[006 Consider and act upon a request for an Exception to Sec. 3.5501 of the Midlothian Zoning Ordinance to allow for the construction of the primary roof of a building with a roof pitch less than the minimum requirement of 8:12. The property is presently zoned Single Family One (SF-1) District. The property is located on ±6.115 acres located at 3621 Waters Edge Drive. (Case No. M02-2023-08).]

ITEM 006 IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.

CONSIDER AN ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION TO SECTION 3.5501 OF THE MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PRIMARY ROOF OF A BUILDING WITH A PITCH ROOF LESS THAN THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 8:12.

THE PROPERTY IS PRESENTLY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON PLUS OR MINUS 6.115 ACRES LOCATED AT

3621 WATERS EDGE DRIVE. >> AS CHAIRMAN OSBORN MENTIONED, THE APPLICANT, JIM JOHNSON, IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A 5:12 ROOF PITCH VS. THE 8:12 THAT IS CURRENTLY REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE WATERS EDGE SUBDIVISION AT 3621 WATERED WATER.

RECENTLY REBROUGHT TOGETHER A SIMILAR REQUEST FOR ANOTHER HOUSE IN THE SUBDIVISION. THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR THIS ROOF PITCH CHANGE BECAUSE HE WANTS THE MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE STYLE OF THE HOME THAT IS BEING BUILT.

THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE HOME. THE ROOF WILL BE A STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF. HERE IS THE ELEVATIONS OF THE HOME. THE HOME IS PLANNED TO BE ABOUT 5,000 PLUS SQUARE FEET WITH A THREE-CAR GARAGE.

THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME OR

THEM. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT AND WISH TO SPEAK?

>> YES. >> IF YOU WOULD, COME UP, SIR, TO THE MICROPHONE. IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND WHERE

YOU'RE FROM. >> JIM JOHNSON.

I LIVE IN DESOTO RIGHT NOW. I'M ONLY HERE FOR QUESTIONS.

LESLIE DID A GREAT JOB, BUT LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY

[00:10:03]

QUESTIONS. LY TELL YOU, THIS IS A VERY POPULAR STYLE. IT'S KIND OF CALLED A TRANSITIONAL SOFT C CONTEMPORAR. YOU APPROVED ONE TWO OR THREE MONTHS AGONE ON "WATERS EDGE. THEY'RE LOWER-PITCHED ROOF.

IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD WITH AN 8:12.

WE BUILD WHAT PEOPLE WANT. THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT RIGHT NOW. WE TRAN SIXED FROM THAT OLD-WORLD, HIGH-PITCHED ROOF. WE FILL DO SOME OF THOSE, BUT THIS IS VERY POPULAR. LIKE ANYTHING, IT COMES AND GOES. ANY QUESTIONS I GUESS?

>> QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT? OKAY.

THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

WE HAVE NO ONE TO SPEAK ON THIS, RIGHT? OKAY. OKAY.

THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR ACTION.

>> GO AHEAD. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO

APPROVE. >> I JUST WANTED TO CHECK BEFORE WE SECOND THE APPROVAL, STAFF HAS NO ATTACHED COMMENTS TO

THIS? >> CORRECT.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS.

[007 Consider and act upon a resolution, approving a detailed site plan for a development of .49 acres out of the Marcellus T. Hawkins Survey, Abstract No. 463 and Benjamin F. Hawkins Survey, Abstract No. 464, being in Planned Development- 81 (PD-81). The property is generally located just east of the 2000 block of S 14th Street and is zoned Planned Development-81 (SP01-2023-09)]

ITEM 007, CONSIDER AN ACT UPON A RESOLUTION APPROVING A DETAILED SITE PLAN FOR A DEVELOPMENT OF .49 ACRES OUT OF THE MARCELLUS T. HAWKINS SURVEY ABSTRACT 436 AND BENJAMIN F. HAWKINS SURVEY ABSTRACT 464, BEING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 81.

THIS PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED JUST EAST OF THE 2000 BLOCK OF SOUTH 14TH STREET AND IS ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

81. >> GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS A REQUEST TO APPROVE A SITE PLAN.

I WANTED TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE PROCEDURE REAL QUICK. I DON'T KNOW WE'VE DONE IT RECENTLY, AT LEAST NOT IN MY SEVEN MONTHS HERE SOME THIS PD81 FOR THE HAWKINS NORTH AREA REQUIRES THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE BY RESOLUTION THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND ELEVATIONS. YOU STILL HAVE, AS IT WERE, A DISCRETIONARY ACT, BUT THIS IS NOT AMENDING THE PD.

THIS IS NOT AN SUP. THIS IS BY RESOLUTION THAT IT WILL JUST DOCUMENT IF P&Z AND COUNCIL APPROVE IT, IT'S A SIGNED COPY WITH THOSE DOCUMENTS SO WE HAVE A GOOD, SOLID RECORD FOR WHAT WAS APPROVED FOR THAT PD.

SO PROCEDURALLY HOPEFULLY THAT MADE SOME SENSE.

OKAY. SO AGAIN, HAWKINS RETAIL NORTH.

THIS WOULD BE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MOUNT ZION AND 14TH STREET. IT'S A REQUEST FOR ABOUT A 3,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFENSE BUILDING FOR ALLUVIUM.

TERRANCE JOB AND HIS TEAM A ARE HERE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES BEING ASKED.

IN THE SITE PLAN, HE'S MEETING OR EXCEEDING ALL THE STANDARDS OF PD81 AS REQUIRED. THE USE OF A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IS ALLOWED IN COMMUNITY RETAIL, WHICH IS THE BASE ZONING FOR THAT AREA. THAT PD.

THE SITE ITSELF IS ABOUT HALF ACRE.

IT DOES FRONT MINOR ARTERIAL. THEY DID DO A TIA WORK SHEET.

IT WAS DETERMINED BY ENGINEERING THAT A FULL TIA WOULD NOT BE NESS FOR A SMALL PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING.

AGAIN, GIVE YOU AN ORIENTATION, SOUTH 14TH STREET RUNNING NORTH AND SOUTH AND MOUNT ZION CURRENTLY RUNNING THIS WAY, BUT I BHEECH IT WILL TRANSITION THIS WAY IN THE FUTURE.

KIND OF COVERS THIS BUT JUST A BRIEF HISTORY, 201 IS WHEN THE PD WAS AMENDED TO ALLOW THE COMMERCIAL RETAIL DEVELOP ON THAT SIDE OF 14TH STREET. THAT WAS IN 2016.

AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS, BUT JUST TO SHOW IN TERMS OF THE SITE PLAN DETAILS, THIS IS A SNAPSHOT DEMONSTRATING THEY'RE MEETING OR EXCEEDING THE REQUIREMENTS OF PD81. AND SAME IS TRUE FOR THE LANDSCAPE PLAN DETAILS. FOR THE SITE PLAN, JUST TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW, THEN I WILL GO TO A LARGER IMAGE HERE, SO THERE WILL BE SHARED ACCESS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH. THIS YELLOW LINE HERE REPRESENTS A MASONRY WALL THAT IS REQUIRED PER THE PD.

THAT'S BECAUSE THERE WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST AND TO

[00:15:02]

THE SOUTH. THERE WILL... I BELIEVE IT'S 57% OF LANDSCAPED AREA WELL UNDER THE LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENT.

THEY HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING, THE SIGN HERE, THERE'S IN THE A DETAIL IN THE PLANS, BECAUSE IT WILL FOLLOW THE STANDARD CODE, BUT THIS WOULD BE THE SITE LOCATION.

IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING, SIX LIVE OAK TREATS, TWO CREPE MYRTLES, AND 60-PLUS SHRUBS PRIMARILY ALONG EITHER THE PERIMETER BACK LINE, PROPERTY LINES, OR AS A SCREEN HEDGE FOR THE PARKING UP FRONT. IN TERMS OF THE ELEVATIONS, THE SOD PLANT, 29 FEET IS THE MAX HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.

