[00:00:01]
>> MAYOR: GOOD AFTERNOON. IT IS 6 P.M., TUESDAY, MAY 24TH.
I CALL THE SESSION OF MIDLOTHIAN CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER.
THE INVOCATION WILL BE GIVEN BY THE PASTOR OF THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF MIDLOTHIAN, PASTOR PRINCETON.
>> LET US PRAY. PRECIOUS AND GOOD GOD, OH, HOW WE GIVE YOU THANKS. LORD WE GIVE YOU THANKS FOR LIFE WE GIVE YOU THANKS FOR THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY, CALLED MIDLOTHIAN. GOD OF HEAVEN I PRAY TODAY THAT YOU WILL OPEN THE WINDOWS OF HEAVEN, POUR DOWN YOUR SPIRIT UPON THIS CITY, UPON THE MAYOR, UPON THIS CHAMBER, UPON EVERYONE THAT LIVES IN THIS PLACE, MAY YOUR BLESSES BE UPON THEM, O, GOD. WE PRAY FOR PROTECTION AROUND THIS CITY. WE PRAY THAT YOU WILL PROSPER IT, THAT YOU CAUSE BLESSINGS TO BE UPON IT.
AS WE ASK FOR ALL THESE MANY BLESSINGS FOR OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY, WE PAUSE RIGHT NOW TO REMEMBER OUR SIBLINGS AND NEIGHBORS WHO ARE MOURNING, WHO ARE WEEPING.
THE TEARS THAT THEY ARE WEEPING, O, GOD, CAN ONLY BE WIPED AWAY BY YOU. WE ASK YOUR COMFORT UPON THEM RIGHT NOW. BRING ORDER AND PEACE, MAY YOUR PEACE REIGN AND WE ASK THAT SAME PEACE FOR OUR CITY, F FOR OUR COUNTY, FOR OUR STATE. FOR OUR BELOVED COUNTRY.
AND FOR YOUR WORLD, O, GOD, BLESS THE DELIBERATIONS TONIGHT THAT EVERYTHING THAT WILL BE DONE HERE WILL GIVE YOU GLORY.
>> 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.
UNDER THE TEXAS FLAG, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD AND ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
>> MAYOR: WE DO GO PAUSE AND REFLECTION OF NE VALDI THAT HAS HAPPENED THERE. 2022-206 ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO NEWLY ELECTED COUNCIL MEMBER PLACE 4.
WAY DOWNSTAIRS, 2022-207 PROCLAMATIONS HONORING THE GIRL SCOUT GOLD AWARD RECIPIENTS.
[00:05:10]
>> MAYOR: TONIGHT WE HONOR THE HARD WORK AND DEDICATION OF FOUR GIRL SCOUTS OF THE NORTHEAST TEXAS COUNCIL WHO HAVE EARNED THE GIRL SCOUT GOLD AWARD. FIRST, DENI DEVICO WHO PLANNED AND COORDINATE THE TWO ACCESSIBLE GARDEN CENTERS PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR RESIDENTS TO ENJOY THE OUTDOORS WHILE SUPPORTING THEIR PHYSICAL NEEDS AND MENTAL WELLNESS.
WHITNEY, WHOSE SERVICE PROJECT ENTAILED THE CREATION OF A NEW THEATER COMPANY, THE TRUPE THEATER, ACCESSIBLE TO EVERYONE AND OFFERING A PLACE FOR YOUNG ACTORS TO HONE THEIR CRAFT.
>> MAYOR: AND SAMANTHA IS NOT HERE, OKAY.
WE HAVE ONE GIRL THAT IS NOT WITH US.
CAMDA WHIRLLY WHO WORKED WITH SUCCESS FOR EVERY COMMUNITY TO CONSTRUCT TWO LARGE SHELVING UNITS AND DEVELOP A SORTING SYSTEM FOR DONATIONS TO THEIR THRIFT STORE AT THE OUTLET.
THE EFFICIENCY OF PROCESSING OF DONATIONS HAS BEEN GREATLY INCREASED AND SALES HAVE BEEN BOOSTED LEADING TO AN INCREASE IN FUNDING FOR CHILDREN'S CAMPS AND PROGRAMS. CAMDEN.
>> MAYOR: APPLAUSE FOR ALL OF THEM, PLEASE.
THIS IS THE HIGHEST AWARD FOR A GIRL SCOUTS.
CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. THE CITY COUNCIL INVITES
CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCI >> MAYOR: TO COME AT THIS TIME.
WE HAVE NO ONE SIGNED UP. CONSENT AGENDA.
ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION WITHOUT SEPARATE DISCUSSION. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE IT AND SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.
CONSENT AGENDA PASSES 7-0. THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO OPEN FOUR ITEMS. THERE WILL BE CONTINUED. I WILL OPEN ITEMS 2022-216, 2022-220, 2022-221, 2022-222. DO I HAVE A MOTION.
>> SO MOVED. >> DO I HAVE A SECOND? PLEASE VOTE. ALL THEE ITEMS WILL BE MOVED TO THE JUNE 28TH COUNCIL SESSION. I OPEN ITEM, 2022-214 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 32 BY CHANGING THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING AND AMENDING THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1371 WEST MAIN STREET MARCOS.
>> 7 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE AT CHASE BANK LOCATION WHICH HAS TOTAL OF 42 STALLS. THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT THESE SPACES ARE NEEDED DUE TO CONGESTION ISSUES AT THIS SITE.
THEY FEEL THIS WILL HELP WITH PARKING AVAILABILITY,
[00:10:05]
CIRCULATION FOR BOTH CHASE AND THE STARBUCKS LOCATION THAT'S LOCATED TO THE NORTH. HERE IS A LOWT LAYOUT OF THE PD SPACES. THIS REQUEST WILL INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SPACES TO A TOTAL OF 49 SPACES.THERE ARE ABOUT 11 EMPLOYEES ON SITE AND THEY DO EXPECT ABOUT 30 TO 35 CUSTOMERS DURING PEAK TIMES.
THIS IS THE ONLY LOCATION WITHIN A TEN-MILE RADIUS FOR CHASE BANK. HERE'S THE CURRENT AREA THAT WILL CONTAIN THE NEW PARKING SPOTS.
1700 SQUARE FEET OF LANDSCAPING WILL BE REMOVED.
NEW SHRUBS, GROUND COVER, BOULDERS AND ORNAMENTAL GRASSES.
THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, THE AREA SHADED IN GREEN THAT IS WHERE THE UPDATES WILL GO FOR LANDSCAPING.
SPLIT RAIL FENCING WHICH CURRENTLY IS MADE OF WOOD MATERIAL, THAT WILL ALL BE REMOVED.
AND REPLACED WITH A CONCRETE SPLIT RAIL FENCE.
HERE'S AN OVERHEAD SHOT OF THE LOCATION WHERE MY POINTER IS RIGHT NOW, THAT'S WHERE THOSE SPACES WILL GO.
YOU CAN SEE HUE HOW SHE IS CARK UP WHERE STARBUCKS IS NOT ALLOWING THESE VEHICLES TO EXIT. HERE'S ANOTHER INTERESTING SHOT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE CUEING, EVEN IF YOU DO HAVE PARKING ON THIS SIDE, NOT SURE HOW MUCH THAT WILL ACTUALLY HELP.
STAFF DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, THAT ACTUALLY CAME FROM STARBUCKS TO THE NORTH.
ON MAY 17TH, THE COMMISSION DID UNANIMOUSLY.
STAFFRECOMMEND DENIAL AS WE FEEL THE AREA IS ALREADY OVERPARKED.
WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE MIQUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>> WHAT'S GOING ON THE FRONT PARKING LOT THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SO TIME, NO DOUBT BLOCKING INGR INGRES AND EGRESSD
BLOCKING PARKING SPACES? >> AT THIS POINT, THEY HAVE PULLED A PERMIT. I CAN LET THE APPLICANT COME UP AND PROBABLY EXPLAIN THIS BETTER.
BUT THEY ARE HAVING A LOT OF CONCRETE FAILURES IN THIS AREA, SO THEY ARE COMPLETELY REDOING ALL OF THE UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE IN THIS LOCATION. SO THEY HAVE TO CLOSE THE PARKING LOT AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT.
BUT THE PARKING LOT WILL OPEN UP.
THIS HE WILL HAVE A TOTAL OF 42 AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES.
>> TWO QUESTIONS TO THAT. YOU SAID, AT THIS POINT THEY PULLED A PERMIT AND SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
HOW LONG HAS THAT BEEN BLOCKED? >> PROBABLY I SHOULD LET THE APPLICANT COME UP AND SPEAK ON THAT.
I DO KNOW THAT THERE IS A CURRENT PERMIT THAT HAS BEEN PULLED. THEY MAY HAVE PULLED PREVIOUS PERMITS TO FIX CONCRETE FAILURES.
NOW THEY HAVE DECIDED TO JUST REDO THE ENTIRE THING, MAINLY BECAUSE THEY KEEP HAVING THAT SAME CONCRETE FAILURE IN THAT LOCATION. SO AT THAT POINT, AGAIN, NOT THAT YOU GUYS WOULD KNOW THIS RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO CLOSE ALL OF THE PARKING TEMPORARILY HERE VERY SOON AND THEY ARE GOING TO ADD SOME TEMPORARY PARKING WHERE THAT DRIVE-THROUGH IS. THAT DRIVE-THROUGH AREA IS GOING TO BECOME TEMPORARY PARKING, JUST TEMPORARILY, UP UNTIL THEY GET EVERYTHING FIXED. SO, AGAIN, THEY WANT TO AT THE END ADD ADDITIONAL 7 SPOTS. THAT WHAT THIS REQUEST IS FOR.
>> HATE TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE, HOW LONG HAS THAT PARKING LOT
BEEN BLOCKED? >> I WILL LET THE APPLICANT
SPEAK TO THAT. >> CAN WE GET THAT BEFORE WE
MOVE ON. >> TO BE HONEST, I AM -- MASON LEE PECK, WITH CUMULUS DESIGN, THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT. I ACTUALLY DO NOT KNOW HOW LONG IT HAS BEEN CLOSED. BUT I DO KNOW IT IS DUE TO AN UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM THAT HAS COMPLETELY COLLAPSED UNDERGROUND AND SO IT IS UNSAFE TO CROSS THE PARKING LOT RIGHT THERE WHERE IT IS CLOSED DOWN AT THE MOMENT AND.
LIKE HE SAID, WE HAVE PULLED THE PERMITS AND JUST WAITING ON THE RIGHT CONTRACTOR TO BE ABLE TO GET OUT THERE AND GET THAT REPLACED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THE IDEA IS THAT AS PART OF THAT WORK, WHILE THEY ARE TEARING UP ALL THE PAVEMENT ANYWAY, TO GO AHEAD AND ADD THESE SPOTS IN THE SAME TIME.
>> SO THREE MONTHS? SIX MONTHS? A YEAR? YEAR AND A HALF? AS FAR AS THE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION TIME?
>> HOW LONG HAS THAT PARKING LOT BEEN BLOCKED?
>> I'M SORRY, I DO NOT KNOW? 12 DAYS? WE HAVE A WH WHOLE STAFF HERE. HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN BLOCKED?
>> IT HAS BEEN A YEAR PLUS. MIKE, ANYBODY -- THIS IS A
[00:15:04]
SIMPLE QUESTION. CAN SOMEONE GIVE THE ANSWER?>> IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A YEAR. >> IF YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME TO THE MIC. SO CAN SOMEBODY ANSWER WALTER'S
QUESTION? >> I'M ASSUMING AT LEAST A YEAR.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, NOT FOR THIS CASE DO WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE.
BUT WE CAN GET IT. WE JUST HAVE TO GO INTO THE SYSTEM AND PULL THE PERMIT, SEE WHEN THEY ACTUALLY FIRST INITIALLY CLOSED IT. BUT I'M ASSUMING ABOUT A YEAR.
>> SO AN EMERGENCY SITUATION GOVERNING THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF THE DRIVE LANE OF PARKING LOT IN FRONT OF THE BANK HAS BEEN IN THAT CONDITION FOR AT LEAST A YEAR AND THEY WANT TO ADD SPOTS AND ALSO FIX THE PARKING LOT NOW.
IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF MARCOS?
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> IN FRONT OF THE FRONT DOOR.
>> IN FRONT OF THE FRONT DOOR? >> YES, SIR.
>> YOU ARE GOING TO REPLACE ALL THE CONCRETE AROUND THE
BUILDING? >> YES, SIR, THE ACTUAL DETENTION SYSTEM UNDERGROUND WRAPS AROUND THE ENTIRE PARKING AREA RIGHT THERE. THE ONLY WAY TO GET IN THERE AND REMOVE THE OLD SYSTEM AND PUT A NEW SYSTEM IS IT --
>> HOW LONG IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO YOU DO IT.
>> THAT'S ABOUT SIX MONTHS, THREE TO SIX MONTHS.
>> MAYOR, IF THERE IS NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT, CAN WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE CLOSED DISCUSSION?
>> ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY? >> I DO NOT, UNLESS THERE ARE
>> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE A MOTION.
>> I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. 7-0.
CLARK. >> WELL, I WAS GOING -- I JUST HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH COUNCIL.
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE EXTRA PARKING IN THE BACK JUST BECAUSE OF THE STARBUCKS. I MEAN, SOMETIMES THE STARBUCKS DRIVERS CAN'T EVEN GET OUT OF STARBUCKS AND NOW WE WILL HAVE THE CHASE BANK PARKING AS WELL. THIS IS A WEIRD TERM TO USE BECAUSE WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET MORE PARKING IN DOWNTOWN.
I DO BELIEVE THERE IS WHAT THEY CALL PARKING POLLUTION, YOU GO INTO OTHER CITIES, MASSIVE EMPTY PARKING LOTS.
I HAVE GONE THROUGH HERE MANY TIMES AND HAVE NEVER SEEN IT FULL EVER. STARBUCKS, SURE, NOT AT&T AND CHASE. FOR THOSE REASONS, I DON'T FEEL LIKE THE 7 ADDITIONAL SPACES ARE NEEDED.
THAT'S JUST ONE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OPINION.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> I'M CURIOUS TO HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS ARE BLOCKED OFF DUE TO THE SINKHOLE?
DO WE KNOW? >> WELL, AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT, I THINK IT IS ONLY MAYBE JUST A TOTAL OF MAYBE FIVE PARKING SPACES AT THIS POINT. BUT ONCE THE -- ONCE THEY CLOSE EVERYTHING OFF, BASICALLY MOST OF THESE PARKING SPACES ARE GOING TO BE -- MOST PARKING SPACES WILL BE CLOSED ONCE THEY GET THEIR CONTRACTOR AND START MOVING FORWARD.
>> POTENTIALLY FOR UP TO POSSIBLY A YEAR OR MORE, THEY HAVE HAD FIVE PARKING SPACES OR SO THAT THEY HAVEN'T HAD ACCESS TO AND THEIR REQUEST IS FOR SEVEN ADDITIONAL?
>> YES, SIR. >> AND DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WILL THERE BE AVAILABLE?
>> DURING CONSTRUCTION, BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, WE DIR CURRENT PARKING RATIO REQUIREMENTS FOR BANKING.
SO I THINK TOTAL, THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE A 13 OR 12 -- IT WAS 13 PARKING SPACES WILL BE AVAILABLE.
BUT THAT MEETS THE BASE MINIMUM. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT I ADDRESSED THOUGH. THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH FIVE SHORT AND THEN THEY ARE GOING TO BE WORKING WITH 13 TOTAL FOR
SOME NUMBER OF MONTHS. >> I GUESS THEY WILL BE A DRIVE-THROUGH LOCATION FOR A WHILE?
>> THEY WON'T HAVE A DRIVE-THROUGH.
ALL THEIR TEMPORARY PARKING WILL BE IN THE DRIVE-THROUGH.
>> SO THEY WON'T HAVE DRIVE-THROUGH.
>> THEY WILL NOT HAVE DRIVE-THROUGH.
NOT DURING THE CONSTRUCTION P PART.
[00:20:07]
>> TEAMS TO ME THE BENEFIT OF THIS WOULD BE GOING TO STARBUCKS, MIGHT PARK THERE, IT IS EASIER TO GET OUT POTENTIALLY. STARBUCKS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAME OUT AGAINST IT. SO IT IS A LITTLE SUSPECT TO ME
TO SAY THE LEAST. >> I HAVE A COMERCHT.
