[Call to Order and Determination of Quorum.] [00:00:10] >> IT IS 6:00, AND WE DO HAVE A QUORUM SO I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE MIDLOTHIAN PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING TO ORDER. WE'LL START OFF WITH CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INVITES MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY TOPIC NOT SCHEDULED FOR CONSIDERATION FOR ACTION ON THIS AGENDA AND PRESENT IT TO CITY STAFF PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT THE COMMISSION CANNOT DISCUSS OR ACT ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SCHEDULED? NOPE. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER 2, STAFF REVIEW OF CASES THAT WERE HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL IN THE LAST 30 DAYS. >> THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY FAST. [003 Drone Delivery and Drone Delivery Nests as proposed new uses in the Zoning Use Table] THERE WERE NONE. >> OKAY. >> ITEM NUMBER 3, DRONE DELIVERY AND DRONE DELIVERY NESTS AS PROPOSED NEW USES IN THE ZONING USE TABLE. >> HI. MARIAN SPENCER ASSISTANT DIRECTEDER OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY SEVERAL COMPANIES THAT ARE LOOKING TO DO DRONE DELIVERY HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN. WE DISCOVERED THEY ARE NOT IN OUR ZONING USE TABLE, SO WE WOULD BE COMING FORWARD WITH A NEW AND UNLISTED USES IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCES. JUST TO KIND OF WALK THROUGH WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND KIND OF GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THAT. AND SO BASICALLY IT'S GONNA COME TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FIRST. AND THEN IT'S GONNA GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION. AND SO JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS LISTING DRONE DELIVERY AS THE USE OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES TO TRANSPORT GOODS DIRECTLY TO CUSTOMERS. AND WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF DRONE DELIVERY MERCHANTS THAT ARE LOOKING AT COMING. THERE'S THE DRONE HUB, WHICH IS ON THE LEFT SIDE HERE, WHICH IS A FREESTANDING STRUCTURE FOR PURPOSES OF DRONE DELIVERY, WHERE THEY HAVE SINGULAR DRONE DELIVERY, THEY'RE HOUSED INSIDE IT, CHARGED AND DISPATCHED. THEN THERE'S THE DRONE DELIVERY NEST, WHICH IS -- THERE'S A COUPLE OF THEM PICTURED HERE. AND THOSE ARE WHERE THEY LEAVE LIKE A STATION AND THEN THEY GO OUT AND DO THE DRONE DELIVERIES, BUT IT'S MORE OF PAD SITE VERSUS AN INDIVIDUAL. AND SO THE DRONES ARE ACTUALLY REGULATED UNDER THE FAA. CFR PART 135. AND THAT IS FOR OPERATIONAL AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMUTER, ON DEMAND, AIR TAXI AND CHARTER OPERATIONS. SO IT'S FALLING UNDER THAT SECTION. THEY HAVE A WHOLE WEBSITE JUST ON DRONE DELIVERY. SO IF WE CAN SEND THIS OUT TO YOU IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. THEY HAVE LIKE A NICE 18 MINUTE VIDEO ON THEIR PAPER THAT THEY DID FOR DRONE DELIVERY OPERATORS. AND SO THE OPERATORS HAVE TO BE CERTIFIED AND THEY ARE CURRENTLY ABOUT 15 THAT ARE APPROVED THROUGH THE FAA. AND THEY DID PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IN DECEMBER AND THEY HAD COMMENTS OPEN IN JANUARY. AND THAT PAPER, I CAN SEND YOU THE LINK TO THAT AS WELL. ON THEIR TEXT DRAFT AND THEN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY SET FOR THESE SITES. BUT THEY WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT THEY LOOKED AT IT FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND THEY'RE NOT APPROVING ANY SPECIFIC OPERATIONS. AND THEY STILL HAVE TO BE REVIEWED FOR IMPACTS. THEY DIDN'T FIND ANY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON FAA AIR SPACE. AND THERE'S TEN -- THERE'S 11 STATES THAT HAVE COMPLETED, YOU KNOW, STATE LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS ON DRONE DELIVERY. THERE WAS ONE IN TEXAS DONE IN HOUSTON. AND SO KIND OF THE HIGHLIGHTING SOME OF THE THINGS THEY FOUND IN THEIR REPORT THAT THE NOISE LEVELS, IT HAS A MAXIMUM DECIBEL OF 65 DECIBELS ON THE SITE FOR [00:05:01] THE NEST TYPE USES. AND THEY FOUND IT EXTENDS ABOUT 300 FEET FROM THE TAKEOFF AND LANDINGS OF THOSE. AND SO THEY RECOMMENDED INCREASED SETBACKS FROM NOISE SENSITIVE LAND USES, RESIDENTIAL, ENVIRONMENT, EDUCATIONAL, HEALTH, RELIGIOUS STRUCTURES, PARKS, WILDLIFE, WILDERNESS, CULTURAL AND HISTORIC SITES. THEY RECOMMENDED IN THEIR PAPER A SETBACK OF 600 FEET FROM NOISE SENSITIVE LINE USES. THEY DIDN'T FIND ANY VISUAL IMPACTS, BUT THEY DID NOTICE FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO SECTION 106. THEY RECOMMENDED NOT ALLOWING THEM WITHIN HALF MILE OF A SENSITIVE HISTORIC PROPERTY LIKE YOUR CEMETERIES, YOUR RUINS AND THOSE KIND OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES. AND WITHIN BOUNDARIES OF SECTION FOUR PROPERTIES, WHICH IS YOUR WILD LIFE REFUGE, YOUR WILDERNESS Z. SO OF COURSE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT NEW THINGS, YOU LOOK WHAT ARE THE PEOPLE AROUND YOU DOING. AND APPARENTLY THE SAME COMPANIES THAT HAVE APPROACHED MIDLOTHIAN HAVE MADE ROUNDS TO MULTIPLE MUNICIPALITIES IN THE AREA. EVERYBODY'S LOOKING AT THEM AND TRYING TO DECIDE WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO IN THEIR CITIES. EVERYBODY'S KIND OF LOOKING AT DOING TEXT AMENDMENT TYPE USES. SOME ARE EVALUATING THEM. SOME ALLOW THEM OUTRIGHT RIGHT NOW. FRISCO IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A PILOT PROGRAM. >> CAN YOU SHARE WHAT HAD CRANBERRY OFFERED? >> SO THEY HAD ONE THAT OPERATED. THEY WERE IN THEIR TEST PERIOD. THEY HIT AN ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER AND HALF THE