Sep 16, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission

[00:00:42]

>> WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE RECORD. YOU CAN ALSO STREAM THE MEETING ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE OR HAVE QUESTIONS, CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HERE OR HERE. OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INVITES MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION OF ANY TOPIC NOT SCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION FOR ACTION ON THIS AGENDA AND PRESENT IT TO CITY STAFF PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IN ACCORDANCE TO

[002 Staff review of the cases that were heard by City Council in the last sixty (60) days. ]

REVIEW. >> WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA THIS PAST MONTH. WHILE THE CHANGES WITH THE NOTICING REQUIREMENTS, WE DID NOTICE PD, SO COUNSEL CONTINUED TO THE SEPTEMBER 23 MEETING. THE SEPTEMBER 9TH MEETING, THE COUNCIL VOTED ON THE GOVERNANCE POLICY AND THEY CHANGE -- AMENDED POLICIES TO ALLOW TO REQUIRE A MANDATORY ONE-YEAR BREAK BETWEEN TERM LIMITS FOR ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. ARE

[003 Introduce new Zoning Inspector and discuss position purpose. ]

>> OKAY. >> WE HAVE OUR ZONING INSPECTOR, WHICH HAS BEEN WITH US SINCE MAY AND IT'S A RELATIVELY NEW POSITION, SO WE WANT TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF PRESENTATION TO LET YOU KNOW WHO HE IS AND WHAT HE DOES. MATT COMES TO US WITH 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, MOST OF IT FROM MANSFIELD. CODY ZONING INSPECTION AND THIS FACILITY INSPECTION EXPERIENCE. THE PURPOSE OF THE POSITION IS TO ENFORCE ADOPTED CITY ZONING REGULATIONS AND ENSURE THAT THE SITES ARE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE. HE VERIFIES THAT CONSTRUCTION MEETS THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BEING ISSUED. COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMUNITY MAINTAINS ITS HIGHEST STANDARDS, ESPECIALLY ON OUR COMMERCIAL.

>> THESE ARE JUST A FEW THINGS THAT I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE. THIS IS LANDSCAPING. MADE AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM TO REPLACE OCTOBER WHEN IT COOLS DOWN. THE ACCESS ROAD IS 67 AND MAIN. IT WAS EITHER DEAD OR MISSING. I WENT THROUGH THERE AND TALKED TO THEM AND THEY WENT IN THERE AND REPLACED. THIS IS ERIC AND MAIN AND LINKED THE CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER AND WENT IN THERE AND REPLACED ALL DECORATIVE ROCK, MULCH AND THE PLACES THAT WERE MISSING. THIS IS A PLANNING FUNNEL AND IT WAS BASICALLY PARKING REGULATIONS AND NO STRIKE WHEN I WENT INTO THE INSPECTION. IT WAS NOT INSTALLED

[00:05:08]

THAT'S IT. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CASES I HAVE BEEN WORKING

[CONSENT AGENDA]

ON. THANK YOU. >> WILL MOVE DOWN TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. ACT ON REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN ANYTHING WISH TO BE REMOVED, IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> PLEASE VOTE. HAS EVERYBODY VOTED? OKAY. WE ARE READY TO GO INTO PUBLIC HEARING. LET ME JUST ASK BEFORE WE GET STARTED, HOW MANY OF YOU ARE HERE FOR CASE NUMBER 12? THAT IS THE BUILDING OUT TO THE NORTH. OKAY. WE WILL

[006 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the use and development of 10.284+ acres out of the William Hawkins Survey, Abstract No. 465 by changing the zoning from Planned Development District No. 2 to Planned Development District No. 170 (PD-170) for a mixed-use development. The property is generally located on the south side of East Ridge Drive and north of Main Street. (Z17-2025-032)]

>> THIS CASE WAS CONTINUED FROM THE AUGUST 16TH MEETING AND THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR VARIOUS USES TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT 170 FOR MIXED USES THIS TRAPPED IN PARTICULAR WAS A COMMERCIAL DESIGNATED TRACK. THERE ARE THREE SUBDISTRICTS FOR THIS REQUEST. VERTICAL MIXED-USE SUBDISTRICT, TOWNHOMES AND OPEN SPACE AND COMMUNITY RETAIL. IT IS 10.28 ACRES AND IT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN SHOWS IT AS NEW TOWN MODULE, WHICH APPROPRIATE USES INCLUDE SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED ARTICLE MIXED-USE OR GENERAL COMMERCIAL MIXED USES. THIS IS THE BREAKDOWN OF DIFFERENT DISTRICTS, WHICH DID CHANGE SLIGHTLY FROM LAST MONTH, SO I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND A TON OF TIME ON THIS SLIDE, SURROUNDING ZONING LAND USES ARE AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN ZONING CASES AND TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE 33 FOR MULTIFAMILY USES AND IT HAS A DENSITY -- MAXIMUM DENSITY. YOU HAVE -- YOU ALSO HAVE THE TOWNHOMES THERE, PD 71, WHICH HAS 12 UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT OR ACTUALLY MORE DENSE THAN WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE. THERE ARE VARIOUS COMMERCIAL TYPE USES TO EAST WITH VACANT LAND AND TO THE WEST YOU HAVE PD 2 FOR MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL USES. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL ADJACENT LAND USES AND ZONING. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS STRATEGIES THAT SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT . IT SUPPORTS MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT IN CERTAIN AREAS BY ESTABLISHING A MIX OF USES AND IT ENCOURAGES LIVE NEAR

[00:10:06]

FOR THE VERTICAL MIXED-USE DISTRICT, YOU HAVE LIMITED RETAIL SERVICES FOR THE FIRST FLOOR AND NONRESIDENTIAL PARKING RATIOS FOR 300 SQUARE HEAT, WHICH IS 77 SPACES. THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS, TWO SPACES PER UNIT THE FIRST 50 AND 1.75.

THAT IS SO THAT THE GRAND TOTAL IS 180 SPACES WITH SIX BASES FOR A.D.A. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS 50 FEET. THE GROUND FLOOR, WHICH IS RETAIL HAS A MINIMUM -- THIS IS UNIQUE TO MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT.

THE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 11 FEET. ON THE GROUND FLOOR, LEVEL USES ARE LESS INTENSE, LIKE SMALL RESTAURANTS, BEAUTY SALON, BEAUTY SHOP, PICK UP AND DROP OFF MEDICAL OR DENTAL OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, SERVICES OR RETAIL STORES. THE MULTIFAMILY WOULD ONLY BE ON THE SECOND OR THIRD FLOORS. IT DOES ALLOW FOR OUTDOOR SEATING AND THEY WERE GOING TO BE A RESTAURANT AMOUNT AND IT DOES HAVE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. ONE OF THE THINGS THEY DID IN RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FROM LAST MONTH WAS THAT THEY INCREASED PARKING, COVERED PARKING, AS WELL AS GARAGE PARKING. THE TYPE OF GARAGES FOR THE MIXED-USE BUILDING. THIS WAS A PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT THEY WOULD LOOK LIKE.

FOR THE TOWNHOME DISTRICTS, THEY PROVIDE A MINIMUM COMMON AREA OF 1.42 ACRES, WHICH WILL BE MAIN STREET. THEY ARE PROVIDING 159 SPACES, WHICH IS 95 SURFACE AND TANDEM SPACES AND 64 GARAGE SPACES. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS 30 FEET OR TWO STORIES. THEY ARE PROVIDING FOR ELEVATION DIVERSITY WITH WHAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE TOWNHOME ELEVATIONS. FOR THE COMMUNITY RETAIL SUBDISTRICT, THEY WILL NEED TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND BASE ZONING IS CR, WHICH IS CONSISTENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THEY DID AGREE TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN USES LIKE CAR WASH, GAS STATION. THE PARKING AND DUMPSTER WILL COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS. THIS WILL CONNECT WITH THE ACCESS EASEMENT BUT THE PROPERTY, BUT IT WILL NOT GO THROUGH THE VERTICAL MIXED-USE THEY DID PROVIDE A MANEUVERING DIAGRAM, WHICH I WILL LET THEM .

THIS IS THEIR LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THEY DO SEE THE REQUIREMENTS AND TRYING VERY HARD TO PRESERVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE IT IS A WOODED SITE NEAR THE MAIN STREET. THEY'RE STRUGGLING

[00:15:07]

THEY BROUGHT IT INTO THE CENTER OF THE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT.

