING THE SITE ONE -- EVEN THOUGH IT DOES REQUIRE ON STREET OR OFFSTREET PARKING WE RECOMMEND CREATING PARKING DOWN THIS ROAD ON BOTH SIDES TO BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY ADD ONTO THE PARKING FOR THE REST OF DOWNTOWN, ANYONE CAN USE BUT ALSO TO SUPPORT THE STRUCTURES.

WITH THE PARKING WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS OVER THE PARKING BECAUSE WE DO FEEL WE HAVE A DESIGN THAT WILL BE ABLE TO NOT ONLY COMPLEMENT THE USE BUT ACTUALLY PROMOTE OTHER BUSINESSES. ONE OF THE CONCERNS WAS WILL WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKING AND I THINK THIS WILL REALLY HELP OUT WITH THAT. ONE THING THEY ARE ALSO DOING, ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE. ONE THING WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO BECAUSE WE HAVE UTILITIES TO PLANNED AND PERMANENT LANDSCAPING. WE HAVE MOBILE PLANTERS ALL THROUGHOUT THE PARKING AREAS. WE HAVE -- RIGHT NOW IS NOT REALLY ANY DIRT ANYWHERE, IT IS ALL CEMENT ALL IMPERVIOUS COVER. WE ARE USING DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES AND METHODS TO ADD LANDSCAPE AND TRY TO SOFTEN THE EDGE. ONE THING PROPOSING TO DO IS TO ENHANCE THE BUILDING, THERE REQUESTING ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE THAT ISN'T GENERALLY WHAT PERMITTED RIGHT NOW HOWEVER CONSISTENT WITH THE DOWNTOWN PLAN CALLED FOR.

THEY WILL HAVE A SON DIRECTLY ON THE BUILDING SIGNAGE THAT IS BACKLIT, THAT MATCHES THIS PROPOSED USE.

ONE THING WE REALLY AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS WHAT CAN WE DO TO ENHANCE THE AREA? AND ONE THING WE REALLY NEED TO FOCUS ON IS MOBILITY HOW DOES ONE PERSON GET FROM ONE POINT TO ANOTHER AND THAT'S WHY THE PARKING IS DESIGNED A CERTAIN WAY, THAT'S WHAT WE DID EVERYTHING, EVEN THE SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDINGS OF PEDESTRIAN SCALE. IF YOU SEE THE DIFFERENT SIGNAGE FOR EACH DIFFERENT USE YOU HAVE THE SIGNS HANGING DOWN, NOT HUGE SIGNS PLACED ON THE BUILDING THERE WILL BE A COUPLE OF THE BUILDING, THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE.

BUT USING DIFFERENT TYPES OF SIGNAGE TO BE UNIQUE TO THE DOWNTOWN. THESE ARE ALL THINGS WE FOCUS ON DURING THIS PROCESS. ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR ZERO IN OPPOSITION 35 LETTERS IN TOTAL WERE SENT OUT.

WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> IS THE LONG BUILDING, ZEPPELIN THERE LOOKING AT, WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE DRAWINGS, NOTHING WILL BE DONE WITH THE

BRICK BUILDING. >> WHEN THEY ARE DUE TO COME IN FOR DEVELOPMENT -- IT IS INCLUDED IN THE UVPD SO THEY

[02:55:08]

IT'S ONE THING HE WANTED TO AVOID.

SOMETHING ALSO BRING UP, THE USE ON THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING, IT CAN BE USED FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFERS ALSO THE SECOND STORY THAT CAN BE USED FOR SOME SORT OF RESIDENTIAL.

>> AGE TO WORK IN THAT BUILDING.

ALSO PROMOTING A DIVERSE HOUSING INSIDE OF THE BUILDING AND TURN PERCENTAGES ARE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE VERSUS RESIDENTIAL THAT THEY CAN HAVE ON THE UPPER FLOORS.

>> OKAY LOFTLIKE BUSINESSES? >> YES.

>> EVERYTHING DOWNTOWN PLAN ENCOURAGED IT IS MEETING IT.

IT IS MEETING THE DOWNTOWN PLAN --

>> UPSTAIRS, THAT IS GOING TO PROMOTE MORE ACTIVITY.

IT WILL KEEP THE DOWNTOWN ALIVE.> ALSO WE ARE TRYING

TO DO. >> ALSO WANT TO STRESS WITHIN WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TO THE FOLKS WILL KNOW, THIS PROPERTY IS NOT BEING DEVELOPED BY THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, TRANSFER IS THE FOLKS THE WISDOM OF COUNSEL, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF HARD WORK GOING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.

TRY TO TAKE CARE OF A LOT OF COMPLAINTS OVER LOT OF YEARS WITH WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT OLD BUILDING.

>> MANY YEARS. >> OKAY.

>> AND IT DOES REQUIRE -- >> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE AT THIS POINT WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WHO HAD NOT SIGNED UP? WE DO NOT HAVE ANY -- IF YOU LIKE TO APPROACH THE PODIUM.

NAME ADDRESS AND IF YOU COULD FILL OUT A FORM FOR THE TOPIC

AFTER YOU SPEAK, PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS -- CLARK I LIVE AT 5431 SPRING -- I OWN A BUILDING DOWNTOWN.

I WOULD WONDER, IT SAYS RESIDENTIAL, WHERE ARE THESE PEOPLE GOING TO PARK? OBVIOUSLY THEY GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE -- EVERYBODY'S GOT A CAR THERE GOING TO LEAVE THE CARS

OUT ALL THE TIME OR WHAT? >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS

THAT? >> CORRECT.

THAT IS THE INTENT. THIS WILL BE SHARED PARKING.

FOR BOTH DAYTIME AND EVENING. >> HE'S BROUGHT UP A GOOD

POINT. >> IT IS ALREADY A PROBLEM.

>> WITHIN WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED, AS USAGE, WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. I TOOK IT IN YOUR EXPLANATION AS THOUGH THE POTENTIAL LOFT LIVING PRESENTATION MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED LATER.

IS IT WITHIN THIS PROPOSAL AND WHAT WE -- BECAUSE HE'S GOT A VERY GOOD POINT. WE HAVE A VERY SERIOUS PARKING

PROBLEM DOWNTOWN. >> IT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT.

THE TOO PARKING -- >> IT'S ALREADY PERMITTED BY

RIGHT? >> IN THIS ORDINANCE.

IT IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE LOFT

-- >> OKAY SO, HAVE WE ALREADY DETERMINED THAT WITHIN THE USAGES OF ALL THE POTENTIAL OFFICE SPACE WITHIN THIS DWELLING, AND LIVING, THE

PARKING IS THERE? >> I THINK WE AT THIS PARKING TO THE EXISTING PARKING DOWNTOWN EVEN THOUGH IT IS SPREAD OUT MORE, AS YOU RECALL THE DOWNTOWN PLAN THAT WE WENT THROUGH, WE HAVE CONSULTANTS WE ADD TO PUT PARKING DOWNTOWN.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS YOU ALWAYS SEE IS A LOT OF THING WE DO HERE IS THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING DOWNTOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE TO WALK FURTHER.

WE HAD AN EXHIBIT DOWNTOWN WHERE WE HAD A PICTURE OF WALMART AND THE FURTHEST SPOT PEOPLE WOULD WALK AND GO TO WALMART. GETTING OUT THERE NOT WILLING TO DO THAT IN THE DOWNTOWN. IN MY OPINION I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKING DOWNTOWN FOR THE USE.

PROPOSED USES, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT YOU KNOW, WHERE IS HE ADDITIONAL PARKING COME IN? IF YOU WANT MORE PARKING ONE OF THE DETERRENTS OF THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN WAS TO PREVENT -- TO PROVIDE ENOUGH PARKING FOR CERTAIN SITE SPECIFICS.

[03:00:09]

>> I BELIEVE THERE'S ENOUGH PARKING THERE TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY. BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE'S ENOUGH PARKING TO PROVIDE FOR LIVING ALSO INTO CARS OR JUST STAY ALL THE TIME. AND THE OTHER NEGATIVE TO THAT IS, THERE ARE SOME ASPECTS, SOME BUSINESSES THAT DON'T OPERATE OVER THE WEEKEND. WHAT WE USE THE PARKING FOR, PARKING THAT WE NEED WHEN FOLKS COME TO TOWN ON WEEKENDS.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, THEY'RE ADDING 60 SPOTS IN THE MIDDLE. SO OF COURSE WE ARE TAKING WAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET. UT THEY'RE ADDING 60 SPOTS.

IF YOU GO OUT THERE ANOTHER'S ADEQUATE SPOTS FOR SOME RESIDENTIAL. AND I THINK -- [INAUDIBLE] NO, JUST THE PARKING. JUST THE PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE. THEY ADDED ABOUT 60 SPOTS RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE. I WAS ON THE WEST SIDE, MIKE DO NONRESPONSIVE RIGHT NOW?25 MAX? SO OVERALL WE ARE ADDING PARKING SPOTS.

I THINK IF YOU GO THERE RIGHT NOW AT NIGHTTIME THERE'S ALWAYS ADEQUATE PARKING. THERE IS EXCESS PARKING SO --

>> I WILL SEE WHAT MARK IS ALLUDING TO, YOU'RE RIGHT.

YOU'RE NOT GETTING RID OF SEVENTH STREET.

SEVENTH STREET AS WE KNOW IT YOU CAN DRIVE THROUGH THEIR --

>> I MEAN WE'VE HAD THE FIRE MARSHAL LOOK AT THIS.

>> WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DRIVE THROUGH LIKE WE DO TODAY.

AND I UNDERSTAND I'M JUST FOLLOWING WHAT MARK IS SAYING.

SORRY. >> DO WE HAVE ANYTHING PLANNED?

>> IS BASED ON PERCENTAGE. ALL THIS PARKING RIGHT HERE NONE OF THAT IS STRIPED RIGHT NOW THROUGH ITS ALSO PARKING, THERE ARE VARIOUS THINGS. THESE ARE NOT STRICT AT ALL.

I'M THINKING FROM AN ENGINEERING CONCEPT.

BECAUSE I WORKED IN THAT BUILDING AND AS YOU KNOW IT WAS

MAYBE IN THE 70S, EARLY 70S. >> I WOULD ASSUME.

>> WE START TALKING ABOUT ADDING A SECOND STORY TO AN INTERIOR BUILDING. ALL OF THIS IS TAKEN INTO CONTACT WITH YOU GUYS. WE ARE PROVING YOU, YOU WILL DO THE SECOND STORY BUT THE BUILDING MOST, THAT WAS FOR IT TO BE A METAL BUILDING NOT A TWO-STORY RESIDENCE.

>> AND GOING TO THE PROCESS A CHECK THE FOUNDATION AND ALL THE THINGS YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

>> I'M JUST A LITTLE LEERY OF PROVING FOR A USAGE WHEN IT'S HIGHLY LIKELY IT WAS NOT ENGINEERED FOR THE USAGE.

>> ANY ZONING WE HAVE TAKE THE DOWNTOWN OUT, THERE'S AN ENGINEER THAT HAS TO GO TO THE PROCESS.

>> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? SEEING NONE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

OTHER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

[011 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the use and development being Lots 1A1, 1A2, 2A, and 3A, Block 1 of the McCowan Addition by changing the zoning from Light Industrial (LI) District to Planned Development District No. 149 (PD-149) for Distribution Center Uses. The property is located south of Tayman Drive, between U.S. Hwy 67 and Old Hwy 67 (4191 N U.S. Hwy 67) (Case No. Z48-2021-194).]

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF TAYMAN DRIVE BETWEEN US HIGHWAY 67 AND OLD HIGHWAY 67. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

[03:05:10]

THE PROPERTY DOES A BUT SHILOH ROAD TO THE NORTH ALSO HIGHWAY 67 ON THE REAR SIDE OR I GUESS THE WEST SIDE.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND IS ADJACENT TO AN EXISTING MOBILE HOME PARK.

IT IS ALSO ADJACENT TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND PDU 37 FUTURE LANDLESS PLAN USE OF THE PROPERTY SURROUNDED BY THE INDUSTRIAL MODULE WITH THE BASE ZONING OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND USE BEING LIMITED TO AN INDUSTRIAL OR DISTRIBUTION CENTER.

THE REQUEST DOES APPEAR TO CONFORM TO OUR INDUSTRIAL MODULE. THE PROPOSAL DOES INCLUDE TWO BUILDINGS TOTALING 386,000 SQUARE FEET.

BUILDING SPACE WITH PARKING, GUEST PARKING IS ACTUALLY ON THE REAR SIDE, THOSE WILL BE FOR THE TRACTOR-TRAILERS.