POWER WAS OUT FOR A LITTLE BIT. SO THAT OPERATOR DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE. AND THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY MORE COME BACK TO APPROACH THEM. AND SO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GONNA -- WE'D LIKE TO KNOW IS IF YOU WANT IT TO BE -- ARE YOU LOOKING FOR IT TO BE MORE OF AN ACCESSORY USE TO A PRIMARY USE? LIKE, IF IT'S A RESTAURANT, THEY HAVE TO HAVE IT ON SITE AND DELIVER ONLY FOR THEIR BUSINESS. SO IT'S AN ACCESSORY USE. OR CAN THE HUBS AND NESTS BE A PRIMARY USE, LIKE A STAND ALONE STRUCTURE? ARE YOU GONNA REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE INDEPENDENT POWER OR ARE THEY GONNA BE POWERED BY THE BUILDING? ARE YOU GONNA WANT SOME WIND RESISTANT SPECIFICATIONS? DO YOU GUYS WANT TO LOOK AT SIZE LIMITATIONS? AND DO WE WANT TO LOOK AT SITE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS? AND THEN JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA FOR THE USERS THAT ARE USING THEM, YOUR DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANTS AND RESTAURANTS OVER 1,000 ALL REQUIRE AN SUP ALREADY. SO THIS IS A PICTURE OF WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE ON THE GROUND. THIS IS A HUB. AND SO NESTS THEY TAKE UP, GENERALLY THEY ARE HOUSED IN PARKING LOTS. YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN A COUPLE AT LIKE WAL-MART, AROUND THE AREA, AND OTHER PLACES. AGAIN, THIS IS A QUESTION IF WE WANT IT TO BE AN ACCESSORY OR PRIMARY USE. AND THEN OPTION DO YOU WANT IT TO BE ON PREMISE SERVICE, OFF PREMISE SO THAT IF IT'S ON PREMISE, IT'S DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE RESTAURANT USER. IF OFF PREMISE, THEN THEY WOULD BRING IT TO THEM AND THEN THE THIRD PARTY USERS WOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE GRUB HUB, UBER EATS KIND OF THING. AGAIN, HOW DO THEY POWER THEM? THEY HAVE TO HAVE POWER FOR THE DRONES. AGAIN, DO WE WANT TO HAVE SIZE LIMITATIONS? AND, AGAIN, DO WE WANT TO HAVE SITE DESIGNS FOR BOTH THE USERS AND THE LOCATIONS. AND FOR SURE WE DO NOT WANT THEM TO BE IN STORE CONTAINERS WHERE THEY HOUSE THEM, SO THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE THEM TO DO SOME KIND OF STRUCTURE FOR THEM. AND DO WE WANT LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING? AND AGAIN JUST AN IDEA OF THE [00:10:01] USERS TODAY WOULD REQUIRE AN SUP. AND WHAT ZONING CATEGORIES DO YOU THINK YOU WANT TO SEE -- WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE THOSE. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING FORTH THE TEXT -- SORRY. IN JULY. WE'RE GONNA BRING IT TO YOU. SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE KIND OF WORKING THROUGH THE TEXT AMENDMENTS THIS MONTH. THAT'S WHY WE'RE BRINGING THIS PRESENTATION FORWARD. AND THEN WE'LL PRESENT TO YOU IN JULY. AND THEN COUNCIL, END OF JULY/EARLY AUGUST. SO DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> CAN WE REGULATE HOURS THAT THEY FLY? >> YES, THAT CAN BE INCLUDED. >> DO OTHER CITIES DO THAT? >> I CAN LOOK INTO THAT, BECAUSE THOSE -- THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO BRING THIS, IS TO GET KIND OF A QUESTION -- >> THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE OBVIOUSLY BIGGER DRONES THAN YOU HAVE RECREATIONAL PERSON. BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF WIND UP HERE. AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S -- I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. JUST FYI THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT COULD COME UP THAT THEY NEED TO BE AWARE OF. >> OKAY. >> TWO THINGS. ONE, CAN WE REGULATE THEIR FLIGHT PLANS OR IS THAT AN FAA ISSUE? >> THAT'S FAA. >> WE CAN'T LIMIT THEM JUST FLYING ALONG THE ROAD. >> NO. >> CAN WE JUST BAN THEM ENTIRELY? >> YES. >> OKAY. >> 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT A PERMITTED USE. >> THE TRICKY PART IS, WE CAN REGULATE WHERE THEY -- TAKEOFF/LANDING LOCATIONS. BUT THE MINUTE THEY LEAVE THE GROUND, WE HAVE NO REGULATION AUTHORITY. WE ARE TOTALLY PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW. >> OKAY. >> SO THERE'S -- THAT'S ONE OF THE TRICKY PARTS ABOUT IT. THAT PREEMPTION CONTINUES TO GET BROADER AND BROADER. OR WE CAN CONTINUE TO USE HUMANS TO DELIVER FOOD AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THIS DISTURBING US. >> BUT IF YOU DON'T ALLOW THEM AT ALL, ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS GO RIGHT OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND THEY CAN FLY RIGHT BACK INTO YOUR CITY. >> RIGHT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. DO THEY TYPICALLY HAVE CAMERAS FOR, LIKE, LANDING GEAR SO THEY CAN SEE WHERE THEY'RE LANDING? >> YES. >> AND ARE THOSE CAMERAS ALSO AVAILABLE TO BE IN USE IF THEY ARE GOING OVER PRIVATE PROPERTY? >> THAT I DO NOT KNOW. >> I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, I'VE HAD EXPERIENCE IN ANOTHER CITY WHERE WE WENT EXTENSIVELY WITH THE -- HAD A LOT OF EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS ON THOSE KIND OF ISSUES. AND WHAT THEY'LL TELL YOU IS THE TYPES OF CAMERAS ARE NOT THE KIND OF CAMERAS THAT YOU CAN DO A LOT OF DETAIL. IT'S PRIMARILY JUST FOR PURPOSES OF SEEING LANDING AREAS. AND DROP ZONES, WHATNOT. THEY DON'T RECORD THE INFORMATION. SO THERE'S NO DATA CAPTURE OR VIDEO CAPTURE WITH RESPECT TO THE CAMERAS THAT THEY USE. AND THEY'RE NOT -- IT'S NOT LIKE CIA SPY QUALITY TYPE CAMERAS, YOU KNOW? THEY'RE PRETTY DIFFICULT. YEAH. LOT OF THE INFORMATION I HAVE RECEIVED GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS IN ANOTHER CITY IS -- AND THEY'LL BE WILLING TO COME HERE AND ANSWER ALL THOSE QUESTIONS 'CAUSE THEY ACTUALLY SEND TEAMS