THEY PROVIDED MORE SIDEWALKS AND MAKE SURE EVERY SIDEWALK CONNECTED SOMEWHERE, SO THIS IS THE DIAGRAM SHOWING THAT THEY MADE SURE EVERY SIDEWALK HAD A CONNECTION. THE ENTRYWAYS HAVE CONCRETE AND DURABLE SEATING AREAS, WHEN SHADE STRUCTURES AND HAS MINIMUM STANDARDS. YOU WILL HAVE OUTDOOR LIGHTED AREAS AND DOCK PARK. THE CHANGES FROM AUGUST, THEY ADDED PARKING FOR 210 PARKING SPACES TO 339. THEY PROVIDE THE PARKING MANEUVERING DIAGRAM AND THE PLAYGROUND AREA WAS MOVED AND THEY ADDED PSYCH LOCKS SIDEWALKS TO INCREASE CONNECTIVITY. THIS IS WHERE THAT IS ACTUALLY NOT THERE I'LL. THERE IS SEPARATED FROM RETAIL TO THE TOWNHOMES TO ENCOURAGE THE TOWNHOMES TO USE STORAGE AS PRIMARY ACCESS. WE NOW HAVE 27 POSTCARDS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE APPLICANT ALSO SENT OUT A LETTER AND VISITED WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND WHEELIE -- RECEIVED ONE LETTER OF SUPPORT AND UTILITY LINES BE VARIED, WHICH APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO DO AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF PD 170.

ANY QUESTIONS? >> APPLICANT BROUGHT HER OWN PRESENTATION, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU. DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT OR WOULD YOU RATHER HEAR FROM ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I THINK WE WILL MOVE TO THE APPLICANT.

>> DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU WOULD IDENTIFY

YOURSELF, PLEASE. >> 2203 YORKS TOWN DRIVE. I BELIEVE MARY DID SUCH A GOOD JOB AND THERE'S NOT A LOT LEFT FOR ME TO SHOW YOU. I DID PUT SOME THINGS HIGHLIGHTED, SO YOU CAN SEE THE CHANGES. THESE WERE THE FOUR THINGS WE WERE ASKED TO DO WITH THE PREVIOUS MEETING WHAT YOU DID WITH THE COVERINGS AND GARAGES, MOVE THE PLAYGROUND, INCREASE THE WALK ABILITY OF THE SITE AND PARKING. I AM VERY UPSET. WE GO DOWN TO THE SLIDE.

THE THIS SHOWS YOU BETTER THAN THE OTHER PICTURES. THE BLUE CLOUDS THERE SHOWING YOU EVERYWHERE WE HAD COVERED PARKING AND THEN WE HAVE 23 GARAGES AND THAT VERTICAL MIXED-USE BIG ONE. MARY ALREADY SHOWED YOU THIS ONE. I DID WANT TO SHOW THIS YEAR. WE MOVED IT. THAT WAS REALLY THE BEST PLACE TO PUT IT. SORRY ABOUT THAT. HERE IS THE ENLARGED PICTURE OF THE PLAYGROUNDS. HERE, WE REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY TO IMPROVE WALK ABILITY, THEN YOU WILL SEE ON THE LEFT SIDE, THE CLOUD WHERE WE CLOSE THIS TO KEEP IT FROM HAVING DRIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC.

HERE, YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE SHADE STRUCTURES. THIS IS THE DOG PARK, IF YOU REMEMBER. THIS IS SHOWING THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A POND AND THIS IS WHERE IT WOULD BE. JUST IN CASE.

WE HAVE A SHADE STRUCTURE UP HERE THIS DRAWING. THIS UNIT, WE USED TO HAVE A COMMUNITY CENTER UP HERE. THERE IS A CLUBHOUSE WHERE YOU LEASE AND WE MOVED THAT INTO THIS BUILDING. THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING IS SPLIT BETWEEN THE LEASING OFFICE AND THE FITNESS CENTER THAT WE HAVE FOR PEOPLE WHO LET OUT HERE, THEN WE MOVED THE POOL OVER HERE. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE

[00:20:05]

>> QUESTIONS ? >> I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU.

YOU HAD ALL THE NAILS ON THE HEAD WITH WHAT YOU ARE ASKING LAST TIME. I DID HAVE A QUICK QUESTION THAT I READ AND I WANT TO CONFIRM. YOUR POOL AND AMENITY CENTERS WILL BE PAID BY

THE OWNERS. >> THEY ARE STILL APARTMENTS FOR

NOW. >> I READ IT WAS CONDOMINIUM, SO

I WANT TO CLARIFY. >> YES.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU. WE DO NOT HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T MISS ANYBODY THAT TURNED IN A FORM. I SEE NONE COME AS I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. CLOSING THE VOTE. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, 5-0.

THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR ACTION.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A

SECOND? >> SECOND PART

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. OKAY. IT IS UNANIMOUS. WE WILL NOW MOVE

[007 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the development regulations of Planned Development District No. 184 (PD-184) for Single Family Four (SF-4) uses relating to the use and development of 16.24+ acres out of the Martha Brenan Survey, Abstract No. 43. The property is generally located on the west side of S. 14th Street, and north of McAlpin Road. (Z19-2025-048)]

MCALPINE ROAD. >> APPLICANT IS OPPOSING THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS. THIS WAS APPROVED BACK IN MARCH. THEY HAVE A BUILDER NOW. THEY ADJUSTED AND THE LOTS MADE IT WIDER AND IT IS ACTUALLY STILL THE SAME. IT IS WITHIN THE FOUR.

THEY PROVIDED VARIOUS ELEVATIONS THAT WOULD GIVE THEM ENOUGH VARIETY TO MEET THEIR ANTI-MONOTONOUS STANDARDS., PROMOTE SAFE NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY NEED THAT AND THEY MEET THE RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM DENSITY. I WILL NOT GO INTO DETAIL, BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY NOT A ZONING REQUEST, BUT AN AMENDMENT. WE FIND THAT IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT LAND USES AND ZONING WITH THE ORIGINAL REQUEST. IT'S YOUR CALL ON THIS ONE. COUNSEL HAD ASKED TO MIX UP THE STEEL FENCING, SO THERE WAS VARIETY ALONG 14TH STREET AND IT WASN'T JUST ONE LARGE REVOLVED AROUND THE ROADWAY. THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE INCREASE IN FRONT FACING GARAGES. 65% MAXIMUM AND THE ONLY DO SIDE ENTRY, I THINK I ACTUALLY GAVE TO ELEVATION THAT SHOWED AND DELETING THEM IN THE COUNCIL VERSION THAT WAS A MISTAKE. SINGLE-FAMILY PLAN DEVELOPMENT, BLUEBONNET HILL HAS 86% FRONT ENTRY AND THEY PROVIDE

[00:25:06]

>> QUESTIONS? >> THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE INCLUDED J SWINGS. THE ORIGINAL INCLUDED IT, BUT THEY WILL DO

SIDE ENTRY AND NOT J SWINGS. >> FRONT ENTRY AND SIDE ENTRY FOR SOME OF THEM. THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, DOES THE APPLICANT PRESENT WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU WOULD IDENTIFY

YOURSELF? >> MY NAME IS TODD WITH 201. AS ALWAYS, MARY DID A FANTASTIC JOB OF EXPLAINING THIS IN DETAIL.

BASICALLY ALL WE HAVE DONE IS HAVE A BUILDER NOW AND THESE WERE SOME THINGS THAT HE WANTED AND I THINK IF YOU SEE THOSE PICTURES, IT WILL BE A REALLY NICE PRODUCT. WHAT WE DID WAS LOST ONE LOT FROM 38 TO 37 AND WE MADE ABOUT HALF OF THE LOTS, I THINK. THEY WERE 83 FEET WIDE. IT ALLOWS SIDE ENTRY. THAT IS REALLY THE BIGGEST CHANGE WE HAVE. OTHER THAN THAT, I'M HAPPY

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

SIR. I'M SORRY. >> DOES THE BUILDER NOT HAVE J SWINGS? WHY ARE WE GETTING AWAY FROM THOSE?

>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY DID NOT WANT J SWINGS AND THE BUILDERS ARE NOT CRAZY ABOUT THEM EITHER. WE AGREED TO

TAKE THEM OUT. >> IS THERE A SAMPLE PICTURE OF

YOUR SIDE ENTRY? >> THE OTHER WHEN SHE HAD PULLED

UP WAS A SIDE ENTRY. >> THE ONE IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT IS THE SIDE ENTRY. THE GARAGE IS THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THAT

PICTURE. THAT'S THE GARAGE. >> ON THE SITE PLAN, WHICH HOMES

WOULD HAVE THAT ENTRY? >> THAT IS 83 FEET WIDE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT FLOORPLAN. SOME OF THEM ARE 80 AND THOSE WOULD BE THE FRONT ENTRY. IT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THAT.

>> THE DRIVEWAY WILL BE ON THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. THERE IS USUALLY A FIVE FOOT RADIUS, THEN OUR DRIVEWAY AND A SWING IN THE HOUSE. I WANT TO SAY IT TAKES 27 OR 28 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE SIDE ENTRY.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP, SO I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOTION AND SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PLEASE VOTE.

