[00:00:09] >> OKAY, IT IS 6:00, SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND START THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND WE DID HAVE A QUORUM, BY THE WAY. WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO ITEM ONE . WE INVITE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. DO WE HAVE [002 Staff review of the cases that were heard by City Council in the last sixty (60) days.] ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? ITEM TWO HIS STAFF REVIEW. >> GOOD EVENING. WE HAD SEVERAL CASES THAT WENT TO THE JUNE 11TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING . THE SECONDARY DWELLING WAS APPROVED BY COUNSEL 7-0 . THE SECONDARY DWELLING FOR CHARLOTTE ROAD, ROOM NUMBER, THAT WAS A TWO-PARTER TO APPROVE THE SECONDARY DWELLING . THAT WAS ALSO 7-0. THE TWO RESTAURANTS WERE BOTH APPROVED 7-0. THE WEST SIDE PRESERVE AMENDMENT WAS CONTINUED TO THE JUNE 25TH MEETING. THEY ASKED THE APPLICANT TO HAVE HIS NAME AND THE LOT ORIENTATION. WE MOVE LOTS AWAY FROM THE GAS WELL, AND MOVED CLOSER TO THE 60% RATIO FOR GARAGES. AND THEN, JUST ONE MORE NOTE, THE COMP PLAN OPEN HOUSE WILL BE EXTENDED ONLINE FOR ANOTHER COUPLE OF WEEKS IF ANYONE WANTS TO TAKE NOTES. AND THAT IS IT. [CONSENT AGENDA] >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL MOVE NOW TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF MAY 21ST, CONSIDER THE PULMONARY PLAT OF WALNUT GROVE 287, AND CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A FINAL PLAT ON WEST HIGHLAND ESTATES. I WILL TAKE EMOTIONAL SOMEONE WISHES TO HAVE ONE REMOVED? >> I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OR SUBMITTED. >> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A [007 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance for a grocery store relating to the use and development of +/-1,500 square feet of floor area on Lot 1AR, Block 1 of Midlothian Plaza Shopping Center, City of Midlothian, Ellis County, Texas. The property is presently zoned Commercial (C) and is located at 1000 E Main Street, Suite 102. (Case no. SUP10-2024-46) ] SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? FOLLOWED BY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED? WE WILL MOVE NOW TO PUBLIC HEARINGS. ITEM 007, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE FOR A GROCERY STORE RELATING TO THE USE OF DEVELOPMENT OF PLUS OR MINUS 1500 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA ON LOT IAR, BLOCK ONE AT MIDLOTHIAN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE PROPERTY IS PRESENTLY A ZONE IN COMMERCIAL AND IS LOCATED AT 1000 EAST MAIN STREET, SUITE 102. >> THANK YOU. THE GROCERY STORE BE ABOUT 1500 SQUARE FEET. THIS IS A REQUIREMENT FOR ZONING ORDINANCE THAT THE USE OF A GROCERY STORE REQUIRES THAT YOU BE IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, AND THIS IS A COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. AGAIN, AT 1000 EAST MAIN STREET, SUITE 1 AND TWO IS OVER HERE. THE APPROVAL OF THIS SEP, AGAIN, IT WOULD BE SPECIFIC TO THE SUITE JUST FOR THAT SITE . IF SOMEBODY ELSE WANTED TO DO A SMALL GROCERY STORE SOMEONE OUT ELSE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO UNDER THIS SEP. IT SITE SPECIFIC AND SQUARE FOOTAGE SPECIFIC. STAFF IS NOT SEEN THE NEED TO ADD THE CONDITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS. NORMALLY, AND SEP IS A GROCERY STORE THAT IS LARGER, AND YOU MIGHT BE CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC OR SAFETY CONCERNS WITH 1500 SQUARE FEET . BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT CONCERN. IN THE APPLICANT IS NOT ASKING FOR ANY VARIANCES OR CONCESSIONS. [00:05:04] THEY WILL JUST REMODEL THE BUILDING , USE IT OTHERWISE AS IS , THEY WILL FOLLOW THE SIGN CODE, PRETTY STRAIGHT BOARD. WE SENT OUT EIGHT LETTERS TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY CORRESPONDENCE FOR OR AGAINST, OR ANY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THAT MATTER. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL , AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IS THIS TRULY A GROCERY STORE? IS IT A CONVENIENCE STORE? >> WE DEBATED IT. WE SETTLED THAT IT WAS A GROCERY STORE BECAUSE THERE WILL BE REFRIGERATORS . IT ESSENTIALLY AMOUNTS TO WHAT YOU MIGHT CONSIDER WHAT FOODS. IN UNDER THE CONVENIENCE STORE DEFINITION, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT DRYGOODS. SO, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD JUST BE BETTER TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION AND GO UNDER THE GROCERY STORE USE INTERPRETATION , JUST BECAUSE I SHOULD COVER EVERYTHING SHE DOES. CANNED GOODS, BOTTLE GOODS, DRIED THINGS LIKE BEANS, AND REFRIGERATED PRODUCTS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. BASICALLY ANYTHING YOU DO PROBABLY IN A GROCERY STORE, JUST ON A VERY SMALL SCALE. >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT IN WHICH TO SPEAK? DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK, SIR? >> OF THE APPLICANTS? OKAY. WE DO NOT HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK , SO I WILL MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION IT. >> SECOND. >> OKAY, THAT'S A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> A MOTION IN A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY [008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance and zoning map by changing the zoning of 0.888 + acres in the Benjamin F. Hawkins Survey, Abstract No. 464 from Community Retail (CR) Zoning District to Planned Development District No. 118 (PD-118) and amending and restating the development and use regulations of PD-118 as set forth in Section 1 of Ordinance No. 2020-50, inclusive of all exhibits thereto. The overall property is +/- 7.328 acres, and is generally located south of US Highway 287 and west of 14th Street. (Case No. Z07-2024-029).] AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED? AS UNANIMOUS. WE WILL NOW OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING NOT BY CHANGING THE ZONING OF 0.888 PLUS ACRES OF BENJAMIN F HAWKEN SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 464 FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL ZONING DISTRICT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 118 AND AMENDING AND RESTATING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PD 118 AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2020-50, INCLUSIVE OF ALL EXHIBITS THERETO. THE OVERALL PROPERTY IS PLUS OR MINUS 7.328 ACRES AND IS GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF U.S. HIGHWAY 287 AND WEST OF 14TH STREET. >> THIS IS A ZONING CHANGE PRE-AMENDMENT. THE PORTION TO THE NORTH , THERE IS CONSTRUCTION TO THE NORTH THAT WAS SEPARATED BY OUTLINE ROAD. WHEN THIS PORTION OF BEDTIME ROAD WAS ABANDONED, THE APPLICANT ACQUIRED THAT ABANDONMENT AS WELL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT, AND THEY WERE INTEGRATING THAT INTO THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT. IN ADDITION, THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT IF A BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTE IT COULD BE ADDED WITH A DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY , WE ADDED THAT TO THE USES, AND THEY WOULD LIKE IT A MINISTRY TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THAT AS WELL. THE PROPERTY IS COMMERCIAL DISTRICT , FUTURE LAND USE MAPS SHOWS A MIX OF LAND USES THAT ENCOURAGE WALK ABILITY AND HIKING. SO, THE PROPERTIES ON ALL SIDES ARE A PART OF THE NEW TOWN MODULES AS WELL. 14TH STREET IS AN EXISTING MINOR ARROW FAIR AND A 90 FOOT WIDE RIGHT AWAY. THEY DID PROVIDE A LETTER WITH THE T.I.A. WORKSHEET EXPLAINING THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE AREA ARE ADEQUATE TO ADDRESS THE INCREASE OF TRAFFIC. P1 18 HAS A BASE ZONING OF GENERAL PROFESSIONAL . THE SITE PLAN, IF IT DOES NOT TO ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS , THAT IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL. SO, WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF TO THE SITE PLAN IS THAT THE [00:10:06] BUILDING HE WILL BECOME SMALLER ORIGINALLY APPROVED CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN THAT SHOW TO BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE OTHER 12,250 SQUARE FEET , IT IS PRODUCED A CLOSER TO 6000, SO WILL BE ABOUT HALF THE SIZE OF THE OTHER MEDICAL BUILDINGS. SO, THERE IS ONE LAST FORAY VARIANCE, AND THAT IS TO THE DUMPSTER THAT IS LOCATED ALONG 14TH STREET . IT'S LOCATED AT THIS SITE HERE. I WILL COME BACK TO THAT. I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU THE LANDSCAPE PLAN . WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT LOCATION IS THAT THEY ARE PROVIDING THAT SURROUND IT. THEY ARE THREE FOOT TALL SHRUB WITH EIGHT-FOOT TALL SCREENINGS. AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT. STAFF PREFER THAT THEY WOULD TRY TO INTEGRATE THE STRUCTURES WITH ONE OF THE SITES , AND WE WILL LET THEM TELL YOU THE RATIONAL TO KEEP IT AT THIS LOCATION. I MEAN, THAT IS NOT A DEALBREAKER FOR US , BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD PREFER NOT TO SEE RIGHT NEXT TO THE STREET RIGHT AWAY. THE APPLICANT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT THIS IN TWO PHASES , PHASE ONE WILL INCORPORATE MOST OF THE SITE , AND IN HARMONY BANK WILL COME BACK FOR A SAY PLAN AND CONSTRUCT THEIR PORTION PROBABLY SOON AFTER. ONE BUILDING IS CURRENTLY BUILT, BUILDING A, AND IT DOES CONFORM TO THE ELEVATIONS THAT WERE APPROVED AT THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN. THE ARCHITECT PROVIDED ELEVATIONS FOR BUILDING C FOR VOCABULARY AS WELL AS THE ORIGINAL SMALLER SCALE. AGAIN, THE DESIGN AND THE DUMPSTER WILL CONFORM WITH PLANS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED . IT'S ORANGE AND BLACK BRICK WITH LIGHT AND DARK STUCCO , AND STOREFRONT SYSTEMS. SO, IT LOOKS LIKE A PROFESSIONAL BUILDING. THE TREES ARE PISTACHIO . THEY OFFER DIFFERENT TYPES OF SHRUBS , AND I WILL LET YOU ASK ABOUT THAT IF YOU SO CHOOSE. WE SENT 21 NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE SITE . WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY INPUT BACK FROM ANY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS . STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVALS . WE RECOMMEND A CONDITION THAT JUST SAYS THAT THEY SHOULD MOVE THE DUMPSTERS AWAY FROM 14TH STREET , OR WHATEVER THE COMMISSIONER WANTS. ANY QUESTIONS? >> AND YOU GO BACK TO THE SIDE TRYING WERE THE BANK IS? >> YOU WANT ME TO POINT FOR THE BANK IS LOCATED? >> NO, THERE IS ANOTHER PICTURE ANOTHER SLIDE. IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE ONE THAT HAD THE FACE DESIGN. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A DRIVE-THROUGH. CORRECT? >> THEY DO ON A DRIVE-THROUGH, YES. >> WHAT IS BETTER FOR THE DRIVE-THROUGH? >> SO, THEY STILL NEED TO SUBMIT IT FOR REVIEW. THEY HAVE SHOWN US TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT LAYOUTS. WE DON'T DO A REVIEW LIKE THEY DO AT THE MEETING, BUT IF YOU JUST PROVIDE INPUT , I THINK TWO OF THE THINGS THEY SHOWED US THAT THE BUILDING WAS ABOUT AS LARGE AS THESE BUILDINGS TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE STREET , AND THEN COUNTING THE DRIVE-THROUGH'S OFF OF THE DRIVE AND TURN THIS WAY, THEY DON'T HAVE AS MANY DRIVE-THROUGH'S IS A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT. SO, IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT THE BANK ON THE CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND 67, IT HAS SHORT CUES AS WELL. >> FOR THE ATLANTA COME BACK, WITHOUT BE THE SAME ? >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DOES ANYONE PRESENT WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU WOULD, SIR, COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE SO WE MAY HEAR YOU, AND GIVE YOUR NAME. [00:15:02] >> I WASN'T PREPARED TO SPEAK, BUT I'M THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER. I AM WORKING FOR THE OWNERS , BUT I AM PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH EVERYTHING. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? >> WHERE THE BANK IS , IT SAYS FUTURE DRIVE. IS THAT WHERE IT IS NOW? >> WELL, THE SERVICE ROAD -- YOU CAN SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO DO A LAND. SO, THAT IS A SERVICE ROAD RIGHT THERE. >> SERVICE ROAD IS NOT RIGHT. THE ABANDONED MOUNTAINSIDE. >> I WILL BE A NEW DRIVEWAY GOING INTO THE ROAD. AND THAT IT WILL GO AROUND THE BACKSIDE , BECAUSE IT IS A PRETTY SMALL DRIVE-THROUGH. THEY CAN COME BACK AND EXIT OUT WITH A RAMP UP THERE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THE DUMPSTER CIDER ON 14TH STREET, WHAT ARE YOU PROPOSING TO DO WITH THAT? >> WE ARE LOOKING TO PUT SOME INPUT IN THE TREES. WE WILL DECORATE THAT LIKE WE DID LAST YEAR WITH Y'ALL'S APPROVAL. BUT WE HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT WALL , AND I THINK WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND DO SOME EIGHT-FOOT TREES AROUND THE WHOLE AREA FOR 14 FEET THREE TRAFFIC. >> >> IF WE PUT ON THE OTHER END , WE WOULD NOTHING TO ADD THAT. THERE WAS TALK OF THAT WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW. >> SO WASN'T ON THE CENTER DRIVE AREA 'S WE CAN ACCESS BUILDINGS EASILY FROM THE PARKING AREA. ULTIMATELY WE MAY LOOSEN PARKING SPACES OR MASSIVE TRAFFIC FLOW. STEVEN WILSON, ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> >> IF YOU MAY COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF? >> 1412 CREEK. >> YOU HAVE COMMENTS TO MAKE, SIR? >> ACTUALLY, I DON'T HAVE COMMENTS. THE STAFF IS PRETTY MUCH OUTLINED EVERYTHING. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THEM. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO BASICALLY IS A SYNOPSIS FOR THE ABANDONMENT OF THE MOUNTAINSIDE IN THE ACQUISITION -- INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ] WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS COME BACK TO INCORPORATE THAT . WE ALSO HAVE A TENANT, A BANK , PARTIAL LAND RIGHT HERE FOR THE BANK , AND I THINK THAT WAS THE MAIN ADJUSTMENT TO THE ORDINANCE. THAT WAS THE REQUIREMENT TO COME BACK IF WE HAD A DRIVE-THROUGH. WHAT WE ARE [00:20:01] ASKING FOR DRIVE-THROUGH PURPOSES IS AN INSTANT BANK INSTITUTION RATHER THAN A DRIVE-THROUGH FOR RESTAURANTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THRUST OF THE PLAN PRETTY MUCH STAYS THE SAME . WE HAVE REDUCED OUR BUILDING . REALLY HAVE FIVE, AND WE ARE CONDUCTING -- SMALLER BUILDING. I MUST MAINLY THE MAJOR CHANGES WE ARE ASKING FOR. >> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? >> WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO MOVE THE DUMPSTER ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO THE WEST SIDE? >> TRAFFIC IS BAD IN MIDLOTHIAN, I DRIVE TO AND FROM MOSES. THIS IS WHERE ALL OF OUR INTERNAL TRAFFIC IS. IT'S OFF OF THE MAIN ROAD SO WE COULD INTERNALIZE ALL OF OUR TRAFFIC. ALL OF THE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ON THE ROAD THAT GETS TO THE RESTAURANTS, SOME OF OUR TENANTS HAVE ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY RESTAURANTS WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE , SO THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT IT IS. IF YOU NOTICE ALL OF OUR OTHER DUMPSTERS ARE OFF OF THE CENTER DRIVE, JUST BECAUSE OUR PEDESTRIANS ON THE SIDEWALKS COMING THROUGH HERE