Feb 08, 2022 City Council

[Call to Order, Invocation, and Pledge of Allegiance. ]

[00:00:10]

, 6 P.M., FUSE, FEBRUARY 8, THIS SESSION OF THE MIDLOTHIAN COUNCIL IS CALLED TO ORDER.

WE WILL BE LED IN THE INVOCATION AND PLEDGES, PLEASE.

>> LET US PRAY. DEAR LORD, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THIS HOUSE AND WORSHIP AND TO THINK TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY.

AND, LORD, WE THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY AEN WE ASK THAT YOU GUIDE US, WE WILL MAKE WHAT'S RIGHT IN YOUR MIND, EVERY DECISION WE MAKE. WE ASK YOU TO WATCH OVER THIS COUNCIL, WATCH OVER THIS COUNTRY.

FORGIVE US FOR OUR SINS IN JESUS' NAME, AMEN.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

HONOR THE TEXT FLAG, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE INDIV INDIVISIBLE.

>> ITEM 2022-057. AT THIS TIME WE HAVE NO CITIZENS

[2022-058 ]

152 (UVPD-152) FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES.

(CASE NO. Z07-2022-032). >> THIS LOT IS CURRENTLY A VACANT LOT WITHIN OUR ORIGINAL TOWN OF MIDLOTHIAN.

WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER CAME TO VOAL BUILD A HOME, THEY COULDN'E A REGULAR -- TYPICAL SIZED HOME ACCORDING TO SETBACKS.

FOR THIS REASON, THEY APPLIED FOR YOU URBAN VILLAGE PLANNED DISTRICT. IT IS TO ALLOW FOR SMALLER LOTS THAT CAN'T TYPICALLY DEVELOP UNDER THE NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND ALLOW THEM THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES AS SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS THAT ARE THAT HAVE BEEN DESIGNED, ONE DWELLING, MATCHES SIMILAR HOUSES AROUND THIS AREA WHICH ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE URBAN VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

ALTHOUGH IT IS ASKING WITHIN THE UVPD REGULATIONS FOR SETBACKS TO BE LESS. STAFF HAS FOUND THIS IS ACCEPTABLE AND WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THIS WEPT BEFORE P&Z WHO ALSO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. 16 LETTERS MADE OUT, NO IN OPPOSITION. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT

THIS TIME. >> COUNCIL, WE DO HAVE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS NOW.

>> WE MAILED OUT A TOTAL OF 16 AND HEARD NOTHING BACK.

>> I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. THE GARAGE ACCESS, IS THAT FROM

THE ALLEY? >> CORRECT, GARAGE ACCESS WILL

BE FROM THE ALLEY. >> THANK YOU.

>> WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS. >> ISN'T THAT A DIRT ALLEYWAY?

>> RIGHT NOW, A PORTION OF IT IS IMPROVED BUT IT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL THE REGULATIONS OF THE ALLEY.

IMPROVE THOSE PORTIONS OF THE ALLEY THAT ARE REQUIRED.

>> THE BUILDER IS GOING TO BE IMPROVING THE ALLEYWAY?

>> WHAT'S THAT? >> THE BUILDER IS THE ONE TO

APPROVE THE ALLEYWAY? >> CORRECT, THEIR PORTION OF THE ALLEYWAY THEY NEED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THEY ARE NOT ASKING FOR ANY SORT OF DEVIATION FROM THAT.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> DO WE HAVE MOTION TO CLOSE? OKAY, SECOND PLEASE VOTE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

[00:05:03]

ITEM PASSES 7-0. OPEN ITEM 2022-059.

[2022-059 ]

>> SO PD117, ALSO KNOWN AS AZALIA HALLOW, THAT CONTAINS A VARIETY OF LOT SIZES. SIX TENTHS OF AN ACRE UP TO ONE ACRE AND LARGER. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT ALL LOTS WITHIN AZALIA HOLLOW HAVE THE ABILITY TO BUILD A REST ROOM IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. ONE TOILET, ONE SINK, A TUB AND A SHOWER. CURRENTLY, THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW FOR REST ROOMS WITHIN AN ACCESSORY BUILDING ON LOTS THAT ARE ONE ACRE IN SIZE OR LARGER.

STAFF DID MAIL 37 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT AREA. STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSE FROM ANY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

ON JANUARY 18TH, THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DID UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMEND APPROVAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

I WILL CONTINUE TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> WHY DOES STAFF RECOMMEND BLANKET APPROVAL OF PLUMBING FIXTURES IN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT?

>> FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? WELL, AS I WAS SAYING BEFORE, ALSO, ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS AN ONE ACRE PLUS, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH A REST ROOM. ALL THIS APPLICANT IS ASKING TO DO IS TO HAVE THOSE EXACT SAME CRITERIA, THOSE SAME REQUIREMENTS APPLIED TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

THE FACT THAT IT IS SIX TENTHS, SEVEN TENTHS, EIGHT-TENTHS OF AN ACRE. STAFF DOESN'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH KEEPING THE CONSISTENCY CONSIDERING THAT A LOT OF THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE WITHIN AZALIA HALLOW ORIGINALLY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE ONE ACRE BUT WHEN WE APPROVED AZALIA HALLOW, THEY WERE ALLOWED TO LESS THAN AN ACRE.

ALL OF THOSE LOTS THAT HAVE LESS THAN AN ACRE HAVE A LOW FLOW OR -- NONAEROBIC SYSTEM IN BACK. SO ESSENTIALLY WE DON'T, I THINK, FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WE DON'T SEE AN ISSUE.

IF THEY DECIDE TO HAVE A REST ROOM LIKE WITH A POOL HOUSE OR

STUDIO. >> IN THE PAST, IN GENERAL, THIS IS GOING TO BE A PRETTY LOADED QUESTION, WHAT WOULD BE OUR RECORD FOR DENYING PLUMBING FIXTURES IN PROPERTIES ASKING FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN LESS THAN AN ACRE? I WOULD THINK THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERABLY UNFAIR TO ALL THOSE

PREVIOUS APPLICANTS. >> IT IS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, WE HAVE APPROVED THEM IN THE PAST.

IN THIS SITUATION SPECIFICALLY WHERE THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS A HIGHLY CUSTOMIZED NEIGHBORHOOD.

EACH HOUSE IS DIFFERENT. THEY HAVE PRETTY STRICT DEEDS AND COULD HAVE VENTS. COVENANTS.

IT WOULD ALLOW FOR CONSISTENCY. YOU WILL NOT HAVE A NEIGHBOR IN THIS LOT BE ALLOWED DO IT AND TWO NEIGHBORING LOTS ON EITHER SIDE NOT BEING ALLOWED DO IT. IT IS A VARIETY OF MIXTURE OF LOTS .6 TO ABOVE ONE ACRE. WE WOULD FEEL, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS, IT WOULD PROVIDE CONSISTENCY.

WE HAVE ALLOWED THIS IN THE PAST WHEN THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS AND REQUESTED IT. SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS, WE CHANGED THAT FROM SPECIFIC USE PERMITS TO PERMITTED BY RIGHT.

ANY DWELLING INSIDE MIDLOTHIAN MEET THOSE MINIMUM STANDARDS CAN

ALSO DO THIS AS WELL. >> AS A STAND-ALONE PROPERTY OWNER OF SIX TENTHS OF AN ACRE, AM I ALLOWED BY RIGHT TO HAVE A SOMEACCESSORY STRUCTURE? AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH

PLUMBING? >> AT THIS POINT IN TIME, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING BY RIGHT.

ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, YOU COULDN'T DO IT ANYWHERE IN THE

[00:10:01]

COUNCIL'S DIRECTION. >> JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, IF WE SAID NO TO THIS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR SUP FOR ANY PERSON THAT WANTED TO BUILD A SECONDARY DWELLING --

>> AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH PLUMBING FIXTURES.

>> WHAT'S THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT AND

POOL HOUSE? >> IT IS THE LIVING SPACE.

THEY HAVE DEDICATED LIVING SPACE WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT PLANS.

THAT WOULD CONSIDER IT A SECONDARY DWELLING ACCORDING TO BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. AND A KITCHEN.

>> I WAS JUST STRETCHING. >> WHAT'S THE SMALLEST LOT SIZE?

IS IT .6 OR .8? >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> WHAT'S THE TOTAL ACCESSORY A? >> I JUST HAVE ONE LITTLE THING TO SAY AND THEN I'M DONE AND I WILL GO WITH THE FLOW.

BUT I HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID REAL QUICK THAT I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING A DEVELOPER TO DO SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NOT ALLOW OUR RESIDENTS TO DO WHICH IS WHY I WAS ASKING THE

QUESTIONS THAT I WAS. >> IT IS A GOOD VALID POINT.

I THINK IN PARTICULAR SITUATION, BECAUSE IT IS A PD, HE IS TRYING TO MAKE IT BY RIGHT ACROSS THE BOARD INSTEAD OF HAVING EACH INDIVIDUAL PERSON TRY TO COME BACK AND DO.

>> WHO IS THE DEVELOPER? >> THE DEVELOPER IS AUGUSTA

HOMES. >> I AGREE, BUT ALSO ANYONE COULD COME IN AND ASK FOR A VARIANCE AND GET THE EXCEPTION.

I THINK THAT THIS IS NOT A REFLECTION ON STAFF, NOR PREVIOUS COUNCILS, THIS IS SORT OF OVERGOVERNMENT REGULATION.

MAYBE WE SHOULD BACK IT DOWN TO HALF ACRE CITY WIDE, CHANGE THE REGULATIONS. BECAUSE I CAN FOR SEE HAVING A HALF ACRE, HAVING A SWIMMING POOL AND NOT WANTING WET DRIPPING KIDS IN MY HOUSE. MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING WE CONSIDER CHANGING. THAT'S MY INPUT.

>> I WILL CLARIFY ONE MORE THING.

WE USED TO APPROVE SECONDARY DWELLING.

NOW IT IS BEING DONE AT THE STAFF LEVEL.

WE WOULDN'T EVEN SEE THESE. >> IF IT IS AN ACTUAL TRUE SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT THAT HAS BEDROOM, KITCHEN, MAKES IT AN ACTUAL DWELLING UNIT, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, YOU WOULD NOT SEE IT UNLESS THEY WERE TRYING TO SEEK SOME SORT OF VARIANCE FROM WHAT OUR STANDARD 11 CRITERIA REQUIRES.

>> WHICH IS LOT SIZE. >> WELL, ACTUALLY, IT IS MORE --

>> LOT SIZE IS USUALLY THE DRIVER.

>> WELL, ACTUALLY, LOT SIZE, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, YOU CAN'T HAVE A SECONDARY SWELLINGG UNIT ON SOMETHING THAT IS LESS

THAN AN ACRE. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS 2.5 ACRES OR GREATER COULD HAVE A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT AND GO THROUGH

STAFF LEVEL. >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> THE MINIMUM -- WHAT REALLY TRIGGERS FOLKS COMING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL WHEN WE ARE DEALING WITH SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH THE SIZE OF THE SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT.

MOST FOLKS WANT A LARGER SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT.

OUR REQUIREMENT SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PRIMARY HOME, THE AIR CONDITIONED SIDE OF THE PRIMARY HOME, AND HALF THAT. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM SIZE YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT.

THAT ALSO INCLUDES THE PATIO AREA.

THAT INCLUDES EVERYTHING. SO A LOT OF TIMES IT PUSHES THE SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS TO 700, 800 SQUARE FEET.

MOST FOLKS WANT LARGER THAN THAT.

>> I MIGHT HAVE USED THE WRONG TERMINOLOGY.

TO ME, I LOOK AT THE POOL HOUSE, SAME THING AS SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT. I SHOULD HAVE SAID ACCESSORY BUILDING. ANY ACCESSORY BUILDINGS CURRENTLY COME TO COUNCIL, THEY ARE HANDLI HANDLED ON THE STAFF.

>> IF THEY ARE AN ACRE PLUS, THEY ARE ALWAYS HANDLED ON STAFF

LEVEL. >> SO IF WE DIDN'T SAY YES TO THIS AND EVERY HOUSE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WANTED TO DO A POOL HOUSE, WE WOULD SEE EVERY SINGLE PERSON.

>> COME IN AND TRY TO REQUEST THIS.

YES, SIR. >> OKAY, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT

TWO THINGS HERE OR ONE? >> JUST ONE.

>> POOL HOUSE AND STUDIO. >> I CAN LET THE APPLICANT EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE. BUT IT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME

THING. >> IT IS THE SAME BUILDING, WHAT IT IS USED FOR. USE IT FOR A POOL HOUSE OR USE

IT FOR A STUDIO. >> SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A POOL, SO THEY HAVE A STUDIO. THEY WANT TO DO ART OR CRAFTS OR SOMETHING. THE POOL HOUSE IS MORE FOR FOLKS

THAT ACTUALLY HAVE A POOL. >> IT CAN BE USED FOR EITHER

[00:15:02]

ONE. >> ABSOLUTELY, YES, SIR.

>> ACCORDING TO THE PD, WHAT PERCENT OF THE LOT CAN BE HOUSE?

>> WHAT% WHAT PERCENT OF THE LO. I AMIMPERVIOUS.

MAYBE 50%. >> THAT WOULD INCLUDE SUM TOTAL.

>> THAT WOULD INCLUDE EVERYTHING.

THE DRIVEWAY, THE HOUSE, ACCESSORY BUILDING, POOL.

>> WHEN THEY COME AND ASK FOR PERMISSION, THEY FALL UNDER

THOSE CRITERIA. >> ABSOLUTELY, YES.

THEY WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT A BUILDING PERMIT TO THE BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT. EVERY PERMIT GOES THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. WE CHECK THAT AGAINST THE PD TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT GOING OVER THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE FOR

THE LOT. >> MARCOS, WHY HAVE WE NOT DONE THIS BEFORE? I REMEMBER APPROVING THE LADY AT LAKE GROVE. IS THERE A REASON THAT THIS IS SPECIAL? IS THERE SOMEBODY MESS UP WHEN THEY WROTE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? IS THIS -- OKAY, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY WE ARE DOING

THIS. >> OUR CONCERN IN LAKE GROVE, SOMEBODY ESTABLISHED TWO LIVING UNITS.

>> SECONDARY DWELLING VERSUS ACCESSORY.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> WHAT I WAS ASKING, BECAUSE NOW WE ARE LETTING THEM DO IT NO MATTER WHAT, I KNOW FROM BUILDING A COUPLE OF HOUSES, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A STUDIO AND APARTMENT IS A STOVE AND PL PLUG-IN.

SO THAT'S NOTHING. EVEN IF YOU HIDE IT FROM EVERYBODY, YOU PUT IT IN LATER. DEVELOPMENT WIDE GREEN LIGHT TO

BUILD THEM. >> JUST KEEP IN MIND ALSO THAT OBVIOUSLY THESE ALL HAVE TO BE INSPECTED BY OUR INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT, IF THEY CAME IN WITH A SECOND SINK, RIGHT. WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT, THAT FALLS OUTSIDE OF THE REQUIREMENT OF

ACCESSORY BUILDING. >> MARCOS, HE IS ONE REMODEL FROM DOING THAT. HE IS THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS

FROM DOING THAT. >> COUNCIL, WILL THE DEVELOPER COME FORWARD. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WHO YOU ARE WITH AND YOU HAVE REASONABLE TIME.

>> EVENING COUNCIL. TAYLOR PERRIN, AMERICAN SPAR ROW DRIVE. MY APOLOGIES, I GOT HERE AT 6 6:04. P&Z A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF TO THIS CASE, SO I DO APOLOGIZE.