COMMENT.HOW MANY INTERACTION HAU HAD WITH THAT BRANCH MANAGER? THE APPLICATION WAS PROVIDED BY ACTUALLY THE ENGINEER IS HEADING UP THE REQUEST. WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY TALKS WITH THE CORPORATE OFFICE, JUST WITH THE ENGINEER.
THEY DID SIGN A LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION FOR THE ENGINEER TO ACT ON THEIR BEHALF. THIS IS REALLY COMING FROM THE ENGINEER COMPANY, WHO IS WORKING WITH CHASE BANK.
>> WHAT IS STAFF'S BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL?
OVERPARKING OR GREEN SPACE? >> IT IS THE OVER-PARKING PART OF IT. NORMALLY WHEN YOU HAVE A BANK, I CAN BRING UP THE TABLE, OUR MAXIMUM ALLOTTED AMOUNT IS REALLY 15. SO THEY ARE ALREADY AT 42.
WE ARE JUST -- THEY ARE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL 7 WHICH REALLY PUTS US 35 PARKING SPACES OVER THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT.
SO WE DO JUST FEEL IT IS JUST OVER-PARK SITUATION.
>> MAYOR: DO WE HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY, SECONDED.
PLEASE VOTE. THE MOTION PASS 6-1.
THE REQUEST IS DENIED. OPEN ITEM 2022-215 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES IN THE 459 H.F. HINKLEY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 459, AND ON LOT 1, BLOCK 1, LIGHTHOUSE ADDITION, AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 46 IN REFERENCE TO SIGNAGE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF NORTH 9TH STREET, BETWEEN EAST RIDGEWAY DRIVE AND SUNSET AND PRESENTLY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 46. .
>> ITEM 215, CASE NO. Z26-2022-104.
THIS IS FOR LIGHTHOUSE AND THEY ARE REQUESTING TO AMEND THE EXISTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE TO ADD ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE TO THE BUILDINGS ON THE SITE.
AGAIN, THE ZONING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 46. THIS NEXT SLIDE DEPICTS THE OVERALL SITE PLAN LAYOUT FOR THE SITE ALONG THE LEFT-HAND SIDE.
OUTLINED IN YELLOW IS NORTH NINTH STREET, RIGHT HERE IS THE LIGHTHOUSE CAFE. FURTHER TO THE EAST, DEPICTS THE LIGHTHOUSE DEVELOPMENT. SIGN ONE HERE AND SIGN TWO TOWARD THE BOTTOM. THE NEXT TWO SLIDES DEPICT IN FURTHER DETAIL WHAT EACH SIGN INCLUDES.
SIGN ONE ACTUALLY CURRENTLY EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY ALREADY.
IT IS A LITTLE HARD TO TELL. SORRY ABOUT THAT PICTURE.
SIGN 1, 64 FEET. AGAIN, CURRENTLY EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY. SIGN TWO, WHICH IS PROPOSED HERE, EXISTING PHOTO AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT, AND TO THE LEFT IS RENDERING OF WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE, 16 SQUARE FEET, FOUR BY FOUR. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO AMEND THE PD, ASKING FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST FROM OUR SIGNAGE LETTERING AND SYMBOL REQUIREMENTS PER SECTION 4.6 OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED PD AMENDMENT. THE PLANNING & ZONING VOTED 7-0 TO APPROVE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. QUESTIONS?
>> IS THE APPLICANT HERE? DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE? COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? MAKE A MOTION.
MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED, PLEASE VOTE.
ITEM IS CLOSED, 7-0. >> MOTION TO APPROVE AS
[00:25:04]
>> SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.
SECONDED, PLEASE VOTE. >> I SKIPPED ONE MEETING, IT WAS
35 MINUTES. >> ACTUALLY, IT WAS 36, BUT I DON'T THINK WE WILL MAKE IT TONIGHT.
ITEM IS PASSED 7-0. 2022-217 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 104.38+ ACRES OF LAND SITUATED IN THE L.W. STEWART SURVEY, ABSTRACT 997, C.R. WERELY SURVEY, ABSTRACT SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1327 BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MIXED USES.
>> THANK YOU, AGAIN, OUR NEXT CASE FOR THIS EVENING IS FOR AGENDA ITEM 217, CASE NO. Z29-2022-108.
THIS IS FOR THE HIGHLANDS PROPOSED PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
THE CURRENT ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IS AGRICULTURAL.
THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN HAS CORPORATE MODULE.
SO EVEN THOUGH THE HIGHLANDS IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE DEVELOPMENT FROM LAGO VISTA, IT WAS WITHIN THE SAME AREA AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE GIVE YOU GUYS A LITTLE BACKGROUND HISTORY. AGAIN, WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE HERE IS LAGO VISTA CONCEPT PLAN, 273 ACRES, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE WARE WAREHOUSE.
SO, AGAIN, AT THE MARCH 8TH, 2022, CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY COUNCIL VOTED 4-3 TO DENY THE LAGO VISTA DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED WHICH CONSISTED OF 311 TOTAL LOTS, OFFICE WAREHOUSE AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AGAIN, WE UNDERSTAND TWO SEPARATE DEVELOPMENTS, WANTED TO PAINT YOU GUYS A SUMMARY.
THE ACREAGE FROM LAGOS VISTA, HIGHLANDS PROPOSED, THE APPLICANT REDUCED THE RESIDENTIAL LOT TYPES FROM 5-3.
THE TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LOT COUNT REDUCED 311 SINGLE FAMILY TO 112. ALSO THOSE TYPE A, TYPE B, AND TYPE C REDUCTIONS AS WELL. OFFICE WAREHOUSE ACREAGE REDUCED FROM 60.5 ACRES TO 28.6 ACRES. THE APPLICANT REVISED THE CONCEPT PLAN TO INCLUDE TWO ACRES OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL SPACE. SO GOING TO THE HIGHLANDS, WHICH IS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL, WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SLIDE IS THE CONCEPT PLAN BEING TOTAL OF 104.4 ACRES SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BEING 74 ACRES. COMMERCIAL RETAIL BEING TWO ACRES. AND OFFICE WAREHOUSE BEING 28.6 ACRES. FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BREAKDOWN OF THAT 7E TYPE OF A LOTS, 57 TYPE B LOTS AND 52 TYPE C LOTS. SO THESE NEXT FEW SLIDES GIVE FURTHER BREAKDOWN. TYPE A LOTS, BEING HALF ACRE LOTS. THREE LOTS, 21,760 SQUARE FEET.
90 FEET MINIMUM WIDTH AND 3,000 MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE.
THE TYPE B LOTS OUTLINED IN BROWN THROUGHOUT THE PLAN WILL BE 57 LOTS, MINIMUM 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, MINIMUM 80 FEET WIDE AND MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 2600 SQUARE FEET. AND LASTLY, TYPE C LOTS OUT LIOUTLINEDIN BLUE, 12,600 MINIME FOOT LOTS, 80-FOOT WIDTH AND MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE OF 2200 SQUARE FEET.
WE UNDERSTAND THIS IS A PD, WE WANTED TO HELP THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL USES HAS A BASE ON IT, WE WANTED TO PAINT A PICTURE. EACH COLUMN LOT A, LOT B, OR TYPE A, TYPE B, TYPE C, EXCUSE ME, LOTS AND SO THE APPLICANT FOR THE MOST PART IS MEETING EVERYTHING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE AREAS HIGHLIGHTED IN BOLD. SO 12,600 FOR LOT C OR TYPE C DOES NOT CONFORM TO SINGLE FAMILY 4.
THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR SINGLE FAMILY 4 IS 15,000.
THE MINIMUM WIDTH FOR SINGLE FAMILY 4 IS 100, AND SO TYPE A IS 90, TYPE B AND C ARE 80. THEN LAST YOLY, MINIMUMERY MASOY COVERAGE IS 60%. THE MINIMUM FOR SINGLE FAMILY 4 IS 90%. WE DO NOTE THAT ALL GARAGES WILL BE SIDE OR REAR ENTRY. FRONT FACES GARAGES WILL BE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.
WE WILL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THAT.
[00:30:02]
ONE OF THE MAIN AMENITIES, 25-FOOT BUFFER GOING ALONG HERE, CONSISTING OF CEDAR ELM, AND OPN SPACE TRAILS SURROUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT. THESE NEXT FEW SLIDES DEPICT CONCEPT ELEVATIONS. SO IT WON'T EXACTLY BE THESE HOMES. HOWEVER, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS TARGETING WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT FOR THOSE CONCEPT ELEVATIONS. AND SO, AGAIN, APPLICANT CAN'T SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THESE CONCEPTS WHEN HE COMES UP.AGAIN, MORE ON AMENITIES, OPEN SPACE, SHADED TREES, BENCHES, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND TRAILS. AND AT THE MAY 17TH PLANNING & ZONING MEETING, PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION VOTED 7-0 TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED, OR AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT.
HOWEVER, DUE TO THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION NOT BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WHICH, AGAIN IS CORPORATE MODULE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
>> MAYOR, COUNCIL, I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU AGAIN ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
WE HAVE MADE QUITE A FEW CHANGES.
>> WE ALL KNOW YOU, BUT NAME. >> TERRY WEAVER, STERLING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 815 WEST MAIN.
I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, EXCUSE ME.
COLBY DID A GOOD JOB ON THAT. ONE OF THE NUMBERS HE HAD TO PRESENT WHICH IS A LITTLE MISLEADING, FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WE HAD 148 ACRES IN THE PREVIOUS -- WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO COMBINE IT TO LAS LAGOS, WE DID REDUCE IT TO 112, WE REDUCED IT FROM 148 TO 112 FOR THIS PARTICULAR 70 SOME ACRES. WITH UNTHING THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TONIGHT TO PUT BEFORE THE COUNCIL, AS WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE COUNCIL REALLY DOESN'T -- AND THE TOWN RIGHT AT THIS TIME DOESN'T WANT TO SEE ANY LOTS SMALLER THAN 15,000 SQUARE FEET, WE ARE WILLING TO TAKE ALL OF OUR 12,006 LOTS OUT AND MAKE THEM 15S, WELL REDUCE OUR LOTS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 4 AND 8 TO 10, WE DON'T KNOW UNTIL WE WE REWORK THE SITE PLAN.
IT WILL KEEP THE SAME FLAVOR OTHER THAN ALL THE LOTS WILL BE A LITTLE BIT LARGER. TO BE REAL HONEST WITH YOU, IN OUR SITE PLAN THAT DEPICTED THE 112 LOTS, A LOT OF THOSE 12,600 SQUARE FEET LOTS WERE ALMOST 14,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS THE WAY THEY WERE LAID OUT. IT IS JUST WHEN YOU HAVE TWO CATEGORIES, IF YOU ARE NOT 15,000, YOU HAVE TO MOVE THEM DOWN TO THE 12,600. I KNOW WE ARE NOT MEETING THE CORPORATE MODULE ENTIRELY. WE ARE MEETING IT WITH THIS PARTICULAR TRACK OF 28 ACRES OF OFFICE WAREHOUSE AND TWO ACRES OF COMMERCIAL. THERE'S 73 ACRES THAT DOES NOT MEET THE CORPORATE MODULE. WE STILL FEEL THAT IT WOULD BE A VERY GOOD TRANSITION AREA SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE HAYES CROSSING ON THE TOP OF US AND WE HAVE THE HAMMOND PROPERTY ZONED FOR PD.
SO WE ARE TOTALLY SURROUNDED BY, AS YOU CAN TELL, RESIDENTIAL.
WE ARE ALSO BUFFERED FROM ALL THE OFFICE WAREHOUSE TO THE EAST BY FOUR LANE COLLECTOR ROAD THAT WILL GET BUILT OF WHICH WE ARE RESPONSIBLE TO BUILD TWO LANES OF THAT.
ALL THE WAY FROM CURRENT HAYES CROSSING TO SOUTHERN SIDE OF HAMMOND DEVELOP MANY. WE ARE PLANNING ON THIS BEING A COMMERCIAL AREA TO THE EAST OF OFFICE WAREHOUSE.
IT CAN BE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, PROBABLY DOESN'T LEND ITSELF THAT WAY. WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN TALKING TO THE AIRPORT ABOUT SOME COMMERCIAL POSSIBILITIES OF THE 28 ACRES RELATED TO THIS ZONING AND THE 30 ACRES IN THE FUTURE.
25 ACRES WE OWN TO THE EAST AS WELL AS THE FORMER ZONING OF OFE LAS LAGOS THAT HAD 30 ACRES. I FEEL LIKE I HAVE TALKED ENOUGH, I WOULD BE GLAD TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION FOR FUTURE PLANNING FOR AIRPORT NEGOTIATIONS OR DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU HAVE?
>> NO, WE ARE IN THE EARLY STAGE.
WE JUST GO OUT AND TALK TO PHILIP EVERY NOW AND THEN.
HE TALKS TO US. I HAVE CLIENTS CALLING ME WANTING TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT LAND AROUND THE AIRPORT. I ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS WE ARE GOING TO DEVELOP IT. AND THEY ASK ME WHAT THAT IS.
[00:35:01]
I TELL THEM, TODAY I DON'T KNOW. I DO HAVE ONE PARTICULAR CLIENT THAT I HAVE TALKED TO THAT WILL WANT FIVE TO SEVEN ACRES.THEY ARE AN AIRPORT FUNCTIONING USE THAT WRECKS OUT PLANES AND RESELLS PARTS. NTHEY CAN'T DO THROUGH THE FENC, THEY WILL BE DISTRIBUTING PARTS OUT OF OUR AREA.
WHERE THEY WRECK THEM IS SOMETHING THEY WILL WORK OUT WITH PHILIP. THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED.
AND THEN I HAVE TWO OR THREE DISTRIBUTION COMPANIES THAT HAVE
TALKED TO US. >> JUST A POINT OF CORRECTION,
DARRELL PHILIPS. >> EXCUSE ME, WHAT DID I SAY? PHILIP? MR. FILL LIN-MANUELS.
>> YELLOW, IS POWER LINE. >> [INAUDIBLE].
>> TRA WATER LINE. GOOD NEWS IS I HAVE NO NOTHING -- I DON'T HAVE ANY NATURAL GAS, JET FUEL FOR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I HAVE DEVELOPED AROUND THOSE MY WHOLE CAREER. IT IS NICE TO HAVE ONE THAT
WON'T BLOW UP. >> SO THE YELLOW POWER LINES THERE, THAT'S COUNTING TOWARD YOUR GREEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS?
>> WE WILL HAVE WALKING TRAILS UNDER IT.
WE WILL KEEP IT ALL MOWED UP AND NICE AND IT REALLY WORK OUT
WELL. >> CAN WE FLY A KITE THERE?
>> I WOULDN'T. BUT IF YOU WANT TO, GO AHEAD.
BEN FRANKLIN DID IT, BUT I DON'T THINK HE HAD THAT MUCH POWER.
>> IN YOUR LAYOUT O THERE WON'T CHANGE WITH YOUR LOT
ADJUSTMENTS. >> IF IT WILL, I WILL LOSE LOTS.
>> THE GREEN SPACE. >> NO, EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME. I DON'T KNOW, MAYOR, IF I CAN SQUEEZE AS MANY LOTS IN THERE. WE WILL TRY.
WE WILL TRY TO KEEP IT AT 112. I WOULD THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOSE A MINIMUM OF FOUR. IF YOU NOTICE, ONE OF OUR FEATURES IS OUR GREEN SPACE BECAUSE IT IS 21% OF OUR 73 ACRES IS GREEN SPACE. NOT ALL UNDERNEATH THE POWER
LINE. >> ONLY GREEN SPACE BY AND LARGE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PUT A HOUSE ON IT.
CAN'T PUT A HOUSE OVER THE WATER LINE OR UNDER THE POWER LINES?
>> JUSTIN, YOU HAVE A QUESTION. >> JUST REAL QUICK, IS THE DEVELOPMENT JUST NORTH OF THIS ONE, IS THAT YOUR DEVELOPMENT?
>> I STARTED WHEN I WAS RUNNING JOHN HOUSTON DEVELOPMENT.
I'M NO LONGER INVOLVED. >> JUST CURIOUS IF YOU KNOW IF THE DENSITY LEVELS ARE CLOSE TO THE DENSITY LEVELS PROPOSED.
