[D. Consider and act upon a request from the Midlothian Chamber of Commerce to expend $20,000 of Municipal Hotel/Motel Tax monies for advertising and event expenses for the April 2026 MidloFest. ]

CONSIDERING AND ACUPON A REQUEST FROM THE MIDLOTHIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO EXPEND $20,000 OF MUNICIPAL HOTEL/MOTEL TAX MONIES FOR ADVERTISING AND EVENT EXPENSES

FROM THE APRIL 2026 MID LOFEST. >> I WILL TAKE THOSE QUESTIONS, MIKE I HAD A COUPLE -- SEVERAL FOLKS CALL ME ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM. THOSE QUESTIONS SEEM TO REMOVAL VOLVE MORE AROUND THESE FUNDS AND HOW THE DOLLARS WILL BE RELEASED? IT IT IT WILL BE A LUMP-SUM OR EXPENSED AS INVOICES PRESENTED HOW WILL THESE FUNDS BE PRESENTED?

[00:05:04]

>> I THINK IT WILL BE IN A LUMP-SUM AND THE MAJORITY IS FOR MARKETING AND ADVERTISING.

SO I THINK IT COULD HAPPEN ANY WAY YOU WOULD WANT IT TO. IF YOU WANT TO DO IT BY INVOICE, WE CAN DO IT THAT WAY OR LUMP-SUM TO UTILIZE IT FOR MARKETING AND ADVERTISING.

>> I KNOW THAT THOSE ARE KIND OF THE REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE MADE ON SOME OTHER GRANTS. I KNOW FOR SOME HISTORICAL QUESTIONS, AND PROTOCOLS THAT I WONDER -- I WILL LISTEN TO THE BALANCE OF COUNCIL, BUT I ALWAYS THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO RELEASE FUNDS AS EXPENSES ARE PRESENTED IN INVOICE FORMAT. I'M HAPPY TO LISTEN TO WHATEVER COUNCIL SAYS.

>> ALLEN? >> HOW HAVE WE TRADITIONALLY RELEASED THE EXPENDITURES?

>> CHRIS OR AN, SOMEBODY HELP ME ON THIS ONE. I THINK IN A LUMP SUM.

>> I THINK IT DEPENDS ON -- >> THE REASON I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S HOT TAX RELATED. OUR HOT TAX AS YOU KNOW, HOTEL RECENTLY SOLD. THIS IS NOT ACTIVITY BASE THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE GOOD ADVANTAGE OF, AND SO THIS IS KIND OF NEW, AND IT WOULD BE NICE -- I KNOW WITHIN THE TYPICAL GRANT PROCESS OF 4B, THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF INVOICE PRESENTATION-RELATED RELEASE. SO I'M WONDERING HOW COUNCIL WANTS TO THINK HOW TO HOW WE'RE

GOING TO DO THIS ON HOT TAX? >> I CAN SPEAK TO WHAT WE HAVE DONE THROUGH THE PAST. FOR THEM, WE GENERALLY DO JUST GIVE THEM A CHECK AND USUALLY SHE WILL SEND SOMETHING TO ME THAT I USE AS BACKUP TO THAT, NOT JUST A PRESENTATION, BUT IT WILL ACTUALLY BE A LETTER, OR AN INVOICE THAT I PAY FROM. IT'S ALL DONE IN ONE LUMP-SUM FOR THESE. AND AS CLYDE SAID, IN THIS CASE IT'S A HOT OF MARKETING. SO THEY WERE WANTING THAT MONEY UPFRONT TO

BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THE MARKETING. >> SO WILL THERE BE A FILE SO

TO SPEAK PRESENTED AT THE END, WITH A BULK OF INVOICES? >> GENERALLY WE HAVE NOT ASKED FOR THOSE FROM THE CHAMBER. IT'S CERTAIN HI SOMETHING WE COULD CONSIDER.

>> IT'S A CONCERN THAT -- AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE BALANCE ACCOUNTS, BUT FOR ME, I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN THAT THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IS GOING TO ALLOCATE THE MONEY IMPROPERLY.

IS THAT A CONCERN THAT YOU ARE HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC? LIKE IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE?

OR IS IT MORE GENERAL? >> I THINK THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE RECEIVED IS IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO ACTUALLY WITH THE CHAMBER. BUT THAT WE GET OFF ON THE RIGHT FOOT. AND WHEN YOU RELEASING $20,000 SUMS OF MONEY, WHICH IT DOESN'T SOUND LYING LIKE WE HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF BALANCE SHEET PROTOCOL TO ESTABLISH WHERE THOSE FUNDS ARE SPENT, DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THE CHAMBER WOULD DO THAT. BUT I BELIEVE THE DOOR COULD BE OPENED FOR NONPROFIT, AND DON'T WANT TO SEE THEM SEPARATE FROM THE CITIZENS' MONEY. THAT IS WHY I HAVE ACTUALLY RECEIVED THREE CALLSES ON THIS TODAY. THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS,

NOT ONLY THIS, BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE? >> THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME.

I MEAN AT LEAST THE PAST TWO YEARS THEY HAVE ASKED FOR HOT MONIES AND WE HAVE GIVEN THEM THOSE FOR ADVERTISING AND MARKETING OR THE SECRETARY OF STATE OR COMPTROLLER REGULATES WHAT WE USE THOSE FUND FOR. THERE'S A SEVEN-PART TEST AND THING LIKE THAT. SO WE CAN

DEFINITELY ASK FOR THE INVOICES. >> I WANT TO HEAR FROM REST OF COUNCIL.

>> THAT IS WHAT I'M HOOKING FOR. I'M TRYING TO PRESENT QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE BEEN ASKED. I'M LOOKING FOR INPUT OF COUNCIL, IF THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED TO GO DOWN THAT

ROAD, I'M HAPPY TO MOVE. >> LET'S GO TO ROSS NEXT. IN REVIEWING THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THIS USE OF FUNDS ON THE HOT TAM. THEY ARE LIMITED STATUTORY WHAT THEY CAN BE FOR AS THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO SUPPORT TOURISM AND PUTTING BED AND HEADS AIN COMMUNITY TO REINVEST BACK METAL AND ECONOMIC TOURISM. THERE IS AT LEAST A PERSPECTIVE ITEMIZED ACCOUNTING WHERE THEY BREAK DOWN THE USE OF THE 20,000 DOLLARS. I THINK MIKE IS CORRECT, IT'S PROBABLY PRUDENT FOR US TO SET THE PRECEDENT THAT SAYS HEY AT THE END OF THE EVENT, WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO SHORE THAT UP WITH THE RECEIPTS FROM THAT. SO THAT WE SET A GOOD MANNER OF BUSINESS MOVING FORWARD. AGAIN, I HAVE NO CONCERNS OF ANY KIND OF MISAPPROPRIATION OR MISALLOCATION OF THE FUNDS THAT WE'RE INVEST LONG SIDE THE

[00:10:03]

CHAMBER AND OUR COMMUNITY WITH THIS EVENT THAT BRINGS THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HERE FOR THE PURPOSE OF TOURISM. I THINK AS WE CONTINUE TO SEE THE BALANCE OF THE HOT FUND ACCOUNT GROW AND THE COLLECTIONS IN THAT ARENA GROW, THAT WE DO NEED TO SET A CLEAR PRECEDENCE HOW THOSE FUNDS ARE USED AND THERE'S A TRUST AND VERIFY COMPONENT OF THAT. I AGREE

COMPLETELY. >> SO ME, WHETHER IT'S $20,000 OR $100,000, THESE RELEASES ARE GOING TO GET LARGER. SO WHETHER IT'S A SMALL OR LARGE AMOUNT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO

CONDUCT THOSE RELEASED IN AN EVEN PLAYING-FIELD. >> CLARK? WELL, I MEAN ROSS SAID MOST OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. THANK YOU. I WOULD JUST, I GUESS, IT'S MORE POSING A QUESTION. SINCE IT'S ADVERTISING AND MARKETING, I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE YOU WOULD DO IT WITHOUT RELEASING THE MONEY UPFRONT? I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU IN THE FACT THAT MAYBE THEY PROVIDE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AFTER THE EVENT AND IF THEY DON'T MEET THE THRESHOLD, OR THEY DIDN'T SPEND THE MONEY OR CAN PROVE THAT THEY SPENT THE MONEY CORRECTLY THAT IS A DECISION FOR COUNCIL MOVING FORWARD THE NEXT TIME, SORRY, YOU DIDN'T USE THE FUNDS WE THOUGHT YOU WERE. HOW TO OVERCOME RELEASING IT UPFRONT, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO THAT. UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO PAY THE VENDOR ON BEHALF OF THE CHAMBER, OR WHOEVER NONPROFIT? I'M SURE THAT WOULD BE A HEADACHE FOR ACCOUNTING.

>> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH RELEASING THE FUNDS UPFRONTS AS LONG AS WE H■AVE CHECKS AND■

[2026-036 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the regulations relating to the use and development of Milligan Addition, Block 5, Lot 13 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) ]

[00:20:17]

PRESENTED. >> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

[00:20:19]

>> I ALREADY MADE THE MOTION. DO YOU WANT TO SECOND IT?

>> SECOND IT. >> GOOD ENOUGH. MOTION BY MYSELF AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RODGERS, PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 6-0.

[2026-037 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending 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 (SUP) for a daycare use. The property is generally located on Walnut Grove Road north of Pasture View Avenue and south of Clancey Lane. (Z37-2025-096).]

THANK YOU. ITEM 2026-37 KONG DUCT YOU APUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 2.341 PLUS OR MINUSING ACRE TRACT IN THE JOHN EARLY SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 343 BY CHANGING THE ZONING IF URGAL DISTRICT TO GENERAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT AND INCORPORATING THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A DAYCARE USE. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON WALNUT GROVE ROAD NORTH OF PASTURE VIEW AVENUE AND SOUTH OF CHANCE

YEE LANE. >> GOOD EVENING, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING. THE NEXT ITEM IS A REQUEST TO REZONE 2.341 ACRES OF A PORTION OF UNDEVELOPED LAND ON WELL, YOU NUT GROVE NORTH OF PASTURE VIEW. THERE'S PASTURE VIEW AVENUE. SOUTH OF CLANCEY LANE. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO REZONE IT FROM AGRICULTURAL TO GENERAL PROFESSIONAL, AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A DAYCARE USE. THE MAST EVERY THOROUGHFARE PLAN SHOWS WALNUT GROVE AS A MAJOR ARTERIAL. A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE THAT IS 120' IN WIDTH. AND THEIR DAYCARE FACILITY THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING IS 11,274 SQUARE FEET. AND THEY ARE REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES, WHICH IS ONE FOR DRIVEWAY SPACING, LESS THAN 330' ON A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. AND TO HAVE AN INTERNALLY ELLUMINATED SIGN. THE FUTURE LAND USE SHOWS IT'S MEDIUM DENSITY MODULE. THIS MODULE ALLOWS FOR SURROUNDING RETAIL AND OFFICE USE THAT ARE COMPATIBLE AND CONNECTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENCOURAGES A BALANCE OF HORIZONTAL MIXED-USE APPROPRIATE IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS. IT ALSO CALLS FOR EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIESES TO EXPAND THE LOCAL JOB OPPORTUNITIES. THE ZONING MAP SHOWS THAT THE AREA IS SURROUNDED BY AGRICULTURAL AND IT'S A MIX OF SINGLE-FAMILY, AND TWO DIFFERENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EAST AND SOUTH IS BRIDGE WATER. AND THE OTHER SIDE IS THE VILLAGES OF WALNUT GROVE AND ANOTHER SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ZONING WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, IT'S THE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL, WHICH IS THE LOWEST NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO TIE DOWN THE SPECIFIC USE FOR THIS PORTION OF THE LOT. SO THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES. AND SO THIS IS AN AREA OF THEIR DETAILED SITE PLAN. THIS DRIVEWAY HERE IS APPROXIMATELY 294' FROM PRAIRIE VIEW LANE AND 303' FROM THE MEDIAN OPENING HERE. BECAUSE OF THOSE DISTANCES, THEY DO -- THEY ARE ASKING FOR THAT VARIANCE OF THE 330'. AND STAFF DID REVIEW IT, AND SO DID ENGINEERING AS WELL. THEY'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT VARIANCE. THIS IS THE ELEVATIONS. THEY DO MEET ALL OF THE ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS.

THIS IS THE SIDE SETBACK AND THE PROPOSED SIGN WILL BE LOCATED ALONG WALNUT GROVE. IT WILL BE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WITH A MESSAGING BOARD PORTION OF IT. THIS IS JUST A VISUAL OF THEIR DUMPSTER SCREENING AND THEIR WALL. THEY WILL HAVE A -- MASONRY WALL ON TWO SIDE BECAUSE IT'S SURROUNDED BY AGRICULTURAL, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THEY WILL ALSO HAVE LANDSCAPING ALONG ALL THREE OF THE SIDES WHERE IT'S ADJACENT TO THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WE DID SEND 37 POSTCARDS TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN

[00:25:03]

200' OF THE PROPERTY. WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE.

HOWEVER, ONE PERSON DID SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. AND SO STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FROM GENERAL PROFESSIONAL TO AGRICULTURAL, AS WELL AS THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE DAYCARE AS IT'S COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE ON WALNUT GROVE BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. AT THE JANUARY 20TH, 26 MEETING. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THERE WOULD BE A FLIP BACK CONDITION THEIR TI DID RECOMMEND A SOUTHBOUND TURN LANE HERE AT THIS DRIVE HERE, WHICH THEY ALREADY SAID THEY WOULD DO. IT JUST PUTS IT IN THE ORDINANCE.

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO

SPEAK? >> JACK FREEMAN. >> MR. FREEMAN.

WELCOME, IF YOU WANT TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. JUST STATE YOUR NAME INTO THE MIC FOR THE RECORD AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS, WHICH WE KNOW YOU DO UNAYOU HAVE

THREE COMMITTEES. >> JACK FREEMAN, I LIVE AT 220 SOUTH WALNUT GROVE ROAD. I DIDN'T SIGN UP AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THE ITEM WAS GOING TO BE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE AT ALL WITH THE PROJECT. I THINK SOME OF THE TERMS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING WERE MISLEADING. I HAD KIDS IN DAYCARE FOR A LOT OF YEARS. IF THE DAYCARE IS GOING TO HAVE 200 KIDS, PRIMETIME IS 6:45 TO 7:15 IN THE MORNING FOR DROP-OFF. ROUGHLY 150 CARS. HALF -- IF YOU JUST TOOK HALF OF THE CARS AROUND 80. GET IN THERE EVERY 30 SECONDS. STARTING AT 6:45, THAT IS GOING TO TAKE OVER 40 MINUTES.

DROPPING IN AND OUT IS NOT GOING TO TAKE 2-3 MINUTES. IT TAKE 5-10 MINUTE AND LITTLEJOHNNY'S MOM HAS TO TALK TO THE TEACHER OR DIAPER, MILK, WHATEVER. THE RIGHT-HAND TURN LANE WHEN YOU TURN IN, YOU TURN LEFT TO DROP-OFF. THERE'S IS GOING TO BE ROUGHLY 25 CARS OR MORE COMING FROM THE SOUTH. AND IT'S GOING TO BACK UP ONTO WALNUT GROVE. SOME FROM THE SOUTHBOUND SIDE. UNLESS THE DECELERATION OR TURN LANE IS 200' LONG, YOU WILL HAVE CARS BLOCK THE LEFT-HAND LANE OF SOUTHBOUND WALNUT GROVE AND HAVE CARS BLOCK THE NORTHBOUND LANE, RIGHT-HAND LANE OF WALNUT GROVE AND YOU HAVE SOMEBODY GOING SOUTHBOUND GO ACROSS BECAUSE THEY THINK KIND OF THAT ODD DRIVEWAY COMING FROM THE SOUTH, THAT THEY CAN GET ACROSS. THEY WILL GO ACROSS AND BLOCK THE NORTHBOUND LANES. I HAD ALL OF THIS -- I MEAN, I SUPPORT IT. I THINK IT'S A GREAT SPOT. I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR THE AREA.

I THINK IT'S PERFECT FOR THE AREA. I JUST -- I FEEL A TURN LANE GOING NORTHBOUND IS GOING TO BE NEEDED, BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY THAT ALL THOSE CARS, AGAIN, I ONLY CALCULATED 80 CARS GETTING THERE PRIMETIME AND A CAR EVERY 30 SECOND YOU WILL HAVE 30 CARS OR MORE BACKED UP.

JUST WHAT I SEE FROM THE DRAWING, THE DRAWING HOLDS 15 CARS, MAYBE LESS? BUT AGAIN, I DIDN'T DRAW IT AND MAYBE THE DEVELOPERS CAN ANSWER THAT? THAT WAS MY ONLY ISSUE WAS WHEN THEY BROUGHT UP, BECAUSE BRIDGEPORT IS KIND OF LOCATED AT. THEY COULDN'T REALLY DO A LANE. AGAIN, I MEAN, I'M FOR IT.

>> GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE, BUT TRAFFIC CONCERNS.

>> TRAFFIC CONCERNS FOR THE TURN LANES. >> UNDERSTOOD, THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? NO OTHER SPEAKERS I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM WICKLIFFE, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SHUFFIELD, PLEASE VOTE. ONE MORE VOTE. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSES 6-0. IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO MAKE COMMENT OR JUST STAND FOR QUESTIONS AS THEY ARISE, YOU ARE WELCOME TO EITHER WAY. JUST INTRODUCE YOURSELF, PLEASE.

[00:30:01]

>> YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT. I APPRECIATE COMING TO SPEAK.