THERE ARE FOUR POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS THREE OR ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD, ONE IS ON THE REAR SIDE ACCESSING ONTO OLD HIGHWAY 67. STAFF DOES HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC THIS WILL GENERATE AND MORE OR LESS CREATE. TO START STOP HAS CONCERNS REGARDING THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED MIDDLE DRIVE.

WHICH I AM HIGHLIGHTING HERE. THAT IS OFF OF 67 FRONTAGE, BEING TOO CLOSE TO THE EXISTING ENTRANCE RAMP, STAFF HAS CONCERNS ABOUT YOUR TRACTOR-TRAILERS WILL OBVIOUSLY HAVE A LOWER ACCELERATION RATE COMPARED TO A PASSENGER VEHICLE. AND REQUIRE LONGER DISTANCES TO CATCH UP TO THE TYPICAL FREEWAY SPEED.

IN ADDITION, STAFF IS REQUESTING -- AS WELL AS AN TURN LANE. STAFF RECOMMENDS ASPHALT OVERLAY IMPROVEMENT. THAT WOULD RUN ALONG SHILOH AND OLD HIGHWAY 67 AS OBVIOUSLY WILL HAVE MANY TRUCKS UTILIZING THAT AREA. IT IS CLASSIFIED AS A MAJOR ARTERIAL ROAD ON OUR CURRENT THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

CONTROLLED ACCESS, STOPS WILL BE NEEDED AS WELL.

AT THE LOCATION OF SHILOH AND 67 ON BOTH SIDES OF HIGHWAY 67.

THIS IS AN ARCHITECTURAL RENDERING SHOWING THE FRONT SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THE BUILDINGS DO OFFER HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ARTICULATION ON THE FRONT AND THE SIDES.UT THE ARTICULATION PROPOSED DOES NOT ADHERE TO OUR CURRENT SECTION 4.5502 WITHIN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THEREFORE THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SOME RELIEF FROM THIS DESIGN REQUIREMENT.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE AT LEAST AT A MINIMUM, SOME ARTICULATED CORRESPONDENCE ONLY TAUGHT MAYBE SOME FORM LINER SURFACES ALONG THE FRONT FAC'ADE AS WELL I DO MENTION EARLIER THAT THE PROPERTY IS BORDERED ON THREE SIDES WITH RIGHT-OF-WAY, CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS ARE TYPICALLY REQUIRED FOR ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A VARIANCE AS A SIDEWALKS DO NOT EXIST WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR AREA REGARDING THE SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING OF WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN DUE TO A PROPOSED RETAINING WALL WHICH AM HIGHLIGHTING HERE ON THE SCREEN, AND PARTICULARLY APPLICANT IS ASKING TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIRED TREES WITHIN THE AREA. THEY ARE ALSO ASKING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF FENCING REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE AREA ALSO. AGAIN, THAT IS DUE TO A RETAINING WALL. THIS LIBRARY HERE SHOWS THE PROPOSED MASONRY WALL THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.

AGAIN, THAT WILL HELP BLOCK THE TRAILER PARKING AREA.

THIS SLIDE HERE SHOWS THIS IS IN BLUE RIGHT HERE.

THIS IS THE PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE WITH STONE COLUMNS.

I BELIEVE VERY 32 FEET. THAT SCREENING STILL PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT. AND IT SHOULD ALSO HELP SCREEN THE TRUCK COURT. THE PROPERTY IS NOT GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY TYPE OF ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER SIGNS OR ANY TYPE OF -- SPONSOR WILL ALSO BE SERVED WITH OFF-SITE SANITARY SEWER FACILITY. IT WILL NOT BE SEWER THERE IS NOT A SEWER LINE ANYWHERE NEAR HERE.

WE DID SEND OUT A TO MINISTER PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. WE DO TO RECEIVE FOUR LITTERS IN OPPOSITION ONE LETTER AND SUPPORT.

NONE OF THESE LETTERS WERE FROM ACTUAL PROPERTY OWNERS.

WITH THAT, I KNOW THIS IS VERY WARTY BUT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS SHOWN ON YOUR STAFF REPORT. STAFF IS KNOWING THAT THIS IS

[03:10:04]

I'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH MOST OF THESE.

YOU KNOW FOR THE MOST PART AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE ARTICULATION SIDE IF THE APPLICANT IS A WANTED TO ADHERE TO CORNICE LINE DETAILING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THEN WE PREFER THEY JUST YOU KNOW, ADHERE TO THE BASE STANDARDS FOR DESIGN. WITH THAT I CAN TAKE THE QUESTIONS I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WANTS TO ALSO PROVIDE A PRESENTATION AS WELL. [INAUDIBLE]

>> THAT WE 45 FEET IS WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR.

TYPICALLY 35 FEET IS OR WE ARE ALLOWING TO DO IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THEY'RE ASKING FOR 45 FEET.

THAT IS JUST WHAT THEY NEED BUT I WORK THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THAT. [INAUDIBLE]

>> THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.

>> MY NAME IS HUNTLY LEWIS, 1607 LIGHT STREET DALLAS, TEXAS. WITH OUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, WE CAN ANSWER SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS AS WELL AS ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONDITIONS AND VARIANCES WE ARE REQUESTING.

YES, I GUESS UNLIKE THE PREVIOUS KIND OF PD HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC DESIGN FOR THE SITE. IT IS THE TWO BUILDINGS YOU SAW THERE WHICH ARE WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES.THEY ARE SMALLER IN NATURE AND SOME OF THE -- THEY ARE SHALLOWER AND APPEAL MORE TOWARDS COMMERCIAL USES LIKE YOU SAID, LIKE APPLIANCES, AS FAR AS HOUSING FIXTURE MANUFACTURER, NOT MANUFACTURERS BUT COMPANIES THAT SELL OUT TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS. MORE COMMERCIAL BASED.

AND I JUST WANTED TO GO TO THE FIRST THREE YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS SITE IS ON 67 AS YOU ENTER MIDLOTHIAN ON THE NORTHERN CITY BOUNDARIES. AND IT IS KIND OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE CITY SO WE DID PUT A LOT OF INTENT INTO THE ELEVATIONS AND THE LOOK OF THE BUILDING AS YOU'RE COMING UP THE HIGHWAY.

THIS IS A RENDERED VIEW FROM 67 SOUTHBOUND.

OTHER FIRST BUILDING. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ARTICULATION IS REQUIRED IN THE ORDINANCE. PERHAPS NOT TO THE LETTER BUT WE DO THINK THAT THIS LOOKS VERY GOOD AND IS PART OF A MODERN TEMPORARY DESIGN THAT YOU ARE SEEING FOR THE BUILDINGS NOWADAYS. HERE'S ANOTHER ONE AS YOU'RE COMING NORTHBOUND ON 67. THAT IS THE SOUTHERNMOST BUILDING. JUST TO ADDRESS THE HEIGHT QUESTIONS, THIS IS PROPOSED TO BE A 32 FOOT CLEAR HEIGHT BUILDING. THE ADDITIONAL FEET ARE SIMPLY FOR THESE ENTRY FEATURES ALONG US 67 FRONTAGE AS WELL AS THE -- REQUIRED TO SCREEN ANY ROOFTOP, AC UNITS OR OTHER THING THAT MADE HIM TO BE UP THERE.

SO YOU KNOW THAT IS THE ONLY AREA WE ARE POSING OR NEED THE EXTRA HEIGHT. OTHERWISE IS A 32 FOOT CLEAR BUILDING WHICH IS INSIDE PLUS -- JUST REALLY QUICK, I WOULD LIKE TO GO DOWN SOME OF THE CONDITIONS THAT MARCO PROVIDED

[03:15:06]

THERE ARE NINE OF THEM. I WILL TRY TO GET THROUGH IT BUT A LOT OF THESE WERE ALREADY ADDRESSING.

FIRST OFF IS THE SIDEWALKS. THE SITE IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT IS SURROUNDED BY RIGHT-OF-WAY ON ALMOST THE ENTIRE PROPERTY BOUNDARY. THERE IS ALMOST A MILE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG 67 SHILOH ROAD AND OLD 67.

GIVEN THE SURROUNDING AREA OF PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL USES, AND NO SIDEWALKS WE JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT AMOUNT OF SIDEWALK WILL TRULY BENEFIT THE SURROUNDING AREA OR REALLY BE USED BY ANY PEDESTRIANS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WE ARE JUST NOT REALLY SURE WHERE THEY WILL GO EITHER.

THIS IS JUST KIND OF SOME PICTURES OF THE AREA, TO THE NORTH THERE ARE SOME LOTS BUT IT REALLY IS MOSTLY INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES. NOT REALLY ANY PEDESTRIAN DRIVERS THAT REQUIRE SIDEWALK. AND THEN YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE FUTURE, WE ARE SURROUNDED BY TWO CEMENT PLANTS AND YOU KNOW OF COURSE AT SOME POINT THOSE CAN BE DEVELOPED BUT YOU KNOW, JUST FROM A SIDEWALK PERSPECTIVE WE JUST DO NOT SEE A LOT OF DRIVERS THAT NEED THAT AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE ASKING FOR RELIEF THERE. SO, CONDITIONS TWO, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX ARE ALL TRAFFIC RELATED.

JUST AS AN UPDATE, THIS IS BEEN ONGOING COORDINATION WITH BOTH THE CITY ENGINEER, MARCOS IS ALWAYS TXDOT AND OUR ENGINEERS WE COMPLETED A TIA AND WE'VE ALSO COMMUNICATED WITH TXDOT WITH DIESEL ENGINE PROPOSED DRIVE LOCATIONS AS WELL AS THE INTERSECTION OF SHILOH ROAD AND 67.

SO AT THIS STAGE, TXDOT HAS APPROVED ALL THREE OF THESE DRIVES AND CONFIRMED THAT THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING THE LOCATION OF THE CENTRAL DRIVE TO THE ON RAMP.

THIS IS THE MINIMUM TXDOT REQUIREMENT IS 200 FEET.HEY DID NOT SPECIFY AN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CAR OR TRUCK.

RIGHT NOW WE ARE PROVIDING 250 FEET.

IT IS JUST THE EMAIL WE GOT FROM TXDOT, TRAFFIC SAFETY TEAM GOING THROUGH THIS KIND OF CONFIRMING DISTANCES ARE ADEQUATE, THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS.

THEY AGREE WITH OUR TIA WHICH OUR TIA DOES NOT SUGGEST DIESEL LANES FOR ANY OF OUR DRIVES. THAT SAID, WE ARE PROPOSING A DIESEL LANE FOR THIS DRIVE WHICH WILL BE PREDOMINANT YOU KNOW WHERE THE TRUCKS WILL BE COMING IN.

AND RETHINK MAJORITY OF TRUCKS WILL BE COMING IN ALONG 67 FRONTAGE, NOT SO MUCH SHILOH ROAD.

BUT THERE WILL BE SOME FOR OUTBOUND TRAFFIC THAT GOES NORTHBOUND ON 67. ANOTHER KIND OF CONCERN FROM THE SAFETY POINT WAS THAT SHILOH ROAD 67 DRIVERS NOT CONTROLLED. WE HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH TXDOT AND THEY AGREE THAT, AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO CONVERT THE INTERSECTION OF SHILOH ROAD WITH US 67 TWO AND ALWAYS STOP CONTROL. WE WOULD BE ADDING STOP SIGN FOR THE FRONTAGE ROAD HERE AND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD.

TO BREAK UP ANY TRAFFIC THAT MIGHT BE FLYING DOWN THIS FRONTAGE ROAD AND ALLOW ANY EXITING TRAFFIC OR ENTERING TRAFFIC TO GET OUT ONTO THE ROAD ONTO THE RAMP.

I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT ON 67, THERE IS A DEDICATED THIRD LANE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE FOLLOWING EXIT.

WHICH IS ABOUT 1000 FEET. SO THAT REALLY DOES GIVE A LOT OF ROOM FOR A TRUCK TO SPEED UP AND ENTER ONTO THE HIGHWAY OR ANY CARS I MIGHT BEHIND THE TRUCK TO GET OVER AND GO AROUND. I HAVE A FEW EXAMPLES OF OTHER PROJECTS ALONG TXDOT HIGHWAYS. AROUND DFW, WE HAVE HUNDRED 50 FOOT HERE 170 FEET HERE, 225 FEET AGAIN ON I 45.

AND I WANT TO POINT OUT THIS IS WHAT WE WILL CALL A CROSS FACILITY WHICH IS A MUCH HIGHER TRAFFIC YOU KNOW TURNOVER THAN WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING WHICH IS MORE KIND OF BUSINESS AND

[03:20:05]

ESPECIALLY WITH MULTIPLE DIFFERENT DRIVES TO ACCESS.