I WAS A COUPLE MINUTES LATE. TO KIND OF GO BACK, BECAUSE I EXPLAINED THIS AT P&Z AS WELL. THE REASON WHY THIS CAME UP IS, YOU KNOW, WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE PD BACK IN 2018, 2019, MARCOS AND TRENT AND STAFF DID A PHENOMENAL JOB.

YOU CAN'T CATCH EVERYTHING. SO THE STUDIO THERE IS A HOUSE THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION THAT WE ARE FRAMING RIGHT NOW. THE NEWSOM FAMILY, ON .91 ACRES.

AS WE WERE DOING THE PERMITTING FOR THE HOUSE, WE REALIZED, TALKING WITH STAFF, THAT BECAUSE IT IS UNDER ONE ACRE, THAT NOW IT HAS GOT TO BE PERMITTED, INSPECTED, PAID FOR AS A SECONDARY STRUCTURE, RIGHT? SO THAT'S $3,500 PLUS A HOUSE AND A STUDIO BEING INSPECTED KIND OF UNDER THE SAME GUIDELINES AS A HOUSE, RIGHT, VERSUS -- NOT THAT WE ARE BUILDING IT ANY DIFFERENT. SO WE STARTED DISCUSSING, YOU KNOW, WELL, WHAT CAN WE DO TO BE AN AUXILIARY STRUCTURE.

WHAT CAME UP WAS THE LOT NEXT TO THIS ONE IS ONE ACRE AND TO ANSWER SOME OF YA'LL'S QUESTIONS, THERE'S .65 ALL THE WAY UP TO 1.5-ACRE LOTS. THERE'S 15 LOTS IN THERE THAT ARE .65 TO .75 THAT HAVE THE CONVENTIONAL REQUIREMENT ON THE SEPTIC. WHEN WE DID THE INITIAL PD, WE HAD OUR ARCHITECT LAY OUT ALL THESE DIFFERENT SITE PLANS.

MAX COVERAGE ON .65 TO .75 IS 3. I THINK IT IS 40% ABOVE THAT.

BUT WE KIND OF FIGURED THAT IT WASN'T REALLY FAIR TO THE NEIGHBOR -- TO THE NEWSOMS THAT HAVE .91 ACRES, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PERMIT THIS AS SECONDARY DWELLING, PAY THE $3,500.

WE HAVE TO DO A WHOLE SET OF INSPECTIONS LIKE IT WAS ANOTHER HOUSE VERSUS THE NEIGHBOR COULD BUILD THAT SAME EXACT STUDIO

[00:20:05]

I THINK THERE IS ABOUT 50 LOTS OF THE 110 LOTS THAT ARE UNDER ONE ACRE. A LOT OF THEM ARE IN THE .8 TO ONE ACRE. BUT THERE'S ABOUT 50 OF THEM THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS. I KNOW P&Z ASKED IT, IT IS A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S GOING TO HAVE RENTED POOL HOUSES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THESE ARE TRULY POOL HOUSES AND STUDIOS.

I GUESS IF IT WAS A SECONDARY DWELLING, WE WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM AT HAVING IT PR PERMITTD LIKE A SECONDARY DWELLING.

THESE ARE BOTH REAL -- THE POOL HOUSE ONE IS ACTUALLY ONE THAT IS ON AN ONE ACRE PLUS LOT. THE STUDIO IS ON THE ONE THAT IS

THE .91 ACRES. >> COUNCIL, COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> UNDERRUNDER THE OPEN PORTIONY OTHER QUESTIONS? MOTION?

>> MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SECONDED, PLEASE VOTE. 7-0.

DISCUSSION? ONE THING I HEARD WAS THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE A THOUGHT THAT THIS PPROBABLY OVERREACH OF GOVERNMENT. IS THAT FAIR?

>> I THINK OVERREGULATION. >> SAME DIFFERENCE.

>> IT IS A NICER WAY TO P PUT I. >> CAN WE CLARIFY, MAYBE I'M MIS-REMEMBERING SOMETHING. IN A THREE QUARTER ACRE LOT IN MIDLOTHIAN, COULD I DO THIS BY RIGHT?

>> NO. >> WHY NOT?

>> THE ACTUAL RULES LISTED -- I FORGET THE SUBSECTION, BUT THE SUBSECTION UNDER ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, VERY SPECIFIC AND SAYING YOU HAVE TO BE ONE ACRE OR LARGER IN ORDER TO HAVE A REST ROOM INCLUDED INSIDE OF YOUR ACCESSORY BUILDING.

>> SO FOR SOME REASON ACROSS THE CITY, WE STILL HAVE NOT FOUND A REASON TO ADDRESS THAT, WORKSHOP THAT, STUDY THAT AND DECIDE IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT CITY-WIDE? ONE ACRE IS THE CUT-OFF, THEN I WOULD KEEP IT -- IF YOU WANT TO BLANKET APPROVE THE ONE ACRE AND UP, FINE, AND THEN WHEN WE RE-EVALUATE IT FOR THE REST OF THE CITIZENS, IF THEY WANT TO COME BACK. BUT WE HAVE NEVER BLANKET APPROVED SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR A DEVELOPMENT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT I WANT TO START TODAY UNTIL WE STUDY IT

BETTER. >> I AGREE WITH WALTER.

THE THING IS, IF WE THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE STUDIED, I AGREE.

THEN LET'S NOT MAKE THIS THE CASE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND GO TO NORMAL STANDARDS LIKE WE DO EVERY DAY, AS OF YESTERDAY, AND THEN BRING IT BACK AS A WORKSHOP ITEM FOR US LATER ON IN THE YEAR, LATER ON IN THE MONTH, WHATEVER THE NEXT TIME FRAME IS, AND WE CAN SEE IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THE SIX-TENTHS OF AN ACRE RULE OR LEAVE IT THE SAME.

IT HAS BEEN THE SAME FOR A WHILE.

I SAY WE LEAVE IT THE SAME UNTIL THE NEXT DEVELOPMENT OR MONTH AFTER THAT. I JUST HATE REWRITING A RULE BOOK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME. SO I WOULD RATHER NOT DO IT AS A BLANKET THING NOW. IF IT COSTS $3,000 TO GET A STUDIO VERSUS A POOL HOUSE, NO OFFENSE TO NEWSOMS, WHOEVER, I DON'T THINK THEY WILL BUILD 50 STUDIOS ON 50 LOTS.

THEY MIGHT BUILD FIVE OR TEN. SO IT IS NOT LIKE THIS IS HUGE PROBLEM IN THIS ONE SUBDIVISION. IF THEY WANT TO WORK IT A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, FOR THE OVERREACH LIKE JUSTIN WAS SAYING AND HUD WERE SAYING, WE CAN CHANGE IT FROM ONE ACRE TO

SIX-TENTHS. >> DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE DID THE ONE ACRE? '17?

SO IT WAS ABOUT '18, '19. >> IF WE DID A WORKSHOP, MADE A CHANGE, WHEN COULD THE APPLICANT COME BACK? IF WE DENY THIS, THEY HAVE TO WAIT SIX MONTHS?

[00:25:01]

JUSTIN, DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS? >> I GET THE BLANKET STATEMENT STUFF. BUT TO ME IT IS LIKE, IF WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THESE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, THEN WHY NOT DRAW A LITTLE CIRCLE AROUND THIS AREA AND MAKE THE BLANK ACCOUNT AND BLANKET AND ADDRESSIT AT A LATE. IT IS SIX OF ONE AND HALF DOZEN

OF THE OTHER. >> MY STATE APOLOGIES, TO SPEAE MORE THING, TED, WALTER, I RESPECT THE HECK OUT OF THAT I THINK YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING BACK IN HISTORY.

ONE THING I HAVE BEEN COMING TO INITIALLY ON AZALIA HALLOW SINCE 2018, EVERY STEP OF THE WAY FROM THE DRCS TO THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, P&Z TO COUNCIL, I HAVE DONE ONE OR TWO AMENDMENTS THAT MAKE SENSE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE ALWAYS PASSED.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT THERE'S NOT GOING TOCK ONE THAT PASSES, I THINK WHAT I HOPE IS THAT EVERYONE SEES IS THAT THERE'S SOME BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOODS IN ELLIS COUNTY, MIDLOTHIAN.

BUT EVERY STEP OF THE WAY SINCE 2018, THE STAFF, COUNCIL, ENGINEERING, BUILDING INSPECTIONS HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT AZALIA IS KIND OF THE STANDARD OF WHAT THEY WANT DEVELOPERS DOING IN MIDLOTHIAN. NOT EVERY ONE IS GOING TO BE AZALIA HALLOW. WE MET EVERY PRIMARY AMENITY, SECONDARY AMENITY, WE REZONED, PLATTED, ANNEXED.

WE DID THINGS THE STAFF HAD SAID NEVER BEEN DONE IN MIDLOTHIAN BEFORE. ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, MULTIPLE MEMBERS APPLAUDED A AZALIA.

I TRULY UNDERSTAND THE PAST AND THE DIFFERENT ORDINANCES AND STUFF. THERE WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG, BASED ON THE TRACK RECORD, THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE IT HAS EXCEEDED EVERYTHING GOING THROUGH IT. THAT IF THIS WAS, AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, SOMETHING THAT, AGAIN, THESE ARE POOL HOUSES AND STUDIOS. THESE AREN'T RENTED APARTMENTS.

EVERYTHING HAS BEEN EXTREMELY PLANNED OUT FROM THE .65 TO THE .75-ACRE LOTS, THE LAYOUTS. IF YOU GO BACK IN THE HISTORY THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. I WOULD LIKE FOR YA'LL TO AT LEAST CONSIDER THAT. I UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE -- WE KIND OF RAN INTO THIS. WHY IS IT EVEN LIKE THIS? WE HAVE FORMS SET ON THE STUDIO, WE TALKED TO HEATH, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A CREATIVE WAY TO KIND OF MAKE PROGRESS ON THIS WHILE WE ARE ALSO MAKING PROGRESS ON THE HOUSE.

WE PATIENTLY WORKED OVER THE LAST 60 DAYS TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO RUSH ANYTHING.

BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TRACK RECORD OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS IS KIND OF BEING CONSIDERED IN THIS DISCUSSION.

I DO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >> I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION.

IN YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS, DOES IT SAY THEY CAN'T HAVE A SECONDARY DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY?

>> YES. IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, IT SAYS THAT YOU CAN'T RENT OUT SOMETHING ON THE PROPERTY.

IT ALSO SAYS THAT ANY POOL HOUSA COUPLE NEIGHBORHOODS OUT THERE, POOL HOUSES, SHEDS, YOU CAN'T HAVE A SHED OVER 20 SQUARE FEET THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THE HOUSE.

SO ANY STUDIO, ANY POOL HOUSE, ANYTHING, HAS TO LOOK JUST LIKE THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOUSE. REMEMBER IN EA AZALIA, ALL 26 ARCHITECTURE STYLES ARE APPROVED SO WE CAN DO A FULL MEDITERRANEAN TO FARMHOUSE. ALL ARCHITECTURE STYLES WERE

APPROVED. >> I THINK MY QUESTION AKIN TO THAT, I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T LIKE ASKING THE QUESTION, BUT I WILL,

IS THERE A HOA. >> YES, SIR.

>> YOU ARE GOING TO ENFORCE YOUR OWN RULES.

>> WE HAVE ALREADY HAD TWO LITTLE CASES ON AN ADDRESS BLOCK THAT WE BUILT. BUT THE DEVELOPER, I THINK, THROUGH 85 LOT SALES, MYSELF AND OUR JOINT VENTURE PARTNER, THE TWO GENTLEMEN THERE, WE ARE THE ACC.

>> THE THING IS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU ARE DOING AT ALL. I PROBABLY VOTED ON IT ONCE OR TWICE BETWEEN THEN AND NOW. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE

BLANKET PART. >> THAT'S ME.

>> THAT'S WHAT MY PROBLEM IS, THE BLANKET PART.

IF THEY CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT OVER THERE, THAT'S THEIR PROBLEM, THEIR THING. I JUST DON'T WITH A TO DO A

BLANKET DEAL. >> AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, THOUGH, SOMETHING -- THIS PROBABLY COULD HAVE, AGAIN, WE CAUGHT A TON OF THINGS, MARCS

[00:30:10]

50 LOTS, YOU ARE CORRECT, WE ARE NOT GOING TO BUILD 50 POOL HOUSES OR STUDIOS.

TO GO THROUGH A SECOND BUILDING PERMIT.

I HAVE GOTTEN FEEDBACK FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

DARRELL WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT THERE TWO DIFFERENT TIMES, 7 DIFFERENT TIMES ON THE STUDIO AS WE ARE BUILDING IT AT THE SAME TIME AS THE HOUSE. IT DOES BECOME A CHALLENGE.

>> BUT THAT'S WHY YOU GET PAID THE BIG BUCKS.

>> OKAY. >> HAVE YOU SEEN LUMBER PRICING.

>> WE HAVE THE RULE, IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST ONE ACRE.

IF IT IS NOT, IT IS GOING TO BE AN EXCEPTION.

AND I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MAKING AN EXCEPTION FOR A WHOLE DEVELOPMENT. FOR THE INDIVIDUAL, ONE HOME, I

HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT. >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> HOLD ON, BEFORE YOU EVEN SUGGEST THAT, BECAUSE I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT AS WELL, I DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE LOTS THESE ARE GOING ON.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SHOULD EVEN PRESENT THAT.

I CAN'T MAKE A DECISION ON IT. >> CAN I ASK -- SORRY, I DON'T

MEAN TO CUT YOU BACK OUT. >> CAN I ASK -- I MEAN, IF -- I'M GOING TO SHOW MY CARDS. I'M KIND OF SPLIT HERE.

I GUESS TO THOSE WHO WANT TO HOLD THE STANDARD, I GUESS WHAT I AM STRUGGLING WITH, EVERY SINGLE TIME WE APPROVE A PD, THAT IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT OUR STANDARD SAYS.

WE DON'T FOLLOW OUR SET STANDARD EVERY DAY.

>> AGREED. >> I'M KIND OF LIKE -- I HEAR WHY IT MATTERS BUT AT THE SAME TIME --

>> BUT I HANG BACK ON IF WE CAN'T GET THIS SAME TREATMENT FOR ANY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE SITTING IN THE ROOM ON THEIR ONE HOME, I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE A BLANKET ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> WHO A ARE WE TRYING TO PROTE? >> THE CITY.

>> DO WE DO THAT BY DO WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD HERE? BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY ARE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THEM THEMSELVES. I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

BUT AREN'T WE SAYING, OKAY, THIS IS CALLED WHAT AZALIA, YA'LL

TAKE CARE OF YOURSELVES. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THAT.

WHEN YOU DESIGNED THIS DEVELOPMENT, DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT -- IN ORDER TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YOU HAD TO HAVE ONE

ACRE LOTS? >> THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS WE WENT THROUGH IN THE DEVELOPMENT. KNOWING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC THING, ONE REST ROOM AND SINK CANNOT BE DONE UNDER ONE ACRES.

AS WE WERE GOING OUTLAYING OUT THE .65 AND UNDER.

THAT MAY BE ANOTHER POINT. WE ASKED, I'M AN ENGINEER BY TRADE, WE STARTED ASKING THE CITY AND TCQ, IS IT A HARD AND FAST RULE THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE SEPTIC UNDER ONE ACRE.