>> THEY ARE HIGHER THAN WHAT I AM PROPOSING.
THEY WERE ALL, I THINK, COUNCIL KAUFMANCOFFMAN.
>> COUNCIL, ANY MORE QUESTIONS. >> CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> CAN I SAY ONE THING, MAKE SURE THAT I AM CHANGING ALL THE 12,600 TO 15. THANK YOU.
>> SECOND THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION TO CLOSE, SECONDED, PLEASE VOTE.
CLARK? PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.
COMMENTS, COUNCIL? WE HAVE A MOTION.
>> I ACTUALLY LIKE -- WHEN WE WERE AT THE WORKSHOP, I TALKED ABOUT THIS. I ACTUALLY LIKE DOING THESE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS INSTEAD OF BRICK WALLS.
I LIKE THOSE A LOT. A BETTER TIE-IN ON HOW WE SHOULD DO DEVELOPMENTS MOVING FORWARD INSTEAD OF BRICK WALLS.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK TO DOUBLE UTILIZE THE SPACE, LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS JUST THAT, A LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
WHEN YOU TURN IT INTO A GREEN SPACE, I MEAN, --
>> YEAH, I GET YOUR ARGUMENT. REALLY THE ONLY BUFFER IS -- WELL, THIS ISN'T WORKING ANYMORE.
BUT THE NORTHEAST SIDE AND THE NORTHWEST SIDE AND TWO SOUTH SIDES ARE TECHNICALLY FORCED TO THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE YOU DO THERE.
>> GET MORE GREEN SPACE. >> WITH HIS ADJUSTMENTS, I FIND
[00:40:04]
THIS AS A GOOD PROPOSAL. >> YOU CAN SEE BY THE PICTURE, IT RUNS TOGETHER WITH THE REST OF THE -- IT DOESN'T LOOK OUT OF PLACE, LIKE A WHOLE BUNCH OF 40-FOOT LOTS, LIKE IT BELONGS
WHERE IT IS. >> MINIMUM OF 80, YEAH.
>> AND THE MAINTAINING THE TRAIL SPACE UNDERNEATH THE POWER LINES AND DOWN THE WATER LINE, MAKES IT VERY NICE.
BECAUSE THAT'S A WAY TO CONNECT ONE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT CROSSING HIGHWAYS AND FREEWAYS AND THAT OTHER STUFF. AND IF YOU -- MAY I MAKE A
>> ANY CLARIFICATION, THERE'S AN ORDINANCE, OR STAFF, IF YOU CAN CLARIFY, WE DO HAVE FOR THE C, 52.
SO THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO CHANGE, CORRECT? SINCE WE ARE GOING WITH MINIMUM LOT AREA NOW OF 15,000.
DO YOU BY CHANCE KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER WILL BE? SO B WOULD BE 109. THEN WE JUST NEED TO HAVE TO AMEND THE CONCEPT PLAN TO MAKE -- HERE'S WHAT SHOWN AS C,
B, CHANGE THE COLOR. >> YOU CAN'T LEAVE THE LOT SIZE THE SAME AND INCREASE THE LOT SIZE, SO BASICALLY SAYING I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THE LOTS NUMBER AT 112 WOULD INDICATE THAT HE IS TELLING US HE WANTS 21,750 IN MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR LOT A, BUT YOU CAN'T PHYSICALLY DO THAT.
YOU CAN'T MAKE A SMALLEST LOTS SMALLER AND NOT MAKE THE LARGE E LOTS LARGER WHILE RETAINING THE SAME LOT COUNT.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE WILL DO AWAY WITH THE
NUMBER OF LOTS FOR A AND B. >> WHAT IF HE WANTS TO DO ALL OF
THEM IN B? >> TERRY, WE WILL ELIMINATE C
AND HAVE AS AND BS. >> ACT LIKE IT NEVER HAPPENED.
>> LITTLE CONFUSED ON WHAT THAT LEAVES US.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> SO C IS NOT JUST GOING AWAY, IT IS GOING AWAY AND BEING ADDED TO BS.
>> SO SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> DOES IT NEED TO BE CRAFTED A CERTAIN WAY?
>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH WHAT JOE SAID ADDED.
>> 109 IS A CORRECT NUMBER FOR THE B LOTS.
SO IT WOULD BE MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CHANGING THE NUMBER OF LOTS B LOTS TO 109 AND CORRECTING THE CONCEPT.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> ARE WE ENGINEERING FROM THE
-- >> I THINK WE NEED TO TABLE T
THIS. >> LET'S JUST DO ONE AT A TIME.
>> WHAT DOES THIS DO TO THE GREEN SPACE?
>> JOE? >> IF WE ELIMINATE -- I DON'T THINK IT IS JUST ADDING THAT NUMBER OF LOTS, 52, BECAUSE WE ARE GOING FROM LOT SIZE 12,600 FEET TO 15,000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUMS. SO WITHOUT HAVING HIM DOING ENGINEERING ON THE FLY, I DON'T THINK WE CAN DETERMINE THE ACTUAL QUANTITY OF LOTS THAT WOULD BE TYPE B.
AM I INCORRECT IN THAT, TERRY? >> CAN IT BE AS SIMPLE AS LOT A COUNT MUST HAVE A MINIMUM OF THREE AND THEN LOT B -- NO OTHER
[00:45:04]
LOT IN THE SUBDIVISION SHALL BE LESS THAN 15,000 SQUARE FEET.>> CAN WE SAY MAXIMUM. TETECHNICALLY, FOR EVERY C LOT U REMOVE YOU CAN ADD A B. THAT WAS ALREADY AVAILABLE TO HIM. NOW, I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT THE MAP IS -- YOU ELIMINATE 12,600, YOU DON'T GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF THE 15S. IFS JUST A MAXIMUM OF 109, AS LONG AS YOU MAINTAIN THE GREEN SPACE, YOU ARE FINE.
>> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE TABLE THIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REGROUP SO THAT NO MISTAKES ARE MADE.
>> ONE THING HE CAN DO IS CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING IT BACK ON THE REGULAR AGENDA, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING THE ORDINANCES BACK ON THE REGULAR AGENDA WITH THE CHANGES IN THEM.
>> SOUNDS GOOD. >> WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> ONE SUGGESTION HERE IS THAT THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT ARE NOW GOING TO BE IN THE B CATEGORY THAT IS CONCERNING EVERYONE, BECAUSE I CAN CUT THOSE NUMBER DOWN.
>> I THINK IT IS KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT THAT NUMBER IS.
>> MOST LOOK JUST LIKE THIS. >> THE ONLY CHANGE -- TERRY.
THE ONLY CHANGE WE HAVE MADE IS TO RAISE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 15,000. THE GREEN SPACE, EVERYTHING ELSE IS LEFT THE SAME. THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE WE ARE MAKING. SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE RE-ENGINEERING. WE ARE CLARIFYING.
DO WE HAVE TO SPEAK TO THE NUMBER OF LOTS?
>> SEE, THAT REALLY NORMALLY GETS INTO THE PLATTING PHASE.
YOU DO THROW NUMBERS OUT AT THIS POINT.
BUT UNTIL IT PLATS OUT, I STILL HAVE TO COME BACK FOR APPROVAL
FOR PLATTING. >> UNDERSTANDABLE.
WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT PUTS THE NUMBER OF LOTS, NUMBER OF LOT WIDTH. I'M COMFORTABLE IF WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE TAKING OUT -- AND IF THE COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT
THEY ARE VOTING ON. >> CAN YOU GO TO WHAT YOU SAID, BRING IT BACK THROUGH THE REGULAR AGENDA.
>> HAS A MOTION BEEN MADE. CAN I MAKE ONE, MAYOR?
>> GO AHEAD AND MAKE IT. >> WALTER, IF YOU LET ME RUN THE
COUNCIL, PLEASE. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING SO WE CAN CLARIFY THE ORDINANCE AS NEEDED.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION, SECONDED, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION IS DENIED 4-3.
COUNCILPERSON HARTSON. >> I WOULD LIKE TO DO IT RIGHT
THE FIRST TIME, PERSONALLY. >> CAN WE MAYBE HEAR WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS TO BE APPROVED, SEE IF THERE IS CLARITY, GO FROM
THERE. >> CLYDE, WOULD YOU CARE TO TAKE
A SHOT AT THIS IF? ?>> IT IS JUST C PORTION OF THE
ORDINANCE. >> YOU LOOK AT THAT TABLE, THE SITE PLAN WILL COME BACK THROUGL BE APPROVED AT STAFF -- I.
>> WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE APPROVED AT STAFF LEVEL.
>> IT WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL. >> IT WILL GO BACK TO P&Z.
YES, AS A PLAT. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL, YOU'RE CORRECT. SO WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE IS ELIMINATING THIS LOT TYPE C. SO 12,600 SQUARE FOOT.
80 WIDTH, 2200 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE.
AND ALL OF THEM WOULD BE LOT A AND LOT B.
AND PER CLARK'S RECOMMENDATION, HE SAID THERE WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF THREE AND THAT IS WHAT IS DEPICTED IN YOUR C1
TABLE. >> AND THE REMAINING WOULD BE B.
>> AND WE HAVE 112, NO MORE THAN 112 AS THE MAX.
>> CORRECT. >> SO IF IT DROPS BLOW THAT, WE
THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I WAS TRYING TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION. I JUST FELT LIKE IT IS AS SIMPLE AS SAYING, EVEN THOSE 3, 15,000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM.
>> DWELLING UNIT SIZE, 2600 SQUARE FEET.
>> SAYING WITH THE MINIMUM HOUSE SIZE, FRONT.
>> NOTHING ELSE IS CHANGING. >> SO WE REMOVE COLUMN C, REMOVE
[00:50:10]
THE NUMBER 57, INSERT REMAINING LOTS.>> YES. >> REMAINING NUMBER OF LOTS.
>> I WILL NOT MAKE THIS CONFUSING, TO WALTER'S POINT, TO YOU DO YOU PLUG IN THAT THE DEDICATED GREEN SPACE MUST STAY
THE SAME. >> WITHIN THE SITE PLAN, ALL RESIDENTIAL LOTS HAVE TO REMAIN WITHIN THOSE RESIDENTIAL LOTS
DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN. >> THANS CONCEPT PLAN.
>> I KNOW I LIKE IT BECAUSE OF THE LANDSCAPING.
MOST PEOPLE LIKE THE LANDSCAPING, WHATEVER WE HAVE TO
DO TO PROTECT THE LANDSCAPING. >> PLACE THAT IN YOUR MOTION, ELIMINATE LOT TYPE C AND ELIMINATE NO OTHER LANDSCAPING
AND/OR BUFFERS OR EASEMENTS. >> [INAUDIBLE].
>> I THOUGHT WE WERE DOING AWAY WITH THE CS.
>> YES, ALL 15,000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUMS WITH THIS CURRENT SITE PLAN, WE ARE ALMOST THERE ANYWAY.
VERY FEW LOTS ARE 12,600. THEY ARE 13,400.
BUT ANYTHING UNDER 15,000, WE HAD TO THROW IT HERE.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> MAKE SURE WE DON'T LOSE ANY OF THE GREEN SPACE. 20.2% IS WHAT IS ACCOUNTED FOR.
[INAUDIBLE] THEN WE MOVE EVERYTHING TO THE 15,000 SQUARE FEET. [INAUDIBLE].
>> I UNDERSTAND. YOU ARE WRITING IT.
>> SO MR., MAYOR, CAN I MAKE THE MOTION THAT WAY? AS LONG AS THE GREEN SPACE STAYS AT THE --
>> MAKE YOUR MOTION, PLEASE. >> REFERENCE AT 21.7%.
>> REFERENCE IN YOUR MOTION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CHANGING FROM ALL OF THE CS TO AS AND BS.
AND KEEPING 21.7% GREEN SPACE, OPEN SPACE.
AND ALL THE HOUSE LOTS TO BE AT LEAST 15,000 SQUARE FEET OR GREATER. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> I SECOND THAT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WAS MADE AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE.
AND THE ITEM PASSES 5-1 WITH ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> MR. WEAVER, THANK YOU VERY
>> OPEN ITEM 2022-218, 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.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FM 663 AND
FM 875. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO THE APPLICANT DOES WANT TO
[00:55:02]
AMEND PD120 LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CITY.COUNCIL, A SIMILAR REQUEST WAS ACTUALLY BROUGHT TO YOU THIS PAST NOVEMBER. BUT THE CASE WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME. SO THE APPLICANT HAS MADE SOME SLIGHT ADJUSTMENTS AND THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT TONIGHT. THIS RIGHT HERE IS PD120 AS IT IS CURRENTLY APPROVED. PD120 DOES ALLOW FOR ONLY 35 LOTS. AND ALL LOTS MUST BE ONE ACRE IN SIZE. ON SITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS ARE PERMITTED IN THIS AREA OR IN THIS PD.
IT ALSO INCLUDES AN AN A AERATED AND WALKING TRAIL.
THIS IS HOW THE PD STANDS NOW. OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES SHOW THE AREA IS IN WITH WHAT WE CALL THE SUBURBAN LOW DENSITY MODULE.
THIS MODULE DOES CALL FOR MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 20,000 SQUARE FEET. IT INCLUDES A LIMITED SMALL SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD SURFACE AS SECONDARY COMPONENT.
SO WE DO FEEL THAT THIS PROPOSAL THAT THE APPLICANT BROUGHT TO US DOES ADHERE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
HERE'S THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO INCREASE THIS LOT COUNT FROM 35 LOTS TO 55 AND IT WILL INCLUDE FIVE RETAIL LOTS. MINIMUM LOT SIZE WILL BE REDUCED DOWN FROM ONE ACRE TO THE MINIMUM OF 20,000 SQUARE FEET.
THEY DO PLAN TO CONNECT TO OUR CITY SEWER AND THE SITE WILL INCLUDE A PLAYGROUND AND HAVE SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS RIGHT HERE IS JUST A COMPARISON TABLE. YOU HAVE GOT THIS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. PROBABLY THE MOST NOTICEABLE DIFFERENCE IS THE LOT SIZE. OBVIOUSLY, ONE ACRE VERSUS 20,000, AND THEN ON SITE SEWER VERSUS THE LOTS ACTUALLY CONNECTING TO OUR CITY SEWER. THE APPLICANT WILL INSTALL AN 8-FOOT TALL MASONRY WALL THAT SEPARATES THE RETAIL FROM THE ACTUAL RESIDENTIAL AREA. THE PERIMETER WILL ALSO INCLUDE SIX-FOOT TALL ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE.
ALSO A VEGETATIVE SCREEN WALL IN FRONT OF THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE ALONG THE PERIMETER OF 875.
HERE ARE SOME DETAILS SHOWING THE AMENITIES.
STAMPED STAINED CONCRETE, EQUIPPED PLAYGROUND, TRAIL ALONG 875 AND 663, ENTRY MONUMENTS ARE ALL INCLUDED.
HERE IS A CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT OF A GENERAL RETAIL USE.
THIS IS JUST TO SHOW HOW THE BUILDINGS AND PARKING COULD POTENTIALLY LAY OUT IN THIS AREA.
YOU CAN SEE THE ACCESS ON TO 875 AS WELL AS THE ACCESS ON TO THE LOCAL STREET THAT LEADS INTO THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO FOUR OF THESE LOTS DO HAVE AN OPEN CHANNEL CONCEPT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS THE LAST TIME THE APPLICANT BROUGHT THIS CASE BACK IN NOVEMBER. STAFF DOESN'T RECOMMEND -- STAFF ACTUALLY RECOMMENDS AVOIDING AN OPEN CHANNEL ALONG THE FRONT SIDE OF SOME OF THESE LOTS, MEANING THAT THESE FOUR LOTS WILL HAVE A BAR DITCH. THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE CURB AND GUTTER. CULVERTS, HEAD WALLS WILL OBVIOUSLY REQUIRE PERIODIC MAINTENANCE SINCE CHANNELS DO BECOME BLOCKED WITH DEBRIS MATERIALS.
SO, AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT.
TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED TWO LETTERS IN OPPOSITION FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS . ON THE 17TH THE COMMISSION DID VOTE 6-1 TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
P&Z REQUESTED CONCERN TO TRAFFIC AT THIS INTERSECTION OF 663 AND TRAFFIC ON 875. ON THE FLIP SIDE, STAFF DOES SUPPORT THIS REQUEST BECAUSE IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE OPEN CHANNEL CONCEPT BE AVOIDED. WITH THAT, I WILL STAND FOR
QUESTIONS. >> SO DOES STAFF RECOMMEND
APPROVAL OR DENIAL? >> APPROVAL FOR THIS.
APPROVAL WITHOUT THE OPEN CONCEPT.
>> THEN IT IS DENIAL AS PRESENTED.
>> IT MEETS THE COMP PLAN. WE SUPPORT IT.
WE DON'T JUST SUPPORT THE OPEN CHANNEL.
IF THEY CLOSED IN THAT OPEN CHANNEL.
THAT'S PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATION, IS THAT THEY CLOSE IN THAT OPEN CHANNEL AND NOT HAVE AN OPEN CHANNEL.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY RETAIL ASPECT OF IT.
WE SUPPORT THEM DROPPING IT DOWN FROM ONE ACRE DOWN TO 20,000
[01:00:01]
SQUARE FEET FOR EACH LOT. .>> MY NAME IS JUSTIN CROCKER. THANKS FOR HAVING ME BACK AGAIN.
IT HAS BEEN ABOUT HALF YEAR AGO THAT WE LOOKED AT THIS.
WE WORKED WITH THE CITY STAFF AND OUR ENGINEERS WENT THROUGH MULTIPLE DRCS TO FINE TUNE THIS.
HOPEFULLY WE DID A GOOD JOB OF ADDRESSING FEW OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP LAST TIME. SO WE JUST WANT TO COME BACK AND GO OVER IT AGAIN. SO I WANT TO START JUST BY GOING OVER A FEW OF THE CHANGES THAT WE MADE TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME SPECIFIC CONCERNS. SO I THINK ONE OF THE FIRST ONES THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IS, AT ONE TIME, MR. HARTSON, YOU HAD COMMENTED ON, WE DIDN'T SHOW WHAT COULD FIT OR WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN THERE ON THE COMMUNITY RETAIL.
WE MADE THOSE A LITTLE BIT DEEPER AND WE PRESENTED -- IT IS ON A DIFFERENT SLIDE. BUT WE WANTED TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE. THERE'S A QUESTION ON THE SIZE, ON THIS BIG PLAN, IT LOOKED TOO SMALL I THINK WAS WHAT WAS SAID.
DIDN'T LOOK LIKE BUILDINGS COULD FEET.
FIT. THIS IS CONCEPTUAL, ANYTHING WE PUT IN WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU GUYS ON.
IT SHOWS, WE TOOK SOME EXISTING BUILDINGS HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN.
IF YOU LOOK AT THAT CORNER TO BEGIN WITH, THAT'S ACTUALLY A PRETTY GOOD EXACT REPLICA TO SCALE OF COUPLE OF THE GAS STATION CONVENIENT STORES THAT HAVE GONE INTO TOWN.
NEXT OF THAT ON LOT 6, UP AT THE TOP, THOSE REPRESENT ABOUT 10,000 SQUARE FEET BUILDING THAT WOULD BE MIXED USE BUILDING.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAD ENOUGH ROOM TO HAVE PLENTY OF PARKING ALL THE WAY AROUND THOSE. IN THE MIDDLE, JUST SOME RESTAURANT CONCEPTS. SO JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE MARRIED TO, BUT WE WANT TO HAVE PROOF OF CONCEPT, WE DID ALLOT FOR ENOUGH SPACE TO FIT THESE TYPE OF USES IN THERE. ONE OF THE BIG CHANGES WE MADE WITH THE CITY STAFF WAS WHEN WE WENT IN, THAT CUL-DE-SAC, WE CHANGED THE WHOLE -- THAT WHOLE AREA A GOOD BIT REALLY.
ORIGINALLY THE ROAD DID SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IN THERE. THIS WAS ALL PER DRC RECOMMENDATION. BEHIND THE WALL, GREEN SPACE WITH VERY THICK LANDSCAPING AND WALKING TRAIL, JUST TO PROVIDE A BETTER BUFFER AND CONNECTIVITY. THAT WAS ALL JUST PER THE CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, WOULD GOING WITH THOSE GUYS ON THAT.
ONE OF THE BIG ONES THAT WE DID WAS WE WORKED ON THESE -- THE WAY YOU GET IN AND OUT SPECIFICALLY OF THE COMMUNITY RETAIL SPACE, SO IF YOU LOOK AT FROM THE CORNER OF 663 AND 875, WE HAVE PULLED THAT BACK EVEN FURTHER.
SO WE ARE FURTHER THAN THE CITY OR TXDOT REQUIRES, JUST GETS US AWAY FROM THAT INTERSECTION TO TRY TO HELP WITH ANY TRAFFIC ISSUES THERE. I THINK WE ARE IN THE 500-FOOT RANGE. TO PUT THAT IN P PERSPECTIVE, I ROUGHLY MEASURED FROM THE OLD CABIN TO B BRANDENBURGER, THIS GIVES US THE DISTANCE TO WHERE YOU ENITTER THAT SPACE.
TO THE OTHER END, FROM WHAT WE ORIGINALLY HAD, WE MOVED THAT FURTHER BACK OFF OF THE 663 CONNECTION POINT, WHICH I ACTUALLY LIKE HOW WE HAVE GREEN SPACE THERE ALL THE WAY AND LINED THAT UP WITH THE STREET ACROSS FROM IT.
THAT WAS ALL JUST WORKING WITH THE CITY STAFF.
SO WHEN I FIRST LOOKED AT THIS PROPERTY, MY MAIN GOAL WAS TO GET -- WE BI BUILD HIGHER END CUSTOM HOMES.
EVERYTHING COMING TO MIDLOTHIAN IS ALREADY BOUGHT BY PRODUCTION BUILDERS BEFORE WE HAVE A CHANCE AT IT.
IT IS NOT REALLY OUR PRODUCT. SO WE ARE DOING A LOT OF STUFF DOWN THAT WAY. I WANTED TO PROVIDE SOME OF THE PRODUCT WE BUILD, LITTLE BIT HIGHER END.
WE HAVE PEOPLE ASKING FOR THAT HALF ACRE LOT SIZE.
THE SUBURBANS MODULE SAYS 20,000 SQUARE FEET PLUS.
WE ORIGINALLY HAD HALF ACRE. WE DIPPED A LITTLE BIT, WE HAD TO GIVE MORE RIGHT-OF-WAYS FOR 875.
WE ARE STILL -- WE WANT TO MEET THE MODULE, ALSO REALIZE THERE'S NOT LOTS OF DEVELOPERS DOING THAT SIZE BECAUSE YOU CAN MAKE MORE MONEY ON SMALLER LOTS. BUT WE HAVE A VISION FOR THE PRODUCT THAT WE PUT AND WE ARE WOULD RATHER SACRIFICE PRODUCTS AS DEVELOPER TO GET THAT LITTLE BIT LARGER LOT SIZE THAT FITS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER END CUSTOM HOME WHICH IS A PRODUCT WE WANT TO BRING. WE REALLY EXPLORED IT AND LOOKED AT THE OFF SITE SEWER COST, THERE'S NOT SEWER THERE.
WE WILL HAVE TO GO OUT OF THE NORTHEAST WHERE WE HAVE THAT CONCONNECTIVITY, A GOOD BIT OF F SITE SEWER.
THAT WAS A BIG PROBLEM FOR THAT PROJECT.
[01:05:03]
WITHOUT THAT COMMERCIAL ASPECT ON THE CORNER, IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE TO RUN THAT MUCH AND STILL DEVELOP THE PROPERTY.SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS WE LOOKED AT UP FRONT.
I ALSO TOUCHED ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE ADJUSTED JUST AS WE SPOKE WITH THE CITY STAFF AND WORKED ON THIS PROJECT.
SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER FACTORS THAT -- THESE THINGS KIND OF CAME UP A LITTLE BIT LAST TIME AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS. ONE THING, I HAVE HEARD A LOT, NOT JUST IN MY CASE, ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND CON JEST I DON'T CONGESTION ON 663.IF WE ARE ABLE BUSINESSES IN HERE AT THE CORNER, WHAT WE WILL BE DOING IS WORK TO GO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES INTO TOWN FROM 663.
A LOT OF OUR HOMES GO THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION MULTIPLE TIMES EVERY DAY. A LOT OF TRAFFIC FEEDS FROM MCMCALPIN. PEOPLE MAKING RUNS TO GET GAS, COFFEE, THOSE TYPES OF SERVICES. AND THEY HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY TO QU QUICK TRIP. I THINK THIS WILL BE A DIFFERENCE MAKER TO HELP. I KNOW IT WILL HELP BECAUSE WE ARE GIVING SOME OF THOSE SERVICES MORE CONVENIENT TO WHERE THESE FOLKS LIVE. AND THEN THEY ARE DOING AMISSING THINGS WITH THE CHOSEN AND JUST A LOT MORE PEOPLE BACK IN THAT AREA THAN THERE ONCE WAS. I THINK IT IS GREAT FOR MIDLOTHIAN WHAT THEY ARE DOING. BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WHEN I ORIGINALLY TALKED TO THEM, THEY DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS. THEY HAD APPROACHED ME AND SAID, WHAT CAN WE DO TO GET SOME OF THESE SERVICES OUT HERE.
WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE OUT THERE AT A TIME.
AND IT IS A LONG HAUL, 663, TRAFFIC TO GO GET GAS OR COFFEE.
THEY ARE LOOKING FOR SOME THINGS THAT WE THINK THAT WE ARE HELPING THEM WITH. SO THAT BEING SAID, ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS, TALKING ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE DOWN THERE AND WHAT THEY HAVE GOING, ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WAS DISCUSSED A GOOD BIT WAS I THINK IT WAS CALLED THE 875, OUTER RING, OUTER EDGE OF TOWN. I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT THAT THAT WAS THE CASE AT ONE TIME, THAT THINGS LIKE THAT WERE SAID AND IT MADE A LOT OF SENSE.
I THINK SINCE I SAW YOU GUYS LAST TIME, THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE KNOW IS COMING, THESE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY ACQUIRED THE LAND. WE KNOW THERE IS A HUGE PROJECT DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET REALLY EVENTUALLY COMING, THEN I CAN PERSONALLY ATTEST FOR A LOT OF STUFF THAT'S NOT EVEN GOING TO COME THROUGH HERE, WE ARE FROM THAT INTERSECTION, WE ARE 8 OR 9 MINUTES DOWN THE ROAD BUILDING REALLY NICE CUSTOM HOMES. I CAN ACCOUNT FOR TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT I AM INVOLVED IN THAT HAVE -- ONE IS 290 LOTS AND ONE IS 140. IT DOESN'T TAKE LONG FOR US TO GET RIGHT HERE. OVER ON 157, JUST SOUTH ONE OF OURS, THERE'S A -- THEY DID A PID WITH SEWER, 200 TOTAL HOMES.
THEY ARE TIGHTER LOTS. FIRST PHASE OF SEVERAL HUNDRED IS ABOUT TO START PAVING. THESE ARE ALL ACTUALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. AND THEN THE SAME DEVELOPER JUST ACQUIRED, GO DOWN THE HILL TO 875, A THOUSAND SOMETHING ACRES, THEY DO SOMETHING SIMILAR RIGHT THERE.
THEY HAVE ALREADY ACQUIRED THE LAND, MIDLOTHIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT. THE GROWTH IS GOING SOUTH ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN AND I THINK IT IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO SO.
WE LIVE IT EVERY DAY, WE TALK TO THE BUILDING.
PEOPLE. WE ARE BUILDING DOWN THERE.
I THINK AS THINGS HAVE CHANGED OVER TIME, MIDLOTHIAN IS EXPANDING. EXPANDING FURTHER SOUTH THAN IT ONCE WAS AND I DON'T THINK THAT ANY OF THESE FOLKS BUILDING IN THAT CORRIDOR ARE BUILDING THERE TO DRIVE INTO O VENUS TO GET GROCERIES OR GO TO A RESTAURANT. YES, SIR.
>> COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF THE -- >> CLARIFICATION.
STAFF DID MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. DID YOU ADDRESS THE OPEN CHANNEL CONCEPT, THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT IT BE CLOSED.
>> SURE, I THINK IT IS FINE IF WE DID A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE HOA WHICH WE DID ON THERE.
I LIKE LEAVING THE -- IT IS A SHALLOW ROCK BOTTOM CREEK, USUALLY DOESN'T HAVE WATER BUT NICE TREES.
I THINK IT IS BETTER FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD TO NOT BULLDOZE ALL THE TREES AND CLEAR OUT THE CREEK.
SO IF GUY PASS ME WITH THE TERM WANT ME TO CLEAR THE CREEK AND PUT IN CONCRETE CULVERTS, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT.
FOR ME, PERSONALLY, I GET THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT MAINTENANCE.
I WOULD RATHER HAVE THE HOA BE RESPONSIBLE OR SOME AVENUE LIKE THAT AND KEEP IT, INSTEAD OF HAVING A PERFECTLY GRIDDED REC
TRECTANGULAR NEIGHBORHOOD. >> MR. CROCKER, WHAT WAS THE
ADDRESS YOU GAVE. >> 3441 PLAIN VIEW ROAD.
[01:10:03]
>> HOW MUCH COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ARE OUT THERE WITHIN
QUARTER MILE OF YOU? >> WELL, THERE'S ONE NEXT DOOR TO MY HOUSE IS THE HEADQUARTERS FOR OUR LANDSCAPE COMPANY.
DOWN TO THE GAS STATIONS ON -- >> COULD A DEVELOPER COME IN AND MAKE YOU HAPPY ABOUT PUTTING THIS NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE?
>> WELL, I THINK THAT'S -- I'M NOT LIVING AT THE CORNER OF TWO MAJOR ROADS. THE THING IS, WE ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING THOSE HOUSES, SO I FEEL LIKE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT BOUGHT WOULD KNOW WHAT THEY WERE BUYING NEXT TO.
BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ANY RESIDENTIAL RIGHT NEXT TO THIS.
ACROSS THE STREET, THERE IS A CHURCH AND THERE'S A DAY CARE AND THERE'S A LOT THAT IS ZONED THIS WAY.
>> PLAIN VIEW IS MAJOR ARTERY, SAME WAY 663 AND 875 ARE.
AND SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT YOU MENTION ARE COMING ARE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND OUTSIDE OF OUR INFLUENCE AND MORE THAN ANY OTHER PROJECT OR ITEM ON THE AGENDA THE LAST SIX MONTHS, I RECEIVED THE MOST PHONE CALLS, EMAILS AND MESSAGES ON SOCIAL MEDIA REGARDING THIS PROJECT. NONE OF THEM WERE FOR IT AND THEY ALL WANTED ME TO ASK IF THIS WAS OKAY TO PUT NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE. I THINK I UNDERSTAND --
>> I DON'T SEE HOW THAT IS RELEVANT.
>> PLAIN VIEW ROAD IS A MAJOR ARTERY.
THESE ARE MAJOR ARTERIES. IF YOU THINK THIS IS GREAT FOR MIDLOTHIAN, I DON'T SEE THIS NEXT TO YOU AND PART OF MIDLOTHIAN IS WHEN YOU MOVE TO MIDLOTHIAN, YOU EXPECT TO DRIVE IN FOR SERVICES. I HAVE LIVED OUT THERE CLOSE TO THIS MY ENTIRE LIFE. THAT'S 48 YEARS.
WE HAVE NEVER DRIVEN TO MAPROL FOR SERVICES, VENUS FOR SERVICES. NEVER, NOT ONCE.
WE DRIVE TO MIDLOTHIAN BECAUSE IT IS CLOSER.
THIS IS CLOSER TO MIDLOTHIAN. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO BE ARLINGTON AND DEVELOPING THIS KIND OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES AT THE END OF EVERY ARTERY IN THE CITY WILL DO THAT, WHETHER WE ADMIT IT OR NOT IT, WILL DO T THAT. SO IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, YOU SAY THIS WILL TAKE AWAY FROM THE TRAFFIC ON 663 AND NOT CAUSE US TO HAVE TO OR TXDOT TO HAVE TO WIDEN 663.