OKAY SO FOR CONDITIONS NUMBER EIGHT AND NINE REGARDING ARCHITECTURAL ARTICULATION, WE ARE DOING OUR BEST TO PROVIDE WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR THE BUILDING, ARTICULATION HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL. ON THREE OF THE SIDES, ESPECIALLY THE FRONTAGE FACING 67.

REALLY THE RELIEF WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION.

OU KNOW, HAVING TWO OR THREE FEET OFFSET WHERE YOU HAVE A LOADING DOCK CAN ADD ISSUES FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE.OU KNOW, TRUCKS TRYING TO AVOID THAT AS WELL AS INTERNALLY, AND A LOT OF TIMES AS INBOUND OR OUTBOUND TRUCKS ARE COMING AND YOU HAVE IT LINED UP KIND OF WITH AN AREA FOR FORKLIFTS. THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY RELIEF WE ARE SEEKING. WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE ADJACENT TO THE MOBILE HOME PARK.

AND WE CONSIDER THAT IN OUR DESIGN AND WHAT MAY NOT BE CLEAR, SOME OF THE GRADING ASSOCIATE WITH THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE HOME PARK WHICH IS RIGHT HERE.

THAT IS SECTION BB. THE SITE WILL BE MUCH HIGHER THAN THE EXISTING GRID AT THAT LOCATION.

NOT TO MENTION WE HAVE ABOUT 100 FEET OF RETENTION POND.

THEN ANOTHER 200 FEET OF PARKING AND TRUCK ACTIVITY.

WE ARE PROPOSING -- AS WELL AS A LINE OF TREES THEY ARE SUCH THAT YOU HAVE ALMOST AN ENTIRE FOOTBALL FIELD BEFORE YOU CAN EVEN SEE THE BUILDING. AND WE REALLY THINK THAT IF YOU ARE IN THE HOME PARK EVEN LOOKING AT YOUR WINDOW, WE THINK YOU'RE PREDOMINANTLY GOING TO BE SEEING THE FENCE AND TREES AND POND WHICH COULD BE SEEN AS AN IMPROVEMENT DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU THINK OF THE DRIVING RANGE.

>> NUMBER THREE ABOUT OLD HIGHWAY 67.

WE UNDERSTAND WILL PUT MORE TRAFFIC THERE, IT IS NOT GREAT SHAPE TODAY. WE UNDERSTAND THE ASPHALT REQUEST, WE WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEE CREDITS IF POSSIBLE SINCE WE ARE IMPROVING FOR OTHER USERS.

AND ONE ASPECT OF NUMBER THREE ABOUT THE LEFT TURN LANE.

WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY WANT TO DO BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN COME BUT THERE'S KIND OF A WEIRD INTERSECTION WHERE YOU HAVE SHILOH ROAD, THIS ROAD WHICH I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S NAMED LEWIS AVENUE -- WE THINK THAT AGAIN, THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE A LOT OF INBOUND TRUCK TRAFFIC ON THIS DRIVE.

BUT ADDING A LEFT TURN LANE IN THEIR COULD CREATE MORE CONFUSION THAN ACTUALLY SOLVES. SO THAT'S JUST ONE THING WE DON'T WANT TO DO BIG IN THE RESURFACING WE ARE TOTALLY ON BOARD FOR THAT. AND THE NUMBER SEVEN THE WATER UPGRADE, WITH GRENADE WITH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ON THAT, IT IS ON INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN. WE JUST ALSO WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR CREDITS IF REQUIRED.

THAT IS ALL I'VE HAD TO SAY IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS I'D BE HAPPY

TO ANSWER. >> THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHERE'S ALL THE WATER GOING TO GO? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, I CAN TAKE THE ENTIRE AREA IS UNDERDEVELOPED FOR DRAINAGE. ARE YOU TAKING ALL THAT WATER TO THE HIGHWAY? WHERE IS IT GOING?

>> THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE DOES GO TO AN EXISTING UNDERGROUND CULVERT. WHICH I BELIEVE IS LOCATED AROUND HERE. THIS ENTIRE AREA IS A RETENTION POND OR DETENTION POND THAT YOU KNOW, WILL --

>> IT WILL CATCH BACK -- IT WILL CATCH IT.

>> IS A CULVERT HERE THAT GOES UP THERE, BUT YOU KNOW OUR ENGINEERS WILL PLAN FORWARD AND THERE IS AN OUTFALL.

>> BUT YOU KNOW, IS IT GOING OUT OR DOES THE BACK SIDE TRY, I'M NOT FOLLOWING. YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY STATING THERE IS A CULVERT COMMON UNDERGROUND CULVERT.

I ASSUME THAT'S WITHIN YOUR CONSTRUCTION.

BECAUSE IS REALLY NOTHING THERE NOW.

>> JUST AS UNDERGROUND CULVERT THAT GOES UNDER HIGHWAY 67 I DID MY DARNDEST TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IT WENT AND I'M NOT SURE.

[03:25:05]

>> JUMPING OFF IN THAT CREEK BACK THERE.

>> I THINK THERE IS A CREEK THERE.

>> IT WILL BE A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF WATER.

>> WILL BE DETAINING BACK TO NORMAL CONDITION SO WILL NOT BE AN INCREASE BASED ON ENGINEERING DESIGN.

>> I'VE GOT A BIG ISSUE WITH -- RUNNING TO THE CENTER THE BUILDINGS. IT'S A TERRIBLE IDEA.

IT'S GOING TO JACKED THE TRAFFIC UP ON THE HIGHWAY.

THEY WILL BE JACKED UP SPOTS. I WOULD HOPE IT APPEARS AS THOUGH THE REST OF THE BUILDING NOT NECESSARILY FOR TRUCK PARKING AS IS OFFICE STAFF OR PERSONNEL THAT WORK THERE.

I WOULD ASSUME YOU'D WANT YOUR TRUCKS TO COME DOWN THE

BACKSIDE. >> TRUE.

>> COULD YOU NOT MOVE THE ENTRANCE TO THE EAST PAST THAT CENTURY? BECAUSE OF HIM A TRUCK DRIVER I'M GOING RIGHT UP TO THE MIDDLE AND ZOOM I'M GOING TO RUN RIGHT OUT THERE. AND TRY TO GET ON THE HIGHWAY

ABOUT 80 MILES AN HOUR. >> IS ALREADY STOCK CONTROLS THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET OUT.

>> I DON'T MEAN THAT BUT -- >> ONE CONSIDERATION, OCCASIONALLY THE BUILDING RENTED OUT TO SEPARATE USERS.

AND SO YOU KNOW, WE DO, IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE ACCESS TO BOTH SIDES IF YOU WILL, TO ALLOW FOR CIRCULATION AND YES, OUTBOUND TRUCK TRAFFIC, THE ACCESS ONTO THE HIGHWAY WE THINK IS IMPORTANT AND WHAT POTENTIAL TENANTS LOOK FOR VERSUS GOING THROUGH OTHER PARTS OF THE ROAD.> HOW MUCH ROAD IMPROVEMENT ARE YOU MAKING ON THE CITY ROAD?

>> WE ARE RESURFACING FROM OUR DRIVE --

>> NOT CONCRETE? >> NO, SIR.

>> HOW MANY TRUCKS WILL YOU ROLL A DAY THROUGH THEIR?

>> THAT WILL REALLY DEPEND ON THE USER.

BUT LIKE I SAID, THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING IS -- IT IS NOT ZOOMED IN HERE BUT THE DEPTH OF THE BAY LEADS TO MORE STORAGE, WAREHOUSING AND FILLING ORDERS WHEN THE COMMAND VERSUS SOME OF THESE OTHER TYPES WHERE YOU HAVING TRUCKS BRINGING IN AND YOU'RE SORTING IT AND SENDING IMMEDIATELY OUT TO A NEW --

>> HOW MANY TRUCKS ARE YOU GOING TO RUN THROUGH THEIR? WE WERE LOOKING UP DOWN THE ROAD WHICH IS A LARGER PROJECT BUT THEY ARE TALKING THOUSANDS. THEN CUT IN HALF THE TALKING 800 TODAY. DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA? 600 A DAY? POSSIBLY? [INAUDIBLE] THAT IS MY PROBLEM. ONE OTHER QUICK QUESTION, ARE YOU, THIS WILL HAVE, THIS WILL LEAK WHAT I'LL BE ASKING STAFF IN A FEW MINUTES. ARE YOU HUNG UP ON YOUR BUILDING HEIGHT? BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN VERY FORCEFUL WITH SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS JUST DOWN THE ROAD.

IF THEY HAD TO FIT WITHIN THE CONFINEMENTS OF OUR APPLIED BUILDING STANDARDS FOR FRONTAGES THE BUILDING AND HIDES AND FAC'ADES AND WHATNOT SO, ARE YOU ABLE TO MAKE

ADJUSTMENTS ALSO? >> WITH THE COMBO INTO THE 32 FOOT CLEAR HEIGHT INTERIOR. THE EXTRA HEIGHT TRULY WAS FOR THESE ENTRY FEATURES WHICH WE WANTED ALONG FRONTAGE.

IF WE NEEDED TO PUT THAT DOWN I THINK THAT'S --

>> I GUESS THE REASON I MENTION THIS.

THE OTHER DEVELOPERS HAVE VERY GOOD REASONS ALSO.

BUT WE CAN SAID NO, IT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.

I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THE ONLY OTHER CONCERN I HAVE HONESTLY, I THINK THAT SOME PLANNING HAS GONE INTO THIS AND THE ENGINEERS DON'T -- THE OUTFLOW OF WATER ON THE BACKSIDE, THAT IS NOT WELL PLANNED.

YOUR TAKE WHAT'S BEEN DRIVING RANGE AND LETTING A LOT OF CONCRETE AND ALL THAT WATER HAS GOT TO GO SOMEWHERE AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE SIMPLE THAT WE HAVE CONTAINMENT PONDS AND IT WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF. I FEEL LIKE YOU'VE GOT A PRODUCT THAT IS WORTH CONSIDERING.

I FEEL LIKE THERE IS MORE PLANNING THAT NEEDS TO GO INTO

THIS MYSELF. >> IF I CAN SPEAK TO THIS, WE WILL BE HELD TO PROVING THE DETENTION POND DOES RETAIN THE

[03:30:05]

ESPECIALLY NOT KNOWING WHAT THE DOWNSTREAM CONDITIONS ARE.

WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO THE PROCEDURE CODE.

HE TOLD US THAT FROM THE GET GO.> INCLUDES MIKE AND THE CULVERT RUNNING UNDER THE ROAD? FOR ALL WE KNOW IT IS TWO FOOT TALL. WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING IS THE WATER IS BEING ABSORBED MOST. AND THAT WILL BE DISPLAYED AND IT WILL -- ESPECIALLY INTO THE REAR ONCE EVERY 15 YEAR REIGN PATCHES THE CONTAINMENT WILL NOT HOLD ALL OF IT.

IT'S JUST GOING TO BE FLOWING OUT OF THERE.

>> TYPICALLY WHAT WE REQUIRE WHEN YOU DO THAT IS YOU HAVE TO DETAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PRE-AND POST-DEVELOPMENT.

PREDEVELOPMENT IS AS IT IS NOW. THEN YOU HAVE THE POST, YOU HAVE TO DETAIN AND SLOWLY RELEASE THAT.

BUT WE HAVE THEM LOOK AT -- BECAUSE IN THE PAST YOU JUST LOOK AT THE 100 YEAR EVENT AND THAT IS IT.

FIVE AND 10 AND 25 YEAR EVENTS OCCUR MORE FREQUENTLY IS A PRETTY BIG IMPACT DOWNSTREAM IS ALL WE HAD TO COME IN AND IF THEY -- IF WE HAVE A FIVE YEAR EVENT YOU ARE HOLDING BACK THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRE-AND POST-DEVELOPMENT FOR A FIVE-YEAR EVENT SHOWS DISCHARGE AND FIVE-YEAR VENTING OF THE TENURE EVENT AND DO THE SAME THING.

AS THE STORM GROWS AND GETS BIG YEAR DISCHARGING THE STORM EVENTS FROM PREDEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT ALL THE WAY UP TO B,100. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THEIR CONSULTANTS WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVE UP TO US.

IT IS SIGNED AND SEALED AND WE REVIEWED IT.