WE JUST KIND OF DISAGREE ON THE WINDOW, THE AMOUNT OF CARS AND THE BACK UP YOU WOULD EXPECT. WE EXPECT THIS TO BE MORE SPREAD OUT. I HAVE A YOUNG ONE AT DAYCARE IT'S AT FIREHOUSE OFF OF 9TH STREET AND NEVER HAD A SINGLE CAR BACKED UP, MORNING OR EVENING. SO WE WOULD -- WE DID A TIA ANALYSIS, AND CAME TO THIS

CONCLUSION. SO JUST WANTED TO SPEAK ON THAT. >> STAY CLOSE, IN CASE THERE'S QUESTIONS MORE SPECIFIC. COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR THE

APPLICANT? CLARK? >> I HAVE ONE FOR STAFF. IT'S GOING BACK TO THE P&Z VOTE. YOU TOLD US HOW THEY VOTED BUT WAS THAT WITH OR WITHOUT THE VARIANCES? WERE THEY APPROVING OR NOT APPROVING THE VARIANCES THEY APPROVED THE VARIANCES, WHICH WAS THE ADDITION OF PUTTING THE TURN LANE

INTO -- >> AND INTERNALLY LIT SIGN? >> YES.

>> THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, THOUGHTS? RUSS.

>> QUESTION FOR STAFF. -- INTERNAL LIGHT, DO WE HAVE THAT AS FAR AS THE BRIGHTNESS OF THAT, ESPECIALLY THIS CLOSE, YOU KNOW, TO A THOROUGHFARE? I JUST THINK BACK TO WHEN IT WAS FIRST INSTALLED THIS AND WHEN YOU WENT BACK AFTER DARK, IT WAS BLINDING, WHILE YOU WERE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD. THAT IS THE LIGHT PROJECTING INTO THE DRIVEWAY RATHER THAN ONTO THE SIGN. THE MESSAGE BOARDS ESPECIALLY TEND TO GET TUNED UP REAL HIGH.

DO WE HAVE SOME UNDERPINNINGS FOR THAT?

>> IN THE BASE ZONING WE DO NOT. BUT WE HAVE ADDED LANGUAGE IN THE INDIVIDUAL ORDINANCES WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN APPROVED TO REQUIRE

DIMMING. >> 200 -- FROM DUSK TO DAWN. >> I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT A

KNIT IS. >> IT'S A WAY OF MEASURING THE AVERAGE LUMENS FOR AN AREA SO THAT METRIC WAS ARRIVED BECAUSE WE GOT IT FROM

-- >> THAT WASN'T ADDED SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE. BUT WE DID HAVE A CASE THAT CAME THROUGH, AND COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO LOOK AT THAT AND WE'RE CURRENTLY PUTTING TOGETHER SOME INFORMATION FOR COUNCIL.

>> IT SOUNDS NEAT, BUT I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THIS ACTUALLY EQUATES TO

FROM A DRIVEWAY, YOU KNOW? >> RIGHT.

>> 201 AND I CAN'T SEE TO DRIVE IN THE LANE. THAT WHAT I'M TRYING TO

FIGURE OUT. >> THE GENTLEMAN THAT ASKED FOR THE VARIANCE, I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS, A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, HE DID TALK ABOUT -- HE PROVIDED THE EXACT LUMENS FOR HIS SIGNS. AND THE SAME CONCERN WAS BROUGHT UP. AND HE SAID THAT THE THEY ARE NOT GOING FOR EXTREME BRIGHTNESS, BECAUSE WHEN IT'S DARK AT NIGHT, THEY ARE NOT -- THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE TO HAVE IT SUPER BRIGHT TO BE ABLE

TO SEE. >> WHEN YOU HAVE AN INTERNALLY LIT SIGN ON A BOULEVARD THAT AS OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING ON IT.

>> RIGHT. STREET LIGHTS MIGHT BE BRIGHTER. >> IT MIGHT TONE DOWN THE SIGN. THIS IS GOING INTO AN AREA WHERE THERE IS NOT A WHOLE LOT OF LIGHT POLLUTION RIGHT NOW IN THE EVENING. SO THAT MEANS EVEN A DIMMER LIGHT ISN'T THAT MUCH BRIGHTER. THAT IS MY CONCERN COMING BACK THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IT'S RIGHT AT THE FIRST ENTRANCE AND LIKE I GET BY BRIDGEWATER TURN OFF AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE'S A BRIGHT LIGHT IN MY FACE. MINE IS SAFETY CONCERN, BUT IF STAFF IS COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE, TO GIVE US THE ABILITY TO

MODERATE THAT. >> I REMEMBER THE FIRST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT KNITS. SO THIS GOES BACK TO THE FIRST TIME, WHICH WAS KROEGER.

AND MY ONLY THING IS AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON THE MEASUREMENT OF WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT DOESN'T GENERATE ENOUGH LIGHTING FOR TRAFFIC. STREET LIGHTS CAN RANGE FROM 3,000 TO 100,000 NITS. SO I GUESS MY THING IS, AND WE APPROVED ANOTHER ONE LIKE THIS. IF OUR BASE ORDINANCE SAID IT CAN'T BE HIGHER THAN 200 NITS, AND AT LEAST WHATEVER RESEARCH I CAN GET TO THAT FAST, IS THAT 200 NITS IS YOUR IPAD SCREEN, ARE YOU GOING OUT THERE AND CHECKING THE AMOUNT OF NITS

[00:35:05]

FROM THE OTHER LIGHTS, OR OTHER SCREENS ALREADY PUT IN? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT IS A COMPARISON

>> IT'S AVERAGE LUMENS FOR AREA. THIS IS CONCENTRATED.

>> VERSUS SPREAD VERSUS SPREAD. >> OKAY. OKAY. THAT MAKES A LITTLE MORE SENSETCH I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THIS IN OUR BASE ZONE. THIS IS JUST INDIVIDUALLY WRITTEN. BECAUSE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGNS AREN'T REALLY ALLOWED. SO WE DON'T HAVE A BASE STANDARD. SO THAT IS WHY IT'S WRITTEN INTO THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE. SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT CHECKING OTHER SIGNS THEY COULD HAVE ALL KINDS OF

DIFFERENT WHATEVER WE PUT IN. >> WHICHEVER PD IT WAS. >> WELL, IT'S IN THAT SPECIAL SECTION THAT YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT. IT'S NOT IN EACH INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT, YOU'RE CORRECT. IT'S IN THAT SPECIAL

SECTION THAT SOMEBODY TACKED ON. >> OKAY. I MEAN, I JUST SHARE THE SAME WORRY AS ROSS ON THAT. I REMEMBER WHEN DAIRY QUEEN PUTS THEIRS, IT WAS LIKE BLINDING. I KNOW WE CAN WRITE IT INTO THE ORDINANCE, BUT WRITING INTO THE ORDINANCE AND ENFORCING IS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. FOR ME I WOULD RATHER SKIRT IT AND STICK TO OUR STANDARD, WHICH NOT INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN, BUT I'M NOT GOING DIE

ON THAT HILL EITHER. >> OTHERS MIGHT. MIKE? >> QUICK QUESTION, I'M ASSUMING WITHIN THE SIGNAGE, WHICH I TRY TO STAY OUT OF THIS SUBJECT, BECAUSE IT'S DEEP. WE HAVE A BOOK ABOUT THIS THICK FOR SIGNAGE. I LOST MY DOCTORATE DEGREE ON SIGNAGE. I'M ASSUMING ONCE THE BRIGHTNESS AS THAT SIGN SETS UP, IS THAT FIXED FOR LIFE? I JUST HAD AN ASSUMPTION THERE WAS A DIMMING

MECHANISM. >> THERE IS A DIMMING. >> AND SECOND ASSUMPTION THAT WE AT SOME TIME AND LEGAL CAN SPEAK TO THIS, MAYBE? IF WE WERE TO IMPOSE AN ORDINANCE AT A FUTURE DATE, I JUST ASSUME, IF WANTED THAT EXTRA SIGNS WOULD NEED TO BE BRIGHTER DURING THE DAY, AND THERE WOULD BE A SENSOR, JUST LIKE YOUR CAR, TO SENSE IT'S TURNED TO NIGHT AND DIM IT MORE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN IMPOSE, OR ONLY THE ONESES BEFORE THAT COULD BE

GRANDFATHERED? >> FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU ARE GOING TO SAY AT NIGHT, IT CAN GO DOWN TO 500 NITS AND IT'S GREATER, IT WOULD BE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS LIGHTER. ONLY 100 NITS. THEN IT WOULD HAVE -- STILL BE GRANDFATHERED.

THAT WOULD BE A GRANDFATHERING. YOU COULD NOT IMPOSE THAT ON THOSE ALREADY OUT THERE THAT MECHANISM WAS ADOPTED.

>> I'M KIND OF LIKE CLARK, I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO MEASURE THIS. I FEEL THEE THAT ONCE WE GET ENOUGH OF THESE WE'RE GOING TO COME TO A POINT WE'RE ALMOSTING GOING TO DRIVE OUT TO THE SIDE WHAT THAT PROPER LIGHT LEVEL AND WE MIGHT NEED TO DECIDE THAT SOON. MY LAST QUESTION TO SUM THIS UP, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE THE SIGNS WHICH HAVE A CERTAIN BRIGHTNESS IN THE DAY AND THEY DIM TO A POINT AT NIGHT OR DO

YOU KNOW? >> WE COULD. I DON'T THINK THEY TURN ON ILLUMINATED SIGNS DURING THE DAY. I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY

NECESSARILY DO THAT. >> I'M MAINLY TALKING ABOUT

THE L.E.D. ONES. >> OH, THE MESSAGE BOARDS.

THEY ARE ALL OVER THE CITY IT'S NOT THAT IMPORTANT.

>> I DON'T THINK THEY ARE AS BIG AS A NUANCE AS THE IL LUM NATED CABINET SIGNS CAN BE IN TERMS OF IMPEDING OR

DISTRACTING THANK YOU. ROSS. >> I THINK THE CHALLENGE WITH ANYTHING LIGHT-RELATED IS IT'S BASED UPON THE BACKDROP; RIGHT? IN A PURE PITCH BLACK ROOM, A SINGLE CANDLE BEING LIT CAN BE SIGNIFICANTLY BRIGHT. YOU KNOW? A MODERATELY LIT ROOM YOU PROBABLY WOULDN'T NOTICE YOU LIT A CANDLE AND THAT IS MY CONCERN AS WE SEE MORE NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS THAT HISTORICALLY HAVE NOT HAD THAT, THE AVERAGE BACKDROP IS MUCH LOWER IN THOSE AREAS. I THINK THAT IS WHERE THE CHALLENGE COMES IN THAT ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL; RIGHT? IT'S MORE OF A CONTRAST, IF YOU WILL,

[00:40:03]

BETWEEN THE TWO. THAT IS REALLY THE BIGGEST FEAR ON I HAVE THIS CORRIDOR THAT EVEN A DIMMER SIGN CAN BE DISTRACTING.

>> I HAD THE EXACT SAME THOUGHT. IF YOU CONTRAST WHAT IS GOING ON AT TOM THUMB DOWN THE STREET, IT'S MORE A COMMERCIAL AREA WITH A HIGH SCHOOL ACROSS THE STREET AND FITS BETTER THERE WITH THE LIGHTING SPECIFICALLY, AND THE SIGNAGE. I WOULD MUCH PREFER NOT OFFERING THAT. I WANT TO GET TO WAYNE, DID YOU COMPLETE YOUR THOUGHT, ROSS?

>> YES, SIR. >> WAYNE? >> I JUST WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO QUIZ OF THE APPLICANT, WITH REGARDS TO THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION ON TRAFFIC ISSUES. I NOTICED IN YOUR DIAGRAM, THERE'S A WRAP AROUND DRIVE. TYPICALLY DO YOU ALL LOAD AND UNLOAD FROM THE VERY FRONT OR WRAP AROUND? GETTING OFF THE STREET TO TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC?

I JUST WONDERED WHAT YOU THOUGHTS WERE? >> TYPICALLY, ACTIVE FROM THE FRONT. I THINK IF WE HAD SPILLOVER FROM WALNUT

-- MOSTLY FOR FIRE LANES. >> THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT. >> TRAFFIC JAMS, WE WOULD FIGURE OUT ALTERNATIVES AND WE HAVE THIS OTHER ENTRANCE OVER HERE TO BE USED. YOU KNOW, TIME WILL TELL, THE ANALYSIS IS DONE BY REALLY QUALIFIED PEOPLE.

>> I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HAD EXPERIENCE? BECAUSE THIS ISN'T THE FIRST RODEO. SO WHAT TYPE OF EXPERIENCE DO YOU ALL HAVE IN

OTHER PLACES? >> MY NAME IS CAM, ENGINEERING I'M THE CIVIL ENGINEER ON THIS JOB. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE DONE MANY OF THESE, AND THIS IS NOT THE FIRST ONE. MY CLIENT OWNS ALMOST 20 ACRES. SO WE HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY ISSUE WITH THE TRAFFIC. TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE DROP-OFF, WE HAVE ALONG THE FRONT, 21' THAT COULD FIT

. >> PARENTS COULD DROP OFF THE KIDS AND PARK ALONG THE FRONT. THIS SCHOOL -- AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM, SO IT'S NOT DAYCARE. AFTER CARE PROGRAM FOR KIDS UP TO 12 YEARS OLD. SO I UNDERSTAND 200 OCCUPANCY IS THE MAXIMUM.

BUT YOU KNOW, HARDLY ANY SCHOOL, WE DON'T EXPERIENCE 200 KIDS IN ONE SCHOOL. ALSO 30% OF THAT IS AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS KIDS FOR AFTER-SCHOOL. SO IT'S NOT LIKE -- AND THE DROP-OFF TIME, THE SCHOOL OPENS AT 6:30, STARTS ACCEPTING KIDS AT 6:30 AND PARENTS

ALLOW PARENTS AMPLE TIME TO SPREAD OUT. >> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION.

YOU HAVE EARLIER DROP-OFFS SOME PEOPLE COMING EARLIER WE OPEN THE SCHOOL AT 6:30 AND USUALLY PARENTS COME IN THAT TIME BETWEEN THEN AND 9:00 ARE THE SPREAD-OUT

TIMES. >> WAYNE, GET WHAT YOU NEED? THE ONLY HEARTBURN I HAVE IS ONLY THE INTERNALLY LIT SIGN. I THINK IT'S A GOOD LOCATION FOR THE USE. WITH THE SIGN SPECIFICALLY, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT ROSS SAID:YOU ARE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND STARTING USE, WE KNOW THAT WILL DEVELOP OUT COMMERCIALLY DOWN THE LINE. BUT IT WILL BE -- IT WILL FEEL LIKE LIGHT POLLUTION FOR THOSE RESIDENTS IN BRIDGEWATER, ESPECIALLY. ARE YOU ALL WILLING TO ADJUST YOUR PLAN AND COME UP WITH THE INTERNALLY LIT SIGN OR IS THAT A DEAL

BREAKER? >> ROSS, YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING SAYS ARKA? I FEEL LIKE THAT IS GOING FOR ANYBODY TRYING TO FIND THE BUILDING AT NIGHT, THE LETTERS ON THE BUILDING BEING ILLUMINATED WOULD BE SUFFICIENT. I'M KIND OF WHERE THE MAYOR TO SEE THE MONUMENT SIGN. I WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE A MESSAGE BOARD AND BE EXTERNALLY

LIT. >> I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT,

[00:45:03]

BUT HE IS HERE TOO. WE JUST WANT TO BUILD THE SCHOOL.

>> FIGURED AS MUCH. >> MY NAME IS ROBBY, THIS IS OUR 21ST MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND RECENTLY OPENED IN PRINCETON. THERE IS AN OPTION WHERE WE LOWER THE ILLUMINATION. FROM 5-7:30 IS WHAT WE USE THOSE LIGHTS, BECAUSE OF THE STAFF, THEY WANT TO -- BECAUSE IN THE WINTER, IT'S PRETTY DARK, SO FOR PICKING UP AND DROPPING OFF. THOSE ARE ADJUSTABLE TO TURN IT DOWN OR TURN IT UP. SO IT'S CONTROLLABLE PRINCETON CITY REQUESTED US TO HAVE --

A MOTION ON THIS CASE? ROSS? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITHOUT THE VARIANCE FOR THE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGN AND MESSAGE BOARD.

>> DOES THAT INCLUDE THE P&Z'S RECOMMENDATION. LEFT-TURN LANE NORTHBOUND DRIVEWAY TO BE

CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE? >> YES, SIR.

>> I WANTED TO ASK, YOU HAD MADE MENTION ABOUT THE MESSAGE

BOARD. ARE YOU STRIKING BOTH OF THEM? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> BECAUSE THEY KIND OF HAD THEM CALLED OUT A LITTLE BIT

SEPARATE. >> BOTH REQUIRE A VARIANCE, CORRECT?

NO. >> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THE

MESSAGE BOARD DOESN'T REQUIRE A VARIANCE? >> SO WITHOUT THE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN. IT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHT.

>> IT'S SUP. >> IT STANDS ORIGINALLY SAID. NO MESSAGE BOARD, NO INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED -- HERE WE GO. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED INCORPORATING P&Z'S RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO THE DECELERATION TURN LANE, AND REMOVING THE VARIANCE FOR THE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN AND REMOVING THE PROVISION FOR THE MESSAGE BOARD ON THE MONUMENT SIGN.

>> SECOND MOTION MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER. SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RODGERS. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 6-0. THANK YOU,

[2026-038 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending 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. (Case No. Z38-2025-097).]