WE LEARNED VERY QUICKLY WHAT THE CITY AND TCQ, YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN AND SO IF YOU GO BACK INTO THE PROCESS THROUGH THE PD, WE HAD THESE DIFFERENT LAYOUTS THAT PROVED THAT WE COULD HAVE SEPTIC, I AEROBIC, UNDER ONE AC, AND IT HAS BEEN ZERO ISSUES SO

FAR IN THE PROCESS. >> ISN'T THERE A STATE LAW THAT

AEROBIC IS SIX-TENTHS. >> YOU KNEW WHEN YOU WERE PLANNING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE US TO GET THESE APPROVED SINCE YOUR LOTS WERE UNDER AN

ACRE. >> NO, SIR.

WE OVERLOOKED THE IDEA THAT -- WE DIDN'T KNOW AT THE TIME THAT THE STUDIO OR THE POOL HOUSE -- WE HADN'T LOOKED THAT FAR IN THE FUTURE. WE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT A HOUSE THAT WANTED A STUDIO OR POOL HOUSE UNDER ONE ACRE COULD NOT

BE AN AUXILIARY STRUCTURE. >> WELL, IT CAN BE, BUT ONCE YOU

PUT PLUMBING, THAT'S THE ISSUE. >> WE CAN DO A GARAGE, I

[00:35:12]

THING BUT THEY CAN'T. >> BUT THAT'S NOT A GOOD

ARGUMENT. >> OKAY, MARCOS, CAN I ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> HE SAID HE GOT THE FORM BOARDS UP RIGHT NOW.

NEWSOMS COME BACK TOMORROW, GET THEIR PERMIT, NO PROBLEM AT ALL.

>> FOR THEIR ACCESSORY BUILDING. >> YES.

>> THEY CAN COME BACK. THEY WALK IN YOUR OFFICE TOMORROW, THEY GET THEIR PERMANENT, PAY THE $3,000, BUT WE ARE NOT STOPPING THEIR ACCESSORY BUILDING FROM BEING

BUILT. >> RIGHT, IT WOULD BE CLASSIFIED

AS SECONDARY DWELLING. >> BUT WE ARE NOT -- IF THEY COME BACK TOMORROW, WE ARE NOT STOPPING THEIR PROJECT.

WE ARE ADDING INSPECTIONS, BUT WE ARE NOT STOPPING THAT

PROJECT. >> CORRECT.

THE FORM BOARDS DON'T HAVE TO BE TAKEN DOWN.

PLUMBING DOESN'T NEED TO BE YANKED OUT OF THE GROUND.

THEY HAVE TO GET A PERMIT. >> PRETTY MUCH EVERY HOUSE IN

AZALIA IS A MILLION BUCKS. >> IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH

P&Z AND COUNCIL PROCESS. >> NO, WE NEVER SEE IT AGAIN.

>> IT IS CLASSIFIED AS SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT.

>> THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED PROCEDURALLY BY RIGHT AS LONG AS YOU PAY YOUR MONEY AND PASS INSPECTION.

>> RIGHT. YOU ARE CLASSIFIED AS SECONDARY DWELLING NOT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

>> THEN WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT THIS?

>> THE APPLICANT BROUGHT IT UP. >> ALSO A -- [INAUDIBLE].

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT MORE, IS NOW IT IS A SECOND ROAD IMPACT FEE.

THAT'S WHAT MAKE THE PERMIT FOR THAT SECONDARY DWELLING EVEN THOUGH THEY PAID IT ON THE HOUSE, THE $2,500 MAKES THAT SECONDARY DWELLING SO EXPENSIVE. I'M OPEN TO THAT.

THAT'S WHAT WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT, IF THERE IS A WAY TO NOT

HAVE THE ROAD IMPACT FEE TWICE. >> $2,500 IN A HOUSE THAT IS A

MILLION DOLLARS. >> TED, TED, I DID APPRECIATE IT, BUT, LIKE, THIS HAS BEEN A CHALLENGING 18 MONTHS.

I KNOW YOU PROBABLY THINK THAT ALL OF OUR CLIENTS ARE JUST -- NO, THESE THINGS DO MATTER AND, I MEAN, EVERY DOLLAR, DOESN'T MATTER WHAT SIZE OR COST OF THE HOUSE, IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT.

>> BUT THE PD BY DEFINITION IS THIS IS GOING -- WE ARE VARYING FROM STANDARDS AND NORMS BY THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A PD.

BRAND NEW PD IN FRONT OF US, WE WOULDN'T BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION. I'M LEANING WITH THE DEVELOPER.

YOU SAY YOU HATE TO SET THE STANDARD FOR THE CITY.

WE DIDN'T. WE SET IT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

I ALSO AGREE WITH WALTER THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME ASK AND THEY DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO COME ASK. THEY CAN'T DO IT ON A BLANKET.

LIKE I SAID, IF HE SUBMITTED THIS AZALIA HALLOW TODAY AND THAT WAS IN IT, WE WOULDN'T BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.

WE WOULD SAY THAT'S OKAY, THAT'S FINE.

>> JUSTIN? >> I ALREADY MADE MY POINT.

I STAND BEHIND THEM. >> AND IF THE ANSWER IS WE DO THIS TO PROTECT THE CITY, I KNOW THEY CAN COME IN TOMORROW AND BY RIGHT AND DO IT. ALL WE ARE DOING IS ADDING $3,500 AND IMPACT TO THE DEVELOPER.

>> CAN I MAKE A MOTION? >> YES.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. >> SECOND.

[00:40:02]

>> A MOTION TO DENY, SECOND. IF YOU VOTE YES, YOU ARE DENYING. NO, YOU ARE VOTING FOR IT.

PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 4-3.

SO THE REQUEST IS DENIED. OPEN ITEM

[2022-060 ]

>> MARCOS. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, THE PROPOSED DAY CARE IS LOCATED ON 9TH STREET, THIS IS ACROSS FROM THE MIDLOTHIAN HIGH SCHOOL. THIS AREA IS LOCATED IN WHAT WE CALL THE NEWTOWN MODULE. MUTOWN MODULE BASED ON THE DESCRIPTION OF THE NEWTOWN MODULE, A DAY CARE USE WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE USE WITHIN THE MODULE.

HERE IS THE SITE PLAN. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS APPROXIMATELY 5100 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.

THERE'S A PLAY AREA ON THE REAR SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

THE SITE DOES INCLUDE TWO ACCESS POINTS, BOTH ACCESS POINTS WILL ACCESS LOCAL STREET, NOT ON TO 9TH STREET.

IT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE A NEW ROAD THAT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED THAT BOTH POINTS WILL ACCESS. ALTHOUGH THE ACCESS DOES LOOK GOOD, STAFF HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE WIDER SHOULDER AREA ON 9TH STREET WHERE VEHICLES HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAYBE IDLE OR PARK.

STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND PREVENTATIVE MEASURES BE CLOUD INCLUDED TO ENSURE THAT VEHICLES DON'T TEMPORARILY PARK OR IDLE FOR ANY PURPOSE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING SIGNS. NO-PARKING SIGNS.

SO THE AMOUNT OF PARKING PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT DOES EXCEED OUR 25 PERCENT MAXIMUM THRESHOLD.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR APPROXIMATELY 26 PARKING SPACES. THEY REALLY ONLY PERMITTED TO DO 17 PARKING SPACES. DAY CARE HAS STATED THAT THEY DO PLAN TO HAVE ABOUT 18 STAFF, SO OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO HAVE PARKING FOR PARENTS, FOR VISITORS.

STAFF ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTS THE 26 STALLS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.

HERE ARE THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS.

STAFF ALSO SUPPORTS THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING.

WE DID SEND OUT 7 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED MANY RESPONSES BUT ALL OF THESE RESPONSES ARE OUTSIDE OF THAT 200-FOOT BOUNDARY.

ALL OF THE RESPONSES RECEIVED WERE IN SUPPORT.

SO ON JANUARY 18TH, PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. THEY DID GIVE DIRECTION FOR STREET SIGNS TO PREVENT PARKING AND IDLING.

I WILL CONTINUE TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

>> QUICK QUESTION ON THE SIGNS, BECAUSE PEOPLE ALREADY PARK ON THAT STREET TO DROP OFF THEIR KIDS AND PICK THEM UP ON THE HIGH SCHOOL. SO I'M ASSUMING THE SIGN WOULD BE SOME TYPE OF WARNING WITH A FINE THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WAS GOING TO BE ENFORCING? I'M JUST -- DO YOU SEE WHERE I'M

HEADED WITH THIS? >> COUNCIL, PARDON ME.

IF YOU HAVE QUICK QUESTION OF MARCOS ASK THEM, WE HAVE 14 SPEAKERS, I WOULD LIKE TO GET TO THE SPEAKERS.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> YOU CAN'T TALK FROM THE AUDIENCE. WE HAVE 14 SPEAKERS, I WILL CALL LORI WEBB, YA'LL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 15 MINUTES TO DIVIDE HOW YOU LIKE. WHEN YOU START REPEATING

YOURSELF. >> WE WILL NOT DO THAT, I PROMISE. MY NAME IS LORI WEBB, 5453 RED ROSE TRAIL, MIDLOTHIAN. I HAVE NOTES AND IT IS REALLY HOT AND I'M REALLY NERVOUS. THAT LAST ONE MADE ME NERVOUS, YA'LL. SO I SENT YOU ALL INDIVIDUAL EMAILS, I BELIEVE, AND I HOPE, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT GROWING IN GRACE, ABOUT MYSELF.

SO I DON'T WANT TO BE REDUNDANT TONIGHT.

I REALLY MAYBE WANT TO SPEAK TO TRAFFIC, TO ANY CONCERNS YOU MIGHT HAVE IN REGARD TO THAT. THIS HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS.

[00:45:12]

WE FOUND THIS MIDTOWN WORKED WITH US TO FIND A LOT ACROSS FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL. SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE TODAY.

DO YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR ME? I CAN GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR ENROLLMENT, OUR FAMILIES, ONLY FOR THE REASON IN REGARD TO TRAFFIC.

BECAUSE WE HAVE 75 CHILDREN ENROLLED.

WE WILL HAVE 85 WHEN WE MOVE. WE ARE VERY SMALL IN COMPARISON TO EVEN A CENTER DOWN THE STREET THAT I BELIEVE WOULD HAVE 220 STUDENTS. SO AND THAT 85 WON'T CHANGE BASED ON 30 SQUARE FEET PER CHILD.

THAT'S A STATE LAW. SO WE WILL ENROLL 85 AND THAT IS, RIGHT NOW WE SIT AT ABOUT 56 TOTAL FAMILIES DUE TO MULTIPLE SICKSIBLING GROUPS. I THINK TRENT I THINK HAD -- LET ME SEE THAT OTHER -- SO WE DID A GRAPH BASED ON DROP-OFF AND PICK-UP. WE ARE NOT A MOTHER'S DAY OUT, NOT A SCHOOL IN REGARD TO A SPECIFIC DESIGNATED AND PICK UP TIME. WE OPEN AT 7 A.M., CLOSE AT 5:4.

WE HAVE ABOUT A TWO AND A HALF WINDOW IN THE AM AND PM TO WHERE FAMILIES DROP OFF. AND WE HAVE MONITORED THAT TRAFFIC PATTERN FOR THE LAST YEAR AND WE DID A GRAPH TO SHOW THAT WE NEVER HAVE, IN 15-MINUTE INTERVALS, FOR TWO AND A HALF HOURS. WE NEVER HAVE MORE THAN TEN CARS IN A 15-MINUTE INTERVAL. THAT DOES INCLUDE MY STAFF BECAUSE I HAVE NINE STAFF CHILDREN.

SO WE WILL NEVER PARK ON 663. INFANT, FIVE-YEAR-OLDS, THE FAMILIES ARE WONDERFUL. THEY WOULD NEVER DO THAT.

WE HAVE CREATED 27 SPACES SO THAT WE WILL HAVE TEN ADDITIONAL SPACES AND THAT SMALL LITTLE DROP-OFF ZONE.

SO IF THEY WANT TO PULL UP, THEY CAN.

BUT OUR FAMILIES WOULD NEVER PARK ON 663 BECAUSE OF THE SAFETY ISSUE FOR THEIR TODDLERS. SIX WEEKS TO FIVE YEARS.

SO WE HAVE A VERY SMALL CENTER. WE HAVE VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF CARS. AGAIN, WE HAVE A TWO AND A HALF HOUR WINDOW OF DROP-OFF AND PICK UP.

AGAIN, THAT'S 7 A.M. TO 9:30. 3 OR 3:30 TO 5.

45. 5:45, I FIRMLY BELIEVE WE WILL HAVE NO TRAFFIC ISSUES.

DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME. >> THE THING IS, THEY ARE ALREADY DOING IT AT THE HIGH SCHOOL.

THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE A BABY, NOT STOP THERE AND GRAB A BABY OUT OF THE BACK SEAT WHEN THEM CARS ARE GOING BY AT 30 MILES PER HOUR, 6 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT.

>> RIGHT. THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

THANK YOU. >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> ERIKA LEONARD. HI.

FIRST OF ALL, EXCUSE MY ATTIRE, I CAME STRAIGHT FROM COACHING.

I'M THE MATH TEACHER, HEAD VOLLEYBALL COACH.

I HAVE BEEN HERE A TOTAL OF SIX YEARS, THREE SMALL CHILDREN, ALL OF WHICH WHO HAVE BEEN BLESSED BY GROWING IN GRACE.

JUST REAL QUICKLY, AFTER A DISAPPOINTING EXPERIENCE AT ANOTHER CHILD CARE FACILITY, I WAS INTRODUCED TO LORI AND SHE GLADLY WELCOMED MY FAMILY INTO HER SMALL HOME CENTER AT THE TIME. THEN IT WAS JUST MY TWO BOYS.

I QUICKLY SAW THE IMPACT THAT THEY HAD ON THEM AND THEY WEREN'T JUST BABY-SITTING. I WANT TO MAKE THAT VERY CLEAR, TEN HOURS A DAY, TEACHING THEM, LOVING THEM AND TRULY POURING THEIR HEARTS INTO THEM. IF ANYONE KNOWS ABOUT A COACH'S LIFE, THE TIME SPENT WITH MY FAMILY DURING THAT SEASON IS EXTREMELY LIMITED AND TRUSTING THOSE WHO CARE FOR YOUR CHILDREN IS ESSENTIAL. IT IS IMPERATIVE TO ME THAT MY KIDS GROW, LEARN AND PREPARE FOR THE NEXT PHASE OF LIFE.

MY SON, WHO IS NOW FIVE, IS ATTENDING LONG BRANCH HERE AND I REMEMBER WHAT IT FELT LIKE BEING ANXIOUS FOR THAT FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL. AND MEETING THE TEACHER AND

[00:50:02]

WHAT I WANT TO MAKE NOTE OF WITH HIM, WITHOUT GROWING IN GRACE, HE IS LEARNING AT THREE YEARS OLD TO MANAGE HIS EMOTIONS.

IN TODAY'S SOCIETY, IS SO INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.

WITH JUST A BABY-SITTER, THAT WOULD NOT HAPPEN.

SO I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT THAT I WOULD BE THE ONE THAT'S LEARNING FROM THEIR CONTINUE COS PATIENCE AND GRACE.

I HAVE A BABY GIRL NOW, SIX MONTHS OLD, AND CARED FOR LIKE SHE IS THE ONLY BABY IN THE BUILDING.

I FEEL BABIES CAN SENSE AND FEEL WHO IS CARING FOR THEM.

