[008 Consider and act upon a request for a Final Plat of Bridgewater Phase 2A-1, being 48.873± acres out of the WM Lick Survey, Abstract No. 620. Generally located on the east side of Park Vista Way and south of Timberdrift Street. (FP09-2025-106)]

>> THAT PASSES 7-0. WE HAVE ONE STEPPING OUT, RECUSING THEMSELVES FOR ITEM 008.

CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT OF BRIDGEWATER PHASE 2 A- 1 BEING 48. 873 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES OUT OF THE WM LICK SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 620, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PARK VISTA WAY AND SOUTH OF TIMBERDRIFT STREET FP 09-2025-106. DO I HEAR A MOTION?

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVEAPPROVE 8 AS

PRESENTED. >> DO I HEAR A SECOND? PLEASE VOTE.

[00:10:09]

>> ITEM PASSES 7- 0. THAT'S THE ORIGINAL ONE.

YEP. TRY AGAIN.

PLEASE VOTE. THERE YOU GO. ITEM PASSES 6-0 WITH ONE ABSENCE. ALL RIGHT.

[009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an amendment to the City of Midlothian Comprehensive Plan and Thoroughfare Map reclassifying the segment of Hayes Road from its intersection with FM 1387 to its future extension and intersection with U.S. Highway 287 from Existing/Proposed Major Collector (80’ ROW) to Existing/Proposed Minor Thoroughfare /Arterial (90’ ROW). (C01-2025-109)]

WE'LL MOVE ONTO THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ITEM 009, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON THOROUGHFARE MAP RECLASSIFYING THE SEGMENT OF HAYES ROAD FROM ITS FROM OF FM 1387 TO ITS FUTURE EXTENSION AND INTERSECTION WITH US HIGHWAY 287 FROM EXISTING PROPOSED MAJOR COLLECTOR 80- FOOT RIGHT-OF- WAY TO AN EXISTING PROPOSED MINOR THOROUGHFARE ARTERIAL 90 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. C 01-2025-109.

>> CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS, THIS REQUEST IS AT THE REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR SOUTH HAYES ROADROAD FM 1387 TO US HIGHWAY 287.

THE PORTION THAT IS FROM 1387 TO HAYES CROSSING PHASE ONE, THAT IS AN EXISTING MAJOR COLLECTOR, WHICH IS 80 FEET WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THEN FROM HAYES CROSSING TO HIGHWAY 287, THAT'S A PROPOSED MAJOR COLLECTOR, 80- FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SEGMENT TO EXISTING PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL WITH 90 FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO THIS IS SHOWING THE PORTION THAT IS IN PLACE FROM 1387 TO HAYES CROSSING, WHICH IS JUST SOUTH OF STONE LANE. THE PORTION THAT'S PROPOSED, THAT WOULD BE IN THE DASH LINE, IS SOUTH OF STONE LANE DOWN TO U.S. 287. AND THIS IS A PROPOSED ALIGNMENT. IT WILL NOT BE FINALIZED UNTIL THE TIME THAT IT ISIS DEVELOPED. AND THEN WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THE RIGHT, THAT WILL BE WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE WHEN IT IS ACTED UPON. SO THIS DOES MEET SEVERAL COP PLAN GOALS AND STRATEGIES TO TMR TO LEVERAGE MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS AND PLAN FOR IN ADVANCE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TM- 5 TO PRIORITIZE IMPROVEMENTS SO WE CAN DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT PERFORMANCE MEASURES, AND THEN WE CONTINUALLY ASSESS TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON MAJOR STREETS, WHICH FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA WALNUT GROVE IS CURRENTLY AT 12,000 TRIPS PER DAY. AND WE ANTICIPATE THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE. SO THIS WOULD GIVE SOME NORTH TO SOUTH CONNECTIVITY FOR THE AREA.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO ONE THOROUGHFARE IN THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN OF THE COP PLAN TO RECLASSIFY HAYES ROAD SOUTH FROM A MAJOR COLLECTOR TO A MINOR ARTERIAL.

STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> CAN YOU IDENTIFY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MAJOR ARTERIAL AND THE MINOR COLLECTOR -- MAJOR COLLECTOR AND MINOR ARTERIAL, LIKE, HOW WIDE IS THE ROAD? I UNDERSTAND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE RIGHT-OF-WAY GOING TO A MINOR, BUT HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD

ITSELF? >> WELL, THE SEGMENTS HAVE DIFFERENT DESIGN CRITERIA, AND THEY'RE NOT DESIGNED AT THIS TIME, SO IT COULD CHANGE. BUT THE DIFFERENT DESIGN CRITERIA CAN INCLUDE NUMBER OF LANES, WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A TURN LANE, THE DISTANCE FROM INTERSECTING ROADWAYS. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CRITERIA THAT CHANGE WITH GOING FROM A COLLECTOR TO ANAN ARTERIAL.

>> SO IF WALNUT GROVE IS ALREADYALREADY AT 12,000 TRIPS A DAY, IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, AND WE KNOW BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST TO THE SOUTH OF HAYESHAYES CROSSING, WOULD BE US TAKING AA BACK?

>> TAKING A STEP BACK?

>> YEAH. KNOWING THAT WE

[00:15:02]

HAVE SIGNIFICANTSIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THAT'S THE BACKSIDE OF BRIDGEWATER, WOULDN'T WE WANT IT TO BE BUILT AS A MAJOR COLLECTOR.

>> THE MAJOR MINOR IS WHAT'S CONFUSING. THERE'S A MAJOR COLLECTOR AND A MINOR COLLECTOR AND A MAJOR ARTERIAL AND A MINOR ARTERIAL.

THE ARTERIALS HANDLE MORE CAPACITY THAN THE

COLLECTORS. >> SO THIS WILL BE BUILT TO HANDLE MORE THAN A COLLECTOR?

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT

EXPLANATION. >> OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK? OKAY. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE

THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC÷÷ DO I HEAR A SECOND? PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 7-0. DO I HEAR ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS PUBLIC HEARING HEARING 009? IF NOT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO -- I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> DO I HEAR A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT. HAVING HEARD A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND, PLEASE VOTE.

>> DID IT NOT TAKE? ALL RIGHT. PLEASE VOTE.

[010 Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend the regulations relating to the use and development of Lot 13, Block 5, Milligan Addition, from Commercial (C) District to Urban Village Planned Development District No. 189 (UVPD-189) for single family residential use. The property is located at 215 West Avenue B. (Z33-2025-087)]

ITEM PASSES 7-0. MOVE ONTO ITEM 10.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A REQUEST TO AMEND THETHE RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOT 13, BLOCK 5, MILLIGAN ADDITION FROMFROM COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO URBAN VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 179 FOR SINGLE USE FAMILY PROPERTY LOCATED AT 215 WEST AVENUE B.

Z33-2025-087. >> CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS, THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM COMMERCIAL TO UV PLAN DEVELOPMENT 189 FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE WITH A BASE ZONING OF SINGLE FAMILY FOUR. THE SITE IS . 1 ACRE WHICH IS 37. 5 BY 115 FEET. IT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

THE GUIDING REACH MIDLOTHIAN 2435 SHOWS THE ENTIRE AREA AROUND IT AS ORIGINAL TOWN, WHICH ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL AND NON- NON-RESIDENTIAL USES TO COEXIST.

IT IS PARTIALLY COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES.

THIS IS THE PROPERTY RIGHT HERE. TO THE NORTH IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT IS ZONED R-3.

RESIDENTIAL 3 WAS THE COMMON RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR THIS AREA. IT IS AN INACTIVE ZONING DISTRICT. TO THE EAST THERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT IS ZONED NORTH 8TH STREET.

NORTH 8TH STREET IS A DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS BOTH NON- RESIDENTIAL AND EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES.

TO THE SOUTH IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

THAT'S ACTUALLY ZONED COMMERCIAL.

AND TO THE WEST IS COMMERCIAL, AND IT'S AN INDOOR GYM.

SO IT'S PARTIALLY CONSISTENT. THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH.

THERE ARE SOME TO THE EAST, BUT THEY'RE NON-CONFORMING.

THIS IS A SIDE. IT KIND OF SHOWS THE WAY THIS AREA IS CHECKERED AMONG DIFFERENT ZONING CATEGORIES. IT DOES MEET SOME OF OUR CRITERIA FOR THETHE PLAN.

[00:20:05]

WE LIKE TO HAVE THE LOTS DEVELOP IN COMPATIBLE AND MEANINGFUL WAYS. SO THAT DOES ALLOW FOR SMALL SCALE INFILL DEVELOPMENTS IF IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA AND ALSO ENCOURAGE A BALANCE OF LAND USES AND÷÷ ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL TO BE IN PROXIMITY TO COMMERCIAL USES. SO THE -- AS I SAID, THE ORIGINAL ZONING WAS R-3. THAT'S REALLY THE CLOSEST TO WHAT IT ACTUALLY IS. SO WE HAD TO LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS.

THERE ARE TWO VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED.

THEY'RE WANTING TO HAVE VEHICULAR ENTRY FROM THE FRONT OF THE SITE AND NOT FROM THE ALLEY.

THEY'LL GIVE THE REASONS FOR THAT. THEY'RE WANTING TO LIMIT TURNING MOVEMENT ON AVENUE B AND THEY SAY THERE ARE OBSTRUCTIONS TO ACCESSING FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

AND THEN THE OTHER ONE IS THAT THEY WANT TO PUT THE GARAGE IN FRONT OF THE PORCH. SO THE GARAGE SHOULD SET BACK A MINIMUM OF FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE OR THE PORCH AND BE A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO WHILE THE HOUSES ALONG NORTH 7TH STREET DO HAVE DRIVEWAYS AND FRONT DOORS THAT FRONT 7TH STREET, THE FRONT PORCHES ARE CLOSER TO THE STREET THAN ANY OF THE ONES THAT HAVE GARAGES. SO THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALL HOUSES IN THIS AREA, AND THEY HAVE CARPORTS AND ENCLOSED GARAGES. SOME OF THEM HAVE DETACHED GARAGES. BUT THEY ARE NOT IN FRONT OF THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE. STAFF SUPPORTS THE FIRST VARIANCE, BUT NOT THE SECOND VARIANCE. SO FRONT PORCHES THAT ARE FULLY COVERED AND HAVE A MINIMUM DEPTH OF SEVEN FEET MAY ENCROACH TEN FEET INTO THE FRONT SETBACK.

SO THIS COULD EASILY BE REDESIGNED TO PROJECT THE FRONT PORCH OUT TO THE FRONT. SO THE APPLICANT SAID THAT HE HAS NOT FINALIZED THE FLOOR PLAN AND THE ELEVATIONS. SO THESE ARE THE CRITERIA THAT HE OFFERED FOR THE ELEVATIONS. HE PROVIDED AN EXAMPLE ELEVATION, WHICH SHOWS THE GARAGE IN FRONT OF THE PORCH.

AND SO STAFF WOULD EITHER LIKE HIM TO AMEND THE ELEVATION OR JUST REMOVE EXHIBIT D. TO THE NORTH, I WENT AHEAD AND TOOK A COUPLE OF PICTURES. TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE FRONT PORCHES THAT ARE IN FRONT OF THE FRONT FACADE.

AND TO THE SOUTH THERE ARE SOME GARAGES.

HOWEVER, THEY'RE ON THE SIDE YARD AND NOT PROJECTING INTO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.

SO 18 POSTCARDS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET.

TO DATE, STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SINCE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, PARTIALLY COMPATIBLE SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES AND CONSISTENT WITH COMP PLAN POLICIES. HOWEVER, STAFF SUPPORTS THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW FRONT ENTRY.

HOWEVER, DOES NOT SUPPORT THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE GARAGE TO PROJECT IN FRONT OF THE FRONT PORCH AND FRONT FACADE.

SO THAT WOULD MEAN THAT EXHIBIT D WOULD EITHER NEED TO BE REVISED OR ELIMINATED TO MEET THE STANDARD. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> I HAVE A COUPLE. ON THE SITE THERE'S A HANDFUL OF TREES THAT ARE AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. ARE THEY STAYING, OR ARE THEY BEING REMOVED? DO WE HAVE A TREE MITIGATION PLAN IN THE CITY? ARE THEY WORTH SAVING?

>> I DON'T THINK -- I THINK YOU'RE SEEING THE

SHADOW. >> I WAS OUT THERE THIS

MORNING. >> OH, YOU WERE OUT THERE THIS MORNING? OKAY.

I'LL LET THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD. I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT. CAN I LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT QUESTION?

>> EXCUSE ME. COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME.

>> ALAN.

HERE ABOUT 40 YEARS. WE'VE DONE 19 PROJECTS IN YOURYOUR AREA. ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, THE 35 FEET, THERE IS A UTILITY POLE, GUY WIRE, WATER METER,

[00:25:04]

A GAS MAIN AND A SEWER MAIN HOLE.

I CAN'T COME IN THE BACK, SO ALL THAT STAYS.

>> SO WE'RE NOT ALLOWING ANY ACCESS FROM THE ALLEY? IT'S JUST GOING TO BE FENCED

OFF, NO GATES? >> RIGHT.

>> THIS IS CONSIDERED OLD TOWN, CORRECT? DO WE HAVE SPECIFIC DESIGN STANDARDS FOR BEING IN OLD TOWN?

>> WE DO NOT. THE GENERAL PLAN HAS JUST SUGGESTIONS OF ABOUT TYPOLOGIES BUT NOT SOMETHING WE CAN

ENFORCE. >> THE URBAN VILLAIN HAS VILLAGE HAS BEEN PRESENTED ABOUT TEN DIFFERENT WAYS IN THE PAST. WE DISAGREE A LITTLE BIT. WE STARTED THIS PROJECT ABOUT NINE MONTHS AGO. IT TAKES SOME TIME TO GET THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING WITH ALL THE UTILITIES AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND EVERYTHING.

IF I BRING THE PORCH UP AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A CRACKER BOX, I DON'T WANT THAT. EVERYBODY THAT IS SOUTH OF ME, NO ONE HAS A GARAGE.

EVERYBODY JUST PARKS IN THEIR FRONT YARD.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS WOULD LOOK GOOD. IT WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE CORNER. IF YOU TURN THE CORNER AND LOOKLOOK THROUGH THERE, YOU WOULD SEE A NEW LITTLE HOUSE ON THE CORNER. THE FENCE WOULD BE ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. I THINK.

CRACKER BOX FOR THAT. SO MY DRIVEWAY IN THE FRONT WOULD BE INCONSISTENT BECAUSE NO ONE HAS A DRIVEWAY SOUTH OF ME. WE DO HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH ENCORE TO SET AN ADDITIONAL POLE AND ADDITIONAL TRANSFORMER FOR THOSE HOUSES BEYOND ME, BECAUSE ALL SIX OF THEM RIGHT NOW ARE BASICALLY ON THE SAME TRANSFORMER. THERE'S BEEN NO UPGRADES THROUGH THERE. SO WE STARTED THAT BACK IN JULY ON A PLAN TO REEVALUATE THE TRANSFORMERS. THAT'S ALL BEING TAKEN CARE OF AT NO CHARGE FROM ENCORE JUST BECAUSE THIS PROJECT KIND OF TRIGGERED THAT.