MARY ANNE. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN. ONTO ITEM 2026-38 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PD NO. 171. PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF STATE SPUR 73 AND EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF U.S. HIGHWAY 67

AND U.S. HIGHWAY 287TCH>> THIS IS A PD AMENDMENT IT ADDRESS PHASE 2 OF MAIN STREET TOWN CROSSING AND ADJUST THE DEVELOPMENT USE REGULATIONS FOR USES.

OVERALL SITE IS 71.737 ACRES AND PHASE 2 IS 20.39 ACRES. IT'S PART OF THE REGIONAL MODULE, AND IT'S DESIGNED TO CREATE AN URBAN STYLE MIXED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ALONG ARTERIAL AND REGIONAL THOROUGHFARES. THIS IS THE ZONING MAP AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE REQUEST IS STILL CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES. AND STILL MEETS THE COMP PLAN GOALS FOR LONG-TERM FINANCIAL STABILITY OF MAJOR THOROUGHFARES, AND THEY ARE STILL PLANNING ON PRESERVING THE CREEK AREA. SO WHAT THEY ARE WANTING TO DO IS READJUST PHASE 2 AS PREVIOUSLY SHOWN WITH A LARGE FORMAT RETAIL STORE AND ANOTHER JUNIOR ANCHOR AND BUILDING THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE RETAIL OR RESTAURANT. THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN SHOWS WEST MAIN STREET 67 FRONTAGE ROAD AND SPUR 73 AS MAJOR ARTERIALS WITH 120' RIGHT-OF-WAY, NICOLET CREEK ROAD IS A MAJOR COLLECTOR 80' RIDE.

THE TIA DONE WITH THE ORIGINAL ZONING REQUEST IS STILL VALID ON JANUARY 9TH, 2024 COUNCIL APPROVED PD 171 FOR CR

[00:50:02]

USES, AND THE ORDINANCE 202405 CREATED THE OVERALL CONCEPT PLAN. SO THE ADDITIONAN USE THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING IS A FITNESS FACILITY THAT WILL ALSO HAVE AN OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREA.

WE WILL DEFINE THE OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREA AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO A FITNESS OR HEALTH CENTER, PROVIDED THAT IT'S LOCATED WITHIN A CLOSED AREA AND SCREENED TO PROVIDE THE OF AN OUTDOOR EXPERIENCE. CREEK WITH A ZERO SETBACK TO MAXIMIZE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE IT AN AMENITY FOR RESTAURANT AND RETAIL. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN MEETS MOST CRITERIA. THEY ARE REQUESTING NOT TO DO THE STREET TREES IN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE THE NORTHBOUND OFF-RAMP FOR 67 IS A BRIDGE FOR A GOOD PORTION OF THAT AREA. AND THEN BETWEEN THEIR PROPERTY LINE, AND THE SERVICE LANES, THERE ARE 150' AND 250' BUFFER THAT INCLUDES LANDSCAPE. I WILL LET THEM MAKE THIS ARGUMENT. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF LANDSCAPE THERE. AND SO THE ELEVATIONS WILL CONFORM EXCEPT FOR LARGE FORMAT RETAIL STORE. THERE'S A PROVISION THAT ALLOWS THEM TO -- HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION AND VERTICAL ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEY HAVE MORE LATITUDE WITH THE LARGE FORMAT RETAIL STORE. THE OFF-STREET PARKING WILL CONFORM TO THE ZONING, EXCEPT THAT THEY MAY EXCEED THE 125 LIMIT, BUT NOT GREATER THAN 20 SPACES, PER A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT OF RESTAURANT OR SEVEN SPACES FOR A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT OF FITNESS HEALTH CENTER. I MENTIONED THE TREES ALONG FRONTAGE ROAD. THERE ARE TWO VARIANCES. SO THE ORIGINAL UNIFIED SIGNAGE PLAN INCLUDED THESE PYLON SIGNS IN THE GREATEST HEIGHT WAS 40'. THEY ARE INCREASING THE VARIANCE TO 55'. SO THAT IS ONE. THEY'RE ASKING TO CREATE ZONES ALONG THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY TO ALLOW THE PYLON SIGN TO BE LOCATED WITHIN THOSE ZONES. SO THAT THEY CAN FIGURE OUT WHERE IT WOULD NEED TO BE LOCATED WITH THE TENANTS, FUTURE TENANTS. AND THEN THE OTHER WITH THE INCREASE OF VARIANCE HERE, THESE CABINET SIGNS WOULD INCREASE AS WELL. SO THERE IS THAT VARIANCE. THE REASON THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE FOR P-4, WHICH IS THE TALLEST AND IT'S ONLY ONE, IS BECAUSE THE BRIDGE IS APPROXIMATELY 25' IN HEIGHT. AND SO THEY WANT TO HAVE MORE VISIBILITY FOR PEOPLE COMING OFF THAT BRIDGE.

I BELIEVE WITH THE P&Z THEY ASKED ABOUT THE LOVE SIGN AND HEIGHT FOR THAT. ONE LOVE SIGN IS 74', THE OTHER ONE IS 80' TALL. SO THEY ARE SUBSTANTIALLY TALLER THAN WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING. 17 POSTCARDS WERE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200'. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE AND THE RECOMMENDED APATROL SINCE IT'S COMPATSIBLE WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN AND POLICIES, WE SUPPORT THE VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED AND P&Z RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH A VOTE OF 6-0 AT THE JANUARY 2026 MEETING. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> I'M SURE THERE WILL BE. THANK YOU, MARY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, MOTION MADE BY PRO TEM MAYOR WICKLIFFE AND SECONDED. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 6-0. MR. WEBER, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A PRESENTATION OR STAND FOR QUESTIONS, EITHER WAY?

>> STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. WELL, SO JUST A POINT OF CLARITY, PROBABLY FOR STAFF. IF THIS IS APPROVED THIS EVENING, WILL WE SEE ELEVATIONS OR SUPS ON ANYTHING GOING FORWARD OR THIS IS A DONE-DEAL AFTER THIS, IF THIS IS APPROVED?

>> ALL OF THE SITES IN THE TOWN CROSSING DEVELOPMENT DO REQUIRE

[00:55:04]

A FOLLOW-UP SITE PLAN. BUT THERE'S A PROVISION THAT SAYS THAT IN THE PD ORDINANCE THAT SAYS THEY CAN MAKE MINOR MODIFICATIONS AS DEFINED IN THE PD

ORDINANCE. >> OKAY. SO WHEN THE LARGE FORMAT STORE IS IDENTIFIED AND COMES FORWARD TO ACTUALLY BUILD, THEY WILL

COME BACK BEFORE US? >> THEY WON'T, IF THEY CAN MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. DO YOU WANT THEM TO COME BACK?

>> NO, JUST ASKING THE QUESTION. COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR

THE APPLICANT? ? >> YOU CAN HELP ME OUT IF I'M WRONG HERE. I WENT THROUGH THE OLD ORDINANCE AND WENT TO LIGHTING AND IT DIDN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT INTERNALLY LIT SIGNS IS THAT ALREADY APPROVED IN THE ORIGINAL PD?

>> THEY SHOWED ON THEIR UNIFIED SIGNAGE PLAN THE CABINETS ON THE ORIGINAL SIGN PLAN. AND THEY DID HAVE SOME NOTES THAT WE HAD ACTUALLY ASKED THEM TO REMOVE. THAT GAVE THEM SOME LEEWAY ON THAT, BUT IF YOU WANT US TO PUT MORE CLARIFYING LANGUAGE, WE CAN DO THAT AS WELL.

>> I JUST WANT CONSISTENCY. SO IF THE FIRST PHASE DOESN'T HAVE IT, I DON'T WANT THE SECOND PHASE. IF THE FIRST PHASE ALREADY HAS IT, THAT IS FINE. JUST CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT IS ALL I WAS LOOKING FOR, WHICH ALSO LEADS ME TO THE SECOND QUESTION, THE SIGN HEIGHT. AND AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE. I FOUND THE BUILDING HEIGHT, BUT I NEVER FOUND WHERE WE SET THE HEIGHT FOR THE ONE ON MAIN, AND THE 67 OFF-RAMP, WHICH I THINK IS THE TALLEST SIGN THAT WE ALLOWED?

>> IS IT 41? >> THE ONE ON THE HARD CORNER OF MAIN AND 67 IS PRESENTLY BUILT 45' TALL. IN OUR LAST MEETING A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WE DISCUSSED 40 AND THEN WE ULTIMATELY AGREED THAT 45, BECAUSE WE KNEW THERE WAS A TOPO CHANGE, WHERE IT WAS PRETTY LOW. AS I LOOK AT IT TODAY, IT'S STILL QUITE LOW. AS YOU LOOK AT -- AS YOU DRIVE DOWN HIGHWAY 67. I THINK THAT IS THE REASON FOR OUR REQUEST FOR THE TALLER PYLON SIGN. AS SHOWN HERE ON WHAT WE CALL PHASE 2. THAT TOPOIS ACTUALLY EVEN LOWER, BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE CREEK IS. AND THE ROAD ADGENERALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES TO US IS EVEN HIGHER. SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS INCREASE THAT, AND I THINK WE PUT A PRETTY TALL NUMBER. I THINK I AGREED TO GO 55' WITH P&Z. HAPPY TO VISIT WITH EVERYONE TODAY, BUT I THINK THAT IS A POTENTIALLY A FAIR GOOD NUMBER.

BUT I'M OPEN TO COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS.

>> ALL RIGHT. AND THEN MARY KIND OF ALREADY SAID, SHE WOULD LET YOU MAKE THE ARGUMENT FOR LANDSCAPING. SO I

GUESS I'M READY TO HEAR THE ARGUMENT. >> THE ARGUMENT ON THE LANDSCAPING IS THE DEVELOPING IN DALLAS IS INTERESTING. IT'S NORMALLY PRETTY FLAT AND THIS IS THE ONE SITE THAT HAS SIGNIFICANT TOPO. WE RUN ABOUT 70' OF DIFFERENCE FROM THE LOWEST POINT TO THE HIGHEST POINT THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY.

ONE OF THE THINGS ON THE LANDSCAPING THAT WE HAVE LEARNED ON SAY FOR INSTANCE MAIN STREET BY THE LOWE'S IS HOW GREAT THAT SLOPE IS. SO WE PLANTED THAT FIRST-ROUND OF TREES, AND CAUGHT SOME BAD WEATHER AND REPLACE MOST OF THOSE AND MAYBE GO WITH SOME TALLER TREES BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T SEE THEM.

THAT IS KIND OF THE SAME ISSUE THAT WE HAVE GOT GOING OVER HERE ON WHAT WOULD BE THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND THE ISSUE IS EVEN MORE EXACERBATED THAN THE REPRESENTATIVE EXAMPLE I JUST PROVIDED. SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS TRY TO PUT TREES IN PLACES THAT MIGHT ACTUAL MATTER, BECAUSE THERE'S NO TREE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY GROW TALL ENOUGH AT THAT PARTICULAR SPOT. AND IF WE NEED TO ADD SOME, WE WILL. I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO PUSH A MORE CLOSER TO THE CORNER, THERE BY KIND OF WHERE THE YELLOW IS HERE ON THIS PLAN.

WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO PUT THE SIGNSS, THINGS LEVEL OUT AND FLATTEN OUT THERE. BUT THAT IS OUR REASONING. THEY JUST BECOME VERY HARD TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

SO WE PUT THEM ON THE INTERNAL DRIVE, WE COME ON IN. I THINK PEDESTRIANS MIGHT LIKE THAT MORE IN THE FUTURE.

AGAIN, THAT IS EVERYONE'S ENTITLED TO AN OPINION AND THAT WAS OURS AT

THE TIME. >> 55' SIGN IS IDENTIFIED

[01:00:01]

TOWARDS THE CREEK, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? >> YES.

>> ROSS, YOU'RE NEXT. >> SO JUST CLARIFICATION ON ONE OF THE TEXT AMENDMENTS WAS RELATED TO THE FITNESS CENTER AND IT SAYS IT'S ADDING SECTION F TO SECTION 2B, TO THE ORDINANCE AND IT DESCRIBES THE OUTDOOR SECTION SHALL BE PARTIALLY ENCLOSED, AND WILL CONTAIN SCREENS. I JUST HAVE REALLY NO IDEA WHAT THAT

ACTUALLY MEANS. >> I'M LOOKING AT TWO PARTICULAR FITNESS USERS. ONE IN PARTICULAR HAS ABOUT A 2,000 SQUARE FOOT AREA AND ITS OWN ROOF WITH ACTUAL STRUCTURAL WALLS ON THE SIDE. IT'S JUST CERTAIN AREAS ARE MORE OPEN KIND OF, IF YOU WILL, ENCLOSED GARDEN CENTER WITH A PERMANENT ROOF STRUCTURAL SIDES, BUT AN AREA THAT CERTAINLY DON'T WANT PEOPLE WALKING OUT OF THAT AND THEY DON'T WANT PEOPLE COMING IN. BUT IT'S JUST OPEN. SO MAYBE LIKE A PATIO, WHERE THE WINDOWS ARE THERE OR MIGHT BE A FENCE, MORE LIKE THAT. SO TECHNICALLY IT'S OUTDOOR. IT'S NOT -- IT'S NOT AIR-CONDITIONED, BUT IT'S COVERED WITH WALLS AROUND IT. SO THAT IS THE TECHNICAL REASONING, AND AS JOE WILL TELL YOU, WHEN WE GET ALL OF THESE ATTORNEYS INVOLVED, THE RETAIL ATTORNEYS START LOOKING AT THINGS AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE EXACT LANGUAGE THERE, I WILL BE BACK HERE SPENDING MORE OF YOUR TIME TRYING TO

CLARIFY THAT. >> SO WHAT IS MEANT BY

> FROM A SCREEN, IT COULD BE Select to skip to this part of the video">"SCREENS "THE THAT IS THE PART I'M TRYING TO. >> FROM A SCREEN, IT COULD BE AN ACTUAL LIKE A FLY SCREEN TYPE, THAT

COULD GO UP-AND-DOWN. STUFF LIKE THAT. >> OKAY. AND THEN THE AMENDMENT AS IT RELATES TO THE ELEVATION. IT SAYS EVERYTHING SHALL CONFORM TO THIS ORDINANCE EXCEPT FOR THE LARGE FORMAT STORE, WHICH WILL CONFORM TO SECTION 4.

-- HANG ON, 5502 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. SO WE HAVE ONE BUILDING THAT IS TIEING BACK TO OUR BASE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE OTHER BUILDS ON THIS PARCEL ARE BEHOLDING TO THE ACTUAL PD

AS APPROVED. >> AS WE PRESENT THIS TODAY, THIS IS BASICALLY AN EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING PD. WHEN WE STARTED THIS INITIALLY, WE HAD A LOT TO FIGURE OUT IN PHASE ONE.

SO WE KNEW SOME THINGS AND GOT THOSE DONE AND AT THE TIME WE'LL FIGURE OUT PHASE 2 A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD AND THAT ROAD IS NOW COMING FOR US. SO WE INTEND TO MATCH THE ELEVATIONS THAT WERE IN THE PD. AND IT GETS TO A POINT WHERE WE NEED TO MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS, WE WOULD COME BACK BEFORE THIS COUNCIL AND SUBMIT WHAT I WOULD UNDERSTAND TO BE A DETAILED SITE PLAN, WITH ELEVATIONS, IF THEY DEVIATED

FROM THE PD AS IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN. >> WE'RE SAYING THAT THE LARGE FORMAT RETAILER WOULD NOT BE BEHOLDING TO HAVE THE PD AS WRITTEN. IT'S JUST OUR BASE COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE.

>> I MEAN, THERE ARE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BASE ZONING, LIKE THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ARTICULATION AND ALL OF THAT.

IF IT'S THE WILL OF THIS COUNCIL, WE COULD SAY WE'LL BRING IT BACK, IF THAT IS SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO YOU. WE CAN DO THAT I JUST REMEMBER HOW MUCH CONVERSATION THERE WAS ABOUT A CONSISTENCY OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS THAT RELATE TO A NOD TO THE MERCANTILE OF OUR DOWNTOWN THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF THIS PROJECT. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE EVERYBODY AWARE WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE, EVERYTHING CONFORMS TO THAT, BUT THIS BIG BUILDING AT THE VERY BACK ON SPUR 73. THAT IS WHAT THAT TEXT AMENDMENT SAYS. IF THAT IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL, COOL, LET'S GO FOR IT. WHEN IT REFERENCES A SEMI NUANCED SECTION OF OUR BASE ZONING CODE, I TOOK THE TIME TO LOOK IT UP AND WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY DO? IT SAYS NONE OF THESE OTHER COOL RULES APPLY THAT EVERY OTHER BUILDING HAS TO CONFORM TO, BUT TO MEET ELEVATION REQUIREMENT AS FAR AS

ARTICULATION HEIGHTS. >> I THINK THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO DO IS -- THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THE MAIN STREET ARCHETYPE WAS TO CONTINUE THAT ARK TEGURAL VOCABULARY OF THE OLD TOWN AREA. SO IN THIS AREA, IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY FAR AWAY FROM MAIN STREET. BUT I MEAN,

[01:05:02]

IF THIS COUNCIL REALLY WANTS TO SEE MORE OF THAT MERCANTILE DEVELOPMENT, I MEAN, WE COULD BRING IT BACK, AND SEE ARE THEY ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH US THERE'S LAND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SPUR 73 WITH SOME CHALLENGES IN FRONT OF IT.