CLOSE THE VOTE. IT IS UNANIMOUS. FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR

ACTION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION

[00:30:01]

[008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the development regulations of Planned Development District No. 113 (PD-113) for Community Retail (CR) uses to revise the Combination Concept Plan and Development Site Plan for property platted as Lot 2, Block 1, Hopper 287 Addition. The property is generally located on the north side of Don Floyd Drive, south of Methodist Way, and west of E. US Highway 287. (Z20-2025-037)]

HIGHWAY 287. >> OKAY. THIS REQUEST IS SIMPLE.

THE ORIGINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HAD A CONCEPT PLAN AND DETAILED SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS VERY SPECIFIC. IT DIDN'T HAVE ANY LANGUAGE IN IT THAT ALLOWED FOR MINOR MODIFICATIONS, SO IN ADDITION TO REVISING THE CONCEPT PLAN, WE ADDED THAT LANGUAGE TO GIVE MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR FUTURE SITE PLANS. THEY ARE ADDING 8740 SQUARE FOOT EMERGENCY ROOM EXPANSION AND 36 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES AND SHOWS US THE NEW TOWN MODULE, WHICH SUPPORTS COMMUNITY FACILITIES. SINCE THIS IS A ZONING CHANGE, IT IS REALLY JUST AN AMENDMENT AND I WILL NOT GO INTO THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. EVERYTHING IS VERY INTERNAL TO THE SITE. THE EXPANSION IS ON THE LEFT AND THE PARKING SPACES ARE ON THE RIGHT.

THERE IS A HELIPAD, SO THAT WILL IMPACT THE LANDSCAPE. THERE IS 36 PARKING SPACES. THEY ARE MOSTLY JUST DOING SOD AND PUTTING IN THE A COUPLE OF ORNAMENTAL TREES IN PARKING WHERE THEY WON'T INTERFERE WITH THE SITE. THE AMENDMENT WILL REPLACE THE CONCEPT PLAN. ALL USES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING USES FOR THE HOSPITAL. THE ELEVATIONS THEY ARE PROPOSING WILL MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING. 12 POSTCARDS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SITE AND WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF PD 113 WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FOR THE EMERGENCY ROOM EXPANSION. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> QUESTIONS TO STAFF? THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE. >> 2728 NORTH HARWOOD STREET DALLAS, TEXAS. ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, METHODIST HOSPITAL IS I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD BEYOND WHAT SHE ADDED. SHE DID A FANTASTIC JOB. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE HOSPITAL HERE AND OUR ENGINEERING TEAM AND ARCHITECTURE TEAM ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BEYOND THAT, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO A MOTION.

>> QUESTIONS ON THE ITEM? THANK YOU, SIR. NO ONE IS SIGNED UP, SO I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PLEASE VOTE.

PLEASE CLOSE THE VOTE. THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR

ACTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE.

ANY QUESTION OR DISCUSSION? PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. IT

[009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian Zoning Ordinance by adding Section 4, Subsection 5.214 “Criteria for Retail Stores for Tobacco, E-cigarettes, Vaping, and CBD oil or hemp based products,” amending Section 2.04 “Use Table” to require a Specific Use Permit for such uses in certain districts and amending Section 100.100 “General Definitions” to add related definitions. (OZ01- 2025-039) ]

[00:35:05]

ADD RELATED DEFINITIONS. >> CHAIRMAN, THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS AT THE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LEVEL ABOUT HEMP DERIVED PRODUCTS. IT HAS RAMPED UP RECENTLY WITH THE 2018 ACT THAT MADE IT LEGAL TO SELL. THERE WERE TWO BILLS THAT FAILED TO PASS THE 89TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE THIS GO ROUND AND THE GOVERNOR ISSUED EXECUTIVE ORDER TO REGULATE SALES TO MINORS, REVISE EXISTING ADJACENCY RULES, COORDINATE ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS AND IMPLEMENT RULES IN A PHASED PLAN. WE ARE PROVIDING AN OPTION A COUNSEL FOR YOU TO CONSIDER. A LOT OF THE LARGE CITIES TREAT CBD STORAGE THE SAME AS OTHER RETAIL STORES. THE CITIES THAT ARE MITIGATING THAT WE RESEARCHED. THESE SEP IN MOST CASES AND LIMIT IT TO COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL AREAS AND IT REQUIRES DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FROM SCHOOLS OR LIMIT THE FLOOR AREAS DEDICATED SALES. THEY REQUIRE 1000 FEET FROM SCHOOLS FROM CHURCHES, HOSPITALS AND DAY CARES AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT REQUIRES 1000 LINEAR FEET -- IT CANNOT BE WITHIN 500 LINEAR FEET OF MAJOR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS. WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT BRINGING SOMETHING FORWARD, WE LOOKED AT WHERE SOME FACILITIES ARE LOCATED OR WHERE THEY ARE CLUSTERED TO DETERMINE WHAT APPROACH TO TAKE. AGAIN, IF WE BREAK OUT THE USES SEPARATELY, AS OF TODAY, WE STREET THEM AS SPECIALTY SHOPS, SO THEY ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND WE HAVE EIGHT OF THEM IN THE CITY. ALCOHOL SALES REQUIRE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. A LOT OF WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS THAT THERE IS NOT REGULATION IN PLACE LIKE THERE IS FOR ALCOHOL OR A LOT OF THESE TYPES OF PRODUCTS. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE PROPOSING SOMETHING SIMILAR FOR CBD AND HEMP THAT THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS TOBACCO COMBINED WITH CBD PRODUCTS, STANDALONE TOBACCO STORES CAN BE IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, AS WELL. SO, WE DO MAKE ALLOWANCES FOR PHARMACIES THAT PROVIDE THOSE PRODUCTS WITH A PRESCRIPTION, CONVENIENCE STORES, LARGER RETAIL STORES THAT SELL TOBACCO OR VAPING PRODUCTS OR PRESCRIPTIONS OF THAT EXCEPTION, AS WELL. THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT, THE SUSPENDERS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING 500 FEET WITHIN THE DISTANCE OF MAJOR STREETS AND WE PROVIDED A MAP WITH STREETS OUT IN ORDINANCE, THEN 500 EAT OF ANY ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ALLOW USES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH CHILDREN AND 500 FEET OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND A MEASUREMENT CRITERIA TO MAKE IT CLEAR AS TO HOW IT COULD BE MEASURED. WE PROVIDED DEFINITIONS FOR ELECTRONIC VAPING DEVICE IN RETAIL, CBD OIL AND HEMP-BASED PRODUCTS, ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE, TOBACCO STORE, TOBACCO E-CIGARETTE AND BEEPING CBD STORE. THESE

[00:40:03]

SOMEONE WAS TELLING PEOPLE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO SHUT THEM DOWN AND THEY ARE NOT. THEY ARE BECOMING NONCONFORMING USE. WE ARE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW TO PROVIDE THAT NOTICE. I AM HERE

TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS TO STAFF?

>> HOW DO YOU DECIDE 500 FEET FROM MANSFIELD OR CLEVELAND

WHOEVER WAS AT 1000? >> REALLY, THE 500 FEET CAPTURES THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS WITHIN THAT. IF I WERE TO PULL A VENEREAL, THOSE AREAS OF 500 FEET IS PRETTY MUCH GOING INTO .

THAT IS LIKE A BLOCK. A LOT OF TIMES THEY WILL HAVE CHANGE OF

USE BEYOND THAT DISTANCE. >> ANYONE ELSE?

>> WE DID JUST GET A SPEAKER FORM FOR THIS ITEM.

>> HAS HE FILLED OUT A FORM? >> YES.

>> DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION?

>> KIND OF PIGGYBACKING, WHY ARE WE NOT CONSIDERING 1000 FEET?

>> I'M OPEN TO THAT AMENDMENT. I JUST TRY TO PUT TOGETHER SOMETHING THAT KIND OF HITS THE MIDDLEGROUND AFTER READING ALL OF THE ORDINANCES AND WAS TRYING NOT TO GO TOO STRICT OR TRYING

TO GO TOO PERMISSIVE. >> WHAT IS THE DISTANCE FOR

ALCOHOL SALES FROM SCHOOLS? >> 2000 FEET, I BELIEVE.

>> IT IS 500, AS WELL? >> ANYONE ELSE?

>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ONE FORM.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I APPRECIATE YOU.

>> YOU ARE A RESIDENT OF MIDLOTHIAN?

>> ARABS AND TWO CLIENTS WHO HAVE BUSINESSES IN MIDLOTHIAN .

