[2025-370 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, relating to the use and development of 0.783+ acres, being in Planned Development District No. 118 (PD-118); and being Lot 2, Block A, Midpark Addition, as recorded in Plat Records, Ellis County, Texas, Instrument No. 2427883. The property is generally located on the south side of US Highway 287 service road, and on the west side of S. 14th Street. (Z28-2025-068) ]

[2025-371 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, relating to the use and development of 11.102± acres out of the J.V. Emerson Survey, Abstract No. 1208, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) to Single-Family Two (SF-2). The property is generally located southeast of Onward Road and Shiloh Road. (Z27-2025-067).]

[2025-372 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 (PD-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) ]

[01:03:45]

CUTTING OFF THROUGH TRAFFIC KILLS OUR WALKABILITY IF THAT

[01:03:48]

MAKES SENSE. >> IT WOULDN'T KILL THE

[01:03:53]

WALKABILITY, BUT YOU KNOW, THOSE COVERED SPACES BETWEEN THE FIRST

[01:03:56]

TWO BUILDINGS ARE DEDICATED FOR THE RETAIL. THEY ARE NOT

[01:04:01]

DEDICATED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE. SO YOU KNOW, WE

[01:04:05]

THOUGHT THAT HAVING A TURN AROUND WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO

[01:04:08]

SOMEONE TRYING TO FIND A PARKING SPACE FOR THE RETAIL. IF THOSE

[01:04:11]

WERE DEDICATED FOR RESIDENTIAL AND THEY WERE SPECIFIC TO A

[01:04:16]

UNIT, THEN IT WOULDN'T BE A BIG DEAL. I THINK IF SOMEONE GOT

[01:04:21]

INTO THAT DEAD END, SAW THERE WASN'T ANY PARKING SPACES AND

[01:04:25]

HAD TO DO A TURN AROUND, THEY WOULD BE MORE LIKELY TO DRIVE

[01:04:28]

OFF THAN TO FIND A PARKING SPACE . WE ARE ALREADY A LITTLE BEHIND

[01:04:32]

THE EIGHT BALL WITH THE RETAIL IN GENERAL BECAUSE WE ARE BEHIND THE STRIP CENTER, RILEY'S AND SCOOTERS. BUT ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO RESTRICT VEHICLULAR IS ONLY GOING TO HELP THAT RETAIL.

>> IS THERE ANY CONCERN DEPENDING ON THE RETAIL THAT PARKING COULD FLOW BACK TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA IF IT IS OPEN?

>> RIGHT NOW, WE ARE MEETING THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR

[01:05:04]

ALL USES, FOR RETAIL, OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL, TOWN HOMES, WE ARE MEETING THE MINIMUMS. IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THAT, THEN THERE IS A BIGGER PROBLEM WITH THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. >> OR JUST GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE MINIMUM STANDARD WE ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND BECAUSE EVEN ON THE TOWN HOMES WE HAVE TWO GARAGE SPACES FOR EACH HOME BUT ONE TANDEM SPACE IN THE DRIVEWAY. WE HAVE 48 MORE TANDEM SPACES THAN WE ARE SHOWING IN OUR PROVIDED COUNT. WE ARE WELL ABOVE AND BEYOND MINIMUMS WHEN YOU COUNT THAT.

>> IS THE TOWN HOME RATIO 2.1 PEOPLE WERE UNIT OR 3?

>> 2.73. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RATIO

IS. >> NOT PARKING, YOU'RE TALKING

ABOUT PEOPLE, CORRECT? >> WE WILL HAVE A MIXTURE OF 2 BEDROOM AND 3 BEDROOM. SO IT WILL BE A GOOD MIX BETWEEN THE

TWO AND THREE STORY BUILDINGS. >> I'M A LITTLE INDIFFERENT ON THE CONNECTION. ON ONE HAND I DON'T LIKE MIXING THE USES AND ON THE OTHER HAND, I WOULD BE THE GUY THAT CUTS THROUGH THERE.

I WOULD. >> AS LONG AS YOU STOP AND SHOP ON URWAY THROUGH, IT'S FINE I HAVE THE HEARTBURN OF MIXING THE TWO BUT I ALSO SEE THE BENEFIT IF SOMEONE NEEDS TO FIND A WORK AROUND TO GET OVER THERE. I'M INDIFFERENT.

>> ON THAT SAME SUGGEST, WHAT'S THE WIDTH OVER THERE? IF YOU GOT CARS THAT ARE GOING TO PARK AND OF COURSE THERE ARE TWO IN THE ILLUSTRATION BUT CARS ARE GOING TO PARG ON BOTH SIDES, THEY GET OUT, AND IS THERE ANY -- LIKE A CUT THROUGH, IS IT GOING TO BE

REALLY NARROW? >> ALL OF OUR BUILDINGS ARE 30 FEET OR TALLER. WE ARE SHOWING 26 FOOT FIRE LANES EVERYWHERE. .