IS THAT PART OF THE EXTENDED DOWNTOWN AREA? IS THAT NOT PART OF THE EXTENDED DOWNTOWN AREA? WHAT DO WE WANT TO SET THE TONE FOR THAT CORRIDOR? AND AGAIN, THAT IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE. THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN DOESN'T REALLY IN MY OPINION ARTICULATE THAT VERY WELL. AND I WANTED TO

CLARIFY THAT BEFORE. >> WHAT I WILL SAY, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WRITE THIS IN AN AMENDMENT, BUT I HAVE WORKED WITH THIS PARTICULAR RETAILER MANY TIMES, PREVIOUSLY. I HAVE HAD NUMEROUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THEIR ARCHITECTURAL TEAM REGARDING THE MAIN STREET THEME. THEY ARE VERY MUCH OPEN TO INCORPORATING AS MANY OF THE MAIN STREET ELEMENTS INTO THEIR ELEVATION AS ONE CAN, AND STILL PRESERVE WHAT WOULD BE THEIR ULTIMATE PROTOTYPE. THIS IS A NEW PROTOTYPE THAT JUST CAME OUT THAT THEY HAVE NOT BUILT BEFORE. SO IT WOULD BE THE FIRST OF A KIND SO TO SPEAK. AND THEY HAVE GIVEN US A SCHEDULE. SO I HAVE ALREADY HAD THESE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM. I CERTAINLY RECOGNIZE THE QUALITY THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PUT INTO THIS AND I DON'T PLAN TO DEVIATE ANYTHING LESS.

BUT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU SAY THAT IN A PD? BUT IF YOU HAVE A BETTER IDEA, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR.

>> I GUESS MY COUNTER POINT WOULD BE TO SAY THE RULES OF THE

ORDINANCE APPLY. >> YES. >> IF YOU HAVE A COMPELLING ARGUMENT OF HOW YOU ARE PAYING HOMAGE TO THAT, MAYBE NOT MEETING THE STRICT LETTER OF THAT? THAT IS WHOLE KIND OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS AT THAT POINT. SO I FEEL LIKE WE'RE WATERING DOWN THE REGULATIONS BEFORE WE HAVE SEEN THE ASK. AND THAT IS THE CONCERN I HAVE, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE THIS COUNCIL THAT PUT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME IN HELPING TO CREATE THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THAT, THAT I THINK IS DEVELOPING OUT VERY NICELY AND VERY ATTRACTIVELY, AND CREATING A PLACE THAT YOU KNOW

IS IN MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. >> I'M NOT 100% CERTAIN HOW TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. YOU KNOW, IF THERE WERE A BUILDING I WAS BUILDING COMPLETELY, I COULD SIT HERE AND SHOW YOU EXACT THINGS. THEY HAVE A PROTOTYPE. I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM ABOUT MATCHING THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS. THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE IS TO SUBMIT TO THE CITY AND ULTIMATELY RECEIVE THE FINAL APPROVAL.

THAT COULD POTENTIALLY COME WITH THE STAFF LEVEL OR COME AT A DETAILED ELEVATION THROUGH P&Z AND CITY COUNCIL. I AM HAPPY TO DO WHAT IT TAKES TO WINS EVERYONE'S SUPPORT IN THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN. I HAVE SAID THAT MANY TIMES BEFORE AND I STAND HERE AGAIN, WILLING TO SAY IT

AGAIN. >> MIKE, YOU ARE NEXT. >> I'M GOING TO ECHO MR. WEAVER'S COMMENTS STRONGLY. THE BIGGEST CONCERN I HAVE, WHICH IS DEFINITELY NOT AGAINST STAFF AND THEIR DECISION-MAKING PROCESS. WE INVESTED AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF TIME AND PISTOL-WHIPPEDLITERALLY LOWE'S INTO SEVERAL ROUNDS TO GET THEM WHERE THEY GOT THEM. I WOULD ASSUME IN THE EARLIER PROCESSES, THAT YOU WERE ALREADY AWARE YOU WERE GOING TO BE PROVIDING A LOWE'S STORE THAT WAS OPEN INFORMATION TO A CERTAIN POINT AND THEREFORE, WE COULD REVIEW IT WITHIN

THAT PROCESS. >> YES. >> AND APPLICATION. WE WENT WELL OUT OF OUR WAY TO PROVIDE THE FIRST RENDITIONS OF COURSE WERE OUTSTANDING. THEY WERE MORE OF A GRAPEVINE NORTH SIDE WONDERFUL WORK, BUT DIDN'T MATCH WHAT WE WANTED TO SEE. NOT ONLY THAT, AS FOLKS ROLLED ON THE OVERPASS, AND LOOKED OUT OVER THAT BOTTOM, WE WANTED AN INVITING ENVIRONMENT TO WHERE THEY GO WOW, THAT IS LIKE A LITTLE TOWN.

AND ONCE THEY ROLLED DOWN, AND ROLLED UP THE HILL, IT KIND OF MATCHED. AND FALLING INTO ALSO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER

[01:10:04]

WEAVER MENTIONED, BECOMING AWARE THAT THAT PROPERTY AT LEAST SOME OF THAT PROPERTY IS BEING BOUGHT AS WE SPEAK.

AS YOU COME UP THE SPUR, AND ROUND UP THE SPUR BACK INTO TOWN, THAT WILL, OF COURSE, AS THEY ARE PASSING YOUR PROPERTY, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO COMPLETE THE TOTAL PROCESS OF THE THEME WORK THAT WE SO ELQUENTSLY STARTED. MY ONLY CONCERN AND I WANT TO MENTION MR. WEBER HAS CALLED UPON ME TO LOOK AT SOME RENDITIONS. WE HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO MEET YET AND I STRONGLY THANK YOU FOR THINKING OF ME IN DOING THAT. I AM A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED GOING BACK TO WHAT MARY HAD MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, THAT THE IDEA OF IT MATCHING THE ORDINANCE DEFINITIONS, AND I DO REALIZE JOE, I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL HERE, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME BY RIGHT ISSUES HERE, I REALIZE. I'M KIND OF LOOKING -- I'M CONCERNED THAT I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA WHO IS COMING. BUT I ALSO KNOW WITHIN THESE LARGER BOXES, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN THING THAT IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST TO MATCH IT AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. AND IT TIES INTO ALL OF IT, INSIDE THE STORE THEMES, AND ON AND ON WE CAN GO. SO I AM IMMENSELY CONCERNED THAT HOW FORTHRIGHT THEY MIGHT BE ABOUT COMING OVER ON OUR SIDE? AND IN ITS OWN WAY AS STRANGE AS IT SOUND, I'M NOT -- I HATE TO SAY THIS, BUT I'M GOING TO SAY IT. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN A NEWER STYLE STORE. I'M INTERESTED IN ONLY

ONE-OF-A-KIND STORE. >> YES. >> I'M NOT THROWING THAT UPON YOU TO PRODUCE THAT, BUT THAT IS KIND OF THE LEVEL. AND THE LOWE'S, YOU JUST KNOCKED IT OUT OF THE PARK WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE DONE THERE, KNOCKED IT OUT OF THE PARK. I WOULD HATE TO SEE US FALL BACK ON THAT, ON THE BACKSIDE. AND EVEN FROM THE HOW WE DEALT WITH THOSE OTHER RETAILERS AND THE DEMANDS THAT WE MADE ON THEM FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THE STORE, EVEN BEING DRESSED UP AESTHETICALLY AND FACADE ON THE BACK. ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THAT. I'M HAVING CONCERNS, HOW DO WE ENSURE THIS BEFORE WE GET TO SEE IT? AND IF WE RELEASE IT TONIGHT, I TRUST YOU. BUT, BUT, I WONDER IF WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY WITH LOWE'S BEFORE APPROVING IT, ACTUALLY, IF WE WOULD HAVE GOTEN AS FAR AS WE DID WITH A BIG-BOX STORE LIKE THAT? LET'S DO THIS, I'M OPEN TO COMPROMISE ALWAYS. IF THERE'S A PROCESS TO COME IN AND DO AN ELEVATION REVIEW, THAT CAN BE DONE. AND WE CAN -- I'M

OPEN. >> ALLEN. >> MR. WEBER, I JUST GOT A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND MAYBE A QUESTION OR TWO.

I GUESS TO START WITH, I HAVE GOT A REALLY GREAT APPRECIATION FOR THE APPROACH YOUR FIRM HAS TAKEN ON THIS PROJECT FROM THE TIME WE STARTED PHASE 1 ALL THE WAY TO TODAY. YOU KNOW, IN MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE, WHEN WE'VE WORKED WITH LARGE DEVELOPMENTS SUCH AS THIS, MANY TIMES THE APPLICANT COMES IN, AND WE START WITH A BASELINE OF LET'S KIND OF SEE WHAT WE CAN SLIDE BY HERE, AND THEN WE KIND OF PICK IT APART, AND EVENTUALLY GET IT TO SOMETHING THAT LOOKS MAYBE HALFWAY DECENT OR GOOD. I FEEL STRONGLY SINCE THE FIRST TIME WE WORKSHOPPED WITH YOUR FIRM THE APPROACH HAS BEEN VERY THOUGHTFUL, VERY LOGICAL, WHEN THERE'S BEEN VARIANCE REQUESTS SUCH AS TONIGHT, THERE'S BEEN A VERY SPECIFIC NEED AROUND THOSE, NOT JUST WELL WE THOUGHT WE WOULD KIND OF THROW THIS IN OR ASK FOR THIS. AND SO I HAVE GOT A BIG APPRECIATION FOR THAT. JUST ON THIS END HERE AT THE DAIS.

SPECIFIC TO THE CONCERNS MENTIONED I HAVE FAR LESS CONCERNS PRIMARILY BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE CAN LOOK AT HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHT HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT YOUR FIRM HAS WORKED WITH USING ON. WE CAN LOOK AT THE KROEGER DEVELOPMENT. IS THE DEVELOPMENT EVER GOING TO BE PERFECT? NO, THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE

[01:15:02]

SOMETHING ON THE BACK-END, YOU CAN SAY MAN, I WISH WE DONE THIS OR THAT. BUT I THINK WE HAVE GOT A REALLY QUALITY DEVELOPMENT THERE. I THINK WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN PHASE 1, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN LOOK AT IT AND SEE GRANTED I KNOW IT

TOOK A WHILE TO GET THERE. >> THEY ALL DO. >> BUT I THINK THE QUALITY IS THERE. I THINK YOUR INTENTION EVEN WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING TONIGHT TO CONTINUE THAT QUALITY. I HAVE MUCH LESS CONCERN AROUND THAT. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE REQUEST TONIGHT. AND I BELIEVE THAT IN THESE PARTNERSHIPS BECAUSE THAT IS TRULY WHAT THESE LARGE DEVELOPERS ARE WITH THE CITY, ECONOMIC DRIVERS FOR US. I BELIEVE THERE'S HISTORY THERE AND QUALITY THERE AND I THINK WE CAN WIN SOME TRUST FACTOR TO OUR PARTNERS IN THOSE AREAS. SO I HAVE LESS CONCERNS AROUND OF THOSE AREAS. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF IT. I JUST WANTED TO SHARE SOME OF THAT.

>> THANK YOU, ALLEN. SO I AM HEARING FROM TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE PREFER TO HAVE A SITE REVIEW AND ONE THAT DOESN'T NEED IT. WAYNE OR CLARK, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD?

OR DIFFERENT TOPIC? >> I JUST HAD ONE LAST QUESTION OF THE LANDSCAPING VARIANCE. IS THE VARIANCE FOR JUST THE SPOT THAT RUNS ON -- WHAT WOULD THAT BE? THE WEST SIDE, OR DOES THAT INCLUDE THE BACK PART OF THAT BACK UP TO SPUR 73?

>> THERE IS, I BELIEVE, IN THE P&Z, MARY MAYBE HELP ME IF I'M WRONG. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ORIGINALLY, BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY HAVE A PRETTY LARGE SLOPE ON 73, TOO. THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. THAT WE ASKED FOR THAT TO HAVE A FEW LESS TREES, BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY TIGHT WITH THE SLOPE AND EVERYTHING.

I THINK IN THE P&Z MEETING, WE AGREED TO --

>> YES, YOU PROVIDED MORE TREES. I THINK THIS MEETS THE STANDARD HERE AND THEN YOU HAVE THESE TREES ON THE EDGE, BUT THEY LOOK LIKE THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PARKING TREES. I MEAN, THERE'S A COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES

FOR CLUSTERING. >> I JUST -- I MEAN, I HAVE VERY SMALL AMOUNTS OF HEARTBURN ON THE HIGHWAY RAMP. I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE THE BACKSIDE OF THE BUILDING TYPICALLY

WHERE SEMIS AND BOXES AND TRASH IS. >> I WOULD SAY IT'S STILL EARLY IN THE ENGINEERING. I BELIEVE SPUR 73 IS GOING TO BE 8-10' TALLER THAN THE FIRE LANE OF THE FUTURE RETAILER.

SO YOU WILL HAVE THAT. AND OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR NO LANDSCAPING. I MEAN, WE'RE SHOWING SOME AND WE'RE

GOING PUT MORE IN AND GRASS. >> IT'S ALSO THE ENTRANCE, THE BACKSIDE ENTRANCE, BUT IT IS THE ENTRANCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

>> WE CERTAINLY INTEND TO BEAT CITY STANDARDS ON SPUR 73. WHAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO SAY, WE HAVE GOT A SLOPE ISSUE THERE. AND AND THERE'S UTILITIES AND IT STARTS TO GET DIFFICULT WITH SLOPES AND UTILITIES TO PLANT EVERYTHING THAT THE WRITTEN CODE SO. SO THE REQUEST WAS TO MAKE SURE WE MEET THE CODE, BUT TO PROVIDE STAFF SOME ABILITY TO MAYBE MOVE SOME

THINGS AROUND. >> I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THIS ORDINANCE, MAYBE IT'S SOMEWHERE I MISSED? I KNOW THAT STAFF TYPICALLY ALLOWS THEMSELVESS A PERCENTAGE TO THE DRC MEETING TO REDUCE OR INCREASE. I'M ASSUMING IT'S 5% LIKE THE OTHERS. I WAS FLIPPING HOW TO, BUT DON'T SEE IT.

>> IT'S AN AMENDMENT, TOO. SO IF IT'S IN THE 2024-05 ORDINANCE, IT'S

STILL APPLICABLE. >> LIKE I SAID, I JUST THINK SPUR 73 IS THE BACK ENTRANCE. AS LONG AS YOU ARE MEETING THE REQUIREMENT ON SPUR 73, I CAN GET OVER THE HEARTBURN ON

THE HIGHWAY. >> DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON

THE ELEVATION REVIEW? >> I DON'T WANT TO STEAL ROSS'

THUNDER HE ALREADY SHARED HIS THUNDER. >> I AGREE WITH ROSS. WE LEAVE IT AS THE PD AS WRITTEN AND THAT USER CAN COME SEEK A VARIANCE IF THEY CAN'T MEET THAT ARCHITECTURAL SIL.

>> SO THREE ON HAD A SIDE. WAYNE, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT? SAME. SO IT'S FOUR. DO YOU HAVE OTHER COMMENTS,

MIKE? >> NO. >> SO I'M GETTING THE SENSE GENERALLY OKAY WITH EVERYTHING WITH THE EXCEPTION

[01:20:02]

OF JUST THE ELEVATION. >> WHICH I THINK IS AN EXCELLENT IDEA.

FRANKLY, AS COUNCIL MEMBER RODGERS WILL TELL YOU, I ANTICIPATED SENDING MORE TIME WITH YOU ALL ON THE ELEVATION. SO GOOD WITH ME.

>> FINAL COMMENTS, ROSS? >> MR. MAYOR, I THINK WE CAN EASILY SOLVE THAT BY STRIKING SECTION 1, ITEM 1I FROM THE PARAGRAPH THAT WOULD AMEND THE BASE ZONING ELEVATION REQUIREMENT

REVIEW. >> IS THAT CORRECT, JOE? >> YES.

WE'LL GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES REVIEW. MARY, DO YOU WANT TO CONFIRM THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? IN WE TAKE OUT I OUT, THEN IT'S GOING TO GO BACK TO THE ORDINANCE, ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THAT

COME BACK BEFORE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. >> RIGHT NOW THE ITEM BEING AMENDED IN SECTION 2F9G SUBSECTION 3 INDICATES THE FACADES OF LARGE FORMAT STORES SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL OF THE DETAILED SITE PLAN FOR THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH SUCH LARGE FORMAT STORES IS CONSTRUCTED. SO IF WE REMOVE THE AMENDMENT.

>> THEN THAT IS THE WAY I READ IT. >> THEN IT GOES BACK TO APPROVAL, WHICH COULD COME BACK BEFORE US .

IT WOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL. YES. >> OKAY.

>> FINAL COMMENTS, MIKE? >> QUICK QUESTION ON THE SIGNAGE TO GET MY MIND WRAPPED AROUND IT. PE4 IS 55 FOOTER. I DON'T PERSONALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION AND THE WAY ITS TUCKED IN ALONG THE HIGHWAY. THERE IS NOTHING FOR THAT HEIGHT TO AFFECT OTHER THAN THE HIGHWAY. COUNCIL, I KNOW WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF HEARTBURN ON TALLER SIGNAGE IN THE PAST. DID WE DECIDE THE SIGNAGE IS OKAY? I'M OKAY WITH

IT. I'M INTERESTED IN HOW -- >> I GOT THE SENSE THAT OTHER THAN SOME COMMENTS CLARK MADE EARLIER,

PRETTY SOLID. >> I'M THE FIRST ONE TO THROW A FIT ABOUT HEIGHT. I'M THINKING RIGHT THERE IT'S NOT A HUGE ISSUE.

>> I PERSONALLY WISH IT WAS THE 45, BECAUSE KIND OF BEEN WHAT I HAVE BEEN MAKING EVERYBODY DO. I'M NOT GOING TO

FIGHT OVER 10'. >> SO WE'RE GOOD. >> LET'S MOVE ON UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING MAJOR. OKAY. TAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED RECOMMENDED WITH THE STRIKING OF ITEM I IN A BELIEVE SECTION 1 OF THE

DRAFT ORDINANCE. YES, SIR. >> I WILL SECOND.