REUSED TO WE USED TO HAVE A HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY THAT GOT TORN DOWN. WE HAVE OUR WATER METER AND SEWER. IT'S A COMMERCIAL UMBRELLA THAT JUST KIND OF CAUGHT THAT LOT ON DOWNTOWN. IT'S TOO SMALL TO PUT AA ON. I JUST NEED TO FLIP BACK SO WE CAN BUILD A LITTLE HOUSE THERE. THANK Y'ALL.

>> ALAN, I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> STAFF IS SUGGESTING THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COVERED FRONT

PORCH. >> I HAVE A COVERED FRONT PORCH.

IT'S JUST SET BACK NOT LEVEL -- IT'S JUST SET BACK FURTHER THAN THE FRONT OF THE

GARAGE. >> WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO MAKE THAT COVERED FRONT PORCH A LITTLE BIT BIGGER?

>> IT WOULD LOOK STUPID, BUT I WOULD DO

IT. >> NOT BRINGING IT ALL THE WAY UP, BUT MAYBE ABOUT HALFWAY OVER THE

GARAGE. >> I WOULD.

WHAT THAT'S GOING TO CREATE, THEN YOU WALK IN THE FRONT DOOR, IT'S GOING TO CREATE A TUNNEL YOU HAVE TO WALK DOWN.

THE HOUSE IS KIND OF NARROW ANYWAY.

IT'S GOING TO CREATE A SIX FOOT BY 15 FOOT TUNNEL THAT YOU HAVE TO WALK THROUGH TO THE LIVING ROOM. IT'S NOT GOING TO GIVE OPEN CONCEPT. I'LL PULL IT UP IF I NEED TO.

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT REALLY CAVERNOUS.

>> WHEN YOU LOOK FROM THE CORNER YOU SEE A FENCE, HALF OF THE HOUSE, THE DOOR, THE REST OF THE LANDSCAPE AND THE GARAGE KIND OF CURVES AROUND.

I WOULD PULL IT UP. IT WOULD JUST MAKE IT LOOK MORE LIKE A CRACKER BOX. I WOULD DO IT IF I HAVE

TO. >> WHAT I WAS ENVISIONING IS THE VIEW FROM AVENUE B NOT NECESSARILY BEING AN ENCLOSED PORCH, BUT YOU KNOW, AT LEAST A SIX TO EIGHT-FOOT WIDE PORCH SO YOU CAN HAVE A COUPLE OF CHAIRS.

>> BRING THE ROOF DOWN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER?

>> YES. >> I WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT. I MIGHT EVEN COULD PUT HAND RAIL DOWN THROUGH THERE.

>> WELL, THE FRONT DOOR -- EVEN PUT A HANDRAIL DOWN THROUGH THERE.

>> I MEAN, YOU COULD. I'M JUST THINKING IF YOU WANTED TO COME OUT AND SIT ON THE PORCH AND YOU HAD ENOUGH SPACE TO AT LEAST PUT A COUPLE OF CHAIRS AND TABLE AND ENJOY YOUR MORNING COFFEE.

>> WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE A PRETTY GOOD SIZED BACK PORCH AND PRIVACY FENCE PUT IN SO THEY HAVE A LITTLE PRIVACY BACK THERE

TOO. >> I'M OKAY WITH NOT HAVING THE ALLEY ACCESS, BECAUSE THAT ALLEY ISN'T REALLY UTILIZED.

WOULD THAT BE A FAIR STATEMENT?

>> YEAH. THERE'S ONE PERSON THAT USES IT. BUT BECAUSE OF THE UTILITIES I CAN'T ACCESS IT.

>> OKAY.

>> THEY WON'T TAKE THE GUY WIRE DOWN EITHER.

[00:30:01]

IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

>> OKAY.

>> THANK Y'ALL.

>> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> YEAH. MR. MCKIVER, WHAT IS THE DOOR ON THE GARAGE?

>> WE HAVEN'T SET THAT DESIGN STANDARD YET. I'M UPUP WHATEVER.

IT WOULD BE A WOOD GARAGE DOOR.

>> YEAH. >> THAT WOULD BE A GOOD TRADEOFF FOR HAVING THE CURRENT PLAN, CORRECT?

>> TRUE. THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> SINCE MY MICROPHONE IS ON, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> DO I HEAR A SECOND? PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 7-0.

DO I HEAR OTHER DISCUSSION? ANY MOTIONS? ANY DISCUSSION?

>> I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. I'M JUST LOOKING BACK AT THE VARIANCES HERE. TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED AND ALLOW BOTH VARIANCES, IF I'M SAYING THIS CORRECTLY, TO NOT HAVE THE ALLEY ACCESS AND TO ALLOW THE GARAGE TO BE IN FRONT OF THE PORCH.

>> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

[011 Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend the development and use regulations of Planned Development District No. 171 (PD-171). The property is generally located on the north side of State Spur 73 and east of the intersection of US Highway 67 with US Highway 287. (Z38-2025-097)]

>> PASSES 7-0. ITEM 011.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 171. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STATE SPUR 73 AND EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF US HIGHWAY 67 67 US HIGHWAY 287. Z38-2025-097.

>> OKAY. THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ADDRESS PHASE TWO BY ADDING IN EXHIBIT THAT DEFINES IT AND ADJUST DEVELOPMENT USE REGULATIONS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 171 FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL USES.

THE SITE IS OVERALL 71. 737 ACRES WITH PHASE TWO BEINGBEING 23. 9 ACRES.

THE PROPERTY IS PARTIALLY DEVELOPED. IT'S DEVELOPED TO THE NORTH AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CREEK NICOLETTE CREEK ROAD IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE. THE COMP PLAN DEFINES THIS PROPERTY AS REGIONAL MODULE, WHICH IS DESIGNED TO CREATE AN URBAN STYLE MIXED COMMERCIAL AREA ALONG ARTERIAL AND REGIONAL THOROUGHFARES. LEFT IS A ZONING MAP, A FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE STRIPED AREA IS A CONSERVATION DISTRICT. HOWEVER, THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS IN THE REGIONAL MODULE. SO TO THE NORTH, YOU HAVE PHASE ONE OF PD 171 AND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT YOU HAVE TWO PLAN DEVELOPMENTS WITH A BASE ZONING OF COMMUNITY RETAIL.

EXISTING LAND USES ARE COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, OFFICE AND RESTAURANTS. THIS IS ALSO PART OF THE TO THE SOUTH, SOUTH OF SPUR 73 IS PD 4.

THERE'S SOME UNDEVELOPED LAND THERE AND DUPLEXES AND MULTIFAMILY. THAT'S PART OF THE NEW TOWN MODULE. TO THE EAST IS MEDIUM DENSITY ONE AND COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS UNDEVELOPED. THAT'S PART OF THE REGIONAL MODULE AS WELL. TO THE WEST ACROSS THE HIGHWAY YOU HAVE MORE REGIONAL MODULE. PD 179 IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF HIGHWAY 67. SO THE GOALS THAT THIS MEETS ENSURE THAT MIDLOTHIAN SHORT AND LONG- TERM FINANCIAL STABILITY WITH FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOCUS ON MAJOR THOROUGHFARES AS IMPORTANT ENTRIES, PRIORITIZE DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECTS THAT ENHANCE THE HEALTH OF DRAINAGE WAYS SO THEY ARE PRESERVING THE CREEK FLOODPLAIN AND ADDING TRAILS AND AMENITIES.

[00:35:01]

SO THIS IS THE PHASE TWO EXHIBIT.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S ANOTHER LARGE FORMAT STORE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, RETAIL AND RESTAURANT TO THE NORTH OF THAT AND ANOTHER JUNIOR ANCHOR TO THE WEST, WHICH I BELIEVE IS WHERE THE FITNESS FACILITY WILL BE LOCATED. THE÷÷ THOROUGHFARE PLAN SHOWS MAIN STREET AND THE SURROUNDING HIGHWAYS AS MAJOR ARTERIALS. NICOLETTE CREEK IS A MAJOR COLLECTOR. THE TIA WAS DONE WITH THE ORIGINAL ZONING REQUEST. THIS ZONING WAS APPROVED JANUARY 9TH OF 2024. SO THE OVERALL CONCEPT PLANPLAN CREATED IN 2024.

SO THIS IS NOT A PICTURE OF THE SITE.

IT'S JUST TO GIVE AN IDEA. THEY WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO PRESERVE THE CREEK AREA AND UTILIZE IT AS AN AMENITY.

THE FITNESS FACILITY WILL INCLUDE AN OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREA. THIS IS DEFINED AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO THE FITNESS HEALTH CENTER.

IT WILL BE LOCATED IN AN ENCLOSED AREA THAT HAS SCREENS TO PROVIDE THE EFFECT OF AN OUTDOOR EXPERIENCE. CREEK WILL HAVE ZERO SETBACK SO WE'RE NOT PUTTING ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE UP AGAINST THE CREEK OR WALLS. IT WILL MAXIMIZE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE CREEK AN AMENITY. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

THEY ARE ASKING FOR ONE VARIANCE ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTIES. THERE ARE A LOT OF EASEMENTS THERE. I'LL LET THEM MAKE THEIR ARGUMENTS.

THERE IS AN AREA THAT IS BETWEEN THE PROPERTY AND THE BRIDGE. IT'S ACTUALLY BRIDGE IN THIS LOCATION. IT'S NOT HEAVILY WOODED, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF VEGETATION IN THAT AREA.

SO THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN IT'S MOWED.

SO THE PERIMETER FENCING LANDSCAPING WILL CONFORM WITH EXHIBIT E. THE ELEVATIONS WILL CONFORM WITH THE ORIGINAL PD 171 STANDARDS EXCEPT FOR THE LARGE FORMAT RETAIL STORE. THEY'LL SUBMIT THEIR ELEVATIONS WITH THEIR DETAILED SITE PLAN. THE DETAILED SITE PLAN MAY BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED WITH THE SAME CRITERIA THAT WERE APPROVED WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

OFF- STREET PARKING WILL CONFORM TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, EXCEPT THEY HAVE 125% LIMIT THAT FOR RESTAURANT USES THEY'LL BE ALLOWED TO ADD 20 SPACES PER THOUSAND SQUARE FEET FOR THE RESTAURANT USES AND SEVEN SPACES PER THOUSAND SQUARE FEET FOR THE FITNESS HEALTH CENTER. THE OTHER VARIANCES, THEY WOULD LIKE A VARIANCE NOT TO PROVIDE STREET TREES ALONG US HIGHWAY 67 SERVICE ROAD, AND THEY HAVE A COUPLE OF SIGN VARIANCES. THIS IS THEIR UNIFIED SIGNAGE PLAN. THEY'RE NOT MAKING CHANGES TO PHASE ONE. ON PHASE TWO -- I'M NOT SEEING IT. MAYBE -- YEAH, IT'S THERE.

OKAY. SO IT'S VERY LIGHT. BUT THIS IS THE DASHED AREA IS A ZONE WHERE THE SIGN COULD GO, AND THERE'S ONE HERE AS WELL.

SO THERE'S A DASH LINE HERE AS WELL.

SO EXHIBIT C- 1 WILL REPLACE EXHIBIT C IN THE ORDINANCE, MAKING NO CHANGES TO PHASE ONE.

THE PYLON SIGNS P 4 AND P 2 MAY BE LOCATED ANYWHERE ALONG THE ZONE SHOWN ON THE PLAN. THERE'S A VARIANCE FOR P 4 FOR THE SIGN HEIGHT.

THEY WOULD LIKE A 70 FOOT TALL SIGN ALONG THE HIGHWAY 67 SERVICE ROAD.

A STAFF MEMBER WENT AND TOOK SOME PICTURES AND DID SOME ESTIMATES. STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE HIGHWAY IS 25 FEET ABOVE THE GRADE AT THAT POINT. SO THAT WOULD PUT THE SIGN 45 OVER THE GRADE. STAFF WOULD LIKE THEM TO REDUCE THE VARIANCE BY 15 FEET, MAKING IT A 55 FOOT TALL SIGN.

THE SIGNS WILL BE ILLUMINATED JUST LIKE THE SIGNS ARE ILLUMINATED FOR PHASE ONE.

SO 14 POSTCARDS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY -- 17 POSTCARDS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SITE.

TO DATE, STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY CORRESPONDENCE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BECAUSE IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES CONSISTENT WITH COMP PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE AND

[00:40:03]

POLICIES. STAFF SUPPORTS THE PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND ILLUMINATED SIGN VARIANCES, BUT NOT THE VARIANCE FOR THE P 4 PYLON SIGN HEIGHT. STAFF RECOMMENDS 55 FEET IN HEIGHT.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> DODO KNOW HOW HIGH THE LOVE SIGN IS OVER

THERE? >> I KNEW YOU WERE GOING TO ASK ME THAT, AND I MEANT TO CHECK.

I DON'T WANT TO GUESS. I KNOW THAT IT'S LIKE INCREDIBLY TALL, LIKE PROBABLY IN THE 70 FOOT TALL HEIGHT. I BET THE APPLICANT KNOWS.

>> YEAH.

THEY JUST HAD IT A COUPLE YEARS AGO.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> ON SPUR 73, ARE THEY REQUIRED TO UPDATE THAT ROAD AT ALL?

>> YES. SO THEY CURRENTLY HAVE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THEY'RE GOING TO BRING IN REVISIONS. WHAT THEY'VE BEEN ASKED TO DO IS PROVIDE ACCELERATION, DECELERATION LANES ON THAT.

THEY CAN PROBABLY GIVE YOU MORE DETAIL ON THAT, BUT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO IMPROVE IT.

>> PERFECT. ALSO, I NOTICE ON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN WE'VE GOT A HIGHER DENSITY OF TREES ALONG NICOLETTE VERSUS SPUR 73.

IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THAT, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN EXTEND DOWN SPUR 73? I JUST IMAGINE THAT -- GOING EAST ON 73, THAT PROPERTY IS GOING TO START BUILDING UP, SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE IT AS --

>> I THINK YOU CAN ASK THE APPLICANT ON THAT. I BELIEVE WHAT THE GOAL WAS IS THERE ARE EXISTING TREES THERE. THIS IS IF YOU WERE TO PUT TREE THERE IS MEETING THE 40 ON CENTER STANDARD AND THIS IS CLUSTERING LIKE IF YOU WERE TO SPREAD THEM OUT, BUT I DON'T REALLY KNOW THE QUALITY OF THESE TREES.

I BET THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE

APPLICANT. >> OKAY.

ARE WE REQUIRING THEM TOTO STABILIZE CREEK AT ALL? BECAUSE THERE'S SOME MAJOR EROSION

RIGHT NOW. >> YES.

WE WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO DO THAT.

SO IF WE HAVEN'T ALREADY ASKED

WE'LL CHECK INTO IT FOR YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

>> DOES THE APPLICANT HERE WISH TO SPEAK? STATE YOUR NAME.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JOHN WEBER.

I'M THE DEVELOPER FOR MAIN STREET TOWN CROSSING. APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU IN THE NEW CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS.