>> OKAY. IF IT'S NOT A CUT THROUGH, IT'S GOING TO BE A

PARKING LOT. >> CORRECT. IT WOULD BE A DEAD END PARKING LOT. WE WOULD HAVE TO REDUCE THE END SPACES BY TWO AND DO ANOTHER STRIPED OFF AREA, TURN AROUND LIKE WE ARE SHOWING

BEHIND THE DUMPSTER. >> AND THE MAYOR'S POINT EARLIER WAS THE WALKABILITY SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE REDUCED

TO SOME DEGREE. >> IF WE DID THE DEAD END, THERE WOULD BE A SIDEWALK THERE OR PEOPLE WOULD WALK ACROSS THE STRIPED OPTURN AROUND AREA. AS IT IS NOW, THERE WILL BE A CROSSWALK THERE JUST LIKE THERE IS A CROSSWALK ACROSS ANY OF THE

OTHER DRIVES. >> I'M KIND OF INDIFFERENT . I WOULD PROBABLY NOT DRIVE THRU BUT I WOULD SIT THERE AND POINT MY FINGER AT MAYOR PRO TEM DRIVING THROUGH.

>> GOING DOWN MAIN AND TURNING UP 14TH TO GET TO THE APARTMENTS, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, APARTMENTS AND TOWN HOMES, THAT'S EASIER THAN THE CUT THROUGH ITSELF. SO PERSONALLY, I WOULDN'T TAKE THE CUT THROUGH. BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING THROUGH A PARKING LOT, STOPPING AT THE ALLEY, THROUGH CAR PORT PARKINGS, A STOP AT THE TEE AND ANOTHER STOP. YOU ARE STOPPING THREE TIMES VERSEERSE FOLLOWING 14 TH TO EAST RIDGE .

>> I HAVE MORE CONCERN WITH PEOPLE LEAVING THE FACILITY AND GOING EAST ON THE DRIVEWAY AND BACKING UP TO LIGHT. I HAVE MORE CONCERNS EXITING THE FACILITY THAN ENTERING.

>> I UNDERSTAND. BUT MAYBE IT IS JUST ME BUT I WOULD GO TO THE LIGHT TO MAKE IT EASIER TO TURN EAST ON THE MAIN VERSUS TRYING TO GET OUT AT AN UNSIGNALLED INTERSECTION.

>> YOU DON'T HAVE A BIASSED OPINION AT ALL, DO YOU? OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I KIND OF AGREE, I'M SOMEWHAT INDIFFERENT. I KNOW THERE ARE GOING TO BE REPERCUSSIONS EITHER WAY. I DON'T SEE IT AS A HILL WORTH DYING ON.

>> TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE NOT THINKING THAT EITHER. WE ARE PERFECTLY FINE. WE PREFER THIS ONE BUT IF YOU SAID YOU REALLY WANT TO CLOSE IT OFF AND DO THE STRIPED TURN AROUND, WE ARE

HAPPY WITH THAT AS WELL. >> THIS IS FIRST OF ITS KIND DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY AND YOU HAVE BEEN PATIENT WITH US AS I'M SURE YOU HAVE GOT CONFLICTING INFORMATION THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS AND YOU HAD THE DIFFICULT TASK OF BALANCING ALL THE OPINIONS. FINAL COMMENTS?

>> THE ONLY STICKING POINT I HAVE IS I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA

[01:10:02]

OF A THREE STORY BUILDING THIS CLOSE TO MAIN STREET. I LIKE THE ORIGINAL RENDITION OF THE RETAIL SPOT. I THINK THE PATIO IS A GREAT IDEA. I GET THE IDEA OF VERTICAL MIXED USE BACK IN THE DEVELOPMENT. IT HAS AN UPTOWN FEEL TO IT. A DALLAS FEEL TO IT.

I LIKE THE POND, THE WET POND, BUT THE THREE STORIES ON MAIN IS

A DEAL BREAKER FOR ME. >> AND TO BE CLEAR, WE HONESTLY HAD SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS INTERNALLY AS WELL. THAT'S PART OF WHY WE ADDED THE LARGE PATIO IS TRY TO SET THE BUILDING FURTHER. IT IS SET BACK BEYOND THE LINE OF THE O'REILLY'S. YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME COMPATIBILITY THERE. BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO SAID IT, THE REALITY IS THAT EVENTUALLY THE SCOOTERS, O'REILLY'S, AND EVEN THE TACO BELL ARE GOING TO BE REDEVELOPED AT SOME POINT. I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN WITH THE COMPATIBILITY.

WE TRIED TO MEET HALFWAY TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT'S THERE BUT THOSE BUILDINGS ARE NOT GOING TO BE THERE FOREVER. OUR BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO BE THERE MUCH LONGER THAN ANY OF THE

EXISTING ONES. >> AND WE WANT TO DO A GREAT PROJECT. IF THIS PROJECT TURNS OUT HALF AS GOOD AS THE RENDERINGS LOOK AND YOU POINT TO FUTURE DEVELOPERS TO SAY THIS IS WHAT WE WANT FUTURE PROJECTS TOLOOK LIKE.