MY KIDS HAVE MANNERS. MY KIDS KNOW THEY ARE WORTHY AND MY KIDS ARE LOVED. THOSE FEELINGS ARE NOT JUST PORTRAYED AT HOME BY MY HUSBAND AND I.

100 PERCENT GIVE GROWING IN GRACE JUST THE BLESSING OF THAT.

IN DECEMBER OF 2019, I WAS BLESSED TO SEE LORI'S DREAM COME FROM SOMETHING SO SMALL INTO HER HOME TO WHAT IT IS EVEN NOW.

AND THIS IS WHAT I WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH, THE HARD TRUTH, YOU GUYS, IF THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN, ALL OF THESE FAMILIES WILL BE WITHOUT CHILD CARE. WE LOSE ALL THOSE THAT INSPIRE THEM EVERY SINGLE DAY. WE WILL NOT HAVE THE TEACHERS THAT POUR INTO THEM THEIR HEART AND THEIR SOUL.

THIS IMPACT WOULD HAVE ON SO MANY OTHERS, NOT JUST MYSELF.

IN EDUCATION, WE ARE ASKED WHAT'S OUR WHY.

LORI AND HER STAFF HAVE A CLEAR WHY.

THAT IS TO BLESS OUR CHILDREN, HELP MOLD THEM INTO LIFELONG STUDENTS AND PREPARE THEM FOR THE NEXT PHASE OF LIFE.

SO IT IS NOT JUST A CHILD CARE FACILITY.

THIS IS MY FAMILY. >> THANK YOU.

>> WELL SAID, COACH. IS THERE A JAMES FORSHAY HERE?

WOULD YOU COME SPEAK, PLEASE. >> I WILL KEEP IT SHORT.

GOOD EVENING, I LIVE AT 3930 JOE WILSON ROAD.

I HAVE LIVED HERE IN THIS COMMUNITY SINCE 1998, I'M EXCITED TO RAISE OUR CHILDREN HERE AS WELL.

YA'LL PROBABLY KNOW LORI BY NOW. IF YOU WATCHED THE PLANNING & ZONING MEETING, YOU HEARD HOW HIGHLY HER STAFF AND WE AS PARENTS THINK OF HER. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN THIS COMMUNITY PUTTING A FLAGSHIP CHILD CARE FACILITY IN THIS TOWN, IT WOULD BE HER. THERE'S ONE CONCERN THAT I HAVE WITH GROWING IN GRACE NOW, IT IS THE CURRENT LOCATION.

EVERY DAY WE HAVE TO CROSS 287 TRAFFIC WITH NO LIGHT, CARRYING OUR MOST PRECIOUS GIFTS TOLE SCOO.

SCHOOL. I BELIEVE GROWING IN GRACE WOULD BE AN ADDITION TO THE AREA ALREADY BUSTLING WITH CHILDREN.

AT NO POINT HAVE I SEEN MORE THAN THREE TO FOUR PARENTS COMING AND GOING FOR DROP-OFF OR PICK-UP.

OUR GIRLS ARE NORMALLY DROPPED OFF NO LATER THAN 8.

MOST OF THEIR FRIENDS ARE ALREADY IN CLASS.

IT DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH HIGH SCHOOL TRAFFIC TIMES.

IN MY EYES, THE TRAFFIC FOOTPRINT WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE, CERTAINLY COMPARED TO THE RISK AT THE CURRENT LOCATION ON 287.

FOR THESE REASONS AND OTHERS YOU HAVE MENTIONED OR AWARE OF, I ASK THAT YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS.

>> SIR, CAN YOU JUST INFORM ME WHERE IT IS NOW?

>> IT IS ON 287, CREEK SIDE CHURCH.

>> OKAY. IS THERE SOMEBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS POINT? PLEASE COME AND GIVE US YOUR

NAME. >> HI, GINGER FARMER.

I WORK FOR GROWING IN GRACE. I HAVE WORKED FOR LORI FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND I JUST -- WE ARE A FAMILY.

LIKE WHAT ERIKA SAID. WE -- THIS IS THE BEST PLACE TO WORK AND WE ARE A FAMILY. ANYTHING THAT OUR FAMILIES GO THROUGH, OUR EMPLOYEES GO THROUGH, WE ALL CARRY IT.

AND IN ORDER FOR US TO KEEP OUR FAMILY TOGETHER, WE DO HAVE TO MOVE OUT OF CREEK SIDE CHURCH BECAUSE IT WAS TEMPORARY WHEN WE MOVED IN THERE, WE KNEW THAT, AND THEY HAVE PLANS WE JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH. IN ORDER FOR US TO CONTINUE THAT AND KEEP OUR FAMILY TOGETHER, WE DO HAVE TO BUILD AND MOVE INTO OUR NEW FACILITY BECAUSE NEXT YEAR WE DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO GO IF WE CANNOT BUILD OUR NEW BUILDINGS.

WE JUST ARE THANKFUL FOR THAT CONSIDERATION.

>> THANK YOU. >> DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER,

[00:55:08]

SPEAKERS? >> NO, SIR.

>> OKAY. >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

BACK YEARS AGO WHEN WE APPROVED MIDTOWN, ALONG 663, THERE WAS GOING TO BE A SLIP STREET. THE STREET THAT'S GOING TO GO BY THIS, IS THAT ONE OF THOSE THAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY TXDOT

TO GET ON THE 663? >> SO THE PLAN THAT'S IN PD42, IT IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT A LOT MIDTOWN HAS BEEN VERY PIECEMEALED.

APPROVED ONE HERE, ONE THERE. I DO KNOW THAT THE MIDTOWN APPLICANT IS COMING BACK WITH AN OVERALL SITE PLAN, REVISED SITE PLAN, AN ACTUAL DETAILED SITE PLAN TO REPLACE THAT CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN. YOU ARE CORRECT.

THERE WAS A SLIP STREET. THERE STILL IS.

A SLIP STREET RUNNING THROUGH THIS AREA.

ALTHOUGH WHERE THESE FOLKS ARE PLANNING TO PUT THIS DAY CARE, THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE -- THERE WAS ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL HOMES IN THAT AREA. SO RESIDENTIAL HOMES WERE GOING TO FACE OUT ON TO 9TH STREET, SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE ON GEORGE HOPPER ROAD. WITH THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT SHOW THE SLIP STREET OBVIOUSLY.

THIS IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED TO US.

>> IS IT GOING TO BE A SLIP STREET FURTHER SOUTH?

>> GOING FURTHER SOUTH, THERE WILL BE A SLIP STREET.

BASED ON THE PLANS WE HAVE SEEN ALREADY.

THE SITE PLAN IS GOING TO BE BROUGHT TO THE CITY COUNCIL -- TRENT, WHEN WILL THAT BE BROUGHT? NEXT FEW MONTHS. WE ARE IN THE PRELIMINARY TALKS.

>> THE STREET THAT IS GOING TO COME BY HERE, IS THAT ONE THAT

WAS APPROVED BY TXDOT? >> THAT'S JUST A LOCAL STREET.

JUST A LOCAL STREET. THIS STREET RIGHT HERE.

>> I KNOW IT IS A LOCAL STREET. IS IT ONE OF THOSE THAT WERE APPROVED BY TXDOT IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN? I KNOW THERE WAS ONLY A COUPLE OF STREETS APPROACHED, COUPLE

ACCESSES ON TO 663. >> LET ME SEE IF I HAVE AN AERIAL. WHERE MY CURSOR IS, SIR, RIGHT HERE, THIS IS DYLAN STREET. THAT'S THE MAIN ROAD THAT CUTS ACROSS. BELOW THAT IS THE SKILLED NURSING. SO THERE'S A SKILLED NURSING CENTER THAT THIS COUNCIL APPROVED, NOT TOO LONG AGO, IF YOU DRIEWF DRIVE BY RIGHT NOW,Y HAVE TURNED DIRT.

IT DOES NOT HAVE A SLIP STREET EITHER.

THIS WOULD AGAIN BE THE VERY LAST PARCEL BEFORE YOU MOVE INTO THE ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL AREA, WILL HAVE THAT SLIP STREET IN

FRONT. >> OKAY.

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION. IS THIS AN ACCESS TO 663 THAT WAS APPROVED FROM MIDTOWN IN THE BEGINNING?

>> WE PROBABLY NEED THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN TO SEE.

THERE WAS TWO MAIN ROADS ON OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

DON FLOYD CONNECTING TO LENA LANE.

THAT WAS GOING TO BE A FOUR-LANE ROAD, DIVIDED.

80-FOOT WIDE THOROUGHFARE. THAT IS ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, THAT IS REQUIRED ONCE THEY DEVELOP DO I KNOW THERE.

DOWN THERE.THE ONLY OTHER STREET 14TH STREET TO 9TH STREET WAS DYLAN ROAD. THERE ARE ONE MORE CONNECTION, LOOKS LIKE IT ACTUALLY LINES UP WITH ABOUT WHERE STILES.

>> THERE IS NOT A STREET GOING BY THIS DAY CARE CENTER THEN.

>> NOT ON THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN. BUT THE APPLICANT ABSOLUTELY WOULD BE ON THE HOOK FOR -- SOMEBODY IS GOING TO NEED TO CONSTRUCT THIS ROAD. THIS IS A NEW ROAD CONSTRUCTED.

>> OKAY, A NEW ROAD, BUT IF IT HAS ACCESS TO 663, TXDOT IS

GOING TO HAVE TO APPROVE IT. >> YES, ABSOLUTELY.

>> HAVE THEY APPROVED THIS STREET TO GO BY THERE?

>> EXACTLY. TXDOT WOULD HAVE TO --

>> THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. >> I'M SORRY.

[01:00:02]

>> I WAS, BECAUSE THERE WAS A NUMBER OF ACCESS ON 663.

THERE WAS GOING TO BE A SLIP STREET.

>> I DON'T THINK THEY PROPOSED A STREET.

>> THEY ARE JUST TYING INTO -- THIS IS ONE OF THE STREETS THAT

WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED THEN? >> NOT ON THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, NO. THIS IS A NEW --

>> THIS NEEDS TXDOT APPROVAL TO BUILD THAT STREET.

>> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING.

THEY WILL HAVE TO GET TXDOT APPROVAL TO GET THE STREET BY

THE PLACE. >> MARCOS, YOU HAVE SOMEBODY IN A FUNNY HAT THAT WANTS TO COME UP AND TALK.

>> OH, GOOD, SHANE. >> SHANE FEMSTE, MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. JUST TO CLARIFY ON THE STREETS, SO THIS STREET, WITH THE SKILLED NURSING ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR, WE PREPARED A PRELIMINARY PLAT. THAT CARVED OUT THIS LOT, TOO, WHERE THE DAY CARE IS GOING. AND THE STREET, WHICH IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED, LINES UP WITH THE HIGH SCHOOL ENTRANCE AND THAT WAS BY STAFF'S REQUEST.

SO THE ENGINEERING HAS BEEN PREPARED ON THIS STREET AND SUBMITTED TO TXDOT FOR APPROVAL.

DYLAN WAY IS APPROVED AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

THIS STREET SOUTH OF THE DAY CARE SITE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND

APPROVED BY TXDOT. >> IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY

TXDOT. >> IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.

>> YOU SAY HIGH SCHOOL ENTRANCE, WHICH ENTRANCE ARE YOU TALKING

ABOUT? >> BY THE OLD SIGN.

>> DIDN'T YOU SAY IN P&Z, THAT'S WHERE THE SLIP STREET STARTS.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU SAID FROM RIGHT -- RIGHTT THERE. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO TOUCH 663

RIGHT THERE. >> THIS PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TIES INTO 663 AT THE HOLD HIGH SCHOOL ENTRANCE.

OLD HIGH SCHOOL ENTRANCE.

THAT WAS PER REQUEST OF THE C CITY.

IT TURNS NORTH TO TIE INTO THE SKILLED NURSING NORTH.

THEN CONTINUES TO TIE INTO THE NEW MASTER PLAN WITH THE RESIDENTIAL THAT I'M WORKING WITH STAFF ON RIGHT NOW.

>> SO SHE HAS TO USE YOUR PARKING LOT TO THE SKILLED

NURSING TO GET TO HER BUSINESS? >> NO, IT IS A PUBLIC

RIGHT-OF-WAY OFF OF 663. >> A SLIP STREET HAS TO CONNECT

TO BOTH -- >> WE ARE BUILDING THE ROAD FOR

HER. >> THAT SLIP STREET AT THE NORTH END NEEDS TO TIE INTO 663 AND 14TH STREET BOTH TO BE USABLE.

>> NO, SIR. IT TIES IN RIGHT HERE AT THIS NEW 50-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT.

IT TIES IN, AND IT HEADS SOUTH ALL THE WAY TO THE NEW DON FLOYD CONNECTOR ROAD. THE RESIDENTIAL IS OFF OF THAT.

>> SLIP STREET FROM 14TH STREET. >> EVENTUALLY, YES, YOU CAN, BUT IT DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

THERE ARE OTHER CONNECTORS ON 14TH.

YOU WILL HAVE TWO SLIP STREETS NORTH AND SOUTH.

ONE FROM HERE SOUTH ALONG 9TH. TO THE NEW DON FLOYD CONNECTOR ROAD APPROVED ON THE ORIGINAL CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

THEN YOU WILL HAVE ANOTHER NORTH/SOUTH SLIP STREET ON THE

14TH SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. >> OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS AFTER. >> OHM THING ONLY THING I'M WORT IS GET TO GO A CO AND NOT HAVING ONE BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS. YOU HAVE BUSINESSES THAT DON'T

HAVE COS BECAUSE OF PARKING. >> WELL, SO DYLAN IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THAT WILL BE THE NORTHERN ACCESS TO SKILLED NURSING FACILITY. THIS SLIP STREET WAS NOT REQUIRED FOR THE SKILLED NURSING.

HOWEVER, CONTRACTUALLY WE AGREED TO PUT IT IN, THEY WANTED A NORTH/SOUTH ENTRANCE. AND THIS LOT, TOO, THAT LORI IS GOING ON, GROWING IN GRACE DAY CARE WAS THE LEFTOVER LAND THAT WAS CREATED WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT BECAUSE THE CITY WANTED THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY TO LINE UP WITH THE HIGH SCHOOL ENTRANCE.

IT CREATED THIS .9-ACRE TRACT THAT IS THERE BECAUSE OF THE ROAD ALIGNMENT, IF YOU WILL. THAT'S WHERE WE CONTRACTED IT TO

[01:05:03]

GROWING IN GRACE. >> I THINK WHAT HE IS SAYING, YOU ARE ROLLING SOME DICE IF YOU GO AHEAD -- LET'S SAY WE LOVE IT AND APPROVE IT AND YOU BUILD IT, AND THEN THE ROAD DOESN'T GET APPROVED AS IS, NOW WE HAVE A PROBLEM.

>> ABSOLUTELY, IF TXDOT DOES NOT APPROVE IT, THAT WILL BE AN ISSUE. WE WILL NOT BE AWARD ED ANY

PERMITS UNLESS ROADS ARE BONDED. >> SO NOW I'M TOTALLY LOST.

I'M NOT TRYING TO BRING IN ANOTHER ISSUE.

I LITERALLY GOT A PHONE CALL THIS WEEK FROM SOMEBODY WHO IS TRYING TO PUT A DRIVEWAY ACCESS ON 663, TXDOT SAID YOU HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FROM THE CITY. NOW YOU SAY APPROVAL FROM

TXDOT. >> WE DID GET APPROVAL FROM BOTH ON DYLAN WAY. WE HAVE IN CONVERSATION WITH TXDOT. IT MEETS ALL THEIR REQUIREMENTS.