WITH THAT SAID, WE ARE NOW WORKING ON OUT OF THE FIRST PORTION OF A TWO- STEP PROCESS. THIS WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE FOR THE ZONING. I DO HAVE A PARTICULAR USER IN MIND WHO HAS CONTACTED ME AND I'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK WITH. IT WOULD BE AN EIGHT OR TEN MONTH PROCESS. THIS FIRST STEP IS ABOUT GETTING THE BASE ENTITLEMENTS AND THE USE ALLOWED FOR THEM.

I'LL BE BACK IN SHORTLY FOR THE DETAILED ELEVATIONS AND SITE PLAN, WHERE I'M SURE YOU MAY HAVE EVEN MORE QUESTIONS. I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AT THAT TIME. TODAY OUR REQUEST IS SPECIFICALLY ON SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT MARY HIT ON. I WILL SAY THAT I'LL HIT THE MOST OBVIOUS ONE ON THE SIGNAGE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING 55 FEET.

THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION I'D BE WILLING TO ACCEPT.

IF YOU SAW TO APPROVE THAT. I THINK WE STARTED AT 70 FEET.

YOU LOOK AT THE SIGN, AND IT DOES LOOK PRETTY TALL.

WE DO HAVE THE HEIGHT OF THE 287 BYPASS. AS WE LEARNED ON OUR HARD CORNER PYLON SIGN WHICH WE THOUGHT WAS LARGE, THE GRADES MIGHT HAVE BEEN A LITTLE LOWER THAN WE ANTICIPATED EVEN THOUGH WE WERE LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS.

IT'S ACTUALLY EVEN HARD TO SEE THAT SIGN FROM THE FREEWAY OR MORE IN PARTICULAR WHEN YOU GET OFF THE OFF RAMP COMING SOUTHBOUND ON 67. SO THAT WAS THE GENESIS FOR THIS REQUEST TODAY. WE BELIEVE 55 FEET WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND WOULD ACCOMPLISH OUR OBJECTIVE AND WE'D BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT. AS FOR THE LANDSCAPE, KIND

[00:45:08]

OF THE TWO AREAS WE OR ASKING FOR IS WE DID TRY TO BEEF UP MORE OF THE LANDSCAPE ON THE INTERIOR, THE PARKING LOT AREA. WE DID ASK FOR LESS ALONG THE 67 BYPASS OR THE OFF RAMP, THAT RAMP THERE, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE GRADES. YOU HAVE THIS 25 FOOT SLOPE, AND THERE'S ALMOST NO TREE THAT WE'RE GOING TO PLANT THERE WHICH IS GOING TO HAVE ANY NOTICEABLE EFFECT. OUR THOUGHT PROCESS WAS LET'S PUT THOSE TREES IN AN AREA THAT MIGHT BE BETTER FOR THE FOR DEVELOPMENT. THE AREA ON 73, WE'VE GOT ABOUT AN EIGHT FOOT SLOPE THERE. WE'VE GOT SOME UTILITY EASEMENTS. IF THERE IS A RECOMMENDATION WE COULD PROBABLY ADD A FEW MORE TREES. SOMETIMES YOU LOOK AT THESE PLANS AS YOU SIT UP HERE AND EVEN AFTER YOU SUBMIT THEM YOU SAY, HEY, WE COULD DO A LITTLE BIT BETTER THERE AND MOVE SOME THINGS AROUND. SO WE'D BE OPEN TO THAT.

WE WILL DO A DECEL LANE. THAT IS A TEX DOT ROAD.

OUR ABILITY TO REPAVE IT I'D LOVE TO HAVE. LOOKS A LOT BETTER WHEN THE RETAILERS COME TO TOWN, BUT I CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH.

I BELIEVE UNLESS I'M MISSING ANYTHING ON THE PARKING WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO BUILD ANY MORE PARKING THAN WE HAVE TO. I THINK THE GOAL IS A LOT OF THESE RETAILERS HAVE A SET AMOUNT.

WE'VE GOT SOME RESTAURANTS IN MIND AND AGAIN THE LARGE RETAILER IN PARTICULAR. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.

>> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> ARE WE ALLOWED TO KNOW WHO THE RETAILER IS?

>> I WOULD LOVE TO TELL YOU. I THINK IT WILL BECOME AVAILABLE. THEIR MAIN GOAL IS THAT FOR SOME REASON IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND MAYBE OCTOBER WHEN WE WOULD PLAN ON CLOSING BIG PICTURE AND THEY DIDN'T COME, THEY DON'T WANT TO BE CONSIDERED, YOU KNOW, NOT WANTING TO COME FOR ANY OTHER OTHER THAN THAT. IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THE SHOPPING CENTERS I'VE BUILT, YOU'LL PROBABLY BE ABLE TO PUT IT TOGETHER.

I'LL CONTINUE TO VISIT. WHEN WE COME WITH ELEVATIONS AND DETAILED SITE PLAN.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT. DO I HEAR A MOTION?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> HAVE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 6-0.

FURTHER DISCUSSION? DO I HEAR A

MOTION? >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH THE VARIANCE FORFOR THE HEIGHT TO BE LIMITED TO 55 FEET.

>> ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

[012 Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend the regulations relating to the use and development of a 2.341± acre tract of the John Early Survey Abstract No. 343, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to General Professional (GP) District and incorporating a Specific Use Permit for a daycare use. The property is generally located on Walnut Grove Road north of Pasture View Avenue and south of Clancey. (Z37-2025-096)]

PASSES 6-0. ITEM 12.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A REQUEST TO AMEND THE REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 2. 34 PLUS OR MINUS ACRE TRACT OF THE JOHN EARLY SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 343 BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO GENERALLY PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT AND INCORPORATING SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A DAYCARE USE. THIS PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON WALNUT GROVE ROAD NORTH OF PASTURE VIEW AVENUE AND SOUTH OF CLANCY.

>> GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS. MARIANNE SPENCER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.

THE NEXT ITEM IS A REQUEST TO REZONE A PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL TO GENERAL PROFESSIONAL WITH THE REQUEST TO ADD A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A DAYCARE USE. SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SHOWS THE PROPERTY ASAS MEDIUM DENSITY ITY

[00:50:04]

MODULE AND -- SURROUNDING RESIDENCES. THE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT DOES ALLOW FOR MORE PROFESSIONAL OFFICES AND THE DAYCARE USE WITH THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE GOALS FOR THE LANDLAND NUMBER THREE ENCOURAGE A BALANCE OF LAND USES TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF RESIDENCES THROUGH ACCESSIBLE JOBS AND SERVICES AND TO SUPPORT HORIZONTAL MIXING OF APPROPRIATE USES AND ALL ZONING DISTRICTS.

AND SO THE SITE IS HERE, AND IT'S SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY AND AGRICULTURAL ZONING.

AND THE OTHER GOAL IS TO ALLOW TO DIVERSIFY MIDLOTHIAN'S EMPLOYMENT BASE TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND EXPAND LOCAL JOB OPPORTUNITIES.

AND SO THIS IS THE ZONING MAP. AS YOU CAN SEE TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE AGRICULTURAL ZONING, AND TO THE EAST YOU HAVE AGRICULTURAL AND PLAN DEVELOPMENT 136 WHICH IS BRIDGEWATER.

TO THE SOUTH YOU HAVE PLAN DEVELOPMENT 136 WHICH IS ALSO BRIDGEWATER. AND TO THE WEST YOU HAVE PLAN DEVELOPMENT 127 WHICH IS THE VILLAGES OF WALNUT GROVE AND SOME AGRICULTURAL USE THERE TOO. AND SO THE PROPOSED GENERAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT ALLOWS NON- RESIDENTIAL USES SUCH AS MEDICAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES. AND THE SUP FOR DAYCARE ISIS CONSISTENT WITH ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND -- PLAN SHOWS WALNUT GROVE ROAD AS AN EXISTING MAJOR THOROUGHFARE THAT'S 120 IN WIDTH.

THE PROPOSED DAYCARE FACILITY IS 11,274 SQUARE FEET.

THEY ARE REQUESTING ONE VARIANCE, WHICH IS FOR DRIVEWAY SPACING THAT'S LESS THAN 330 FEET ON A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. SO THEIR PROPOSED DRIVEWAY IS LOCATED ROUGHLY IN HERE ON THIS MAP. AND SO THIS STREET HERE IS 294 FEET AWAY. AND THEIR PROPOSED NORTHERN DRIVE IS ALIGNING WITH THETHE AND CLANCY, SO YOU CAN SEE IT HERE.

HERE'S THAT NORTHERN DRIVE AND HERE'S THAT SOUTHERN DRIVE. THEY'RE PROPOSING TO SHARE IT WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE TRACT OF LAND. AND THEN HERE'S THE ELEVATION.

THEY IMMEDIATE ALL OF OUR ARTICULATION AND MASONRY REQUIREMENTS. AND HERE'S THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING. AND HERE'S THE SIGN, THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND THEIR MASONRY -- SHOWING THE REQUIRED FOUR- INCH CALIPER TREES ON WALNUT GROVE AND EVERGREEN SHRUBSSHRUBS PROPERTIES THAT ARE ZONED AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL. AND THEY DO HAVE THE SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL ALONG THESE TWO SIDES, AND THEY ARE UTILIZING THE EXISTING FENCING FOR THE HOMES ALONG BRIDGEWATER THAT EXIST TODAY. WE SENT 37 POSTCARDS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE. WE RECEIVED NO CORRESPONDENCE, A COUPLE OF CALLS OF INQUIRY. WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL TO GENERAL PROFESSIONAL AND THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE DAYCARE USE.

THE PROPOSED ZONING AND USE ARE COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING, AND THE PROPOSED ZONING AND USE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT HERE ANDAND TO SPEAK?

>> THEY ARE HERE.

>> QUESTIONS OF APPLICANT?

>> HI, DREW WILLIAMS REPRESENTING THE

DEVELOPER. >> YOUR ADDRESS?

>> 4050 WISTERIA HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN.

>> QUESTIONS?

>> LOOKING AT THIS AGENDA ITEM IT SAYS 2. 341 ACRES, BUT THE PROPERTY THAT YOU OWN OR IS OWNED BY ARCA IS ALMOST 12 ACRES.

[00:55:03]

WHAT'S THE INTENT OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND IT?

>> UNDETERMINED. THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN HAD SOME RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, BUT THAT WAS AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF IT WAS EASIER TO CARVE THIS OUT AND LEAVE IT FOR FUTURE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT AG AS IS.

>> OKAY. AS FAR AS BUILDING THE MASONRY WALL, YOU'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND BUILD THAT ALL THE WAY AROUND THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY?

>> CORRECT. YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT THAT THERE MIGHT BE RESIDENTIAL HERE AND THAT MASONRY WALL WOULDN'T BE NEEDED, BUT AS THE CURRENT ORDINANCE STANDS, WE WOULD ENCLOSE ALL THREE SIDES.

>> AND THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE NORTH IS RESIDENCE, THEY'RE OKAY WITH HAVING THAT DRIVEWAY AND PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT?

>> I CAN'T -- I DON'T KNOW.

I WOULDN'T SPEAK FOR THEM. WE'VE TALKED TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS MULTIPLE TIMES. THEY DIDN'T RESPOND TO THE LETTERS THAT WERE SENT OUT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT. MAYBE THEY ARE.

>> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN I'M LOOKING ON THIS, THE HOUSE THAT Y'ALL OWN THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, IS THAT HOUSE GOING TOTO

THERE? >> OH, WE'RE GOING TO DEMOLISH THAT. THAT'S GOING TO BE TORN DOWN.

THE EXISTING HOUSE IS GOING TO BE TORN DOWN.

>> OKAY. SO THEN ON THE NORTH SIDE WHERE THAT CURRENT HOMEHOME IS, STILL NO PLANS FOR THAT EITHER?

>> THAT HOME, I BELIEVE IS INCORPORATED IN THE PROPERTY SITE FOR THE DAYCARE.

I BELIEVE IT'S WITHIN THE -- IT'S OUTSIDE -- NO.

WE WOULD LEAVE IT AGRICULTURAL. WE WOULD TAKE THE HOUSE DOWN, LEAVE IT AGRICULTURE AND CARVE OUT THOSE 2.24 ACRES.

>> OKAY.

>> WE DISCUSSED SOME KIND OF PD FOR ALL 11 ACRES.

IT JUST SEEMED HARDER AND MORE COMPLICATED THAN JUST CARVING THIS OUT FOR NOW AND DEALING WITH THAT AT A FUTURE DATE.

IF THERE'S SOME AMENDMENT WE CAN PUT IN HERE, SOME LANGUAGE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I THINK WE'D BE OPEN TO

THAT. >> OKAY.

AS FAR AS COLOR DESIGN, I REALIZE IT'S A PRESCHOOL. BUT IT SEEMS VERY BRIGHT.

>> SO ARCA -- THEY HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT LOCATIONS IN THE AREA.

IT'S A CONSISTENT THEME. IF THAT WAS A REQUIREMENT TO ALTER IT, I THINK THEY'LL BE

OPEN TO IT. >> IT'S A

BRANDING THING? >> IT'S A

BRAND. >> MY LAST QUESTION IS, IS THIS TRULY DAYCARE OR WILL THIS GO MONTESSORI AND GO UP?

>> COULD YOU COME FORWARD PLEASE, SIR.

>> JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET YOU ON THE MICROPHONE.

>> MY NAME IS RAVI -- I'M THE OWNER OF ARCA MONTESSORI.

WE SERVE SIX WEEKS TO -- SIX WEEKS TO FIVE YEARS IS OUROUR APPLICATION.

SIX TO 12 IS AFTER SCHOOL.

>> IT'S STILL DAYCARE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> YES. I'VE GOT ONE. THE ACCESS ROAD AROUND THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL, IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY LIGHTS BACK THERE, ANY POLE LIGHTS? THE ONLY CONCERN IS WE HAVE HOUSES TO THE SOUTH OF IT WITH A SIX FOOT WALL.

>> MY NAME IS -- AS FAR AS THE LIGHTING GOES, WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN PREPARED.

WHATEVER THE CITY CODE SAYS, WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY LIGHTS THAT SHINE TO THE BACK.

YOU KNOW, WE WILL PROVIDE ZERO CANDLE LIGHTS, MAKE SURE ZERO CANDLES SO IT'S NOT GOING TO SHINE ONTO SOMEONE'S PROPERTY.

>> PERFECT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BOUNDARY ON THE SOUTH SIDE, YOU'RE NOT PUTTING A RETAIN WALL OR SCREEN WALL THERE, YOU'RE GOING TO UTILIZE WOOD FENCING?

>> WHATEVER THE CITY REQUIRES US TO DO.

IF IT'S A MASONRY WALL -- WE COULD INSTALL IT AND WHEN THE HOMEOWNER -- WANT TO KEEP THE WOOD FENCE OR KEEP THE MASONRY FENCE.

>> IT'S A RELATIVELY NEW FENCE AT SIX FEET.