>> I'M SORRY IT HAPPENED THAT WAY. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE COUNCIL. BUT THIS MAY BE SETTING THIS FOR A BUNCH OF THREE STORY BUILDINGS ON MAIN IN A MORE MODERN FORMAT. I APPRECIATE YOUR

INPUT. >> GIVEN THAT FEEDBACK, AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO TOO MUCH DESIGNING BUT I WILL ASK THE QUESTION, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO THE IDEA OF DOING TWO STORY

THERE? >> THAT'S A LITTLE TOUGH BECAUSE ALL OF THESE CHANGES WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE OVER THE MONTHS WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO KEEP THE TOTAL UNIT THE SAME, ONE TO ONE SWAP FOR MORE VERTICAL SPACE. WE HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY AT 124 UNITS SINCE WE BROUGHT THIS BEFORE P AND Z.

DOING THAT, THERE IS NOWHERE TO REPLACE THE UNIT LOSS IN THE SITE. SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT OF A STICKING POINT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A LOT BUT EIGHT UNITS ON A DEAL THIS SIZE IS QUITE A LOT.

>> SURE, OKAY. >> YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.

>> ANYONE ELSE HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT MIKE SAID IN THAT I THINK YOU ALL HAVE BROUGHT FORTH A GOOD PROJECT. THE SCALE OF THAT FRONT BUILDING IN COMPARISON TO THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR IS GOING TO BE DRAMATIC. IT'S GOING TO -- IT TRULY IS GOING TO SET THE TONE FOR DOWN THERE. I UNDERSTAND REDEVELOPMENT WILL HAPPEN BUT THAT IS 30, 40, 50 YEARS FROM NOW PROBABLY BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH OTHER BUILDABLE

SPACE. GO AHEAD. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY WE CAN'T MAKE DECISIONS ON THE IDEA OF DEVELOPMENT BEING BULL DOZED AND CHANGED LATER. SO BEFORE, WHEN HE CAME LAST TIME, YOU HAD NOTHING THERE. WE ASKEDIA TO REDUCE EVERYTHING AND YOU ADDED

IT TO THE TOP? >> BEFORE WE SHOWED A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA THAT WAS AMBIGUOUS, COMMUNITY RETAIL, ANYTHING FROM MIXED USE TO QUICK SERVE RESTAURANT OR A STRIP CENTER. BUT OVERWHELMINGLY, WHAT WE HEARD FROM COUNCIL WAS THAT WE WANTED MORE VERTICAL MIXED USE. SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE TRIED TO DO HERE IS WE COULDN'T REALLY MAKE THE EXISTING VERTICAL USE BUILDINGS ANY LARGER. WE COULDN'T EXTEND THEM TO THE EAST. THE GREEN AREA BELOW THAT IS ALL FLOOD PLAINS.

THERE IS NOTHING GOING TO BE BUILT UP ON MAIN FROM THAT BUILDING TO THE EAST UNTIL YOU GET PAST THE FLOOD PLAIN. THAT WAS OUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO ADD MORE VERTICAL MIXED USE WHICH AGAIN, AFTER THE FIRST MEETING, THAT WAS IN MY MIND, THE NUMBER ONE THING YOU WERE ASKING FOR WAS MORE VERTICAL MIXED USE.

>> THE TOP FLOOR OF THAT FRONT COMMERCIAL BUILDING IS EIGHT

RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS. >> YES. THE GROUND FLOOR IS 100% COMMERCIAL, RESTAURANTS AND RETAIL SPACES AND OFFICE. THEN THE UPPER TWO FLOORS, THERE IS EIGHT UNITS ON EACH FLOOR.

>> THE FOUR UNITS THAT ARE TO THE FAR EAST OVER THERE, IN THE

[01:15:06]

HYPOTHETICAL, WHAT IF YOU MADE THOSE THREE STORY INSTEAD AND YOU GOT YOUR APARTMENT COUNT SIMILAR?

>> I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T FOLLOW THAT.

>> TO THE RIGHT OF THE GRAPHIC, THERE ARE FOUR TOWN HOMES THERE.

WHAT IFFIA MADE THOSE THREE STORIES INSTEAD OF THE FRONT

BUILDING? >> IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE UNIT COUNT. IT WOULD JUST CHANGE THEM FROM TWO BEDROOM UNITS TO THREE

BEDROOM UNITS. >> OKAY.

>> JUST FOR CLARITY, I FEEL LIKE WE WERE SAYING WE LOVE VERTICAL MIXED USE, AND WE WANT THE RESIDENTIAL COUNT LOWER, THAT'S AT LEAST WHAT I FELT. I DON'T KNOW. I'M STRUGGLING ON THIS

ONE. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR PROJECT EXCEPT FOR WHAT WAS RETAIL REMOVED. AND YES, WE DID SAY VERTICAL MIXED USE. THE THOUGHT PROCESS I HAD IN MY MIND WAS THAT THE VERTICAL MIXED USE WOULD FALL BEHIND THE POND. I'M ASSUMING THOSE ARE THREE STORY TOWN HOMES BEHIND THE POND.