WOULD BE AN ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE. WE HAVE EXTRA TREES ALONG HERE , WITH EXTRA SHRUBBERY AROUND IT . WE HAVE PEDESTRIAN DOORS SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO OPEN THE DATES. SO HOPEFULLY, WE CAN KEEP THE GATES CLOSED. ACCESS OFF OF THE CENTER DRIVE IS JUST CUMBERSOME. >> OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, SIR. >> YOU BET. >> WE HAVE NO ONE ELSE TO SEE, THEY WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MAKE IT TO CLOSE. BUT WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. I'M LOOKING FOR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ACTION? SO, WITH STAFF BECOME TROUBLE WITH THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE AND EIGHT-FOOT TREES? YOU JUST DON'T LIKE THE LOCATION? >> YOU KNOW, I DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY HAD THOSE SIDE DOORS KEEPING THE FRONT GATE CLOSED. I THINK THAT HELP. IT'S REALLY UP TO YOU . THEY HAVE THREE FEET BOX RUBS , BUT IF THE GATES ARE CLOSED , I MEAN, THAT IS THE MAIN CONCERN. >> IF I HEARD THEM CORRECTLY, THEY'RE WILLING TO DO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. OKAY. >> I MEAN, YOU CAN GET EIGHT-FOOT MEDIUM SHRUBS OR WHATEVER. >> >> WITH YOUR PLEASURE, COMMISSION? >> I MOVE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. I BELIEVE THAT ARI FITS WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE, DOESN'T IT? >> WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? >> ALL SECONDED. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A [00:25:03] MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> OKAY. I BELIEVE I HEARD A NO [009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 5631 Kolter Lane, being +/-1 acre of land, Lot 17, Block 1 of Sweetwater Creek Estates, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to a Single Family Two (SF-2) District. (Case no. Z11-2024-45)] INSIDE OF THAT. WE WILL MOVE 2009 , CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 5631 COULTER LANE, BEING PLUS OR MINUS ONE ACRE OF LAND, LOT 17, BLOCK ONE OF SWEETWATER CREEK ESTATES, BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AGRICULTURE DISTRICT TO SINGLE-FAMILY TO DISTRICT. >> ARRAY. OUR NEXT CASE FOR THIS EVENING'S AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE. THIS IS AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME PROPERTY. IT'S JUST OVER ONE ACRE IN APPLICANT SURFACE FOR CONTINUED USES EVERYTHING THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN THAT EXISTS IN AREAS OF THE MODULE , AND JUST AS A LARGER LOCATION OF THE IMAGE. THIS NEXT SLIDE IS A COMPARISON CHART SHOWING THE CURRENT ZONING , WHICH IS AGRICULTURAL IN THE THIRD COLUMN. IN THE FAR RIGHT-HAND COLUMN , THE PROPOSED ZONING, WHICH IS SINGLE-FAMILY AS WELL. AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FOR SINGLE-FAMILY BECAUSE SINGLE-FAMILY ALIGNS MORE WITH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY . SO, JUST FOR EXAMPLE, THAT STARTING AT THE TOP MINIMAL ACRES. THAT'S ONE ACRE SINGLE-FAMILY THAT IS PROPOSED FOR ONE ACRE AS WELL. THE AGRICULTURAL MINIMUM LOT IS THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF 460 FEET AT 631 VIRTUAL LANE. THE ZONING IS 125 FEET . I WON'T READ THROUGH ALL OF THE IS , BUT YOU KIND OF GET THE PICTURE OF THAT. MOST OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ALONG SINGLE-FAMILY IS CLOSE TO AGRICULTURAL ZONING. THIS IS ALSO FOR THE SOFTWARE AS WELL. SO I CAN, THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. WE JUST SENT OUT LETTERS ARE ON THE PROPERTY . WE DO NOT RECEIVE ANY LETTERS OF SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION FOR THIS , AND STAFF RECOMMEND'S APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> WHAT IS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES? >> SAY THE