IT'S ONE STORY THAT DOES HAVE AN INTERIOR ATTIC THAT MAYBE GIVES IT A 1.5 STORY FEEL OR LOOK IF YOU WILL.

THE ROOF PITCHES ARE 1:12 AND 0:12.

THE TOTAL AREA UNDER ROOF IS 3,300 SQUARE FEET, AND AGAIN, NOT THAT WE REGULATE MATERIALS, BUT STONE, BRICK, STUCCO AND METAL ARE THE MATERIALS FOR THE BUILDING, AND IT DID EXCEED ALL OUR REQUIREMENTS ON ARTICULATIONS FOR BOTH HORIZON AND VERTICAL. AND ALSO WITH THE FOUR-SIDED ARCHITECTURE. THIS IS THE FRONT ELEVATION, SO THIS IS IF YOU WERE STANDING IN FRONT OF IT FROM THE STREET.

THIS IS THE VIEW YOU WOULD HAVE. REAR AND SOUTH ELEVATION SIDE VIEW, NORTH ELEVATION SIDE VIEW. IN TERMS OF STAFF ANALYSIS, AGAIN, IT NEEDS OR EXCEEDS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF PD81.

AS I MENTIONED ON THE TIA WORKSHEET, DID NOT TRIGGER A NEED FOR A FULL TIA. FOR A RESOLUTION, THERE IS NOT A PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE. SO IT DOES GET NOTICE POSTED ON AN AGENDA. TO THAT I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM ANYONE. AND RECOMMENDATION-WISE, STAFF RECOMMENDS AS PRESENTED. HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> YOU SAID IT WAS ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 14TH AND MOUNT ZION, BUT IT'S REALLY ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN BETWEEN MOUNT ZION AND HAWKINS RUN, RIGHTS?

>> I TAKE YOUR POINT, YES. >> I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE.

>> YEAH. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. STAFF, ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY. APPLICANT PRESENT? WISH TO SPEAK? COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF,

SIR, AND WHERE YOU'RE FROM. >> CF TERRANCE JOB, ALLUVIUM DEVELOPMENT, MIDLOTHIAN. TO HELP HIM WITH THAT QUESTION, IT WILL BE ON 14TH, I'M SORRY, I HAVE LARYNGITIS TODAY, MOUNT ZION IS BEING RELOCATED. SO WHEN IT DOES, THIS SITE WILL

BE ON THE CORNER. >> ON THE NEW?

>> YES, SIR. >> WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE WE'RE PRIVILEGED TO DEED THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY.

I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

OKAY. >> THANKS.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY.

THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION.

>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION?

>> YES. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY QUESTION OR DISCUSSION.

IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

[008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 34.14± acres in the Coleman Jenkins Survey, Abstract No. 555 and the Joseph H. Witherspoon Survey, Abstract 1136, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District and Commercial (C) District to a Planned Development (PD) District for mixed use. The property is generally located on East Highway 287, east of Shady Grove Road. (Case No. Z51-2022-198).]

IT IS UNANIMOUS. ITEM 008, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 34.14 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES OF THE COLEMAN JENKINS SURVEY. ABSTRACT 555 AND THE JOSEPH H.

WITHERSPOON SURVEY ABSTRACT 1134 BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM CHRISTENSEN AGNANT CULTURAL DISTRICT AND COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MIXED USE.

THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON EAST HIGHWAY 287,

EAST OF SHADY GROVE ROAD. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS FOR Z51-2022-198 FOR A PROPOSED PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR SHADY GROVE ROAD BUSINESS PARK. BEFORE I GET TO THAT, THE TOTAL SITE IS 34 ACRES CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, MIXED USE, RETAIL, RESTAURANT, HOTEL, AND OFFICE SPACE.

THE CURRENT ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IS AG AND COMMERCIAL.

THE FUTURE LAND-USE PLAN IS REGIONAL MODULE.

THIS NEXT LOT DEPICTS A LARGER VIEW OF WHERE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS. IT'S 287 SHADY GROVE ROAD BEHIND

[00:20:04]

IT. SOME CASE HISTORY ON THIS, I BELIEVE EVERYONE WAS STILL ON P&Z AT THIS POINT, BUT LAST YEAR, JUNE 20 21, 2022 TO BE SPECIFIC, THE APPLICANT BROUGHT FORWARD A CASE WHICH WAS A COLOR-CODED PLAN.

SO AT THAT MEETING P&Z VOTED 7-0 TO APPROVE STAFF COMMENTS.

THOSE COMMENTS WERE ONLY THAT DETAILED SITE PLANS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COME THROUGH P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL.

AT THE JULY 12, 2022 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED TO WITHDRAW THE CASE FROM THAT MEETING.

AGAIN, THIS IS THE COLOR-CODED CONCEPT PLAN PRESENTED.

YOU SEE DIFFERENT COLORS CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL, GENERAL, PROFESSIONAL, COMMUNITY, RETAIL SOME WHILE P&Z DID VOTE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL, COUNCIL VOTED -- WELL, THE APPLICANT CHOSE TO WITHDRAW LARGELY DUE TO AFTER DISCUSSION AMONGST COUNCIL. THEY DRUNK DRIVER NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE APPROVING A PLAN WITHOUT MORE DETAIL, WHICH IS WHY THE APPLICANT WITHDREW AND WHY THE APPLICANT IS BACK BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING. AGAIN, THE PREVIOUS LOT WAS THE COLOR-CODED CONCEPT PLAN. THIS NEXT SLIDE SHOWS A MORE DETAILED PLAN SHOWING THE PROPOSED USAGE WITHIN THE PD.

THESE SLIDES WILL PROVIDE A DEEPER BREAKDOWN OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. TOTAL ACRES, 34.14 CONSISTING OF RESTAURANT, OFFICE, RETAIL, AND HOTEL USES AND JUST KNOW WE DID WANT TO MENTION AGAIN, IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO BRING BACK DETAILED SITE PLANS TO P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AS WELL.

SO STARTING AT THE TOP, OUTLINE IN PINK, A QUICK SERVICE RESTAURANT, DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS.

THE APPLICANTS IS PROPOSING THREE PROPOSED DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS RANGING BETWEEN 2,800 TO 4,000 SQUARE FEET.

SO WE DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THERE COULD BE POTENTIAL CASUAL DINING RESTAURANTS WITHIN THE RETAIL LOCATIONS.

IT'S POSSIBLE A MULTITENANT LOCATION, HOWEVER, AT THIS TIME IT'S HIGH LEVEL AND WE'RE NOT SURE AT THIS POINT.

BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE THAT NOTED.

ALSO WE DO WANT TO NOTE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR ANY RESTAURANT OVER 1,000 SQUARE FEET TO BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT.

THIS NEXT LOT DEPICTS THE OFFICE LOCATION, SO OUTLINED IN ORANGE.

THREE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDINGS, ALL PROPOSED TO BE AROUND 7,500 SQUARE FEET. SO BEAR WITH ME ON THIS ONE.

OUTLINED IN GREEN IS PROPOSED RETAIL LOCATIONS.

SO THERE'S OVERALL NINE PROPOSED RETAIL BUILDINGS.

SO SHOWN ON THE CONCEPT PLAN, THE APPLICANT IS LABELING THE BUILDINGS OUTLINED IF GREEN AS RETAIL SPECIFICALLY.

THERE ARE FOUR PROPOSED HOTEL LOCATIONS.

YOU'LL SEE ONE NOT OUTLINED IN BLUE.

THE THREE OUTLINED IN BLUE ARE LADIES AND GENTLEMENNED AS HOTEL OR RETAIL SPACES FOR THE CONCEPT PLAN.