AROUND TO DO JUST THAT WHEN CITIES ARE CONSIDERING THESE ORDINANCES. >> THE ONLY OTHER ITEM I WOULD ASK STAFF TO CONSIDER IS THE SOUND, THE DECIBELS PUT OUT BY THESE DRONES. EVEN THE REALLY SMALL DRONES, IF YOU'RE SITTING ON YOUR BACK PATIO, YOU CAN HEAR THE BUZZING SOUND, WHICH IS DISRUPTIVE. I WOULD IMAGINE A DRONE OF MUCH GREATER SIZE WOULD BE EVEN LOUDER. AND I THINK THAT, IF WE HAD SOME SORT OF DECIBEL RATING, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. >> OKAY. >> THANKS. >> AND IF YOU LOOK ON THE SLIDES, THAT'S WHY WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT WHAT ZONING CATEGORIES WOULD WE EVEN START CONSIDERING THEM IN, AND THAT'S WHY WE DID NOT PUT THEM IN THE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL 'CAUSE THOSE ARE TYPICALLY ADJACENT TO YOUR MORE RESIDENTIAL USES. THAT'S THE LOWEST NONRESIDENTIAL USE WE HAVE. [00:15:03] WE ALSO DIDN'T PUT THEM IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND THE 8TH STREET DISTRICT FOR THOSE SAME REASONS. FOR THE NOISE SENSITIVITY. AND WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE USE ITSELF, WE HAD SOME CONCERNS WITH MORE INTENSE INDUSTRIAL USERS BECAUSE AS TECHNOLOGY CHANGES, DRONE DELIVERY RIGHT NOW MAY JUST BE, YOU KNOW, A WATER BOTTLE AND FOOD. IN THE FUTURE IT COULD BE CONCRETE. AND DO WE REALLY WANT CONCRETE FLYING OVER? AND SO THAT'S WHY WE, FOR INITIAL, YOU KNOW, LET'S LOOK AT THIS, THAT'S WHY WE PICKED THOSE DISTRICTS. >> ANYONE ELSE? >> I'LL SEND THIS POWER POINT AND THE TWO WEBSITE LINKS TO YOU GUYS AS WELL. >> YEAH, IF WE COULD GET THAT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. >> I'LL SEND IT TO YOU TOMORROW. >> THAT WILL WORK. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. [CONSENT AGENDA] THANK YOU. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WISH TO HAVE PULLED? ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. HEARING THAT, WE'LL CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 4, CONSIDER THE MINUTES FOR THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DATED MAY 19, 2026. ITEM 05 CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ONCOR SERVICE CENTER MIDLOTHIAN BEING A 44.818 ACRE PORTION OF THE R. BERRY SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 42. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED OBJECT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF W JONES ROAD AND OLD W JONES ROAD. AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR A FINAL PLAT OF REDDEN FARMS 2A SOUTH BEING A 15.13 ACRE PORTION OF THE BENJAMIN MOORE SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 700. GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF ONWARD ROAD AND EAST OF FARMHOUSE DRIVE. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT TKA. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MCDONALD AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BLAND. PLEASE VOTE. EVERYBODY VOTE? PASSES 4-0. [007 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon a request for an ordinance to rezone Lot 6, Block 31, Original Town of Midlothian and a 0.16+ acre portion of the R. Horton Survey, Abstract No. 508, from Residential Three (R-3) District to Urban Village Planned Development District No. 191 (UVPD-191). The property is located at 316 South 5th Street. (Z12-2026-034)] ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARINGS. ITEM 007 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AN ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE LOT 6, BLOCK 31, ORIGINAL TOWN OF MIDLOTHIAN AND A 0.16+ ACRE PORTION OF THE R. HORTON SURVEY FROM RESIDENTIAL 3 DISTRICT TO URBAN VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 191. PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 316 SOUTH 5TH STREET. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSION. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO ALLOW AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO BE USED AS A BEAUTY SHOP. STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE ORIGINAL TOWN DESIGNATION AS IT SUPPORTS A VARIETY OF LAND USES. STAFF ALSO FINDS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN WHICH DESIGNATES THE AREA INDICATED BY THE STAR AT THE BOTTOM MIDDLE AS MIXED USE TRANSITION WHICH SUPPORTS MIXING OF RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL. THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE PROPERTY OUTLINED IN YELLOW WITH THE ADJACENT ZONING LAND USES AND FUTURE LAND USES IN THE BOTTOM LEFT TABLE. STAFF FINDS REQUEST COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES DUE TO LIMITED HOURS OF 8 TO 8 AND LOW TRAFFIC IMPACT. THERE WILL BE NO INCREASE IN BUILDING FOOTPRINTS BUT THE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES NEW PARKING, RENOVATED FENCING ALONG THE NORTH AND EAST BOUNDARY FOR RESIDENTIAL ADJACENT AND REMOVE SOUTHERN PARKING. THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES ONE VARIANCE FROM 20 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENT. STAFF SUPPORTS THE VARIANCE, MEETING THE REQUIREMENT IS NOT FEASIBLE DUE TO THE EXISTENCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE. YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED [00:20:01] EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS WHICH ADD MORE RESIDENTIAL DETAILING. A MORE DEFINED ENTRANCE, MASONRY BASED COLUMNS AND UPDATED FACADE ELEMENTS. THESE RENDERS WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT. THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING GOALS WHICH AIM TO PRESERVE DOWNTOWN WITH ADAPTIVE REUSE, APPROPRIATE ZONING MIXING AND ENHANCED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ALONG MAJOR THOROUGH FARES. PUBLIC NOTICES WERE SENT OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY AND STAFF RECEIVED NO CORRESPONDENCE. SIGN WAS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS NOTICE OF THE COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING BEING PUBLISHED IN THE CITY NEWSPAPER IN COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS LAW. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL DUE TO THE FOLLOWING REASONS. I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS. THE APPLICANT HAS A REPRESENTATIVE HERE AS WELL. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE, AND WHERE DO YOU LIVE IN THE CITY. >> YES. MY NAME IS TAMMY. GOOD EVENING. I AM PRESENTING THIS LETTER ON BEHALF OF LISA TRUELOVE, THE APPLICANT. MY NAME IS LISA TRUELOVE. MIDLOTHIAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY HOME. I WAS RAISED HERE AND A PROUD GRADUATE OF MIDLOTHIAN CLASS OF 1990. I CHOSE TO REMAIN A RESIDENT OF THIS AMAZING COMMUNITY THAT'S MEANT SO MUCH TO MY COMMUNITY. THE MIDLOTHIAN ROOTS CONTINUE TO RUN DEEP. MY OLDEST DAUGHTER, MACESY, GRADUATED FROM MHS IN 2017. MY YOUNGEST DAUGHTER MACKENZIE ALSO GRADUATED FROM MHS CLASS OF 2020. TODAY ALL THREE OF US ARE NURSES AND CONTINUE TO SERVE AND CARE FOR OTHERS WHILE REMAINING DEEPLY CONNECTED TO THE TOWN WE LOVE. WE STILL PROUDLY BLEED MIDLOTHIAN BLUE. IT IS BECAUSE OF THESE ROOTS AND OUR LOVE FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT I'M RESPECTFULLY ASKING FOR YOU TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR 215 SOUTH 5TH STREET. MY VISION IS TO TRANSFORM IT INTO AN UPSCALE SALON SWEET TRUELOVE ATHLETICS AND SUITE. IT IS COMBINING A SALON WITH MODERN SERVICES IN A SPA-LIKE ATMOSPHERE IN THE HEART OF OUR COMMUNITY. UNLIKE TRADITIONAL SALONS, THE SUITES WILL FOCUS ON PROVIDING A QUIET SERENE EXPERIENCE SO CLIENTS CAN ESCAPE EVERYDAY STRESS WHILE RECEIVING PROFESSIONAL SALON AND AESTHETIC SERVICES. OUR PURPOSE IS TO CREATE SUITES FOR LOCAL INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONALS, STYLISTS WHO HAVE THEIR OWN RELAXING PRIVATE SPACE FOR PERSONALIZED CARE. THESE ARE EACH STATE LICENSED, PROFESSIONALS IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT NEED AN AVAILABLE SPACE FOR FLEXIBLE HOURS TO BE ABLE TO SET THEIR OWN FEES FOR SERVICE AND CREATE A BETTER WORK/LIFE BALANCE. OUR SUITES WILL CREATE A FEELING OF A SOPHISTICATED SALON WITH AN APPROACHABLE MIDLOTHIAN WELCOME. OUR COMMUNITY HAS A LIMITED NUMBER OF SALON AMENITIES THAT PROVIDE A QUIET TRANQUIL ATMOSPHERE FOR SELF-EMPLOYED BEAUTICIANS, COSMETIC NURSE INJECTOR, MAN CURISTS, EYELASH APPLICATION, PERMANENT MAKEUP AND OTHER PERSONAL SERVICE NEEDED BY LOCALS IN OUR COMMUNITY. ANOTHER GOAL IS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH WHILE SUPPORTING LOCAL ENTREPRENEURS AND KEEPING TALENT IN OUR COMMUNITY. THIS WILL ATTRACT MORE HOMETOWN BUSINESS OWNERS. WHEN LOCAL TALL LEN GOES TO SURROUNDING AREAS TO WORK FOR BIG BOX COMPANIES THAT TAKES REVENUE AWAY FROM MIDLOTHIAN, DISRUPTS THE FLEXIBLE HOURS FOR FAMILIES AND CAUSES LOCAL TALENT TO GENERATE LESS INCOME FOR THEIR FAMILY. THE MAIN GOAL IS TO PROVIDE A LOCAL PLACE FOR LOCAL TALENT TO PROVIDE LOCAL INCOME FOR OUR TOWN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, LISA TRUELOVE. >> JUST VERY QUICKLY. I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE NOT LISA. BUT HOW LONG HAS THIS BUSINESS BEEN IN EXISTENCE? >> THEY HAVE BEEN IN -- COULD YOU COME UP, PLEASE. >> GET BACK IN FRONT OF THE MICROPHONE. >> MACESY TRUELOVE HAS ALREADY BEEN PRACTICING HERE IN MIDLOTHIAN. AND THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO FIND A LARGER VENUE THAT HAS AN AREA TO BE ABLE TO HOUSE ALL THESE DIFFERENT, I GUESS, SERVICES SO THAT IT'S KIND OF LIKE A ONE STOP FOR LADIES AND GENTLEMEN FOR THEIR BEAUTY NEEDS. THEY'VE BEEN HERE FOR OVER A YEAR. >> OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE. IT'S NOT A NEW BUSINESS. IT'S AN EXISTING BUSINESS THAT IS INVESTING FURTHER INTO THE COMMUNITY? >> YES. >> GOTCHA. GOTCHA. >> THEY WANT TO BUILD UPON WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY BEGUN. >> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. [00:25:08] SO THEY'LL BE OFFERING EACH ONE OF THE SUITES A DIFFERENT SERVICE. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. OKAY. QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS BEING SO CLOSE TO THE RAIL ROAD, DO WE HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE PARKING AND THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE RAILROAD? THAT WAS MY ONLY THOUGHT. >> NO. NO. >> OKAY. >> NO. >> OKAY. >> YEAH. JUST MAKING SURE. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE BY COMMISSIONER ALTMAN. HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MACDONNELL. PLEASE VOTE. 5-0. DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> THE APPLICANT PRESENTED A GOOD PRESENTATION. THIS IS WHAT WE NEED IN THE MODULE WITH MIXED USE. I MOVE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED AND GRANT THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR LANDSCAPING. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO MOVE BY COMMI COMMISSIONER ALTMAN? DO I HAVE A SECOND. >> I AGREE IT'S A GREAT PRESENTATION. >> SECONDED BY MS. MCDONALD. PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 5-0. [008 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon a request for an ordinance amending the development and use regulations of Planned Development District No. 68 (PD-68) for a detailed site development plan, elevations, and a landscape plan for Lot 3-B3, Block 1, Hawkins Meadows Commercial. The property is located at 250 Hawkins Run Road. (SP04-2026-036)] ITEM 008. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 68 FOR A DETAILED SITED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ELEVATIONS AND LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR LOT 3-B3 BLOCK 1 HAWKINS MEADOWS COMMERCIAL. PROPERTY IS LOCATED 250 HAWKINS RUN ROAD. >> >> THIS IS A REQUEST TO INCORPORATE A MULTITENANT SHOPPING CENTER IN PD68. THIS CASE WAS DENIED BY COUNCIL IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR AND THEREFORE THE APPLICANT HAD TO WAIT SIX MONTHS TO RESUBMIT. NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE BUILDING LOCATION OR FOOTPRINTS SINCE COUNCIL'S DENIAL. BATTERY HAS BEEN MADE RAEUBGT. PARKING NO LONGER ENCROACHES INTO THE EASEMENT ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARIES, AND THE DRIVE HAS BEEN SHIFTED 85 FEET EAST. IF APPROVED THIS AMENDMENT WILL SERVE AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE 280 FOOT DRIVE WAY DISTANCE REQUIREMENT. LANDSCAPING LOCATED IN THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED UTILITY EASEMENT STILL REQUIRES COORDINATION. PUBLIC NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO CORRESPONDENCE. SIGN WAS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING BEING PUBLISHED IN THE CITY NEWSPAPER FOR COMPLIANCE IN TEXAS LAW. STAFFERS MENTIONED DENIALED REQUEST FOR THE FOLLOWING REA REASONS. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL DENIAL REASON BY CITY COUNCIL? >> IT WAS FOR THE VARIANCES. >> THE VARIANCES. >> VARIANCE FOR PARKING, BUILDING ARTICULATION AND ADJACENT PROPERTY INFORMATION. >> HAVE THEY UPDATED THAT INFORMATION? >> YES, THEY HAVE. >> OKAY. >> IS THERE A REASON THAT WE CAN'T USE THE ACCESS IN FRONT OF STARBUCKS INSTEAD OF ADDING ANOTHER ENTRANCE? WOULD THAT SATISFY OUR -- >> THAT WOULD SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT JUST BECAUSE OF SPACING BETWEEN THE TWO DRIVE WAYS. I DO KNOW HAVING PASSED BY THAT STARBUCKS QUITE OFTEN ENTRANCE IS CONGESTED QUITE A BIT SO I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THEY'RE OPTING TO GO ANOTHER ROUTE. >> YOU MENTIONED THE ARTICULATION. HAVE THEY CHANGED FROM [00:30:02] ORIGINALLY PRESENTED TO WHAT THEY'RE PRESENTING NOW? >> YES, THEY HAVE. THEY ADDED HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ARTICULATION MIDWAY THROUGH THE BUILDING AND MET ALL REQUIREMENTS. >> SO WHAT I'M SEEING IN THE PACKET DOESN'T REALLY GIVE ME A WHOLE LOT. DO YOU HAVE RENDERINGS OR DRAWINGS THAT YOU CAN PUT UP? >> WOULD YOU LIKE THE ELEVATION? >> AND IS THIS IN LINE WITH THE OTHER BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE ON THAT STREET? >> AS FAR AS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS, YES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> I'M CONFUSED. SO WE TALK ABOUT IT NOT BEING CONSISTENT WITH ENHANCING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. WHERE ARE THEY FALLING SHORT IF THEY'RE MEETING THEIR ARTICULATION? ARE THEY STILL FALLING SHORT THEN IN TERMS OF STRATEGY CH.2.B? IN THE PACKET IT SAYS THEY'RE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING. JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, WHAT SHOULD THEY BE DOING BETTER, IN Y'ALL'S OPINION? >> JUST READING. I'M SORRY. TO BE HONEST, I WOULD SAY WE DID WANT MORE ARTICULATION AND DIFFERENCE AS FAR AS HORIZONTAL. NOT THAT THAT'S THE BEST ANSWER. >> OKAY. I KNOW WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION IN TERMS OF THE CHURCH THE OTHER DAY AND EVEN SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG 67 AND 287. IT SEEMS LIKE THIS ARTICULATION, EVEN THOUGH IT ADDED THINGS, SEEMS TO BE FALLING SHORT OF THAT ENTRYWAY GUIDANCE. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? >> YES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> IS THE APPLICANT HERE AND WISH TO SPEAK? ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS SIGNED UP? >> NO. >> FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I'LL HEAR A MOTION THEN. >> MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE BY COMMISSIONER ALTMAN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BLAND. PLEASE VOTE. ALL RIGHT. CLOSES 5-0. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? >> BASED ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOT MEETING OUR CURRENT STANDARDS AND WE HAVE TAKEN TO TASK OTHER AP PPLICANTS FOR FAILURE TO HAVE PROPER ARTICULATION, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION AS PRESENTED. >> HEARING NONE, I WILL SECOND. PLEASE VOTE. ITEM IS DENIED 5-0. [009 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon a request for an ordinance granting a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for a Secondary Dwelling Unit in an Agricultural (A) District, relating to the use and development of Lot 38, Blue Grass Estates, located at 3210 Bluegrass Drive. (SUP07-2026-033)] WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 009 CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE GRANTING SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT IN AN AGRICULTURAL A DISTRICT RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOT 38 BLUE GRASS ESTATES LOCATED AT 3210 BLUEGRASS DRIVE. >> YES. GOOD EVENING. SO THIS IS AN SUP REQUEST FOR 3210 BLUEGRASS, SPECIFICALLY FOR AN ADDITIONAL ELECTRICAL METER FOR THE SECONDARY DWELLING THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE. THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES THESE SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT BE ON THE SAME ELECTRICAL METER AS THE PRIMARY DWELLING UNIT SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE SUP TO