>> NO, THOSE ARE TWO STORY. >> SO HOW TALL ARE THE TOWN

HOMES BEHIND THE POND? >> TWO STORIES. THE ONLY THREE STORIES ARE THE ONES IN THE MIDDLE IN THE GREEN.

>> MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS FROM THE VISIBILITY OF MAIN, MAYBE BEHIND THE POND, THAT'S WHERE THE MIXED USE WOULD BE TO KEEP

THE HEIGHT DOWN UP ON MAIN. >> SO THE PROBLEM ON PUTTING MORE RETAIL THERE IS THERE IS ZERO VISIBILITY BECAUSE ALL OF THE AREA THAT IS IN THE FLOOD PLAIN IS HEAVILY TREED. YOU WILL NOT SEE ANYTHING BEYOND THAT. THAT'S WHY WHAT I SAID EARLIER IS WE CAN REALLY EXTEND THAT TO THE EAST BECAUSE YOU WILL NEVER SEE IT. THE TOWN HOMES OR A THREE STORY VERTICAL MIXED USE, YOU WILL NEVER SEE THAT FROM MAIN STREET.

>> I WILL BE HONEST, I REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT FIT ON THIS SITE. IT'S VERY UNIQUE. IF FACT THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING ON MAIN AND A BIG PORTION TUCKED BEHIND. I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE AN ISSUE IF YOU PUT A FOUR STORY BUILDING RIGHT THERE. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN THE BACK. I PERSONALLY HATE THE THEMING. TO MIKE'S POINT, I WOULD RATHER IT LOOK LIKE A TRADITIONAL OR HISTORICAL LOOKING COMPLEX. I HAVE LOCKED AT SOME ONLINE AND I HAVE THEM PULLED UP NOW. FOR ME, IT WOULD TAKE SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO GET OVER THE HEARTBURN OF EVERYTHING YOU HAVE GOING ON IN THE COMPLEX, PERSONALLY. YOU CAN TAKE THAT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT IF YOU WOULD LIKE. I THINK IT DOESN'T MATCH OF THE SURROUNDING USES, PERSONALLY.

>> SO TO GO BACK ON WHAT CLARK JUST MENTIONED AND I DIDN'T BRING IT UP BECAUSE I FEEL BAD ABOUT THIS BECAUSE -- WHAT YOU GUYS NEED IS TO TELL US WHAT STAFF IN A BOOK, WHAT DO YOU WANT, RIGHT? AND I FEEL LIKE YOU TRIED TO DO THAT. AND YOU HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF IT. I'M KIND OF CLARK IN A WAY. I'M NOT, AT LEAST FOR ME PERSONALLY, CURRENTLY, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THIS COUNCIL, WHAT CLARK JUST MENTIONED WAS A GREAT WORD. I CAN GET OVER THE HEARTBURN OF THIS BEING A TALLER BUILDING IF IT IS NOT IN A MODERN FORMAT FOR ME. BUT HERE'S THE PROBLEM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WANT IS CORRECT FOR THE COMMUNITY WHICH BOTHERS ME BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T TACKLED THIS TO GIVE YOU WHAT YOU NEED WHICH HAS BEEN MY CONCERN ALL EVENING. SO SO THIS IS WHY I'M HAVING A BATTLE IN MY HEAD. DO I WANT THIS THREE STORY STRUCTURE THAT IN MY VIEW DOESN'T EVEN MATCH THAT PART OF TOWN. IT'S GOING TO BE NICE. IT'S GOING TO LOOK NICE. BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT'S GOING TO SET A TONE FOR US FOR THE BALANCE.

>> SO IF WE DROPPED IT DOWN TO TWO.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT DROPPED TO TWO AND I'M NOT SURE IF A MODERN FORMAT WORKS RIGHT THERE. THE WHOLE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT, GREAT. BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT MATCHES. I DON'T

KNOW. >> PERSONALLY, IF YOU CAME BACK WITH A LOOK LIKE THAT OR THIS OTHER ONE, I WOULDN'T CARE IF

[01:20:08]

THEY WERE FOUR STORY. >> NOW, CLARK.

>> THE BETTER PRODUCT GETS YOU THE BETTER GOAL. IT'S NOT THE

BETTER PRODUCT. >> OKAY.

>> DO WE WANT A CONTINUANCE UNTIL WE FIGURE OUT WHAT TYPE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN WE WANT HERE?

>> I THINK THAT IS UP TO YOU IF YOU WANT A CONTINUANCE OR TAKE A

VOTE NOW. >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD

IDEA. >> WE ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR HARD WORK

ON THIS. >> WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO WORK HARD. I EVEN TALKED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND HE WAS WILLING TO DROP THE FRONT BUILDING DOWN TO TWO STORIES.