SO EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE FOUR HOTEL LOCATIONS PER PD, THERE WILL BE NO MORE THAN TWO HOTELS DEVELOPED ON THE SITE.

THERE COULD BE ONE, HOWEVER, THERE WILL BE NO MORE THAN TWO.

SO FOR THE REMAINING TWO, THOSE AREAS WILL BE USED AS RETAIL LOCATIONS. THESE COULD RANGE BETWEEN 4,ED 9 THE -- 4,900 SQUARE FEET. I BELIEVE IT'S THIS AREA THAT COULD BE HOTEL OR RETAIL SPACE THAT IS SHOWING US 26,300.

IT COULD BE A MULTITENANT SPACE THAT CONSISTS OF CASUAL DINING, AS WELL. SO AS MENTIONED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, FOUR PROPOSED ROW TELL LOCATIONS, HOWEVER, AREAS WITH THE GREEN DOTS FOR THE CONCEPT PLAN DEPICT HOTEL OR RETAIL.

SO AGAIN, NO MORE THAN TWO HOTEL LOCATIONS WILL BE DEVELOPED, HOWEVER, THE REMAINING TWO WILL BE USED AS A RETAIL SPACE.

THESE COULD RANGE BETWEEN 15,000 TO 26,000 AND A MAXIMUM HIGH FOR THESE HOTELS WILL BE 60 FEET. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CERTAIN USES TO BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT.

THE USES THAT YOU SEE HERE WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HAVING A BASE ZONING OF COMMERCIAL PER OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, ALL OF THESE USES WOULD REQUIRE SPECIFIC USE PERMITS PER COMMERCIAL ZONING. HOWEVER, WITHIN THIS PD, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THEY BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT.

GAS STATION WITH OR WITHOUT RETAIL SALES, RESTAURANTS OVER 1,000 SQUARE FEET, HOTEL OR MOTEL, BUT IN THIS CASE HOTELS, BUSINESS WITH DRIVE-THRU SERVICES, GROCERY STORE, ANIMAL CLINIC WITH NO OUTSIDE PENS AND SEASONAL OUTDOOR DISPLAY.

AGAIN, ALL OF THESE USES PER COMMERCIAL WITHIN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD REQUIRE SUP, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THESE USES BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT.

I'LL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK MORE TO THAT.

THESE NEXT FEW SLIDES TAKE THE PROPOSED SIGNS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. THESE CIRCLES SHOW THE PROPOSED SIGN LOCATIONS WITHIN THE PD. STARTING IN RED AT THE TOP HERE, THIS IS PROPOSED MULTITENANT ENTRYWAY SIGN IS 35 FEET TALL.

[00:25:03]

EACH SIGN AS YOU SEE TO THE LEFT WILL CONSISTENT OF WOOD, METAL, AND STONE MATERIAL AT THE BOTTOM.

THIS NEXT SLIDE LADIES AND GENTLEMENNED P2 AND P3 SIGNS WILL BE A MAX OF 25 FEET TALL. TO THE LEFT THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. AND LASTLY, A P4 SIGNAGE THE WORK PROPOSED OPTION, MA'AM MUM NINE FEET TALL.

AGAIN, WOOD, METAL AND STONE. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS OPTION A HAS A SINGLE TENANT AND OPTION B HAS MULTITENANTS ON THERE.

SO THAT COULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER LOCATED AT THIS SECTION HERE. THESE NEXT FEW SLIDES ARE RENDERINGS OF WHAT THE AERIAL VIEW WILL LOOK LIKE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 287 SHADY GROVE ROAD IN THE BACK HERE.

STAFF HAS NOT SEEN ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO DATE. DUE TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT, A TIA WAS REQUIRED. WITHIN THAT TIA WE DID PROVIDE WITHIN OUR STAFF REPORT INFORMATION FROM STAFF, WITHIN THE TIA MEMO, WE ALSO ATTACHED THE ACTUAL TIA MEMO WITHIN OUR EXHIBITS AS WELL. SO WITHIN THAT, AND I KNOW MIKE ADAMS IS HERE, AS WELL, SO IF THERE IS ANY TRAFFIC-RELATED QUESTIONS, I'M SURE HE COULD ADD ON TO THAT.

WITHIN THAT TIA, WE MENTIONED HOW THESE LANES WILL BE HELPFUL FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. ALSO PHASING OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE HELPFUL, AS WELL. THE DEVELOPMENT HAS SHOWN IT'S TOO HIGH LEVEL FOR TXDOT TO MAKE ANY DETAILED COMMENT, HOWEVER, IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO GET ALL CONSTRUCTION PLANS APPROVED BY TXDOT.

SO WITH THAT, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. PER STAFF COMMENT, ALL SITE PLANS WILL BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW. AS I MENTIONED, IT'S TOO HIGH LEVEL AT THIS POINT FOR TXDOT TO MAKE COMMENT, HOWEVER, IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO SEEK APPROVAL FROM TXDOT ON ALL CONSTRUCTION PLANS.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS HERE

AS WELL. >> A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

FIRST ONE, MAYBE THE SIMPLE ONE IN RELATION TO THE SIGNS, IF YOU

CAN GO BACK TO THAT. >> JUST THE OVERALL SIGNAGE OR IS THERE A CERTAIN ONE YOU WANT THE LOOK AT?

>> CURRENTLY THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET AN SUP FOR, THAT AND HE'S

ASKING THIS BE INCLUDED? >> ALL THESE SIGNS WOULD BE

INCLUDED WITHIN THE PD. >> SORRY, MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR GROUND MONUMENT SIGNS ARE... THE HIGHEST WITH THIS ONE STARTING HERE WOULD BE 35 FEET. THESE TWO PINK ONES WOULD BE 25 FEET. AND THE ONLY ONE THAT TECHNICALLY WOULD MEET IT WOULD BE THE BLUE ONE BEING AT NINE FEET TALL. I DO WANT TO NOTE, AMONGST THAT CONVERSATION AMONGST COUNCIL LAST YEAR IN JULY, ONE OF THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS THAT COUNCIL GOT THE APPLICANT THE LOOK AT REGARDING PDS WAS THE KROGER PD.

I'M NOT SURE IF YOU REMEMBER THE LAST TIME AMONGST P&Z THERE WAS A DISCUSSION OF SIGNAGE. AT THAT TIME THE APPLING CAN'T DIDN'T HAVE ANY SIGNS WITHIN THE PRESENTATION TO SHOW YOU GUYS.

SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR INTO THAT DISCUSSION, HOWEVER, KROGER WAS A MENTIONED SIGN AS WELL AS COCO NAILS.

THE APPLICANT TOOK COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE AND USED THAT WITH THE

SIGNAGE HERE. >> SO IF WE GIVE IT BY RIGHT, THIS IS A DESIGN THAT HAS TO COME BACK TO P&Z AND/OR COUNCIL?

>> THIS WOULDN'T PER SE, BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE AS SHOWN WITHIN THESE EXHIBITS HERE. THIS IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE. THE ONLY THING YOU AND COUNCIL WOULD BE LOOKING AT IS THE ACTUAL BUILDINGS ITSELF GOING

ALONG THERE. >> OKAY.

AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS WHO IS GOING TO COVER EGRESS AND INGRESS ON 287 AND SHADY GROVE?

>> WE HAVE TWO MIKE, BECAUSE ONE WASN'T ENOUGH.

MIKE ADAM, OUR CITY ENGINEER AND MICHAEL WESTFALL WITH THE

APPLICANT. >> BUT SOMEONE IS GOING TO DO

IT? >> SOMEONE NAME MIKE.

>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD IS FOR YOUR USAGE.

YOU SAID THOSE WOULD BE COVERED BY RIGHT OR THEY'RE GOING TO BE

EACH AN SUP? >> ARE YOU REFERENCING THIS

HERE? >> SIR?

>> ARE YOU REFERENCING THIS PAGE HERE?