IT IS A MATTER OF THEM FINALIZING THE STORM DRAINAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING NOW.

AS FAR AS SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS, THE CITY REQUIREMENTS ARE LINING UP WITH WITH THE DRIVE ACROSS THE STREET, THE HIGH SCHOOL PARKING LOT, IT MEETS ALL THE

REQUIREMENTS. >> LET ME ADD ONE THING HERE, ALSO, GOING BACK TO PD42, IT IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND LOOK AT HOW EVERYTHING IS DEVELOPED IN MIDTOWN, IT LOOKS NOTHING ALIKE.

IT IS LIKE NIGHT AND DAY. AND SO I DON'T WANT -- I'M NOT SURE, SHANE, JUST SO WE ARE ALL UNDERSTANDING THIS, ALSO, THE CITY DID NOT SAY THAT YOU NEED TO COME IN WITH A ROAD OR ANYTHING LIKE THIS. THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS BROUGHT TO US. THEY PROVIDED THE SITE PLAN BECAUSE THE OTHER SITE PLAN THAT WAS ON THE NORTH SIDE GOT REJECTED. THEY CAME IN WITH THIS PLAN.

SO WHAT WE DO AS STAFF, WE LOOK AT THE ROADS AND WE SAY, OKAY IF, IF YOU BUILD THAT ROAD, YOU NEED TO HAVE IT LINE UP.

WE DIDN'T SAY YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS ROAD.

THIS WAS WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US, THIS IS WHY WE ARE HERE

TODAY, IT IS A PD AMENDMENT. >> MARCOS, ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO, WE DO AS SEVEN ELECTED OFFICIALS, WE HAVE

TO LOOK OUT FOR EVERYBODY. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I DON'T WANT HER SITTING HERE IN 14 MONTHS AND READY TO OPEN THE DOORS, SHE LOST HER OTHER PLACE ALREADY, SHE IS INVESTED HER ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS AND EVERYTHING, I'M GOOD WITH THE ZONING, ALL WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS THE ZONING.

I'M HUNDRED HUNDRED PERCENT. >> THE ROADS HAVE TO GET BUILT.

IF THE ROADS AREN'T THERE, WE CAN'T ISSUE A BUILDING PERMIT.

THEY HAVE ZERO ACCESS ON TO 9TH STREET.

>> BACK TO THE SLIP STREET, SLIP STREET IS SUPPOSED BETWEEN THAT

FACILITY AND -- >> IF YOU FOLLOW THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN. IF YOU LOOK AT THE REST OF MIDTOWN, IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

I THINK THAT'S WHY WE DEFINITELY WANT THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK, BRING THAT DETAILED SITE PLAN, GET YOU GUYS TO ADOPT THAT.

>> SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE REQ REQUEST.

>> IF WE DECIDE NOT TO DO THE SIGNAGE, BUT, YEAH, THERE'S AREAS WITHIN THE CITY WHERE WE DO HAVE NO-PARKING SIGNAGE.

YOU GO BACK HERE TO BACK ALLEY PLAZA, NO-PARKING SIGN.

BASED ON AN ORDINANCE. IF YOU GO BY LOVES, NO PARKING SIGNS RUNNING ALL ALONG THAT AREA.

THAT WAS ADOPTED. SO IF WE DO DO ANY TYPE OF NO-PARKING SIGN, CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, JOE, WE HAVE TO DO A

RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE. >> I GUESS WHERE I WAS GOING FOR, IF WE PUT A SIGN THAT SAYS NO PARKING, THEY ARE DOING IT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET AT THE HIGH SCHOOL.

>> THEY DON'T DO IT ON BOTH SI. >> NO, THEY DON'T PARK THERE.

I AM THERE EVERY DAY. >> WITH THAT BEING SAID, DO WE HAVE -- SPEND AN HOUR OR SLIP STREETS.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> THIRD. >> SECONDED, PLEASE VOTE.

[01:10:05]

>> PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. >> SECOND.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION -- IF YA'LL WON'T GET AHEAD OF ME, I

APPRECIATE IT. >> YOU CALLED FOR THE MOTION.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> YES. >> AND SECONDED.

>> YES. >> AND WE VOTED.

SO NOW DO WE HAVE A MOTION. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION, SECONDED, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTES.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST DAY CARES WE DID NOT ARGUE OVER.

WE ARE ALL LOOKING OUT FOR HER. >> THANK, LADIES.

>> DID WE APPROVE P&Z OR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

>> AS PRESENTED. >> THE SIGNS ARE NOT IN IT.

THEY ARE NOT IN THERE. IT WAS JUST DIRECTION.

IT IS NOT IN THE ORDINANCE. >> THIS IS GOING TO BE

[2022-061 ]

>> THE SUBJECT AREA, 20 ACRES, OLD HIGHWAY 67 THAT RUNS ON THAT REAR SIDE. HIGHWAY 67.

THE AREA IS ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

IT IS ADJACENT TO OTHER ZONE DISTRICTS.

YOU CAN SEE A MOBILE HOME ZONING DISTRICT THAT'S ADJACENT TO IT AS WELL AS MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY THE INDUSTRIAL MODULE. SO THE PROPOSED USE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH OUR PLAN. THE PROPOSAL DOES INCLUDE TWO BUILDINGS AND THIS IS GOING TO TOTAL 386,000 SQUARE FEET WITH A TRUCK COURT ON THE REAR SIDE. THERE'S ALSO FIVE POINTS OF INGRESS, EGRESS ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD OF 67.

WE HAVE ALSO GOT ONE POINT OF INGRINGRESS, EGRESS ON THE SOUTH SIDE CONNECTING INTO SHILOH ROAD.

STAFF HAS CONCERNS ABOUT ONE OF THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS, IT IS

[01:15:03]

SO THE ONE CONCERN IS THIS PARTICULAR ENTRANCE.

SO W WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, I WOULD SAY -- LET ME START WITH THIS ALSO, THAT STAFF IS ACTUALLY ON THE SIDE OF REMOVING THAT DRIVE. NOT EVEN HAVING IT.

BUT THE APPLICANT HAS WORKED WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE. WHAT I HAVE ON THE SCREEN IS THE ALTERNATIVE. PULL THE DRIVE FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THE FRONTAGE DRIVE THAT SHOULD DETER ANY 18-WHEELER FROM EXITING FROM THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION.

THIS RIGHT HERE IS A RENDER SHOWING THE SEPARATED ENTRANCE AND IF THIS IS ACCEPTABLE TO TXDOT, WHICH, AGAIN, HASN'T GONE BEFORE TXDOT YET. TXDOT HASN'T SAID WHETHER THEY ARE OKAY WITH THIS OR NOT, IF THEY ARE OKAY WITH IT, STAFF IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE OKAY WITH THIS ALSO AS WELL.

STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING A DECELERATION LANE AT THE FIRST ENTRANCE, WHERE THAT SEPARATED ENTRANCE IS.

WE ARE ALSO ASKING FOR A LEFT TURN LANE OFF OF OLD HIGHWAY 67.

SO YOU CAN SEE BOTH OF THEM ARE POINTED OUT ON HERE.

HERE ARE THE ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. STAFF DOES SUPPORT THE PROPOSED DESIGN. SIDEWALKS ARE REQUIRED WITH ANY TYPE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION, I KNOW WE HAVE HAD THAT DISCUSSION BEFORE. APPLICANT IS PLANNING TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS ONLY ALONG SHILOH ROAD.

ROAD. THIS IS THE ONLY LOCATION WHERE THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS WHERE I AM POINTING NOW.

THEY WON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS ANYWHERE ELSE.

WE DID SEND 18 LETTERS OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

TO DATE, STAFF HAS ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION WITHIN THE 200-FOOT.

WE RECEIVED ANOTHER 53 LETTERS OF OPPOSITION AND THOSE ARE RESIDENTS FROM PECAN ACRES THAT ALSO PROVIDED LETTERS OF OPPOSITION. SO ON JANUARY 18TH, THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. I HAVE GOT ALL THREE OF THOSE LISTED UP HERE RIGHT NOW. ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS SAYING HERE -- LET ME GO BACK TO THE SHOT.

WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS, THEY WOULD STILL WANT TO SEE A RIGHT TURN LANE AT THIS LOCATION. LEFT TURN LANE OFF OF SHILOH ROAD AND SEE THIS DRIVE BE PULLED AWAY.

WHICH, AGAIN, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED SOME DETAILS ON THAT, THIS SCREEN SHOT RIGHT HERE IS WHAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDED.

WITH THAT, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> PECAN ACRES? THAT IS LOCATED BEHIND THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN YELLOW. PECAN ACRES IS DIRECTLY BEHIND

IT. >> COUNCIL, WE HAVE UPWARDS OF SIX SPEAKERS. ARE ANY OF THE SPEAKERS HERE?

>> YES. >> OKAY, I WILL GIVE YOU TWO MINUTES. I HAVE ONE FOR SANDRA.

>> SANDRA PETRACELI, I HAVE OWNED PECAN ACRES FOR 35 YEARS.

IT IS COUNTRY, RESIDENTIAL. THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING THIS MONSTER AND I BELIEVE IT IS ABOUT TEN FEET HIGHER IN GRADE THAN MY PARK. AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THEY PLAN TO ASPHALT ABOUT 28 ACRES OF WHICH I WILL HAVE SERIOUS WATER PROBLEMS, DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. ALSO, IN THE FIRST MEETING THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING A FOUR-STORY BUILDING. AND THEN ON THE SECOND MEETING, THEY NE SAID THEY WERE GOING TO LOWER.

NOTHING IS IN WRITING. I BELIEVE THE PECAN ACRES WILL SUFFER DEARLY FROM THIS. AND THERE HAS BEEN NOTHING TALKED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE SITUATION.

ALSO, KEEPING IT COUNTRY LIVING. BUT MY BIGGEST PROBLEM IS, WHERE IS ALL THE WATER GOING WHEN IT RAINS IN TEXAS AND WE ALL KNOW, THEY HAVE GULLY WASHERS, SO IF THAT'S ALL ASPHALT AND I'M BELOW BY ABOUT, I WOULD SAY, 8 TO 10 FEET, MY TENANTS WILL BE

[01:20:03]

IS THAT MY TWO MINUTES? >> YOU STILL HAVE --

>> I WILL GIVE YOU 30-SECOND WARNING.

YOU OWN OR MANAGE THE PROPERTY IN THERE?

>> DO I OWN IT OR MANAGE? >> I OWN IT AND MY MANAGER IS RIGHT HERE. SHE HAS BEEN WITH ME FOR OVER 30

YEARS. >> YOU HAVE HOW MANY UNITS IN

THERE. >> 100 PADS.

AND IT IS FULL. AND IT HAS BEEN FULL AND THIS IS A MONSTER AND WE USED TO LOOK AT A DRIVING RANGE AND NOW WE WILL LOOK AT -- I DON'T KNOW HOW BIG THIS BUILDING.

HOW BIG IS THE BUILDING HOW HIGH?

45 FEET. >> SO FOUR STORIES.

>> 45 FEET IS B BECAUSE OF THE CORNICE DETAILING.

IT MAKES IT LOOK HIGHER. >> SANDRA, THANK YOU.

I MAY COME BACK TO YOU. >> I CAN SIT?

>> MARCOS, THE BLUE, THAT THE WATER DETENTION?

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> SO JUST MAKE SURE I'M LOOKING AT THE RIGHT SITE, THIS IS THE GOLF DRIVING RANGE.

>> JUST GOLF DRIVING RANGE OR ADDITIONAL LAND? I WANT TO GET A MENTAL IMAGE. ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS HERE? COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OF ANYBODY?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MARCOS. WHEN I WAS AT P&Z WATCHING IT, WHERE DOES THE WATER START AND WHERE DOES IT END ACROSS THAT PROPERTY? I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHERE THE

WATER WAS RUNNING AT ALL. >> DO YOU WANT THE ENGINEER TO -- DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN HOW THE WATER FLOWS IN THIS AREA.

>> IT IS A BIG DITCH RIGHT NOW. THAT'S THE REASON I HAD TO

QUESTION. >> YES, SO PATRICK HOGAN, I'M THE CIVIL ENGINEER ON THE PROPERTY.

PROJECT, DALLAS, TEXAS. MOST OF THE DRAINAGE STARTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE. AND BASICALLY IT ALL KIND OF CONNECTS AT A TWO 36-INCH RPC CULVERTS AROUND WHERE THE OLD HIGHWAY 67 LABEL IS, AND THEN GOES INTO A SMALL DRAINAGE CREEK

AND KEEPS GOING OUT WEST. >> DRAINAGE CREEK OR DETENTION POND? SO RIGHT NOW, EXISTING CONDITIONS, EVERYTHING GOES TO THESE TWO 36-INCH CULVERTS.

THERE'S A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE THAT ALSO DRAINS INTO TXDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. BUT THEN SO EVERYTHING ON OUR SITE WILL MATCH EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN.

SO WHAT DRAINAGE GOES TO TECH TXDOT, WE WILL SEND TO DECKS TO THE. TXDOT.

THE OTHER WILL BE RELEASED AT CONDITION RATE.

THE SAME RATE THAT IS GOING AT RIGHT NOW TODAY.

>> DO YOU HAVE A POINTER? WHERE ARE THE EXITS FOR THE WATER. YOU SAID ONE GOES TO TXDOT

RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> RIGHT NOW THERE IS A -- ABOUT RIGHT HERE. IT FLOWS, I THINK, IN THIS CREEK

AND KEEPS GOING SOUTH. >> THERE'S A CREEK THERE?

>> YES. >> THE OTHER ONE GOES NORTH

UNDERNEATH THE HIGHWAY. >> YEAH, SO THERE'S ANOTHER CULVERT OUT HERE. IT IS A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE.

SO IF WE DO NEED TO OVER DETAIN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE CAN.

>> SO FROM MEMORY, THE CLUBHOUSE IS TO THE FAR RIGHT.

FENCED TO THE LEFT AND IT SLOPES DOWN IN THE MIDDLE.

WHAT'S THE ELEVATION DROP FROM THE HIGHEST POINT TO THE LOWEST

POINT, AS IT IS CURRENTLY? >> I WOULD SAY 40 FEET.

PROBABLY ABOUT 15, 20 FEET FROM HIGH TO LOW.

>> SO WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO THE LANDSCAPE?

LEVEL IT, OR FILL IT IN. >> THERE IS A FEW RETAINING

[01:25:04]

BUT THE RETENTION POND. >> THE WOULD DEVELOPMENTS WILL

BE ON LEVEL GROUND. >> A COUPLE FEET OF EACH OTHER.

>> BUT FILL IT IN? >> WE WILL BALANCE THE SITE.

MOVE DIRT. >> MOVE THE DIRT THAT YOU HAVE.

>> CORRECT. >> YOU WON'T BRING ADDITIONAL

DIRT IN. >> THAT'S THE PLAN.

>> SO AT THE FAR END, ON THE FAR WESTERN END.

>> LEFT-HAND IS NORTH, SOUTH IS RIGHT-HAND.

>> IT IS NOT TRUE NORTH. TO THE SOUTH THEN, IF YOU WANT -- THE HIGHWAY, THE SOUTH END, WHAT WILL BE THERE?