>> THREE MINUTES. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I JUST GOT OUT OF THE COURTROOM. MY NAME IS AARON CARTWRIGHT AND I AM AN ATTORNEY AND I'M NOT HERE AS A CONTENTIOUS BIT OF ANYTHING. MY CLIENTS OWNING TWO BUSINESSES THAT ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THIS PARTICULAR CHANGE ARE JUST CURIOUS AND PERHAPS THIS IS MORE OF A QUESTION FOR MARY, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR APPEARANCE WAS NOTED HERE. WE HAVE ENTERED INTO COMMERCIAL LEASES. COMMERCIAL LEASES -- EXTENSIVE COMMERCIAL LEASES OF ABOUT 8 TO 10 YEARS AT OUR CURRENT LOCATIONS AND LEASES THAT WE CANNOT BACK OUT OF BED WE ARE WONDERING IF THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF GRANDFATHERING IN A CURRENTLY APPROVED USE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT RUN A FOUL OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A QUESTION FOR THE BOARD OR FOR MISS MARY. THANK YOU.

>> JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND, IF IT'S AN EXISTING USE AT TIME THAT THIS WAS PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL, IT IS ALREADY AFFECTED AND AS LONG AS THAT USE CONTINUES AND THERE IS NO LAPSE IN THAT USE FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS, THEN IT WILL CONTINUE.

NONCONFORMING USE, POTENTIALLY. THAT USE WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE. EFFECTIVELY, YES. IT IS GRANDFATHERED IF IT IS

[00:45:04]

ALREADY IN PLACE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION PERFECTLY. YOU ARE APPRECIATED.

>> I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED UP, SO I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE

THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PLEASE VOTE.

>> CHAIRMAN, I DO WANT TO MAKE ONE CORRECTION. THE DISTANCE WITH RESPECT TO STATE LAW REGARDING THE DISTANCES FOR HOSPITAL SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES IS NOT 500, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY 300.

IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT'S PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE WITH RESPECT TO SCHOOLS. AS YOU WALK, WITH RESPECT TO CHURCHES AND

HOSPITALS. >> THE STATE LAW IS 18. I

BELIEVE IT'S 18. >> JUST TO CLARIFY WITH MY MIC, THE AGE FOR VAPING DEVICES WOULD BE 18 AND EIGHT FOR CBD WOULD BE

21. THANK YOU. >> WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE

COMMISSION? >> I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE US FALL IN LINE WHEN OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY AND HAVE IT AT 1000. THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AMEND THIS TO 1000 FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> MOVING TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH THE AMENDMENT TO 1000 FEET FROM 500? DID I HEAR A SECOND? I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. THAT PASSES 5-0. WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM ZERO 10, CONDUCT A

[010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the development regulations of Planned Development District No. 107 (PD-107) for Single Family Three (SF-3) by amending the Planned Development Site Plan relating to a 49.768+ acre portion of PD-107 generally located south of Grove Branch Blvd. and west of Summer Grove Drive. (Z25-2025-064)]

SUMMER GROVE DRIVE. >> GOOD EVENING. CAN YOU HEAR ME GOOD? PERFECT. THIS REQUEST IS A REVIEW FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PD 107. IT IS JUST FOR PHASE EAST. THERE WAS A CONCEPT PLAN AND PHASE TWO A AND 2B EAST DID NOT MATCH THE CONCEPT PLAN, SO THEY ARE DOING THIS AMENDMENT TO MATCH. THEY HAD TO CHANGE THE LINES AND EVERYTHING DUE TO DRAINAGE NEEDS, SO THE TOTAL SITE IS ABOUT 50 ACRES AND IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED, SO FOR THAT SINGLE-FAMILY. THEY ARE PROPOSING 100S SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND OPEN SPACE LOTS. AND RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY. SO, HERE IS PART OF A NEW PLAN. THEN, TO THE LEFT SIDE OF SCREEN AND WE GET INTO THIS IN A SECOND. IT IS NEAR THE INDUSTRIAL TO SEE THE GAP OR BUFFER RESIDENTIAL TO THE INDUSTRIAL. HERE IS THE TOP CORNER PLAN. PRETTY MUCH ON THREE SIDES OF THESE PHASES ARE RESIDENTIAL, THEN THE WEST IS

[00:50:03]

>> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> I DO HAVE ONE. YOU PASSED IT.

THE COLORED MAP. I GUESS I MISSED IT. THE RED LINES OVER TO

THE LEFT OF THE PICTURE. >> LET ME GET MY MOUSE.

>> THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. UP AT THE TOP AND OVER TO THE LEFT.

RIGHT IN THERE. DID I MISS SOMETHING THERE? WHAT IS THAT?

>> IS UNDEVELOPED. >> IT'S JUST PARCELS. IT'S

JUST A BRIGHT RED. >> THE MAP IN OUR BOOKLET HERE SHOWS A SOLID RED LINE JUST LIKE THE OTHERS. IT IS A LITTLE

CONFUSING. >> ADVOCATES BECAUSE OF THE CITY

LIMITS OVER HERE. >> DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU WOULD

IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> MY NAME IS RUSSELL, ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT AT 1003 TECHNOLOGY BOULEVARD DRIVE DALLAS, TEXAS. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT

THIS. >> I ONLY HAVE ONE QUESTION.

WHAT WOULD HE HAVE A. >> WE CAN CHANGE STREET NAMES.

>> TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. FIRST. ABSOLUTELY. LET ME HAVE HER NAME, SO I CAN PUT IT ON THE FORM. LYNN AND GARY?

>> YES. RESIDENT IN MIDLOTHIAN FOR THE PAST 73 YEARS . WE SAW THAT LAND OR VACATED THE LAND IN 2008. BEFORE I GO INTO DETAIL, IF YOU CAN LOOK AT YOUR MAP OUT THERE, YOU SEE THE TRAIL PARALLEL OR NOT PARALLEL. THE REDLINE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, THAT LAND IS MINE ON THE OTHER SIDE. ABOUT 30 ACRES OF LAND.

FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES, THEY CHOSE TO PUT IT ACROSS THE DRAINAGE ACROSS MY PROPERTY. I HAD BOUGHT FOUR INDUSTRIAL LOTS AND DEVELOPMENTS OFF OF ME, BUT THEY HAVE COME ACROSS AND HAVE COMPLAINED AND ARE

[00:55:09]

IF WE HAD MORE RAIN. >> DID YOU GET IT TO WORK? EXTENSIVE FLOODING FROM LESS THAN TWO INCHES OF RAIN. I WOULDN'T LET MY CHILDREN CROSS IT. IT IS FLOODING GOING OVER THE CULVERT TO GET TO MY CAL PASTOR. IT IS ERODING THE SOIL AND IT IS ABOUT TO PUSH MY FIST DOWN COMING ACROSS WITH THE DEBRIS AND STUFF AND IT GOES AGAINST IT. PICTURES ARE WORTH 1000 WORDS. I CAN EXPRESS WITH THAT WOULD SHOW. MY CONCERN IS

--. >> NOT THOSE.

>> ABOUT THE FLOODING. IF YOU NOTICE ON THE MAPS ON ALL OF THEIR PONDS AND STUFF, THEY ARE PUTTING IT DOWN THE CENTER, CONCRETE RIDGES, SO IT DOESN'T ERODE AND TEAR IT UP, THEN IT WILL BE PERMANENT. ON MINE, I DON'T HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE UNLESS I DO IT MYSELF. THEY ARE CAUSING EXTENSIVE DAMAGE.

>> HAVE A LOT OF THINGS ON THIS FLASH DRIVE.

>> WE ALLOW THREE MINUTES AND I WILL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT LONGER SINCE I DIDN'T FOREWARN YOU.

>> IF WE CAN GET THEM UP, WE CAN GET GET THEM UP.

>> THAT IS A TORRENTIAL AMOUNT OF WATER. I SAY 75 FEET FROM MY

PROPERTY LINE. >> MY TURN.

>> 60S AND LATE 70S WHEN WE'RE UP THERE. YOU CAN SEE IN THE

BACKGROUND OF THE CREEK. >> THE WATER GOES. THERE WAS NO CREEK WHERE THE WATER IS GOING NOW.

>> THIS IS THE PART WHERE I WOULDN'T LET MY CHILDREN CROSS.

>> IT WAS DRY. >> THE PORTION OF THE WATER.

THERE APPEARED THIS IS FROM MY BACK PORCH LOOKING OUT TOWARDS

THE DEVELOPMENT. >> THAT WAS TWO INCH RAIN. LOOK

AT THIS. >> THAT IS COMING INTO MY BACKYARD ABOVE MY SWIMMING POOL.

>> AGAIN, I KNOW IT'S NOT -- LOOK AT THIS. THERE IS A PORTION OF THAT WERE ALL OF IT IS FROM ONE. HERE IS THE PART WHERE THERE ON THERE POINTING TOWARDS MAINTENANCE. WELL, THEY TURNED IT AND INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH MY FENCE, DATED THE 45 AND CONVERTED IT OVER, SO IT GOES TO THE INDUSTRIAL AND ACROSS THREE

OF MY INDUSTRIAL LOTS. >> THAT'S OFFENSE.