IT MEETS THE STANDARDS. IF WE NEED TO PUT A MASONRY WALL BEHIND THAT, WE WOULD, BUT WE'D LIKE TO NOT IF POSSIBLE.

[01:00:01]

>> MY CONCERN WOULD BE MAINTENANCE BETWEEN THE TWO WALLS.

>> OKAY. GREAT.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK

YOU. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

>> LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

SCOTT.

>> YES, SIR.

>> STATE YOUR NAME.

>> SCOTT -- I LIVE ON FIELD STONE DRIVE WHICH DRIVE PART OF THE BRIDGEWATER DEVELOPMENT.

WE BUTT RIGHT UP AGAINST THIS PROPERTY HERE. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL. I'M NOT OBJECTING TO IT.

THE BEST THINGS YOU COULD ASK FOR IN A NEIGHBORHOOD IS TO HAVE A BUSINESS LIKE THIS BUTT UP AGAINST YOU. IT'S QUIET. IT SERVES A PURPOSE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. IT IS CERTAINLY HELPFUL VALUE FOR OUR RESIDENTS' PERSPECTIVE. IT'S AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF A BUSINESS THAT WORKS IN HARMONY WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK THESE ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS WE SHOULD CONSIDER AS WE GO FORWARD AND THIS PLACE GETS BUILT OUT AROUND BRIDGEWATER. I DO HAVE A VERY SHORT LIST OF CONCERNS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

ONE IS THE FENCE LINE THAT EXISTS TODAY HAS A LOT OF TREES DOWN IT.

THEY'RE MATURE TREES AND THEY MAKE A GREAT BREAK BETWEEN THE NORTH LINE OF BRIDGEWATER AND THIS FIELD WHICH WOULD BE THIS BUSINESS. WE'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THOSE AREN'T GOING TO BE TAKEN DOWN ARBITRARILY AND THAT A FENCE IS BUILT PROVIDING ADDITIONAL BREAKAGE BETWEEN THE BUSINESS AND THE NORTH END OF BRIDGEWATER AS WELL. THOSE TWO THINGS WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO KEEPING THE PROPERTY SEPARATED AND ALSO CONTINUE TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS WITH IT.

SO WITH REGARDS TO ACCESS VIA WALNUT GROVE, THERE PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE SOME TYPE OF TURN LANE INTO THIS BUSINESS, BECAUSEBECAUSE ROAD, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, IS GROWING QUICKLY. THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC ON IT STOPPING AND TURNING AT THAT POINT, WHICH IS RIGHT ON THE CURVE, IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE DANGEROUS.

IT OUGHT TO BE AT LEAST CONSIDERED THAT WE BUILD A TURN IN OFF OF WALNUT GROVE INTO THEIR DRIVEWAY, WHICH WILL HELP KEEP ANY ACCIDENTS DOWN. FURTHER I WOULD SAY WE WOULD NOT LIKE ANY ROADS BUILT FROM BRIDGEWATER INTO THAT SUBDIVISION. I DON'T THINK THAT COULD HAPPEN THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT NOW, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS. I THINK THEY MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS. I THINK THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER SIMILAR BUSINESSES, COFFEE HOUSE, RESTAURANTS THAT WOULD ALSO MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS FOR BRIDGEWATER. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ANY MOTIONS?

>> JUST WANT TO ADD TO WHATWHAT THE WAS ASKING EARLIER ABOUT A TRAFFIC, WE DID PERFORM A TIA FOR THE SCHOOL. AT THIS MOMENT, I MEAN, ON THE NORTHBOUND -- ON WALNUT GROVE, WE ARE NOT CALLING FOR ANY TURN LANE, BUT ON THE SOUTHBOUND AT THE MEDIAN BREAK, THE CITY DOES REQUIRE US TO INSTALL A LEFT TURN LANE ON THE SOUTHBOUND COMING THROUGH, YEAH, SOUTHBOUND.

>> WHEN YOU GO TO THE SITE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE -- SO THERE WILL BE A TURN LANE GOING TO THIS ONE, AND THEY HAVE ACCOMMODATED SPACING FOR THIS ONE TO DO A DECELL LANE INTO THEIR SITE FOR THIS ONE. BUT BECAUSE OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THIS DRIVE AND THE EXISTING STREET, IT'S TOO CLOSE TO DO A DECELERATION LANE FOR THIS DRIVE.

>> ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?

>> WE SPOKE EARLIER ON A DIFFERENT ONE ABOUT THE TREES.

I THINK IT WAS ON MC KIFERS. I'M NOT SURE THE TREES WILLWILL BETWEEN TWO FENCES WITH NO SUN.

>> THEY DO HAVE A TREE MITIGATION PLAN. IN LOOKING AT THE AERIAL, THE TREES START ADJACENT TO LOT 41 AND 38 WHICH IS ON THE AGRICULTURAL PART, THAT'S NOT

BEING DEVELOPED AT THIS TIME. >> OKAY.

>> AND THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME CEDAR SCRUB TREES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE.

>> WE'LL PRESERVE WHATEVER TREES WE CAN PRESERVE.

WE'LL DO WHAT THE CITY CODE SAYSSAYS AS FAR AS WHEN IT COMES

[01:05:04]

TO TREE MITIGATION AND PRESERVATION.

>> THANK YOU.

>> SIR, YOU'VE ALREADY HAD YOUR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? DO I HEAR A MOTION?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 7-0. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID ABOUT THE LEFT TURN LANE, THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE, IS STAFF -- WAS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE LEFT TURN LANE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT?

>> YES. IT'S SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.

>> IT'S SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, BUT IT'S NOT WRITTEN INTO THE TEXT OF THE ORDINANCE. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REFERENCE IT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES -- SO ON A SITE PLAN IT'S IN THE STREET RIGHT-OF- WAY AS OPPOSED TO BEING ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S COVERED IN THE ORDINANCE.

SO WHAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO DO IS ADD A PROVISION TO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE AND THIS PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MOTION ASSUMING IT'S APPROVED, THAT WE PROVIDE -- THAT THE ORDINANCE INCLUDE A PROVISION FOR COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE LEFT TURN LANE -- DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? OKAY.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE IT?

>> SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY THERE. WE NEED TO ADD TO THE ORDINANCE TO ADD THE SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE

LANGUAGE? >> THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE INTO THE PROPERTY AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN IS TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF C.O. FOR THE BUILDING, CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT'S BASICALLY HOW I'LL END UP DRAFTING

IT. >> DO WE NEED TO REFERENCE THE DEACCELERATION LANE? IT'S ALSO ON THE SITE PLAN BUT IT'S ALSO NOT IN HERE. DO WE NEED TO SAY BOTH?

>> YES. ON THE -- IT'S ON --

>> IS THAT BEING REQUIRED BY THE, THE TIA?

>> DOES THE TIA REQUIRE THAT DEACCELERATION LANE?

>> FOR NOW, BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW -- BECAUSE ENGINEERING WHEN THEY LOOKED AT THE TIA, THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE LAND USE WAS FOR THE REMAINDER. AND SO THEY'RE LEAVING ACCOMMODATION TO INCORPORATE THAT DEPENDING ON WHAT COMES IN ON

THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE. >> OKAY.

>> AND THAT'S REFERENCING TO THE DECELL LANE GOING NORTHBOUND?

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY.

>> SO I'LL SAY MY QUESTION AGAIN. DO WE NEED TO REFERENCE THAT OR DO WE LEAVE THAT FOR ENGINEERING TO DETERMINE LATER?

>> THAT'S REALLY UP TO THE COMMISSION.

AS FAR AS YOUR RECOMMENDATION GOES, I MEAN, IF IT SOUNDS LIKE ENGINEERING DOESN'T KNOW FOR CERTAIN THAT IT'S NECESSARY DEPENDING ON THE BALANCE OF THE PROPERTY BEING DEVELOPED AND HOW IT GETS DEVELOPED, IT MAY BE BEST TO WAIT FOR THAT POINT WHERE WE -- THAT POINT IN TIME -- OF COURSE WE NEED TO GET AN EASEMENT FROM THIS PROPERTY.

>> YES. IF I RECALL CORRECTLY THIS IS THE PORTION OF WALNUT GROVEGROVE THAT NOT COMPLETED IN CONCRETE, IT WAS PUT IN ASPHALT, CORRECT?

>> RIGHT. THEY BELIEVE'S -- I

[01:10:04]

BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT IN ANTICIPATION OF -- MEDIAN WITH SEGMENT, THAT IS CORRECT.

>> ALONG WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT WE DO HAVE TO PROVIDE DECELL LANE AND ALL THAT STUFF.

>> WE SHOW IT ON THE SITE PLAN TOO.

AND ACCOMMODATE WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN THE FUTURE. THE TIA FOR THE DAYCARE DOESN'T WARRANT A WIDE TURN LANE AT THIS POINT. YEAH.

WHEN THE NEXT PHASE COMESCOMES AND DOING THE REMAINDER, DEVELOPING THE REMAINDER THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT A NEW TIA.

STAFF IS REQUIRING IT.

>> OKAY. >> YEAH.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

>> OKAY. I DID WRITE IT DOWN.

I DIDN'T GET ALL OF IT BUT HOPEFULLY YOU'LL FILL IN THE BLANKS FOR ME.

OKAY. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE TO BE COMPLETED AND THE SITE PLAN TO INCLUDE THE DEACCELERATION LANE ON THE NORTHBOUND SIDE PRIOR TO C.O.

>> SECOND?

>> DID I GET THAT RIGHT?

>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, SO YOU'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THAT THEY BUILD THE DECELL LANE?

>> ON THE NORTH SIDE ON THEIR PROPERTY.

>> OKAY. YOU'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THEY BUILD THAT IN ADDITION TO -- OKAY.

>> SO DEACCELERATION LANE ON THE NORTHBOUND SIDE WHICH GOES TO THE÷÷ SECOND DRIVEWAY WHICH BRINGS PEOPLE BACK TO THE --

>> RIGHT. SO DRIVING THAT ROAD RIGHT NOW WE ONLY HAVE TWO LANES. THIS IS MY THOUGHT PROCESS HERE.

WE ONLY HAVE THE TWO LANES. SO IF WE HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO SLAM ON THEIR BRAKES TO TURN IN RIGHT THERE WHEN IT'S 45 MILES AN HOUR, THAT'S GOING TO CREATE

TRAFFIC. >> IT WILL.

ARE YOU SAYING YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUILD THE PART IN BLACK AND WHITE ABOVE THE COLOR PORTION?

>> WE DON'T HAVE TO BUILD ANYTHING RIGHT NOW ON THE -- WE DIDN'T CALL FOR THE RIGHT TURN LANE RIGHT NOW FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST AT THIS POINT.

>> YOU'RE SAYING ONCE YOU SUBMIT A TIA IN THE FUTURE, IT WILL PROBABLY REQUIRE

THAT? >> DEPENDING ON THE FUTURE --

. >> MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS WHILE THEY DON'T HAVE A PLAN RIGHT NOW, THAT'S ALL BUILDABLE LANE. WE MIGHT AS WELL SET THE STAGE INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM COME BACK LATER AND DIG UP --

>> THAT'S TOUGH. I'M TRYING TO THINK OF IT FROM THEIR STANDPOINT ON MONEY, YOU KNOW, SPENT. BUT TO THE GENTLEMAN'S STANDPOINT, THE RESIDENT, WE CAN'T DO A DECELL LANE GOING INTO THE RIGHT SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO MITIGATE DANGER.

I DO GREE THAT'S A POSSIBILITY FOR CAR

WRECKS. >> WE CAN'T DO IT ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE. WE JUST CAN'T DO IT TO THE FIRST ENTRANCE. WE HAVE TO DO

IT TO THE SECOND. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN FORCE THEM TO BUILD A SECONDSECOND AND A DECELL LANE WITHOUT THEM HAVING A PRESPECIFIED USE FOR THAT PROPERTY.

BECAUSE WE MIGHT BE MAKING THEM SPEND A WHOLE BUNCH OF MONEY FOR NO

REASON. >> IF I MAY ADD, IS THAT THAT THIS SIDE OF WALNUT GROVE, I MEAN, THERE'S GOING TO BE A FUTURE EXPANSION PLAN TOO.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS NOT ULTIMATE ROADWAY RIGHT NOW FOR WALNUT

GROVE. >> IT'S CURRENTLY ASPHALT.

>> IF YOU PUT THE LANE IN RIGHT NOW IN THE FUTURE, THE CITY IS GOING TO HAVE TO COME IN AND TEAR IT UP AGAIN.

[01:15:01]

AGAIN, THE TRAFFIC -- THAT WE HAVE LIKE A SET TIME LIKE DROPOFF OR PICKUP TIME. YOU KNOW, WE OPEN THE SCHOOL AT LIKE 6:30 USUALLY TO ALLOW PARENTS TO DROP OFF THEIR KIDS BEFORE THEY GO TO WORK. SO THE TIME IS SPREAD OUT. IT'S NOT AS CONCENTRATED LIKE REGULAR SCHOOL, LIKE 8:00 YOUR CLASS START AND YOU HAVE TO COME BEFORE 8:00.

SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE TRAFFIC IS PRETTY MUCH SPREAD

OUT. >> YOU'RE FOR SURE THERE'S NO PEAK TIME FRAME WHEN EVERYBODY PICKS THEIR KIDS UP?

>> I MEAN, USUALLY PARENTS COME FROM 4:00 TO 6:30 USUALLY.

THAT'S WHEN THE PARENTS COME AND PICK --

>> SO I'M SORRY, I'M JUST CURIOUS. AS A BUSINESS MODEL Y'ALL PROBABLY SPACE IT OUT TO WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE A CRAZY AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC COMING IN, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> WE ALLOW 6:30 TO 9:00 DROPOFF IN THE MORNING AND PICK UP LIKE 4:00 TO 6:30. IT'S NOT LIKE, HEY, YOU HAVE TO COME IN AT 5:00 AND YOU HAVE CARS LINED UP OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

>> WHAT KIND OF ATTENDANCE ARE YOU EXPECTING, WHAT NUMBER OF KIDS?

>> 200 KIDS, YEAH. THAT'S THE MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY.

USUALLY, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT FIRST OPENS, YOU'RE LOOKING AT 80, 90 KIDS AND SLOWLY GRADUALLY INCREASE TO MAXIMUM CAPACITY LIKE 200 KIDS.

>> YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ACCOUNTED FOR IT IN THE SITE PLAN, THE RIGHT-OF- WAY DEDICATION, THE TIA WE JUST DID, THE ENGINEERS ARE NOT REQUIRING IT, THE CITY IS NOT REQUIRING IT. I WOULD BE A PRETTY EXPENSIVE ITEM TO ADD ON. THAT COULD ULTIMATELY GO TO A SINGLE FAMILY USER ONE DAY THAT WANTS TO CREATE A SMALL RANCH. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE COSTLY ON OUR÷÷ END ON THE FRONT END TO POTENTIALLY PUT IT IN NOW.

THE ALLOCATION FOR IT LATER, THESE ARE STILL THE PROPERTY OWNERS. THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK, BRING A NEW TIA ANALYSIS. THAT WOULD BE MY ARGUMENT AGAINST REQUIRING THAT RIGHT NOW.