>> YES. >> SO THESE USES WOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE PD BY RIGHT. WHAT I WAS REFERENCING WAS THAT THESE USES PER OUR ORDINANCE, REQUIRED SUPS UNDER COMMERCIAL, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR THIS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PD ALLOWED BY RIGHT WITH THE APPROVAL THAT

[00:30:02]

WOULD INCLUDE THESE USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT.

>> THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT, I BELIEVE AS I READ IN HERE, THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH A COUPLE OF ATTACHMENTS, OPINIONS THAT IT DIDN'T FALL WITHIN THIS SUBJECT MATTER WE'RE TALKING. IF YOU ALL APPROVED IT WITHOUT THAT IN YOUR SPECIAL NOTES, THEN YOU'RE SATISFIED WITH THAT?

>> YES, SIR. >> RIGHT?

>> YES, SIR. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> WHAT'S IN -- GO BACK TO THE PHOTO IF YOU WOULD OR THE PLAN.

WHAT'S IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT-HAND SIDE?

IS THAT PART OF THIS PROPERTY? >> SO YOU ARE REFERENCING RIGHT

HERE I'M ASSUMING? >> NO, THE BOTTOM RIGHT.

UNDERNEATH THE BLUE. RIGHT THERE.

>> NO, THIS IS THE PROPERTY HERE.

OH, NO, THIS AREA HERE? >> NO, THIS IS NOT IN THE PD,

NO, SIR. >> OKAY.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.

APPLICANT PRESENT AND WISH TO SPEAK? COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND WHERE YOU'RE FROM.

>> MY NAME IS CHAD ADAMS. I LIVE HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. I HAVE BEEN HERE ABOUT 30 YEARS.

AND I HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE COME INTO A COMMUNITY TO DEVELOP, THE CITY CANNOT DO IT BY THEMSELVES AND THE DEVELOPER CANNOT DO IT BY THEMSELVES, SO TOGETHER WE BUILD THE COMMUNITY. SO WE HAVE APPRECIATED THE COMMENTS FROM P&Z MEMBERS, CITY STAFF, AND CITY COUNCIL OVER THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF AS WE HAVE WORKED THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

WE HAVE ALL BUT LAID DOWN GIVING EVERY THE STAFF WANTED TO GET THIS THROUGH. THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB COMMUNICATING WITH US. WAY ON THE HIGHLIGHT A FEW PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE. WE HAVE ANDREW GARRET, WHO IS INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT. ALSO MICHAEL WESTFALL, WHO IS OUR ENGINEER. WE ALSO HAVE TOM HARDY, A BROKER ON THIS PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE BACK ROW IS THE SELLERS OF THE PROPERTY, LONGSTANDING MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING A LEGACY OF THE PROPERTY THAT THEIR FAMILY OWNED TURN INTO A PROJECT LIKE THIS.

YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT THIS PROPERTY VERY, VERY CAREFULLY. IT IS IN A I'M NOT GOING TO SAY BLIGHTED AREA, BUT THE JUNKYARD MAKES IT A BLIGHTED AREA.

SO WE'RE HOPING TO REALLY REVIVE THIS AREA AND BRING LIFE TO THE AREA AND KICK START SOMETHING THAT WILL CONTINUE TO MOVE DOWN THE CORRIDOR AND REALLY BE AN AREA OF PRIDE FOR THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN. NOW, I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT THIS PROJECT WILL CONTINUE TO COME BEFORE YOU AND COUNCIL.

YOU KNOW, THAT WE KNOW THAT, BUT I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW IN THE PUBLIC. WE'LL COME COM BACK WITH A PRELIMINARY PLATT. WE'LL COME BACK FOR EACH PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE'LL COME BACK BEFORE YOU ALL, AND YOU ALL WILL VOTE ON IT. WE APPRECIATE YOUR OPINIONS ON THAT AND YOUR STANDARDS. IT'S GOING TO HELP MAKE A REALLY NICE AREA. SO AS WE DIG DOWN INTO THE TECHNICAL SIDE, I'M GOING TO HAVE MICHAEL COME UP AND MAYBE ADDRESS SOME OF THE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES, BUT AT THIS POINT, IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'D BE HAPPY

TO ANSWER THEM. >> QUESTIONS? OKAY. THANK YOU.

> SIR, IF YOU WOULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND TELL US

WHERE YOU'RE FROM. >> MY NAME IS MICHAEL WESTFALL.

I LIVE IN LUCAS, TEXAS. I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER WITH CHAD.

WE HAVE A COUPLE OF BASIC LINES THAT WILL HELP YOU KIND OF WALK THROUGH WHAT WE'VE DONE TO LOOK AT TRAFFIC FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY. SO GIVEN THE SIZE, IT TRIGGERED A TIA. WE HIRED A TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, A TRAFFIC IMPACT GROUP TO DO A TIA FOR THE PROJECT.

WE HAD TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS FOR USES ON THE PROJECT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THOSE FULLY DEFINED.

SO HE USED THAT CONCEPT PLAN. A FEW THINGS TO NOTE ON THE CONCEPT PLAN, HE HAD FOUR HOTELS ON THERE, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE LIMITED TO TWO. SO IT HAS MORE TRAFFIC.

IN THE TIA, THERE WAS ALSO SOME PROPOSED USES FOR MULTIFAMILY, WHICH ARE NOT IN THE ZONING ANYMORE.

BUT THAT DROVE UP EVEN MORE TRAFFIC COUNTS.

SO THE TIA HAD MORE TRAFFIC VOLUME PROJECTED THAN WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING. BUT BECAUSE IT WAS MORE, WE DECIDED IT WASN'T WORTH GOING BACK AND REDOING IT, BECAUSE WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO EXCEED WHAT THE TIA RECOMMENDED FOR

[00:35:01]

TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. SO ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT CAME UP WITH -- LET ME TELL YOU THE RESULT OF THE TIA FIRST, WHICH ARE IN YOUR MEMO. IT STATED THERE WAS A NEEDS FOR TURN LANES ON CONNECTIONS TO 287.

THE TIA WAS STATING THAT THERE WAS AN ALLOWANCE TO CONNECT DIRECTLY TO 287 AS LONG AS THERE WAS RIGHT DETAIL LANES AND NO OTHER IMPROVEMENTS BESIDE THOSE TURN LANES.

WORKING WITH STAFF, WE REALIZED VERY QUICKLY THAT WAS NOT A DESIRED SOLUTION AND NOT REALLY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE REALITY OF TRAFFIC OUT THERE. WE DID NOT WANT A BUNCH OF CONNECTIONS DIRECTLY TO 287. ALSO KNOWING THAT TXDOT WAS GOING TO BE AT SOME POINT EXPANDING THAT WITH FRONTAGE ROADS, SO WE HAD A MEETING WITH CITY STAFF, MIKE ADAM, TXDOT, CHRIS WALKER TO DISCUSS THE TIMING OF TXDOT PRIEWMPLETS TO S TO UNDERSTAND WHEN THAT FRONTAGE ROAD WOULD COME IN AND HOW IT RELATED TO THE TIMING OF THIS JOB.

ULTIMATELY IT WAS DECIDED THAT TXDOT DOES NOT KNOW THE EXACT TIMING SO WE TRIED TO MITIGATE FOR THOSE PROBLEMS WITHOUT KNOWING WHEN THE FRONTAGE ROAD WAS GOING TO GET BUILT.

THIS EXHIBIT IS ONE OF TXDOT'S FEASIBILITY STUDIES THAT SHOWS THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED VERY ZOOMED OUT, BUT YOU CAN SEE IN CYAN THERE, YOU CAN SEE THE ROAD STOPS IN FRONT OF OUR SALVAGE YARD. IT'S PROPOSED TO EXTEND BEYOND OUR PROJECT. I'LL DISOOMG INTO THAT RED AREA A LITTLE BIT. YOU SEE THE SALVAGE YARD THERE.