DEPENDING HOW COMPLEXES RESEND IT OUT BUT IT WILL BE LOOKED AT AND REVIEWED. LOOKING AT KIND OF WESTERN BECAUSE IT IS UNDERSIZED AND EVEN BEING UNDER 12 TRAILER BIG ENOUGH RAINS CAUSING HAVOC. IT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO FLOW THROUGH NOW. ONCE AGAIN IT WILL BE CAREFUL BECAUSE AT THE SAME TIME IF YOU NEED TO COME IN AND UPSIZE A CULVERT NOW YOU ARE IMPACTING PEOPLE DOWNSTREAM THAT MAYBE THE CULVERT WAS RESTRICTING. SO THEY WILL BE CALLING BACK TO THE PREDEVELOPMENT IS. THAT SHOULD BE STAYING ON SITE.

>> IF THEY HAVE 600 TRUCKS A DAY, I'M A TRUCK DRIVER, I AM GOING RIGHT UP TO THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDINGS.

CLOSE ESPECIALLY FOR ME TO GO SOUTH.

THE 600 TOTAL THAT'S EVERYTHING.

AS PASSENGER VEHICLES AND TRUCKS.

DUCKS LOOKING AT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND TYPE OF USE OF THE BUILDING, THAT IS TOTAL NUMBER SO THAT IS NOT 600 TRUCKS, THERE IS A PERCENTAGE OF IT THAT WILL BE TRUCKS BUT NOT KNOWING WHAT THE END USER IS GOING TO BE CAN BE FIVE PERCENT, TO BE 25 PERCENT I JUST DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT.

>> I GUESS I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IS IF YOU'RE RUNNING 600 UNITS OUT OF THEIR DAY, CUT THEM IN HALF AND THEY ARE GOING SOUTHBOUND.

YOU HAVE A UNIT ROAMING OUT EVERY 4.8 MINUTES.

IF THEY DECIDED TO GO THAT WAY. I'M HAVING A REAL PROBLEM WITH THIS OUTLET. LITERALLY RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SOUTHBOUND ENTRANCE.> AND REALLY, WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WE LOOKED AT IT AND KNOWING WHAT WE KNOW LIVING HERE AS LONG AS WE HAVE AND ALSO WHERE THE WATER CHILLER PLANT I'VE BEEN TO THE INTERSECTION MORE TIMES THAN NOT.

YOU KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW THOSE FRONTAGE ROADS ARE NOT STOPPING -- AND THEY ARE NOT STOP CONDITION.

FRONTAGE ROAD HAS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE INTERSECTION. WE ACTUALLY FROM THE CITY, GOT TXDOT TO PUT SUPPLEMENTAL SIGNS UNDERNEATH THE STOP SIGNS WHEN YOU'RE COMING UP FROM CROSS STREET THIS IS CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP. THAT WAS YEARS AGO BUT THERE WERE THINGS ALREADY, SO WHEN IT FIRST CAME IN, THE BIGGER CONCERN WAS TO HAVE THREE DRIVES, THE FARTHEST ONE TO THE SOUTH IS NOT AS BIG OF A CONCERN BECAUSE THERE WERE CARS REALLY TRYING TO GET TO THE RAMP AND GET ON SOUTHBOUND 67.

BUT YOU HAVE TWO OTHER DRIVES. THE ONE THAT REALLY CAUSE CONCERN BECAUSE WE ARE TOLD THE MIDDLES REALLY GOING TO BE MORE, A COMBINATION PASSENGER VEHICLES AND TRUCKS TO GET ACCESS AS WELL. MY CONCERN IS AGAIN BEING ON THE AREA FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS AND SEEING HOW IT WORKS OR HAVING A CONTROLLED INTERSECTION.HEY TRUCK PULLING UP FROM ZERO GOING TO 65, WHICH IS WHAT IS ON SOUTHBOUND. WITHIN 250 FEET, A THING ORIGINALLY WAS LESS THAN THAT THINK WAS LESS THAN 250 BUT EVEN TRYING TO GET TO HER AND THEN THE RAMP WAS ON A LITTLE INCLINE AS WELL. THERE ARE THINGS THAT CAUSE CONCERN ON OUR PART WE CAME BACK AND SAID WE REALLY THINK SOMETHING IS TO BE LOOKING AT AS WELL IS A TRAFFIC IMPACT AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLD HIGHWAY 67 AND SHILOH ON THE OTHER SIDE AS WELL. THEY DID AN UPDATED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND BASED ON THAT LOOK LIKE IT WOULD BE FOR

[03:35:02]

-- WITH ENCORE COMING WITH THEIR FACILITY ACTING FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT IT WILL HELP. THAT WAS DONE AS PART OF AN UPDATE AND RECENTLY THE DISTRICT LOOKED AT IT.

AND CAME BACK WITH WHAT THEY HAD SAID THEY WERE OKAY WITH.

I CAN TELL YOU WE ALSO MET WITH EVERY ENGINEER TODAY AND THE MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR. HE SAID THE ULTIMATE FALLS DOWN TO MAKING THE APPROVALS. MR. HUSTON LOOKED IN THE OFFICE AND HAS TO BE REVIEWED. THE DRAINAGE AND LOOKED AT AS WELL BECAUSE TXDOT WILL LOOK AT THEIR FACILITIES AND SO YOU HAVE TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE NOT IMPACTING AND HAVING A PROBLEM WITH OUR FACILITIES AS WELL. THAT STILL HAS TO HAPPEN ON THE AREA SIDE JUST THE DISTRICT OFFICE LOOKED AT AND THEY LOOK AT IT FROM BASICALLY A PIECE OF PAPER SAYING THESE ARE WHAT OUR STANDARDS ARE HERE ABOUT THE DISTANCES AND THE SPACE AND REQUIREMENTS ARE. MEET THOSE, THE RAMP IS HERE THE DRIVEWAYS HERE. BUT AGAIN THE AREAS REALLY GOING TO BE THE ONE ULTIMATELY WHO WILL SAY WE HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE OF X, Y, AND Z. AND IT CAN BE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE

ARE TALKING ABOUT AS WELL. >> I'M NOT CONCERNED MAX'S BECAUSE I CAUGHT THE POINT THAT THERE WOULD BE A THREE-WAY STOP THERE. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TRUCKS ROLLING ACROSS THE ROAD AND CRAMMING GEARS TO GET ON THE HIGHWAY AND THEIR CARS COMING OFF THE STOP SIGNS AND GETTING BOGGED UP TRYING TO GET ON THE HIGHWAY RIGHT THERE.

>> AND THAT'S THE REASON THE CONDITION MARCOS HAD READ SAYING CENTRAL DRIVE EITHER IT CAN BE PUSHED SOMEWHERE WHERE YOU CAN'T GET OR YOU CAN PUSH BACK FOR THE WAY YOU CAN GET UP ENOUGH SPEED BUT I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING FOR THE CONFIGURATION. YOU HAVE LONG SPENT A PIECE OF PROPERTY WE HEREBY YOU HAVE THAT LONGER BUILDING.

WE SET A DEAL THAT IF THEY WERE AWAKE AFFLICTED TO BUILDINGS AROUND, NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN IT JUST PUSHED TO WHERE YOU ON THE DOWNSTREAM SIDE OF THE RAMP AND YOU CANNOT GET TO IT.

WE DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ACCESS TO THE 67 FRONTAGE ROAD.

IT MEETS THE SPACING REQUIREMENTS.

>> I WOULD PREFER FRONTAGE ROAD VERSUS THE BACK ROADS TO BEGIN WITH. THE OTHER ISSUE IS YOU ARE NOT CONCERNED AT ALL ABOUT -- I'VE TRAVELED THE ROAD MANY TIMES.

THE QUALITY OF OLD 67 THERE, THAT THEY JUST GO TO TOP IT AND THEY CAN BE RUNNING LET'S SAY THE TRUCKS DO NOT WANT TO GO OUT THERE OR ENDS UP THERE ISN'T AN EXIT OUT THERE? WE WILL RUN 600 TRUCKS OUT ON THE OLD BEAT UP ROAD AND THEY TOPPED IT?R AM I MISSING SOMETHING?

>> THE ONE THING WE LOOKED AT AS WELL, RIGHT NOW OLD HIGHWAY 67 HAS A REALLY GOOD BASE. I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE ASPHALT HAS WORN OVER TIME. IT HAS A GOOD BASE ON IT.

BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD SURFACE TO WATER.

>> PEOPLE HAVE POCKETS YOU'RE GOING ALL OVER THE PLACE.

THAT'S WHAT YOU DO WITH THE OVERLAY.YOU COME IN WITH THE OVERLAY AND MAKE IT, I CAN TELL YOU THIS, FINANCE A MEETING WITH TXDOT, WE ARE MEETING ON SOMETHING ELSE BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS PROJECT. THERE RIGHT-OF-WAY COMES ALL THE WAY DOWN TO -- WHEN WE MENTIONED WE LOOK AT HAVING THAT IMPROVED AND THE OVERLAY THEY SAID IT WOULD BE GREAT.

IT WOULD BE GREAT BUT THAT'S REALLY TXDOT WHICH AGAIN WE THOUGHT IT WAS OUR -- THE SUPERVISOR HAS BEEN A LONG TIME AND HE SAYS HIS HOURS ALL THE WAY DOWN -- JUST A LITTLE BIT SHORT. [INAUDIBLE]

>> THANK YOU. >> YES SIR.

>> I WILL MAKE A COUPLE OF POINTS.

WE WOULD LOVE TO MOVE THIS FURTHER WEST IF WE COULD.

WE ARE LIMITED IN THE FACT THAT WE ARE DOING A SEPTIC SYSTEM ANDREW DO HAD TO RESERVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF AREA FOR THE ENDS HERE. WHICH IS RESTRICTING US ON THIS AND FOR MAY BE BUMPING THIS BUILDING OVER AND HELPING OUT A LITTLE BIT WITH THE DRIVE. ADDITIONALLY, YES IF WE FLIP THE BUILDINGS BUT WE KIND OF NEED THIS LONG SKINNY ONE HERE IS BASED ON THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY.

>> WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF YOU HAD YOUR ENTRANCE GOING OFF THAT? THE LEFT HAND JUST STRAIGHT OUT OR WHATEVER YOU'VE GOT -- THE INTERSECTION. HERE'S WHERE I'M AT.

I WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT, THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS CAN VOTE HOW THEY WANT. I CANNOT SUPPORT WITH THERE BEING AN ENTRANCE RIGHT AT THE FRONT THERE, AND I FEEL LIKE WHERE THEY'VE DONE SOME GOOD ENGINEERING ON A PROJECT, I AM

[03:40:04]

THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW. >> I JUST SAY THIS IS CRITICAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. WE NEED TO POINTS OF TRUCK

ACCESS AND THAT IS CONSISTENT. >> I'M NOT TELLING YOU, IN MY VIEW YOU CANNOT HAVE IT JUST NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED.

YOU NEED THE -- OUT RATHER YOU GOING OUT ON THE SERVICE ROAD THEN BEHIND THE ENTRANCE THERE IS A BAD IDEA.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN THE ORDERS THAT WANT TO TALK TALK ON THIS TOPIC? SEEING NONE, A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC.

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

>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUS.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WHAT ABOUT THE BUILDING HEIGHT, MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK WORKED REALLY HARD ON THOSE GUYS. JUST ONE EXAMPLE, WHAT IS THEIR HEIGHT? ROUGHLY ABOUT THAT OR --

[INAUDIBLE] >> HOW MUCH?

[INAUDIBLE] >> IS THAT YOU GOING TO SAY 69 FEET. IT'S OKAY DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.

I JUST KNEW THAT WE HELD THEM PRETTY MUCH WHERE WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE AT AND WE CANNOT CRACK THE WHIP ON THEM AND THEN START MAKING ADJUSTMENTS SEVERAL WEEKS LATER.

OR A MONTH LATER. >> WE DO HAVE -- WHO IS HEAD OF THE PROGRAM REGARDING TRAFFIC. THE OTHER WAS A DEAL WITH ALL THE TRUCKS IN AND OUT OF THE CITY IN VIOLATION OF

ORDINANCES. >> MY PRIMARY, I CANNOT SUPPORT IT WITH THAT ENTRANCE ACROSS FROM HIGHWAY INTEREST I CAN'T

MAKE IT HAPPEN. >> THANK YOU.

>> MY MAIN CONCERN WITH THAT IS WITH THE SLOW ACCELERATION BUT WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT -- PRIMARILY USED FOR -- [INAUDIBLE] I SIT RIGHT HERE MOST DAYS.

I WATCH THIS ALL THE TIME AND THAT IS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE

FROM OUR SIDE I THINK. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS ANY SCHEDULE TO SPEAK. WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A

MOTION AT THIS TIME? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION WE, THE

CLIENT HAS PRESENTED. >> I WILL SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUS. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12.