>> OKAY. MOTION MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER AND SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER SHUFFIELD, BEAT YOU TO IT.

PLEASE VOTE. ALL RIGHT PASSES 6-0. THANK YOU, MR. WEBER AND TEAM. WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THAT

[2026-039 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 Lot 2, Midlothian Heritage High School, and a 1.41-acre portion of vacated right-of-way of FM 1387, by changing the zoning from Single-Family Three (SF-3) District 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) ]

DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM 2026-39.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN ZOIC ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOT 2 MIDLOTHIAN HERITAGE HIGH SCHOOL AND 1.41 ACRES PORTION OF VACATED RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FM 1387. , ET CETERA. DAMAGE.

DANIEL. >> THANK YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL; A REQUEST TO PD WITH AN NU LYING ZONING OF CR FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE COMP PLAN DESIGNATION IS NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL RETAIL.

THE SLIDE SHOWS THESE IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY. THE SITE PLAN INCLUDES SIX LOTS, LOT 1 HAS A DAYCARE, LOTS 2-3 HAVE TWO MULTI-TENANT RETAIL BUILDING. BOTH BUILDINGS HAVE FIVE LEASACLE SPACES AND ONE HAS A PICK-UP WINDOW.

FLY BUILDINGS INCLUDED WITH FUTURE PHASE FOR REFERENCES ONLY.

HAVE NO DEFINITIVE USES OR SIZES AND WORTH NOTING THAT THE BUSINESSES CAN BE ALLOWED ANY USE IN THE CR ZONING UNLESS STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND THE ORDINANCE WHICH ARE LISTED ON THE NEXT SLIDE. HERE IS THE LANDSCAPING PLANS

[01:25:11]

AND THE DETAILS. THESE ARE THE DAYCARE ELEVATIONS, WHICH INCLUDE FOUR INTERNALLY LIT WALL SIGNS AND ELEVATIONS FOR RETAIL B. HERE ARE THE ELEVATIONS FOR RETAIL C. HERE IS THE SIGN PLAN SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE FIVE PROPOSED MONUMENT WITH ALL UNTERNAL ILLUMINATION AND THE SIGN LOCATED AT 1387 WALNUT GROVE INTERSECTION IS SINGLE TENANTS, THREE SIGNS LOCATED AT THE ENTRANCES WILL BE MULTI-TENANTS. THE PROPOSED SIGN ALONG FM 1387 IS 15'. A VARIANCE WILL BE NEEDED SINCE THIS EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM HIGHLIGHT ALLOWANCE. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL, EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAN ZONING AND USE TOTSES NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST, BUT IS COMPATIBLE WITH NON-RESIDENTIAL PD FOR TOM THUMB AND MCDONALDS TO THE EAST.

AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THE COMP PLAN DESIGNATION FOR THIS PROPERTY IS NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL RETAIL, WHICH IS INTEND 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 PHARYN. THESE TWO SLIDES SHOWS GUIDE AND STRATEGIES TO EMPHASIZE THAT. SO STAFF HAS FOUR MAIN CONCERNS WITH THE PD REQUESTSING AND THEY ARE AS FOLLOWS: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF UPDATED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS STILL NEEDED. IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA BASED ON EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, AND TIMELINE FOR PUBLIC PRIME MINISTERS TO FM 1397 ARE UNKNOWN. NEEDS MITIGATION DUE TO IMMEDIATING DOWN STREAM CAPACITY IS.

AWESOME THOUGH PLAN HAS PHASE 3 APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THE CITY'S ABILITY TO CONTROL CONSTRUCTION, JENNING AND REGULATING CORRESPONDING TRAFFIC DRAINAGE AND COMPATIBILITY IMPACTS WILL BE LIMITED. THE FOURTH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEET THE TRANSITIONAL LOT DESIGN ADDITIONAL SCREENING, RESTRAINED DENSITY OR LANDSCAPING, SIGN AND PARKING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS TO COMP PLAN GOALS. THERE'S ALSO NO PROVIDED PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ON WALNUT GROVE UNTIL THE FINAL PHASE. SINCE THE JANUARY P&Z, THE APPLICANT HAS REDUCED THE NUMBER OF VARIANCES FROM FIVE TO THREE.

TWO VARIANCES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED INCLUDE THE APPLICANT PROVIDING THE REQUIRED PLANNING MATERIALS NEEDEDER TO THE RESIDENTIALLY ADJACENT RAND SCAPE BUFFER ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE HORIZONTAL BUILDING ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS. EXCEEDING THE NAME HEIGHT ALLOWANCE OF 10', P&Z -- THE APPLICANT REDUCED THE SIGN'S HEIGHT BY 10', BUT A VARIANCE WILL STILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE SIGN TO BE 15'. THE VARIANCE IS STILL REQUIRED AS WELL FOR ALL INTERNAL ILLUMINATION ON ALL MONUMENT SIGN AND VARIANCE FOR THE 6' MASONRY WALL REQUIRED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY IS STILL NEEDED ALTHOUGH A PORTION HAS BEEN PROVIDED.

PUBLIC NOTICES WERE SENT OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200' RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY AND STAFF RECEIVED NO OBJECTION. P&Z RECOMMENDED DENIAL AT A VOTE OF 6-0 AND RECOMMENDED THE APPLICANT WORK WITH STAFF TO MITIGATE THE FIVE VARIANCES. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF REQUEST DUE TO COMP PLAN INCONSISTENCY, SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE COMPATIBLE ISSUES AND INADEQUATE ZONING, AND KNOWN IMPACT ON TRAFFIC AS TXDOT HAS NO

REQUIREMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT FM 1387. >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. >> JACK FREE MARN.

YOU WILL NEED TO REINTRODUCE YOURSELF AS IT'S A NEW CASE JACK

[01:30:07]

FREEMAN, 220 SOUTH WALNUT GROVE. I SPOKE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AND I LIVE ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. SO DIRECTLY DIAGONAL ACROSS FROM IT. I KNOW THE CONCBIG CONCERN WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING, AND MY CONVERSATION WITH THE DEVELOPERS. I HAVE SIGNED, I GUESS A STATEMENT SAYING THAT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROJECT. I HAVE TALKED TO THE DEVELOPERS AND I HAVE TALKED TO ENGINEERING WITH THE CITY. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN CONCERNS OF THE THEORY OF THE WAY THE DRAINAGE IS GOING TO WORK, AND YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE OVERALL PROJECT, I THINK SOMETHING LIKE WHAT THEY ARE WANTING TO PUT THERE IS PERFECT FOR IT. AND ME AND THE DEVELOPER WE HAD A CONVERSATION AGAIN TODAY, BECAUSE I TOLD HIM I MAY BE RUNNING LATE TO THE MEETING.

SO THE ONLY QUESTION WE WERE TALKING AGAIN WAS DRAINAGE. AND HE EXPLAINED A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL AFTER MY CONVERSATION WITH MIKE LETTING HIM KNOW THAT I PREVIOUSLY SPOKE TO THE DEVELOPER REGARDING THE DRAINAGE. AND AGAIN, WITH MY PROPERTY BEING DOWNSTREAM, SO TO SAY, THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE BEHIND ME THAT WHEN WE KNOW WE GET THOSE BOTTOMS JUST DROP OUT MIDLOTHIAN, THE AMOUNT OF RAIN THAT WE CAN GET IN SOME AREAS, YOU KNOW? THERE'S A LOT OF WATER THAT COME THROUGH THERE. SO THAT WAS- THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY CONCERN. BUT I DON'T -- I THINK AFTER LOOKING AT EVERYTHING, I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN WITH IT AS LONG AS THEY DO IT -- IF THEY DO IT THE WAY THEY ARE GOING TO DO AND THE THEORY OF THE WAY THEY ARE DOING SEEM LIKE IT'S GOING TO WORK. AND THE ENGINEERING ON THE CITY'S SIDE, GETS WITH THEIR ENGINEERS AND THEY COME TO AN AGREEMENT IT SHOULD WORK, THEN I DON'T HAVE REALLY ANY ISSUE WITH IT. THAT AS ALWAYS BEEN MY QUESTION, AND IT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. ON THE PROJECT ITSELF, I KNOW PLANNING AND ZONING HAD SOME OTHER CONCERNS THAT I THINK ONE OF THEM MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE -- I DON'T THINK THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF THE DECELERATION LANE ON 1387. I BELIEVE. I COULD BE RECALLING SOMETHING WRONG. BUT I KNOW THE DEVELOPERS WORKED REAL HARD AND MADE SOME CHANGES ON TRYING TO GET THIS DONE. SO THAT IS ALL

I HAVE TO SAY. APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? SINCE THERE'S NO OTHER PUBLIC INPUT, TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY MAY MAYOR PRO TEM WICKLIFFE AND SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER, PLEASE VOTE. ITEM CLOSES 6-0. THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK OR MAKE A PRESENTATION OR JUST BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, IT'S UP TO YOU. SURE, COME ON UP.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS MANNY, AND I LIVE IN THE CITY OF CAPEL. JUST WANTED TO THANK THE STAFF. I HAVE A PRESENTATION JUST A FEW SLIDES TO TALK ABOUT THE BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT AND THE VARIANCES WE HAVE HAD.

BOTH WITH THE STAFF OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS TO GET THIS PROJECT TO FRUITION AND WHERE WE'RE TODAY. WE HAVE WORKED WITH P&Z, AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION LAST MONTH TO INCORPORATE MOST OF THE CHANGES THAT WE HAVE, AND WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS A LIST OF CHANGES THAT WE HAVE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE PROJECT, JUST WORKING WITH ENGINEERING STAFF TO INCORPORATE WHAT IS NEEDED FOR THE CITY AND FOR THE COMMUNITY. WE ALL KNOW THAT PART OF TOWN NEAR TOM THUMB IS GROWING AND WE HAVE A LOT OF OTHER DEVELOPMENT COMING UP. AND THIS IS, I FEEL IS A MUCH-NEEDED RETAIL COMPONENT THAT WILL COMPLIMENT WHAT IS ALREADY THERE. AS YOU SEE, I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THIS, BUT WE HAVE MADE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS AND WHERE IT ORIGINATED FROM AND HOW IT'S COMING TO FRUITION IN THE SITE PLAN AND ENGINEERING PLAN YOU SEE. THERE ARE TWO VARIANCES THAT CAME AS PART OF P&Z, WHICH I WANTED TO SORT OF HIGHLIGHT. WE'RE REQUESTING THESE VARIANCES AND I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT TO YOU WHAT THESE ARE. THE FIRST VARIANCE IS SCREENING WALL FROM A CONTEXT PERSPECTIVE ON THE SITE PLAN, THE SCREENING WALL IS GOING TO

[01:35:01]

GO ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

ORDINANCE REQUIRES US TO HAVE A SCREENING WALL. PERSONALLY WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM IN DOING THAT, BUT I WANTED TO SORT OF HIGHLIGHT TO COUNCIL AND STAFF SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WE WOULD FACE IF WE WERE TO PUT THE SCREENING WALL. THIS IS THE OLD ABANDON FM 1387 ROAD AND DUE TO THE CHANGES WE HAVE DONE IN THE PROJECT, I WANTED TO PUT IN PERSPECTIVE WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. WE ARE LOCATING A WATER LINE THAT RUNS ON THE SOUTHSIDE OF THIS SLIDE THAT YOU SEE TO THE NORTH SIDE, VERY CLOSE TO THE SCREENING WALL.

I HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE, MET WITH HIM SEVERAL TIMES. WE'RE PROVIDING HIM A NEW TRASH COLLECTOR AND MAILBOX. THAT IS THE ENTRANCE TO HIS PROPERTY. HE HAS THESE SHRUB TREES THAT ARE PLANTED VERY NICELY AND THE SCREENING WALL WERE TO GO HERE, THAT WOULD BE RIGHT ON THIS. WE'LL HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH HIS TRASH COLLECTOR AND MAILBOX. AND THEN THERE'S A SUBSTATION HERE, AD & D SUBSTATION THAT REQUIRES MAINTENANCE.

WITH ALL OF THESE CHANGES AND THE FIVE THINGS THAT YOU SEE HERE, THAT IS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE MORE FROM AN ACCESS AND NOT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF NOT MEETING THE REQUIRED ORDINANCE. I BELIEVE THE NEED FOR AN ORDINANCE COMES FROM THE FACT THERE'S A COMMERCIAL AND THERE'S A RESIDENTIAL TYPE APPLICATION HERE.

THIS IS ZONED AG. THE HOUSE BEHIND IS ABOUT 340' FROM OUR LOCATION AND THE CHURCH IS ABOUT 220' FROM THIS. VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE APPLICATION THAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN TOM THUMB, WHERE YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAT ARE ABUTTING TO THIS. SO I JUST WANTED TO DO HIGHLIGHT THAT. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM, BUT THIS IS MORE OF AN ACCESS ISSUE. THE SECOND VARIANCE WAS A SIGN ILLUMINATION. WE URGENTLY HAD A SIGN HERE THAT YOU SEE AS HIGHLIGHTED IN NO. 1. PER P&Z RECOMMENDATIONS WE HAVE MOVED THAT LOCATION. OFF THE SIGN TO WHERE YOU SEE NO. 2 HERE. PRIMARILY IT WAS OVER CONCERN FROM A KENSINGTON COMMUNITY AND HAVE THEY HAVE ILLUMINATED SIGNSES DURING THE NIGHT. SO WE DID REMOVE IT, BUT STAFF HAD SOME CONCERNSING ON THE ACTUAL SIGN BEING ILLUMINATED.

JUST WANTED TO PUT THIS IN PERSPECTIVE.

THERE IS A SIGN THAT IS BEING ILLUMINATED FROM THE CHURCH AND THE SIGN WITH THE NEW LOCATION IS ABOUT 445' AWAY FROM THIS. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT YOU ARE SEEING HERE.

THOSE ARE THE TWO SLIDES THAT I HAD. WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS A MASONRY NOT TO HAVE A MASONRY WALL DUE TO ACCESS CONSIDERATION, AND TO HAVE A 12' PLANNERS WITH ASORTED GROUND COVER IS THE VARIANCE WE'RE ASKING AND THE SIGN ILLUMINATION. WHAT YOU SEE IS A PICTURE OF TREES PLANTED BY THE OWNER TO THE NORTH OF OUR SITE. AND I DO HAVE OTHER SLIDES THAT TALKS ABOUT CONSIDERATIONS AND ALL OF THAT.

ONE THING WAS TXDOT, OUR APPLICATION IS IN FRONT OF TXDOT. THERE WAS A QUESTION FROM STAFF ON THE DECELERATION LANE. THAT IS BEING CHANGED. SO WE WORKED DILIGENTLY TO ADDRESS ANY AND ALL CONCERNS THAT TXDOT AND STAFF HAVE. I HAVE SLIDES THAT I WOULDN'T GO THROUGH IN DETAIL WITH ALL THE FULL CONCERNS THAT STAFF HAD. AGAIN, LASTLY, I THINK THIS PROJECT BRINGS IN THE MUCH-NEEDED RETAIL, AND NECESSARY COMPONENT FOR THE GROWING COMMUNITY THERE WITH THE LARGE DEVELOPMENTS. THAT IS ALL I HAVE. I HAVE A TIA CONSULTANT AND MY CONSULTANT AND ARCHITECT IS HERE.

>> THANK YOU. QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE?

ROSS. >> QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL DUE TO THE INTENSITY OF USE. YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING -- IT'S ALWAYS FUN FOR ME, BECAUSE I CAN'T FIND THE USE CHARTS WHEN I NEED THEM AND WOULD LOVE ONE FORMATTED BASED ON EACH ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND NOT EACH POD OF USES THAT I HAVE TO THEN GO CHECK IF IF I COULD LAY A GP NEXT TO A CR AND GO THROUGH THAT. TO ME, WHEN

[01:40:01]

I LOOK AT THIS, 17,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING IS A LITTLE BIT MORE SIGNIFICANT MASS ON THE WESTERN EDGE OF THIS PROJECT, THAN I THINK I WOULD PROBABLY PREFER. I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE LOTS 1, 2 AND MAYBE 3 TO BE MORE GENERALLY PROFESSION AND THEN YOU HAVE MORE CR AS YOU GET CLOSER TO WALNUT GROVE ARTHUR AND FEATHER INTO THE TOM THUMB. ING AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO HAVE HEAVIER CRS ARE CLOSER TO THE INTERSECTION TO SIMILAR USES WITH A CHURCH TO THE NORTH AND THE TOM THUMB DEVELOPMENT TO DIRECTLY EAST. OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK THE APPLICANT MAKES A COMPELLING ARGUMENT AS TO WHY BUILDING A MASONRY WALL, WHICH ONE SECTION OF WOULD BE PARALLELING ANOTHER MASONRY WALL THAT IS ALREADY THERE AND ONE SECTION IS EITHER REMOVING OR IMPAIRING THE VEGETATIVE SCREEN THAT THE EXISTING RESIDENT IS VERY COMFORTABLE WITH AND ALREADY WORKED WITH. THE OTHER ONE IS SCREENING IT FROM A CHURCH. I MEAN, I MAY BE MISTAKEN, BUT YOU HAVE GOT SEVERAL CHURCHS IN THIS TOWN THAT ARE ADJACENT TO NON-RESIDENTIAL USES THERE IS NO SCREENING WALL BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM, EVEN WOOD OR ANYTHING. IS IT A RELIGIOUS USE? YES, BUT FOR ALL INTENT AND PURPOSES CHURCHES ARE BUILT TO THE DESIGN SPECS OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, AND FLOW VERY WELL IN THAT. SO I THINK HE MAKES A COMPELLING ARGUMENT THERE. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE INTENSITY OF THE USE, YOU ARE SAYING BECAUSE IT'S CR, AND BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE

BUILDINGS OR JUST MORE BECAUSE IT'S CR? >> REALLY JUST MORE FOR CR.