THIS IS THE NORTH SIDE OF OUR CONCEPT PLAN, WHICH YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL TO, GIVE A LITTLE CLARITY OF WHERE WE ARE.

AND THEN I'LL DO ONE MORE HERE. THEN THIS IS ANOTHER EXHIBIT.

WE WANTED TO... WE WORKED WITH MIKE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW CAN WE WORK WITH THE FRONTAGE ROAD NOT KNOWING THE TIMING, BUT WE COULDN'T FRONT THE COST FOR DOING THE WHOLE FRONTAGE ROAD WITHOUT ANY DEVELOPMENT. SO WE WORKED WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION TO MINIMIZE TO A SINGLE ACCESS POINT ON 287 INITIALLY IN PHASE ONE. IT WOULD BE TRIGGERED WHENEVER A DEVELOPMENT CAME IN WHENEVER A USER COMES IN.

YOU SEE IN THE MIDDLE THE LANGUAGE RECOMMENDED IN THE TIA AND HAVING THAT SINGLE ENTRANCE OFF OF 287.

BUT THEN DURING THAT DRIVE THAT COMES OFF TO THE RIGHT, THAT GOES OVER AND TIES INTO THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

SO IT WOULD BE A PARTIAL EXTENSION OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

THE IDEA IS TO EXTEND IT OVER IN PHASES AS THE PROJECT DEVELOPS.

WE'RE NOT HAVING TO FORK OVER ALL THAT MONEY RIGHT UP FRONT.

THAT WOULD BE A RIDE IN-RIDE OUT OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE.

ON THE SOUTHEAST ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN WOULD BE AN EXIT ONLY. WORKING WITH TXDOT AND CITY STAFF, THERE WAS A DESIRE TO MINIMIZE THE ABILITY TO CROSS OVER 287 AT THAT POINT. THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE MODIFICATIONS. THE IDEA IS THE TRAFFIC EXITING WOULD BE ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE NEXT INTERCHANGE AND BE ABLE TO DO A U-TURN AND GET ON TO THE HIGHWAY AT THAT POINT. SO IT WAS TRYING TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT THERE. THE THOUGHT WAS THIS WOULD BE THE CONFIGURATION WHILE THESE FRONT LOTS STARTED TO DEVELOP.

AND IF ANYTHING DEVELOPED TO THE LEFT OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE DRAG, THE FRONTAGE ROAD WAS GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE TO BE EXTENDED OVER. SO INITIALLY IT WOULD BE THE SMALL EXTENSION AND WORK ITS WAY OVER.

ONCE THE DEVELOPMENT STARTED TO COME IN SOUTH OF THE -- BELOW THESE FRONTAGE LOTS, THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE CONNECTION DOWN TO SHADY GROVE, WHICH ROUGHLY SHOWN AND SHADED HERE.

AND WE WORKED WITH CITY STAFF TO DETERMINE WHAT IMPROVEMENTS ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED ON SHADY GROVE, THE TIA DIDN'T RECOMMEND ANY IMPROVEMENTS, BUT WORKING WITH STAFF, YOU REALIZELED THE DESIRE WAS TO GET A MINIMUM OF 24 FOOT.

WHAT WAS PROPOSED HERE WAS WHEN THAT DRIVE COMES INTOE SHADY GROVE, WE'D WIDEN IT TO 24-FOOT MINIMUM AND DO A FRESH OVERLAY ON IT. THE SAME THING WOULD HAPPEN IS IT GOES OVER TO THE NEXT CONNECTION TO SHADY GROVE.

SHADY GROVE ROAD WOULD BE APPROVED IN PIECES THAT.

HELPS US TO SPREAD OUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE COST TO ADVERTISE IT BUT THEN AS IT DEVELOP, IT CAN ALSO WORK THROUGH THE INIMPROVEMENTS. THERE WERE A LOT OF MEETINGS WITH CITY STAFF AND TXDOT. I BELIEVE WE ALL AGREED ON THIS APPROACH. MIKE CAN TALK FROM THE CITY PERSPECTIVE AND MAKE SURE I'M NOT MISSING ANYTHING, BUT I THINK THAT GENERALLY COVERS THE TRAFFIC.

THE OVERWHELMING THING, THOUGH, IS WE'RE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE TIA WAS RECOMMENDING EVEN NO THAT HAD MORE TRIP GENERATIONS PROJECTED THAN WHAT WE'RE PROJECTING.

I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

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

MIKE, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? >> GOOD EVENING, EC, COMMISSION.

[00:40:16]

THE TIA DOESN'T REALLY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SAFETY.

WHEN YOU'RE ON 287, THAT WAS THE PRIME CONCERN FROM CITY STAFF.

SO WE DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH TXDOT.

WE DID HAVE THREE REPRESENTATIVES HERE.

AND TXDOT FROM A CONCEPT WAS FINE WITH THIS APPROACH FROM THAT STANDPOINT. SO JUST REAL QUICK, REALLY KIND OF WHAT MICHAEL HIT ON MOST OF THESE, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD EXTEND THE FRONTAGE ROAD ALONG THIS SEGMENT HERE TO THIS EASTERN DRIVE. THIS WOULD BE ENTRANCE ONLY.

SO WHEN YOU COME OUT HERE, EVERYTHING HAS TO GO TO THE RIGHT AND GO OUT THIS DIRECTION. AND WHAT IT INDICATED WAS WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AND OF COURSE ALL THIS WOULD HAVE TO GET THROUGH TXDOT TO MEET TXDOT STANDARDS.

THE FRONTAGE ROAD EXTENSION TO TXDOT AS WELL AS BEING ABLE TO PROHIBITED OR PROHIBITING FOLKS FROM BEING ABLE TO COME AND HEAD TO THE LEFT AND GO NORTHBOUND ON 287, WHICH CROSSING THAT TRAFFIC IS WHERE WE'RE STARTING TO SEE SOME ACCIDENTS AND SOME THINGS HAPPENING. SO THEY WOULD STAY ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD UNTIL YOU GET THE PLAINVIEW.

IF YOU WANTED TO GO BACK NORTH, YOU TAKE THE TEXAS TURNAROUND THAT'S THERE. IF YOU WANTED TO CONTINUE SOUTH TOWARD LOXAHATCHEE, GET ON THE RAMP ONCE YOU GO THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION. FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, THEY'RE PHASING US IN. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AGAIN, NOT LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS FROM THE TIA, BUT REALLY LOOKING AT IT FROM WHAT WE'RE SEEING OUT THERE AGAIN.

THERE HAVE BEEN SOME RECENT ACCIDENTS AND A COUPLE FATALITIES RECENTLY. SO THE INTENT WAS NOT TRYING TO KEEP DEVELOPMENT FROM HAPPENING ALONG 287, BUT TRYING TO MINIMIZE AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOME UNIQUE THOUGHTS AND IDEAS AND CONCEPTS ON HOW TO TRY TO PHASE THIS IN.

AND AS MICHAEL MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, WHEN THINGS STARTED DEVELOPING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THIS, THEN THIS FRONTAGE ROAD WOULD GET EXTENDED OUT TO THIS DRIVE HERE.

THIS COULD BECOME A FULL ACCESS DRIVE, BECAUSE YOU WOULD NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO THE MAIN LANES OF 287.

YOU WOULD BE ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

THIS WOULD BE PUSHED BACK SO YOU CAN TURN OFF AND OR GET ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND TURN INTO THE DEVELOPMENT.

IT WOULD BE WORKED IN PHASES. THAT ALSO NEEDS TO BE COORDINATED WITH AND THROUGH TXDOT, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH TXDOT AT THAT MEETING.

SO TXDOT, THE AREA OFFICE IS AWARE OF WHAT WAS DISCUSSED.