HAVE YA'LL BUILT INTO YOUR PLANS ROOM FOR 875 AND 663 TO WIDEN AT
EVEN FROM THE TIME THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WAS HERE, WE ACTUALLY GAVE THEM MORE SPACE JUST TO -- THAT WAS SOMETHING WE WORKED WITH THE CITY STAFF ON. AT ONE POINT, WE MOVED EVERYTHING UP. WE SQUEEZED OUR LOTS BECAUSE IT IS ACTUALLY A LOT OF SPACE THAT WE GAVE UP AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT WILL HAPPEN. ALSO, FOR TRAFFIC, FOR OURSELVES, WE WILL HAVE TO HIRE A TRAFFIC -- COMPANY THAT DOES PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC STUDIES AND THEY WILL DO THE TRAFFIC STUDIES. WE KNOW THAT --
>> BUT THIS IS APPROVED, YOU WILL HAVE TO DO THAT.
IF THIS IS APPROVED, YOU WON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.
>> WE DO TO ACCESS TXDOT. TXDOT REQUIRES US TO DO THAT STUDY. THEN WE HAVE TO, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE ROAD WITHOUT MEETING WHAT THEY STATE.
SO WE KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE COSTS AND DECEL LANES PART OF THE COST OF DOING THIS DEVELOPMENT JUST BECAUSE WE ARE
ON A TXDOT ROAD. >> MAYOR: COUNCIL, MORE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? WE DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER.
>> ONE LAST COMMENT, SUPER FAST, I APPRECIATE YA'LL HEARING THIS.
PLEASE CONSIDER WHAT IS IN THE SOUTH OF TOWN AND ALSO ASK YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER THAT WE ARE MEETING EVERYTHING WITH WHAT WAS REQUIRED MODULE-WISE, THE COMMUNITY RETAIL.
WE ARE GOING AND DEVELOPING ALONG WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HERE. NOT TRYING TO BUCK THE SYSTEM.
I JUST WANT YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER THAT, PLEASE.
WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER DAN TOLBERT. DAN IS WITH THE CHOSEN, THEY HAVE FINISHED FILMING LAST WEEK AND THEY ARE MOVING BACK AT SOME POINT. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU, MY NAME IS DAN TOLBERT, COTTON CREEK TRAIL.
MAYOR RENO, COUNCILMEN, THANK YOU FOR THE CHANCE TO SPEAK TONIGHT. I'M A BUSINESS OFFICER WITH THE CHOSEN IN CHARGE OF BUILDING OUR FILM CAMPUS AND OUR REPLICA OF OUR FIRST CENTURY CITY. CURRENTLY WE HAVE ABOUT 200 STAFF MEMBERS INCLUDING ACTORS, ACTRESSES, FILM CREW ON CAMP HOVESLE ON SOUTH SINGLETON ROAD. TWO MILES SOUTH OF THIS
[01:15:01]
PARTICULAR FACILITY. I TRAVEL THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION OF 663 AND 875 FIVE OR SIX TIMES A DAY.AND OUR REQUEST IS THAT THIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BE APPROVED BECAUSE IT IS MORE CHALLENGING ON THE SOUTH END WHERE WE OCCUPY AND LIVE AND MANY RESIDENTS ARE BUILDING TO TRAVEL ALL THE WAY DOWN TO KROGER FOR GROCERIES.
CONVENIENT STORE TO BUY GROCERIES, GASOLINE, PIZZA, MAYBE EVEN A RESTAURANT. WE DRIVE DOWN TO ALE'S KITCHEN.
IT IS A TRAFFIC HAZARD WITH MOUNTAIN PEAK ELEMENTARY DURING CHILDREN DROP-OFF AND PICK UP. MY PURPOSE TO BE HERE TONIGHT IS THAT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS WOULD SERVE OUR ENDEAVORS AT CAMMI CAMP HAVESEL AND THE GG NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE AREA?
>> WHERE DO YOU LIVE, SIR? >> 1841 COTTON CREEK TRAIL.
>> SO YOU HAVE TO DRIVE THROUGH THAT TECHS INTERSECTION TO GET O
>> ARE YOU SPEAKING FOR YOURSELF OR ENTIRE CAST --
>> I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE CHOSEN AND DESIRES OF OUR TEAM,
MANAGEMENT AND MYSELF AS WELL. >> .THESE ARE NOT MY PERSONAL V, THEY MIMIC OUR PERSONAL VIEWS. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF OUR
COMPANY. >> I'M A FIRM BELIEVER WHEN GO INTO A COMMUNITY, ORGANIZATION OR GROUP, LET'S SAY IF I JOWND IF I JOINEDTHE MASONS, I WOULD T THEM TO ADHERE TO MY BELIEFS.
THE CHOSEN CHOSE WHICH -- I WANT TO SAY, I'M A BIG FAN OF THAT SERIES. I HAVE WATCHED IT TWICE NOW, IT IS GREAT. I PLAN ON WATCHING THE SECOND SEASON SOON. WHEN YOU MOVE INTO A SOCIETY, INTO A GROUP OR CITY OR ORGANIZATION, YOU ARE TO ASIMILAR ASSIMILATE INTO THEM AM INTO YOU.
YA'LL CHOSE THE LOCATION DUE TO COST, WITHOUT THE AMENITIES.
YOU HAVE SURVIVED THIS LONG WITHOUT THOSE AMENITIES.
I'M SURE YOU WOULD AGREE THAT YA'LL WOULD SURVIVE WITHOUT THOSE AMENITIES IN THE FUTURE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY A MOVIE OR A SHOW WOULD WANT TO COME TO TOWN AND DICTATE TO THE TOWN WHERE WE SHOULD BUILD THINGS WHEN THEY CHOSE THIS COMMUNITY TO FILM THEIR PROJECT. THAT CONCERNS ME.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN HARTSON.
IT IS NOT A DEMAND. IT IS A QSM AS CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY, WE BROUGHT 15 FAMILIES HERE SO FAR.
AND FARM TO MARKET, 663 IS A CHALLENGING ROAD TO TRAVEL ON.
55 TO 65 MILES PER HOUR SPEED LIMITS.
SO THIS IS JUST SIMPLY SHARING OUR OPINION AS A USER OF THE FACILITY FOR YOU. SO PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF IT SOUNDED LIKE A DEMAND. WE'RE HERE.
WE ARE GRATEFUL TO BE IN MIDLOTHIAN.
WE WANT TO BE GOOD CITIZENS. WE WANT TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION TO THE COMMUNITY IN MANY WAYS POSSIBLE.
WE FEEL AND BELIEF, MANY OF OUR PEOPLE ARE LOOKING TO BUY HOMES OUT IN THAT AREA. AND WE JUST FEEL IT WOULD ACTUALLY CREATE A SAFER MIDLOTHIAN TO HAVE LESS OF THOSE PEOPLE TRAVELING SOUTH AND NORTH ON 663.
>> I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES? >> IT DOES.
I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH IT.
BUT OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> COUNCIL, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT?
>> I WILL CLOSE AND -- >> I WAS GOING TO ASK IF WE COULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, TAKE THE DISCUSSION INTO CLOSE
THE DISCUSSION. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. >> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE
>> PLEASE VOTE. PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.
7-0. COUNCIL, DISCUSSION WHICH CAN
INCLUDE QUESTIONS OF STAFF. >> I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM, THERE
IS A DECEL LANE ON 875,. >>HE.
>> N875, YES?>> NOT AT THIS TIMS NOT A DECEL LANE.
AT A MINIMUM, WHEN WE TALK TO THE APPLICANT, AND I THINK WE GO INTO IT IN THE STAFF REPORT ALSO, BUT LEFT TURN LANES ARE REQUIRED. INTO THE COMMERCIAL AREA OR THE COMMUNITY RETAIL AREA, AND INTO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
SO EVEN WITHOUT A TIA, LEFT TURN LANES ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED, JUST FROM A CITY REQUIREMENT. WHEN HE COMES IN AND HE ACTUALLY REDEVELOPS THIS AREA, THAT'S WHEN A TIA IS REALLY GOING TO BE
[01:20:03]
TRIGGERED. THAT'S USUALLY DURING THE CIVIL REVIEW PROCESS. THERE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED ON 663 OR ALONG 875? MAYBE POSSIBLY DEPENDING ON WHAT USES GET APPROVED, THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO TRIGGER THAT.AT A MINIMUM AGAIN, THE AGREEMENT OR WHAT IS ACTUALLY SHOWN IN THE ORDINANCE, I BELIEVE UNDER THE SITE PLAN, THAT'S WHERE WE TALK ABOUT LEFT TURN LANES INTO THE RESIDENTIAL
SECTIONS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION, IF I MAY, MAYOR. IT HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE THAT TXDOT HAS BEEN VERY SLOW TO RESPOND AS FAR AS WIDENING ROADS AND LIGHTS. HAS THAT BEEN YOUR EXPERIENCE,
TOO? >> I WILL LET THE ENGINEER COME UP HERE AND ANSWER THAT ONE SINCE IT IS BEING RECORDED.
>> IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE PROJECT ITSELF.
ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WE WOULD BE ANTICIPATING ON OUR END OF IT WITH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, TXDOT WOULD REVIEW WITH CITY STAFF ANY REQUIREMENTS NEEDED ON ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE DONE BY THE DEVELOPER. WE WOULDN'T BE WAITING ON
>> SO THEY COULDN'T JUST SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, THEY NEED TXDOT'S PERMISSION. HOW FAST HAS TXDOT BEEN IN MIDLOTHIAN OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS TO PUT IN LIGHTS AND WIDEN ROADS? IT HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE THEY HAVE BEEN PAINFULLY SLOW TO THE DETRIMENT OF OUR CITIZENS AND SAFETY OF
OUR CITIZENS. >> I THINK IT DEPENDS IF IT IS A TXDOT PROJECT AND TXDOT IS DOING THE DESIGN AND PAYING FOR THE PROJECT OR BEING DONE BY DEVELOPERS.
THERE'S BEEN A BUNCH OF WORK. THE LAST IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE DID, TXDOT ACTUALLY ALLOWED US WHEN WE DID THE DESIGN --
>> HOW MANY -- >> SO TXDOT LET US DO THAT AS A CITY PROJECT WHICH IS UNUSUAL. THEY HAVE TAKEN DIFFERENT STOPS
STEPSTO ALLOW PROJECTS TO GO QU. >> OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, HOW MANY STOPLIGHTS HAS TXDOT PUT IN DUE TO A NEIGHBORHOOD BEING BUILT? MY MEMORY IS ZERO.
TXDOT, PUT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, LET US PUT A STOPLIGHT THERE FOR YOUR CITIZENS SAFETY. THAT'S ZERO.
WE HAVE ASKED NUMEROUS TEAMS FOR THEM TO DO STUDIES.
THEY DO A STUDY, THEY NEVER TAKE ANY ACTION ON RED LIGHTS.
SEVERAL RED LIGHTS, I HAVE HEARD YOU AND CHRIS SAY, THAT WE NEED IN TOWN AND THEY ARE NOT ACTING ON IT.
SO THIS WOULD ADD TO THAT CONFUSION AND TO THAT SAFETY HAZARD TO THE CITIZENS. IS THERE AN EXAMPLE THAT YOU CAN GIVE OF TXDOT PUTTING IN A LIGHT WHERE ONE IS NEEDED BECAUSE A NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN BUILT.
>> ONE OF THE NEW ONES, PUTTING IN NOW, IS AT AUTUMN RUN, HAWK
HAWKINS RUN. >> HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN ASKING
THEM TO DO THAT. >> HUD, YIELD FOR A MOMENT.
>> THIS IS ZONING, WE ARE GOING ON EXAMPLES.
WE HAVE TO RELATE THIS BACK TO THE ZONING CASE.
>> I BELIEVE I DID THAT. >> MULTIPLE REQUESTS WE MADE FOR
LOOKING AT TRAFFIC SIGNAL. >> CAN I MAKE PINT THAT ON EVEN THOUGH THE CITY DOES MAKE THE REQUEST, WHEN YOU DO A TIA AND TXDOT DOESN'T DEEM IT NECESSARY, NO ONE DOES IT.
NOW, HE, THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO DO A TIA.
THE DEVELOPER WILL PAY FOR THE DECEL LANE.
THE CITY HAS COLLECTED IMPACT FEES FOR EVERY NEW DEVELOPMENT.
YOU KEEP STATING IT IS A STATE ROAD AND IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY, BUT WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS TAKEN IN IMPACT FEES. YOU COULD SAY IT IS AS MUCH OUR FAULT AS STATE'S FALL FOR NOT PUTTING CITY SAFETY FIRST WHEN WE HAVE THE IMPACT MONEY TO DO SO.
I HEAR WHERE YOU ARE GOING, BUT IT IS A DOUBLE EDGED SWORD.
WE COLLECTED FEES TO PUT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS IN.
>> THIS QUESTION, WE CAN'T PUT SIGNAL LIGHTS IN WITHOUT
TXDOT. >> IF YOU WENT TO THEM, WE ARE GOING TO PUT IN FREE LIGHTS, WOULD THEY TURN DOWN FREE MONEY.
>> THEY WOULD ALLOW US. >> NOT ENTIRELY, MCALPIN, THEY WOULDN'T LET US. SO THERE IS SOMETIMES WHEN THEY WILL -- EVEN IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY, THEY WON'T LET YOU PUT A
SIGNAL IN. >> THAT WAS MY POINT, WE HAVE TO
HAVE THEIR PERMISSION TO DO IT. >> ANYBODY ON A STATE ROADWAY HAS TO GET PERMISSION FROM THE STATE AND DO A TIA.
[01:25:01]
HILLWOOD, EVERY SINGLE DEVELOPMENT WE APPROVED TIA, AFTER THE ZONING. THAT IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT.WHY WE ARE BEATING UP ON THE TIA, I HAVE NO IDEA.
A CLEAR POINT, MOST PEOPLE DO TIAS AFTER.
>> THE POINT I TOOK WAS THE DEED, WHICH COMES FIRST.
>> THIS JUST HAPPENED ON BYRD RANCH.
TXDOT, COULD SAY NO, WE DON'T WANT TO YOU HAVE A DECEL, WHAT DO YOU DO THEN. YOU CAN'T BE HELD TO THE FIRE.
>> THE LANDSCAPING ON THE SOUTH END OF THE DEVELOP MANY, DEVELO, MENTIONED IT IS GOING TO HAVE AN IRON FENCE.
FROM THE PICTURE THAT I SEE, THE LANDSCAPING PLAN LOOKS PRETTY DENSE. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM IS CLEAR VIEW INTO PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS.
IS THERE A HEIGHTENED LEVEL OF LAND LANDSCAPING DUE TO THE FEN.
>> YES, SIR. SO YOU ARE CORRECT.
AN ORNAMENTAL. STONE COLUMNS EVERY 32 FEET IS THE REQUIREMENT. NOW, TO HELP WITH THE SCREENING, THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE PUTTING IN SIX-FOOT TALL HOLLY SHRUBS OR NELLY R. STEVENS. IT IS IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THOSE EVERY THREE FEET.
THAT'S AT THE -- THEY HAVE TO BE SIX FOOT TALL, RIGHT AT INSTALLATION. NOT ONE OF THESE WHERE THEY PUT IN THREE FOOT AND WAIT UNTIL IT GROWS TO SIX FOOT, IT HAS TO BE SIX FOOT ON INSTALLATION. ON TOP OF THAT, THE APPLICANT IS PLANTING TREES EVERY 30 FEET IN ADDITION TO THAT.
SO NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE THE GREEN SCREEN WALL, AND THE ORNAMENTAL IRON FENCE, YOU HAVE TREES PLANTED EVERY 30 FEET.
FOUR-INCH CALIPER TREES INSTALLED.
>> THANK YOU. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE AERIAL VIEW. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE THINGS. I LIVE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE TOWN NOW. I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS I'M OUT OF THE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT.
I AM A FIRM BELIEVER THAT PUTTING SOME RETAIL IN ON THE SOUTH END OF TOWN WILL ALLEVIATE 663.
IF I HAVE TO GO GET DIAPERS FOR MY SON, I'M GOING ALL THE WAY INTO TOWN. THE GAS, ALL THE WAY INTO THE TOWN. ALL THE HOMECOMING RIGHT HERE , IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING, ALL WE ARE DOING IS ADDING TO THE PROBLEM. SO I'M NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO PUT RESTAURANTS DOWN THERE. WE WANT TO KEEP RESTAURANTS IN TOWN. BUT SOME BASIC SERVICES HAVE TO GET TO THIS OUTSIDE OF TOWN OR WE ARE FORCING TRAFFIC ON 14TH STREET AND 663 WHICH IS GOING TO CAUSE TRAFFIC ISSUE.