>> DREW, I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU.

THIS IS JUST TOTALLY THROWING THIS OUT THERE. WHAT WOULD STOP YOU FROM THE ENTRYWAY ON THE SOUTH SIDE THE ONE YOU HAVE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD, WHY DON'T YOU JUST MOVE THAT FURTHER NORTH? WOULD THAT MAYBE ALLOW FOR A DECELERATION LANE TO BE BUILT?

>> WE TRY TO SPACE IT OUT EVENLY BETWEEN OUR DRIVE, THE MEDIUM DRIVE AND THE ONE TO OUR SOUTH.

YOU KNOW, WE SPOKE WITH MIKE. WE ARE OPEN TO, YOU KNOW -- SOUTHERN DRIVEWAY. SAID WHY DON'T YOU TRY TO SPACE IT OUT EVEN THAT'S WHAT WE DID.

>> I WAS THINKING IT MIGHT GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT AND EVERYBODY'S HAPPY AND WE CAN JUST MOVE

ON. >> THE THINKING FOR THE NORTHBOUND LANE IS SOME PARENTS EXITING LEAVING, BUT REAL REALLY IT'S FUTURE --

>> SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE AND WE'RE UNDERSTANDING, WHILE WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT IS COLORED AS FAR AS THE DRIVEWAY GOES, THE ENTIRETY OF THE DRIVEWAY WOULD BE GOING IN WITH THIS BUILDING?

>> CORRECT. I ALMOST SAID THAT TO COMMISSIONER GLASS.

BOTH OF THOSE INGRESSES AND EGRESSES ARE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THIS -- THE EXIT DOES REQUIRE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS AS WELL.

WE WILL HAVE TWO ENTRANCES, TWO EXITS BEING THE SAME PLACES. AND YOU HAD A TIA DONE.

>> CORRECT.

>> AND THE LIKELIHOOD THAT YOU WILL BE DEVELOPING THIS LAND IN THE NEAR FUTURE IS PLAUSIBLE, YES?

>> SORRY. IF I MAY ADD TO THAT, MY CLIENT IS A DAYCARE OPERATOR. THEY'RE IN THE DAYCARE BUSINESS OR MONTESSORI SCHOOL BUSINESS.

THEY ARE NOT ANY OTHER KINDS OF DEVELOPER. YOU KNOW, IF THEY CAN FIND A POTENTIAL BUYER, I MEAN, THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO SELL IT OR -- DEVELOPED INTO ONE ACRE LOTS. AT THAT TIME IT WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMMISSION, WE WOULD HAVE TO REENVISION THIS --

[01:20:08]

>> THANK YOU.

>> WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT IT IN THERE AND COUNCIL CAN MAKE FINAL CALL AT THAT POINT.

>> DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> THAT'S WHAT THEY JUST SAID.

INGRESS, EGRESS. WHAT WE'RE NOT BUILDING IS A DECELL LANE TO THE NORTH. IT WASN'T DETERMINED -- CORRECT, INTO THAT NORTHBOUND --

>> TURN MINE BACK ON TOO. AS A COMMISSION, I FEEL LIKE BECAUSE WE KNOW THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THIS PROPERTY WILL DEVELOP OUT AND THEY'RE ALREADY PUTTING IN THE INGRESS EGRESS WITH THE CROSSOVER THERE ON WALNUT GROVE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD BRIDGEWATER THAT IS JUST TO THE SOUTH OF THIS, WE'VE GOT AMPLE AMOUNT OF

TRAFFIC. >> RIGHT.

>> IT WAS ANOTHER CASE WE HEARD 12,000 TRIPS ON THIS

ROAD. >> RIGHT.

MY ONLY LOGIC ON THIS IS WHY WOULD WE MAKE THEM, THIS SMALL GROUP OF LAND INCUR THE TOTAL COST OF THAT WHEN WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE USED FOR.

I THINK THAT'S UNFAIR TO THE

APPLICANT. >> 200 KIDS A DAY, WHICH IS 200 PARENTS HAVING TO TURN INTO

THIS. >> IT COULD BE 100 CARS.

IT COULD BE BROTHERS, SISTERS, YOU KNOW, DIVIDED BY TWO.

THAT'S ITS MAXIMUM. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW.

IS THERE SOME SORT OF DAYCARE TIA WE CAN DO OR --

>> THAT WAS PART OF THE TIA. THAT WAS ALL FACTORED INTO

THAT. >> SO DID THE TIA SAY THAT WAS RECOMMENDED OR NO?

>> IT WAS DEPENDENT ON THE FUTURE USE OF THAT REMAINING ACREAGE. BUT MY ARGUMENT TO THAT IS NOBODY COULD DEVELOP THAT WITH THE WAY IT IS TODAY.

THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED AT THAT TIME.

YOU KNOW, THE ARGUMENT IS PROBABLY DANGER FOR THE CURRENT USE VERSUS POTENTIAL FUTURE DANGER. THAT'S JUST TWO DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS, I THINK.

>> WHY DON'T YOU GUYS JUST MOVE THE ENTRY POINT DOWN AND THEN THIS ALL GOES AWAY?

>> THE MAIN POINT IS DISTANCE FROM OTHER INGRESS

EGRESSES. >> EVEN IF YOU MOVED IT ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF WHERE YOU'RE CURRENTLY GOING, IT STILL WOULDN'T MATTER?

>> THE SOUTHERN INGRESS EGRESS?

>> MM-HM.

>> IT'S CROSSING DOWN TO THE BRIDGEWATER DEVELOPMENT. WE COULDN'T PUT ONE

THERE. >> THE SOUTHERN ONE, IF YOU MOVED IT UP, IT STILL WOULDN'T MATTER? MOVED IT UP IN LINE WITH THE LOOP AROUND THE BUILDING.

>> YEAH.

>> YEAH. BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY GIVING A VARIANCE FOR THEM TO BE TOO CLOSE AS IT IS, RIGHT?

>> THE OTHER THING, IF YOU MOVE THE SOUTHERN DRIVE CLOSER, WHAT YOU COULD POTENTIALLY CREATE IS PEOPLE CROSSING TO GO TO THE MEDIAN. SO YOU WANT TO KIND OF BRING THE DRIVEWAY BACK SO YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE CROSSING OVER TO THE

MEDIAN. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT. SOUNDS LIKE YOU EXPLORED ALL THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AS YOU WENT THROUGH THE

PROCESS, CORRECT? >>

YES. >> AND THIS IS YOUR BEST SOLUTION?

>> FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, YES.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WE'RE STILL WAITING ON A SECOND.

>> ONE THING IS THAT THE WALNUT GROVE IS NOT FULLY DEVELOPED YET. PUTTING IN A DECELL LANE DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. I DON'T KNOW THE TIMING OF THE WALNUT GROVE IMPROVEMENT ON THIS --

>> IF NO ONE WANTS ME TO GIVE A SECOND, MAKE ANOTHER MOTION.

>> SECOND. WE'LL DECLARE IT DEAD.

[01:25:01]

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE -- JUST TO BE CLEAR, WITHOUT A DECELERATION LANE --

>> THE SOUTHBOUND, YES, BUT NOT THE -- YES.

CORRECT. >>

I'LL SECOND THAT. >> PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 6-1. ALL RIGHT.

[013 Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend the regulations relating to the use and development of Lot 2, Midlothian Heritage High School, by changing the zoning from Single-Family 3 (SF-3) District, Agricultural (A) District, and Planned Development District No. 43 (PD-43) to a Planned Development District for Community Retail (CR) District uses. The property is generally located at the northeast corner of the intersection of N. Walnut Grove Road and north of FM 1387. (Z34-2025-090)]

>> ITEM 13. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST A REQUEST TO AMEND THE REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOT 2, MIDLOTHIAN HERITAGE HIGH SCHOOL, BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 43 TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT USES. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH WALNUT GROVE ROAD AND NORTH OF FM 1387.

>> DANIEL HUMBERT SENIOR PLANNER TO PRESENT ITEM 13.

THIS IS A REQUEST TO REZONE A 7. 48 ACRE UNDEVELOPED LOT TO A PD WITH AN UNDERLYING ZONING OF CR FOR NON- RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE COMP PLAN DESIGNATION IS NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL RETAIL FOR THIS PROPERTY.

THIS SLIDE SHOWS ADJACENT ZONING LAND USES AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY. THE SITE PLAN INCLUDES SIX LOTS.

LOT ONE IS A DAYCARE. LOTS TWO AND THREE HAVE TWO MULTITENANT RETAIL BUILDINGS, BOTH HAVING FIVE USABLE SPACES, AND ONE IS A PICKUP WINDOW.

THE THREE BUILDINGS INCLUDED IN THE GRADE PORTION LABELED FUTURE PHASE FOR REFERENCES ONLY HAVE NO DEFINITIVE USES OR SIZES. IT IS WORTH NOTING THESE BUILDINGS CAN BE ALLOWED ANY USE IN THE CR ZONING UNLESS STRICTLY PROHIBITED IN THE ORDINANCE WHICH ARE LISTED IN A FOLLOWING SLIDE.

A VARIANCE WILL ALSO BE REQUIRED TO NOT REQUIRE A SIX FOOT MASONRY SCREENING WALL BETWEEN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONE LOT TO THE NORTH. AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, HERE'S A LIST OF PROHIBITED USES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE CR ZONING THAT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY NEGATIVELY INCREASE TRAFFIC. HERE'S THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.

THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL ADD JAY SEVEN SI TO THE NORTH WAS PROVIDED BUT SINCE IT IS COMPOSED OF SOD INSTEAD OF EVERGREEN MATERIAL REQUIRED A VARIANCE WILL BE NEEDED. THIS IS THE DAYCARE ELEVATIONS WHICH INCLUDE FOUR INTERNALLY LIT WALL SIGNS AND WILL NEED A VARIANCE DUE TO THE HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS NOT BEING MET. DUE TO ELEVATIONS FOR RETAIL B, WHICH INCLUDE NO VARIANCES, RETAIL C ALSO INCLUDES NO VARIANCES.

HERE'S THE SITE PLAN SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE FIVE PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGNS.

ALL MONUMENT SIGNS WILL REQUIRE A VARIANCE FOR THE INTERNAL LED ILLUMINATION. THE DAYCARE SIGN AND SIGN LOCATED AT THE 1387 AND WALNUT GROVE WILL -- 1387 IS 25 FEET HIGH. A VARIANCE WILL BE NEEDED SINCE THIS EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWANCE BY 15 FEET.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ZONING AND USES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST, BUT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NONRESIDENTIAL PD FOR TOM THUMB AND MCDONALD'S TO THE EAST.

AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE COMP PLAN DESIGNATED THIS PROPERTY AS NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL RETAIL, WHICH IS INTENDED FOR BUSINESSES FOR RESIDENTIAL NEEDS, CROSS ACCESS TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS STATING THAT LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT IS DESIRABLE.

THEREFORE, THE CR UNDERLYING ZONING IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN. THESE TWO SLIDES SHOW GOALS AND STRATEGIES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT EMPHASIZE THE INCONSISTENCY. WE HAVE FOUR MAIN CONCERNS WITH THE PD REQUEST. THEY ARE AS FOLLOWS.

REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF AN UPDATED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS STILL NEEDED, IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA BASED ON THE EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND THE TIMELINE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO FM 1387 ARE UNKNOWN.

THE PROPOSED EGRESS AND INGRESS DOESN'T ADEQUATELY RESTRICT

[01:30:01]

ACCESS AS INTENDED. AND THE PROPOSED DECELL LANE DOESN'T APPEAR TO MEET THE TEX DOT STANDARDS OF 50 MILES AN HOUR. ALTHOUGH THE PLANS HAVE A PHASE THREE IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THE CITY'S ABILITY TO CONTROL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING REGULATING CORRESPONDING TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE ANDAND IMPACTS IS -- PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEET THE TRANSITIONAL LOT DESIGN, ADDITIONAL SCREENING, RESTRAINED DENSITY OR LANDSCAPING SIGN, PARKING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS. THERE'S ALSO NO PROVIDED PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ON WALNUT GROVE UNTIL THE FINAL PHASE. PUBLIC NOTICES WERE SENT OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY, AND STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO OBJECTION.

STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

THANK YOU. I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> WHAT DID WE PUT DOWN FOR TOM THUMB? THEY HAD TO DO MONUMENT SIGNS UNDER TEN FEET, CORRECT? OR DID WE GIVE THEM --

>> SOME OF THEM WERE 10 1/2. I BELIEVE OVER ONE OR TWO WERE 15 FEET. I KNOW THE ONE WITH THE GAS PRICES WAS 15 FEET. YOU WERE JUST SPEAKING ABOUT THE HEIGHT, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. THE OTHER ISSUE IS WE OBVIOUSLY HAD THE SAME CONCERNS WITH TOM THUMB WITH THE FACT THAT WE DON'T KNOW TEX DOT'S PLANS. BUT THE FEELING THEN WAS THAT AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS -- CONCERNS THAT THIS SITE HAS NOT ADDRESSED TRAFFIC CONCERNS AS WELL AS THE TOM THUMB DEVELOPMENT?

>> FROM MY KIND OF LIKE OBSERVATION READING, IT IS PRETTY SIMILAR, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE COMMUNITY IS REALLY WANTED AND PUSHED FOR A TOM THUMB.

I'VE WATCHED THE MEETING ONE TIME. I KNOW IT'S PRETTY LONG, SO I COULDN'T REALLY ANSWER THAT IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS I'D LIKE.

BUT I BELIEVE IT'S KIND OF THE SAME AS FAR AS CONCERNS.

>> BUT I DON'T RECALL ANY DRAINAGE ISSUES WITH TOM THUMB, CORRECT? THEIR ENGINEERS ADDRESSED ANY KIND OF DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE DRAINAGE IS AN ISSUE WITH THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION?

>> DRAINAGE, I CAN JUST SHOW YOU REALLY QUICK.

STAFF -- THIS NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT ABOVE IS ALREADY HAVING DRAINAGE ISSUES GOING INTO THIS AREA. AND SO I BELIEVE ENGINEERING OR STAFF WAS PROPOSING THAT THIS DETENTION AREA WAS ACTUALLY MOVED FARTHER SOUTH F THAT -- IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

>> YOU ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERNS THEY HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT SCREENING, GRADUATED DENSITYDENSITY AND --

>> WE'VE BEEN WORKING THE APPLICANT FOR A WHILE, A FEW MONTHS. THERE HAS BEEN CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. THERE HAVE BEEN CONCERNS THAT, YOU KNOW, STILL WE'RE WORKING ON THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ADDRESSED. SO, YES, IT'S BEEN A BACK AND FORTH PROCESS.

>> THANK YOU.

>> INTERESTING OBSERVATION. SO IT'S VERY SIMILAR WHENEVER YOU LOOK AT IT AS FAR AS LIKE THE -- CHARTING STATIONS COMPARED TO TOM THUMB, BECAUSE THEY DO COUNT TOWARDS THE REQUIRED PARKING AND I KNOW KNOW THERE A DAYCARE, BUT ALSO TO -- THESE ARE -- YOU KNOW, THE RETAIL BUILDINGS, MULTITENANTS, THOSE ARE FIVE LEASABLE SPACES EACH, WHICH I'M SURE YOU KNOW ONE OR TWO CUSTOMERS LIKE TO

[01:35:05]

CHARGE YOUR CAR --

>> I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TOTO ENGINEERING.