>> I THINK THE TWO STORIES WILL DEFINITELY HELP. I LIKE THE LOOK OF IT BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE SAYING AS FAR AS THE FITTING

IN. >> I THINK THE TWO STORY WOULD BE PERFECT. I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE PATIO RIGHT THERE. I THINK THOSE ARE GREAT IDEAS AND THEY WILL FIT THE FEEL. I'M WITH CLARK THOUGH THAT WE NEED SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE

MODERN UPTOWN LOOK. >> YOU ARE COMING INTO THE

HISTORICAL DISTRICT. >> I WILL STATE FOR THE PUBLIC THAT YOU CONTACTED ME A COUPLE OF TIMES AND I HAVE NOT HAD TIME. SO IT ISN'T AS THOUGH -- I HAVE BEEN SO BUSY WITH WORK.

BUT I'M HAPPY TO BE AVAILABLE. I APOLOGIZE BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN

AVAILABLE. >> I KNOW THIS IS FRUSTRATING.

HOW MUCH TIME WOULD YOU NEED IF YOU CONTINUED THIS?

>> WHEN CAN YOU GET A MEETING WITH THIS COMMUNITY TO TALK

ABOUT DESIGN GOING FORWARD? >> WHAT'S THE SHORTEST WE CAN CONTINUE IT? IS IT 9/9? SORRY, 12/9.

>> HE SAID 99. >> THERE IS ALSO A WORK SHOP NEXT FRIDAY. IT MIGHT BE GOOD FOR A COLLECTIVE COUNCIL TO HEAR THIS PROCESS. RATHER THAN TWO OR THROW AT A TIME.

>> I'M OPEN FOR WHATEVER. >> WE ECOULD STREAM LINE IT.

>> WE ARE DOING THAT HERE. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN OR NOT.

>> DO WHAT? >> KEEP IT SHORT.

>> I DON'T WANT TO KEEP IT SHORT. IT IS OUR JOB.

>> WHAT I HEARD TONIGHT IS THAT THERE IS HEARTBURN OVER THE THREE LEVELS ON THE FRONT FACILITY. I DIDN'T HEAR A LOT OF HEARTBURN OVER UNIT COUNT. IF YOU ARE ABLE TO SHIFT THAT AROUND, IN MY OPINION, IF IT WORKS SOMEHOW.

>> THE ONLY WAY WE COULD DO THAT IS TAKE ONE OF THE OTHER

BUILDINGS UP TO A FOURTH FLOOR. >> AND THEN I GET THE FEELING FACADE IS A STATEMENT. THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING.

>> THIS IS ME PERSONALLY AND WE COULD PUT OUT A WORK SHOP. IF YOU BROUGHT A BETTER PRODUCT, I WOULDN'T CARE THE THEME WHAT DO

YOU MEAN? >> I JUST SHOWED YOU A PICTURE BUT I CAN SHOW MORE IF WE HAVE A WORK SHOP.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT HEARTBURN AND THE SIMPLE FACT IS WE WILL NEVER PLEASE EVERYONE ON AESTHETICS BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN AESTHETICS. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE VICTORIAN HOUSES, AND MODERN HOUSES AND FLAT ROOF SAID, AND PITCHED ROOFS. SO ONE PERSON'S IDEAL IS NOT THE NEXT PERSON'S. SO YOU KNOW, I STRUGGLE WITH THAT. OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO DO GOOD DESIGN. WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD DESIGN. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT A MODERN AESTHETIC IS NOT FOR EVERYONE. BUT MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, IS IT THE CITY'S PLACE TO DICTATE AESTHETICS?

>> YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT IS. YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT IS ON BEHALF OF OUR CITIZENS AND THE REST OF THEM CAN DISAGREE WITH ME IF THEY WANT BUT THAT IS OUR JOB. TO DICTATE -- WE WANT THAT MAIN STREET IN 30 YEARS WHEN WE DRIVE THRU IT, I WANT SOMEONE FROM ARKANSAS TO ASK ME WHERE I LIVE AND I SAY MIDLOTHIAN AND THEY SAY THAT IS A REALLY UNIQUE TOWN. YOU HAVE THE MOST WELL PLANNED OUT THEMED TOWN. I GOT OFF ON 67 AND DROVE ALL THE WAY UP THE HILL TO MIDLOTHIAN. I'M THINKING OF MOVING THERE.

[01:25:01]

>> OKAY. HERE'S WHERE WE ARE AT. I GENUINELY APPRECIATE TONIGHT. I'M FRUSTRATED TOO AS SOMEONE WHO HAS MET WITH YOU A COUPLE OF TIMES. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS THE PROCESS. WE ARE -- YOU ARE REQUESTING CONTINUANCE? WE WILL CONTINUE THIS TO BE DETERMINED, HOST A WORK SHOP WHERE WE CAN HOPEFULLY HAVE HEALTHY DIALOGUE ABOUT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

>> IF THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THIS, WHETHER THERE IS THE NUMBER OF YOU KNOWTS, DO THEY HAVE TO GO CONSIDER GOING BACK AND READVERTISING AND GOING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, WE CAN DECIDE THAT ONCE WE DECIDE WHERE WE GO FROM HERE.