SECOND THING IS, ON THE NEIGHBORS, I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR AT LEAST ONE TERM, I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY NEIGHBORS THAT I KNOW OF COMPLAIN THAT THEY ARE GETTING LARGER LOTS THAN THEY ALREADY HAVE. HALF ACRES, THOSE ARE TINY,
PROBABLY 70 FEET. >> THOSE ARE ACTUALLY 100-FOOT WIDE. LARGER LOTS ON THE BOTTOM.
REALLY SMALL INTO. >> THE POINT BEING, WE HAVE TRIED TO MATCH LOT SIZE ON DEVELOPMENTS, NEVER PUT 2 TO 1.
THIS IS A LARGER LOT SUBDIVISION THAN ANYTHING AROUND IT.
I THINK IT MAKES SENSE AND IT MEETS OUR COMP PLAN.
THAT WAS CITIZEN INPUT. THAT WAS P&Z INPUT, COUNCIL
INPUT OVER THE YEARS. >> WHAT WAS P&Z'S
RECOMMENDATION? >> RECOMMENDED DENIAL 6-1.
>> OKAY. >> P&Z DREW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. TIME IS FORGETFUL.
>> DO WE HAVE A RECORD OF THE ONE, 6-1, WHO WAS THE 1?
>> IT WAS KOEHLER. >> COULD HAVE GUESSED.
>> I HAVE A COMMENT TO MAKE BEFORE WE MAKE A MOTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> THIS MIGHT BE A DIFFICULT ONE. DO WE HAVE RECORD OF HOW P&Z VOTED WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED IN MARCH?
>> LAST TIME. >> THE TIME BEFORE?
>> OH, THE TIME BEFORE THAT. GO MAYOR, YOU ASKED IF ANYONE HAD ANYTHING ELSE. I WANT TO ADD ONE THING REAL QUICK. THIS IS MY SECOND TERM, SECOND YEAR ON THE COUNCIL, AND I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED BUT THIS IS
[01:30:04]
THE ONE TOPIC W WHERE OVER 20 PEOPLE, MORE THAN ANY OTHER AGENDA ITEM, CAME AND SPOKE OUT THAT THEY DO NOT WANT THIS.>> THEY DIDN'T SEND ANY LETTERS IN.
>> COUNCIL ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
>> A COMMENT, AND I WILL BE BRIEF.
PHILOSOPHICALLY, I THINK THAT I VIEW THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY FROM MY FRIEND NEXT TO ME.
EVEN LAST NIGHT, I DROVE TO THE DOLLAR GENERAL ON 875 TO RELIEF TRAFFIC GOING INTO KROGER BECAUSE IT WAS CONVENIENT.
I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ARE LIVING OUT THERE THAT COULD USE SOME CONVENIENCE. WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE EXACTLY, I DON'T KNOW. BUT HAVING POCKETS OF COMMERCIAL
RETAIL. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE COMMERCIAL PART THERE. THAT'S OKAY FOR ME.
THE WATER RUNNING ACROSS THE FRONT YARDS, I HAVE PROBLEMS
WITH THAT. >> TALKING ABOUT THE CREEK? THAT, TO ME, THAT KEEPS ME FROM VOTING FOR IT.
>> HE SAID HE WOULD BOX IT UP AND COVER IT OVER.
>> IF HE RECOMMEND IT. >> OKAY, WHAT WAS THAT?
>> HOW MANY OF YA'LL VIEW THAT, WHAT WAYNE SAID?
>> I WILL TRY TO CHOOSE MY WORDS CAREFULLY.
I HAVE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CHOSEN.
AND WHAT THEY ARE BRINGING TO OUR COMMUNITY IS VERY UNIQUE.
THEY ARE VERY FORTUNATE AND I DON'T WANT TO SAY BLESSED, AND IN THESE CONVERSATIONS, THEY HAVE ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE ON OUR CITY.
LAST WEEK THEY HAD 200 PEOPLE FILMING AND THEY HAVE CARS AND TRUCKS EVERY WER. EVERYWHERE.THEY ARE COMMITTED FE SEASONS OR THREE TO FILM THE GOSPEL SERIES THE CHOSEN.
WHAT HAPPENS BEFORE THAT, I CAN'T COMMENT.
THERE'S A CHANCE THEY WILL BE HERE FOR A WHILE.
THEY WILL BRING A LOT OF PEOPLE TO THIS COMMUNITY THAT WE NEED AS A COUNCIL TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ABSORB.
THAT'S IN ADDITION TO THE HIGHLANDS AND ALL THESE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS, FIRST OFF, I WANT TO SAY THE CHOSEN IS VERY SENSITIVE TO WHAT THEY WILL DO TO OUR COMMUNITY.
BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE AN IMPACT BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL AND THAT'S GOING TO BRING PEOPLE HERE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO THINK ABOUT.
AT THIS TIME, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR STATEMENTS, I
WILL TAKE A MOTION. >> I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING. >> WE ALREADY CLOSED THE PUBLIC
WE DID. WE CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING.
>> OKAY. >> IT HAS BEEN A WHILE.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE WATER UNDERGROUND,
HOWEVER YOU WANT TO SAY THAT. >> LOTS 2 THROUGH 5, CULVERT TO
BE CLOSED. >> LOTS 2 TO 5, CLOSED.
TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> WE HAVE A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.
THE ITEM PASSES, 5-2. THANK YOU.
>> ITEM ITEM 2022-219, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING
[01:35:03]
OF APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES WITHIN THE WM RAWLS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 915, FROM SINGLE FAMILY-1 DISTRICT TO URBAN VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED DIRECTLY NORTH OF FM 663 AND AUTUMN RUN DRIVE.>> NEXT CASE IS 219, CASE NO. Z32-2022-113.
THIS IS FOR PROPOSED GENERAL OFFICE FOR ZONING CHANGE GOING FROM SINGLE FAMILY 1 TO UVPD. AGAIN, TOTAL SITE IS JUST OVER TWO ACRES AT 2.05 ACRES, CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN HAS AREAS ON MODULE.
LOCATION EXHIBIT, OUTLINED IN RED IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT HAND AND IT WILL BE CROSS CONNECTION ACCESS PROVIDED WITH THE BURGER KING RIGHT HERE. THIS NEXT SLIDE DEPICTS OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RELATION TO OUR GENERAL PROFESSIONAL ZONING AND SO FAR LEFT-HAND COLUMN IS OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PROFESSIONAL, SECOND COLUMN CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN AGAIN STANDARDS FOR GENERAL PROFESSIONAL WITH THE PROPOSED DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSING IN THIS THIRD COLUMN. THE FAR RIGHT-HAND COLUMN IS OUR MEETS COLUMN, WHETHER THE APPLICANT IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OR NOT. AS YOU SEE, THE APPLICANT IS MEETING ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OUR GENERAL PROFESSIONAL ZONING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PARKING. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, AS YOU SEE IN THIS THIRD COLUMN, 40 PARKING SPACES.
OUR MAXIMUM ALLOWED EVEN INCLUDING THE 25% MAXIMUM WILL BE 14 SPACES. SO THIS IS SOMETHING WE WILL TOUCH ON A LITTLE BIT MORE HERE IN A SECOND.
AGAIN, NEXT SLIDE IS THE SITE PLAN, 4200 SQUARE FEET DENTAL OFFICE, PROPOSED 40 PARKING SPACES.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT AND PROBABLY WHAT YOU WILL HEAR THEM SPEAK TO IS FOR THE LARGE REASON WHY THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE PARKING SPACES IS DUE TO THEM HAVE 15 TO 20 EMPLOYEES AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THE CUSTOMER TRAFFIC THAT THEY WILL HAVE FOR THAT. NEXT TWO SIDES, CONCEPT ELEVATION PLAN. THE BUILDING DOES CON TIS OF COF STONE, STUCKO. STUCCO.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. PLANNING & ZONING VOTED 7-0 TO APPROVE THE PROPOSAL REQUEST, THAT INCLUDES 40 PROPOSED PARKING SPACES. HOWEVER, WHILE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE PARKING SPACES NOT EXCEED 26 PARKING SPACES.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> QUICK QUESTION, 4200 SQUARE
>> THEY ARE SAYING 15 TO 20 EMPLOYEES.
HOW MANY DENTISTS IS THAT? I'M TRYING TO GET THE PARKING
LOT THING? >> I WILL DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT. YES, SIR.
>> WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER. >> I MADE A MISTAKE.
THE APPLICANT IS MY CO-WORKER. I'M HERE ON THEIR BEHALF.
THERE WILL BE THREE DOCTORS TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
>> SO THREE DOCTORS AND THIS IS NOT NORMALLY WHERE I DIVE INTO, BUT THREE DOCTORS, EACH DOCTOR HAVING --
>> ABOUT FIVE HYGIENISTS. WE ARE LOOKING ABOUT -- MINUS THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF. SOMEONE TO PICK UP THE CALLS.
TOOK IT UP BETWEEN 20 TO 25 EMPLOYEES.
>> AND YOU WANT A TOTAL OF, CORRECT ME, WHAT WAS IT 40.
>> 40 SPACES. >> SO THREE DOCTORS WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 20 PEOPLE AND EACH DOCTOR CAN SEE APPROXIMATELY HOW
MANY PEOPLE AT ONCE? >> THEY HAVE 12 PATIENT CHAIRS AT A TIME. IF ALL OF THEM ARE FULL AT THE SAME TIME AND WORKING ON THEM, THEY HAVE CUSTOMERS WAITING IN THE LOBBY. EASILY BE --
>> WE WILL TAKE IT, WE WOULD LIKE 40.
THE COMPANY THAT HAS DONE THIS, THEY ARE ONE OF THE LARGEST DENTAL BUILDERS AROUND THE COUNTRY.
THEY KNOW WHAT THE TRAFFIC IS AT THE APPLICATION.
THIS IS KIND OF NOT A TRIAL AN ERROR.
>> NO OFFENSE, I HAVE SEEN SOME CORPORATE NATIONAL COMPANIES THAT LOVE TO ASK FOR MORE PARKING PLACES.
I DON'T KNOW. UP FRONT, I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE SEEN WHERE NATIONAL CORPORATE THINKS THEY WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE MORE PARKING SPACES. >> I WANT YOU TO HAVE ENOUGH PARKING TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS.
[01:40:02]
UYOU HAVE BEEN HERE ALL NIGHT, LISTENING TO ME TALKING ABOUT PARKING POLLUTION. THE HEALTHY MIDDLE IS ALL ANY OFUS ARE TRYING TO GET TO. >> WE WANT YOU TO SUCCEED.
>> THANK YOU. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE IS THERE MOTION TO CLOSE.
DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL IN.
>> ARE WE ONLY TALKING PARKING TONIGHT OR WHOLE PROJECT?
>> WHOLE PROJECT . >> THIS PROJECT IS FOR THIS LOT ONLY. THE LOT TO THE SOUTH OF IT, IS THAT LARGE ENOUGH TO DO SOMETHING ON? THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE FOR FUTURE PLANNING, I KNOW, LIKE, WITH BURGER KING, THEY PUT A STUPSTUB THERE SO THIS ORGANIZAN COULD CONNECT TO IT. IN THE FUTURE TO AVOID MORE
ENTRANCES ON TO 663. >> I DON'T THINK TO OUR KNOWLEDGE THAT ANYTHING IS GOING TO BE PROPOSED TO GO RIGHT THERE. AGAIN, TO YOUR POINT, WE ARE TRYING TO LESSEN ANY ADDITIONAL DRIVE ACCESS POINTS ON 663.
>> SO WOULD IT BE WISE TO ASK THEM TO STEP IT OUT FOR A FUTURE FACILITY THERE TO AVOID SOMEONE ELSE COMING IN AND BUYING THE PROPERTY NEXT TO THEM AND BEING FORCED TO GO ON TO 663?
>> THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SA
SAYING. >> TO PROVIDE CROSS ACCESS TO
THE PROPERTY. >> YOU SAID IT BETTER THAN I
DID. >> COULD YOU GO TO THE SLIDE? I DON'T HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL ONE.
>> THIS BUILDING. YOU CAN PUT THE SAME BUILDING
TWTHAT IS THERE. >> THEY ARE TWO ACRES.
AND THEN ONE ACRE. >> THEY ARE BUYING THE WHOLE
LOT. >> BURGER KING IS HERE, CROSS ACCESS HERE. I'M SUGGESTING ANOTHER CROSS ACCESS HERE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO AVOID ANOTHER
ENTRANCE ON TO 663. >> WOULDN'T THEY HAVE TO RESELL IT AND REPLAT IT. HAVE IT APPROVED.
RIGHT NOW, IT IS A SINGLE LOT, IS IT NOT?
>> IF YOU DON'T PUT IT IN HERE THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT THEY GIVE CROSS ACCESS. LET'S -- I WOULD PUT IT ON THE SITE PLAN, THEY HAVE TO CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT IF THEY
SUBDIVIDE. >> THE APPLICANT HAS THE WHOLE PROPERTY. THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK FOR
ANY ADDITIONAL. >> JUST TO REITERATE WHAT I
HEARD. >> WE GET THE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT NOW. NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I WILL
TAKE A MOTION. >> I WILL MOVE TO CLOSE THE
>> WE WERE CLOSED. >> AGAIN WE HAVE? I HAVE LOST THE WHOLE THING HERE.
>> I USUALLY DO THAT. >> [INAUDIBLE].
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> TWO QUESTIONS, THE NUMBER OF PARKING SLOTS AND THE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT.
WE WANT CROSS ACCESS. HOW MANY --
>> DOESN'T A CROSS ACCESS PREVENT 40 SPOTS?
>> ACCESS EASEMENT WITHIN THE FIRE LANE.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH THE 40 SPOTS, SEEMS TO BE A GOOD CASE THERE, AND THE ADDITION OF A CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT FOR ANY FUTURE SUBDIVIDING OF THE PROPERTY.
[01:45:01]
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
MOTION WITH 40 LOTS. AND CROSS ACCESS.
SO PLEASE VOTE. THE ITEM PASSES 6-1.
WELCOME. THAT IS ALL OF THE -- NOPE, NOPE. ONE MORE.
SORRY. OPEN ITEM 2022-223, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MIDLOTHIAN TAX ABATEMENT POLICY ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR A TAX ABATEMENT
PROGRAM. >> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS IS AN ITEM THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO BRING BEFORE THE COUNCIL EVERY TWO YEARS TO CONSIDER THE TAX ABATEMENT AS A WHOLE.
SO THERE'S NO SPECIFIC PROJECT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS.
THIS IS THE GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA USED TO SELECT FUTURE PROJECTS THAT WE DO. A QUICK OVERVIEW, THE TAX ABATEMENT, THIS IS ONE OF THE MANY TOOLS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE THAT IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO THE NEW VALUE THAT IS BEING CREATED.
YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN THIS EXAMPLE BEFORE WHERE WE WALK THROUGH THE TAX ABATEMENT BUT HAVE THAT, IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
THE MAIN THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS ON ARE THE CHANGES THAT WE ARE PROPOSING FROM YOUR FEEDBACK WE HAVE HEARD THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. SO THE FIRST ONE IS THAT WE WOULD NO LONGER LIMIT REINVESTMENT ZONES TO THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL. THIS WOULD OPEN UP A COUPLE OF OTHER OPTIONS THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE SHOULD THE NEED ARISE.
WE ALSO ARE ADJUSTING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS THAT WE WILL GO OVER ON THE NEK SLIDE NE WILL INCREASE AND MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT TO QUALIFY FOR THE TAX ABATEMENTS.
AND THEN A COMMENT THAT WAS REVIEWED LAST TIME WAS THAT ALL OF THESE PROJECTS WOULD BE REVIEWED FIRST OR THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD AS A WHOLE.
THEY WOULD BRING FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL MUCH AS WE DO ON OUR OTHER PROJECTS, BUT IT FORMALIZES WE DO THAT FOR THE TAX ABATEMENT. LAST ONE, MINOR CHANGES THAT YOU SAW ON THE RED LINE PROVIDED IN THE PANGT.
SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS ON ARE THE THREE MAIN QUALIFIERS THAT WOULD BE -- THAT WOULD MAKE PROJECT ELIGIBLE FOR A TAX ABATEMENT. SO IN THE PAST, ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAD IS THAT THEY HAD TO EXCEED THE COUNTY AVERAGE WAGE. THIS IS ONE THAT WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION FROM COUNCIL ON TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE GOING AFTER HIGHER PAYING POSITIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO CHANGE WOULD BE TO GO, INSTEAD OF THE COUNTY AVERAGE WAGE, REFLECTED ON THIS GRAPH FROM THE BLUE LINE, INSTEAD, WE WOULD GO FOR -- IT MUST EXCEED THE INDUSTRY AVERAGE WAGE WHICH YOU SEE IN THE DARK LINES, THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF PROJECTS IN THAT WE FOR TAX ABATEMENTS.
MOST OF THOSE EXCEED THE COUNTY AVERAGE.
WE ARE ADDING ANOTHER BENCHMARK THAT RAISES THE WAGE FOR THESE PROJECTS THAT HELP ENSURE THAT WE ARE PRING BRINGING IN STRONGR PROJECTS TO THE COMMUNITY. THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE THAT THE PROJECTS HAVE A MINIMUM TAXABLE VALUE OF AT LEAST $50 MILLION.
FOR THOSE PROJECTS THAT DID NOT MEET THAT, WE WOULD LOOK AT OTHER INCENTIVE TOOLS TO PARTICIPATE WITH, IF THEY WERE OF INTEREST TO THE COMMUNITY. THE LAST ONE, IN PART OF OUR CHANGE, RE-INVESTMENT ZONES, THIS WOULD OPEN UP A TOOL AVAILABLE IN THE FUTURE FOR DOWNTOWN, AS DOWNTOWN IS A FOCUS OF THE COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY. SO WE WOULD ADD A REQUIREMENT THAT THE PROJECT WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE CATALYST PROJECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE DOWNTOWN PLAN.
SO TO BE CLEAR, FUTURE TAX ABATEMENTS, IF APPROVED, WOULD HAVE TO MEET ONE OF THESE THREE REQUIREMENTS.
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
THAT IS REQUIRED. >> THE COMMENT THAT, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THESE. THE FIRST ONE, KYLE, CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, FROM GOING FROM THE COUNTY AVERAGE TO THE INDUSTRY TWO-DIGIT AVERAGE, WE TEND TO WIN BECAUSE, IF YOU GO BACK THERE, THE ONES THAT ARE THE TALLER BARS ARE THE ONES WE
[01:50:05]
>> AND I HAVE SEEN A COUPLE CASES WHERE THAT HAS RAISED MINIMUM WAGE REQUIREMENT. SO THESE, GIVEN WHAT WE ARE PURSUING AND OTHER THINGS, THESE ADJUSTMENTS ARE TO OUR ADVA ADVANTAGE. COUNCIL, QUESTIONS?
OR A MOTION TO CLOSE. >> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
>> PLEASE VOTE. HUD, WE CLOSED.
DISCUSSION? OR I WILL TAKE A MOTION IF YA'LL
ARE COMFORTABLE. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. SECONDED.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, KYLE.
ITEM 2022-224. CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO SECTION 4.5604, MINIMUM LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, TO THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING WITHIN OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS, FOR AN EXISTING BUILDING ON APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES SITUATED IN THE WM HAWKINS SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 465. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED
AT 505 EAST AVENUE E. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AT THE MISD SUPPORT CENTER AND BUS BARN.
YOU CAN SEE UP HERE ON OUR SCREEN.
MISD WILL BE ADDING 60 PARKING SPACES FOR SHARED PURPOSES BETWEEN BOTH FACILITIES. IN THIS CASE, THE PARKING LOT WILL BE BEHIND THE MAIN BUILDING.
IT WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE PARKING LOT IS GOING TO BE SET BACK ABOUT 300 FEET FROM FM 1387. OUR REGULATIONS DO REQUIRE ONE TREE FOR EVERY TEN PARKING SPACES.
WE ALSO REQUIRE ONE TREE WITHIN 60 FEET OF EVERY STALL.
MISD HAS STATED THAT THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AT THE BUS BARN WILL BECOME AN ONGOING MAINTENANCE AND UTILITY EXPENSE FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOL. THIS ITEM LISTED ON THE SCREEN DOES INCLUDE ALL OF THESE VARIANCE REQUESTS.
SO THEY ARE SEEKING VARIANCE FROM THE TREES PLANTED.
ALSO SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM THE IRRIGATION TO BE INSTALLED AS WELL. BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT ALL DISTURBED AREAS ARE STILL REQUIRED TO INSTALL SOD OR HYDRO MULCH. I DON'T WANT ANYBODY THINKING IT IS PARKING AREA WITH ROCK. ON MAY 17TH, THE COMMISSION DID VOTE UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE. NOW, FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WE DON'T SUPPORT GRANTING THE VARIANCE FOUGHT LANDSCAPE TO THE REQUIREMENTS. OUR TAKE LANDSCAPING PROMOTES VALUE TO THE PROPERTY. IT IMPROVES THE PHYSICAL APPEARANCE. SO WE PREFER TO STICK WITH THE CODE. BUT IF GRANTED, STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THAT MISD AT LEAST INSTALL THE LANDSCAPING NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS FROM TODAY'S DATE.
I WILL CONTINUE TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS.
>> MARCOS, SO MISD HAS THIS PROJECT.
THEY ARE FUNDING THIS PROJECT. AND THEY WANT TO OUT ON OUR BASE REQUIREMENTS FOR THEIR BENEFIT. THEIR BUDGET IS ALMOST TWICE OURS AND THEY ARE NOT USUALLY QUICK TO SKIP OUT ON THINGS FOR THE CHILDREN IN THE ISD. SO THEY ARE ASKING THAT WE SKIP OUT FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR RESIDENTS.
IS THAT KIND OF WHAT I'M HEA HEARING?
>> COULD BE INTERPRETED THAT WAY.
>> WELL, YEAH -- >> SO THEY CAN SAVE MONEY.
>> I THINK -- THIS IS REALLY FINANCIALLY BASED.
AT THE END OF THE DAY. AND THE APPLICANT DID STATE ALSO THAT IT IS -- FROM THEIR EYES, THEY SEE THIS AS AN ONGOING
>> THEY DO FEEL THAT BEING 300 FEET BEHIND THE SUPPORT CENTER, NOT BEING NECESSARILY VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THAT'S WHERE THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE ALSO. BUT AGAIN, FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WE SEE IT AS THOUGH, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE MAKE EVERYBODY ELSE PUT THE LANDSCAPING IN.
THAT'S OUR STANCE. >> I WOULD AGREE.
I THINK IT WOULD SET A POOR EXAMPLE OF A CITY OR ISD ORGANIZATION TO CIR CIR CIRCUME PROCEDURES WE PUSH EVERYONE ELSE
[01:55:01]
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> LET ME HAVE THE MISD REPRESENTATIVE SPEAK ON THAT. ABSOLUTELY.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.
JIM NORRIS, 1818 PLUM CREEK DRIVE, MIDLOTHIAN.
SO I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> WHY ARE WE TRYING TO SAVE MONEY ON TREES AND GRASS AT THE
EXPENSE? >> THIS IS AT THE BACK OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS THE OLD WASHINGTON SCHOOL, IT HAS BEEN SEVERAL THINGS OVER THE YEARS.
WE HAVE TURNED IT INTO OUR MAINTENANCE FOOD SERVICE CUSTODIAL CONSTRUCTION BUILDING. SO STAFF IS MOVING OVER THERE.
WE HAVE ADDED A WAREHOUSE RIGHT BACK IN THE BACK THERE.
WITH THIS PROJECT, WE ARE ALSO GOING TO ADD ANOTHER DRIVE INTO OUR BUS IF A SILL BECAUSE WE FA. WE HAVE ONE WAY IN AND OUT OF OUR TRANSPORTATION AREA. NO LANDSCAPING BACK IN THAT PART AT ALL. SO WE JUST WANTED TO BE ABLE TO TAKE THIS AND PARK OUR MAINTENANCE VEHICLES, DUMP TRUCKS, TRACTORS. WE WILL BUILD A HYP HIGH FENCE
>> CHAIN LINK. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO AND ACTUALLY THE NEXT ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA IS COUPLED WITH THIS BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO TAKE THE OLD BUS BARN DOWN BEHIND THE MILE. GET RID OF THE BUS BARN, CREATE MORE PARKING FOR THE MILE. WE WILL STILL HAVE SOME OF THAT PROPERTY. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LAY DOWN AREA. THAT HE JUST FELT LIKE THERE IS NO REASON TO IRRIGATE AND PUT TREES THERE IF IT IS NOT GOING
TO BE SEEN. >> MR. NORRIS, GOOD TO SEE YOU TONIGHT, BY THE WAY. I STRUGGLE W WHEN I SAW THIS IN THE PACKET. THE CHANGES HAVEN'T BEEN MADE ALREADY. SO IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I'M SORRY, THE CHANGE. >> THE CHANGES HAVEN'T BEEN MADE
>> YEAH, THE BUILDING AND WAREHOUSE, ALL THAT IS THERE, YEAH. WE HAVE REDONE ALL THAT.
YOU WON'T RECOGNIZE IT. >> I WASN'T SURE IF I WAS
LOOKING AT IT. >> THE WAREHOUSE IS THERE.
THE DRIVE AROUND THE BACK IS THERE.
WE JUST WHERE THE SUBJECT AREA, THAT IS GOING TO BE PARKING.
>> COULD YOU SHOW ME ON THERE. >> I THINK YOU HAVE A LASER POINTER. COULD YOU SHOW MERE WHERE THIS
ME WHERE THIS ISEXACTLY? >> WHERE THIS IS.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> WHERE WOULD THIS LANDSCAPING BE EXACTLY? THAT'S WHAT I WAS STRUGGLING
WITH UNDERSTANDING? >> SO IF THEY LANDSCAPE, OBVIOUSLY THESE ARE THE PARKING SPACES THAT YOU CAN SEE.
YOU HAVE THESE ITEMS THAT EXIST ALSO.
NORMALLY, I HAVE TO HAVE ONE TREE FOR EVERY TEN PARKING
SPACES. >> WHERE'S THE FRONTAGE ROAD ON
THAT? >> IT WOULD BE WAY DOWN OVER HERE, 300 FEET AWAY TO THE SO SOUTH.
>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE OTHER PICTURE.
THE LAST ONE MR. NORRIS WAS LOOKING AT.
>> THIS IS WHERE THE FRONT, 1387 LOCATED.
ONE FOR EVERY TEN PARKING SPACE, I HAVE TO HAVE ONE WITHIN 60 FEET OF EVERY SINGLE PARKING SPOT.
WHAT THAT COMES OUT TO -- >> I WASN'T SURE IF THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS AREA OR EXISTING AREA.
>> ONLY IN THIS LOBING RIGHT HERE.
>> THANK YOU. >> ON OTHER MISD PROPERTIES, DO THEY LOOK TO CIRCUMVENT LANDSCAPING.
>> ONLY WHEN WE ADDED A PARKING LOT AT LONG BRANCH.
PARKING LOT AT MOUNT PEAK TO GET PEOPLE OFF 663.
THE PLANNING & ZONING AND COUNCIL AT THAT TIME ALLOWED US TO NOT PUT IT IN THE PARKING LOT.
THEY ASKED US TO PUT TREES OTHER PLACES, FI IF I REMEMBER, MARCO.
>> I GUESS WHAT I AM STRUGGLING WITH, THE ISD HAS ALL THE INGREDIENTS TO TAKE CARE OF A FEW MORE TREES AND LITTLE BIT
[02:00:04]
MORE GRASS AND IT NEVER COMES INTO PLAY IN ANY OTHER SITUATION AND WE THROW EVERY DEVELOPER, WE THROW EVERY APPLICANT THROUGH THE RINGER TO UPHOLD THESE STANDARDS AND IT SEEMS ALMOSTFOOLISH TO CHANGE THAT NOW. >> MR. NORRIS, REAL EASY QUESTION. CAN WE PUT THE TREES IN THE FRONT D -- MARCOS, CAN WE PUT TE TREES ON THE FRONT, INSTEAD OF
THE BACK? >> THAT WOULD BE A VARIANCE.
>> WELL, YOU KNOW, OUR LANDSCAPE RULES DO ALLOW FOR --
>> WE HAVE MOVED ALL KINDS OF STUFF, DUMPTERS DUMPSTERS, PUT E LANDSCAPING TREES UP IN THE FRONT, JUST BEAUTIFY THE PIECE OF PROPERTY BUT NOT BEHIND THE BUILDINGS.
>> OUR RULES, WE, AGAIN, WE WOULD HAVE TO STILL SEEK A VARIANCE TO A TREE WITHIN 60 FEET OF EVERY PARKING SPACE.
IF YOU TOOK ALL OF THOSE TREES AND YOU PUT THEM ALL UP IN FRONT, TECHNICALLY WE DO HAVE RULES THAT SAY THAT IF TREES ARE REQUIRED ALONG THE FRONT, YOU CAN ACTUALLY GROUP THOSE TREES INSTEAD OF LINING THEM UP ONE TREE EVERY 40 FEET.
BUT THAT'S PART OF THIS VARIANCE, IS THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL DESIRES, I DON'T SEE WHY WE COULDN'T
REQUIRE IT. >> WE ARE NOT ARGUING OVER -- I AGREE WITH HUD NOT TO PUT THEM IN THE BACKYARD.
LET'S PUT THEM IN THE FRONT YARD, 8, 9, WHATEVER THE ORDINANCE SAYS. JUST PUT THEM IN THE FRONT YARD.
>> CAN I ASK CLARIFICATION. ARE WE COUNTING BUS PARKING SPACES AS PARKING? YOU SAID EVERY PARKING SPOT.
>> NO, IT IS ONLY THE 60 THAT FALL IN THIS AREA, THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE ON THE HOOK FOR FOR INSTALLING TREES.
ONE FOR EVERY 10. YOU GIVE ME SIX TREES, BUT THEN DEPENDING ON HOW YOU PLACE THEM, I HAVE GOT TO STILL HAVE ONE TREE WITHIN 60 FEET OF EVERY STALL.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> I'M SAYING WHAT THE RULES
SAY. >> IF WE MAKE THE SCHOOL PUT SIX TREES IN, PERIOD, SOMEWHERE ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, WILL YOU
BE HAPPY? >> WILL YOU BE HAPPY?
>> WILL YOU BE HAPPY? >> WE WILL BE HAPPY.
>> IS THAT OKAY? CAN I MAKE THAT MOTION? I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE HAVE SIX TREES SOMEWHERE
>> NO IRRIGATION. >> ITEM PASSES 7-0.
THANK YOU, MR. NORRIS. IT WAS A PLEASURE HAVING YOU HERE. ARE YOU GOING TO COME BACK? ALL RIGHT, 2022-225, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO SECTION 4.5604, MINIMUM LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, TO THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING WITHIN OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 514
WEST AVENUE I IN ORIGINAL TOWN. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.
VERY SIMILAR REQUEST FROM MISD. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THEY ARE ADDING 20 PARKING SPACES TO THIS EXISTING AREA, WHICH WOULD BE TWO TREES, RIGHT. YOU KNOW, THE RULES DO CHANGE IN THIS CASE BECAUSE I ACTUALLY HAVE PARKING THAT IS ADJACENT TO PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHEN I HAVE PARKING FACING, POINTING OUT TOWARD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THEN I HAVE TO HAVE EVERGREEN SHRUBS ALSO INSTALLED ALONG THAT AREA, NOT TO MENTION THE TREES AS WELL. BUT THAT'S ONLY AGAIN BECAUSE I HAVE GOT PARKING THAT IS FACING OUT TO SOUTH 4TH STREET.
WITH THAT, AS WE ALL KNOW, THE APPLICANT, THEY DO FEEL THAT THIS OBVIOUSLY IS GOING TO HAVE FINANCIAL IMPACTS TO IT.
SO ON THE 17TH, THE COMMISSION DID VOTE UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. STATED EARLIER, WE DON'T SUPPORT THE REQUEST. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE WOULD PREFER TO SEE THAT LANDSCAPING BE INSTALLED.
WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> THE POLICY, THE POLICY REQUIRES. JUST THE POLICY.