>> THROUGH THE FENCE. >> JUST ABOUT TO PUSH IT OVER.

>> I WILL ASK YOU TO CLOSE. FINAL STATEMENT?

>> FOR SAFETY PURPOSES, SOUTH TEXAS AND ALL OF THAT.

>> IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME ACROSS.

>> YOU ALL ARE OPPOSED, CORRECT? OKAY.

>> I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

>> ALL RIGHT. I AM NOBODY ELSE SIGNED UP, SO I ENTERTAINED A

MOTION. >> MOTION TO CLOSE.

>> SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR

DISCUSSION OR ACTION. >> CAN YOU SHOW US BETTER

[01:00:03]

WAY IS THE WATER FLOWING? >> WE CAN PULL UP THIS DRAWING, BUT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO DEFER TO THEIR ENGINEER AND TO TALK ABOUT WHERE THE WATER IS FLOWING AND THE DRAINAGE.

>> THE POND REFERENCED, WAS ALREADY BUILT AND WE ARE NOT REALLY AFFECTING IT, BUT TO BONDS DOWN ON THE SOUTHERN END, BUT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO EXPAND THE POND. IF YOU LOOK AT THE EXISTING CONTOURS, IT GOES TO THE PROPERTY INTO THE CREEK.

FLOODPLAIN IS CREEPING UP THROUGH HIS PROPERTY. EVERYTHING TO THE NORTH OF US IS COMING DOWN FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS.

WE ARE ENTERTAINING BACK TO CONSISTING EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR OUR APPROVED PLANS. IT IS A DISCHARGE, BUT THE CITY APPROVED IT BASED ON CITY SPECIFICATION. THIS WAS NOT PART OF THIS

AMENDMENT. >> IT WAS PREVIOUSLY DONE .

>> YOU ARE CHANGING, BECAUSE OF DRAINAGE ISSUES. WHAT WERE THE

DRAINAGE ISSUES? >> IT HAS TO DO WITH SITE BALANCE AND CROSSING THE GAS LINES. THERE ARE NOT TOO LENIENT ON BEING ABLE TO CROSS THEM, SO WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM SOME COVER AND RIGHT NOW THEY DON'T HAVE IT, SO YOU HAVE TO FILL ON TOP OF THE EXISTING LINE TO CROSS IT. THE REASON THAT WE ARE HERE IS BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL PD DID NOT HAVE LANGUAGE IN IT TO ALLOW FOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE CONCEPT PLAN. THE ORIGINAL APPROVED AND EXTENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT DIDN'T MATCH THE CONCEPT PLAN.

IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION CITY STAFF.

>> DUE TO DRAINAGE NEEDS, YOU ARE SAYING BECAUSE OF THE EASEMENT? DOWN IN THE SOUTHERN CORNER, THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN DIDN'T SHOW UP ON THERE, BUT THE GROWTH PHASE THREE DEVELOPED, THEY DUG A POND ON THIS PROPERTY AND PUT STORM STRUCTURES. NOW, WE HAVE TO DESIGN AROUND THAT AND THEY ALSO PUT A HEADWALL ON THE EAST SIDE WHERE THE OTHER OPEN SPACE IS ON THE SOUTH EASTERN SIDE. THAT IS KIND OF WHY WE HAVE TWO OPEN SPACES HERE. WE KIND OF HAVE TO PIVOT A LITTLE BIT WITH THE

DEVELOPMENT AROUND US. >> AND LOOKING AT THIS PAGE.

EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE LINES SHADED OVER. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A POND. THERE IS A WHITE SPOT HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S

THE POND. >> THAT'S THE EXISTING POND.

>> YOU HAVE A POND CURRENTLY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO COVER UP.

>> WE ARE NOT GOING TO COVER UP A POND.

>> I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND I'M FOLLOWING THE BOUNDARY LINES AND

I DON'T SEE A POND. >> IN THE MIDDLE? HIGH POINTS AND LOAN POINTS ARE CLOSE CONTOURS, SO THAT THE HIGH POINT ACTUALLY. IT'S NOT A LOW POINT LIKE A POND OR HILL.

>> I THINK LOTS OR HOUSES, IS THERE A DRAINAGE? THE OVERLAY HAS AN EXISTING POND ON THE SAME SIDE. ONE IS IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER. IT IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE EXISTING POND.

>> THE POND THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT IS I BELIEVE THE RIGHT HERE.

>> RIGHT THERE. >> THAT'S A STOCKPILE.

>> THAT IS A PILE. THERE IS A POND RIGHT HERE. THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SEEING RIGHT HERE. IF YOU CAN SEE THE CONTOURS TO THIS POINT, THIS IS THE DRAINAGE POND. IT IS THIS WAY HEADING WEST TOWARDS THE PROPERTY. THAT IS WHAT I'M SEEING. THIS IS NOT THE TOP -- THIS IS THE TOP OF THE CREEK AND THE CREEK IS COMING DOWN HERE AND THIS IS TRIBUTARY. I'M NOT SURE THE

[01:05:03]

THE STRUCTURE IS RIGHT THERE. DOES THAT CLARIFY THINGS?

>> IT HELPS. I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THAT I WILL CALL IT AS INAUDIBLE ] WHEN WE BUILT KENSINGTON NORTH AND ALL OF THE PEOPLE AROUND THERE THAT GOT FLOODED OUT, BECAUSE OF THE MORE CONCRETE YOU PUT IN, THE LESS THE WATER CAN GO INTO THE GROUND. SEE THE PICTURES. I'M NOT SEEING IN WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING, A PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THE WATER RUNOFF.

>> THAT IS AN EXISTING POND PERMITTED THROUGH THE CITY. THIS ONE IS NOT AFFECTING THAT ONE. THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PLOTTED PROPERTY THAT WAS THE FIRST PHASE AND WE ARE TRYING TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE FOR DRAINAGE, BECAUSE IT WANTS TO MOVE SOUTH.

AND, NOT TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER. NO, SIR.

>> SORRY, IS THIS WHERE YOU ARE TRYING -- IS IS THE AREA THAT

YOU ARE REZONING? >> YES. THIS WAS TAKEN OUT EAST.

>> THIS IS THE POND AREA. THIS IS A PORTION OF THE ZONING

LABELED AS F? >> BASED OFF OF THE PLOTS THAT WE MADE MODIFICATION TO, THAT WILL NO LONGER BE INCLUDED.

>> I AM CONFUSED. IS THIS PART OF THE ZONING CASE? OKAY. YOU BET. WHEN I'M LOOKING AT, THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE ZONING

CASE. >> THEY MADE US TAKE THIS OUT

AND INCLUDED. >> YOU ARE REZONING A PROPERTY

THAT IS ALREADY PLANTED? >> THIS IS 30 DAYS PRIOR THOSE PLOTS WERE SIGNED. WE DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO BE ABLE --.

>> WAS ASSIGNED DEPENDING UPON THE ZONING CASE? OKAY. I MIGHT RECOMMEND C■ONTINUING HIS. WHAT DO YOU THINK? I WOULD RECOMMEND CONTINUING THIS CASE TO THE NEXT MEETING JUST SO THAT THERE IS A LOT OF QUESTIONS HERE ABOUT ZONING, PLANTING AND THINGS THAT ARE BEING REZONED, WHICH MAKES NO SENSE.

>> THAT IS TO THE ORIGINAL PLAT. TIMING ISSUES FROM US.

>> THOSE ARE THE MORE PRESSING ISSUES. THOSE HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE ZONING CASE, THEY PROBABLY DO NOT ADHERE TO THE

ZONING, SO THEY ARE NOT VALID. >> I CAN GRAB IT.

>> WOULD YOU, PLEASE? >> WE HAVE SPENT AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF TIME WORKING ON THIS ORDINANCE.

[01:10:29]

>> WE HAVE TO GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT. THE WHOLE IDEA AS WE ARE TRYING TO GET THE TO MATCHUP AND ACTUALLY TRY TO DO THE OPPOSITE. WE ARE TRYING TO GET THE PLAN ON THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THERE IS ALREADY A SITE PLAN THAT PROVIDES FOR THIS TYPE OF LOT AND THE DRAINAGE AREAS AND PONDS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. THEY WERE CONNECTED AND HAVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, WHICH NECESSITATE HAVING TO CHANGE -- MAKE THESE CHANGES, BUT THAT FAR NORTHWEST PORTION IS PART OF THE AREA WHERE THEY ARE CHANGING OUT AND THAT IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING SCREENING ALONG THERE, WHICH REFLECTED THE NEW SCREENING OR AT LEAST PROVIDE THE SCREENING LANGUAGE FOR IT TO BE INCLUSIVE OF THAT NORTHWEST PANHANDLE. THAT AREA FURTHER TO THE NORTH THAT YOU SEE BEING PART OF THIS CASE, NOW YOU ARE

SAYING IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE? >> WILL HAVE TO TALK --. WE NEED AN INTERNAL DISCUSSION ON THAT.