WHAT'S THE ELEVATION THERE? >> SO RIGHT NOW, WE ARE ACTUALLE FACILITY WILL BE ON SEPTIC, SO THIS WILL BE OUR SEPTIC FIELD AND THEN WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING A SMALL AMENITY PARK FOR THE TENANTS. BUT MOST OF THIS WILL BE JUST OPEN GRASS AREA. THERE'S NOT REALLY --

>> WHAT WOULD BE THE ELEVATION OF THAT?

>> THAT'S -- PROBABLY GOING TO BE AROUND EXISTING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE ARE ONLY REALLY BUILDING THIS ROADWAY OUT HERE.

THAT'S MAINLY JUST TO GET SEPARATION FOR TXDOT APPROVAL.

>> WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE ELEVATION OF THE GRADING AREA

COMPARED TO THE FIRST BUILDING? >> COUPLE FEET.

>> I MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEED THIS ALONG.

THEY ARE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO NOT INCREASE FLOW OF WATER FROM THEIR PROPERTY TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES OR THEY

ARE HELD LIABLE FOR THE DAMAGE. >> CORRECT.

>> DRAIN FROM THE RETENTION POND GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE CREEK?

>> YES, DESIGNED OUT FLOW STRUCTURE THAT WILL TAKE THE DRAINAGE FROM THE POND INTO THE CREEK THAT ARE MATCHED THE EXISTING HUNDRED YEAR FLOWS FOR CITY CODE.

NOTHING MORE THAN IS GOING THERE TODAY.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION. >> PLEASE COME BACK TO THE

PODIUM TO ASK YOUR QUESTION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT

CREEK YOU ARE TYING INTO. >> SPEAK TO THE COUNCIL.

>> OH, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT CREEK HE WOULD BE TYING INTO BECAUSE THERE IS A CREEK AT THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY, AT THE FAR END OF THE PARK ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PARK.

THAT'S WHERE THE CREEK IS. HOW ARE THEY GETTING THEIR WATER

TO THAT CREEK? >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> FOR MY PROPERTY? >> YOU ARE GETTING THE -- WE WILL SEE IF WE TAKE YOUR QUESTION FROM HERE.

ONCE YOU GET THE WATER TO THE CREEK, IT IS JUST THE CREEK WILL

HANDLE THE WATER. >> CORRECT.

BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY.

>> I UNDERSTAND. JUST CLARIFYING.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> CONNECT INTO THE CULVERTS

EXISTING UNDERNEATH HIGHWAY. >> I'M OUT OF MY LEAGUE BUT I WILL ASK THIS QUESTION ANYWA. ISN'T THE DRAINAGE THAT YOU ARE PUTTING IN THERE, WOULD THAT NOT AGGRAVATE THE WATER FLOW INTO THE CREEK MORE THAN IT CURRENTLY IS.

>> ALL HE IS DOING IS BUILDING A DETENTION POND THAT IS GOING TO HAVE A PIPE THAT COMES OUT IN THIS CULVERT, OR MAYBE AS CROSS THE STREET, THE WATER RELEASED TO THE CULVERT AND CARRIED TO THE CREEK. HE IS NOT TAKING A PIPE TO THE CREEK. ALL THAT IS GOING IN IS THIS CULVERT, THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL THEY ARE RELEASING

TO. >> THE ENTIRE ACREAGE MAY CHANGE WATER FLOW ON HIS PROPERTY BUT THE POINT OF THE DETECTION PLOAW

IS TO PONDIS TO CHANGE THE FLOW. >> IF WE GO THROUGH A CIVIL PROCESS, THE ENGINEERS DISCUSS AND ARGUE AT TIMES.

IF IT DOESN'T WORK, THIS DEVELOPMENT WON'T BE ABLE TO OCCUR LEGALLY. WE WON'T BE ABLE TO SIGN OFF ON THE CIVIL PLANS, THE FINAL PLAT IF IT CAN'T MEET THESE

[01:30:05]

REQUIREMENTS. >> THIS IS ZONING, AND THEN CITY

HANDLES THE ENGINEERING. >> SO AS FAR AS ZONING GOES, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. IS THIS LOGISTICS TRUCKING?

IS THAT WHAT YA'LL ARE. >> DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE.

>> WHAT'S THE SCREENING ON THE BACK SIDE, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO ABUT THE MOBILE HOME PARK?

>> IT WILL BE -- WE HAVE SOME MORE SLIDES.

SO WHERE THE MOBILE HOME PARK IS LOCATED, WHICH IS WHERE MY CURSOR IS, WHAT THEY HAVE PLANNED FOR IS A WROUGHT IRON FENCE WITH STONE COLUMNS AND WITH THAT WROUGHT IRON FENCE AND STONE COLUMNS, THEY ARE DOING A TREE EVERY 30 FEET.

SO THERE'S A TWO SETS OF TREES THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING HERE.

BUT EACH TREE WILL BE PLACED EVERY 30 FEET AND THEN IT IS WROUGHT IRON FENCING WITH STONE COLUMNS.

NOT A MASONRY WALL. >> IS THERE A LIMITATION TO LENGTH OF TIME TRUCKS ARE STORED THERE AND BACKED INTO THOSE SLOTS AND STICK AROUND? I ASSUME THAT IS NOTHING WE

WOULD MONITOR. >> WELL, YOU KNOW, FOR US, WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE END USER IS OR WHAT THAT MIGHT ENENTAIL. THIS IS MORE OF A SPEC BUILDING.

APPROVING IT FOR WAREHOUSE BUT ALSO INDUSTRIAL USE.

THEY MIGHT USE IT FOR ANOTHER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE AND NOT A

WAREHOUSE. >> WWOULD THAT BE ADDRESSED

THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS THEN? >> IT DEPENDS ON WHAT USE THEY ALLULTIMATELY COME IN WITH. THAT MAY TRIGGER US TO COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL IF THEY DO SOMETHING THAT FALLS INTO THE MEDIUM OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE. I CAN SAY GOING BACK TO THE SCREENING, THEY HAVE ONE SMALL SECTION HERE THAT WILL CONTAIN A MASONRY WALL BUT IT IS JUST THIS ONE AREA WHERE MY CURSOR IS.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> ARE WE VOTING ON THE HEIGHT

OF THE BUILDINGS? >> NO.

JUST ZONING. >> ARTICULATION OR ZONING.

>> MARCOS, ONE QUICK CAN HE AND WE WILL GO.

>> AARTICULATION THAT YOU SEE HEIGHTS THE 45 FEET.

>> THE EXISTING FOOTAGE -- >> WE ARE VOTING ON THE HEIGHT

OF THE BUILDING. >> PART OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

>> IF YOU WERE GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING ON THIS SITE RIGHT NOW TODAY WITH THE EXISTING ZONING, YOU COULD ONLY DO 35 FEET.

>> WHAT IS MI MEAN, MARCOS, ON THE ATTACHMENT 2, WITH THE

DIFFERENT STUFF. >> MI HERE, THAT'S GOING TO BE MEDIUM INDUSTRY. AND THEN LI IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

>> AND MH IS THE MOBILE HOME, AND THEN HIGH INDUSTRIAL BEHIND

IT. >> YES, SIR, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

>> I WANTED TO CHECK AND VERIFY. >> ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT EXIT TO GO THE HIGHWAY.

WHAT IS IN THEIR REQUEST AND WHAT IS THE CITY'S POSITION? SURE, AGAIN, I THINK THEY HAVE FULFILLED THE REQUEST FROM CITY COUNCIL AND FROM P&Z FROM WHAT THEY ARE SHOWING HERE.

ORIGINALLY THEY SHOWED AN INGRESS AND EGRESS IN THIS LOCATION. SO 18 WHEELERS ABSOLUTELY COULD EXIT FROM THIS LOCATION. OUR CONCERN WAS ACCELERATION RATE OF TRACTOR-TRAILERS AND HOW MANY TRACTOR-TRAILERS ACCESSING THIS AREA. WHAT WE REQUESTED IS THIS AREA ONLY BE FOR INGRESS, NOT EGRESS. THIS IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ABSOLUTELY PROPOSING. THEY ARE PROPOSING A DECELERATION LANE THAT ONLY ALLOWS FOR INGRESS.

>> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS

[01:35:03]

REQUEST HONORS THAT REQUIREMENT. >> RIGHT.

IF TXDOT AGREES FOR THAT AND ALLOWS FOR THAT RAISED CURB, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY, I DON'T SEE WHY WE WANT GET BEHIND THIS.

BUT THEY ARE PROPOSING A RAISED CURB IN THIS AREA AND, AGAIN, IT WOULD BE PULLED AWAY FROM THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

>> SO IF WE VOTE FOR THIS, ARE WE GUARANTEED THAT WILL HAPPEN?

>> THIS IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE.

THESE IMAGES ARE PART OF THE ORDINANCE.

>> YOU PUT AN IF IN THERE. >> IF TXDOT APPROVES IT.

>> IF THEY DON'T APPROVE, WHAT HAPPENS?

>> THEY CAN'T BUILD THIS. >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> ABSOLUTELY. WHAT THEY DO, THEY LOSE THIS.

THEY WILL STILL HAVE THESE OTHER INGREASE INGRESS AND EGRESS POI.

>> IF YOU ZONE SOMETHING, YOU HAVE DONE THAT FOR LIFE.

>> THAT'S NOT TRUE. THERE'S REZONING.

>> WE CAN'T COME BACK. >> WE ARE HERE TO -- WHAT'S YOUR

QUESTION ABOUT ZONING? >> I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE

YOOUTWHAT WE ARE APPROVING. >> WHAT YOU ARE APPROVING IS SITE PLAN, BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND PROPOSED USE WHICH INCLUDES LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES. ANYTHING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, SUP, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS.

MEDIUM OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES, THEY CAN'T DO THIS.

THAT'S WHERE THE SAYING, STUCK FOR LIFE, THEY HAVE TO COME BACK AND START THIS WHOLE THING OVER AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU. >> JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF TRUCKS THAT THEY HAVE COMING IN AND OUT, IS THERE A TI REQUIRED ON THIS?

>> YES, SIR. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE CIVIL DEPARTMENT, OUR ENGINEER DEPARTMENT. AND THEN THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY, THEY HAVE A PRESENTATION ALSO THAT THEY WILL GO THROUGH SOME OF THOSE DETAILS AS WELL. NOW, GEN, I THINK FROM THE AGAIE APPLICANT STANDPOINT, THE TI DOES NOT CALL FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT OUR STAFF IS ASKING FOR.

I DID ADD IN THIS POWERPOINT SLIDE, I DID ADD A TRIP GENERATION, THIS IS OUT OF THEIR TIA HERE.

THIS GIVES YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF HOW MANY TRIPS THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT ABOUT ON A DAILY BASIS. THEY ARE COMING UP WITH 665 DAILY TRIPS. THAT'S WHAT THIS TABLE BASICALLY EXPLAINS THE USE, THE AMOUNT OF WAREHOUSE THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH IT, AND THEN HOW MANY DAILY TRIPS ARE GOING TO ULTIMATELY OCCUR WITH THIS. NOW, AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ULTIMATE USER, WHO THE ULTIMATE USER IS GOING TO BE.

IT COULD BE A FULFILLMENT STATION.

IT DEPENDS. THIS IS JUST BASED OUT OF A DOCUMENT THAT THEY PROVIDED TO US.

THAT'S HOW WE GET THE TIA. >> MARCOS, DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE A PRESENTATION. HOW ABOUT WE GET THAT REAL QUICK. SO WE CAN GET ALL THE

INFORMATION. >> GOOD EVENING, TONY CREAM.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE GATEWAY 67 LOGISTICS CENTER AND ADDRESS SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP AS WELL AS SOME OF THE THINGS WE HAVE DISCUSSED AT THE RECENT P&Z MEETINGS. WE HAVE SEEN THE SITE PLAN HERE.

I JUST DO WANT TO REITERATE THAT BY STATE LAW, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO INCREASE THE FLOWS ABOVE WHAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY TODAY.

THAT'S HOW THIS DETENTION POND WILL BE DESIGNED AS WE WORK THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS WITH THE CITY ENGINEERS.

THERE ARE THREE P&Z CONDITIONS THAT WERE PUT ON THE SITE.

JUST WANT TO HIT EACH ONE OF THESE IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL.

SO THE FIRST ONE WAS, THERE WAS A REQUEST TO ADD A RIGHT TURN LANE ALONG BOTH ACCESS POINTS NORTH OF THE SOUTHBOUND ON-RAMP.

SOUTH ACCESS POINT HERE, WE HAVE ADDRESSED THAT BY ADDING THIS DECEL LANE. WE THINK IT IS NECESSARY AND HELPS GET THE TRUCKS OFF THE SERVICE ROAD INTO THE SITE.

THE NORTH AUTO ACCESS POINT, THERE WAS A REQUEST TO ADD WIN THERE WE WE ARE RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING RELIEF ON THAT AS THE TXDOT THRESHOLD FOR DECELERATION LANES IS 50

[01:40:04]

ONLY 20% OF WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS.

SO WHAT I AM TALK BEING A DECEL LANE RIGHT HERE.

AT P&Z REQUEST, THIS IS A THREE-WAY STOP.

CARS ENTERING THIS SITE, ANY CAR ENTERING THE SITE WILL BE AT DEAD STOP AND IT IS 487 FEET. THEY ARE NOT TRAVELING THAT FAST FOR A DECEL LANE. WE ARE REQUESTING RELIEF ON THIS DECEL LANE HERE. THE NEXT REQUIREMENT, PAGE THREE OUT OF THE TIA SAYS THE DRIVE HAS MINIMAL DELAY IN ENTERING THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURNING LANE.

GIVEN THE LACK OF A SAFE OR PRACTICAL WAY TO ADD THIS ADDITIONAL TURN LANE, WE ARE REQUESTING RELIEF ON THAT.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP ALL THE TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OFF OF HIGHWAY 67 SERVICE ROAD RATHER THAN ENCOURAGING TRUCKS OR CARS TO COME DOWN TAINMENT AND USE THIS ENTRANCE HERE. BY ADDING THIS LEFT TURN LANE, IT WOULD MAKE ROOM FOR TRUCKS TO COME DOWN HERE AND ENTER FROM THE WEST, WE ARE TRYING TO DISCOURAGE THAT, AND KEEP ALL TRAFFIC OFF THE SERVICE ROAD IN ONE OF THESE FOUR ENTRY OR EXIT POINTS. THE THIRD REQUEST WHICH WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IS THIS CENTER DRIVE.

AS MARCOS MENTIONED, WE ORIGINALLY CAME THIS REQUESTING THIS TO BE AN INGRESS AND EGRESS POINT.

THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT CONCERN ABOUT TRUCKS LEAVING AND TRYING TO HOP ON THE SOUTHBOUND ON-RAMP.

WE CAME BACK AND MODIFIED THIS TO BE INGRESS POINT ONLY.

ENTER THE SITES DOWN THE CENTER AND T TURN LEFT OR RIGHT INTO RESPECTIVE BUILDINGS. WE HAVE ADDRESSED THAT THROUGH -- THERE'S A THREE-FOOT ELEVATION DIFFERENCE FROM THIS CURB UP TO THE HIGHWAY 67 FRONTAGE ROAD.

WE ARE GOING TO PUT LANDSCAPING IN HERE.

PUT A FOUR-INCH CURB, MAXIMUM ALLOWED BY TXDOT.

HERE'S A GRAPHIC OF IT HERE, THREE-FOOT ELEVATION DIFFERENCE.

WE THINK TRUCKS ARE GOING TO BOTTOM OUT.

THERE ARE BOLD TRUCK DRIVERS, BUT I THINK TRYING TO DRIVE UPHILL AND OVER A CURB IS GOING TO BE A GOOD DETERRENT FOR THE TRUCKS TO USE A DIFFERENT EXIT POINT.