AT THIS TIME AND CONCEPT ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. ONE OTHER QUICK THING WE DIDN'T TOUCH ON, TXDOT IS DOING A SAFETY PROJECT, AND THAT WORK IS TAKING PLACE NOW. SO THERE WILL BE BARRIER CABLE IN PLACE ALONG THE MEDIAN OF 287 AND FOUR OPENINGS WILL BE CLOSED, SO CLINTON LANE, PRIMROSE, ROBBEN R ROBINSON ANDE WILL ALL BE -- DOES THAT ALIGN WITH PRIMROSE OR ROBINSON? I THINK IT IS ROBINSON. WHERE IT LINES UP, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, WHEN YOU COME OUT "SHADY GROVE AND GO 287, YOU WILL NO LONGER GO NORTHBOUND. 17 WILL GO TO THE RIGHT THAT.

WILL CHANGE TRAFFIC PATTERNS. PEOPLE NOW COMING FROM MOUNT ZION AND WANTING TO GOING NORTHBOUND, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

THERE WILL BE NO REASON FOR FOLKS TO COME HERE AND TURN AND GO BACK AROUND AND HAVE THE LOOP BACK AROUND THAT.

WILL CHANGE TRAFFIC PATTERNS UP THERE AS WELL.

THAT'S WHY WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT NOT REALLY SURE HOW SHADY GROVE ROAD WILL FUNCTION WITH THE CLOSING OF THAT MEDIAN.

YOU STILL WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO TURN RIGHT IF YOU'RE HEADING SOUTHBOUND ON 287, YOU CAN GO RIGHT ON TO SHADY GROVE ROAD, WHICH WILL HAVE TRAFFIC STILL DOING THAT, WHETHER THEIR COMING BECOME THROUGH HERE OR GOING BACK DOWN MOUNT ZION, BUT YOU WON'T HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF TRIPS BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE THAT LEFT-TURN MOVEMENT PROHIBITED. WITH THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE.

>> MIKE, I KNOW TXDOT HAS THEIR MINIMUM STANDARDS.

DID THEY ALLOW ON OCCASION THAT IF IT'S WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE CITY TO COME BACK AND ASK THEM TO DO MORE IF THE CITY HAS THE PAY FOR IT, OR IS IT JUST A STANDARD AND THEY DON'T DEVIATE

FROM THAT? >> I THINK THEY DO HAVE SOME ABILITY. IT WOULD PROBABLY DEPEND ON

WHAT'S BEING ASKED OF THEM. >> IF THE CITY WANTED TO COME BACK AT SOME POINT TO MAYBE UPGRADE OR ASK FOR A LITTLE MORE FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, YOU WOULD HAVE THE LEEWAY TO VISIT

WITH THEM? >> YES, SIR.

>> WHETHER THEY APPROVE IT OR NOT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY?

>> CORRECT, IF IT'S GOING TO BE FUNDED BY DEVELOPMENT, CITY, LOCAL PAR PAGES, THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO AT LEAST DISCUSSING IT.

IT'S GOING TO BE HIGHER THAN THEIR STANDARDS, I THINK THEY

WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT. >> QUESTIONS FOR MIKE?

>> CLARIFICATION, MIKE. COMING OUT GOING SOUTH ON 287, TAKING SHADY GROVE ROAD, WHICH TURNS INTO MOUNT ZION AND RUNS INTO PLAINVIEW. CAN YOU CLARIFY HOW ACCESS TO

THAT ROAD IS GOING TO BE? >> YES, SIR.

SO WHERE MOUNT ZION TIES INTO SHADY GROVE RIGHT NOW, THE

[00:45:05]

TRAFFIC THAT COMES ON MOUNT ZION CAN GO TO THE LEFT AND TRAVEL ON SHADY GROVE ROAD, GET TO 287 AND THEN CROSS THROUGH AND THEN HEAD NORTHBOUND. THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT CABLE BARRIER WILL BE GOING ACROSS THERE.

THAT INTERSECTION WILL BE BLOCKED AND THEN IT WILL ACTUALLY TAKE THOSE APPROACHES OUT.

SO YOU'LL HAVE TO -- IF YOU ARE COMING UP HERE, YOU HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE RIGHT AND CONTINUE ON DOWN AND GO PROBABLY BACK

DOWN TOWARD PLAINVIEW. >> ARE THERE ANY PLANS FOR SHADY GROVE ROAD AND MOUNT ZION, TWO LANES NOW, WITH THIS

DEVELOPMENT, TO BE WIDENED? >> YES, SO THE WIDENING RIGHT NOW, IT'S ROUGHLY A 21 TO 22-FOOT ROAD.

IT'S IN REALLY GOOD SHAPE. LAST TIME I DROVE IT, IT WASN'T BUT MAYBE A WEEK OR TWO AGO, THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS, YEAH, WHEN THIS STARTS DEVELOPING AND YOU START GETTING DOWN TO THIS TIE IN, THEY WOULD WIDE TO AT LEAST A MINIMUM OF 24 FEET, WHICH IS TWO 12-FOOT-WIDE LANES, WHICH IS OUR MINIMUM.

ULTIMATELY SHADY GROVE FROM 287 BACK TO MOUNT ZION IS DESIGNATED AS A I THINK A MAJOR COLLECTOR, WHICH IS AN 80 FOOT, A FOUR-LANE ROAD. IT'S EITHER 80 OR 90678 BUT IT WILL BE A FOUR-LANE ROAD ULTIMATELY, WHETHER IT'S DIVIDED OR UNDIVIDED. THAT WOULD GO FROM 287 BACK THE MOUNT ZION. IT'S A LARGER ROAD FROM MOUNT ZION TO PLAINVIEW BECAUSE YOU HAVE A LOT OF TRIPS THAT WANT TO GO BACK EAST TOWARD PLAINVIEW. YES, SIR?

>> IS THE THOUGHT THAT IF TRAFFIC WERE TO COME DOWN OUT OF THE SOUTH, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THIS, I'M GOING TO CALL THAT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER, THAT TRAFFIC IS NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY NEED TO GO BACK UP TO SHADY GROVE ROAD/287.

IT'S GOING TO GO BACK THIS WAY IF THEY MADE THAT CHOICE.

>> RIGHTS. >> THE ONLY REASON I ASK THAT QUESTION, IF THERE WERE A LOT OF TRAFFIC GOING BACK THERE, WOULD TRAFFIC SLOW DOWN TO EXIT ON THE SLOWDOWN LANE, AND YOU HAVE TRAFFIC TRYING TO COME OUT THE GO TOWARD LOXAHATCHEE.

YOU DON'T LOOK AT THAT TRAFFIC. IT'S GOING TO BE THOSE FEW HOMEOWNERS MORE THAN LIKELY, IF THEY EVEN MAKE THAT CHOICE.

>> RIGHT. >> WHICH THEY WOULD MAKE A SAFER CHOICE I WOULD HOPE TO GO BACK DOWN ALL THE WAY TO THE STOP SIGN OF PLAINVIEW AND USE THE ENTRANCE ROAD, WHICH IS WHAT YOU

THINK WILL HAPPEN. >> YES, SIR, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, AGAIN, UNLESS YOU'RE COMING OUT HERE AND YOU WANT TO GO ULTIMATELY TO THE RIGHT AND YOU WANT TO GO SOUTHBOUND, THAT'S THE ONLY DIRECTION YOU'LL BE ABLE TO TAKE.

AGAIN, NOW, YOU CAN HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE COMING AND THEY WANT TO HEAD, IF THEY'RE HEADING SOUTHBOUND ALREADY, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO TURN ON SHADY GROVE ROAD AND CONTINUE DOWN THIS DIRECTION OR GO TO MOUNT ZION OR CONTINUE TO PLAINVIEW IF THEY WANT TO, BUT YOU WON'T HAVE THAT MOVEMENT IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION UNLESS THEY WANT TO DO A BIG LOOP. YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> UH-HUH.

>> SO SHADY GROVE ROAD IS PART OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN?