>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE THIS.

>> TO THE NEXT MEETING? >> UNTIL STAFF IS READY TO

RE-PRESENT. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO CONTINUE THIS. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE.

[011 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the development regulations relating to the use and development of Lots 1 and 3 thru 11, Block 1, Massey Heritage Addition, presently zoned Planned Development District No. 98 (PD98) by granting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for an internally lit monument sign. The property is generally located on the northeast corner of South Walnut Grove Road and FM 1387. (SUP05-2025-058)]

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSION. TO PRESENT ITEM 11. THIS IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO CHANGE THE MONUMENT SIGNS. THIS PROJECT IS CURRENTLY ON A 20.8.9 ACRE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THE PROPERTY AS LOCAL RETAIL MODULE AND THIS PROPOSAL MEETS ECONOMIC OR PHYSICAL HEALTH AND FUTURE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS. SURROUNDING ZONING INCLUDES RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH AND EAST AND AGRICULTURAL TO THE SOUTH AND CHURCH TO THE WEST. SINGLE-FAMILY TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST AND A CHURCH IN VACANT PROPERTY TO THE WEST. 120 FOOT WIDE MAJOR ARTERIAL FARES. CURRENTLY APPROVED MONUMENT SIGNS EXTERNAL FLOOD LIGHTING TO INTERNAL L.E.D.S. THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE IS TO IMPROVE VISIBILITY AND BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION FOR BOTH. ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDES, YOU WILL SEE SIDE A AND B WILL HAVE TUMORS THAT REDUCE BRIGHTNESS UP TO

[01:15:01]

>> CAN YOU GO BACK TO WHERE THEY ARE LOCATED? ALL OF THOSE ARE

WITHIN 200 FEET OF RESIDENCES? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> THEY HAVE TO GO OFF AT 8:00 P.M.?

>> THEY DO NOT. >> IS THAT NOT WHAT THE NOTE

SAYS? >> THAT IS A PROPOSAL. THAT RULE APPLIES IN THE ORDINANCE TO ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SENDERS. NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE DIFFERENCE, I CAN EXPLAIN IT.

>> IT SAYS THEY MUST BE TURNED ON FROM 8:00.

>> I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PART OF THE MOTION IF WE DECIDE.

>> IT SAYS IT MUST COMPLY, SO I DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS PART OF

IT. I DON'T KNOW. >> YEAH, THAT IS A RECOMMENDATION. IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE PARAGRAPH THAT STAFF SAYS STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE PROPOSAL MUST COMPLY WITH SPECIAL PROVISIONS, THAT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION. IF THERE

WAS ANY CONCERNS. >> OKAY. THAT DOESN'T JUST SAY SIGN A. SAYS ALL ARE DONE GOING OFF AT 8:00 P.M.. THAT IS ALL OF

THEM. >> THAT'S CORRECT. I PHRASED IT LIKE THAT IN CASE IT DID COME UP IN DISCUSSION. THAT IS THE ONE THAT IS CLOSEST TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> ARE YOU STATING NOW THE ONLY TIME THEY WOULD BE SHUT OFF AT 8:00. THAT WOULD BE SIGNING A? THAT CAN ONLY BE CALCULATED AFTER THEY ARE ILLUMINATED. THE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT FOR THE BRIGHTNESS OF L.E.D.S. THE FORMULA IS LEMONS DIVIDED BY 3.426. THAT IS HOW YOU GET THAT.

>> I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO GET REFERENCE. I'M THINKING ABOUT THAT'S CLOSE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. DO WE HAVE ANY

SIGN REQUIREMENTS ON THE AREA? >> TO BE HONEST, I WOULD HAVE TO

LOOK AT --. >> I BELIEVE THOSE.

>> DO WE HAVE REQUIREMENTS ANYWHERE IN THE CITY OF

MIDLOTHIAN? >> OTHER THAN THE OUTSIDE OF THE ELECTRONIC WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF RESIDENTIAL. OTHER

THAN SIGNS, NO. >> I'M TRYING TO THINK OF ANY

[01:20:02]

>> THE CHURCH DAY CARE ON NINTH STREET, THE DAY CARE THERE. THEY HAD TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS.

>> BY THE HOUSE? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> I DON'T THINK THERE ARE TOO MANY OTHERS. I'M TRYING TO THINK BACK THE LAST EIGHT OR NINE YEARS AND ORDINANCES. I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY ONE I CAN THINK OF OFFHAND. I REMEMBER

WRITING THE ORDINANCE. >> CAN I SAY SOMETHING BRIEFLY? I WAS THERE WHEN THEY TALKED TO WHEN THEY FIRST CAME IN AND WHEN SOMEONE ASKS ME THESE QUESTIONS, I RESEARCH CASE HISTORY. WE HAVE APPROVED INTERNALLY SIGNAGE WORDS ON A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES WHERE WE HAVE DENIED IT WHERE IT IS NEXT TO OR ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL. WE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW HOW THIS WOULD GO. WE WANTED TO AT LEAST GIVE A COUPLE OF ALTERNATIVES IN CASE THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BRIGHTNESS AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS CAME IN AND FILLED THE HOUSE WHEN THE ZONING CAME THROUGH FOR THE FIRST TIME, SO THAT'S WHY WE ARE OFFERING A COUPLE OF OPTIONS IN CASE THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON BRIGHTNESS AND ADJACENCY. THE ELECTRONIC MESSAGE SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE TALKS ABOUT CRITERIA FOR WITHIN 200 FEET. SIGNS B, C, D . WE ARE NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I KNOW IT'S OBSCURE AND ALL OF THAT.

IF YOU GO TO A MOVIE THEATER, IT IS 50. YOUR PHONE CAN GO UP TO 500. YOU CAN ADJUST THE BRIGHTNESS. MOST PEOPLE HAVEN'T.

IT'S NOT UNREASONABLE TO SAY, CAN YOU IT? THEY CAN DO THAT. AS FAR AS THE HOURS, THE APPLICANT IS NOT CRAZY ABOUT LIMITING THE HOURS, SO THAT'S ONE WHERE WE SAID WE PRESENT IT AS AN OPTION AND FOR DISCUSSION AND FOR SOME REASON YOU WEREN'T COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING THAT BE WITHIN 75 -- IT'S WITHIN 10 FEET OR 75 FEET AWAY FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE THERE, SO WE JUST WANT TO

PROVIDE OPTIONS. >> HOW TALL IS THE DIVIDING

WALL? >> IT'S 10 FEET. IT'S A BIG

WALL. >> IS THE SAME HEIGHT?

>> IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THE FIRST FLOOR ON THE

HOUSE. >> THEIR HOUSES ACROSS 1387?

>> THERE ARE. IT IS 200 FEET FROM EXACTLY 200 FEET FROM WHERE THE SIGN WOULD BE LOCATED TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

>> BOTH? >> YES, SIR.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS TO STAFF? >> THE ONLY ONE I'M THINKING OF IN THIS AREA IS THAT WE JUST APPROVED A 7-ELEVEN RIGHT THERE.

I DON'T REMEMBER ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT DIMMING THE LIGHTS. THAT IS DIRECTLY TO HOUSES. THIS IS ACROSS -- IT IS WHAT IS GOING TO BECOME A MAJOR --.

>> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 711? DIDN'T ASK. THE 711 ON THE WEST MAIN STREET HAS ELIMINATED AND THE 7-ELEVEN ON 287 HAS ELIMINATED ILLUMINATED AND THEY ARE CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL. THERE

WITHIN THE WEST SIDE PRESERVE. >> I WILL SAVE MY COMMENT FOR HERE IN A MINUTE. I GUESS MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT I'M NOT AS WORRIED ABOUT SIGN A AS I AM D AND E. THEY ARE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM RESIDENCES AND THERE IS NOTHING BLOCKING EXCEPT THAT THE ROADWAY IS SUPPOSED TO BECOME SIX LANES SOMEWHERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THOSE HOUSES WILL BE HOUSES MUCH LONGER NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.

>> I THINK THE SIGNAGE WILL FACE EAST AND WEST. IT'S 90 DEGREES FROM THE HOUSES AND IT WILL BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE ROADS. YOU

[01:25:15]

>> THEY NEED TO PROTECT EAST AND WEST AND NOT SOUTH. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION AND MY OBSERVATION.

>> DIDN'T WE DENY INTERNALLY LIT SIGNS? WE WERE GOING TO DO THE ELECTRONIC STATIONS. THE HAVING CHARGERS HERE ?