NORMALLY, EVERYTHING THAT YOU SEE UNDER 4.5604, THIS IS WHAT
WE WOULD TYPICALLY REQUIRE. >> BUS BARN, THIS IS WHAT I THINK OF BEING THE BUS BARN. THIS IS THE BUS BARN WHEN I WAS
[02:05:03]
GROWING UP. IS THIS PARKING LOT GOING WHERE SOME OF THE FACILITIES WERE THAT ARE GOING TO BE TORN DOWN?>> WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE, GENTLEMEN, IS IF YOU KNOW THIS PROPERTY, IF YOU KNOW WHAT WE CALL THE MILE NOW, ORIGINALLY MIDLOTHIAN HIGH SCHOOL, JUNIOR HIGH, EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD.
THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. HERE'S THE MILE NOW, WE HAVE THIS PARKING, WE HAVE THE PARKING LOT.
THIS IS WHERE OUR DAY CARE IS IN NOW JENKINS, OLD HIGH SCHOOL.
THIS IS THE OLD BUSINESS 67. IF YOU HAVE BEEN TO THIS BUILDING, THIS IS KIND OF WHAT WE CALL OUR LAY DOWN OR SCRAPYARDS, EVERY HAS ONE. THIS BUILDING I SAID THE OTHER NIGHT AT THE BOARD MEETING, PROBABLY TWO OF US COULD PUSH THAT THING OVER. IT NEEDS TO GO.
IT HAS BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. THERE ARE RUMORS THAT I WAS HERE WHEN I WAS BUILT, AND THAT IS NOT TRUE.
BECAUSE THIS IS PROBABLY BEEN HERE PREWORLD WAR II OR RIGHT ABOUT THEN. THAT WAS OUR BUS BARN, JUSTIN, WE HAD FOUR, FIVE BUSES PARK THERE.
THAT'S WHERE OUR MAINTENANCE. I'M SORRY, GUYS, I CAN'T RUN THIS THING. THEY DON'T LET ME DO THIS.
BUT IF YOU WILL NOTICE THIS AREA RIGHT HERE WOULD BE COMPLETELY CLEANED OFF. OLD ORIGINAL BUS BARN, TIN BUILDING. THIS IS AN EYESORE.
THIS WAS ONE OF MY GOALS TO DO SOME OF THIS STUFF.
I WANT TO GET THIS DONE. WE'RE GOING TO CREATE ABOUT 20 SPACES HERE AS MARCOS SAID. WE WILL STILL HAVE OUR FENCE LINE, STILL USE THIS PROPERTY. WE SCREEN.
THIS IS A FAIRLY NICE BUILDING, WE KEEP IT.
WHAT WE REALLY NEED IS PARKING FOR THE MILE.
THIS IS GOING TO GAIN US SPACES FOR MILE ACTIVITIES.
THAT'S OUR REASON. >> THE PURPOSE OF MY QUESTION WAS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S HEAVILY TREED FENCE LINE BEHIND THE BUILDING. IS THAT GOING TO BE CLEAR-CUT
OUT OR KEEP THOSE TREES. >> WE WILL KEEP ALL THIS?
NO REASON. >> WHAT ARE DIRECTLY WEST OF --
>> WEST, RIGHT HERE? >> THESE RIGHT HERE.
>> THERE ARE SOME SCRUB TREES. THEY WILL HAVE TO GO.
>> THAT HE IS ONE RIGHT AT THE END WHERE IT MEETS THE ROAD.
THEN SCRUB, POISONIVY. >> OUR PURPOSE, TO GET RID OF THE BUS BARN AND WHY NOT CREATE PARKING WHILE WE HAVE THE SPOT THERE. WE THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERATION.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. >> YEAH, WHERE IT SAYS 6.5.
THERE'S 6.5, SIX AND A HALF FOOT WIDTH BETWEEN PROPERTY LINE AND ACTUAL PARKING AREA. SO I'M SUPPOSE TODAY HAVE SHRUBS RUN ALL THROUGH THIS AREA AND THEN AT LEAST TWO TREES INSTALLED. JUST ON THE LOT.
ON THE LOT. >> WHAT IS THE -- CLARIFY FOR ME, WHAT IS THE REASONING BEHIND THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SOME SHRUBS AND TWO TREES? THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP BEHIND
THE COST AND ONGOING MAINTENANCE.
THEY WOULD NEED TO INSTALL IRGAIG AS WELL.
IRRIGATION GOES ALONG WITH ALL OUR LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS.
>> THIS ONE IS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> THIS IS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, IT DOES FACE A HOME.
THERE ARE TWO RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAT ARE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF
FOURTH STREET. >> I HELPED YOU ON THE LAST ONE, I DON'T THINK I CAN HELP YOU ON THIS LAST ONE.
WE NEED SHRUBS. THE PEOPLE ACROSS THE STREET, THEY DESERVE TO GET THE STANDARD.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE AS PRESENTED. SECONDED FOR THAT ONE?
>> SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE, YES, AS PRESENTED.
>> I WILL WITHDRAWAL THE SECOND. DISREGARD.
>> DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND.
>> I HAVE A MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST AND SECONDED.
[02:10:12]
>> TO DENY, YOU VOTE YES TO D DENY.
PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 4-2, WITH ONE ABSTENTION. THAT MEANS THE REQUEST IS DE
DENIED. >> THEY HAVE TO PUT THE BUSHES
AND THE MOTION WAS TO DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
>> YES VOTE WOULD BE TO DENY SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
>> I MADE A MOTION TO DENY THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO FORCE THE APPLICANTS TO COMPLY WITH OUR STANDARDS.
>> WE HAVE THE REQUEST, GENTLEMEN, PLEASE.
THE REQUEST HAS BEEN DENIED 4-2 WITH ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ITEM 2022-226, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A PUBLIC ROADWAY ON A SMALL AREA OF THE COMMUNITY PARK PROPERTY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN HAWKINS MEADOW, PHASE 4, WITH SAID REQUEST TO ALSO ALLOW FOR THE PLACEMENT OF AN ENTRY MONUMENT SIGN.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.
THIS IS COMING BEFORE YOU FROM STAFF, THE REQUEST FROM STAFF, THE DEVELOPER IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVE.
IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL, ESSENTIALLY, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TRYING TO DO IS LINE UP THEIR ENTRYWAY ACROSS FROM LAKE PARK DRIVE. CURRENTLY A LEFT TURN LANE IF YOU ARE HEADING NORTHBOUND ON 14TH STREET TO BE ABLE TO TURN ON TO LAKE PARK, THIS WOULD BUILD A LEFT-HAND TURN LANE TO GET INTO THE DEVELOP MANY. THE ORIGINAL PLAN SHOWED IT BEING OFFSET, WHENEVER LAKE PARK DRIVE, WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE EXTENSION OF BELMONT WAS FARTHER TO THE SOUTH, HAD TO BE SHIFTED TO THE NORTH. THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR FULL ACCESS AND ALSO FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE CARS HAVING TO MAKE A U-TURN. SPHU IF YOU WANT TO HEAD SOUTHB, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO NORTHBOUND TO A U-TURN.
AS PARTS OF THAT, THE DEVELOPER ALSO REQUESTED TO BE ABLE TO PLACE A SMALL MONUMENT SIGN IN THIS PHASE OF HAWK HAWKINS MEA.
THEY WOULD ALSO MAINTAIN THE AREA JUST TO THE NORTH OF THE ROADWAY, IN THE HOA. PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, PUBLIC ROADWAY ON PARK PROPERTY. WITH THAT I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE.
>> ARE THEY BUYING THE LAND FROM US?
>> IT WOULD BE OUR ROAD ON TOP OF OUR PROPERTY.
>> WE ARE NOT SELLING IT. THEY WOULD DEDICATE THE PUBLIC STREET TO US ANYWAY. THE ROADWAY WOULD BE OURS ONCE IT WAS CONSTRUCTED ANYWAY. BASICALLY ALLOWING THEM TO PUT A
PUBLIC ROAD ON OUR PROPERTY. >> SIDEWALKS GOING TO 14TH AND
ALL THAT? >> YES, WE HAVE SIDEWALKS THAT COME DOWN HERE, THEN IT CROSSES RIGHT HERE AT THIS INTERSECTION.
YES, SIR. >> COMING OUT OF THAT CUL- CUL-DE-SAC, SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES?
>> YES, OUR STANDARD, YES, SIR. >> DIDN'T SHOW IT ON THE PICTURES, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING.
>> COMMENTS OR MOTION? >> I MOVE.
>> SECONDING. >> MOTION APPROVE, SECONDED.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >> ITEM 2022-227, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ADVISORY AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE DECLARING MIDLOTHIAN A SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN AND APPOINTING THE ON APRIL 26TH COUNCIL WAS
[02:15:05]
PRESENTED WITH THE AGENDA TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE ABANDON ABORTION, BASED ON PUBLIC COMMENTS, THE COUNCIL DECIDED TO RECOMMEND THE MAYOR APPOINT AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.THEREFORE, WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ADVISORY AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE DECLARING MIDLOTHIAN A SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN AND CITY COUNCIL FURTHER DESIRES TO ESTABLISH A CHARGE FOR THE AD HOC. SECTION 2, IT STATES CITY COUNCIL CHARGES THE ADVISORY AD HOC COMMITTEE WITH THE REVIEW OF THE ORDINANCE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 26TH, 2022, AND TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE, APPROVE AMENDED ORDINANCE OR PROVIDE OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH REGARDS TO DECLARING MIDLOTHIAN A SANCTUARY CITY FOR THE UNBORN.
THE ADVISORY AD HOC COMMITTEE SHALL BE COMPLETE AS REVIEWED BY JULY 26, 2022. AND MAKE A PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. THE COUNCIL WILL HAVE TEN MEMBERS. IT WILL BE CHAIRED BY THE MAYOR, RICHRICHARD RENO, AND HAVE A VIE CHAIR, JUSTIN COFFMAN.
THE OTHER EIGHT MEMBERS WILL BE DAN ALTMAN, KARINA BLACKWELL.
DRSM LISA TAYLOR COOK, DR. JOAN DAVIS, DR. WAYNE SHOULD HAVE FIELD, BETTY TRION AND GREG WILLHAM, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
>> FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC, THOSE NAMES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY
SECRETARY'S OFFICE. >> THE DATE OF JULY 26TH IS TO ALLOW TIME, IF DESIRED, TO PUT THE DESIRED ACTION ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT FOR REFERENDUM TO THE PUBLIC.
THAT LEAVES THE OPTION OPEN. I WILL COMMENT THAT THERE IS NEWS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL WITH SOME ANTICIPATION OF SOMETHING HAPPENING IN JUNE OR JULY. WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE AS IS WITH THE REALIZATION THAT WE MAY HAVE TO NULLIFY OUR DIRECTION.
BUT WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE PRESUMPTION.
>> I HAVE TO ASK, NOW KNOWING, WHAT IS TO COME, I'M JUST GOING TO ASK, IS THIS STILL SOMETHING -- I MEAN, IT IS AN ATTORNEY QUESTION. IF THE STATE LAWS COME NOW BACK ON TO THE BOOKS, THEN ISN'T THIS ORDINANCE NULL AND VOID ONCE THE SUPREME COURT OVERRULES ROE V. WADE? DOES ANYONE UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM? I'M TRYING TO PIECEMEAL THIS TOGETHER.
>> ARE YOU SUGGESTING WE SHOULD WAIT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS?
>> I'M NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION.
THAT IS IS UP PO SUPPOSITION OFT MIGHT HAPPEN.
IF THAT DOES HAPPEN, WE WILL MODIFY OUR APPROACH.
IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, WE HAVE STARTED THE PROCESS.
SO THAT'S MY LOGIC AND MOTIVATION.
>> I'M NOT ATTACKING ANYONE. IT IS A GENERAL QUESTION.
IFIF IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOG TO BE TAKEN CARE OF, NOT THAT WE ARE NOT SE SENSITIVE TO THE SUBJECT.
BUT WE HAVE OTHER THINGS WE CAN GO AND DO.
IF THIS IS GOING TO BE NULL AND VOID AFTER OVERTURNING ROE V.
WADE. WE ARE SPENDING TIME AND ENERGY AND WE CAN SPEND IT OTHER PLACES KNOWING IT IS GOING TO BE OV OVERTURNED. THAT IS MY COMMENTS.
>> LET ME MAKE THIS STATEMENT WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN JUNE AND JULY THE EFFECT THAT WILL HAVE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
WE HAVE SEEN OTHER STATES DOING THINGS.
THE REST OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PROPOSED, THE ORDINANCE THAT'S GOING TO GO TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, REMEMBER, AS WE DISCUSSED IT, JUST REALLY ADDRESSES THIS FROM A CIVIL
[02:20:04]
RIGHT TO BRING ENFORCEMENT FOR ANYONE THAT AIDS AND ABETS.IF ROE V. WADE IS OVERTURNED, WE HAVE STATUTE STATUTES ON THE BOOKS THAT WILL MAKE IT CRIMINAL.
SO WHETHER OR NOT THIS ORDINANCE WILL STILL BE IN EFFECT, I THINK BOTTOM LINE IS, YOU WILL HAVE A CRICRIMINAL VIOLATION BACK ON TE
BOOKS. >> THAT WAS BASICALLY MY POINT.
>> IF YOU WOULD, THE TIME THAT WE ARE EXPENDING IS FROM PRIMARILY, JUSTIN AND MYSELF, 8 PRIVATE CITIZENS WHO HAVE STEPPED FORWARD. I MIGHT COMMENT THAT WE HAD SEVERAL, I WOULD SAY UPWARDS OF 20 PEOPLE, STEP FORWARD TO VOLUNTEER FOR THIS COMMITTEE. THESE ARE PRIVATE CITIZENS WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED AND ACCEPTED TO SERVE ON THIS COMMITTEE.
IT IS GOING TO BE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.
AND THE RECOMMENDATION WILL BE, THE CITY ATTORNEY IS MODIFYING THE ORDINANCE WE HAVE RECEIVED. TAKEN OUT THE CRIMINAL PENALTY.
AND THIS COMMITTEE WILL SAY WHAT IS UNTIL THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY IN REGARDS TO THIS TOPIC.
>> I AGREE WITH YOU, MAYOR. I DON'T THINK WHAT YOU ARE UNDERSTANDING WHAT I AM SAYING IS, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE TAKEN CARE OF ON ITS OWN, INSTEAD OF CREATING AN ODD AN ADHOC COMMITTEE FOR THIS. WE MAKE AN AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR
OTHER THINGS. >> I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.
NIGHTTII'M NOT SURE YOU UNDERSTY REPLY.
THIS ME BE PREEMPTED, THAT'S TRUE.
BUT IT MAY NOT. THAT IS NOT A FIRM KNOWN EVENT.
IT IS A HIGHLY PROBABLE EVENT. BUT IF WE -- IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, IT DOESN'T OCCUR, THEN WE HAVE LOST TWO, THREE MONTHS MOVING FORWARD ON THIS ITEM. SO I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP BEING BUT REALIZING IN SIX, EIGHT WEEKS, THINGS MAY PREEMPT.
>> I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR'S APPROACH.
I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF UNKNOWN AND PROCEEDING AS IF NOTHING IS CHANGING, I THINK IS WISE AND THEN ADAPTING IF THINGS DO CHANGE. TONS OF THINGS COULD HAPPEN.
IT MAY NOT GET OVERTURNED, WE MAY NEED TO IMPLEMENT SOMETHING.
THERE COULD BE A CLEAN SWEEP IN NOVEMBER AND THERE COULD BE COURT STACKING AND ALL KINDS OF STUFF.
WE DOESN'T KNOW. THIS POTENTIALLY WOULD GIVE US
LAYERS OF P PROTECTION. >> I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP GOING LIKE WE HAVE STARTED. I THINK IT MAY GET SHOT DOWN LATER ON, BUT RIGHT NOW, ACTION IS WHAT WE NEED.
>> I AGREE. I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE AT A
BUSY PACE, NOT LET IT DRAG OUT. >> SO WITH THAT SAID, NO MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I AM TAKE A MOTION.
>> I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, SECONDED.
PLEASE VOTE. ITEM, PASSES 6-2.
, STATISTIC, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. TO DELIBERATE THE OFFER OR INCENTIVE TO A BUSINESS PROSPECT.
AT 8:24, WE ARE ADJOURNED TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.