>> DO I NEED MOTION ON THAT? >> LET'S MAKE MOTION TO CONTINUE. LET'S MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE IT.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS FOR FUTURE DATE UNDETERMINED PENDING A CITY COUNCIL WORK SHOP.

>> SECOND. >> I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE HARD

[2025-373 Consider and act upon an ordinance amending Chapter 10A “Subdivision Ordinance” Section 6.16 “Improvement Standards and Requirements” of the Code of Ordinances by renaming and amending in its entirety, Subsection 5, regarding the design of local drainage systems (OZ02-2025-074). ]

WORK YOU ARE DONE. YOU HAVE MET WITH SEVERAL OF US INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS A GROUP, I THINK, I BELIEVE WE ARE GETTING THERE.

BUT I DIDN'T DEAL WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP WHEN WE TALKED PREVIOUSLY. I DO UNDERSTAND THE PERSPECTIVE IS COMING. I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE LABOR THAT YOU HAVE PUT AND APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO KEEP THIS BALL ROLLING.

>> MOTION MADE TO CONTINUE BY MYSELF, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SHEFFIELD. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM IS CONTINUED, 5-0,

THANK YOU. >> MOVING ON TO 2025-373 CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10A, IMPROVING STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE OF ORDERIANCES, RENAMING SUBSECTION 5 REGARDING DESIGN OF LOCAL

DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. SO THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WERE ADOPTED IN 1988 AND WITHIN THOSE REGULATIONS ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. OF COURSE THE ORDINANCE HAS UNDERGONE A BUNCH OF AMENDMENTS OVER TIME. COUNCIL IS AWARE THAT RIGHT NOW, THERE IS THE ONGOING REWRITE OF THE REGULATIONS. SO AS PART OF THAT, THE INTENT IS TO PULL OUT ALL OF THE DRAINAGE SDRIEN CRITERIA AND HAVE SEPARATE ORDINANCE AND DESIGN MANUAL THAT WILL BE COMPREHENSIVE IN REGARD TO DRAINAGE, MITIGATION THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. WHAT WE WANTED TO DO RIGHT NOW IS REALLY BRING FORWARD THE ITEMS THAT REALLY NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED NOW MORE SO THAN LATER. WHICH I THINK THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ARE LOOKING LIKE MAYBE A YEAR OUT.

SO WHAT WE DID REALLY WAS TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE MAIN THINGS WE ARE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AND WE ARE SEEING SMALLER LOTS. WITHIN YOUR PACKET, THERE'S A COMPARISON IN REGARDS TO THE MAIN HIGHLIGHTS OF WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT AMENDING WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE. SO THE FIRST ONE IS GOING TO BE THE C VALUE. YOU CAN SEE THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. THAT'S THE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT. THE DENTS, MORE IMPERVIOUS, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE HAS THE BALANCE AT 5 DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. ONE OF THE BIG ONES IS RESIDENTIAL. SO THE 0.5 IS A CATCH ALL. IT IS FOR NORMALLY YOU SEE THAT AND WE GET TO THE LARGER LOTS. AS WE CONTINUE TO GET TO THE SMALLER LOTS, YOU CAN SEE THE VALUES NEED TO BE ADJUSTED UP. YOU WILL SEE THAT ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE.

WHEN YOU START GETTING TO THE SINGLE FAMILY, EIGHT ACRE LOTS ARE AT 0.65 INSTEAD OF 0.5. AS YOU GET TO ONE ACRE AND LARGER, YOU GET INTO VALUES THAT ARE A LITTLE LOWER. THIS WILL BE MORE REFLECTIVE OF WHAT WE ARE SEEING NOW WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT ARE COMING IN THAT ARE SMALLER ON THE SINGLE FAMILY SIDE. ALSO WE HAVE THE CURRENT ORDINANCE THAT HAS RAINFALL FREQUENCY DURATION CURVE WHICH IS OUTDATED. YOU COME AND PICK THE POINT AND FIGURE OUT THE INTENSITY TO BE UTILIZED IN THE FORMULAS. WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW IS MORE UPDATED VERSION. IT HAS THE INTENSITY, INCHES PER HOUR ALREADY IDENTIFIED FOR THE VARIOUS STORMS, MUCH MORE STRAIGHT LINE, USING THE SAME NUMBERS AND TRYING TO INTERPRET AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE ON THE GRAPH. ON THE OPEN CHANNEL WITH

[01:30:01]

THE CULVERT DESIGN, ONE OF COMPLAINTS AND CONCERNS IS VELOCITY. WHAT WE ARE DOING IS LOWERING THE VELOCITY THAT IS ALLOWED, BASED ON OPEN CHANNEL AS WELL AS CULVERT DESIGN.