[012 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the zoning of +/-66.441 acres situated in the J. Sharkey Survey, Abstract No. 1065 and the WP Kerr Survey, Abstract No. 609, by changing the zoning from Planned Development District No. 94 (PD-94) to Planned Development District No. 150 (PD-150) for a mixed-use development consisting of residential and nonresidential uses. The property is located to the east of U.S. Hwy 67, between Spur 77 and Main Street (Business 287) (Case No. Z49-2021-199).]

[03:45:07]

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED TO THE EAST OF HIGHWAY 67 BETWEEN SPUR 77 AND MAIN STREET. BUSINESS 287.

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS ON DISTRICT NUMBER 90 FOR TWO NEW DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CONSISTING OF RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL USE.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE PREVIOUS PD 94 A LOT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE MIXED-USE RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES. THE -- THIS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITH RETAIL COMMERCIAL USE ON THE NORTHERN TRACK OF THE PROPERTY. PARTS THAT BEING DEVELOPED, AS PART OF PD 94 WAS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED AND ACTUALLY ALLOWED FOR MULTIFAMILY IN THE PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

IT ALLOWED FOR HOSPITAL I BELIEVE FIRE STATION AND MIXTURE OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL USE.

IN 2018 IS WHEN THEY CAME FORWARD AND RESIGNED TO THE CURRENT. THE PROPERTY OWNER OR APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO PUT MULTIFAMILY ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION. BRING BACK THE MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT OF THE PD. REQUESTING TO DO ENTERTAINMENT, TOWNHOUSE USE, OR NEITHER ONE OF THE TRACKS.

BASICALLY IT STATES YOU CAN DO TOWNHOMES HERE OR HERE.

ONLY IN ONE SPOT FOR NO MORE THAN 40 TOWNHOMES.

THE REMAINDER PORTION OF IT WOULD BE A MIXTURE OF COMMERCIAL, RETAIL USES. EXCUSE ME.

THIS IS THE SITE PLAN ONCE IS DEVELOPED.

NORTH OF THE DEVELOPER, PERTAINING TO THE MULTIFAMILY.

FOR QUITE A BIT, BEFORE WE WERE WORKING ON THE REST OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, WE WORKED ON THE DESIGN OF THIS.

ONE THING THAT WE REITERATED THEM ABOUT THE MULTIFAMILY TRACK IS THAT YOU BRING MULTIFAMILY AND YOU NEED TO FOCUS ON THE DESIGN OF IT. THAT'S WHAT WE DO WITH ALL DEVELOPMENTS, AS THEY COME TO THE CITY WE WANT TO BE REFLECTIVE OF THE AREA. THE CARWASH LOOKS DIFFERENT THAN OTHER CARWASHES. THE SAME WITH THIS THIS IS MULTIFAMILY AND THEY ARE CLOSE TO THE DOWNTOWN.

WE WANT SOMETHING THAT BETTER RESEMBLED THE DOWNTOWN AND POINT OF THE DOWNTOWN. WITH THE SITE PLAN, ONCE AGAIN AS WE FOCUS WITH THE AMENITIES OF THE MULTIFAMILY TRACK, WE ENCOURAGE THEM TO NOT ONLY INCORPORATE MONIES IN THIS BUT BLEED INTO THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

THEY WERE GONE AS PART OF OUR COMMENTS WAS TO INCLUDE A TROLLEY THAT GOES THROUGH CONNECT ON THE SIDEWALKS.

THIS GOES THROUGHOUT THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT COMES ON THE OUTSIDE OF MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT INTO THE OPEN SPACE PRESERVED ALL THROUGHOUT HERE, THE CROSSING GOING THROUGHOUT THE OTHER TOWNHOMES, COME BACK DOWN AND ALL THROUGHOUT THE ENTERTAINMENT AREAS. AND COMMERCIAL AREAS.

THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN WHERE THE EDUCATION PORTION WILL LOOK LIKE A DEVELOPER FOR ENTERTAINMENT.

IT WOULD CONSIST OF POSSIBLY A MOVIE THEATER, BOWLING, WHAT YOU SEE NOR MIXED ENTERTAINMENT CENTERS.

THE LANDSCAPING, ONE THING WE INCORPORATED WITH THE DEVELOPER, I FLIPPED THIS THAT'S MY FAULT.

MY LANDSCAPING WORK WE DO THE OTHER LANDSCAPING DEVELOPMENTS WE WANT THE SITE TO HAVE HEAVY LANDSCAPING ALL THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THE CONSISTENCY OF THE AREA IS VARIOUS TYPES OF EDUCATION WE WANTED TO CONTINUE WITH OUTFLOW. WE WANT LANDSCAPING TO CONTINUALLY BE ENCOURAGED AND REIMPLEMENT IT BACK INTO THE OVERALL DESIGN OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

EVEN WHEN YOU GET TO THE AMENITY CENTER, FOR THE

[03:50:03]

THE TOWNHOUSE NO MORE THAN 40 UNITS.

WITH MULTIFAMILY AS IT TALKS ABOUT THE DESIGN, IT IS SOMETHING WORKED WITH THEM QUITE A BIT.

WHO WANTED SOME MOVEMENT DOWNTOWN GOT RID OF THE TYPICAL GARDENS, THE APARTMENT DESIGN WE REFOCUSED ON MORE ARTICULATION OF HORIZONTAL -- KIND OF BLENDING INTO THE SURROUNDING AREA AS WELL. YOU HAVE THE WALMART ACROSS THE STREET. WE WANTED TO CONTINUE THE ARCHITECTURE DESIGNED MULTIFAMILY.

THERE WILL BE APPROVED DOWNTOWN IF WE WANT SOMETHING MORE COMPLEMENTARY TO THE BUILDINGS THAT YOU SEE DOWNTOWN.

ADDITIONALLY WITH THIS, WANTED THERE TO BE IF YOU CAN SEE THE OVERALL WHAT THIS IS LIKE FROM BASICALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM MAIN STREET OR WALMART LOCATED BY MURPHY GAS STATION OR CAN BE USED ARE LOOKING ONTO THE PROPERTY.

YOU KNOW THE TOWNHOMES HAD THIS GOES UP ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST WOULD BE LOOKING DOWN UPON THE DEVELOPMENT.

THERE WOULD BE NOTHING FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT LOOKING DOWN.

ONE THING WE ALSO WANTED THEM TO DO WAS WANTED THIS TO BE DESIGNED UPON THE PEDESTRIAN RATHER THAN THE AUTOMOBILE.

WE WANT TO PROMOTE WALK ABILITY, DOWNTOWN WORKING ON VARIOUS PLANS TO ENHANCE SIDEWALKS.

TO ENCOURAGE WALKING, TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENTS.

THIS AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S MEANDERING THROUGH WITHOUT LANDSCAPED MEDIANS, THAT WILL BE APPROVED BY THE PARKS DIRECTOR. OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT, MAKE SURE THAT THEIR MEETINGS WE CAN CONTINUE THAT WERE SUSTAINABLE THAT WERE EASILY FOR US TO MAINTAIN AND STILL LOOK GOOD.

>> AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR PLANS.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT THEY DID REQUEST, THEY WORKING BACK AND FORTH FOR THIS RESTAURANTS GREATER THAN OR LESS THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE -- THE ORIGINAL PROPOSING LARGER AND WE WERE RECOMMENDING SMALLER. THE ORDINANCE IS WHAT STOPS RECOMMENDATIONS 3000 SQUARE FEET.

SHOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT FOR RESTAURANTS.

ONE THING THAT DID REQUEST WAS -- ONE CONCERN ABOUT THIS BY RIGHT IS IT'S BEEN A HOT TOPIC. HERE WITHIN THE CITY, WE EXPLAIN HOW MANY TIMES OVER AND OVER AGAIN HOW DIRECTORS, WE SEE MORE AND MORE IN THE CITY. HAVING IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THIS PLAN WAS DESIGNED TO BE ABLE TO CONTAIN THAT WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.

SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE IN THE KROGER DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE THE DRIVE THROUGH, ALL TRAFFIC ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ALSO STRENGTHEN THAT.

WE HAVE LANGUAGE TALK ABOUT THE DRIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC BEING -- IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SELF, PUTTING THAT ONTO MAIN STREET OR 77. ALSO, AS YOU NORMALLY WORK ON A DRIVE THROUGH TEXT AMENDMENT TO ENHANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU HAVE YET TO APPROVE. I AM SURE THEY THE REGULATIONS.

NOW THE DEVELOPMENT HAS THIS ALSO -- THE EASE BEING PERMITTED BY RIGHT. RIGHT NOW AS IT STANDS, TOWN HOUSES WILL BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT HOW THE ORDINANCE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. 40.

YES SIR. BY RIGHT THERE ARE REGULATIONS, THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWNHOUSES.

VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SAW ON THE WEST SIDE PRESERVED.

SIMILAR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS. THAT IS FROM THE CURRENT PD.

[03:55:03]

I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

IT DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. >> CAN YOU CONFIRM FOR ME, WHAT, BECAUSE IT SHOWS EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS.

NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST. WHAT IS THIS, IT A PROPERTY JOINED, HOW DID THIS AND UP WITH ALL DIFFERENT

CLASSIFICATIONS? >> THIS IS ALL ONE PDF.

>> I KNOW. BUT I'M TALKING, IF WE DON'T

APPROVE THIS PD. >> GOES BACK TO PD NUMBER 94.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S ON PD 94 RIGHT NOW?

>> RIGHT NOW, IT'S A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL.

COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, EVERYTHING THAT COMES BACK --

>> 40 RETAIL ON THE NORTH SIDE, IS NOT CONTAINED WITHIN LIKE RETAIL ACROSS THE STREET OR WOULD INCLUDE -- IT WOULD KEEP THE CURRENT REGULATIONS IF YOU WERE TO HAVE A TRUCK STOP THAT GENERALLY SELLS GASOLINE, IT WOULD REQUIRE AN SUP.

THERE REQUESTING THIS ONE FOR A CONVENIENCE STORE TO BE BY RIGHT. I BELIEVE THAT WE CHANGE THAT.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT THE PROPOSAL? >> I'M STILL AN EXISTING.

>> I APOLOGIZE. >> I WANT TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE TODAY AND IF I PROVE SOMETHING DIFFERENT, -- > OCCURRED ORDINANCE IS VERY VAGUE WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT, IT'S PRETTY BASIC. BASICALLY STATES ANY SORT OF DEVELOPMENT HAS TO GO TO THE DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN PROCESS.

REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND IT ALLOWS FOR ANY USE ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT, BY RIGHT. I THINK THERE ARE SOME PROHIBITIONS -- WHERE JOBS ARE PROHIBITED.

BUT THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT IS YOUR TYPICAL RETAIL THAT YOU SEEN ACROSS THE STREET RESTAURANTS WOULD BE PART OF AN

SUP. >> THIS IS CONTAINED WHAT IS

REFERENCED AS THE INNER -- >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION AS WELL.

>> YES HE HAS A PRESENTATION AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS, -- I WILL WAIT FOR THE PRESENTATION TO QUEUE UP IF THAT'S OKAY. WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF. I WILL BE BRIEF.

THE DEVELOPERS ARE HERE, MY LONGTIME COLLEAGUE -- AS WELL.

WE COULD NOT BRING OUR YOUNG COLLEGE BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE IN THE RETAIL AND IT'S REALLY NOT A JOKE.

I MEAN IT'S JUST, WE'VE GOT TWO OFFICES AND THERE IS HARDLY ANY RETAIL. THIS IS ACTUALLY REALLY EXCITING BECAUSE THIS IS SORT OF THE GOOD OLD DAYS.

Y'ALL ARE EXPERIENCING KIND OF THE GOOD OLD DAYS.

OKAY SO, DOWNTOWN DALLAS-BASED. WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO DO A SUPER NICE MIXED-USE PROJECT UNDER VERY DIFFICULT SITE TO BUILD.THIS LITERALLY MAIN AND MAIN.

THERE IS NO REASON THAT IT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN YOU KNOW DEVELOPED EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T TAKE, I DROVE OUT HERE FOR B12 AND HE WAS LIKE THIS WAS A HARD-WON DAD! I MEAN YOU KNOW, AND IT IS PRETTY GOOD.

HIS FAVORITE BUSINESS SO THAT'S A GOOD OBSERVATION.

WE DIDN'T BILL YOU FOR THAT, NECK.

SO, WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH A PD.