>> YES, SIR. >> AND THEY'RE NOT BEING REQUIRED TO BRING IT UP TO SPEED TO WHAT THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN IS

SUPPOSED UPON? >> FROM REBUILDING?

>> AGAIN, THAT'S OPEN TO DISCUSSION, BUT FROM OUR LOOKING AT IT, THE CONDITION THAT IT'S IN RIGHT NOW AND THE IMPACTS THAT WE'RE SEEING INITIALLY FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT WARRANT THE NEED TO COME IN AND REBUILD THE EXISTING ROAD THAT'S

THERE NOW. >> OKAY.

>> BECAUSE THERE'S NOT MUCH ROOM TO REALLY DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF

THERE, CORRECT? >> DUNN HERE YOU HAVE THE CREEK AND THE FLOODPLAIN. THERE ARE SOME PROPERTY, BUT THAT FLOODPLAIN GETS PRETTY FAR UP.

IF SOMETHING DOES HAPPEN, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE REAL DEEP ON

THAT SIDE. >> WOULD WE BE REQUIRING THE

DEDICATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY? >> FOR SURE, YES, SIR.

THAT'S CORRECT. RIGHT-OF-WAY, EASE.

, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS, YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. WOULD WE BE COLLECTING SOME SORT OF IMPACT THAT WE WOULD BE HANGING ON TO IN A WAY OF LOOKING SO THAT WHEN THAT IS EVENTUALLY WIDENED WE WILL HAVE COLLECTED AN IMPACT FOR THE BETTER.

OF THAT THOROUGHFARE? >> RIGHT NOW I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE THIS. WHEN WE DID THE IMPACT, WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS SEGMENT OF SHADY GROVE, NOT KNOWING THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS HAPPENING, BUT WE WILL STILL COLLECT IMPACT FEES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT. THE ONE THING, THE FRONTAGE ROADS ON 287 ARE ON OUR IMPACT, HOWEVER, COUNCIL WITH ULD HAVE TO ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND SAY, YES, WE'RE WILLING TO REIMBURSE YOU FOR YOUR COST OF BUILDING THIS SEGMENT, AN COUNCIL CAN SAY, WE'RE GOING TO COLLECT IMPACT FEES AN USE THEM TOWARD IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT SERVICE AREA. I WOULD IMAGINE AT SOME POINT WHEN WE DO THE NEXT UPDATE, WE'LL COME IN AND THIS ROAD WILL PROBABLY INCLUDE SO IT'S ELIGIBLE THAT WE NEED TO EXPAND

IMPACT MONIES AS WE CAN. >> TWO QUESTIONS, MIKE.

>> YES, SIR. >> WHAT IS THE DISTANCE FROM

[00:50:01]

WHERE THAT ROAD OR STREET COMES OUT ON TO SHADY GROVE DOWN TO MOUNT ZION, WHERE THE BRIDGE IS. I ASSUME THAT'S WHERE THAT DOTTED CURVED LINE, THAT'S MOUNT ZION?

>> NO, SIR, IT'S A PRETTY GOOD DISTANCE.

>> OKAY. MY NEXT QUESTION WAS, HOW IS THIS GOING TO IMPACT THE INTERSECTION OF MOUNT ZION AND PLAINVIEW? ARE THERE GOING TO BE CHANGES OR

UPGRADES AT THAT INTERSECTION? >> NOT WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, NO, SIR. ULTIMATELY THERE WILL BE, BUT AGAIN, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS WITH THE FIRST STAGE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO EVEN HAVE THIS ROAD.

IT WILL NOT CONNECT TO SHADY GROVE ROAD TO START OFF.

WITH IT WILL ONLY BE HERE, YOU COME OFF HERE, EVERYTHING HAS TO EXIT THIS WAY. YOU HAVE TO CONTINUE DOWN THE FRONTAGE ROAD, SO YOU'RE NOT ACCESSING 287 UNTIL YOU GET THE

PLAINVIEW ROAD. >> SO WHAT PHASE WILL THAT ROAD

BE PUT IN? >> WE'RE GOING TO CARRY THAT ROAD OUT AFTER OUR FIRST PHASE INTO ACCOUNT SHADY GROVE.

WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU ALL AND TALK ABOUT THAT PLANK SPACE AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO IN THAT BLANK SPACE.

WE CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AT THAT TIME.

BUT THIS IS OUR ROAD, OUR PHASE 2 WILL GO INTO SHADY GROVE ROAD.

>> BALLPARK, HOW FAR OUT IS THAT?

>> WE COULD BE... IT COULD BE TWO TO THREE, MAYBE FOUR YEARS.

>> OKAY. OKAY.

>> YEAH. QUESTIONS?

>> I WOULD SAY THAT AT SOME POINT WE DEFINITELY WOULD NEED THE LOOK, EVEN TODAY THAT PLAINVIEW IS --

>> THAT'S AN ODD INTERSECTION. >> IT IS.

AT SOME POINT THAT WOULD NEED TO GET IMPROVED, MAYBE UP TO FOUR LANES AT THE INTERSECTION WHERE COW CAN KIND OF SPLIT AND GO RIGHT OR GO LEFT, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS AND GAINING SOME ADDITIONAL CAPACITY. I DON'T THINK THE ENTIRE ROAD NEEDS TO BE WIDENED, BUT INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS FOR SURE. YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, MIKE. WE DON'T HAVE... ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS? WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY TO SPEAK, SO AT THIS TIME I'D ENTERTAIN A MOMENT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

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

>> ALL IN FAVOR. AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.

THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ACTION.

I GUESS IN MY CASE I'M STILL A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE

SIGNS. >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION FOR STAFF. I'M THINKING THE SIGNAGE AT, I BELIEVE IT'S COCO NAILS, ISN'T THAT A 25-FOOTER.

ISN'T KROGER A 45? YOU REALLY DON'T EVER GET IN

THAT RANGE. >> THOSE ARE THE TWO EXCEPTIONS.

WE REALLY RARELY EVER GET TO THIS POINT AND HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS. BUT LIKE I SAID EARLIER --

>> IT STRIKES ME AS THOUGH WE WERE OPEN TO 35-FOOTERS.

>> THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST GO-AROUND, HOWEVER, WE DIDN'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR INTO THAT BECAUSE THE APPLICANT DIDN'T HAVE WHAT THOSE SIGNS WOULD LOOK LIKE.

BUT YOU DID MENTION DUE TO THE KROGER EXAMPLE, DUED TO COCO NAILS EXAMPLE YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO IT, BUT AGAIN, THAT WAS JUNE

OF LAST YEAR. >> SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GOT MY MIND WRAPPED AROUND THE CHAIRMAN'S QUESTION, IF WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT, ARE WE APPROVING THOSE

SIGN HEIGHTS? >> YOU ARE APPROVING HOW THE SIGN LOOKS, THE SIGN LOCATIONS AND THE SIGN HEIGHTS, YES.

SO I'LL RUN THROUGH IT AGAIN. THESE ARE FOUR LOCATIONS.

HERE'S WITH THE CIRCLES. P1 PLACE ONE SIGNAGE.

THIS IS A 35-FOOT TALL ONE. P2 AND P3, SHADY GROVE ROAD, 25-FOOT TALL, AND P4 WILL HAVE OPTION A OR B, SAME HEIGHT, BUT IT WILL HAVE A SINGLE TENANT OR MULTITENANT.

SO AGAIN TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER RODGERS, YOU WILL BE APPROVING THE SIGN LOCATION AND THE SIGN OPTIONS AS PRESENTED, THE MATERIAL WITH THE WOOD, METAL AND STONE MATERIAL, HEIGHT, EVERYTHING WOULD BE APPROVED.

[00:55:03]

>> SO I DO VIEW THIS DEVELOPMENT I REALIZED THIS THE OTHER DAY, AS I DROVE DOWN THE HIGHWAY THROUGH MANSFIELD ANOTHER DAY THROUGH LOXAHATCHEE, THEY HAVE MILES AND MILES OF ROAD TRASH.