>> WE DID LIMIT.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT DIMMING OR SOMETHING, BUT IT:00 IN THE EVENING AND PEOPLE ARE STILL DRIVING ALL

OVER THE PLACE. >> AFTER THAT IT'S NOT EVEN DARK AT THAT POINT. I DON'T SEE A NEED FOR THE DIMMING STATEMENT PUT IN HERE. AS STATED, THEY ARE ALL FACING OPPOSITE, 90 DEGREES ACROSS THE ROAD AND TRYING TO IS BASICALLY THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE WALL BEHIND IT. THAT'S MY STATEMENT.

>> DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

>> I NAME IS ROBERT HORTON I AM THE PRESIDENT FOR THE DEVELOPER FOR THE ENTIRE SHOPPING CENTER. I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING A FEW MINUTES TO VISIT WITH ME ABOUT THIS. THERE ARE A FEW THINGS.

THERE WILL BE NO EV CHARGING STATIONS AT THE STORE. I HAD OUR SIGN GUY TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND EACH TIME IT WILL GENERATE ABOUT 50 AND DO THE CALCULATIONS, SO VERY MINIMAL AMOUNT. THE BIGGEST CONCERN COMING FROM THE NATIONAL RETAILER AND MCDONALD'S, MUCH MORE GROUNDLESS SIGNS, SO YOU DON'T HAVE HOTSPOTS. YOU WILL CREATE CLEAR THAT OUR SHINING OUT. THE BIGGEST GOAL IS TO CREATE A LEGIBLE SIGN FOR CUSTOMERS TO ACCESS AND SAFETY.

THE PROPOSAL CAME UP ABOUT ADDING A LIMITATION TO SIGN TRYING TO. WE WERE OPEN TO THE IDEA OF OPENING A DIMMER. WHEN WE GOT THE SHOPPING CENTER APPROVED, WE DID INSTALL A WALL.

THERE IS A FULL SURROUNDING ON ALL FOUR SIDES OF THE TREES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ABOVE THE WALL HEIGHT AND THERE IS A 50 FOOT SETBACK. WE FELT LIKE WE SHIELDED THE RESIDENCES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT ADEQUATELY, BUT WE ARE OPEN TO THE IDEAS THAT WOULD HELP COME SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. SIX LANE ROAD AT THE STATE HIGHWAY AND WALNUT GROVE IS ANOTHER MAJOR ARTERIAL AND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF HIGH SCHOOL, RETAIL LAND AND CHURCH AND IT WILL EVENTUALLY BE COMMERCIAL I THINK. WE DON'T THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ANY -- THERE IS NO CROSS ELIMINATION. ONLY ONE DIRECTION. WE ARE AMICABLE TO THE IDEA OF PUTTING A LIMITATION ON SIGN TRYING TO AND WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE FOR ALL FIVE AND WE ARE OPEN TO THAT IDEA. THE CONCEPT OF TURNING LIGHTS OFF AT 8:00 P.M. DOESN'T DO ANYBODY ANY GOOD. IT'S DARK AT 8:00 IN THE SCIENCE GO OFF AND THERE IS NO PURPOSE OF A SIGN. WE DON'T SEE THAT IT IS A VIABLE OPTION. THAT IS OUR MAIN CONCERN. WE WANT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, BUT WE ALSO WANT THE CUSTOMERS TO COME INTO THE SHOPPING CENTER AND BE SAFE AND BE ABLE TO SEE WHERE THEY ARE GOING AND UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY ARE TURNING. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME?

>> QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, ALL. >> I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED UP.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE. >> MOTION AND SECOND. PLEASE

[01:30:09]

VOTE. >> CLOSE THE VOTE.

>> FLOOR IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION OR ACTION. WHAT WAS THE SECOND

PART? >> WITHOUT THE TIME LIMITATIONS.

I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS.

>> I SECOND THE MOTION. >> AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. 5-0. WE WILL MOVE TO

[012 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the use and development of Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6, and alley majors of Original Town of Midlothian, being 615 W. 7th Street, by changing the zoning from Commercial (C) District to Light Industrial (LI) District. (Z23-2025-061) ]

TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. >> CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS, THE BUILDING AND LAND USE WILL REMAIN THE SAME. THE GYM CURRENT USE IS AN ATHLETIC FACILITY, WHICH IS ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT. THE HISTORY OF ZONING IS THAT IT WAS REZONED TO COMMERCIAL IN 2022. PRIOR TO THAT, IT WAS ZONED WITH THE CITYWIDE ZONING IN 1989. THE COMP PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWS THAT IT IS THE ORIGINAL TOWN MODULE, WHICH ALLOWS THE MIX OF RESIDENTIAL AND LOW IMPACT NONRESIDENTIAL LAND USES, INTENSE COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES ARE NOT APPROPRIATE IN IT IS THIS MODULE. THIS IS THE PAGE OF THE COMP PLAN THAT DESCRIBES THE ORIGINAL TOWN AND YOU WILL SEE THE CHART FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATENESS AND IT SHOWS INDUSTRIAL AS NOT BEING THE APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS LOCATION. THE SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND-USE TO THE NORTH, THERE IS A CONTRACTOR WITHOUT STORAGE AND TO THE EAST, THERE IS A MIX OF SINGLE FAMILY AND COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT PRIMARILY HAS SINGLE FAMILY, HOWEVER I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME OCCUPATIONS, AS WELL. WE DO NOT SEE SIGNAGE MALL PARKING WHEN WE DROVE IN THAT AREA. TO THE SOUTH, THERE IS A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL'S OF COMMUNITY RETAIL CREDIT TO THE WEST, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL'S. THE ADJACENT SET ZONING AND LAND USES. THE PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL ALLOWS LAND USES THAT ARE PERMITTED AND NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL TOWN MODULE. THE PROPOSED ZONING IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH OWNING AND FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. THERE ARE MANY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE THE SAME, EXCEPT THAT THE COMMERCIAL HAS A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 12,500 SQUARE FEET. A MINIMUM OF 125 FEET AND ALSO 80% LOT COVERAGE MAXIMUM AND SIDE SET BACK OF 10 FEET. NO MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR WIDTH, WHICH ALLOWS 85% LOT COVERAGE WITH NO MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK. BOTH OF THESE DISTRICTS REQUIRE 20 FEET WIDE GREEN BELT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY AND THE SITE IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD AREA OF THE DOWNTOWN PLAN, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE STAR. IT DOES STATE NEXT TO THE FAMILY ORIENTED BUSINESSES . 28 POSTCARDS WERE MAILED PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SITE. TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED ONE LETTER OF OPPOSITION. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE ZONING CHANGE, BECAUSE THE PROJECT IS -- THE ZONING IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. ZONING IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN PRINCIPLES. STRATEGY STATES THAT

[01:35:11]

THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> QUESTIONS?

>> I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WEST AVENUE ON THE MAP. IS THAT NOTE

OPEN? >> IT IS NOT A ROAD. WE ACTUALLY FOUND THE ORIGINAL TOWN PLAN AND IT WAS NEVER DEDICATED AS A

ROAD. IT IS A PARKING LOT. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. THANK YOU. DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO

SPEAK? IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SIR. >> RESIDING AT 213 MIDLOTHIAN. I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN 2000. I WOULD ENSURE THAT IT WAS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AT THAT TIME AND THE BUILDING NORTH OF THERE IN 10 ACRES WEST OF THERE. IT WAS ALL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND IT WAS USED AS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING, BUT IT HAD -- THEY DISPATCHED NURSES. I COULD AT LEAST THE WAREHOUSE. THERE WAS AN INTERNET SALES GUY IN THERE FOR A WHILE, THEN IT WAS VACANT. I SENT SEVERAL PEOPLE DOWN HERE FOR A PERMIT AND THEY WERE ALL SHOT DOWN UNTIL SOMEBODY WANTED TO LEASE THE BUILDING FOR A GYM AND HIS DAD HAD SET ON A CITY COUNCIL. THEY LET HIM LEASE THE BUILDING.

TEXAS WANTED TO LEASE AIR CONDITIONING AND LEASE IT FOR STORAGE. THEY TOLD ME I COULDN'T LEASE IT, BECAUSE IT WAS RESIDENTIAL. ALL THE HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET, I TAKE IT BACK. NOT ALL HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET. THERE ARE TWO PROPERTIES THAT PART OF THE HOUSE IS ON COMMERCIAL AND PART OF IT IS ON RESIDENTIAL. NO RATIONAL HUMAN BEING COULD POTENTIALLY MAKE THAT DECISION. THE ZONING OF WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE AND IF %-Ú MATTRESS FACTORY , THEN THEY HAD TO CARRY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL'S. TO THE NORTH OF IT HAD LIGHT INDUSTRIAL'S AND 10 ACRES HAD

LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. >> QUESTIONS?