AND YOUR STAFF IS SUPER GOOD TO WORK WITH! I GET EMAILS AT MINUTE WHICH MAY BE I DON'T LIKE BECAUSE IT'S INTERRUPTING THE DODGERS GAME BUT STILL, THIS WAS REALLY

[04:00:03]

THAT OLD PD, I DON'T KNOW, IT WAS PROBABLY DONE FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS ALL GOING TO COME TOGETHER AND DIDN'T SO WE PUT TOGETHER DEVELOPMENT TEAM WITH STAFF HELP OF HOW WE DO ALL OF THIS. SO THAT IT HAPPENS ESSENTIALLY AT ONE TIME. AND HAS THAT YOU KNOW INTERACTIVE MIX OF USES OF SOME RENTERS, SOME OWNERS AND THINGS PEOPLE WANT. THAT'S SORT OF WHAT THIS SLIDE IS ABOUT, GOOD PLANNING IS LOOKING FORWARD AND LIKE DRIVING TO LOOK IN THE BACK REARVIEW MIRROR A LITTLE BIT.

IT IS GOOD TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE.

BUT IT CANNOT SHAPE WHAT WE ARE DOING.

TONIGHT WE HAVE A GOOD MICROCOSM OF WHERE THE MARKET IS. AND IT IS NOT TYPICALLY RETAIL.

BUT Y'ALL ARE UNDERSERVED AND SO YOU HAVE A REAL OPPORTUNITY HERE YOU KNOW, AND THIS IS JUST YOU KNOW, ONE OF OUR PEOPLE CAME UP WITH THIS BUT YOU HAVE THE BIGGER BOXES AND YOU GOT TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING SMART. THIS IS SORT OF OUR BIGGEST BARRIER OR ONE OF THEM IS PETER HAVE TO HAVE RETAIL THAT WORKS.

POST-PANDEMIC AMERICA THAT ALSO MEET YOUR CITIZENS DESIRES, WE WANT THEM TO GO THERE AND WE WANT THEM TO MAKE THIS HOME.

YOU KNOW MOST FAMILIES HAVE THAT.

WHEN THEY HAVE A COUPLE PLACES THEY LIKE TO GO AND THEY MAY JUST GO TO THAT LOCATION AND PICK BASED ON HOW LONG THEY MIGHT HAVE TO WAIT TO EAT ARE OTHER THINGS.

THAT'S WHAT WE THINK WE CAN DO HERE.

THE OTHER PROBLEMS, WITH FLOODPLAIN PROBLEMS, YOUR 60 FEET OF FALL ACROSS THE SITE. WE'VE GOT YOU KNOW A GAS PIPELINE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO RELOCATE SOME.

WE HAVE TO BUILD A ROAD INTERIOR OF THE SITE BUT IT DOES NOT DIVIDE IT SO THE PEDESTRIANS CANNOT COME BACK AND FORTH. AND CROSS SHOP.

AND SO, THIS IS WHY SITTING HERE BUT WE CAN DO IT AND WILL WALK THROUGH THAT. WE RETURNED ANY OF THESE IF YOU WILL BUT IF YOU DECIDE TO JUST KIND OF A SLIDE THAT WALKS YOU THROUGH THE PROBLEMS, DEVELOPING THE SITE AND JUST FROM A GRADING STANDPOINT IN ALL OF THE RETAINING WALLS.

YOU WILL SEE HERE, WE GOT A NUMBER OF DETENTION PONDS.

AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO THAT TO MAKE IT INTO A FEATURE WHERE IF YOU LIVE THERE OR YOU GO THERE AND WANT TO WALK IT'S INTERESTING, NOT JUST HOLDING IT SO WE CAN DUMP IT INTO SOMETHING. OKAY SO WE TALKED TO STAFF, YOU SEE A LOT ABOUT WHO ARE RENTERS? I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE YOUR NICEST RENTAL PRODUCT IN TOWN AND THESE ARE ALL OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS THIS IS MY COUSIN, UNFORTUNATELY, SHE WAS A WIDOW IN HER 50S . SHE HAS RENTED TEMPORARILY. THAT'S BEEN MORE THAN 10 YEARS.

YOU'RE FINDING MORE PEOPLE DECIDED TO OPT OUT OF OWNING A HOME AND THEN A LOT OF OUR MILLENNIALS ARE GOOD EARNERS, DOUBLE INCOME FAMILIES. RENTING BY CHOICE.

THESE ARE PEOPLE, WILL SHOW THAT THE POINT OF THIS.

IF WE LOOK AT A BETTER TEACHER AND A FIREFIGHTER, IT'S KIND OF EXAMPLE AND WHAT THEY MAKE BASED ON PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE DATA. WE WILL BE ABOUT ONE DOLLARS AND 65 AFOOT. I BELIEVE TWO YEARS WHEN IT OPENS WILL BE THE NUMBER BUT THIS IS WHAT THE RENT WILL BE.

ONE BEDROOM, $1200, TWO BEDROOM ALMOST $1900.

WHY DO PEOPLE RENT CREATIVELY LIKE A LOT OF THE AMENITIES, THE LIKE NO MAINTENANCE, THEY LIKE ALL THOSE THINGS.

AND YOU ARE GETTING YOUR RENTAL NOW IS EVERY BIT AS SOPHISTICATED AS A BUYER THEY EXPECT THE EXPERIENCE WITH WHAT THEY ARE RENTING. CAN THEY RENT SOMETHING AS NICE AS WHAT THEY CAN BUY CREW HERE ARE THREE HOMES ACTIVELY ON THE MARKET. IF YOU LOOK AT THE PRICES REMEMBER WHAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR RENT.

PEOPLE TYPICALLY PAY A LITTLE MORTAR ON.

RENTERS CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE IN YOUR COMMUNITY AND BY THE COMMUNITY. IN FACT THERE MAY BE SOME PEOPLE THAT DO BOTH. THEY WILL DECIDE BETWEEN RENTING AND BUYING A TOWNHOME THEY CAN DO EITHER.

AND SO WE FIND ALL OVER IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER IF YOU'RE URBAN OR EX URBAN YOU GET RENTERS THAT MOVE HERE FOR A JOB AND THEY ARE PRACTICING WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE BECAUSE IT NO CHURCH THEY WANT TO GO TO, THEY ARE NOT SURE WHAT SCHOOLS THE KIDS MIGHT GO TO AND THEY MAY RENT FOR SOME TIME BEFORE THEY BUY. TO THE POINT WE ARE MAKING IS THAT THESE PRICES THIS IS MULTIFAMILY IS VERY NICE.

AND PEOPLE ARE DECIDING PARTLY BECAUSE WE ARE OFFERING A LOT OF AMENITIES OFF THE SITE AND THE PROXIMITY TO BE IN THE

[04:05:04]

IT IS NICE TO SEE THEIR COUNTRY BACK INTO THE MARKET SOME.

AGAIN, THERE IS THE MULTIFAMILY.

WE DO THINK THIS REALLY HERALDS OF SOMEONE IS COMING IN OR INSENSITIVE SIGNAL THAT WE ARE ENTERING DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.

SO I WILL CLOSE WITH THIS AND IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS I'M HAPPY TO ADDRESS THEM. WE THINK THIS IS ABOUT A $90 MILLION PROJECT. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE NEED TO DO ALL OF IT AT ONE TIME.

AND YOU KNOW, WE RAN THOSE FOR PROJECTIONS BASED ON A LOW NUMBER, 80 MILLION TO BE A LITTLE SAFE.

AND IT IS A SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT BUT I THINK CITIZENS WILL EXPERIENCE THIS AS YOU KNOW, SATISFYING -- IT IS HARD TO QUANTIFY WITH THE NUMBERS. BUT I KNOW FROM MARKET STUDIES, WE SEE A LOT OF SALES TAX IN THE COMMUNITY TODAY WITH THE PEOPLE AND IS ALSO THE TIME OF, TO LEAVE YOUR JURISDICTION GO OUT TO EAT AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THESE ISSUES.

WE APPRECIATE THE STAFF WAS WILLING TO WORK WITH US ON THE DETAILS OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A GOOD FOR-SALE TOWNHOME PRODUCT, BUILDING ARTICULATION AND CHANGING PATTERNS AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. SAME WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH US.

AND THAT WALL HAD A READY CHANGE LARGELY REACH FOR THE PANDEMIC BUT IT IS HEIGHTENED WHERE JASON'S DELI IS ONE OF OUR CLIENTS. THEY WILL NOT CONSIDER SITE WITHOUT A WINDOW, CHIPOTLE IS GOING TO THAT MODEL TOO.OU KNOW PANERA, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO YOU THOUGHT OF AS QUICK SERVE ARE GOING TO A WINDOW, COOK SHACK WHICH IS THE SAME FILM THAT STARTED CHATTERS. WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM AND THEY ARE HAVING WINDOW, NOT FREE TO DRIVE UP IN ORDER, BUT FOR THE UBER DRIVER OR FOR YOU TO PICK UP YOUR ORDER.

I THINK YOU WILL SEE MORE OF THESE THINGS AT THE WINDOW MAY BE ASSOCIATED WITH PICKUP OF YOUR ORDER.

JUST LIKE WHATABURGER, SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN PULL IN AND THE ACT TELLS YOU AND THEY BRING IT OUT.

WE ARE SEEING THAT CHANGE BUT AT $90 MILLION, WE NEED THE FLEXIBILITY IF WE CAN GET -- TO COME OR SOME OF THESE DESTINATION DINING. YOU KNOW, WE REALLY WANT TO ATTRACT THOSE PEOPLE. AND THEY MIX WELL WITH A DIFFERENT PRICE POINT. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT IN THESE PLACES. WE DID VICTORY IN DALLAS, STILL WORKING ON IT BUT IT DIDN'T WORK BECAUSE YOU MIGHT RECALL WHEN IT FIRST OPENED EVERYTHING WAS TOO EXPENSIVE.

GOING TO THE MAVERICKS GAME IS EXPENSIVE NOBODY ATE THERE BECAUSE, IT TOOK AN HOUR AND HALF TO EAT.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE IN MIND THAT IN OUR ENTERTAINMENT USER, THEY DO HAVE FOOD. BUT THEY DON'T MIND THAT PEOPLE GO OFF-SITE TO EAT AS WELL BECAUSE IT GETS YOU, MIKE OF THE MOVIE AND EAT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

THEY WANT PEOPLE TO MAKE THAT THEIR HOME.ND THAT IS THE GOAL OF THIS PROJECT, FOR IT TO BE THE COMMUNITY HEARTBEAT AND A LOT OF THAT IS ABOUT THE SOFT FEATURES, THE WALKING TRAILS, ONE THING WE REALLY WORKED MONITORS ALL OF THE GREEN SPACE. IT DOES NOT FEEL LIKE -- WE WILL PAUSE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

>> QUESTIONS? >> THE ONLY QUESTION I WOULD HAVE, THE INTENT RIGHT NOW IS FOR THE TOWNHOMES TO BE INDIVIDUALLY PLATTED LOTS FOR INDIVIDUALS.

>> RIGHT. I THINK YOU EARLIER DOWNTOWN CASE, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE PARTICULARS BUT THE IDEA OF HAVING SOME PEOPLE WHO LIVED THERE, YOU KNOW IT HELPS.

EVEN IF IT'S ONLY 40 COUPLES OR 40 HOMES, PROVIDES A DIFFERENT KIND OF USE RATHER THAN -- WE WENT WITH STAFF TO SEE A LITTLE ABOUT DOING MAY BE A DIFFERENT KIND OF RETAIL OR DIFFERENT KIND OF MULTIFAMILY OVER THERE. WE JUST GOT THIS IS THE RIGHT FIT. AND THERE WILL BE PEOPLE WHO REALLY WANT TO BE AT THE HEART OF THINGS.

[04:10:05]

>> I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY THAT BECAUSE I'VE SEEN LARGER MULTIFAMILY LIKE THIS RECENTLY BUY-AND-HOLD BLOCKS OF ADJACENT

TOWNHOMES FOR RENTAL AS WELL. >> OUR INTENT IS -- AND EVEN A MULTI-, ARE MULTIFAMILY IF YOU LOOK AT IT, EVEN WITHIN OUR MULTIFAMILY WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT PRODUCT TYPES.

HERE'S MORE OF THE URBAN THING THAT WILL APPEAL TO SOME PEOPLE AND THEY ARE THE OTHER UNITS WHERE THERE IS A MANY PEOPLE TOGETHER. REALLY YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH THREE DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL TYPES THAT MIX WELL.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.

IT WAS PROBABLY TOO LONG A PRESENTATION.

>> YOUR SON UP TO SPEAK AS WELL ARE YOU SURE? SURE? OKAY.

WAS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC?

CAN I GET A MOTION? >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING? OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR TRENT?

>> LET'S GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR A MINUTE. WHAT IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

FOR APARTMENT UNITS? >> FIVE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL

AREA. >> UNLESS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS CHANGED, WE ARE ALREADY ABOVE THAT.