I REALIZED WE DON'T. >> UH-HUH.

>> AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, I AM GLAD THE SEE THIS IS GOING RETAIL. BECAUSE WHEN YOU COME OFF THE HILL AT THE RAILROAD BRIDGE, AND YOU'RE FEEDING OFF IN, THERE YOU WILL BE LOOKING DOWN UPON THIS. AND REALLY THAT'S KIND OF -- ALL THROUGH KROGER, WE HAVE THE PRESERVE, AND THAT'S CONSUMING MOST OF THAT. THE PRESERVE WILL BE A LITTLE RETAIL BARRIER. BUT THEN WE GET INTO... OUR ELEVATIONS START GOING UP AT KROGER, ALL THIS AREA THROUGH THE HOTEL. YOU REALLY CAN'T SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST STAGE TO WHERE YOU DROP OFF WHERE ALL THAT'S GOING TO BECOME RETAIL

ALL THE WAY DOWN THROUGH THERE. >> RIGHT.

>> SO I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT -- I'M GOING TO LET SOME OF THESE SMARTER PEOPLE THAN ME SPEAK ABOUT HOW THOSE ELEVATIONS AFFECT THE NEED POTENTIALLY FOR SIGNS AT THAT HEIGHT.

WE KNOW WE HAVE 25-FOOTER IN TOWN.

HOW TALL IS THE MIDLOTHIAN BUSINESS PARK? OF COURSE, THAT'S CITY, SO THEY GET TO DO THINGS THAT WE DON'T,

RIGHT? >> YEAH.

NO COMMENT. >> IS THAT LIKE A 50-FOOTER?

>> I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I KNOW IT'S AT

LEAST OVER 40. >> I'LL LET THE REST OF -- AND MAURICE, YOU WERE SPEAKING, SO I WAS MAKING SURE, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I'M GOING ALONG WITH WHAT YOU

WERE MENTIONING. >> WELL, WE HAVE FOUR SIGNS?

>> YES, SIR. >> OKAY.

SO IF THEY MEET -- IF WE GIVE THAT TO THEM AND THEY MEET ALL THE MENTIONED REQUIREMENTS BUT THEY WANT TO CHANGE THE DESIGN,

WOULD THEY HAVE TO COME BACK? >> YES, SIR.

>> THEY WOULD? >> SO IT'S GOT TO LOOK EXACTLY

LIKE THAT? >> YES, SIR.

EXACT HEIGHT, EXACT LOOK OF IT MATERIALS, IF THEY WANT THE CHANGE ANYTHING, THAT WOULD TRIGGER COMING BACK TO YOU GUYS

AND COUNCIL. >> THESE ARE ALL FIXED SIGNS

WITH NO GRAPHIC BOARDS. >> RIGHT.

YES, SIR. >> AND ARE THEY LIT?

ARE THEY ILLUMINATED? >> [INAUDIBLE]

>> INTERIOR. >> NOT SHOOTING OUT.

WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE 35 FEET BEING ARY QIERM PER SCALE BASED ON THE ELEVATION OF THE SITE AND THE ELEVATION OF

287? >> DISCUSSION AMONGST US AND THE

APPLICANT? >> YES.

>> NOT NECESSARILY. WE KIND OF JUST... THE APPLICANT PROPOSED THESE OPTIONS AND BASED ON THE LAYOUT, WE WERE OKAY WITH IT. WE DIDN'T GET INTO THAT DETAIL.

HOWEVER, WE CAN DEFER TO THE COMMISSION.

>> I JUST WANTED TO SAY, IF YOU WANTED TO BRING THE APPLICANT BACK UP, THEN YOU'D HAVE TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

BECAUSE YOU CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I WANT THE SPEAK ONE MORE THING. WITH THE PLAN, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO INCORPORATE MORE OF THE GOALS, AND SO THIS IS ALL REGIONAL MODULE. AND THIS IS IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SO YOU KNOW, YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT STAFF BEING COMFORTABLE WITH THE LAND USES. SO YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SEVERAL GOALS THAT SPEAK TO THAT IN THE PLAN, AND IF YOU -- WELL, TRY AND FIND THE AERIAL. IF YOU LOOK AT THE AERIAL, THIS AREA SURROUNDED BY THE REGIONAL MODULE, AND IT ALSO KIND OF HAS A BUILT-IN BUFFER OF THE FLOOD PLAIN WITH THE RAILROAD.

SO THOSE WERE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO OUR COMFORT

LEVEL WITH THE LAND USES. >> WELL, IF THERE HAS BEEN A CONTROVERSIAL ANYTHING, IT'S BEEN SIGNS.

WE ALL KNOW THAT. RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S BEEN A HUGE ISSUE.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING BODY, SO COUNCIL WILL BE THE ONE THAT

[01:00:02]

MAKES THE FINAL DECISION ON THE SIGNS.

SO IF NOBODY ELSE HAS ANYTHING ON, THAT I'D MAKE A MOTION THE

APPROVE AS PRESENTED. >> I SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER QUESTION OR DISCUSSION? IF NOT ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS. ITEM 009, CONDUCT A PUBLIC

[009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the city of Midlothian Zoning Ordinance by amending Section 4.6005 “Real Estate and Homebuilders Signs” in reference to the requirement of a Specific Use Permit. (Case No. OZ01-2023-12).]

HEARING CONSIDERING AN ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AIMPLING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE BY AMENDING SECTION 4.6005, REAL ESTATE AND HOMEBUILDERS SIGNS IN REFERENCE TO THE REQUIREMENT OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. WE'RE NOW IF PUBLIC HEARING.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS ACTUALLY A STAFF-INITIATED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 4.6005, THE REAL ESTATE AND HOMEBUILDERS SIGNS. AS YOU KNOW, WE CURRENTLY REQUIRE A HOME BUILDER SIGN THAT IS ADJACENT TO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE WITH A RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH OF 80 FEET OR GREATER TO COME BEFORE YOU AND ALSO GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR A FINAL DECISION ON AN SUP REQUEST. WHAT STAFF IS PROPOSING IS THAT IF A PERMIT WERE SUBMITTED FOR A HOME BUILDER SIGN AND IT WOULD MEET ALL OF THESE REGULATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THOSE ADMINISTRATIVELY. THESE REGULATIONS INCLUDE THINGS LIKE NOT EXCEEDING 15 FEET IN HEIGHT, NOT EXCEEDING 100 SQUARE FEET IN SIGN AREA. OF COURSE, THEY COULD NOT BE LOCATED ADJACENT TO HIGHWAY 287 BYPASS LOOP.

IT STILL WOULD REMAIN THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED 60 DAYS AFTER THE FINAL CO OF THE LAST UNIT.

THERE WOULD BE TWO INSTANCES, OF COURSE, THAT THEY WOULD STILL COME FORWARD FOR AN SUP, ONE WOULD BE THAT THEY ARE NOT MEETING THOSE REGULATIONS AND THEY STILL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PERMIT. WE WOULD ASK THEM TO COME BEFORE YOU AND GET A RECOMMENDATION AND THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A FINAL DECISION. THE SECOND INSTANCE WOULD BE IF -- FOR SOME OF THESE LARGER SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE PRIMARY ENTRANCES ON LIKE TWO MAJOR ARTERIALS MAYBE ASKING FOR MORE THAN ONE SIGN. WE WOULD ASK IN THAT INSTANCE THAT THEY ALSO COME FORWARD TO REQUEST AN SUP.

I'LL STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS STAFF?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> MO ONE SPEAKS. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> MOTION THE CLOSE.

>> SECOND THAT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS.

THE FLOOR OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? IT IS UNANIMOUS. STAFF, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO? COMMISSIONERS? ANYTHING? I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.