AGAIN, LOWER VELOCITY, LESS CHANCE FOR EROSION AND HAVING THE EROSION VELOCITIES. THE BIG THING, WITHIN OUR ORDINANCE, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT INVOLVES MITIGATION, DETENTION PONDS. WE HAVE A SEPARATE CATEGORY OR PARAGRAPH THAT WE ARE ADDING. THE BIG TAKE AWAY IS GOING TO BE WHAT WE DO RIGHT NOW WHEN THEY COME SQUIN HAVE THE DETENTION PONDS, WE HAVE THE PONDS DESIGNED SO THEY ARE RELEASING AT THE REDEVELOPMENT FLOW. SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PREDEVELOPMENT AND POST DEVELOPMENT, THEY HAVE TO DEFER BACK TO THE POND WITHIN THE SAME YEAR DESIGN. WITHIN THE TWO YEAR, FIVE YEAR, 10, 20, 100 YEAR STORM, THAT IS WHAT THE POND IS BEING DESIGNED WITH. THE REQUIREMENT NOW WOULD BE IF YOU ARE DOING 10 YEAR STORM THAT THE DISCHARGE WOULD BE REDUCED DOWN NOT TO A 10 YEAR PREDEVELOPMENT BUT A 5 YEAR. THAT WAY WE ARE ABLE TO SHOW YOU ARE RELEASING LESS THAN THE PREDEVELOPED FLOW. THE POND DESIGN WON'T CHANGE FROM THE OVERALL DETENTION SIZE. IT IS THE OUTLET STRUCTURE. IT IS GOING TO BE THE MAIN POINT. THAT IS SOMETHING THEY ARE DOING NOW. IT WILL JUST HOLD BACK A LITTLE MORE IN THE POND AND RELEASE IT AT A SLOWER RATE. HOPEFULLY THAT WILL HELP WITH THE VOLUME AND VELOCITY THAT IS COMING. WE HAD QUITE A BIT MORE, SPECIFICS ON THE POND DESIGN THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE AS WELL. THE BIG TAKE AWAY IS GOING TO BE ON THE DISCHARGE, REDUCING THOSE STORM EVENTS. THIS ITEM WAS PRESENTED TO P AND Z LAST MONTH. P AND Z RECOMMENDED WE BRING THAT TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> ANY SIGN UP TO SPEAK? >> COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF MIKE?

>> YEAH. THIS PARAGRAPH, A NEW PARAGRAPH TOTALLY, NOT ANYTHING CHANGED. SO WHEN I WAS READING THROUGH IT, I WAS THINKING ABOUT REGULATION AND HOW TO MANAGE THIS. IS THIS BASED UPON NEW PRODUCT THAT GETS BUILT OR IS IT BASED UPON GOING BACK OVER

WHAT'S ALREADY OUT THERE? >> GOOD QUESTION. THIS REALLY IS NOW INTENDED FOR ANYTHING COMING FORWARD. SO ANYTHING THAT IS ADOPTED ON THE CIVIL PLAN REVIEW, THIS WOULD TAKE EFFECT.

THEY ARE DOING ON-SITE DETENTION. THEY ARE GOING BACK TO THE PREDEVELOPED FLOW. WE ARE SAYING WE WANT YOU TO REDUCE THAT LESS THAN THE PREDEVELOPED FLOW.

>> SO BASICALLY, WE HAVE BEEN DOING MORE ON SITE DETENTION THINGS. THIS WOULD REALLY GO INTO A LOT OF ANALYSIS AND

[2025-377 Consider and act upon the appointment of members to the stakeholder focus group for the Design Overlay for the Downtown District project.]

EVALUATION OF NEW PRODUCT. >> YES, SIR. A LOT OF THIS THEY ARE DOING BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING BECAUSE WITHIN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, AND IT IS STANDARD ACROSS THE

METROPLEX. >> THEY ARE DOING FIVE

CATEGORIES. >> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE BY RODGERS, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO THROW OUR NEIGHBORS A BONE AND SKIP AHEAD AND HANDLE ITEM 2025-377 AND THAT IS THE TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE STAKEHOLDER FOCUS GROUP FOR THE DESIGN OVERLAY FOR THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT PROJECT. I WANT TO TAKE THAT ON SO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO LEAVE CAN LEAVE. OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE WELCOME TO STAY BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THAT AND GO ABOUT YOUR EVENING, THE COUNCIL APPROVED A DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISCUSSION.

>> FIRST MEETING WILL BE DECEMBER 3.

>> FIRST MEETING IS DECEMBER 3. AT A RECENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, WE PUT TOGETHER THE IDEA OF HAVING A CITIZENS STAKEHOLDER FOCUS GROUP TO GIVE US ADVICE AS WE GO THROUGH THAT

[01:35:07]

PROCESS. OBVIOUSLY, THERE WILL BE MULTIPLE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FOR THOSE ON THE COMMITTEE AND THOSE NOT ON THE COMMITTEE THAT ARE IN THE COMMUNITY AND WANTING TO PARTICIPATE. WE ARE LOOKING FOR BROADCAST INFORMATION AND RECEIVED LOTS OF FEEDBACK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THROUGH THE PROCESS. WE HAD 66 APPLICANTS APPLY FOR THE APPOINTMENTS. THE COUNCIL MADE THE RECOMMENDATION TO SPLIT IT UP INTO A GROUP OF 12, SPLIT UP A THIRD, THIRD, THIRD. A THIRD LIVES OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, A THIRD LIVES WITHIN DOWNTOWN AND THE OTHER THIRD ARE BUSINESS OWNERS WITHIN DOWNTOWN.