>> CORRECT. >> SO, DO WE LET THESE DEVELOPERS KNOW WHEN THEY COME TO DO ALL THIS HARD WORK AND DO

ALL THIS -- >> WE LET EVERY DEVELOPER KNOW

THESE THINGS. >> JUST SO THE COMMISSIONERS KNOW, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS LITERALLY THE BIBLE.

IT IS WHAT OUR CITIZENS WORKED TIRELESSLY AND THEIR PEERS TO PUT TOGETHER FOR THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITY AND ITS GROWTH WHICH THEY FIND TO BE ACCEPTABLE.

THEY CONSIDER AN STAFF GOES OUT OF THEIR WAY BECAUSE I BEEN AT THESE MEETINGS, TO PRESENT MARKET STRUCTURES AND WHAT THEY FEEL LIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD WANTS.

AND THEY CONSIDER ALL OF THIS. AND THEY SAY IT IS GOOD THAT THEY WANT THAT BUT WE DON'T WANT THAT HERE.

THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHERE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS BEEN AND WHERE IT IS TODAY REALIZING THAT MARKETS IN THE WORLD CHANGE. WE HAVE, I CAN THINK OF THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, TURNED DOWN SEVERAL FOLKS THAT WANTED TO PUT APARTMENTS ON VERY NICE PIECES OF PROPERTY IN OUR COMMUNITY. SOME OF THEM I KNEW PERSONALLY AND THEY BEEN TRYING TO DO IT, GET THE PROPERTY SOLD FOR YEARS AND RETURN THEM DOWN PRETTY MUCH SOLELY ON THE FACT THAT WE HAD ALREADY EXCEEDED THE PERCENTILE OF ALLOWABLE UNITS WITHIN THE INNER LOOP AND THE COMPANY IS A PLAN.

I DON'T KNOW A WAY AROUND THIS. AND HOW TO APOLOGIZE TO YOU ALL OF YOU FOLKS ARE PRESENTED THIS.

WE'VE GONE OUT OF YOUR WAY TO PRESENT OUTSTANDING PRODUCT WITH AN OUTSTANDING VISION. THAT I CANNOT TRUMPED THE VIEWS OF MY PEERS, CITIZENS AND FELLOW BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN MY COMMUNITY. FOR WHAT THEIR DESIRE IS AND THE PROBLEM IS, HOW MANY UNITS, BECAUSE RECENTLY WE BUILT -- WE COULD SAY I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR ON RECORD.

IT IS NOT AS THOUGH WE ARE SAYING NO TO MULTIFAMILY.

WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE THIS PLACES FIGURES FOLKS LIVE AND THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING BUILT MORE. I BELIEVE ONLY JUST REFUTED AN HOUR OR SO AGO AND HAS NOT ONLY TOWNHOMES BUT MULTIFAMILY.

THE LAST I KNEW I THINK WE FINALLY CLIMBED IN THAT BUT WE

[04:15:03]

>> 18 UNITS PER ACRE. >> NOW, TALKING ABOUT LIKE WE

ARE FIGURING, >> ADDED POPULATION BASE, IN OTHER WORDS WE'VE GOTTEN A DECENT AMOUNT OF RESERVOIR TO GROW ON. YOU GUYS HAVE DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB PRESENTING A GOOD PRODUCT.

BUT I CANNOT SUPPORT IT. BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY, WE ARE ALREADY ABOVE, LESS THE NEWER 10 PERCENT ABOVE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WOULD EVEN ALLOW.

>> I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT NUMBER.> WE'VE ALREADY EXCEEDED WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS YOU CAN HAVE.

>> WE HAVE EXCEEDED. >> I WILL ALSO AGREE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO OVERRULE THE COMPANY HAS A PLAN BUT IT IS NOT WISE. YES SIR, PLEASE.

>> WE WORK ON THE CITY SIDE TOO AND THEY ARE AN IMPORTANT GUIDING TOOL. I THINK YOU HAVE TO WEIGH THIS AGAINST ON THIS SITE, WE HAVE TO HAVE MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE IT'S CARRYING MORE THAN HALF OF THE BURDEN.

SO TO GET, AND I MEAN ANOTHER COMP PLAN ALSO SPEAK TO THAT YOU WANT TO ACTIVATE UPTOWN AND THIS IS IMPORTANT.

AND YOU WANT YOUR CITIZENS I KNOW ARE CLAMORING FOR MORE RETAIL AND MORE ENTERTAINMENT OPTIONS AND YOU NEED THE STREET BUILT THROUGH THERE. SO THERE IS SORT OF YOU KNOW, THERE IS, AND WE ARE NOT DOING REGULAR MULTIFAMILY WE TRIED TO SELF REGULATE AND SET A BAR WHERE THE MARKET IS MUCH HIGHER HERE YOU KNOW THEN LIKE THE ONE BEFORE.

OUR ARTICULATION, THE INTERIOR, THESE ARE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY UNDER THINK IT IS ENTICING BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT CAN BUY ON 1/2 ACRE OR THREE-QUARTER ACRE LOT.

WE ARE ASKING YOU TO NOT IGNORE THE COMP PLAN BUT MAYBE LOOK THAT THERE IS SOME LOGIC HERE THAT YOUR SATISFYING OTHER DEMANDS THAT YOU ALSO VOTED FOR IN THE COMP PLAN AND THIS SITE JUST CAN'T BE DEVELOPED WITH OKAY WE ARE GOING TO SELL A PAD HERE AND DO A TOWNHOME THING HERE.

IT REQUIRES -- I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO BALANCE.

WHILE ALSO MAINTAINING THE QUALITY REALLY HIGH.ND THAT'S WHAT THE PLANS ARE ABOUT AT LEAST I THINK.

WE DO ONE AND WE REALLY TRY TO DO EVERYTHING THAT IS MARKET-BASED LIKE IT HAS TO ACTUALLY WORK, NOT JUST WITH YOUR MATH COLORS. IT HAS TO WORK WITH THE ECONOMICS AND WE TRY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WORKS THAT WAY WITHOUT SACRIFICING ANY QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ANYONE AND THE IMPACT OF THE MULTIFAMILY COMEDIES WILL NOT BE A BURDEN ON THE SCHOOL, THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TRANSITION INTO OWNERSHIP. YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO CATCH THESE PEOPLE AS OPPOSED TO YOUR OTHER COMPETITORS.

WE DID A PROJECT WHERE OUR RENTER WAS, OUR LEASING PEOPLE ORIGINALLY WERE AND STILL ARE TEACHERS, POLICE OFFICERS YOU KNOW NURSES AND PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE, MAYBE NEW TO THE COMMUNITY IN SOME PLACES I GUESS IT'S ALL I CAN SAY THAT WHEN YOU SET A, MAYBE THAT'S A GUIDE AND NOT A HARD AND FAST ABSOLUTELY YOU KNOW I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT, I THINK THERE IS JUSTIFICATION HERE THAT WE ARE MEETING OTHER THINGS THAT Y'ALL WANTED IN YOUR COMP PLAN. I KNOW IT'S A HARD DECISION AND THAT'S ALL WE TRY TO DO SOMETHING THAT WHERE EVERYONE CAN SUE THEMSELVES THEY ARE AND THEY DON'T THINK IT'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX. IT IS PART OF A MIXED-USE ENVIRONMENT AND IT IS HARD TO FIND ANY MIXED-USE ENVIRONMENT IN THE METROPLEX NOW WHICH IS A HUGE PLACE.

8 MILLION PLACES. IF YOU DON'T HAVE MULTIFAMILY YOU CANNOT GET GOOD RETAIL BECAUSE THE MULTI-, THE RETAIL USERS WANT PEOPLE THAT LIVE EITHER.

THERE BUILT IN CUSTOMERS. >> THEY NEED DENSITY.

>> WILL NEED THE DENSITY AND THIS IS YOUR DONKEY THESE ARE

[04:20:03]

I BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL BE LIKE OTHER PROJECTS WHERE YOU GET CITIZEN TO COME TO DO SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS INCLUDING MAYBE THEY MAKE THIS PART OF WHERE THEY GO WALK.

I APPRECIATE THAT YOU CAN TELL WE REALLY WORKED ON THIS.

WE WORKED ON THIS GLOBALLY AND IT TOOK TWO DEVELOPMENT TEAMS TO GET TO THAT. AND STEPH HELPED, THIS WAS NOT, WE HAD A NUMBER OF HARD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A WINDOW. IF YOU WANT TO GET THEM.

IT WOULD BE GREAT, FAMILY FRIENDLY.

SO I DON'T KNOW, WE ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

WE WANT TO MAKE A HARD DECISION.

>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD MENTION TO YOU TO PLEASE UNDERSTAND, WE DIDN'T GET IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, I COULD BE WRONG, WE ARE SITTING 10 PERCENT ABOVE THRESHOLD.

WE DID GET THERE YESTERDAY. AND BELIEVE ME, WE HAD ROOM TO PLAY WITH UP UNTIL ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO AND GUESS WHAT? I'VE NEVER HAD A DEVELOPER COME BEFORE ME BECAUSE I'VE BEEN DEALING WITH MAKING THE DECISIONS SINCE 11, ACTUALLY EIGHT, 2008. I'VE NEVER HAD A DEVELOPER COME BEFORE ME SAYING WERE GOING TO BUILD A BAD PRODUCT.

EVERYONE SAYS THIS WILL BE THE BEST PART OF YOUR MACHINE AND THEY WERE RIGHT. HERE'S THE PROBLEM, BECAUSE IT IS BEEN OTHER FOLKS IN LINE BEFORE YOU, WE CONTINUE SAYING OKAY. AND THEN WE FINALLY HIT THE THRESHOLD AND WE KIND OF SET OKAY A LITTLE MORE.

THERE IS A POINT IN WHICH YOUR BOSS, THE PEOPLE, HAVE TOLD YOU WHAT THEY WANT. AND YOU HAD TO FINALLY DO IT.

THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. I'M NOT OUT FOR THE PRODUCT OR INTENT I'M AT A LIMIT AND I'VE EXCEEDED A FIGHT YOU KNOW BEFORE IT WAS LIKE WE CAN GO A LITTLE FURTHER, SO DO WE SAY IN A FEW YEARS, WE ARE 50 PERCENT ABOVE SELF, THE FOLKS HAVE GOT TO UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO GET THE STREET WE NEED.

THEY JUST HAVE TO GET OVER IT, WE HAVE TO STOP SOMEWHERE.

>> THIS IS A GOOD PIECE FOR Y'ALL TO GET INTO PLAY, IT'S A LOT OF SALES TAX AND WE ARE EXECUTING MULTIFAMILY THAT YOU HAVEN'T SEEN AND WE ARE BOUND BY THE SITE PLAN TO EXECUTE AT THAT LEVEL. I KNOW THIS THE ASSURANCE YOU ALSO KNOW THAT ALL THE UNITS YOU'VE ENTITLED WILL ACTUALLY

GET BUILT. >> BUT WE CANNOT BANK ON --

>> BUT THEY ARE NOT ALL THERE TODAY.

>> ARE SOME REALLY NICE RETIREMENT ACROSS TOWN.

WE'VE DONE SOME THINGS. >> I PUT THOSE IN A DIFFERENT BUCKET. WE COULDN'T SUBSTITUTE THAT HERE TODAY BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT AS GOOD SHOPPERS STATISTICALLY.

>> MADE ALLOWANCES. SO I'M WITH YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR

PRESENTATION. >> ANYTHING ELSE I CAN HELP ON

MR. CHAIR? >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU. >> I WOULD 10 PERCENT OVER THE FIVE PERCENT OR TOTAL OF 10 PERCENT OVER?

>> A COMP ANSWER PLAN HAS, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS CREATED IT TALKS ABOUT MULTIFAMILY. IT BREAKS THE CITY INTO INNER LOOP AND OUTER LOOP. THERE'S A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE APPROVED FOR EACH ONE THIS AREAS IN THE FIVE PERCENT OUT OF THE EXACT NUMBER, THE DAY WE ADOPTED THE PLAN WE WERE OVER AND THE 10 PERCENT, BUT WE ARE OVER BOTH OF THOSE.

>> OKAY. WE ARE OVER WITH THE CITIZENS AND THE COPPER SOUNDS OF PLAN PROCESS HAS DETERMINED WAS AN ALLOWABLE RATE FOR WHAT THEY CALL THE INNER LOOP WHICH IS OLD TOWN ALL THE WAY DOWN INTO, THIS IS THE BOTTOM AND BORDER.

THE THING ABOUT THIS SPOT IS, THAT IS A UNIQUE PIECE OF PROPERTY. KIND OF AN OVERLOOKED POINT.

>> CHRISTOPHER WRONG WAS IT SLATED TO BE A MEDICAL FACILITY? THEY PUSHED DIRT ALL OVER THE

PLACE AND STOPPED. >> YES.