DIFFERENTIATE THE TWO. THE SITE IS ABOUT 15 ACRES AND FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IS COUNTRY MODULE WHICH IT DOES FOLLOW THE COUNTRY MODULE. YOU CAN SEE IT HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ON THE AERIAL, AND THEN ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES FOLLOW THE SAME ZONING EXISTING LAND USE AND FUTURE LAND USE. THAT'S AGRICULTURAL EXISTING FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THE COUNTRY MODULE. HERE'S THE SITE PLAN. SO NORTH IS TO THE LEFT OF YOUR SCREEN. SORRY, IT'S A LITTLE -- GOT TO TURN YOUR HEAD. [00:35:01] SECONDARY DWELLING IS AT THE BOTTOM OF YOUR SCREEN. THEY HAVE A SHOP IN THE BACK AND THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE. BESIDES ONE OF THE ADDITIONAL ELECTRICAL METERS, THEY DO MEAN ALL THE SECONDARY DWELLING REQUIREMENTS WITHIN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE. SOME HISTORY. IN 1996 THE PRIMARY DWELLING UNIT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND IN 2008, IT WAS ANNEXED TO CITY LIMITS AND ZONED AGRICULTURAL WHICH IS WHAT IT HAS STAYED SINCE THEN. WE DID SEND OUT 12 POST CARDS TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS ON MAY 28TH. AND ONE SIGN WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. THE NOTICE FOR THE JULY 14, 2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE PUT IN THE PAPER ON JUNE 27TH. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY OPPOSITION OR ANY CONTACT ABOUT THIS CASE. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS, AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT AS WELL. >> QUESTIONS? >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY. THE SECONDARY DWELLING IS NOT CURRENTLY IN EXISTENCE? >> IT IS IN EXISTENCE. >> IT IS THERE AND IT'S CURRENTLY SHARING A METER? OR IT HAS NO METER? >> IT DOESN'T HAVE A METER. >> SO IT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THEY WERE JUST CLEANING IT UP? >> YES. >> OKAY. AND SO IS THERE A CHANGE TO THE DRIVE WAY OR ANYTHING ELSE ON THE PROPERTY? >> NO, MA'AM. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> DO THEY HAVE WATER SERVICE? IS THAT A SEPARATE METER? OR ARE THEY USING THE SAME METER? >> I BELIEVE IT'S A SEPARATE, BUT THE PROPERTY OWNER MIGHT BE ABLE TO SAY BETTER. >> I ALSO NOTICE THAT IT'S SITTING RIGHT ON TOP OF AN EASEMENT ALREADY. IS THAT AN ISSUE? >> YEAH. THEY GOT MOUNTAIN PEAK APPROVAL. >> OKAY. >> BEFORE CONSTRUCTING. >> OKAY. I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. IS THERE ANY -- WITH ADDING THE SECOND METER, IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY OR ANY FUTURE OPTION TO SUBDIVIDE THIS? >> I BELIEVE IN THE ORDINANCE THERE IS A CLAUSE THAT SAYS IT WON'T BE SUBDIVIDED. BUT ALSO, WITH THE CURRENT ZONING, AGRICULTURAL REQUIRES FOUR ACRE MINIMUM. TO REPLOT IT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? >> SORRY, ONE MORE QUESTION. LOOKING AT THE METAL BUILDING THAT'S AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PROPERTY, DOES THAT BUILDING ALSO HAVE ITS OWN ELECTRIC METER? >> I THINK IT DOES, BUT THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD KNOW BETTER. >> OKAY. >> DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK? IF YOU WOULD COME UP. STATE YOUR NAME AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE IN THE CITY, PLEASE. >> BRETT MASSEY. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO BUILD THIS HOUSE TO TAKE CARE OF A MOTHER AND GRANDFATHER. I STARTEDED THIS PROCESS IN 2021. WENT THROUGH ABOUT TWO YEARS WITH MOUNTAIN PEAK TO RELINQUISH THE EASEMENT. WE GOT THAT SUCCESSFULLY DONE. $20,000 IN DEBT WITH A NEW WATER METER. HAD TO BORE UNDERNEATH THE STREET. IT'S BEEN A JOURNEY, TO SAY THE LEAST. BUT WE DO HAVE AN ELECTRIC METER ON THE SHOP IN THE BACK. AND I STRATEGICALLY PUT OUR SECOND DWELLING RIGHT THERE SO THERE'S A SQUARE. THAT IS THE TRANSFORMER. ENCORE DID COME OUT. THEY DID TELL ME THAT TRANSFORMER IS WELL WITHIN THEIR RANGE AND AMPRAGES TO TIE THAT IN. CITY REQUIRED US TO DO HALF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE MAIN PROPERTY, SO THE SECOND DWELLING IS 1,200 SQUARE FOOT. SO, YEAH. >> QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. >> YEP. >> ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? THANK YOU. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I'LL HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> MOTION TO CLOSE BY COMMISSIONER MCDONALD. CAN I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLAND. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSES 5-0. [00:40:05] ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? >> I JUST WANT TO SAY MY FIRST MEETING AS A COMMISSIONER IS WHEN WE PUT IN OUR ADU PARAMETERS AND SUCH. WE WERE ADAMANT THAT WE DID NOT WANT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE SECOND METERS AND WE WANTED TO LIMIT THAT. WITH THAT SAID, BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THIS LOT AND BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT'S LAND LOCKED, I DON'T SEE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO FURTHER SUBDIVIDE THIS DOWN THE ROAD. WITH THAT, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. >> MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MCDONALD TO APPROVE. >> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. >> SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ALTMAN. PLEASE VOTE. PASSES 5-0. ITEM 10. [010 Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon a request for an ordinance amending and restating the development and use regulations of Planned Development District No. 179 (PD-179), as set forth in Ordinance No. 2025-10 and