>> OKAY. >> ALSO, TOO FOR THE SCREENING, SO THE CHURCH WASN'T THE ISSUE WITH THAT. AS YOU CAN SEE RIGHT HERE, COUNCIL PULLED IT UP LARGER THIS IS ZONED AGRICULTURAL AND TO THE WEST HERE, THIS IS ALSO A PD, BUT IT'S FOR SINGLE-FAMILY SF 3. THAT IS WHERE THE FENCE IS REQUIRED.

>> THAT IS ALREADY EXISTING MASONRY WALL REQUIRED IN THE PD?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> RIGHT. SO THE BIGGEST HEARTBURN I HAVE LOOK AT THIS AND I WILL DIRECT THIS TO THE APPLICANT IT APPEARS BY RIGHT FOR TWO DRIVE THROUGHS. I THINK THEY HAD TWO OR THREE -- TWO. HE IS TELLING ME IT'S TWO. I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HEARTBURN LOOKING AT THIS AND SAYING WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PRE-APPROVE TWO DRIVE-THRU USES WITHOUT KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT THOSE ARE.

SO THOSE ARE TYPICALLY DONE THROUGH AN SUP PROCESS.

>> I THINK WE HAVE ONE BY RIGHT, AND ONE WE'LL COME WITH AN SUP.

>> OKAY. >> ONE BY RIGHT ON RETAIL B HERE.

>> OKAY. SO THAT -- NOW, I DO KNOW IN THE WEBER DEVELOPMENT, THE ONE ATTACHED TO A STRIP RETAIL BUILDING WAS DESIGNATED AS A PICKUP WINDOW AND YOU ARE JUST DRIVING THROUGH TO PICK UP IS THAT IN FRONT OF LOWE'S? SO I MEAN, IS THAT A DEAL BREAKER? DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE DRIVE-THROUGH TO MAKE IT WORK?

>> WE'RE REQUESTING ONE DRIVE-THRU TO MAKE IT WORK. AND RETAIL B IT'S GOING TO BE PHASED. WHEN THE OTHER FUTURE --

WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK. >> DO YOU HAVE ANTICIPATED USES IN BUILDING B AND C THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN A GENERAL

PROFESSIONAL ZONING? >> WE HAVE HAD REQUESTS FOR A DRIVE-THROUGH IN RETAIL B THAT WE'RE TALKING TO SOMEBODY ABOUT.

>> OKAY. BUT IT'S A DRIVE-THROUGH USE THAT WOULD NOT CONFORM WITH THE ALLOWED USES IN THE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL ZONE?

>> YES, IT'S MORE CR. >> OKAY. >> I KIND OF ECHO STAFF'S CONCERNS, ESPECIALLY THE DAYCARE CAN EXIST WITH SUP WITH GENERAL PROFESSIONAL, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY.

SOFTENING UP THOSE TWO USES CREATES THAT TRANSITIONARY BUFFER FROM A USE

[01:45:04]

STANDPOINT AS YOU GET TO THE HARDER USES IN THE CR ALLOWED THROUGH

THE INTERSECTION. >> WE HAVE A REQUEST FROM A NAIL SPA. THOSE ARE THE TYPES. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT MORE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL RESIDENTIAL SCALE OF A COMMERCIAL USE, AND AT THE VERY HARD CORNER AT FM 663 WAS THE MORE CR INTENSIVE USE BECAUSE IT WAS GETTING CLOSER TO A NEIGHBORHOOD. FOR ME TO LOOK AT THIS AND MITIGATE THE CONCERNS THAT STAFF IS BRINGING UP THAT RETAIL C USE, CAN WE DIAL THE INTENSITY

OF THAT BUILDING BACK? >> GOING BACK TO OUR PHASING, WE INTEND TO DEVELOP PHASE 3 ALONG WITH TXDOT DEVELOPMENT AS THIS CORRIDOR BUILDS UP. THAT IS WHY WE INTENTIONALLY PHASED IT TO BE WITH RETAIL C BEING CR USES, AND NOT DOING ANYTHING AROUND PHASE 3. SO RIGHT NOW, IF DON'T -- DO PHASE 1, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO START OFF. OUR PHASE 1 IS THE DAYCARE AND RETAIL C. AND THEN WOULD BE PHASE 2, AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO COME IN FOR ENTIRELY NEW SITE PLAN FOR PHASE 3. SO THAT IS WHERE OUR

INAUDIBLE ] >> MIKE. >> JUST ASKING SOME GUIDANCE GOING BACK TO THE RETAIL. THAT WOULD BE THE

COMMERCIAL. >> I'M SORRY. >> THE BIRDS COMMERCIAL

RETAIL? >> YES. >> COUNCIL HAD TURNED THAT ONE

DOWN IN SOME RETRO SPECK. >> I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER HOW

MANY DRIVE-THROUGHS WERE IN THAT ONE? >> IN BIRD?

>> OH, WAS IT TWO? >> AT LEAST. TWO TO THREE. >> I'M JUST TRYING -- THIS ISN'T THE SAME FORMAT, BUT KIND OF IN ITS OWN WAY, I WOULDN'T SAY EXACTLY MATCHES. I KNOW WE HAD SOME CONCERNS THERE ABOUT WANTING TO SEE TWO LANE GO TO THREE LANE BEFORE WE STARTED IMPLEMENTING SOME MORE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

663? >> YES, FROM TWO TO THREE? >> THERE WAS A DAYCARE

DEVELOPMENT. >> I THINK THAT IS THE CONCERN OF THIS EVERYBODY KNOWS AT SOME POINT, 1387 WILL BE ENLARGED, BUT WHO KNOWS WHEN THAT WILL BE? AND WE KNOW THAT 663 IS AT JUST A CRITICAL POINT RIGHT NOW THAT IT'S HARD TO ADD ANY MORE CURB CUTS TO 663. I THINK THEY ARE TRYING TO MITIGATE THAT WITH THE RIGHT INRIGHT OUT ONLY AT THE MIDDLE DRIVEWAY. BUT YOU ARE STILL GOING GENERATE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC.

>> I'M NOT ARGUING WITH ANYTHING THAT IS BY RIGHT. MY CONCERN IS, AND IT DOES ALSO CAN BE I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE REVIEWING PROPERTIES ON THE SAME PLATFORM AND

SAME PARALLEL TO. >> YOU BET. >> THE ONE -- WHAT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT ON THIS ONE ARE IT'S ON THE CORNER VERSUS THE OTHER IS NOT.

A LOT TO TAKE IN HERE, BUT THAT WAS MY MAIN

QUESTION ON THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. >> ANYBODY ELSE? ROSS?

>> YOU KNOW, FINALLY FOUND THE USE CHART. SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THAT. IT LOOKS LIKE THAT TALKING ABOUT A NAIL SALON BEAUTY SHOP OR BARBERSHOP, DO WE HAVE A DIFFERENT DEFINITION FOR NAIL SALON? BECAUSE YOU CAN HAVE A RESTAURANT UNDER A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. YOU CAN HAVE A PHARMACY, DRUG STORE, YOU CAN HAVE PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, GENERAL RETAIL SALES STORE/SHOP. YOU CAN DO GUN REPAIR WITH AN SUP. OR SELL GUNS. SO THAT IS WHAT I'M SAYING. I THINK MEDICAL OR DENTAL CLINIC, BANK, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE IN A GENERAL

[01:50:02]

PROFESSIONAL AND WHAT IS THE USE WE NEED TO HAVE BY RIGHT TO SAY IT'S GOT TO BE CR ON THAT RETAIL? I THINK IT'S ALLOWED WITH AN SUP AND GIVES US SOME DISCERNMENT. IS IT A RESTAURANT THAT WILL POTENTIALLY CAUSE A NUISANCE TO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD AND NEEDS TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER BUILDING THAT IS FURTHER AWAY. THAT IS THE BENEFIT TO LOOK AT THAT HEY WE CAN CONTROL THE INTENSITY OF THE USE A LITTLE MORE, BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE USES WOULD REQUIRE SECONDARY APPROVAL. THE REST OF COUNCIL MAY DISAGREE WITH ME AND I MAY BY TALKING TO HEAR MYSELF SPEAK, BUT THAT IS WHERE I HAVE THE BIGGEST CONCERN, BECAUSE THAT IS AN ENTRY WAY INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD. NOT -- IT'S NOT A 1387 OR NOT A WALNUT GROVE. IT'S A CORNER, BUT THAT IS HOW THOSE FOLKS A LOT OF THEM GO HOME AT NIGHT.

SO MAYBE A LITTLE SOFTER USAGE OF THAT. >> IS IT -- JUST SPEAKING, CAN WE MAKE THIS SITE RETAIL C MORE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL AND HAVE CR ON THE

OTHER SIDE FACING 1387? >> THE PD ALLOWS A RESTAURANT OVER A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET WITHOUT AN SUP. I MEAN, THE PD IS ALLOWING THAT. YES. IT ALSO ALLOWS DRIVE-THROUGH THAT IS GREATER THAN A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET WITHOUT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 2B2 AND 3, THAT ALLOW FOR TWO RESTAURANTS BY RIGHT GREATER THAN A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET IN THE FIRST PHASE AND IN ADDITION

TO THE OTHER, DAYCARE. >> I DO AGREE THE SOFTER USE GOING INTO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA WOULD BE NICE . I HAVE ALSO GOT TRAFFIC CONCERNS REGARDING TIMING OF 1387. THAT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST RECENT COMPLAINTS THAT I GET THE MOST IS TRAFFIC ALONG 1387 IN THAT CORRIDOR SPECIFICALLY AND BEYOND TO THIS DIRECTION. DOES STAFF FEEL LIKE THE TURN LANES IN THEIR PLAN MITIGATES THAT TRAFFIC FLOW, OR IS THAT PART OF THE REASON YOU ARE RECOMMENDING DENIAL?

>> I THINK, MAYOR THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL. MOVING FORWARD WE WERE THINKING TXDOT WAS MOVING FORWARD AND THE LAST INFORMATION WE GOT IT'S ON PAUSE AND REALLY NO FUNDING AT THIS POINT IN TIME. I HEARD SOMETHING AFTER 2030 POSSIBLY. AGAIN, DON'T FULLY KNOW.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, TOO, BECAUSE MAYOR WE GET THOSE COMPLAINTS AS WELL. SO WE DON'T CURRENTLY KNOW ONCE THAT IS FULLY OPERATIONAL. THE ORIGINAL INTENT. WITH TOM THUMB COMING, AND TXDOT STARTING, IT WOULD BE LAGGING BEHIND, BUT AS IT CURRENTLY STAND WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD FEEL WHEN TXDOT WOULD START THAT SITUATION.

>> I THINK IF THEY HAD HAD BUILT THIS IS A GOOD USE, BUT THE TIMING IS JUST TERRIBLE. ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE BEHIND THE 8-BALL ON ROADWAY INFRASTRUCTURE REGARDING WITH TXDOT.

>> OUR APPLICATION WITH TXDOT HAS GONE THROUGH MULTIPLE ITERATIONS.

THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE TIA AND LOOKED AT THE USE. WE'RE JUST AWAITING APPROVAL. I WAS HOPING TO HAVE IT BEFORE

THIS MEETING. >> ONE THING, KIND OF A CONCERN ON OUR END IS LOOKING AT RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUTS UNLESS DESIGNED A APPROPRIATELY, AND YOU ALSO HAVE AND LOOK AT TIA, YOU HAVE ISSUED WITH TRAFFIC FROM WESTMINSTER TRYING TO GO EASTBOUND. TAKE A LEFT AND GO EASTBOUND ONTO 1387 AND TRYING TO GO NORTH AND TURN ONTO WESTMINSTER THERE ARE SOME

CHALLENGES AS WELL WITH TRAFFIC. >> THANK YOU. TCH ROSS?

>> I MEAN, ," DEFINITELY &%FO WHERE HE IS COMING FROM. PROBABLY ONE

[01:55:03]

OF THE SIDE BENEFITS IS WILL THE CONNECTION TO WALNUT GROVE FURTHER DRIVE LANES BE MADE THROUGH THE PROJECT IN THE

FIRST PHASE? >> ALL OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE INAUDIBLE ] ABLE TO DRIVE THROUGH THIS PARKING LOT

FROM WESTMINSTER TO WALNUT GROVE? >> YES.

>> WHILE NOT IDEAL, WHAT IT DOES CREATE IS THE ABILITY TO GO TO THE WALNUT GROVE LIGHT AND GO -- THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN CONTROL, BUT IT WOULD ALLOW CIRCULATION THROUGH ALTERNATIVE MEANS ALBEIT IT THROUGH A PARKING LOT, WHICH IS NOT IDEAL. I HAVE A LOT OF HEARTBURN HOLDING UP DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CALLED FOR ON OUR COMPREHENSIVIVE PLAN BECAUSE OF THE STATE'S REWILL RELUCTANCE OR INABILITY

TO UPGRADE. >> THE REALITY IS THE RESIDUAL IMPACTS OF THESE DECISIONS IMPACT OUR RESIDENTS DIRECTLY. TXDOT -- THEY DON'T PRIORITIZE THAT LIKE WE DO. TCH I THINK A PORTION OF MIKE'S POINT IS YOU KNOW, WHEN TOM THUMB WAS APPROVED, WE HAD A HORIZON AS TO WHEN 1387 WAS AND WE KNOW THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN NOW. SO WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT TOM THUMB IS GOING TO DO TO THE INTERSECTION OR 1387. SO IT'S NOT AN ALL OR NOTHING, BUT IS THERE SOME WAY TO HIT A PAUSE, WAIT, TAKE A BREATH AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH TOM THUMB? BECAUSE IT LOOK LIKE IT'S IMMINENT. I'M NOT SURE, BUT DRIVING BY IT LOOKS CLOSE TO OPENING UP AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT INTERSECTION.

AND THAT MIGHT ALLEVIATE SOME OF OUR CONCERNS, I DON'T KNOW. I MAY BE NAIVE AND MIKE IS AN ENGINEER.

SO HE CAN DISSOLVE ANY NAIVETE IF HE NEEDS TO. THE CONCEPT OF THE TOM THUMB IS NOT SCOPED THROUGH THE SIZE AND MAGNITUDE TO SAY HEY, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DRAG SOUTHERN MIDLOTHIAN UP TO SHOP AT TOM THUMB IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY. I REALLY FEEL THESE USES, AS WELL AS THE USES ON THAT TRACT ARE CENTERED AROUND FOLKS THAT ARE PROBABLY DRIVING THIS INTERSECTION ANYWAYS IT GET TO SCHOOL, TO GET TO WORKING TO PICKUP KIDS AND GET TO WHEREVER THEY ARE GOING. IT'S UNPROVEN, BUT I DON'T SEE THESE TYPES OF USES GENERATING -- IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE PUTING A COSTCO THAT WILL DRIVE PEOPLE FROM THREE CITIES. THESE ARE RETAIL USES THAT ARE THERE ARE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE OF MIDLOTHIAN THAT ARE DRIVING THIS ON A REGULAR BASIS. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO DOUBLE THE TRAFFIC IMPACT THAT WE'RE SEEING OUT THAT SOMEONE TURNS IN AND GRABS A JUG OF MILK. IF WE'RE GOING TO START DEVELOPING OUR COMMUNITY BASED UPON WHAT TXDOT MAY OR MAY NOT DO, WE MAY AS WELL STOP MAKING DECISIONS AT THIS DAIS, BECAUSE WE HAVE ZERO CONTROL OVER THAT AND THEY HAVE ZERO IDEA WHEN THEY ARE DOING ANYTHING UNTIL THE LAST ABSOLUTE SECOND HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE.

SO I THINK IT WOULD BE -- IF WE WANT TO TIE THE BACK HALF OF THIS DEVELOPMENT PHASE 2/PHASE 3, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO SEE UNTIL WE SEE THAT THE TXDOT, I'M FINE WITH THAT. THAT IS KIND OF WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WRITTEN INTO THE ACTUAL TEXT OF ORDINANCE OR NOT? BUT I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT THIS PROPERTY IS DESIGNED FOR AND COMP PLANED FOR, AS LONG AS WE CAN GET THE INTENSITY OF USE RIGHT. SO I'M MORE OF A SPLIT THE BABY AND SAY DO THE FIRST-HALF, BUT WE'RE GOING TO TIE THE SECOND-HALF TO THE

ROADWAY BEING OPENED. >> COUNCIL MEMBER, THAT IS THE INTENT OF PHASE 3. THAT IS EXACTLY WHY AND, IN FACT WE WENT ONE STEP FURTHER AND SAID WE WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION HAPPENS. THAT WAS OUR WHOLE IDEA TO PHASE

THIS ALL OUT AND MAKE THE INFRASTRUCTURE. >> FROM THAT STANDPOINT, IF WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHEN TXDOT IS GOING TO DO ANYTHING AND 2029, YOU HAVE TO DO IT AFTER. SO AGAIN, THE CONCERN

[02:00:04]

IS THAT WE REALLY DON'T KNOW. BY THE TIME RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION AND BY THE TIME THE RELOCATIONS AND THE TIME YOU DO THE PROJECT, WE'RE LOOKING FIVE YEARS OUT FROM THAT -- WHEN YOU ACTUALLY FIRST START ACQUIRING RIGHT-OF-WAY PROBABLY AT LEAST FIVE YEARS. THEY HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED THAT PROCESS YET AND DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT TIMELINE.

>> YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE ISSUE BASED UPON THE ENTIRETY OF THE FULL PHASED OUT FULLY BUILT OUT PLAN OR BASED ON PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 BEING COMPLETE.

>> IT'S BASED ON THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, MAYOR. STAFF DIDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE DAYCARE AND TALKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL WITH GENERAL PROFESSIONAL WITH THE DAYCARE WOULDN'T HAVE THE SAME INTENSE USE AND IF YOU COULD DO SOMETHING LATER ON AND LEAVE THAT OTHER PROPERTY TO BE REZONED LATER, WHENEVER THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS AND WE KNOW IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMING. AGAIN, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT WASN'T INTERESTED IN DOING IT THAT WAY.

>> MIKE RODGERS? >> I THINK IT'S A GREAT PROJECT. MY CONCERN IS SOLELY TRAFFIC. I DO SIDE WITH A LOT OF WHAT MIKE HAS MENTIONED. I DO FEEL BADLY ABOUT IT IN A WAY, IN AN IMMENSE WAY, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THE HOLD UP ON THIS IS 1387.

ROADWAY FM 1387 IS A TWO-LANE ROAD WITH A TURNING LANE IN THE MIDDLE. THAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM, EVEN WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING WHAT I WAS DISCUSSING A MOMENT AGO CLEAR ACROSS TOWN AT 663 AT LEAST THERE'S TWO LANES ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD THERE. SO WHEN I -- I ALREADY KNOW THE CALLS THAT I HAVE GOTTEN JUST OFF OF THE TOM THUMB APPROVAL.

AND AS I LOOK AT YOUR USAGE, WHICH I THINK THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT. I'M CONCERNED THAT THE ROADWAY INFRASTRUCTURE DOESN'T EXIST TO PROPERLY SUPPORT IT. COULD IT WORK? MAYBE. IS IT GOING TO CAUSE AT PEAK TIMES SOME MORE BOTTLENECK AFFECT? I SEE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT AFTER THE LIGHT.

THE TURNIN LANE, WHICH IS GREAT. BUT AT PEAK TIME WHEN FOLKS ARE DROPPING KIDS OFF AT DAYCARE, AND RETAIL B, THAT WILL BE -- THAT IS DRIVE-THROUGH BY RIGHT, YES OR NO? IF THAT ENDS UP HAVING SOME BREAKFAST COMPONENT TO IT, DOUGHNUT SHOP, WHO KNOWS WHAT? ARE THERE FOLKS ROLLING THROUGH THERE LIKE YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT AND WESTMINSTER DRIVE AND THE MIDDLE POINT, ALL OF THAT IS STACKING UP AND CLOGGING UP WHEN THE SCHOOLS ARE COMING IN ALSO. I DON'T

KNOW HOW THAT IS GOING TO WORK OUT. >> RETAIL B IS MAINLY TYPICAL RESTAURANT. IT WOULD NOT BE A CHICK-FIL-A OR SOMETHING. IT WILL BE VERY LOW-INTENSITY TRAFFIC GENERATOR. I THINK DO YOU HAVE THE HOURS

OF OPERATION FOR THAT GENERAL IDEA >> SO JUST BACKING OFF, WE

[02:05:03]

DON'T HAVE A USE YET. WHAT WE COULD DO IS SOFTEN THIS PROJECT A LITTLE MORE, SAYING PHASE 1 IS BASICALLY THE DAYCARE AND RETAIL C IS WE WOULD DO TO BEGIN WITH.

AND MAYBE WE CAN -- I'M WILLING TO HAVE A TIME FRAME TO BRING IN PHASE 2 AND TIMEFRAME TO BRING IN PHASE 3, IF THAT IS WHAT COUNCIL WANTS TO JUST SLOWLY AND STEADILY BUILD THIS UP, THAT WAS FLOATED AROUND AS AN OPTION. BUT BRINGING IN THE SOFTER RETAIL THAT IS NEEDED, WHICH WILL BE RETAIL C, THE DAYCARE THAT IS NEEDED. SO TWO COMPONENTS THAT ARE MUCH-NEEDED REGARDLESS OF 1387. SO I'M WILLING TO PACE THIS TO GET THIS.

>> SO SOFTEN IT, AND I DON'T KNOW, TO ROSS' POINT EARLIER, WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER TO CALL 1 AND 2 GENERAL PROFESSIONAL.

UNLESS TO ROSS' POINT EARLIER, WE'RE KIND OF CIRCLING BACK TO THAT.

UNLESS THERE'S A SPECIFIC USE THAT YOU ALREADY KNOW ISN'T GOING TO WORK FOR GENERAL PROFESSIONAL, THAT WOULD BE THE SOFTER USE, AND IF WE NEED TO WORK OUT SOMETHING ON THE DRIVE-THRUS, I FEEL LIKE THAT IS PROBABLY BEST IN PHASE 3 ANYWAY, SINCE YOU HAVE TWO OF THEM SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF THE COUNCIL FEELS. THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS IN THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT HERE.

SO I MEAN, IT MAY BE SOMETHING WHERE WE TABLE THIS, GIVE THE APPLICANT MORE TIME TO TALK WITH STAFF, AND AFTER HEARING THE COMMENTS AND THE FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL, TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS, AND COME BACK WITH KIND OF A HIGHEST AND BEST OFFER, AND THEN WE VOTE ON IT. THAT IS UP TO YOU GUYS. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WELL WE COULD DO IT WITHOUT YOU. BUT GIVEN YOU THE DEFERENCE ON THAT, DO YOU WANT TO TRY TO PUSH FOR A FRANKENSTEIN UP-AND-DOWN VOTE WHERE WE'RE PIECING THINGS TOGETHER OR TABLE FOR A MONTH TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO LET YOU ALL HAVE MORE TIME TO VISIT WITH STAFF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. THERE IS A LOT OF MOVING PART AND USUALLY I CAN KEEP TRACK OF

IT IN MY HEAD, BUT THIS IS A LOT. >> I'M WILLING TO TABLE THIS

AND GO BACK TO STAFF FOR ADVICE. >> I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA,

ROSS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. GO AHEAD. >> CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT. I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ON THIS BEFORE WE TABLE IT. IS THERE LIKE ANY -- BECAUSE I HAVE WORKED WITH TXDOTS EXTENSIVE ON THE DESIGN FOR 1387. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM THAT IN ORDER -- THAT WOULD MAKE IT MORE LIKELY, OR MORE ATTRACTIVE? BECAUSE WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT ADDING POTENTIAL DIVIDERS PLASTIC DIVIDERS PYLONS. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT RIGHT NOW THERE'S A CURBED PORKCHOP THAT HAS BEEN ADDED TO TRY TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM MAKING LEFT TURNS INTO THE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT DRIVEWAY. IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT MAKE IT MORE ATTRACTIVE TO THE COUNCIL? WHAT I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE IS VISITING WITH STAFF ABOUT SOME OF THOSE CONCEPTS. YOU KNOW, OR PRESENTING YOUR OWN. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. I HAVE SEEN PLENTY OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THAT GO IN THE OUT ON THESE THINGS AND YOU HAVE A FIELD FULL OF THEM PARKED ACROSS THE STREET. SO I THINK THAT IS WHERE THE CONCERN COMES IN; RIGHT? IS WHAT IS EFFECTIVE, AND WHAT DO YOU GUYS FEEL IN YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH TXDOT THAT IS PALATABILITY TO THEM AND WILL BE AN EFFECTIVE DETERENT FOR THAT BEING USED CORRECTLY?

>> THE ONLY THING THAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THE CITY STAFF ARE VERY CONCERNED WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THROUGH THERE. IF -- -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC SOLUTION TO STAFF'S CONCERNS. THERE'S A LOT OF VEHICLES GOING THROUGH THE AREA. YOU KNOW, THE OMING THING THAT FIXESS THAT IS TXDOT, IF THAT IS THE

CASE HOW DO WE MEET SOMEWHERE? >> THAT IS MY CONCERN. MAYBE IT'S THE

PHASING PLAN. >> AND THAT IS THE CHALLENGES. GET

[02:10:01]

CREATIVE AND BRING US BACK A SOLUTION. >> I HAVE TALKED TO MIKE, AND MIKE INDICATED THAT THE PORKCHOP DONE IN THE KROEGER COMPLEX, THE CITY HAD TO REDO IT AND MAYBE THAT IS SOMETHING WE TAKE AS AN OPTION ON TOP OF WHAT TXDOT

RECOMMENDATIONS ARE. >> I'M HAPPY TO TABLE AND AFTER YOU ALL MAKE ADJUSTMENT AND MEET WITH STAFF, WE CAN WORKSHOP IT AT A

LATER DATE TO REVISIT. IS THAT FAIR? >> I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION.

>> OKAY. >> STAFF, THEY DO HAVE ALL NECESSARY SIDEWALKS, ADA APPROACH SO FORTH AS FAR AS SIDEWALKS GO, CORRECT?

IN THIS VERSION, YES. >> THANK YOU. SO PUBLIC HEARING IS ALREADY CLOSED. JUST WANT TO HAVE THE ORDINANCE COME BACK IS THAT

WHAT I'M HEARING? >> I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE,

IF MAJOR ADJUSTMENTS ARE MADE. >> OKAY. SO WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO ? PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED. IF YOU CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO A DATE-CERTAIN, YOU AVOID

READVERTISING FOR THE PUBLIC TO COME BACK. >> I THINK IT NEEDS TO COME BACK TO P&Z AFTER WE WORKSHOP IS. IS THAT THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. DOES ANYBODY

>> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL A LATER DATE AND WORKSHOP IN THE MEANTIME. SECOND ON MY MOTION.

>> MOTION BY MYSELF, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RODGERS, PLEASE VOTE.

>> BEFORE YOU VOTE, IT'S ALREADY BEEN TO P&Z AND DEPENDING ON WHAT COMES OUT THE WORKSHOP AND IT MAY BE POSSIBLE JUST TO BRING BACK TO COUNCIL ON THE READVERTISEMENT, BASED ON CHANGES WITHOUT GOING BACK TO P&Z. IF THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES AT THAT POINT IN TIME TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION.

>> IT WAS DENIED BY P&Z. >> CORRECT. >> SO IF THEY MAKE SUBSTANTIAL

CHANGES I WOULD LIKE P&Z TO REVIEW THIS. >> THAT IS UP TO YOU ALL.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN TO P&Z. HAPPY TO GO BACK.

>> I FEEL LIKE MAJOR ADJUSTMENTS ARE NEED, IT NEEDS TO GO BACK TO P&Z AND HONOR THE BOARD. MOTION BY MYSELF, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RODGERS, PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSED 6-0. THANK YOU. ONTO 2026-40, CONDUCT A PUBLIC

[2026-040 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the zoning regulations of Planned Development District No. 42 (PD-42) by changing the development regulations for Module F and the approval for a related 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) ]

HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACUPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF PD NO. 42 BY CHANGING THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FROM MODULE FING AND THE APPROVAL FOR A RELATED DETAILED SITE PLAN PLUS OR MINUS .948 ACRES HE PORTION OF PD-42 THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION SOUTH 9TH STREET

AND AMA LANE. >> DANIEL.

>> THIS IS A DETAILED SITE PLAN ELEVATIONS AND LANDSCAPE PLAN.

THIS IS CURRENTLY A 0.948 ACRE UNDEVELOPEDLAT IN GP-BASED PD ZONING IN NEW TOWN MODULER FUTURE LAND DESIGNATION INER THE COMP PLAN. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN.

IT'S WORTH KNOWING THAT THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN FOUNDED IN .ED 42 ONLY HAD ONE OFFICE/RETAIL BUILDING LOCATE IN THE BUILDING A AREA ON THE WEST SIDE. IN SLIDE SHOWS ADJACENT ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IN RELATION TO PROPERTY. THE ELEVATIONS FOR BUILDING A. REQUIRE NO VARIANCES.

THE SAME GOES FOR BUILDING B. LANDSCAPING PLAN. ALL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET AND NO VARIANCES WILL BE REQUIRED. THIS AMENDMENT WILL NOT CHANGE THE BASE ZONING AND THE PROPOSED OFFICES ARE COMPATABILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN. THE GOAL AND STRATEGIES, TO SUPPORT THE COMP PLAN CONSISTENCY. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO OBJECTION AS OF THIS DATE. P&Z RECOMMENDED AAPPROVAL 7-0 AND PLANNED IT'S COMPATABLE WITH SURROUNDINGS LAND USES AND ZONING AND REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND POLICY. THANK YOU. I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL THANK YOU, DANIEL. PUBLIC

HEARING, NO SPEAKERS,. >> MOTION MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM AND SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RODGERS,

[02:15:03]

PLEASE VOTE. WAYNE STEPPED OUT. ITEM PASSES 5-0 WITH COUNCIL MEMBER SHUFFIELD STEPPED OUT. THE APPLICANT IS HERE, WOULD YOU APPLICANT LIKE TO PRESENT OR SPEAK OR JUST STAND FOR

QUESTIONS? IT'S UP TO YOU. ? >> WALTON BRAD BURY AND I LIVE IN WAX HATCHE. IT WAS A DAYCARE AND WE JUST WENT INTO GENERAL PROFESSIONAL

SPACE. >> THANK YOU, QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE AS I LOOK AT THIS BUILDING, IS THERE STILL -- SO THAT WHOLE CONCEPT AND I THINK IT NODE FLOWED ALL THE WAY OVER TO TO 14 WAS BASED ON THE MERCANTILE LOOK. I KNOW THE BOOK WAS DROPPED AND WE USED TO HAVE PICTURES WERE SUPPOSED TO MATCH. THAT IS WHAT WE BOUGHT OFF INTO BACK PRE-2010. THE FLIP STREET AROUND THE ROAD GRANDIOSE. THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF RENDITIONS, CHANGES, BOOKED DROPPED. ORDINANCE -- KIND OF ORDINANCE-BASED CHANGES. ARE WE STILL UNDER ANY OF THAT FORMAT? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EVEN NECESSARILY HAVE TO DO WITH THIS ONLY BUILDING. I'M SEEING SOME OTHER BUILDSINGS BUILT ON 14TH THAT BY NO MEANS ARE LOW QUALITY BUILDINGS. THEY ARE FINE STRUCTURES.

I'M QUESTIONING ARE WE STILL GOING ALONG WITH THAT THEME? BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE BUILDINGS LOOK MODERN BRICK STYLE THAT DON'T EVEN FALL WITHIN "THE TRUE MIDTOWN THEME,"I THOUGHT WE

WERE FOLLOWING. >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE

PATTERN BOOKS? >> I KNOW THE PATTERN BOOKS WERE DROPPED, BUT AS THEY WERE DROPPED, WE WERE ASSURED AND ONCE AGAIN THAT TRUST FACTOR BACK AND FORTH WE WERE ASSURED THAT THE THEME OF MIDTOWN, WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH, A 30S TO 50S FORMAT. I WOULD ASSUME. I'M JUST CURIOUS ARE WE STILL FOLLOWING THAT THEME? IS THIS BUILDING WILL BE THIS WHITE AND THIS IS WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE? AND DOES THIS -- IS THIS MIDTOWN? IS THAT LOOK WE'RE LOOKING FOR?

DO WE STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT LOOK? >> SO YEAH. WITH THE PD 42 ORDINANCE, I MEAN, THE DESIGNATIONS OF DIFFERENT STYLES WERE MORE APPLICABLE TO THE RESIDENTIAL. THERE WERE A FEW PROVISIONS FOR COMMERCIAL. AND WE HAD TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THOSE AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WE COULD ENFORCE AND WHAT WE COULD NOT? BECAUSE A LOT OF THEM WERE PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW TWO OR THREE SESSIONS AGO. SO WE ENFORCE WHAT WE CAN DO. BUT I THINK WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT YOU WOULD PREFER

TO SEE THE MORE TRADITIONAN LOOK. >> WELL, THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE DONE ALL ALONG WALTER STEVENSON. THAT IS WHAT

WAS EXPECTED ALONG 9TH. >> KIND OF. >> I DON'T -- I'M LOOKING TO YOU TO SAY WELL THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT NOW AND WHAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW. I'M NOT TRYING TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN. I'M TRYING TO -- AND THIS IS ON THE 14TH STREET SIDE.

SO IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD. BUT ALSO, I'M ONE OF THESE BY STAYING WITH INCONSISTENCY AND IF WE MAKE OTHER FOLKS FOUR YEARS AGO, OR TEN YEARS AGO, IN AN APPLICATION FORMAT, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS AND THEN TEN YEARS LATER LESSENING THAT REQUIREMENTMENT I DON'T LIKE SEEING THAT INCONSISTENCY.

[02:20:01]

>> PROBABLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT IMPACTS THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME IS THE ROOF PITCH THAT DOESN'T APPLY FOR COMMERCIAL. IF YOU HAVE IT FLAT, IT DOES KIND OF LOOK MORE

CONTEMPORARY. >> THERE IS OBVIOUSLY SOME ELEVATION CHANGES THAT -- THAT IS NORMAL. I JUST IS IT GOING TO BE KIND OF A

WHITE GRAY BRICK LOOK LIKE WE'RE SEEING? >> THIS IS MORE OR LESS A GRAY SCALE. IT'S LIKE AN HISTORICAL REDDISH TO FIT

THE FEEL. >> IF STAFF IS HAPPY WITH IT AND WE SEE WE'RE GOING FOR HISTORICAL LOOK, I'M ALL IN.