THIS WAS GOING TO BE A HOSPITAL.

AND THEN IT GOT TURNED TO SINGLE-FAMILY.

FIRST WAS A HOSPITAL WITH MULTIFAMILY VENDOR TURNED INTO

MEDICAL FACILITY. >> IT IS A TOUGH CALL.

I LIKE THE PRESENTATION, LOOK WHAT THEY'VE OFFERED.

THE -- >> WE DID PUT SOMETHING FOR THE

[04:25:02]

>> MY PROBLEM IS WITH THE COMP PLAN, IF YOU WANT TO BUILD THIS OUTSIDE OF THE INNER LOOP, I MEAN I CAN LOOK AT THAT AND CONSIDER BECAUSE IT IS NOT COMP PLAN -- I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT PLEASE, IN MY VIEW THERE'S SO FAR YOU CAN GO WITH WHAT FOLKS ARE REQUESTED TO BE DONE AND WHERE YOU HAVE TO STOP.

AND ALSO KIND OF WHAT HE JUST MENTIONED, WANT TO DO THE HOSPITAL WITH MULTIFAMILY WE WOULDN'T APPROVE IT.

I REMEMBER WE COVERED THAT. >> ORIGINALLY IT WAS MULTIFAMILY IN THE MCCANN BACK TO CHANGE --

>> WITH SOMETHING ELSE IT WENT ON DOWN THERE WITH TOWNHOMES OR

SOMETHING I THOUGHT TOO. >> I JUST WANT TO INTRODUCE MYSELF I AM -- FAMILY DEVELOPER.

OVERALL DEVELOPER WHO PUT THE DESIGN TOGETHER, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE JOINT RETAIL DEVELOPER.

I JUST WANT TO REITERATE, I THINK THE BIG CRUX OF THIS, SITUATION WITH THE PROPERTY IS, IT'S A LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY BISECTED WITH A FLOOD PLAN IN THOSE ALSO THE FUTURE ROADWAY PLAN WITH -- AND REALLY YOU HAVE TWO OPTIONS ON THE PROPERTY. EITHER YOU DEVELOP IT TOGETHER AND GET A ROAD CONNECTION FROM 73 OR A PIECE IS BUILT AND THE ROAD IS EITHER BUILT FROM THE MAIN SOUTH WHICH ENDS AND TURNS AROUND AT THE FLOOD PLAN OR FROM 73 N. AND AND AND TURNS ROUND THE FLOOD PLAN. AND THE PROBLEM YOU'VE GOT YOU KNOW, THE SITE CONDITIONS ARE INTENSE.

THERE'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF UTILITY WORK TO BE DONE ON THE SITE. ON EITHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ESSENTIALLY THE WATER LINE MUST LOOP FROM WHERE IT IS PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE FROM HIGHWAY 67 ALL THE WAY SOUTH TO THE SOUTH OF OUR PROPERTY AND LOOP BACK UP WHERE THE FUTURE ROADWAY WILL BE AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN ORDER TO DEVELOP EITHER PIECE OF THIS PROPERTY. YOU'VE GOT SERIOUS SITE CONDITIONS, GRADING, POTENTIAL REQUIREMENTS AND ECONOMICALLY, WE HAVE BEEN KICKING THIS AROUND FOR ALMOST A YEAR NOW, WE'VE GONE THROUGH MULTIPLE ITERATIONS OF DESIGN.

WE BROADEN PEOPLE TO LOOK AT IT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY.

FOR MULTIFAMILY, RETAIL, AND THIS IS HOW HE MADE THE PROJECT FEASIBLE FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT AND COST STANDPOINT.

WE CANNOT FIGURE OUT A LITTLE TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITHOUT DOING IT THE WAY WE ARE TRYING TO WHICH IS TO BRING DENSITY TO THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND COMMERCIAL USE TO THE NORTH SO THE TWO ROADWAYS CONNECT AND THE PROPERTY CAN BE BUILT. I DON'T SEE SINGLE-FAMILY EVER BEING BUILT ON THE SOUTHERN PIECE.

I ALSO COMMERCIALLY VIABLE AND 73 BECAUSE IT LACKS THE RETAIL TRAFFIC AND YOU KNOW IT'S JUST, IT IS NORTH OF A, IT IS NORTH OF THE RAILROAD THAT CUTS OFF THE SINGLE-FAMILY.

IT IS JUST SORT OF, IT'S A GOOD PIECE OF PROPERTY FROM A LOCATION STANDPOINT IN THE INNER LOOP HIGHLY CONSTRAINED WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS.

I TRULY BELIEVE THAT IS THE BEST SHOT AT GETTING THE PROPERTY DEVELOPED. AND IN THE FUTURE I DON'T SEE THE PROPERTY CHANGING. THE ACCESS ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE THE PROFILE AND 73 WON'T CHANGE.

>> YOU PROBABLY DOING THIS LONGER THAN I HAVE.

I CANNOT TAKE THE NUMBER PROPERTIES I'VE SEEN OVER TIME.

AND USAGE HAS CHANGED AND THINGS THAT IMPACT THEM I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE PUT A LOT INTO THIS BUT AT WHAT POINT, AT WHAT POINT DO I SAY YES TO WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT?

>> I THINK THE PEOPLE, I THINK THEY WANT TO SEE COMMERCIAL USE, THEY WENT TO SEE ENTERTAINMENT.

I THINK THEY WANT A MIX OF USES.

IT WILL BE THE FIRST PROJECT IN MIDLOTHIAN THAT HOPEFULLY SPURS

FUTURE PROJECTS. >> MAY BE IT COULD WORK I THINK

IT WILL FALL WITHIN THE PLAN. >> UNDERSTAND THE COMP PLAN BUT THAT'S THE POINT OF TRYING TO MAKE.

[04:30:01]

IT IS NOT A COMMERCIAL SITE. ESPECIALLY WITH THE INTERSECTION WITH THE FLOOD PLAN.

YOU CAN'T GO IN THE MIDDLE SO IS NOT A FEASIBLE HOTEL SITE AND AN OFFICE, WHO KNOWS WHEN IT COMES BACK IF IT EVER COMES BACK. [INAUDIBLE]

>> IF WE WRESTLE WITH THIS, YOU JUST HAVE TO COME WITH A WAY TO CARRY THE BURDEN ACROSS THE 66 ACRES.

AND DELIVER THE OTHER THINGS THAT THE PLAN WANTS.

THIS ISN'T A MULTIFAMILY WILL BE NEGATIVELY IMPACT, WE BELIEVE YOU KNOW SO IT'S A HARD CALL.

>> I STILL REMEMBER YOU KNOW WHETHER WALMART IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILL? I STILL REMEMBER THE NUMBER OF PROPOSALS WE HAD FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY TELLING US THAT NOTHING ELSE WOULD WORK THERE. AND HERE'S THE WEIRD PART.

NUMBERS YOUR LITTLE WALMART COMES IN AND CUT THE WHOLE THE SIDE OF THE MOUNTAIN AND BUILDS A WALMART HERE.

SO WEIRD THINGS HAPPEN. >> AND THE PROBLEM IS THIS A SINGLE USER THAT IS REALLY BIG. WE ARE TRYING, COULD YOU DEVELOP IT WITH SOMETHING? YOU CREDIT MAY TAKE THIS SELLER TAKE A HUGE CUT OR THE CITY PROVIDING AUTO SUBSIDY SO THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN.

WE ARE ABLE TO DO IT NOW WHEN THERE IS A MARKET.

I APPRECIATE THERE IS NO PUSHBACK THAT THE RETAIL, THERE'S ACTUAL DEMAND PEOPLE WANT THINGS.

IT IS SUPER UNUSUAL. AND WE JUST HARDLY HAVE ANY RETAIL WORK IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND SO, WE JUST ARE TRYING TO FIGURE A WAY TO CARRY THE COST AND THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL GET THE FREE BOX LUNCH, DINNER FOUR.

TO MAKE THE BIG DECISIONS. WE THINK THE QUALITY IS THERE,

I THINK -- >> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS THERE. I NEED TO MAKE IT CLEAR, YOU'VE DONE A WONDERFUL JOB, YOU ARE RIGHT BUT GUESS WHAT? PEOPLE SAID NO. THAT'S THE PROBLEM.> IN MY MIND I GUESS THE PEOPLE SAID YES.

THEY SAID YESTERDAY WANT TO RETAIL.

AND THEY WANT THE SITE DEVELOPED.ND PROBABLY THEY WANT THE TAX BASE. WE JUST CAN'T, IT'S THE APARTMENTS. THIS IS, I DO A LOT OF PROJECTS WHERE THE ANSWER IS FROM CITIES OR FROM PEOPLE THEY SAY I LOVE YOUR PROJECT BUT IT SHOULD GO SOMEPLACE ELSE.

YOU DON'T GET A LOT OF CHANCES FOR IT TO BE AT MAINE AND MAINE. OUR SHARP EDGE THIS WILL PLANNING IS REALLY NOTHING MORE HUMANITY OR ART.

NOT A SOCIAL SCIENCE. WHEN YOU PRACTICE IT WITH HARD THINGS YOU LOSE A LOT OF THE SPECIAL NATURE OF WHAT MAKES IT SPECIAL. WE'VE WORKED ON A LOT OF MIXED-USE THINGS WE'VE LEARNED LESSONS ABOUT ONES THAT DON'T WORK. AND A LOT OF WHAT MAKES IT WORK IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE OPEN SPACE AND IT HAS TO HAVE PLACES PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE RECREATION. AND TO GATHER AND NOT JUST BE ABOUT A POWER CENTER WE DUMPED THINGS IN HERE.

YOU KNOW, WE WERE THOUGHTFUL THAT'S ALL WE CAN REALLY DO.

WE APPRECIATE IT THANK YOU FOR ALL THE TIME.

>> ANY FINAL COMMENTS FOR STAFF?

CAN I GET A MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. >> CAN I GET A SECOND?

IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

>> SECOND. >> THERE IS A SECOND ON THE MOTION. ALL FOR THE MOTION?

ALL OPPOSED? >> THANK YOU ALL I APPRECIATE

THE DELIBERATION. >> THERE WERE THREE TO TWO, TWO

[04:35:07]

NO MOTION TO APPROVE YET. >> ALSO A MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL.

>> THAT MOTION FAILS THEN. >> CORRECT.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS STAFF

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> CAN WE DO A ROLL CALL VOTE? [INAUDIBLE]

[013 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the city of Midlothian Zoning Ordinance by amending Section 2.04 “Use Tables”, Subsection (a) “Commercial” by adding temporary shipping/storage containers as a use subject to approval of a special exception; adding Section 2.05 “Temporary placement of shipping/storage containers on the property within the City. (Case No. OZ10-2021-205).]

>> ITEM NUMBER 13. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AN ACT UPON ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE BY MANY SECTION 2.04 USE TABLES, SUBSECTION A, COMMERCIAL BY ADDING TEMPORARY SHIPPING/STORAGE CONTAINERS AS A YOU SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. ADDING SECTION 2.05, TEMPORARY PLACEMENT OF SHIPPING/STORAGE CONTAINERS ON THE PROPERTY

WITHIN THE CITY. >> FOR THE NEXT HOUR AND 15 MINUTES -- ABOUT ONE YEAR AGO WE WEREN'T TO WALMART FOR SHIPPING CONTAINERS. THEY WERE REQUESTING SHIPPING CONTAINERS BE ALLOWED ON THE SITE FOR CERTAIN TIME PERIOD.

WHEN WE WENT TO COUNSELING FELL AND WERE GOING TO INVITE COUNSEL TO COME BACK WITH A ALLOWABLE RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO HAVE THE SAME ABILITY.

COME WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT BASICALLY MIMICKED WHAT WALMART ORDINANCE STATED THAT BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO SPECIAL EXCEPTION PROCESS THEY HAVE TO GO BEFORE COUNSEL TO GET APPROVED EACH AND EVERY TIME THEY WANT A SHIPPING CONTAINER ON THEIR PROPERTY TEMPORARILY.

ALLOWING THEM TO HAVE IT THERE 90 DAYS.

A START DATE, HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, THE TOTAL NUMBER FOR THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED MITIGATION PLAN.

WHEN AND HOW THEY WOULD BRING IT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL -- THAT'S WHAT THIS ADDRESSES. DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU. >> AND ONE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

SEEING NONE. >> WE REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

>> CAN I GET A MOTION? >> SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

>> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?

ALL OPPOSED? >> THANK YOU NO ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF. WE JUST NEED ADJOURNMENT OF THE

MEETING. >> ADJOURNMENT.

MEETING ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.