THIS WAS DONE BY OUR CIVIL ENGINEERS, YOU ASKED ABOUT THE GRADE. YOU CAN SEE THE GRADE CHANGE GOING UP TO GET BACK TO THE SERVICE ROAD HERE.

WE PLAN TO HAVE DO NOT ENTER SIGNS AND STOP SIGN.

THIS IS THE VISUAL FROM A CAR SITTING AT THE STOP SIGN, YOU CAN SEE HOW HIGH THE FRONTAGE IS TO THE RIGHT.

REALLY DOING ALL WE CAN TO DETER CARS OR TRUCKS FROM EXITING FROM THE CENTER DRIVE. COUPLE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE REMOVED BY P&Z, SIDEWALKS CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE RIGHTS OF WAY, WE JUST DIDN'T THINK IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO PUT SIDEWALKS ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROAD AT 67 AND HAVE PEDESTRIANS TRYING TO CROSS FOUR ACCESS POINTS. SO WE AGREED TO PUT THE SIDEWALKS HERE ALONG SHILOH AND ADD THE TWO AMENITIES AREAS ON THE BALANCE OF THE SITE. THEN THIS WAS ONE OPTION WAS TO REMOVE THE MIDDLE DRIVEWAY, THAT DOESN'T WORK FOR OUR PROJECT, SO WE REALLY WORKED HARD TO TRY TO SOLVE FOR THE INBOUND ONLY.

THEN THE LAST SLIGHT HERE, JUST A COUPLE PIECES OF THE PROJECT.

THIS PROJECT HAS THE ABILITY TO CREATE UP TO 700 EMPLOYEES.

I DO WANT TO MENTION THAT, BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND THE FACT THAT WE ARE ON SEPTIC, IT WILL LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WE HAVE ON SITE.

IT WILL NOT BE A BIG FULFILLMENT CENTER WITH TONS OF CARS AND TRUCKS GOING. IT WILL BE PHYSICALLY LIMITED.

IT WILL BE A LIGHT MANUFACTURING OR DISTRIBUTION TYPE USE.

AGAIN, WITH CERTAIN LIMITATIONS. THE LOCATION IS LOCATED IN THE INDUSTRIAL FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MODULE.

THE QUALITY OF THE PROPERTY, IT SHARES THE SAME ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES AS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL. AESTHETICS ARE CONSISTENT WITH HIGHER QUALITY USES. THERE'S A MENTION OF THIS BEING A SPEC PROJECT EARLIER. I THINK THAT CAN SCARE A LOT OF PEOPLE. THE BUILDING WILL BE EMPTY.

BUT THE -- I'M NOT SURE IF YOU FOLLOW THE INDUSTRIAL MARKET, IT IS EXTREMELY HOT. THE ABSORPTION IN DFW LAST YEAR WAS TWICE THE AM OF PRODUCT DELIVERED.

70% OF ALL SPACE THAT WAS DELIVERED LAST YEAR WAS LEASED BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. SO REALLY THE POINT THERE IS TO WIN THESE NEW COMPANIES AND WIN THESE JOBS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE PRODUCT ON THE GROUND READY TO LEASE.

WE HAVE TALKED TO KYLE ABOUT SOME OF THE INCREASE HE HAS BEEN GETTING FOR COMPANIES LOOKING AT MIDLOTHIAN.

[01:45:02]

SO WE THINK THIS WILL FILL THAT NEED.

LAST BUT NOT LEAST, MY FIRM KBC, WE ARE THE DEVELOPER, OWNER, WE ARE THE LEASING AGENT. WE ARE VERY INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT START TO FINISH AND MAKING SURE THAT IT SUCCEEDS.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS

IF YOU LIKE. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. >> PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

COUNCIL, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? >> DO WE CURRENTLY NOT HAVE A STOP SIGN ON SHILOH AND THE SERVICE ROAD TO 67.

>> CORRECT. >> NOT ONE THERE IN FRONT OF THE

GAS STATION. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH, INCLUDING THE THREE ADDITIONS BY

THE P&Z BOARD. >> SECOND.

>> DOES THAT ALSO INCLUDE THE TWO ADDITIONS BY STAFF?

>> YES. >> A CLARIFICATION OF WHAT IS BEING ADDED, THE DEVELOPER ASKING FOR WAIVER.

>> DECELERATION RIGHT TURN LANE, LEFT TURN LANE OFF OLD HIGHWAY

67 [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE HAVE STAFF TO THE

SIDEWALKS. >> WITH THE ADDITION OF THE TWO

STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. >> IN ADDITION TO THE STAFF

RECOMMENDATIONS. >> HEY, HUD.

WOULD YOU BE OPPOSED TO ADDING LANDSCAPE WALL ON THAT INGRESS LANE? THAT WOULD PREVENT ANYTHING FROM GOING UP THE HILL, THREE FOOT LANDLANDSCAPE WALL.

>> THE LANDSCAPE WALL, THAT IS IN TXDOT'S RIGHT-OF-WAY.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TXDOT WILL ALLOW.

>> OKAY. >> NO. 2, STAFF REPORT, IS IN CONFLICT, WE HAVE TO PICK ONE OR THE OTHER.

IF YOU WANT THE SIDEWALKS ALONG THE HIGHWAY, YOU COULD ADD THAT ONE. NO. 2 IS CONFLICT.

>> WITH NO. 3. >> ON P&Z.

NO. 2, REMOVE IT ALL TOGETHER. P&Z WANTED IT ALIGNED.

>> SO, HUD, JUST P&Z? >> AND WITH THE NO. 2 ON THE

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. >> YOU TAKE 2 ON STAFF OR 3 ON

P&Z, YOU CAN'T DO BOTH. >> GO WITH P&Z, THAT'S WHAT I

WANT. >> I MAKE MOTION TO APPROVE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY P&Z, THE THREE RECOMMENDATION.

>> IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH? >> NA[INAUDIBLE].

>> JUST SO I AM CLEAR, THAT MEANS THEY ARE DOING THE AMENITIES OVER THE SIDEWALKS, RIGHT? IT IS APPROVING AS PRESENTED. OTHER THAN THE SIDEWALKS.

>> CORRECT. THEY ARE STILL DOING THE SIDEWALK THAT RUNS ALONG SHILOH ROAD.

>> JUST NOT ALONG THE HIGHWAY. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM ON

THE SAME. >> IF SIDEWALKS ARE WANTED

EVERYWHERE ELSE -- >> NO.

>> SECOND. >> SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH THE P&Z THREE RECOMMENDATIONS

[01:50:08]

>> THAT'S FINE. THEY ARE INCLUDED UNDER THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PACKAGE. SECOND, MOTION HAS BEEN SEC SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES, 5-2. >> THANK YOU.

[2022-062 ]

>> THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF 14TH STREET EAST RIDGE DRIVE. IT IS ABOUT 1.5 ACRES IN SIZE.

THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DOES SHOW THIS IS A PART OF THE URBAN HIGH DENSITY MODULE. HIGH DENSITY MODULE DOES INCLUDE RETAIL OFFICE SURFACES AS SECONDARY COMPONENT.

SO THIS PROPOSED USE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MODULE.

THE DEVELOP MANY DOES INCLUDE THREE 4,000 SQUARE FEET BUILDINGS FOR OFFICE AND PERSONAL SERVICES.

THE ELEVATIONS INCLUDE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION BUT IT DOES LACK THE MINIMUM ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS IN SOME AREAS. IN ADDITION, THE ORDINANCE ALSO REQUIRES THAT THE SAME DETAILING ON ALL THE FOUR SIDES OF THE BUILDING BE REQUIRED. SO WHEN YOU HAVE A REAR-FACING BUILDING, AND MAYBE THIS SLIDE MIGHT SHOW YOU BRE BETTER, RIGHT-OF-WAY, PARK, OR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, ALL FOUR SIDES HAVE TO SAME THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL.

THAT'S WHEN THAT IS REQUIRED. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, ALL OF THE BUILDINGS FACE EITHER TOWN HOMES OR THEY FACE APARTMENTS OR THEY FACE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

ZONING ORDINANCE ALSO DOES REQUIRE A MASONRY WALL WHEN YOU ARE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THIS DOES AND IS ADJACENT TO TOWN HOMES AND APARTMENTS.

INSTEAD OF MISERY WALL, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SIX-FOOT ONORNAMENT. THEY ARE ASKING FOR TWO VARIANCES, BUILDING DESIGN AND SCREENING.

IT IS P&Z COMMISSION MEETING, THEY DID UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMEND APPROVAL WHICH INCLUDES BOTH VARIANCES.

THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE BUILDING AS THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED, IT ALLOWS FOR THAT BUILDING TO BE APPROVED AND ALSO DOES NOT REQUIRE THE MASONRY WALL.

IT ALLOWS FOR THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE WITH THE VEGETATIVE SC SCREEN. AND WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY

QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> FOR THAT AREA, I PERSONALLY LIKE THE WROUGHT IRON WITH THE VEGETATIVE SCREEN.

IT IS A MORE OPEN LOOK. BUT HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE

BUILDING VARIANCE, IF YOU WOULD. >> SURE.

SO FOR INSTANCE, THIS RIGHT HERE IS A REAR ELEVATION LOCATED UNDER BUILDING TWO. THE BACK OF IT, AND YOU SEE HOW WE HAVE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, THEY ARE ADHERING TO THE VERTICAL ARTICULATION BUT NOT ADHERING TO THE HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION.

YOU THINK, WE ARE IN THE REAR, WHY WOULD YOU NEED HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION. WHEN YOU ARE BACKING UP TO -- THIS IS HOW THE CODE IS WRITTEN, WHEN BACKING UP TO RESIDENTIAL

[01:55:03]

>> THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE. >> MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. ITEM IS CLOSED.

COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT HERE?

DO YOU WISH OR COMMENT? >> NO, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I WILL SAY THAT BUILDING NO. 2 THAT MARCOS JUST POINTED OUT WITH THE VERTICAL ARTICULATION BUT NOT HORIZONTAL DOES FACE THE SCREENING WALL THAT WE ARE PROPOSING. SO THERE IS A VISUAL SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BACK OF THAT BUILDING AND THE APARTMENTS.

BUILDING ONE, WHICH I DON'T THINK WAS SHOWN IN THIS PRESENTATION, DOES HAVE ADDITIONAL ARTICULATION THAT DOES FACE 14TH STREET. SO AND THEN BUILDING THREE HAS NOT BEEN DESIGNED YET BUT IT WILL HAVE ARTICULATION PLUS THE SCREENING WALL FACING THE TOWN HOMES.

WHAT WE DID FOR THE ARTICULATIOE ELEVATIONS? WE ADDED -- THE CREAM HE REALERL ESTATE BUILDING IS BUILDING NO.

1, THE REAR FACES 14TH STREET. THE REAR OF THE BUILDING, WE HAVE ELEVATIONS THAT SHOW THAT THERE IS VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION ON THAT BUILDING. SO BUILDING NO. 1, REAR ELEVATION, YOU HAVE THE VERTICAL ARTICULATION PLUS THE HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION WITH THE POPPED OUT COLUMNS AND RECESS AND AWNINGS THAT FACES 14TH. THE THREE-FOOT RULE DOES KNOTS COMPLY HERE. WE ARE ONLY BUMPED OUT 18 INCHES BUT WE ADDED ADDITIONAL BUMPOUTS TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT.

>> YOU SAID BUILDING THREE ISN'T DESIGNED YET, BUT ALL THREE

BUILDINGS WILL BE THE SAME. >> THE SAME ARCHITECTURE.

>> CAN WE GO BACK TO THE COLORED ELEVATIONS.

THIS IS BUILDING ONE, THE REAL ESTATE BUILDING.

THE SALON BUILDING IS BUILDING TWO.

YOU CAN SEE THEY ARE SIMILAR IN COMPOSITION.

BUILDING THREE WILL MATCH. IT WILL BE DIFFERENT TO STAND OUT BUT STILL HAVE THE SAME CONCEPT.

AGAIN, BUILDING ONE IS ALREADY LEASED.

WE HAVE IT LEASED TO REAL ESTATE COMPANY.

THE OTHER HALF IS GOING TO BE OFFICE USE.

AND THEN BUILDING TWO IS THE SALON, ALSO ALREADY LEASED OR LEASE PENDING APPROVAL, OBVIOUSLY.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> HE IS COMPENSATING IN OTHER WAYS. NORMALLY I WOULD NEED MAYBE ONE BUMPOUT, HE HAS DONE, FOR INSTANCE, HERE, HE DID THREE BUMP-OUTS THERE. THE ONE BUMP-OUT WOULD HAVE TO BE THREE AND A HALF FEET BUT HE IS DOING 18 INCHES.

>> THERE IS -- THERE ARE SOME -- LIKE IN THE REAL ESTATE BUILDING, THE THE GRAY PANELING WHERE THE SIGNAGE IS, THAT DOES COME OUT THREE FEET. BUT SOME OF THE OTHER SMALLER ONES AT THE END CAPS, WE ONLY COME OUT 12 TO 18 INCHES.

>> MARCOS, CURIOSITY, TALKING ABOUT PARKING SPACES.

>> PARKING IS REALLY GOOD HERE. >> YOU ALWAYS TALK ABOUT

PARKING. >> THEY ACTUALLY MET THE STANDARD REQUIREMENT. I THINK THEY WENT A LITTLE BIT OVER. THEY DIDN'T PASS THE 25% THRESHOLD. IT IS WHEN I HAVE FOLKS THAT GO OVER THE THRESHOLD OR BELOW THAT AMOUNT THAT IT REQUIRES COUNCIL'S APPROVAL. .

>> COUNCIL? TAKE A MOTION.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> PLEASE VOTE.

>> ITEM PASSES 7-0. AT THIS TIME, IT IS 8 O'CLOCK, WE WILL TAKE A 10-MINUTE BREAK AND BE BACK AT 8:10.

[2022-063 ]

[2022-064 ]

[02:01:01]

>> CORRECT. SO -- MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION TO --

[2022-065 ]

>> PREVIOUS ITEM, IN ADDITION TO LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS, THIS ALSO DEALS WITH THE SECONDARY ACCESS WE ARE BRINGING FORWARD AT THIS TIME IN PART, WE KNEW THERE WERE SOME CHANGE ORDERS COMING. THE ORIGINAL PROJECT ALSO WAS AWARDED AFTER WE HAD SUBMITTED OUR BUDGET TO COUNCIL AND SO THAT'S THE REASON WE ARE BRINGING IT FORWARD AT THE TIME.

ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.

>> MOVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE, SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

[2022-066 ]

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, SO THE FIRST TIME IS WHAT THE GARBAGE AND RECYCLING CONTRACT WAS APPROVED, THERE WAS A CALCULATION ERROR THAT REMOVED THE ADD ADMIN FEE FROM THOSE R.

WE ARE TRYING TO ADD BACK THE 101 ADMIN FEE TO CORRECT THAT ERROR. SO THIS WILL ONLY AFFECT CITIZENS THAT ARE GETTING THEIR BILLS DIRECTLY FROM THE CITY.

THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN BILLED DIRECTLY FROM WASTE CONNECTIONS HAVE BEEN GETTING BILLED THE PROPER AMOUNT FROM THE START.

AND THEN ALSO IF COUNCIL WILL REMEMBER, WE -- COUNCIL UPDATED

[02:05:05]

SO WE ARE UPDATING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WITH THE NEW WATER AND SEWER RATES. WITH THAT, I'LL BE GLAD TO

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE, SECOND.