SO THAT'S THE OVERVIEW OF THIS DISCUSSION. TAMMY, DID ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS? NO SPEAKERS. I WILL GIVE YOU THE NAME THAT I'M MAKING RECOMMENDATION OF FOR THIS EVENING FOR APPROVAL OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. IN THE LIVES OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, WE HAVE ASHLEY DAVIS, CHRISTINA CHAMBERS, JIMMY MCCLURE, RYAN MASON. THE LIVES WITHIN DOWNTOWN GROUP IS BUBY WURLY, MELISSA PELGRAM, EARL JONES. THE BUSINESS OWNERS IN DOWNTOWN ARE RENEE COOK, STEVEN HAD, PAM LONG AND CHARLENE CARREIRAS. THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO APPLIED BUT WE TRIED TO PUT TOGETHER A BALANCED APPROACH TO THIS SUBCOMMITTEE. SO WITH THAT I WILL ENTERTAIN A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NAMES I'M PUTTING FORTH TONIGHT. IF THERE IS ANY DISCUSSION TO BE HAD REGARDING THOSE NAMES OR THE ENTIRE PROCESS. NO COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? THEN I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

[2025-375 Consider and act upon awarding a bid to GLC Roofing Systems to build a 3600 sq. ft. accessory building located directly behind Fire Station 2 at a cost of $393,512.67 with a $30,000 contingency for a total cost of $423,512,67. ]

MOTION TO APPROVE BY RODGERS, SECONDED BY SHEFFIELD. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-0. JUST AS A NOTE FOR THOSE URNAME CALLED, YOU WILL RECEIVE COMMUNICATIONS IN THE COMING DAYS IN THE CITY TO TRY TO GET THOSE DATES ON THE CALENDAR. ALSO, I WILL REITERATE THAT THE ENTIRETY OF THE COMMUNITY IS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE AND GIVE FEEDBACK AT ALL O OF THE OPEN MEETINGS. I THANK EVERYONE FOR APPLYING, ALL 66 OF YOU.

>> BOUNCING BACK TO ITEM 2025374 -- THAT'S THE ONE WE ARE SKIPPING. THAT ITEM HAS BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION. THEN WE WILL GO TO 2025-375. CONSIDER AN ACT UPON AWARDING A BID TO GLC ROOFING SYSTEMS TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY BUILDING LOCATED BEHIND FIRE STATION 2 AT A COST OF 393, 512.67 WITH A $30,000 CONTINGENCY FOR A TOTAL OF 423, 512.67.

>> GOOD EVENING . BEFORE YOU TONIGHT WE HAVE I'M ASKING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE AWARDING OF A NEW ACCESSORY BUILDING BEHIND FIRE STATION 2. THIS BUILDING WILL ALLOW US TO PROTECT OUR GROWING ROLLING STOCK IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. WE ARE GOING TO BE EXPANDING THAT WHEN WE TAKE DELIVERY OF OUR NEW LADDER TRUCK AND NEW ENGINE THAT WILL REPLACE THE ENGINE 3. WE WILL HOLD THE EXISTING LADDER TRUCK AND RESERVE STATUS AS WELL AS THE ENGINE THAT IS CURRENTLY RUNNING OUT OF FIRE STATION NUMBER 3 WHICH WILL GIVE US TWO ENGINES AND A LADDER TRUCK TO BACK UP OUR FLEET. WE WILL ENSURE THAT WE NEVER HAVE TO BORROW APPARATUS FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES WHEN OURS ARE BEING REPAIRED OR SERVICED. THIS PROCESS HAS TAKEN A WHILE. WE DID GO THROUGH A SEALED BID ADVERTISEMENT ON THIS. WE HAD FOUR BIDDERS. GLC WAS THE LOW BID AT $393,512. WE HAD A TAX NOTE THAT WAS APPROVED IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET THAT CARRIED OVER. OBVIOUSLY, THE CURRENT BUDGET DOES NOT ALLOW FOR COVERING THE EXISTING BID. WE HAVE $45,000 THAT WE ARE EXPECTING TO SAVE AS WE CLOSE OUT THE ACCESSORY BUILDING THAT IS BEING BUILT BEHIND STATION BUILDING NUMBER 3. THAT SHOULD BE DONE IN THE NEXT TWO TO THREE WEEKS. THE ESD HAS EXPRESSED DESIRE TO HELP IN THE PROCESS AND PARTICIPATE. THEY WOULD