amended by Ordinance 2026-21, being a 33.399+ acre portion of the J.T. Rawls Survey, Abstract No. 993. The property is generally located at the southwest corner of West Main Street, US Highway 67, US Highway 287/US Highway 67 Loop, and West US Highway 287. (Z11-2026-032)] CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON A REQUEST FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RESTATING THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE REGULATIONS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 179 AS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NUMBER 2025-10 AND AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2026-21, BEING A 33.399 PLUS OR MINUS ACRE PORTION OF THE J.T. RAWLS SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 993. PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WEST MAIN STREET, U.S. HIGHWAY 67, U.S. HIGHWAY 287, U.S. HIGHWAY 67 LOOP AND WEST U.S. HIGHWAY 287. >> AGAIN, MIRRIAN SPENCER. THE NEXT ITEM IS A REQUEST TO AMEND THE PD REGULATIONS FOR FUND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 179. IT'S LOCATED AT THE HARD CORNER OF MAIN 287 AND 67. IT'S 33.399 ACRES. IT HAS A BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF COMMUNITY RETAIL. MIDLOTHIAN 2025 ESTABLISHES THIS AS A REGIONAL MODULE. AND THE SURROUNDING LAND USES, TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE UNDEVELOPED LAND AND PD49 AND COMMERCIAL. AND IT'S THE TRUCK STOP CONVENIENCE STORE. TO THE EAST, YOU HAVE, COURSE, THIS IS PD 171. TO THE SOUTH YOU HAVE THE LOOP OF 67 AND 287. AND IT'S ALSO VACANT OVER HERE TO THE SOUTHEAST. AND DIRECTLY TO THE WEST IS FIRE STATION NUMBER 1. SO THIS PD AMENDMENT IS KIND OF A WHOLESALE OVERHAUL OF THE ORDINANCE AND IT LOOKS AT, NOW THAT THEY HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF THE LAND USERS THAT ARE LOOKING TO COME IN, THEY WANTED TO KIND OF GO THROUGH AND REVISE THE LANGUAGE OF THE PD. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THEY WANTED TO DO WAS REMOVE THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT USE REQUIREMENT FOR THEIR HOME IMPROVEMENT STORE AND UPDATE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ACROSS THE STREET. MODIFIES A CONCEPT PLAN TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF LOTS AND THE AMENITY AREAS AND THE PONDS THAT WERE ON THE SITE. IT ALSO UPDATES THE CONCEPT PLAN TO REFLECT THE LAND USES OF THE PEOPLE THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH. IT'S MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE END PRODUCT. THEY ALSO ARE UPDATING SOME OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE LANDSCAPE PORTION OF THE ORDINANCE TO ACCOMMODATE THE UTILITIES THAT ARE IN 67 AND WEST MAIN STREET. AND THERE WERE KIND OF SOME TECHNICAL CLEANUP. IT ALSO UPDATES THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS THE SIGN REQUIREMENTS, AND UPDATES THE SIGN PLAN TO MODIFY LOCATIONS. SO THE SITE PLAN ON THE LEFT IS THE CURRENT CONCEPT PLAN. AND TO THE RIGHT IS THE REVISIONS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO MAKE. SO I'LL START AT THE TOP. INITIALLY IT WAS A RESTAURANT AND A DRIVE-THRU. IT'S STILL GONNA BE A RESTAURANT, BUT IT'S GONNA BE A DRIVE-THRU. THEY'RE GONNA DO RETAIL ON LOT 2. THEY'RE ALSO DOING A SECOND DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT ON LOT 6. LOT 1 IS THE CONVENIENCE STORE THAT YOU PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. THEY'RE ALSO DOING TWO MULTITENANT BUILDINGS THAT WILL [00:45:01] BACK UP TO THE AMENITY AREA. THEY ELIMINATED THIS POND HERE AND EXTENDED BUILDING FURTHER ALONG AND CONNECTED THESE THROUGH LIKE A BREEZEWAY. AND THEY ALSO COMBINED THESE TWO LOTS TO MAKE ONE LOT HERE. THEY COMBINED THIS AREA HERE TO MAKE THE ONE LOT HERE. AND THEY BASICALLY FLIPPED THE HOME IMPROVEMENT STORE AND MADE SOME CHANGES TO THE PARKING AREA AND THE ACCESS AREA TO IT. A LOT GOING ON. AND THE GOAL OF THIS PD AMENDMENT IS SO THAT IT FURTHER SIMPLIFIES THE PROCESS FOR THE DIFFERENT USERS THAT ARE COMING IN AND GIVES THEM CLEAR DIRECTION ON WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS TO SEE. THIS IS SHOWING THE SITE PLAN FOR WHAT WAS APPROVED. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN HAS BEEN REVISED. THERE'S A LOT OF UTILITIES ALONG WEST MAIN AND 67. BUT THE PD REQUIRED SCREENING OF THE GAS PUMPS AND PARKING SPACES, SO WE WERE ABLE TO FIND SOME AREAS ALONG THE FRONTAGE WHERE TREES COULD GO AND NOT BE IMPACTED BY THE UTILITIES. WE'VE GOT LISTS OF TREES AND SHRUBS AND WANTS THAT DON'T IMPACT UTILITIES THAT CAN BE PLANTED ALONG MAIN. BUT ON 67 IT'S TOO MUCH SWISS CHEESE, SO IT'S JUST ALLOWING JUST TO BE SHRUBS AND GRASS ALONG 67. THEY'RE ALSO PROVIDING SOME LANDSCAPING ALONG THE REAR OF THE BUILDING HERE AND ALONG 287 HERE. THE AMENITY PLAN HAS A COVERED PAVILION AREA HERE WITH SOME STADIUM SEATING. IT ALSO HAS AERATORS FOR THE POND. IT HAS WALKING PATH GOING AROUND IT. AS YOU CAN SEE, BUILDING THE TWO MULTITENANT BUILDING AND NINE WILL ALL SPEAK TO THE AMENITY AREA. SO THEY KIND OF WORK -- THE GATEWAY, YOU CAN OPEN THE DOORS AND KIND OF LOOK OUT ON THE AMENITY AREA. THERE'S A PLAYGROUND AREA DOWN IN HERE, I THINK. AND THERE'S BENCHES AND SEATING. THERE'S 80 TREES, 59 ACCENT TREES AND THEY HAVE 36,000 SQUARE FEET OF TURF. SO FOR THE SIGN PLAN, ORIGINALLY THEY HAD ALLOWED BOTH MULTITENANT, MONUMENT SIGNS AND PILE-ON SIGNS. THEY'VE DECIDED TO MAKE THE MONUMENT SIGN SINGLE TENANT FOR THE OUT PARCELS AND DO TWO MULTITENANT SIGNS ON 67 AND MAIN. FIRST ONE'S HERE AND THEN ONE WILL BE ALONG THIS AREA LOOKING AT THE BEST LOCATION FOR IT ALONG 67 HERE. AND THAT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS DONE IN THE PD ACROSS THE STREET. THEY'RE RELOCATING MONUMENT SIGNS THAT WERE PROPOSED HERE AND HERE. AND THEY'RE MOVING THIS ONE HERE. THIS ONE IS GOING HERE. THEY'RE KEEPING THE ONE ON 4. AND THEY ARE -- SORRY. THEY'RE ALSO, THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE QT'S MONUMENT SIGN WHICH IS ON THEIR SITE PLAN SEPARATELY. THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS. THEY'RE MAINTAINING THE CURRENT ELEVATIONS FOR THE PD THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR ALL BUILDINGS UNDER 20,000 SQUARE FEET. AND IF THEY MEET ALL OF THE ELEVATIONS PROVIDED, IT CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED, THE SITE PLAN. BUT FOR BUILDINGS OVER 20,000 SQUARE FEET, THEY ARE EXEMPT FROM THE OLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, BUT THEY MUST MEET VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL ARTICULATION. AND WE ENCOURAGE OLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, BUT BECAUSE OF THOSE, THE SIZE OF THOSE BUILDINGS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A DETAILED SITE PLAN THROUGH YOU AND COUNCIL. >> QUICK QUESTION. >> SURE. >> ON THE INGRESS/EGRESS ON FRONTAGE ROAD 67, THE ONE THAT WOULD ACTUALLY GO TO LOT 10. YEP. LOOKING AT THAT OFF RAMP ON 67, WILL THERE BE SOME SORT OF [00:50:05] PROHIBITION OF TURNING? LIKE THAT'S ALREADY A WEIRD EXCHANGE. YOU'VE GOT THREE LANES. SOME PEOPLE CAN TURN AND SOME PEOPLE CAN'T. THEN YOU'LL HAVE PEOPLE COMING OFF AND IMMEDIATELY TRYING TO TURN IN WHEN OTHERS ARE TRYING TO SPEED UP AND GO STRAIGHT. HAS THAT BEEN ADDRESSED? >> SO THEIR DRIVE WAYS THAT THEY HAVE, THAT THEY'RE SHOWING NOW, WERE ALL PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY TEXDOT. TEXDOT CONTROLS THE ACCESS ON 67 AND MAIN STREET AND 287. >> SO TEXDOT HAS ALREADY APPROVED THIS? >> YES. >> THANK YOU. >> IN FACT, I THINK THE APPROACHES ARE ALL BUILT OUT THERE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION. LOT 9. ALL OF THE OTHER ONES GIVE US SOME INDICATION AS TO WHAT THEIR USE IS, BUT THAT ONE DOES NOT. WHAT IS THAT LIKELY TO BE? >> THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE FOR THAT ONE. >> APPLICANT LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK? >> BY THE WAY, WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS TIM THOMPSON. WE ARE THE OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS OF THE OVERALL DEAL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. MIRRIAN AND CLYDE HAVE DONE GREAT JOB. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR OVER A YEAR. ALL THE CHANGES SEEM LIKE A LOT BUT A YEAR, IT'S BEEN A LOT WOFRBG. WHEN WE INITIALLY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, YOU HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL TRYING TO DETERMINE WHO MIGHT GO WHERE. SINCE THEN WE'VE SECURED OUR ANCHOR POSITIONS. ONCE WE DO THAT, NOW WE CAN FINE TUNE ALL THE DIFFERENT PARCELS. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE COMING HERE FOR TONIGHT, TO SHOW WHAT OUR PLAN IS. MAIN CHANGE I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS ONE THE ANCHORS THE BACK PORTION. WE PROPOSED A BIGGER PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR USERS AND THEIR USE. TWO, WE'VE GONE IN AND WE TOOK OUT THE DRIVEWAY THAT WAS IN BETWEEN THE MULTITENANT CENTER ON HIGHWAY 67 AND BACKED THAT UP TO THE AMENITY AREA TO HAVE MORE OF A PATIO OVERLOOKING THE LAKE. KIDS RUN AROUND, PLAY IN THE WATER -- NOT PLAY IN THE WATER. GO UP TO THE WATER AND ENJOY A DRINK BY A WATER FOUNTAIN. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION REGARDING PLOT NUMBER 9, WE'RE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH SEVERAL SITDOWN CONCEPTS. IT'S GOING TO BE A SITDOWN USER OF SOME SORT. WE'RE NOT EXACTLY SURE WHO JUST YET, BUT IT WILL BE A SITDOWN CONCEPT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. ALSO, I HAVE REPRESENTATIVES HERE FROM HOME DEPOT AND ALSO LIVE CHURCH. THEY WOULD BE THE ONES THAT WOULD ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THEIR PADS, OR THEIR LOTS. >> MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION FOR YOU IS CONCERNING THE POND. BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. THEY'RE HEAVILY FISHED BY THE LOCALS. >> YES, MA'AM. >> WHEN YOU GO TO COMBINE THESE AND MAKE THEM INTO ONE, IS IT YOUR INTENTION TO RESTOCK THEM? IS THERE GOING TO BE A CATCH AND RELEASE PROGRAM? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON HOW ITS FUTURE USE WILL BE? >> RIGHT NOW WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT FAR. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE'D WANT FISHING THERE BECAUSE IT'S A LIABILITY. PEOPLE WITH HOOKS AND FISHING. I DIDN'T GO ENTIRELY DOWN THAT PATH BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE ALLOWING FISHING. HAPPY FOR SUGGESTIONS. I'M A FISHERMAN, TOO. LOVE TO STOCK IT BUT DON'T WANT TO CREATE A HASSLE. >> THANK YOU. >> YES, MA'AM. >> OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU, SIR. >> YES, SIR. THANK YOU ALL. >> DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? >> NO. >> ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE BY COMMISSIONER MCDONALD. >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ALTMAN. PLEASE VOTE. CLOSED 5-0. OTHER DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. >> MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MACDONNELL. DO I HEAR A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ALTMAN. PLEASE VOTE. [00:55:01] PASSES 4-1. ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS FROM STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS? * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.