>> I REMEMBER THIS THREE YEARS AGO WHEN YOU CAME IN AND HAD IT

REZONED THREE YEARS AGO. >> THE ATTORNEY THAT I HIRED WAS ONLY INTERESTED IN COLLECTING HIS $3500. HE WASN'T INTERESTED IN CORRECTING THE MISTAKE. TO ME, THIS IS A CITY FOUL. IF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAD IT WORKED IN 36 YEARS, I WOULD REBOOT MY COMPREHENSION PLAN. NOT ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES HAS CHANGED FROM RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL OR COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL. ALL

IS TO THE SOUTH. >> CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT IS DRIVING TO CHANGE THE ZONING NOW WHEN IT WAS BEING

USED FOR STORAGE? >> LIKE I SAID, THE ATTORNEY THAT I HIRED IS ONLY INTERESTED IN HIS $3500. HE WASN'T INTERESTED IN CORRECTING THE MISTAKE.

>> WHAT WILL IT BE USED FOR NOW?

>> THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING THEIR OWN BUILDING.

>> WHAT IS IT THAT YOU ARE WANTING TO DO WITH THE BUILDING?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY INTENTION OF DOING BUSINESS.

>> WHAT IS THE INTENT OF THE BUILDING.

>> IT'S LEASE PROPERTY. >> YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC TENANT?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA. >> QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE SOME FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. NET?, AND IDENTIFY

YOURSELF. >> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS GARY AT 316 WEST AVENUE. I AM NOT WITHIN THE 200 FOOT ZONE THAT WAS MAILED OUT. NOT SURE HOW THAT WORKS AS

[01:40:09]

I HAVE ISSUES NOW. FOLKS GETTING SPRINKLER HEADS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, LET ALONE THE TRASH PEOPLE THAT DO THE TRASH DELIVERY. IT IS A DEAD-END. THEY HAVE TO GO DOWN AND BACKUP. THERE IS NO ROOM FOR TURNAROUND. MY VISION FROM MIDLOTHIAN IN THE LATE 70S NOT TO HAVE INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN. THE GROWTH PLAN THAT YOU HAVE FOR MIDLOTHIAN, THE OVERLAY THAT WE SEE WITH ALL THE NEW THINGS COMING AND MULTIMILLION DOLLAR HERE. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL FACILITY AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THINGS GOING FORWARD, BUT IN MY OPINION, WHICH MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT SWAY ANYBODY, AND INDUSTRIAL PLANT WITHIN FEET OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSES IS ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WAS NO RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS TO BEGIN WITH, BUT THERE IS NOW.

>> I NEED YOU TO CLOSE. >> YES, SIR. I DO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TODAY AND IT'S MY OPINION THAT THIS WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE SITES THAT WE HAVE ON

BOARD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. CAN HOWARD.

>> MY NAME IS TED HOWARD 203 NORTH STREET AND I LIVE IN AN OLD HOUSE DEVELOPED IN 1900. I'M A HISTORICAL GUY. I HAD A SPEECH ALREADY AND IT CHANGED, BECAUSE I HAVE LISTENED TO A LOT OF STUFF HERE TONIGHT ABOUT THE OBJECTIVE ZONING ISSUES. OURS IS SUBJECTIVE. OLD TOWN HISTORICAL OLD TOWN. THE RESIDENTIAL PART IS SUBJECTIVE, BECAUSE IT'S AN EMOTIONAL THING. IT IS THE CHARACTER OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO PRESERVE, PROTECT AND PROMOTE. THAT IS THE ONLY THING WE CAN STAND UP FOR. WE DON'T HAVE A NEW INDUSTRY GOING ON, ZONING CHANGE OR ANY ZONING CHANGE IN OLD TOWN TO US. IT IS AN ENCROACHMENT, I GUESS, TO CERTAIN DEGREE. IT ENCROACHES ON THE HISTORICAL INTEGRITY OF OLD TOWN. BASED ON THAT, WE HAVE A TEST ON HISTORICAL SOCIETY, WHICH ISN'T GOING TO BE A NUISANCE ZONING CHANGE. THE THIRD ZONING ISSUE HAS PROVEN TO BE A NUISANCE. THAT IS AN ISSUE.

[01:45:05]

THIS REQUEST. >> THANK YOU, TED. I DO NOT HAVE ANYBODY ELSE SIGNED UP, SO I ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. IT IS 5-0. THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR

DISCUSSION OR ACTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND TO DENY AS PRESENTED. ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. IT IS UNANIMOUS 5-0. WE WILL MOVE NOW 2013, CONSIDER AND

[013 Consider and act upon approval of a detailed site plan relating to the development of Lot 3-B3, Block 1, Hawkins Meadows Commercial, located in Planned Development District No. 68 (PD-68). The property is generally located on the south side of Hawkins Run Road, and east of FM 663. (SP04-2024-096) ]

>> COMMISSION SENIOR PLANNER TO PRESENT ITEM 13. THIS IS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED RETAIL CENTER, WHICH CONSISTS OF ONE OFFICE AND FOR MUNICIPAL SUITES. IT IS CURRENTLY 0.89 ACRE VACANT AND UNDEVELOPED LOTS WITH UNDERLYING COMMUNITY RETAIL ZONING. IT IS BEING PRESENTED, BECAUSE IT STATES THE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS LOT REQUIRES THAT A DETAILED SITE PLAN GO THROUGH COUNSEL. THE SITE PLAN VARIANCES WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE SITE PLAN DUE TO THE PROPOSED PARKING EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE BY ONE SPACE, AS WELL AS ADJACENT PROPERTY INFORMATION AND SURVEY BEING NEEDED FOR BOUNDARY ACCURACY. THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS COMPRISED OF THE SAME MIXED-USE ZONING TO THE SOUTH, EAST, AND WEST IN COMMERCIAL PD TO THE NORTH.A OPEN SPACE IN THE EAST AND SINGLE-FAMILY TO THE SELF . A VACANT LOT TO THE WEST AND SHOPPING CENTER TO THE NORTH.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS USE TO A NEW TOWN MODULE TO THE NORTH AND RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY TO THE SOUTH, EAST AND WEST. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRES NO VARIANCES. WE HAVE THE ELEVATIONS SHOWING THAT IT WILL BE ONE STORY AND WITH THE MATERIALS LISTED, A VARIANCE WILL BE NEEDED DUE TO THE HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION STANDARDS AND NOT BEING MET ON THE NORTH, WEST AND SOUTH. STAFF DOES HAS CONCERNS. THERE IS LANDSCAPING LOCATED IN MOUNTAIN PEAK DETAILED EASEMENT WITH NO COORDINATION WITH AN APPLICANT AND THE UTILITY COMPANY. THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EASEMENTS AND DISTANCES ARE MISSING AND PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EASEMENT IN RIGHT-OF-WAY DISTANCES ARE NEEDED, AS WELL AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVED BY COUNSEL THAT PROPOSED DRIVEWAY SPACING AND SIGNAGE NEEDING TO BE PLACED. YOU CAN SEE THE TYPES OF SIGNS LISTED IN PARENTHESES. OBJECTION LETTERS WERE MAILED AND NO CORRESPONDENCE HAS BEEN RECEIVED. THE RETAIL CENTER SITE PLAN WILL REQUIRE SEVEN VARIANCES STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU AND I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS.

>> DO YOU MIND GOING BACK ONE SLIDE? ON THE DRIVEWAY SPACING REQUIREMENT, IT DOESN'T MEET THE CITIES SPACING REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING DRIVES. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE INGRESS EGRESS IS TOO CLOSE TO THE NEXT TURN IN? IS THAT THE PROBLEM?

>> IT'S NOT TOO CLOSE, BUT THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE ACCURATE

[01:50:01]

INGRESS. >> LOOKING AT THE AERIAL ON ONE OF THE MANY PAGES -- LET ME GO BACK. I THOUGHT IT WAS IN HERE.

I MAY HAVE JUST SAW ONLINE. THE DRAINAGE PONDS THERE WHEN YOU TURN IN, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS ENOUGH. IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO TELL US? I'M NOT SEEING ANYONE. THEN, THERE IS A THING IN HERE.

AS FAR AS THE LANDSCAPING, THEY JUST HAVEN'T SHOWN THAT THE

LANDSCAPING WILL COMPLY. >> NOT COMPLY, BUT THE FACT THAT THEY PUT THE LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE EASEMENTS WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH THEM. I VERIFIED THAT. THEY JUST CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION. WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY NEED THAT. WITH ACCESS

AND ALL OF THAT. >> OKAY.

>> THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN APPROVE.

>> THEY ARE NOT HERE? >> THEY ARE NOT.

>> OKAY THEN. THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? NOPE. OKAY. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION? IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION AND SECOND.

OKAY. MOTION AND SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSE THE VOTE. MOTION PASSES 5-0. OKAY. STAFF? ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONERS, ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO

ADJOURN. >> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. EVERYBODY

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.