[2022-067 ]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THIS CONTRACT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE HAD IN PLACE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. THE LAST ONE WENT FOR FIVE YEARS AND HAS NOT BEEN BID FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

WE WERE OUT OF RENEWALS. SO WENT OUT TO BID IN DECEMBER AND THE CONTRACT CAME BACK. IT CAME BACK HIGHER AND WE WERE ABLE TO WHITTLE IT DOWN TO 334570.

THAT IS $100,000 OVER WHAT WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THE MOWING CONTRACT CURRENTLY. AND WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THIS INCLUDES ADDITIONAL 15 PROPERTIES THAT WERE NOT ON THE PREVIOUS CONTRACT THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED OVER THE YEARS. WITH ADDITIONAL CYCLES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE THAT HAVE COME UP DUE TO COMPLAINTS AND CONCERNS FROM THE COMMUNITY. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, MR. DARRACH. >> HOW MANY RESPONDENTS DID WE

HAVE FOR THE PROPOSAL? >> WE RECEIVED ONE BID.

BUT WE HAD TEN PLUS PEOPLE ACTUALLY -- WELL, A LOT MORE THAN THAT LOOK AT IT BUT OVER TEN DIFFERENT COMPANIES PULLED IT. BUT THEY DID NOT TURN IN A BID.

>> AND THE ONE COMPANY THAT PUT IN THE BID IS THE ONE CURRENTLY

SERVICING THE CONTRACT? >> IT IS.

>> HOW LONG IS THIS CONTRACT FOR?

>> THIS CONTRACT IS FOR FIVE YEARS IN TOTAL.

TWO-YEAR CONTRACT WITH THREE ONE-YEAR RENEWALS.

IT IS NOT A STRAIGHT FIVE YEARS. IT IS TWO YEARS, AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE COME BACK TO COUNCIL EACH YEAR TO RENEW IT.

>> NOW, CHRIS AND I SPOKE THIS WEEK AND I KNOW IT IS KIND OF LATE NOTICE, BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY INCLINATION AS TO WHY WE ONLY

RECEIVED ONE. >> FROM JUST A YOU FEW FEW CONVERSATIONS, EARTH TONE CAN'T GET ENOUGH STAFFING, THEY HAVE COME BACK ON SOME OF THEIR MOWING.

I KNOW THE PERSON WHO IS DOING OURS RIGHT NOW THIS YEAR, HE WAS SHARING STAFF WITH ANOTHER COMPANY BECAUSE THEY WERE STRUGGLING. BUT HE CURRENTLY FEELS LIKE HE HAS ENOUGH STAFF THAT THIS IS HIS NO. 1 CONTRACT, THAT HE CAN HANDLE THIS ONE. BUT I REACHED OUT TO FOUR DIFFERENT COMPANIES MYSELF THAT I HAVE USED IN MULTIPLE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE DONE WORK AND I DO NOT KNOW WHY THEY DIDN'T BID ON IT. I REACHED OUT TO SMITH LANDSCAPE, TWO OTHER COMPANIES THAT HAD DROPPED OFF CARDS AND THEN WITMORE AND SONS. THEY PULLED IT.

THEY RESPONDED TO ME AND SAID, THANKS, I WILL GO LOOK AT IT.

>> WHEN DOES OUR CURRENT MOWING CONTRACT EXPIRE?

>> IT EXPIRES THE END OF THIS MONTH.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> YES, SIR, THE NEW PART ON ITSELF IS 44,000, ALMOST $45,000.

SO IT IS -- YOU KNOW, THAT'S MOWING EVERY BIT OF THAT PARK.

>> DOES OUR CURRENT CONTRACT HAVE A MONTH-TO-MONTH EXTENSION OPTION? SHOULD WE NOT APPROVE THIS AT

THIS TIME. >> I DON'T BELIEVE IT DOES.

I MEAN, I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS CALLED OUT.

IT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO WORK OUT WITH THE CONTRACTOR.

>> THE ONLY REASON I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS IS, YES, I KNOW THAT THERE'S STAFF SHOR SHORTAGS ACROSS ALL TRADES.

I KNOW WE HAVE HAD ISSUES IN OUR FINISH MOWING OVER THE YEARS,

[02:10:01]

AND I WOULD LIKE TO, THIS IS WHAT CHRIS AND I SPOKE ABOUT THIS WEEK, I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ZONE OUT THE CITY AND THEN BID IT OUT IN THREE TO FIVE ZONES, NOT ALLOWING THE SAME CONTRACTOR TO TAKE MORE THAN ONE ZONE, IN HOPES THAT THE SMALLER COMPANIES THAT COULD PICK UP CERTAIN AREAS WOULD THEN DO SO AND BEN IF THE BENEFIT OURCITY AND RESIDENTS.

>> WE HAVE NORTH AND SOUTH AND WE ALSO HAVE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE FOR ROUGH CUT. A LOT OF THE SMALLER ONES DON'T WANT TO BID ON MUNICIPAL WORK. THEY DON'T GET PAID ENOUGH, THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH STAFF AND THEY HAVE TO CARRY SO MUCH INSURANCE.

THAT'S WHAT WEEDS OUT A LOT OF THE COMPANIES.

WE WANT A MILLION, MILLION FIVE, TWO MILLION DOLLARS INSURANCE.

THEY DON'T WANT TO CARRY THAT. AND WHEN I WAS THIS BUSINESS, I WOULDN'T TOUCH A CITY. I WOULD NOT EVEN BID ON A MUNICIPAL CONTRACT. IT IS JUST A LOT OF WORK AND IT IS A LOT OF PAPERWORK AND HEADACHE.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

>> I DID REACH OUT TO ONE, THIS IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, I REACHED OUT TO ONE OF THE LARGER ONES HERE IN TOWN AND THEIR RESPONSE WAS, THE CHEAPEST BID ALWAYS WINS THE CITY.

JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY WANTED BECAUSE THEY HAVE LIMITED AVAILABLE RESOURCES, THAT THEY WANTED TO COMMIT TO.

I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. I WOULD SAY THE -- THERE'S ONLY A FEW CHOICES HERE. ONE, WE GO WITH THIS AND WE PUNT IT DOWN TWO YEARS, POTENTIALLY AND WE GET WHAT WE HAVE BEEN GETTING. TWO, WE ASK THE CONTRACTOR FOR MONTH-TO-MONTH EXTENSION AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO IF WE SPLIT IT UP. THREE, WE START MOWING IT OURSELVES OR, FOUR, WE CONSIDER THE COST OF MOWING IT OURSELVES AND MAYBE RE-EVALUATE HOW MUCH WE WOULD BE BUILDING TO PAY FOR

A SERVICE PROVIDER TO DO IT. >> IT CAN BE 700,000.

>> IF LOXAHACHE IS PAYING 700, WE COULD PAY 450, IF WE COULD FOCUS GROUP IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

I HATE TO BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONLY ONE.

WAS IT TWO YEARS AGO NOW, BEFORE I WAS IN COUNCIL, WE HAD PUT OUT A MOWING CONTRACT AND WE GOT ONE OR TWO RESPONDENTS TOO HIGH AND WE YANKED IT. WE THOUGHT MAYBE IT WAS A BAD

TIME TO ASK. >> IT WAS PUT BACK AND THEN PUT BACK OUT AGAIN AND WE HAD TWO RESPONDENTS YET AGAIN.

AND WE WENT WITH THE LOWER BID. I HAVE MULTIPLE CONTRACTORS THAT HAVE ASKED ME TO NOT ASK THEM BECAUSE THE CITY TAKES THE LOWER BID. IT IS NOT WORTH IT.

IT TAKES A SPECIAL COMPANY TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THIS KIND OF WORK AND KEEP UP WITH IT AT THE LEVEL THEY GET, YOU KNOW.

I UNDERSTAND HOW -- I USED TO RUN THE MOWING CONTRACT IN ARLINGTON, THAT'S 99 SQUARE MILES, AND IT WAS A NIGHTMARE.

AND WE HAD MULTIPLE CONTRACTORS, AND IT WAS -- YOU DO NOT WANT AN ARRAINY SEASON, IT IS THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU.

I WILL JUST TELL YOU, YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS HIGHER THAN YOU WANT TO DO, THEN WE REDUCE SERVICES. THAT'S OUR OPTION.

>> I DON'T THINK HIGHER. I WAS JUST SAYING MAYBE THIS WOULD BE AN INSTANCE WHERE HIGHER WOULD BE JUSTIFIED.

MAYBE TOO LOW AND THAT'S WHY NO ONE WANTS TO TOUCH IT.

>> IT IS THE TIMES. IT IS A THIRD HIGHER THAN IT WAS. I SPOKE TO THE CONTRACTOR.

HIM BUYING THE SAME MOTHER IS $2,000 MORE SINCE THIS DECEMBER.

>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> THEY ARE MOWING -- WE HAVE 15 ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES THAT WE HAVE ADDED.

SO WE HAVE ADDED OVER THE LAST YEARS, THAT'S JUST WHAT WE CAN CALL OUT. THERE'S PROPERTY ADDED ALL THE TIME. BUT DIFFERENT -- TWO DIFFERENT AREAS ON ONWARD, 8TH STREET BRIDGE OVER HIGHWAY 67, 9TH STREET, ALL FOUR CORNERS OVER 287, GEORGE HOPPER, SPORTS PARK,

[02:15:07]

THE BIG FIELD. >> IS THAT COVERING THE

COMMUNITY PARK? >> IT IS IN THIS BID.

THEY HAVE NOT -- THEY MOW THE CURRENT PARK, YES, SIR.

THEY DO ALL THE COMMON AREAS AND OUR STAFF DOES ALL THE FIELDS.

SO AN ADDITIONAL $44,800 TO MOW THAT AROUND BOTH PONDS.

>> PER YEAR. >> PER YEAR.

COUNCIL, DO YA'LL HAVE ANY COMMENTS? IT IS UNFORTUNATE, I THINK PARKS AND HEATHER IS BUSINESS IS BUSYT IS NOT DESIRABLE THING BUT I THINK WE SHOULD GO FORWARD WITH THE TWO-YEAR CONTRACT. WE ARE NOT STUCK IN THE TWO YEARS, IT GIVES HER TIME TO COME UP WITH SOME OF THE SUGGESTIONS LIKE WALTER JUST SAID. WE SHOULD BUY TIME.

IT IS UNFORTUNATE, BUT IT IS THE LEAST --

>> IT IS WHERE WE FELL OUT ON BID TIME.

IT WAS A TERRIBLE TIME TO HAVE TO BID OUT.

>> I SECOND THE MAYOR'S MOTION. >> MAKE A MOTION, APPROVED.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? IF NOT, PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 7-0. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

>> BY THE WAY, I HAVE BEEN HEARING ONLY GREAT THINGS ABOUT THE PARKS. YA'LL HAD A GREAT RIBBON

CUTTING. >> I HEAR HAPPY CHILDREN.

[2022-068 ]

>> THOSE TWO ARE TIED TOGETHER, 2022-068 CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 GENERAL FUND BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000.00 FROM THE UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE FOR THE MANICURED MOWING SERVICES CONTRACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 102, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE; APPROPRIATING VARIOUS AMOUNTS THEREOF; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> WELL, AS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, THIS WAS NOT A BUDGETED ITEM SO WE ARE PROPOSING THE FUNDS COME FROM THE GENERAL FUND FUND BALANCE. I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> OR WE CAN GO STRAIGHT TO

MOTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> PLEASE VOTE.

[2022-069 ]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL. LET ME INTRODUCE NICK HARP, CONTROL COMMANDER, OUR STAFF MEMBER THAT HAS BROUGHT THESE BIDS TOGETHER. OVER THE RADIO PROGRAM INTERNALLY. WORKS ON OUR RADIO TEAM AND HE, AS WE GO ALONG, MY STAFF IS GOING TO BE COMING UP AND DOING MORE AND MORE OF THESE PRESENTATIONS AS THEY GROW IN THEIR EXPERIENCE FOR US. HE IS WILLINGLY HERE.

NOT MY BODYGUARD, BUT GOING TO PRESENT TO YOU GUYS SO THEY HAVE BEEN BECOME MORE COMFORTABLE AND KNOWN BY COUNCIL AND DOING MORE

PRESENTATIONS. >> THANKS, CHIEF, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. ON THE AGENDA ITEM BEFORE WE HAVE THE PROPOSED PURCHASE OF 3N ADDITION TO 7 MOBILE RADIOS THAT GO INSIDE THE CARS. BASICALLY WHAT THIS IS WILL ACCOMPLISH, ALLOW US TO INDIVIDUALLY ASSIGN PORTABLE RADIOS TO THE OFFICERS AND THERE'S NUMEROUS BENEFITS TO THAT BUT ONE OF THE PRIMARY BENEFITS IS IT ALLOWS AN ADDITIONAL SAFETY FEATURE. ALL OF THESE RADIOS HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF DISPLAYING TO DISPATCHERS ON THE OTHER END OF IT WHO IS ACTUALLY COMMUNICATING WHEN IT IS INDIVIDUALLY ASSIGNED. CURRENTLY UNDER OUR DEPLOYMENT, OFFICERS ARE SHARING RADIOS, CHECKING THOSE OUT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SHIFT. IN MOST CASES, SO THE RADIO NUMBERS ARE IDENTIFIED BY THE ASSET TAG ON THE RADIO AND NOT -- IT IS NOT EASILY IDENTIFIABLE ON WHO IT IS THAT IS COMMUNICATING. SO OBVIOUSLY IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION, WHEN AN OFFICER TRIES TO COMMUNICATE, IF THEY CAN'T GET OUT THEIR CALL SIGN NOTER NT CLEAR, IF THAT RADIO IS HITTING THE SYSTEM, IT WILL DISPLAY UNIQUE IDENTIFIER WILL BE

[02:20:04]

THAT'S THE PRIMARY BENEFIT BUT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL TO THAT AS WELL. THE 7 RADIOS THAT ARE GOING INTO THE VEHICLES ARE BUDGETED THROUGH SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL VEHICLES WE HAVE IN OUR BUDGET THIS YEAR AS WELL AS SOME ON THE REPLACEMENT PLAN. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS.>> COUNCIL? >> [INAUDIBLE].

>> THIS NUMBER IS NOT BUDGETED FOR.

USING SURPLUS FUNDS OR OTHER FUNDS THAT YOU HAVE GOT TO PAY

FOR IT? >> YES, SIR, IT DESCRIBES A LITTLE BIT ON THE FINANCIAL IMPACT.

BASICALLY, THERE ARE SOME OF TH. SOME THE OF THE PORTABLE RADIOE BBUDGETED FOR POSITIONS. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE NUMBER, 664-1291 TO BE ANTICIPATED SAVINGS, TO INCLUDE

PERSONNEL SERVICES. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE, SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES, 7-0. >> THANK YOU.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION ]

>> AT THIS TIME, WE ARE GOING TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

COUNCIL WILL CONVENE PURSUANT TO THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS ARE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION BUT ANY AND ALL ACTION IS TAKEN IN REGULAR SESSION AND WE WILL BE DOING SECTION 551.087, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. DELIBERATION REGARDING COMMERCIAL OR FINANCIAL INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM A BUSINESS PROSPECT AND/OR TO DELIBERATE THE OFFER OF A FINANCIAL OR OTHER INCENTIVE TO A BUSINESS PROSPECT.

SO AT 8:31, WE STAND ADJOURNED TO EXECUTIVE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.