>> WE COULD ASK THE APPLICANT. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT BROUGHT THEIR ENGINEER AS WELL.

>> ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> I GOT ONE MORE QUESTION. ON THE PROHIBITED USES, WHAT'S STOPPING RETAIL C AND RETAIL B FROM BECOMING LIKE A BAR GRILL OR RESTAURANT THAT SERVES ALCOHOL?

>> THE PROXIMITY WITHIN THE DAYCARE IS A SPECIFIC SECTION IN THE SECTION SECTION THE ORDINANCE.

>> STOPS IT? >> YEAH.

THERE'S SCHOOL, CHURCH -- THERE'S A THIRD ONE BUT --

>> THE ASSUMPTION THOUGH IF THE DAYCARE GETS BUILT FIRST.

>> YEAH. AND THEN YOU'RE WORRIED LATER ON --

>> IF THE DAYCARE IS NOT FIRSTFIRST

IN TIME -- >> WHAT ABOUT THE HIGH SCHOOL?

>> THAT MAY BE ANOTHER THING. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT IT'S 300 FEET PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE. IF IT'S 300 FEET PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE, THAT WOULD ALSO CREATE THE

RESTRICTION. >> OKAY.

THAT'S ALL.÷÷I WAS JUST CURIOUS.

>> WAS THIS PIECE OF LAND ORIGINALLY ZONED TO USE AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THE RESIDENCE AND RETAIL?

>> I'LL BE HONEST.

I DON'T KNOW. IF YOU DO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION IT'S NOT PART OF THIS PRESENTATION, BUT THEY DID AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ACQUIRE A PORTION OF ABANDONED FM 1387 RIGHT-OF-WAY.

IT WAS VACATED. YEAH, TO BE HONEST, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE INTENDED FOR A BUFFER ORIGINALLY, BUT I COULD

BE WRONG. >> I THINK THE SCHOOL PREVIOUSLY OWNED IT AND SOLD IT.

>> DOES THE APPLICANT HERE WISH TO SPEAK? STATE YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU

LIVE. >> MY NAME IS -- I LIVE IN THE CITY OF KOPPEL. I HAVE OUR ARCHITECT GROUP AS WELL AS -- AS WELL AS THE TIA CONSULTANT. SO I HAVE A -- I HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT I PUT TOGETHER FOR THE COMMISSION AS IT RELATES TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS AND VARIANCES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORTH. I THOUGHT I COULD JUST HAVE THE FLOOR FOR A FEW MINUTES. THAT WILL ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION HAS HAD.

WHAT I'M SHOWING YOU HERE IS THE PRESENTATION. THERE'S A LITTLE AGENDA. THIS IS A SITE PLAN WHICH THE STAFF JUST PRESENTED HERE ALONG WITH OUR PHASING PLAN.

I HAVE HERE THE FOUR STAFF CONCERNS.

THE WAY I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU THIS IS THE CONCERN ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE YOU SEE THE STAFF PERSPECTIVE AND THE CONCERNS THAT THEY HAVE ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE YOU BASICALLY SEE OUR PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT THOSE CONCERNS ARE AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THOSE. FIRST OFF, FROM A TIA PERSPECTIVE, STAFF CONCERNSCONCERNS AROUND THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, THE TEX DOT WIDENING DELAYS AND THE DECELERATION LANE --

[01:40:02]

SO PHASE ONE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE THE DAYCARE AND THEN THE RETAIL FOLLOWED BY PHASE TWO WILL BE RETAIL B AND A FUTUREFUTURE PHASE WHICH REQUIRED US TO COME UP WITH A DETAIL PLAN AT A LATER STAGE IS GOING TO BE PHASE DAYCARE, IT'S A LOW IMPACT TRAFFIC SORT OF A BUSINESS.

SOMEONE ASKED ABOUT WHAT OUR PEAK HOURS ARE.

I HAVE A SLIDE HERE ACTUALLY SHOWS WHAT DAYCARE PEAK HOURS WOULD BE, OUR INGRESS/EGRESS. DAYCARE FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE WE HAVE THREE ENTRANCES FOR THE DAYCARE.

IT'S REALLY -- OUR SCHOOL IS GOING TO BE ABOUT 120 TO 150 KIDS. IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE NOT AFFECTING PEAK TRAFFIC DURING -- I KNOW WE HAVE THE HIGH SCHOOL AND THE MIDDLE SCHOOL HERE. OUR DROPOFF TIMES ARE AROUND 9:00 AND PICKUP TIME IS AROUND 5:30.

IT'S NOT COINCIDING WITH ANY OF THE EXISTING TRAFFIC ON -- -- OR WALNUT GROVE. GOING BACK AGAIN TO CONCERN FROM STAFF, SO THE DAYCARE IS A LOW IMPACT.

WE HAVE WORKED WITH STAFF. I WANTED TO THANK THEM FOR THEIRTHEIR INPUT THE LAST SIX MONTHS.

WE HAVE BEEN VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT HOW WE PHASE THIS WHOLE PROJECT. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THIS PARTICULAR JUNCTION OF 1387 AND WALNUT GROVE DOESN'T GET CROWDEDCROWDED GIVEN WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS.

WE UNDERSTAND -- SOME FAILING POINTS IN THE INTERSECTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR PROJECT IS NOT CONTRIBUTING TO THAT. BUT THERE ARE SOME EXISTING FAILING POINTS IN THIS SPECIFICALLY AROUND WIDENING OF TEX DOT.

I'VE HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH TEX DOT COMMISSION.

AND WE HAVE OUR APPLICATION IN FRONT OF THEM FOR, YOU KNOW -- I FEEL VERY CONFIDENT IT'S GOING TO BE APPROVED. SO THERE ARE SOME DELAYS FROM TEX DOT, BUT I THINK THAT'S OUT OF OUR HANDS.

BUT I'M BEING TOLD THAT THEY ARE ACTIVELY MOVING ON IT.

ALTHOUGH WE THINK THE RIGHT OF TEX DOT ISIS TO HAPPEN AROUND 2028 AND THE -- WE ANTICIPATE THIS TO GO VERTICAL AROUND THE 2027 TIME FRAME. WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE PHASE THREE ALIGNED WITH TEX DOT WIDENING.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT PHASE THREE.

THE DECELERATION LANE, I KNOW STAFF HAD A CONCERN.

SINCE THEN WE HAVE EXTENDED OUR DECELERATION LANE AND WE'RE DESIGNING AND BUILDING OUR DECELERATION LANE PER TEX DOT STANDARDS.

SO OUR LANE WAS -- RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ABOUT 440 OF -- THE INTERSECTION, 100 FEET TAPER FOLLOWED BY 230 FEET OF DECELL LANE. THAT'S THE FIRST CONCERN.

DRAINAGE, I KNOW THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT COMMISSIONER JACKIE ABOUT DRAINAGE. TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WE HAVE DONE A PRETTY DETAILED DRAINAGE STUDY WHICH HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO MIKE ADAMS, THE ENGINEER.

I WOULD SAY THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN HAS ONE OF THE STRINGENT DETENTION AND DRAYAGE -- DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE EVER SEEN.

ALL THE DETENTION AREAS ARE TO BE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE 100- YEAR FLOOD IS HOW THE DETENTION WORKS.

WE KNOW THAT. I HAVE TALKED TO THE OWNER DOWNSTREAM TO ENSURE HE'S ON BOARD AND HE WANTS TO SPEAK ABOUT IT.

OUR DETENTION DESIGN IS ACTUALLY GOING TO MITIGATE AND LOWER THE AMOUNT OF FLOW THAT'S GOING INTO HIS PROPERTY TO ANY DOWNSTREAM PROPERTY. THAT'S HOW OUR DETENTION IS.

OUR DETENTION AS I SHOW HERE IS RIGHT AROUND THAT PLACE.

MOST OF THE WATER THAT COMES THROUGH IS FROM THE KENSINGTON DEVELOPMENT. IT COMES THROUGH THE EAST SIDE AND DRAINS DOWN TOWARD WALNUT GROVE. THAT'S OUR DETENTION.

YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE A DETAILED DESIGN, WHICH MIKE ADAMS IS REVIEWING AND WE'LL BE ADDRESSING ALL CONCERNS THAT WE

HAVE. >> YES, THAT IS AN EXISTING

[01:45:05]

POND. LETTER SUBMITTED TO STAFF. WE HAVE THE STAFF AGAIN. OUR PHASE THREE IS SEGREGATED FROM THE HEAVY TRAFFIC AREA.

WE'VE TO COME BACK WITH APPROVAL.

PHASE FOUR AN INCONSISTENCY FROM THE PLAN. THIS SITE IS UNIQUE IN THE FACT THAT IT IS NOT TYPICAL. WE HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON AN AGRICULTURE ZONING AND WE HAVE A CHURCH ON A GP ZONING. UNLIKE THE DEVELOPMENT WHERE WE HAVE BUTTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS, THIS HOUSE IS ABOUT 340 FEET FROM OUR -- FROM THE BUILDING THAT WILL BE HERE AND THE CHURCH IS ABOUT 220 FEET FROM THE BUILDING THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE. I JUST WANTED TO PUT THIS IN PERSPECTIVE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF SCREENING. WE WILL DO THE SCREENING AND THAT'S ONE OF THOSE WE HAD REQUESTED. I THINK WE'LL DO THE SCREENING AND WILL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE HERE.

>> I DON'T HAVE IN THIS PRESENTATION BUT II PULL IT UP ON GOOGLE EARTH RIGHT NOW. THAT'S THE SCREENING REQUIREMENT. THERE WAS ANOTHER CONCERN FROM STAFF AROUND INCONSISTENCY IN SIDEWALK. I KNOW THERE IS AN ORDINANCE TO HAVE SIDEWALKS INSTALLED. AND SINCE OUR FACING PLAN HAS PHASE ONE, PHASE TWO AND PHASE THREE ALL THE WAY THREE, FOUR YEARS DOWN THE ROAD AND THAT TXDOT WILL WIDEN THE STREETS, WE ARE DOING A PHASE-IN PLAN BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE, BECAUSE IT WILL BE A THROWAWAY SOLUTION.

AND, ALSO, WE TOOK SAFETY INTO CONSIDERATION.

I KNOW THAT PARTICULAR INTERSECTION IS HEAVILY USED AND WE ALSO HAVE A A RIGHT ACROSS FROM COMPTON THAT CAN BE READILY USED. THESE ARE ALL FROM THE PD.

THAT WAS A LANDSCAPE MASONRY WALL. I WILL GO THROUGH THAT REALLY QUICK. THE SITE HAS A CHURCH. I ALREADY SHOWED YOU THE DISTANCE. WE ARE WILLING TO DO A TEN- FOOT EVERGREEN BUT A SIX FOOT. IT'S NOT A TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION WE HAVE HERE.

WE WOULD LIKELIKE MAKE A REQUEST ON THAT.

25-FOOT SIGN AG AGE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE HEIGHT. WE ARE WILLING TO GET THAT .

THE DAYCARE IS A PROTOTYPE RIGHT NOW.

ALSO, I WANTED RIGHT SHOW YOU THE POSITIONS OF THE DAYCARE.

IT'S GOING TO BE -- THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ARTICULATION DOES NOT WARRANT THE NEED FOR IT. ONLY BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE COVERED BY A BUILDING AND ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE.

IT WILL NOT BE PERSPECTIVE FROM SOMEONE LOOKING AT IT. WE PERSPECTIVE LIKE TO LOOK FOR IT THERE. 440 FEET RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S THE PLAN. THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THE COMP PLAN. I KNOW MIDLOTHIAN HAS A

[01:50:02]

2023- 2024 COMP PLAN BUT THE COMP PLAN BEFORE THAT DESIGNATED THIS AREA TO BE A MODULE WHICH MEANS HIGH DENSITY, SIX LANE TRAFFIC.

TWO MAJOR ARTERIAL THROUGHFARES. IT'S LOCAL RETAIL. THAT'S A DAYCARE PICKUP.

THAT'S THE DETAILS OF THAT, TIMING, SCHOOLS, KIDS.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE STAFFING. THOSE ARE THE LETTERS THAT I TALKED ABOUT FROM THE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDING THE MIDLOTHIAN ISD.

THAT'S FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> HOW MANY OTHER DAYCARES HAVE YOU BUILT?

>> THIS WILL BE MY SECOND ONE.

>> OKAY. AND ARE THREE ALSO NEXT TO FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS?

>> NO.

>> AS A MOM I KNOW MY KIDS ARE SOMETIMES SLIBRY AND GET THROUGH A DOOR FASTER THAN I CAN, AND WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, THE PLAYGROUND AND THE BUILDING ITSELF ARE SURROUNDED BY NOTHING BUT PARKING LOTS. WHICH TELLS ME CARS.

AND THAT WOULD BE A CONCERN FOR ME THINKING ABOUT ALL THE OTHER DAYCARES IN TOWN I'VE BEEN TO, THEY ARE STANDALONE BUILDINGS, EVEN WHAT WE JUSTJUST IS A STANDALONE BUILDING. YES, THERE'S EVENTUALLY GOING TO BE SOMETHING AROUND IT BUT IT'S A PRETTY BIG PERIMETER WHERE THIS IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY PARKING.

>> SO THE LOT ITSELF IS 1. 3 ACRES.

BY LICENSING STANDARDS THE NUMBER OF PARKING IS GOVERNED BY THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS AND THE LICENSE THAT WE HAVE. AND WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PARENTS WHO ARE PARKING AND TAKE THEIR LITTLE ONE OFF SIX WEEKS TO 3 YEARS, DON'T HAVE THEM WALK THROUGH, LIKE NEXT WEEK, WE'LL HAVE 20 DEGREES. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE COGNIZANT OF HOW FAR THE PARKING IS FROM THE WALKING DISTANCE TO DROP THEM SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS PARKING.

>> AND I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE UNDECIDED, BUT LOOKING AT LOT SIX IN YOUR GRAY AREA, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT IS A DRIVE- THROUGH RESTAURANT.

YOU WILL HAVE CARS LOOPING THAT BUILDING.

>> RIGHT. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE FACING. THIS IS VERY CONCEPTUAL RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR ANY APPROVAL AS PART OF PHASE THREE. WE PUT SOME BLOCKS THERE.

>> WHY DO WE HAVE SO MANY EV CHARGING STATIONS RIGHT NEXT TO

RESIDENCES? >> WE COULD MAKE THAT FIGHT.

IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE WITH WHAT WE ARE SEEING IN EV CHARGERS WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE NICE FROM A CITIZEN PERSPECTIVE.