ONE MORE TIME? SORRY. >> WHAT ARE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES? >> YES. PRIMARILY AGRICULTURAL SURROUNDING THIS. IF YOU GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OUT, AND RETURNING TO SINGLE-FAMILY, BUT PRIMARILY IN THE OTHER AREAS. >> THE EXISTING OTHER HOUSES OR IS AGRICULTURAL? >> YES. THE PRIMARY AREA IS AGRICULTURAL REZONING. YES, SIR. USUALLY WHEN LAND IS ANNEXED , THIS WAS BACK IN -- ANYWAYS, WHEN I FIND THAT ANSWER, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT. WHENEVER IT IS ANNEXED, THE ZONING PLACED PROPERTIES IS AGRICULTURAL ZONING. SO, THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED IN THE SITUATION. HE WILL PROBABLY SEE THAT WITHIN OUR DISTRICT AS WELL. BUT IT DID ALIGN WITH THE ZONING AT THAT TIME. THIS PROPERTY REZONING ALLOWED THE PROPERTY TO BE MORE CONSISTENT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING PROPOSED. >> SO, IS THERE A CURRENT RESIDENCE? >> THERE IS. ALL OF THESE ARE PRIMARILY HOMES ON THE PROPERTY ALREADY. >> ARE THEY LOOKING TO TEAR DOWN THE HOUSE TO BUILD A NEW HOUSE? >> RIGHT. THEY ARE NOT LOOKING TO TEAR DOWN THE HOUSE. HOW THIS CAME OUT, THE APPLICANT WANTED A PERMIT TO BUILD A STRUCTURE , SO HE WAS ABLE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF AGRICULTURAL ZONING. A LOT OF THAT WAS NOT HIS FAULT , BECAUSE THEY WERE GIVING THE ZONING DISTRICT. HE HAD NOT PROPOSE TO DO ANYTHING UNTIL THIS POINT, AND THAT IS HOW HE FOUND THIS OUT. WE TOLD HIM HEY, THIS IS THE PROCESS YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH TO ALZONING DISTRICT. AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE THIS EVENING. >> OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? [00:30:01] DOES THE APPLICANT PRESENT WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY. DO WE HAVE A QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE ACTION ITEM? >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY FURTHER [010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 4040 Parker Lane, being +/-1.033 acre of land, Lot 3, Block G of Crystal Forest Estates, by changing the zoning from Single Family One (SF-1) District to a Single Family Two (SF-2) District. (Case No. Z12-2024-047). ] DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED? WE MOVED TO ITEM 10 AND THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 4040 PARKER LANE, BEING PLUS OR MINUS ONE .033 ACRES OF LAND, LOT 3, BLOCK G OF CRYSTAL FORCE ESTATES, BY CHANGING THE ZONING OF SINGLE-FAMILY ONE DISTRICT TO SINGLE-FAMILY TO DISTRICT. >> THIS WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE LAST CASE THAT YOU HEARD. THIS IS JUST A REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY ONE TO SINGLE-FAMILY TWO. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 4040 PARKER LANE . AS YOU CAN SEE HERE , AGAIN, THE SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING REQUIRES THE MINIMUM AREA OF TWO ACRES . WE ARE ASKING FOR THE PROPOSAL TO BE SINGLE-FAMILY TWO, WHICH ALIGNS MORE WITH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE GROUND. THE LOT IS ACTUALLY ONE .033 ACRES , WHICH ALIGNS MORE WITH A SINGLE-FAMILY TWO ZONING. AGAIN, VERY SIMILAR TO THE SITUATION IN THE PREVIOUS CASE . THIS PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED IN 2017 , AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS CHANGED A YEAR AFTER THAT. SO, THE LOT REQUIREMENTS DOUBLED. THE APPLICANT IS A CAUSING TO REZONE THIS PLAN, AS WELL AS TO MAKE THE PARCEL MORE CONFORMING WITH THE ZONING AGAIN. WE MAILED OUT 17 LETTERS TO PROPERTY OWNERS. STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FOR OR AGAINST , AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS? OKAY. DOES THE APPLICANT PRESENT WISH YOU SPEAK? OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? IF NOT, NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP, SOIL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING. >> I MOVED TO CLOSE. >> MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> OKAY. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> MOTION IN A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. [011 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations of Planned Development-42 (PD-42) by changing the use and development regulations for Module B and the approval for a related detailed site plan for Lot 2, Block A Midtowne Mixed Use, City of Midlothian, Ellis County, Texas. The property is located on +/- .493 acres and is generally located on the southwest corner of 14th and George Hopper. (Case no. Z13-2024-51)] ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> THAT HAS BEEN UNANIMOUS. WE MOVED TO ITEM ZERO 11, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT 40 20 BY CHANGING THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF MODULE B AND THE APPROVAL FOR THE RELATED DETAILED SITE FOR LOTS TWO MOTTO, BLOCK A MIDTOWN MIXED-USE, CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON PLUS OR MINUS .493 ACRES AND IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE 4/10 14TH AND GEORGE HOPPER. >> NORMALLY WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO DO A NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT , THEY COME BEFORE P AND Z FOR APPROVAL OF THAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE . SO, WHAT CAME UP WHEN WE MET WITH THEM , WE WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO PROCESS IT THAT WAY WAS THEY NEEDED SOME CHANGES SPECIFIC TO THEIR LOT , WHICH IS MODULE B IN THE PD. IN THE SCENARIO, WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS NOT JUST THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN, BROUGHT SEVERAL CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE THAT APPLIES IN MODULE B. ONE IS ACTUALLY MORE OF A CLARIFICATION THAN A CHANGE. SO AGAIN, REMINDER, MIDTOWN IS A SHORT DISTRICT. IS ALL ABOUT THAT PRETTY PICTURE SHOW WITH THE ARCHITECTURE AND SITE DESIGN. IT'S ALSO MEANT TO BE A VERY WALKABLE TYPE ENVIRONMENT , UNLIKE SOME OTHER FOREIGN TYPE DEVELOPMENTS. AGAIN, THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE VERY WALKABLE MIXED-USE. WITH THE PD AMENDMENT , SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS TO ALLOW AN INCREASE OF ABOUT 3500 SQUARE FEET TO 4505. IT WAS NEVER STATED SO MUCH AS A MAX SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 3500 , AND I WILL SHOW YOU THAT HERE IN A [00:35:03] SECOND. IS A LITTLE HARD TO READ. IT JUST THAT A TOTAL OF 3500 BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS WHEN YOU DO THE MATH. SO, IT WAS IN A MAXIMUM, IS THIS WHAT THEY SAID AND SHOWED IN MODULE B. THAN THEY ARE ALSO SHOWED 17 PARKING SPACES. THERE NOW ONLY ASKING TO DO 15. ALSO TO CLARIFY, THE USES ARE STILL ALLOWED TO GENERALLY BE RETAIL IN OFFICE . THE ISSUE WAS MODULE B. THEY PUT PERSONAL SERVICE AS A LABEL ON THEIR . IT'S NOT THEIR INTENT TO LIMIT THEMSELVES TO ONLY PERSONAL SERVICE THAT FALLS UNDER RETAIL. SO, I WILL GET THROUGH ALL OF THIS, BUT IF YOU WERE TO IMPROVE IT, JUST SO YOU ARE AWARE, YOU WILL BE APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN WITH THESE CHANGES, AND IT WOULD NOT COME BACK TO YOU LIKE IT NORMALLY DOES FOR YOUR APPROVAL. BECAUSE WHEN YOU AMEND THE PD DEVELOPING SITE PLAN SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY SEEN IT APPROVED, YOU WILL SEE IT AGAIN. SO, THIS IS WHAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL 2022 MODULE B. THEY ARE SHOWING 17 PARKING SPACES THAT GOT YOU TO THE 3500 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN HERE IS WHERE THEY SAID PERSONAL SERVICE. SO, THIS IS THEIR NEW PLAN. THE 15TH YOUR PARKING SPACES. IT'S NOW TWO BUILDINGS , TOTALING 4500 SQUARE FEET. TO STAFF, THE NOTABLE DIFFERENCE IS PROBABLY MORE THERE IS LESS GREEN AREA. THAT'S KIND OF THE SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE. YOU KNOW, IF YOU TAKE THE MIDTOWN DEVELOPING AS A WHOLE, THERE'S A LOT OF GREEN AND OPEN SPACE ALREADY. IT'S PRETTY VALUABLE ROAD FRONTAGE , THE PHYSICAL ZONING PERSPECTIVES , YOU MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THE VALUE DOWN ON THE LAND IN TERMS OF SPACE. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, THEY ARE SHOWING SPACE ON THE 30 FOOT INTERVAL AS REQUIRED IN MIDTOWN. WE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT PUTTING IT ON THEIR PROPERTY AS OPPOSED TO THE ED FOR MIDTOWN, ODDLY ENOUGH, THAT THE ONE TIME I TRIED TO PUT IT IN A RIGHT-OF-WAY, WHICH WE ALREADY DON'T WANT. THIS IS MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT WE NORMALLY REQUIRE. THIS IS FOR THE EASEMENT AND ACTIVITIES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT IF YOU DESIRE TO HAVE STREET TREES, THEY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT LIFE BEING ON A PRIVATE PROPERTY THEN IN OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO, THIS IS AN ELEVATION RENDERING. IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT HEART CORNER, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOUTHWEST , IT CONFORMS WITH THE PD REQUIREMENTS. WE HAVE LOTS OF , I MEAN, I HATE GETTING TECHNICAL, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL , THIS DIFFERENT COLORS, DIFFERENT TEXTURES , THE MOSAIC TILE I PERSONALLY LIKES . THESE ARE ALL OF THE ELEVATIONS AND ALL OF YOUR PACKETS, SO I WILL NOT GO THROUGH THEM ONE BY ONE, BUT AGAIN, YOU CAN ALSO CALL A FORESIGHTED ARCHITECTURE. SO, AGAIN, IF YOU DECIDE TO APPROVE THIS IS PRESENTED AND YOU ARE HAPPY WITH IT , THAT MEANS YOU ARE PROVING THAT SITE PLAN AND REQUESTED CHANGES. THIS IS MORE CLARIFICATION THAN A CHANGE. WE NOTICED THE 16 PEOPLE AND HEARD NOTHING BACK , SO WITH NO CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF RECOMMEND'S APPROVAL . ALSO, THE MIDLOTHIAN -- I'M SORRY, THE MIDTOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ALSO APPROVED THESE EXACT PLANS THAT WERE IN YOUR PACKET . THE REASON WHY THE FIFTH MEMBER DID NOT IS BECAUSE SHE WAS REFUSED BECAUSE SHE DESIGNED THE BUILDING. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> SO, YOU'RE OKAY WITH MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND LESS PARKING? >> YES. >> AND LESS GREEN SPACE. >> IN THIS CONTEXT, YES. >> SO, THE CONCEPT IS THAT THE PARKING IS SHARED . THAT IS WHY ALL OF THE USES ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY , SO THEY ARE ABLE TO WALK TWO DIFFERENT PLACES WITHOUT HAVING TO DRIVE TO IT. >> ARE THESE CODING REQUIREMENTS? >> OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THE APPLICANT PRESENT IN WHICH YOU SPEAK? OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? [00:40:04] SURE. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL? THOSE SPOTS ARE ALMOST USELESS ANYWAYS. THIS BACKS ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE ENTIRE SPACE OF THE DRIVE. >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT THERE WHERE THE TREE IS? >> YES. THAT SPOT IS JUST AWKWARD. ANY QUESTIONS? >> QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, THANK YOU, SIR. I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> A MOTION IN A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ON THEY WERE, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR ACTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED? THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING WE HAVE. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, STAFF? >> NO, SIR. >> OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING? I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.