>> MIKE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOUGHNUT SHOP AND ALL OF THOSE ALONG WALTER STEVENS AT THE ONE-STORY ELEVATION,

MIDTOWN FORMAT. >> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, YOU CALLED OUT 14TH STREET. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO A DIFFERENT

FACILITY, BUT THIS IS 9TH STREET. >> I APOLOGIZE. I LOOKED AT

MY -- SO I LOOKED AT MY MAP WRONG. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE

WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. >> I GUESS ONE LAST QUESTION I WOULD HAVE ON 9TH STREET, THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS IN THE NEAR PAST. I WON'T MENTION THE EXACT APPLICANT, OR WHAT THE USAGE WAS GOING TO BE. BUT AS WE GET CLOSER TO 287, THERE HAD BEEN SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT THE CONCERN THAT WE ENDED UP WITH A BUNCH OF MIXED MATCHED BUILDING AND HEY, DO WE WANT TO GET INTO A THEME FORMAT? I THINK IT'S REAL IMPORTANT AS WE FINISH THAT OUT, WHERE YOU OBVIOUSLY PROBABLY KNOW REALLY MY REAL PET PEEVE WITH THIS ENTIRE PROJECT IS 9TH. THAT IS WHERE THE SLIP DOES SUPPOSED TO BE AND THE HOUSES FACING THE STREET AND ALL OF THE TREESS AND IT JUST SLOWLY GRAVITATED, EVEN WITHIN THE RETIREMENT CENTERS. SO WE LOST THAT. IT TURNED TO RETAIL. I UNDERSTAND THE ECONOMIC IMPACT, AND NEED FOR THAT FROM A DEVELOPER'S STANDPOINT, TOTALLY GET IT. BUT IT DIDN'T FOLLOW THE THEME. IT JUST SLOWLY WHITTLED AWAY AND KIND OF GONE AWAY. SO SOUND LIKE IT'S STILL TRYING TO DO YOUR BEST TO UPHOLD IT AND

I APPRECIATE THAT. >> IT MAY BE A LITTLE LATE FOR THIS COURT ORDER, BUT IF THERE IS INTEREST IN LOOKING AT OTHER CORRIDORS TO DO A STUDY TO LOOK AT SPECIFIC CORRIDORS.

>> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT CORRIDORS?

>> DIFFERENT CORRIDORS IN THIS CASE, THERE'S PROBABLY NOT A LOT LESS.

>> NO, NO, NO AND SADLY EVERYTHING THAT YOU ARE STATING WAS DONE FROM THE BEGINNING, BUT SLOWLY WHITTLED AWAY.

I KNOW WE'RE AMENDING THE CONCEPTUAL SITE FOR MOST RECENT ITERATION OF THE GOOD MORNING ORDINANCE FOR MIDTOWN.

AND THIS WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED AS A SINGLE BUILDING GRANTED IN EQUAL KIND OF SIZE SO THE CONCERN I HAVE HERE, WE'RE CREATING TWO, THAT JUST HAVE ONE WAY IN AND OUT ON EACH ONE. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT FROM A TRAFFIC PATTERN STANDPOINT, AS WE'RE -- THERE'S IN THE THAT SECONDARY POINT OF KIND OF INGRESS/EGRESS. SO THE UNDERLYING ZONING IS THERE NOW INSTEAD OF THERE BEING THAT SECOND BUILDING THERE. THERE'S A LARGER PARKING LOT THAT GOES ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE PRIVATE DRIVE AND LARGER BUILDING AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. SO I GUESS THAT IS MY QUESTION TO STAFF, IS THERE ANY CONCERN WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE PARKING LOTS BEING KIND OF LITTLE SELF-CONTAINED

UNITS ONE WAY IN AND OUT. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU NECESSARILY HAD THAT FLOW WITH THE PREVIOUS VERSION. IT HAD A PARKING LOT HERE AND MIGHT HAVE HAD ACCESS HERE. THAT REALLY ISN'T TOO MUCH DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING. I THINK THEY JUST WANT TO GIVE MORE VARIETY TO TENANTS THEN THEY MINOR MIGHT

HAVE HAD WITH ONE BUILDING. >> NO OTHER DISCUSSION ON

[02:25:08]

THIS ITEM. TAKE A MOTION ON IT? >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION TO APPROVE BY MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOORMAN, PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 6-0. THANK YOU, DANIEL. THANK YOU, MARY. ITEM 2026-41,

[2026-041 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). (Case No. C01-2025-109) ]

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACUPON AN A.M. OF THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN COMPREHENSIVIVE 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 TO EXISTING PROPOSED MINOR THOROUGHFARE. MARY MAYOR, SO I WILL START AND TURN IT OVER TO MIKE. THIS REQUEST IS TO AMEND A THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR SOUTH HAYES ROAD FROM FM 1387 TO U.S. HIGHWAY 287. IT'S AN EXISTING MAJOR COLLECTOR FROM FM 1387 TO ITS TERMINATION AT HAYES CROSSING PHASE 1 AND PROPOSED MAJOR COLLECTOR FROM HAYES CROSSING PHASE 1 TO U.S. HIGHWAY 287. THE PURPOSE IS TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION FROM EXISTING PROPOSED MAJOR COLLECTOR TO EXISTING PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL 90' RIGHT-OF-WAY. AND THEN YOU HAVE AERIALS. 12,000 TO 13,000 AVERAGE DAILY TRIP ALREADY. AND IT MEETS MULTIPLE GOALS AND STRATEGIES IN THE COMP PLAN. WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS SEE IF THERE'S ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, BECAUSE WE KNOW THIS CORRIDOR IS RAPIDLY DEVELOPING. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MIKE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND P&Z RECOMMENDED APPROVAL

7-0. >> IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING AND NO PUBLIC CHOOSE TO SPEAK, I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER. SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WICKLIFFE. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 6-0. COUNCIL ANY MIKE OR MARY,

ROSS? >> WHAT IS 10'? >> IT WILL GET US A DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE FOR LEFT-TURN LANES AT APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS.

>> SO 80', FOUR LANE. >> FOUR LANE UNDIVIDED NOW WE HAVE FOUR LANES WITH A

BOULEVARD? >> CORRECT, YES, SIR. >> AND DO WE THINK THAT IS

ENOUGH? >> IF YOU LOOK, LET ME GO BACK HERE.

>> IT'S 120' RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> CORRECT. IF YOU LOOK LONG BRANCH TO THE EAST IS SET AT 120'. YOU HAVE LONG BRANCH AND TO THE WEST WALNUT GROVE. SO I THINK FROM A 90 FOOTER THAT SHOULD PROVIDE FOR ADEQUATE MOBILITY WITHIN THAT CORRIDOR,

YES, SIR. >> AND HAVE WE LOOKED AT WHAT IMPACT THIS WILL HAVE? IS THE -- THE PORTION IN FRONT OF HAYES CROSSING AND TWIN CREEKS IS ALREADY 90' AND NARROWED TO 80 ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED AT 80 AND PROBABLY MORE ON THE SIDE BECAUSE OF THE BIGGER LOTS IN THAT AREA. THERE WILL BE SOME ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THAT LITTLE SEGMENT FROM BASICALLY HAYES CROSSING FROM 1387. FROM THE SOUTH GOING DOWN, IT'S PRETTY WIDE OPEN AT THIS POINT.

>> THAT WAS MY CONCERN. I KNOW SO THE NOT SO MUCH HAYES CROSSING, BUT THOSE THAT FRONT ONTO HAYES ROAD AND

MOST OF THEM PROBABLY DON'T HAVE 5'. >> CORRECT. IF YOU LOOK HERE, ACTUALLY IT WILL BE SHIFTING MORE TO THE EAST IN THAT AREA. WE ACTUALLY HAD THE INTERSECTION BUILT FOR THE MOST PART ON THE SOUTHSIDE. IT'S NOT DIVIDED, BUT YOU HAVE FOUR

LANES OR FIVE LANES, IF NEEDED. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> ANY MORE QUESTIONS? TAKE A MOTION.

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> MOTION MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER, PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES

[2026-043 Consider and act upon a resolution supporting the improvements of Stonewood Apartments, an existing affordable rental housing apartment complex, located at 110 N. 14th Street and 105 S. 14th Street, Midlothian, Ellis County, Texas, by PK Companies, LLC; approving the waiver of the city’s development/permit fee in the amount of $500 for the development of the Stonewood Apartments. ]

6-06789 REGULAR ITEM, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON RESOLUTION IMPROVING SUPPORTING THE IMPROVEMENTS OF STONEWOOD

[02:30:01]

IMPROVEMENTS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT 110 NORTH 14TH STREWN AND 105 SOUTH 14TH STREET MIDLOTHIAN BY PK COMPANY, LLC., APPROVING THE WAIVER OF THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $500 FOR THE

DEVELOPMENT OF STONEWOOD APARTMENTS. CHRIS. >> I WILL START AND I BELIEVE THE REQUESTER IS IN THE AUDIENCE AS WELL AND CAN THIS IS AN EXISTING AFFORDABLE RENTAL FACILITY OFF OF 14TH STREET, AND THEY ARE LOOKING TO RENOVATION, AND SEEK SOME TAX CREDITS. SO WITH THAT, I WILL LET YOU

EXPLAIN YOUR PROJECT. >> SIR, WELCOME.

>> TIM SMITH, HOOK DEVELOPMENT SERVICES I'M WORKING WITH PK COMPANIES TO HELP SUBMIT APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR FEDERAL TAX CREDITS FOR A SUBSTANTIAL RENOVATION. AS PART OF THAT PROCESS WE NEED TO COME IN AND GET A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THE AMOUNT IS FINANCIAL SUPPORT IN THE AMOUNT OF $500.

IT'S FOR OUR APPLICATION. THESE APARTMENTS ALREADY EXISTING AFFORD ABLE AND OVER 40 YEARS OLD AND THE CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE IS $70,000 A UNIT IN REHABILITATION. SO THIS IS A SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION FROM TOP TO BOTTOM.

>> HOW MANY UNIT? >> 85 TOTAL COMBINED OF TWO DEVELOPMENTS AND THEY ARE

ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER, PHASE 1 AND 2. >> COUNCIL, QUESTIONS OF APPLICANT, OR SPECIFICS ON THIS PROGRAM? SOUND LIKE A PRETTY GOOD DEAL TO ME THAT THEY ARE LOOKING TO REINVEST IN AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT THAT IS HERE. TAKE A MOTION. I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> CELEB. >> SECOND. >> MOTION MADE BY MYSELF TO APPROVE, AND SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOORMAN,

PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 5-1. >> MOTION PASSES.

[2026-044 Consider and act upon a recommendation from Midlothian Economic Development to approve the program and expenditures outlined in the Economic Development Performance Agreement with the Sanderson Pipe Corporation for a project related to the creation and retention of primary jobs. ]

>> THANK YOU. MOVING TO OUR LAST ITEM ON THE REGULAR AGENDA, 2026-44, CONSIDER AND ACUPON A RECOMMENDATION FROM MIDLOTHIAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO APPROVE THE PROGRAM AND EXPENDITURES OUTLINED IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT WITH SANDERSON PIPE CORPORATION FOR A PROJECT RELATED TO THE CREATION AND RETENTION OF

PRIMARY JOBS. KYLE. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. EXCITED TO BE HERE. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN IN THE WORK FOR SEVERAL YEARS AS THE COMPANY HAS BEEN LOOKING AT RAIL PORT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THE AREA FOR A NEW FACILITY THAT THEY HAVE. THIS IS A COMPANY THAT WOULD RELY ON THE RAIL THAT IS OUT IN THAT AREA. AS WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD TO FIND AND SEEK OUT RAIL USERS THAT FIT WITHIN THAT SPACE. WE HAVE A GREAT MANUFACTURER, ONE THAT HAS OTHER LOCATIONS IN OTHER COMMUNITY AND OTHER COMMUNITIES SPEAK VERY HIGHLY OF THIS COMMUNITY. ONE WE THINK WOULD BE A GREAT FIT IN MIDLOTHIAN. LAST NIGHT, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD MET TO CONSIDER THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT. THEY RECOMMENDED ITS APPROVAL 6-0, AND WE COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL TODAY AS COUNCIL'S REQUIREMENT TO APPROVE THE PROGRAM AND EXPENDITURES THAT ARE OUTLINED IN THE AGREEMENT. THIS AGREEMENT LIKE OUR OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS CLEARLY LINES OUT MINIMAL REQUIREMENT SANDERSON PIPE COULD NEED TO MEET IN ORDER FOR THE INNOCENTIVES LAID OUT IN THE AGREEMENT. THE PROJECT WOULD BE ONE THAT FITS WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA, AND AGAIN, WE BELIEVE WOULD BE A GREAT EMPLOYER FOR THE AREA. I HAVE WITH ME ERIC HOWARD, WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF SANDERSON PIPE, WHO IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, AND ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR US. THANK YOU.

>> SURE. I WILL KICK IT OFF. WOULD YOU GIVE US A HIGH-LEVEL OF

JOBS CREATED FOR THIS PROGRAM? >> YOU BET. THE AGREEMENT LAYS OUT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO THE COMPANY PROVIDES REQUIREMENTS AND WE BUILD IN A 15% BUFFER. THE AGREEMENT LAYS OUT 60 EMPLOYEES THAT THEY WILL HIRE.

SO NOT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEES AT THE SITE, BUT THEY WILL HAVE MINIMUM OF 60 EMPLOYEES. ONE OF THE THINGS WORTH MENTIONING IS THAT THE AVERAGE WAGE OF THE FACILITY EXCEEDS COUNTY AVERAGE WAGE. SO THIS IS ALIGNED WITH THE EMPLOYMENT TARGETS THAT ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT HAS. >> FANTASTIC. COUNCIL ANY OTHER

QUESTIONS? WAYNE? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. >> I WILL TAKE YOUR MOTION.

>> I MOVE WE APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> MOTION TO APPROVE BY

[02:35:01]

COUNCIL MEMBER SHUFFIELD AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOORMAN. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM PASSES 6-0. WELCOME TO SANDERSON

PIPE. >> FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU TO YOUR COMMITMENT TO YOUR COMMUNITY. IT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED. WE GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS APPROVAL. WE PROMISE TO BE GOOD STEWARDS TO THE COMMUNITY. WE DON'T MAKE THE FLASHIEST PROJECT OUT THERE, BUT NOTHING IS BETTER THAN SANITARY -- SO WHAT WE PROUDLY DO AND MAKE IS UNDERGROUND AND IN THE WALL , BUT NOTHING IS MORE FUNDAMENTAL. THIS APPROVAL HELPS TO PUSH US TO THE FINISH LINE. IN THIS DAY AND AGE, EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN WHEN ORIGINALLY PLANNED. SO APPROVAL OF THIS HELPS PUSH IT TO THE FINISH LINE, AND WE'RE

GRATEFUL FOR THAT. THANK YOU. >> EXCITED TO YOUR INVESTMENT IN MIDLOTHIAN. THANK YOU. COUNCIL, MOVING TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

AT THIS POINT THE CITY COUNCIL CONVENES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO THE FOLLOWING SECONDS THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS ARE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION, BUT ANY AND ALL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IN REGULAR OPEN SESSION. WE HAVE THREE ITEMS THIS EVENING. NO. 2, WHICH IS 551.072. REAL ESTATE. -- HOLD ON.

COUNCIL I APOLOGIZE. I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO ITEM 2026-42 AND JUST CONTINUE. JUST TO MAKE A STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD, THIS CASE NO. 42 HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO THE MARCH 10TH, 2026 MEETING. I APOLOGIZE ABOUT THAT. BACK TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THREE ITEM KNOX 2 IS THE FIRST ONE IS NO. 2, SECTION 551.072 REAL ESTATE DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL ESTATE PROPERTY TO DELIBERATE THE PERFECT EXCHANGE LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL ESTATE PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS. PERSONNEL MATTERS TO THE APOINDEXTER EMPLOYEE OR DUTY A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. LEGAL CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY ELEMENTS OF MIDLOTHIAN, TEXAS PROPERTY ID 188414 AND 291 776.

[2026-042 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon a request to grant a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a multi-family residential development within Planned Development District No. 146 (PD-146). The property is generally located on US Highway 287 and Old Fort Worth Road. (SUP08-2025-100). ]

LET'S GO AHEAD AND GO BACK TO ITEM 2026-042, BECAUSE I BELIEVE STAFF WANTS US TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THAT AND CONTINUE; RIGHT? MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND READVERTISE. YES OPEN IT AND CONTINUE. YES? NO? WE NEED TO OPEN IT AND MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN AND CONTINUE, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO ADVERTISE AGAIN.

>> THAT IS FINE. >> IS THAT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE. >> OPENING ITEM 2026-42 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AN AGENT UPON A REQUEST TO GRANT A SPECIFY USE PERMIT FOR A MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 146. COUNCIL, THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO BE CONTINUED TO THE MARCH 10TH, 2026 MEETING. I WILL

MAKE THAT MOTION. >> SECOND. >> TO MOVE THAT TO MARCH 10TH, MOTION MYSELF AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER, ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT, PLEASE VOTE.

THANK YOU, MARY ANNE FOR THE VERY THOROUGH PRESENTATION. AT THIS

[EXECUTIVE SESSION ]

POINT, IT'S 8:38. WE'RE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

9:14 P.M.

ACTION ON AND THAT IS ITEM NO. 4, ON YOUR AGENDA, SECTION 51.774 PERSONNEL MATTERS TO EVALUATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYEE OR DUTY A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE I MAKE A AUTHORIZATION TO APPOINT DORY LEE TO THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND COMPENSATE

ABOVE MIDPOINT. >> SECOND. >> MOTION MADE BY MYSELF AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER, PLEASE VOTE.

ITEM PASSES 6-0. WELCOME TO THE TEAM, MS. LEE. ALL RIGHT AT THE:14 P.M. WE'RE -- 9:15 P.M. WE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.