THAT WAS THE -- THAT WAS THE REASON TO PUT THAT IN THAT POSITION AND NOT IN THE FRONT, IT WAS A DECISION THAT WAS MADE JUST BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO BE CLOSE TO 3087 BY ANY SHAPE OR MEANS WHICH WOULD CAUSE ANY ISSUES, TRAFFIC, BECAUSE THE SCHOOL IS THERE. WE ARE WILLING TO CHANGE THE NUMBER, CHANGE THE LOCATION.

>> I DON'T EVEN AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE, ARE THESE 24/7 CHARGING STATIONS? IF I FOUND AT 2:00 A.M.

I COULD WHIP IN THERE AND CHARGE FOR A

WHILE? >> MOST CHARGING STATIONS ARE LIKE THAT. I DRIVE A TESLA.

WHATEVER TIME, I CHARGE IT. YES, IT'S 24.

>> YOU HAVE RESIDENCES. THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO A

NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS 350 HOMES? >> TO YOUR POINT , THE KENSINGTON COMMUNITY IS TO THE LEFT.

I MET WITH THE OWNER AND I HAVE A LETTER FROM HIM SAYING HE DOESN'T OBJECT AND A LETTER TO STAFF.

I CAN PULL UP KENSINGTON IF YOU NEED ME TO.

>> REGARDLESS HOW MANY STATIONS YOU HAVE, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROBLEM OF JUST MOVING IT CLOSER TO THE RIGHT LIKE NORTHEAST OF THE CHILD CARE CENTER INSTEAD?

[01:55:01]

TO JACKIE'S POINT IT'S 200 FEET AWAY. I DON'T SEE WHY WE COULDN'T JUST MOVE IT AND IT IT BE A DISTRACTION FROM THE OTHER ROAD.

>> YEAH, NO PROBLEM.

>> I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE IT'S A LOT CLOSER THAN 200 FEET.

>> LET DANIEL PULL IT UP.

>> RIGHT NOW THERE'S A DRAINAGE BETWEEN THE MASONARY WALL OF KENSINGTON AND THE PRIVATE ACCESS FOR THAT RESIDENCE.

>> WHILE DANIEL IS WORKING ON THAT, I HAD A QUESTION BROUGHT UP EARLIER.

THE AREA RIGHT BEHIND THE DAYCARE.

-- EVEN IF YOU PUT A FENCE THERE, LITTLE KIDS GET IN PLACES.

>> IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A FENCE. THAT WILL BE A DESIGN FOR THE DAYCARE.

>> I THINK IT'S JUST A BAD LOCATION FOR SAFETY ISSUES. AND IF YOU WALL IT OFF YOU WILL HAVE TO PUT IN A GATE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THAT.

I KNOW LITTLE KIDS -- I WAS A LITTLE KID -- AND I GOT INTO LOTS OF PLACES I SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN, AND THAT'S A CONCERN TO ME.

>> SO IF I'M READING THE SIGN CORRECTLY, MONUMENT SIGN TEN FEET TALL IS SIGN THREE, DID I READ THAT CORRECTLY? AND -- NO, STAY ON GOOGLE. SO -- I CAN'T POINT HERE BUT WHERE THAT LITTLE ACCESS ROAD IS COMING OFF WESTMINSTER, YEP, RIGHT THERE. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT SIGN IS GOING TO BE. SO INSTEAD OF BEING -- BECAUSE THAT IS THEIR MAIN ENTRANCE TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO INSTEAD OF BEING A MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOUR SIGN IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST THING THEY SEE BEFORE THAT.

>> YOU SEE THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU MEAN KENSINGTON? YES, WE ARE PROPOSING A SIGN AT DRIVEWAY THREE, THE RETAIL AND THE DAYCARE.

>> AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A TEN-FOOT-TALL SIGN?

>> THAT'S GOING TO BE A TEN-FOOT-TALL SIGN.

I'LL HAVE TO LOOK.

>> SO --

>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A TEN-FOOT-

TALL SIGN. >> YOU HAVE THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE HOUSE THAT'S THERE ON THE WEST SIDE OFOF WESTMINSTER. YOU'VE GOT THE FIRST HOUSE ON THE EAST SIDE OF WESTMINSTER. THAT FIRST OPEN LOT, THAT'S THEIR DRAINAGE LOT. FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> YOU MEAN THIS?

>> YES.

>> YES. THAT'S THE KENSINGTON DRAINAGE,

CORRECT. >> WE ALREADY HAVE WATER COMING DOWN, AND IF I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, THAT'S -- THAT'S WHERE THE WATER IS ORIGINATING

FROM. >> ALL OF THE WATER COLLECTED HERE, NOT JUST THESE HOUSES BUT EVERYTHING THAT'S COLLECTED HERE DRAINS THROUGH THE SOUTH, MOST THROUGH THE EAST, AND MOVES THIS WAY. THAT'S THE FLOW OF WATER.

>> SO THAT'S WHERE I'M CONFUSED.

WHY DO WE HAVE A DRAINAGE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE DAYCARE?

>> BECAUSE WE'RE COLLECTING MOST OF THE WATER FROM THE KENSINGTON COMMUNITY WHICH IS FLOWING THROUGH THIS RIGHT THERE.

>> WHERE DOES IT GO FROM THERE?

>> IT GOES THROUGH THE EAST AND THEN DOWN SOUTH.

>> ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING -- WATER GOES INTO THAT DRAINAGE RETENTION POINT.

IT'S A DETENTION AREA.

>> CORRECT.

>> WHERE DOES IT GO FROM THERE? HOW DOES IT COME OUT, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M ASKING.

>> WATER GETS COLLECTED HERE IN THE DETENTION AREA AND IT'S A SLOW RELEASE. AGAIN, I'M NOT A CIVIL ENGINEER. IT'S DESIGNED TO CATER TO 100-YEAR STORM. MY UNDERSTANDING IT GETS COLLECTED HERE, STAYS IN THE DETENTION AREA AND AND A SLOW RELEASE THAT GOES DOWN, COMES THROUGH, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

>> SO HEARING THAT AND KURT'S CONCERNS OF YOU'VE GOT KIDS OUT HERE PLAYING ANDAND WE'VE GOT STANDING WATER, THAT JUST SEEMS -- THAT JUST SEEMS COUNTER INTUITIVE. THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO JIVE.

[02:00:11]

>> UNDERSTOOD. AS PART OF THE DAYCARE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE -- I'M AN OWNER/OPERATE ARE SO I HAVE MORE CONCERNS. WHAT I AM SAYING, I WILL DO ANYTHING FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT TO COMPLETELY SCREEN THAT÷÷ ON NO VISIBILITY INTO DETENTION. THAT'S HOW IT WILL BE. IT WILL BE A DETENTION AREA AND IT WILL BE SCREENED. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL HAVE THE DESIGN DO.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO MOVING THAT SIGN LOCATION SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT?

>> WE HAVE A DRIVEWAY HERE, SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE SIGN, SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE WOULD PUT IT.

LET ME GO BACK TO MY PRESENTATION HERE.

THE SIGN IS RIGHT THERE IN THE FRONT AND WE HAVE A DRIVEWAY.

>> YOU ALSO HAVE A CORNER ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE WHERE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC WOULD BE TO SEE YOUR SIGN.

>> HERE?

>> MM-HMM. MIGHT BE A GOOD COMPROMISE.

I DON'T KNOW.

>> SO MOVING THE SIGN FROM HERE TO HERE? THAT'S POSSIBLE. WE COULD DO THAT. WE'RE FINE WITH THAT.

>> OKAY.

POINT. WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING HOME, YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE, LIKE, EVERYBODY'S MARKETING, AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO CATCH NEARLY AS MANY PEOPLE AS IT WOULD OFF FM 1387.

>> WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. I THINK THERE WAS ONE MORE QUESTION ON ALCOHOL WAS ANOTHER QUESTION. WE HAD STAFF GO DOOR-TO-DOOR, BY WAY OF THE ALCOHOL COMMISSION, WE MEASURED IT AND MADE SURE NO ISSUE EITHER FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL, FROM THE CHURCH AND ALL OF THAT.

MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND, THE SCHOOL IT'S PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE, IT'S NOT DOOR-TO-DOOR.

SO IF YOU MEASURE DOOR-TO- DOOR, THAT'S A PROBLEM BECAUSE THE MEASUREMENT AND STATE LAW AND UNDER THE ORDINANCE IS PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE.

>> WHEN YOU SAY THE SCHOOL, IT'S THE HIGHHIGH SCHOOL?

>> IS THERE ANY INTENT TO HAVE ALCOHOL OR ALCOHOL SALES ON THE PROPERTY ANYWHERE?

>> THIS WOULD BE A RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, SO THERE COULD BE A RESTAURANT WHICH MAY SERVE

ALCOHOL. >> SO MAYBE LIKE A JASON'S DELI THAT DOESN'T SERVE ALCOHOL?

>> IT COULD BE ONE OF THEM.

>> THAT WAY WE'RE NOT SANDWICHING ALCOHOL IN BETWEEN DAYCARES AND HIGH SCHOOLS, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA NOT TO DO THAT.

>> THE CONVERSATION CAME UP ABOUT SIDEWALKS, AND I KNOW IT SEEMS SILLY AND I UNDERSTAND EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT 1387 WAS GOING TO GET LET A WHOLE LOT SOONER THANTHAN IT HAS IT WAS DELAYED FOR OTHER REASONS. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HIGH SCHOOL KIDS RIGHT THERE AND KIDS WHO ARE NOW WALKING AND AS A COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY HAS BEEN VERY IMPORTANT TO US.

SO JUST LIKE THE LAST CASE, WHILE I UNDERSTAND IT MAY SEEM LIKE CRAZY AND ABOVE AND BEYOND, I THINK THAT WE HAVE A PRECEDENT AS A COMMUNITY.

WE DO WANT TO SEE SIDEWALKS PUT IN PLACE BECAUSE WE WANT TO INCREASE THE ABILITYABILITY FOR THE TO GET OUT AND WALK. AND IF I, YOU KNOW, LIVED IN MASSEY MEADOWS OR IN THETHE GROVE I WANTED TO WALK TO YOUR RESTAURANT OR TO ONE OF THOSE RESTAURANTS IN THE EVENING, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO GET THERE.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S -- HONESTLY, I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE I'M NOT ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN AS OFTEN. DO WE HAVE CROSSWALKS IN FRONT OF HERITAGE? AT THE LIGHT THERE'S NOT?

>> I DON'T THINK SO. I GO THERE A LOT BECAUSE MY KIDS BASKETBALL BECAUSE AND I HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE. I'VE SEEN PEOPLE WALKING ACROSS IT, BUT I DON'T THINK --

>> YEAH.

>> THERE IS?

>> AT THE INTERSECTION.

. >> WITH LIKE THE BUTTONS YOU EVERYTHING? YEAH, OKAY.

>> SORRY, WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK TO YOU. SORRY. OKAY.

SO, WITH THAT, IF WE HAVE CROSSWALKS ALREADY IN PLAY, I WOULD WANT TO SEE SIDEWALKS,

[02:05:01]

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S -- I KNOW THAT'S A LOT TO ASK, SO I WOULD SAY LET'S BE AWARE OF THAT AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND BUILD THE SIDEWALKS ON THE PROPERTY YOU DON'T THINK WILL BE PURCHASED TO EXPAND.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WE'RE HAVING TO BUILD A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO GET THERE, BUT BE FORWARD THINKING THAT WE WANT TO HAVE SIDEWALKS. SO I'M LOOKING -- I'M LOOKING AT THE SIGN EXHIBIT IS THE ONE I'M CURRENTLY LOOKING AT.

SO WHERE YOU HAVE KIND OF THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND WHERE THE SIGNS ARE, HAVING YOUR SIDEWALK -- YEAH.

HAVING YOUR SIDEWALK IN THAT GRAY SHADED AREA -- YOU MOVED IT ON ME.

SO WAY BACK THERE. SO IF YOU'LL COME OVER TO WHERE YOUR ENTRANCE IS AND YOU HAVE A LITTLE CROSS WALK THERE. SO HAVING YOUR CROSSWALKS ON THAT LINE, KIND OF THAT PROPERTY LINE.

>> OKAY, AS PART OF THE FIRST

PHASE. >> BECAUSE YOUR PHASE ONE RETAIL, PHASE TWO RETAIL B COULD BE RESTAURANTS, RIGHT?

>> YES. THE THOUGHT PROCESS IS IN TWO YEARS IT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN OUT WHEN TXDOT ACQUIRES THEIR PROCESS.

THAT WAS THE RATIONALE, THROWAWAY SOLUTION.

>> WE DON'T HAVE ONE THAT WOULDN'T HARM THAT SCREEN. WE DON'T KNOW THAT IT WILL BE TWO YEARS. I THINK TWO YEARS IS WHEN THEY START LOOKING AT ACQUIRING PROPERTY. TOM THUMB DID PUT THE SIDEWALKS IN EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW THEY COULD BE TORN OUT IN THE FUTURE.

>> SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS -- WHAT I'M SAYING ISIS HERE, THAT WE HAVE SIDEWALKS ON THIS PART, NOT WAY DOWN HERE AT THE ROAD. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING TO BE ACQUIRED, CORRECT? SO LET'S BUILD SIDEWALKS ALONG THIS PATH HERE AND THAT PATH THERE.

>> YEAH, NO, I UNDERSTAND. RIGHT NOW THIS WESTMINSTER DRIVE IS ALLALL RESIDENCE. THERE'S A SIDEWALK HERE AND A SIDEWALK THAT GOES ALONG THEIR MASONRY FENCE LINE. THIS IS A WALKABLE AREA.

WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK DOWN HERE, WALK DOWN HERE AND GET IN HERE, OR WE WANT TO CONTINUE WALKING AND GET TO HERE.

>> SO THAT WHEN WE CAN GET TO THIS INTERSECTION IF WE WANT TO WALK ACROSS, WE CAN GO HERE. THAT'S THE IDEA OF CONNECTIVITY.

>> HEY, ARE THERE SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF THAT NEW GROCERY STORE OVER THERE?

>> YES.

>> THERE ARE? SO THERE'S SIDEWALKS ON ALL THREE CORNERS EXCEPT THIS ONE?

>> YES.

>> THE ONLY THING THERE, THEY CAME AND WANT THE SITE TO BE IMPROVED, THEY KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON AND THAT THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT --

>> SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT.

YOU SAY YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH THIS LOCATION OTHER THAN A GENERIC PAD SITE THAT YOU CAN PLUG THINGS IN LATER OTHER THAN THIS DAYCARE,

RIGHT? >> FOR PHASE THREE.

>> FOR PHASE THREE. BECAUSE OF THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO BUILD SIDEWALKS. YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL LATER.

>> FOR THAT SECTION.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> ARE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? WE HAVE ONE INDIVIDUAL TO SPEAK, JACK FREEMAN, STATE YOUR NAME AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS.

[02:10:02]

>> MY NAME IS JACK FREEMAN AND LIVE ON SOUTH WALNUT GROVE ROAD.

>> GET HIM SET BACK UP.

>> SO I LIVELIVE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER, SO DIAGONAL, TOM THUMB IS NORTH OF ME AND THIS PROPERTY IS NORTHWEST OF ME.

I'VE SPOKEN TO MIKE ADAMS REGARDING THE DRAINAGE, SPOKEN TO THE DEVELOPER, AND HE'S GIVEN MEAN THE LETTERS.

I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THE PROJECT WHATSOEVER.

YOU- ALL'S ISSUES WITH THE RETENTION POND'S LOCATION, THAT'S YOU- ALL'S JOB.

IN REGARDS TO THE DAYCARE AND THE RETENTION POND, YOU GO TO EVERY DAYCARE IN MIDLOTHIAN, THEY'RE ON A MAJOR ROAD WITH A CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT LITTLE JOHNNY CAN CLIMB OVER. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY DIFFERENCE WHERE THIS DAYCARE IS AT, THE RETENTION POND RELATING TO A ROAD, BUT, NEVERTHELESS, THAT POND, WHEN I SPOKE TO MIKE ADAMS, I HAD BEEN UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT WHEN THE INTERSECTION WAS ALL DONE, THAT THAT POND WAS TIED INTO THETHE THAT'S COMING FROM KENSINGTON EAST.

>> IT ALL DRAINS THERE, HEADS EAST, HEADS SOUTH ALONG WALNUT GROVE AND COMES THROUGH WHAT I CALL THE CORNER CULVERT WHICH IS ON THE CORNER OF MY PROPERTY.

AND IT DRAINS STRAIGHT EAST AND THEN DRAINS OFF SOUTHEAST TO THE CREEK. BUT THAT WAS INCORRECT.

THE POND HAS NEVER HELD WATER. IT HADN'T HELD WATER IN 35 YEARS. CATTLE OVER THERE, NEVER HELD WATER. SO I KNOW THE DEVELOPER HAS WANTED TO FILL IT IN, BROUGHT DIRT OUT. WHEN I SAW THE DIRT, I CONTACTED MIKE, AND HE SAID, YEAH, ME AND HIM DISCUSSED AND, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPERS ASSURED ME THAT THE WAY THEY'RE GOING TO PLAN ON GRADING IT THAT LESS WATER IS GOING TO COME THROUGH REGARDING -- AT A SLOWER RATE FROM KENSINGTON.

>> I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE -- AND WE TALK ABOUT THIS BEFORE THE MEETING, MY CONCERN WHATEVER TOM THUMB WAS GETTING DEVELOPED, YOU'RE PUTTING ALL THIS CONCRETE - - RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE FIELD.

WATER SATURATES IN THE GROUND AND IT'S COMING THROUGH A CULVERT FROM THE OLD PROPERTY BUT÷÷ NOW IT'S CONCRETE THE WAY THE DEVELOPER SAID THERE THEYTHEY GRADING IT TO GO TO THE RETENTION POND AND DOWN TO THE MAIN CREEK OVER FURTHER EAST.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION TO THEM THAT TO DIDN'T REALLY GET A CHANCE TO DISCUSS ALL THE CONCRETE THAT WOULD BE THERE, IS IT GOING TO GRADE TO THE RETENTION TOPOND? IS IT GOING TO GRADE SOUTH TO 1387 AND DRAIN THAT WAY? OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T SEE EVERYTHING -- YOU CAN'T SEE DRAINS ON A MAP UNLESS YOU HAVE THAT MAP. BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE PROJECT. THAT'S MY SAY ON IT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT.

>> I DO HAVE ONE LAST THING ON THE RETENTION POND.

OVER THE LAST FOUR MONTHS WE HAVE DESIGNED THIS, MIKE ADAMS, THE CITY ENGINEER, OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE, THE CALCULATIONS.

WE HAVE MOVED THE AREA AROUND AND÷÷ IT WILL BE LESS BASED ON OUR CALCULATION AND THE REQUIREMENT THE CITY WANTS US TO IMPOSE.

I WANT TO PUT IT OUT THERE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? DO I HEAR A MOTION? WE NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE

THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I'LL SECOND.

>> SECOND. >> PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 6-0. FURTHER DISCUSSION OR A MOTION?

>> I JUST WANT TO SAY I SUPPORT STAFF AND THEIR APPRAISAL.

I THINK WE HAVE A SITUATION -- I THINK THE APPLICANT -- WE HAVE STRINGENT DRAINAGE STANDARDS, STRINGENT STANDARDS ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS. WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES IN WE EXPECT THEM TO AT LEAST MEET

[02:15:02]

OR EXCEED THOSE STANDARDS AND WE MAY GRANT A VARIANCE HERE OR THERE.

THIS SEEMS LIKE DESPITE STAFF'S HARD WORK ON THIS, THEY'RE NOT REALLY MEETING STAFF AT THAT POINT OF OUR EXPECTATIONS. I MEAN, I JUST SEE TOO MANY PROBLEMS, THE SIGN, THE SCREENING WALL, THE SCREENING ALONG THE BACK PART OF THE PROPERTY, AND, YOU KNOW, NOT BUILDING A SIDEWALK, NOT COOPERATING. TOM THUMB CAME IN AND THEY WERE COOPERATIVE IN WORKING WITH THAT DESPITE MUCH COMMENTARY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I'M RECOMMENDING DENIAL BUT INTERESTED IN FURTHER

DISCUSSION. >> I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU.

I BELIEVE THERE'S JUST -- WE HAVE MORE THAN A SHEET WORTH OF VARIANCES THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. ONE OF THE THINGS IS THETHE OF IT. TO ME, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU CAN SEE IT OR NOT, LET'S DO IT RIGHT.

>> ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I MEAN, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO KNOCK SOME OF THESE OFF?

>> OFF THE VARIANCE LIST?

>> WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL BETWEEN A SIX FOOT AND A TEN FOOT

TREE? >> NOT A BIG DEAL.

WE CAN GET THAT DONE.

>> YOU'VE ALREADY AGREED TO MOVE THE SIGN, CORRECT?

>> SORRY?

>> YOU AGREED TO MOVE THE SIGN DOWN TO THE OTHER LOCATION?

>> YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT.

THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. WE'LL DO THE TEN FOOT EVERGREEN. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.

IF SIDEWALK IS AN ISSUE, WE'LL

GET THAT DONE. >> IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A PRETTY BIG ISSUE, LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO WANT YOU TO BUILD THE SIDEWALKS.

>> WE CAN -- IF THAT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH THE COMMISSION, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE SIDEWALK.

>> I DON'T THINK YOU'RE UNDERSTANDING.

I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THIS PROJECT, AND WE CAN SIT HERE ALL NIGHT AND DO IT. THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH STAFF, AND I THINK STAFF KNOWS WHAT CITY COUNCIL WILL DO AND WE CAN WORK THROUGH ALL THIS AND YOU MAY END UP SOMETHING WE DON'T TOUCH ON. I DON'T THINK YOU'RE IN A POSITION WHERE YOU HAVE MADE AN EFFORT TO WORK WITH STAFF TO MAKE THIS IN A FORM PRESENTABLE TO MIDLOTHIAN AND APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.

>> SO WHAT DOES HE DO? DOES HE COME BACK WITH A LESSENED LIST?

>> YOU CAN APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS, OR DENY. AND NO MATTER WHAT ACTION YOU TAKE, IT COULD GO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.

>> OKAY.

>> JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, COMMISSIONER DAN.

YOUR CONCERN -- WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THE SIDEWALK. JUST SO I'M CLEAR.

>> I THINK MY CONCERN ON THIS IS THE HE AESTHETICS YOU DON'T HAVEHAVE PLAN OR NEED THAT THE CITY NEED.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE HIGHEST INVESTING FOR THE CITIZENS OF MIDLOTHIAN. WHEN A DEVELOPMENT COMES IN, LOOK, WE'RE GOING TO PUT A GROCERY STORE AND MAKE IT A GROCERY STORE WITH SURROUNDING SITES, OR THEY COME AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A DAYCARE, LIKE WE HEARD EARLIER, AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE BEST DAYCARE WE CAN. THIS IS SORT OF A, WE'RE GOING IS TO BUILD A PAD SITE AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE A DAYCARE BUT WE HAVEN'T REALLY THOUGHT OUT HOW THE DAYCARE AND THE PAD SITE AND THE RETENTION POND ALL WORK TOGETHER. SO THERE'S NOT A NEED IN THE RIGHT NOW FOR WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING I LOOK AT AND THINK THE AESTHETICS AS WAS TOUCHED ON, THE AESTHETICS AREN'T SUCH, OOH, WE'RE MISSING OUT ON THE MOST BEAUTIFUL BUILDING WE'VE EVER SEEN.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED WITH TOM THUMB ARE THE ECONOMICS OF THE PEOPLE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TOWN, VERY HIGH- DOLLAR HOMES, THE PROPERTY VALUES ARE VERY HIGH.

THEY HAVE VERY HIGH EXPECTATIONS OF THE FINISH OUT VALUE AND THE WAY÷÷ THE BUILDINGS LOOK AROUND THERE. THERE'S A LOT OF RURAL -- I KNOW MR. FREEMAN IS CONCERNED. WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE PERSON BEHIND BUT THAT RURAL AGRICULTURE LOT HAS BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE. I THINK THEY MAY BE ENTITLED TO MORE SCREENING THAN SIX FOOT OR TEN FOOT OF TREES EVEN. THIS NEEDS TO GO BACK TO STAFF, AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD RECOMMEND DENIAL UNTIL THIS POINT IN TIME UNTIL THOSE ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED.

>> FORMAL MOTION?

>> I WILL MAKE A FORMAL MOTION TO DENY.

>> IS THAT WITH PREJUDICE OR WITHOUT?

>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

>> IT COULD COME BACK IN 30 DAYS.

>> I WOULD GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY IF THEY WORK WITH STAFF.

>> DO I HEAR A SECOND?

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> PLEASE VOTE.

[014 Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend the regulations of Planned Development District No. 42 (PD-42) by changing the development regulations for Module F and approve a detailed site plan for a 0.948± acre portion of PD-42. The property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of South 9th Street and Ama Lane. (Z39-2025-098)]

PASSES 6-0. ALL RIGHT.

ITEM 14.

[02:20:01]

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A REQUEST TO AMEND THE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 42 BY CHANGING THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR MODULE F AND APPROVE A DETAILED SITE PLAN OF A 0. 948+ ACRE PORTION OF PD-42. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSECTION OF SOUTH 9TH STREET AND AMA LANE.

>> I'M HERE TO PRESENT ITEM 14. THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMEND A PD SITE PLAN AND INCORPORATE ELEVATIONS AND LANDSCAPELANDSCAP E PLAN. THIS IS CURRENTLY 0. 948 ACRE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IN THE COMP PLAN. THE SLIDE SHOWS ADJACENT ZONING, LANDDESIGNATION IN THE PROPERTY.

THE SITE PLAN, WORTH KNOWING THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN FOUND IN PD 42 HAD ONLY ONE OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDING LOCATED IN THE BUILDING A AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE LOT.

THIS IS A LANDSCAPING PLAN. ALL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET AND NO VARIANCES WILL BE REQUIRED. THE ELEVATION FOR BUILDING A REQUIRING NO VARIANCES, THE SAME GOES FOR BUILDING B. THIS AMENDMENT WILL NOT CHANGE THE BASE ZONING AND THE PROPOSED OFFICES ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES, THE REQUEST IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

GOALS AND STRATEGIES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO SUPPORT THE CONSISTENCY WITH IT. PUBLIC NOTICES WERE SENT OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A 200- FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO OBJECTION AS OF THIS DATE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO PD- 42 SINCE THE REQUEST WILL REMAIN COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES, REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE MAP AND CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE POLICIES.

I'M OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.

>> QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? THE A APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND WHETHER YOU LIVE IN THE CITY

LIMITS. >> DALTON BRADBERRY AND I RESIDE IN WAXAHACHIE, TEXAS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME CONSIDERING OUR PROJECT. I BELIEVE THE ORIGINAL USE FOR THIS WAS A DAYCARE. OUR SQUARE FOOTAGE MEETS WITH WHAT THAT WAS.

WE'RE LOOKING TO BUILD PROFESSIONAL OFFICE SPACE ULTIMATELY IS WHAT OUR IDEA IS HERE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M OPEN TO THAT.

>> QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> IS THIS ANOTHER STATE FARM?

>> IT IS NOT.

>> OKAY. JUST ASKING.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS OF STAFF? IS THERE A MOTION TO CLOSE?

>> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> SECOND.

>> PLEASE VOTE.

PASSES 7-0.

>> ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR DISCUSSION OR A MOTION?

>> I'LL MAKE A FORMAL MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

[015 Conduct a public hearing and consider a request to grant a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a multi-family residential development within Planned Development District No. 146 (PD146). The property is generally located on US Highway 287 and Old Fort Worth Road. (SUP08-2025-100)]

PASSES 7-0. ITEM 15.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER A REQUEST TO GRANT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 146. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON U.S. HIGHWAY 87 AND OLD FORT WORTH ROAD.

>> THE NEXT ITEM IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR 249- UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON 17. 38 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED LAND. THE MIDLOTHIAN DESIGNATES THIS

[02:25:04]

PROPERTY AS RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY MODULE, AND THE GOALS FOR THE FUTURE LAND USEUSE ATTRACTIVE AND SAFE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FOR ALL RESIDENTS AND SUPPORT THE HORIZONTAL MIXING OF APPROPRIATE LAND USES IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS.

AND SO THIS IS THE CURRENT ZONING MAP, WHICH SHOWS THIS AS A PORTION OF PD- 146 WEST SIDE PRESERVED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWING THIS AREA AS HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MODULE.

THE PROPERTY IS SOUTH OF 287 WHICH IS ON 300 FEET OF EXISTING -- ON THE EXISTING TRAVEL LANES.

THEY DID CONSTRUCT AN ACCESS ROAD ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF 287 TO ACCOMMODATE ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY.

THEY ARE REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES THAT I'LL GET INTO. JUST SOME HISTORY ON THIS PROPERTY. THE ORIGINAL WEST SIDE PRESERVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DID PROPOSE THIS LOT TO BE EITHER MULTIFAMILY USE BASED ZONING OR COMMUNITY RETAIL BASED ZONING.

FOR THE MULTIFAMILY USE, IT REQUIRED A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL, IT DID REQUIRE A DETAILED SITE PLAN TO COME BACK FOR THIS PARCEL.

IF THEY DID DO IN THE ORIGINAL PD IF THEY DID MULTIFAMILY THEY WERE CAPPED AT 302 UNITS.

>> SO IN 2022 THEY PRESENTED A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR MULTIFAMILY. THAT WAS DENIED ON NOVEMBER 8TH BY CITY COUNCIL, AND THEY CAME BACK AGAIN FOR MULTIFAMILY AND THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL JULY OF 2023. THAT APPROVED 294 UNITS WITH ONE VARIANCE. THEY'VE HAD TO -- SINCE THAT GOT APPROVED, THEY BUILT THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND THEY'VE BEEN WORKING TOWARDS COMPLETING THE PROJECT, BUT THEY DID NOT GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BEFORE JULY OF 2025, SO THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT EXPIRED. AND SO THEY ARE REAPPLYING AGAIN FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THE PROJECT WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS FROM THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.