[Call to Order and Determination of Quorum] [00:00:09] >>> JUST TO GIVE A BRIEF OUTLINE OF SOME OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT, MANY OF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER TEN WHICH INVOLVES THE DEVELOPMENT OF WALNUT GROVE ROAD AND MOCKINGBIRD LANE. WE'RE GOING TO COVER SOME CONSENT ITEMS AND MOVE THAT TO THE TOP OF THE AGENDA TO CLEAR PEOPLE OUT WITH THE INTEREST OF HEALTH AND SAFETY. [001. Staff review of the cases that were heard by City Council in the last sixty (60) days.] WITH THAT, I WILL START WITH OUR STAFF REVIEW OF CASES HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL IN THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS. >>> I GUESS WE'LL FIND OUT. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT DIDN'T NECESSARILY GO BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. BUT FOR ITEMS IN INTEREST REGARDING LAND USE, WE HAVE THREE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION CASES WHERE EACH ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES WERE LOCATED WITHIN THE LARGE THREE YEAR SOUTHWEST ANNEXATION WE DID A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. EACH ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES WANTED TO DEVELOP AND THEY ACTUALLY CAME TO THE CITY INSTEAD OF ACTING UPON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THEY REQUESTED BY PETITION TO VOLUNTARY ANNEX INTO THE CITY. THOSE DID GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. THOSE WERE APPROVED. AT THE TIME THEY WERE GIVEN A TEMPORARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION. THESE PROPERTIES WILL BE COMING. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF THEM ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA FOR AN OFFICIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION CASE. AND THOSE WERE ALL OF THE CASES THAT WE HAVEN'T GONE OVER ALREADY. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW WE'LL HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO SPEAK ON ANY TOPIC NOT ALREADY SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COMPLETE A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION FORM AND SUBMIT THAT TO CITY STAFF. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO COMMENT OR TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON ITEMS WHICH ARE NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD WISH TO SPEAK THAT HAS NOT SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO DO SO? [003. Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat for Azalea Hollow, being 123.273± acres out of the J.T. Loper Survey, Abstract No. 1366, the E. Rust Survey, Abstract No. 1277, the D. Kersey Survey, Abstract 611 and the E. Bryson Survey, Abstract No 117, generally located approximately 445 feet north of Montgomery Road and on the west side of Joe Wilson Road (Case No. PP04-2019-28).] SEEING NONE WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE ON THE AGENDA WHICH IS A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR AZALEA HOLLOW. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS APPROXIMATELY 123 ACRES. THIS ITEM HAS GONE BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY. IT WENT JANUARY 15, 2019, BUT EXPIRED DUE TO THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE NOT BEING COMPLETED WITHIN THE GIVEN TIME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. THEY STILL ARE MEETING ARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. ALSO ON THE SAME AGENDA AND OTHER THAN THE CONSENT AGENDA YOU'LL SEE THE SAME ITEM WHICH STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR A MOTION? WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMON. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. [004. Consider and act upon a request for a Preliminary Plat of “C.R.S. HQ Addition at the Farmstead in Midlothian” being ± 19.94 acres of land, situated within the George F. Holman Survey, Abstract No. 460, and the H.F. Hinkley Survey, Abstract No. 459, City of Midlothian, Ellis County, generally located ± 865 feet north of Henderson Street, between US Hwy 67 and North 9th Street (Case No. PP20-2019-170).] ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CONSIDER AND ACT UPON REQUEST FOR LIMB NARY PLAT OF C.R.S. HQ ADDITION AT THE FARMSTEAD IN MIDLOTHIAN. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS LOCATED ON US HIGHWAY 67 ON THE WEST SIDE JUST NORTH OF 9TH STREET. WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO DO IS YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE WITH DIFFERENT PLATS, WHERE THE PREVIOUS VERSION HAD VARIOUS LOTS PLATTED OUT. SINCE THEN THE PROPERTY HAS CHANGED OWNERSHIP AND THE PERSON WHO CURRENTLY OWNS IT WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN. FOR THAT REASON, THEY DID GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT ANOTHER PRELIMINARY PLAT WHICH IS PERMIT UNDER OUR SUBDIVISION ORDNANCE REGULATIONS. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO BREAK THIS DOWN INTO THREE PLATS AT THIS TIME. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. THIS DOES MEET OUR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COME IN FOR A REPLAT. [00:05:01] I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DO I HAVE A MOTION? >> MOTION FOR APPROVAL. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HILL. [Consent Agenda] ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> THAT BRINGS US TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. THESE ARE ITEMS OF A ROUTINE OR MINISTERIAL NATURE AND UNLESS THERE IS A MOTION TO REMOVE THOSE FROM THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE. WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. DO I HAVE A SECOND? A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> THOSE CARRY UNANIMOUSLY. ALL OPPOSED? HEARING NONE THOSE CARRY UNANIMOUSLY. AS MENTIONED WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER TEN ON THE [010. Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 224.883± acres out of the J. Smith Survey, Abstract No. 971, and R. Graham Survey Abstract No. 421, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to a Planned Development District (PD) for single-family residential uses. The property is located on the north side of Mockingbird Lane, between Walnut Grove Road and North Mockingbird Lane (approximately 2,000 feet east of the intersection of Walnut Grove Rd. and Mockingbird Lane) (Z18-2020-068).] AGENDA WHICH IS CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF 224.883 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MOCKINGBIRD LANE BETWEEN WALNUT GROVE ROAD AND NORTH MOCKINGBIRD LANE. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE TO ALLOW FOR 129 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED AS AN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF FOUR ACRES. SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN WHAT WE CALL OUR COUNTRY MODULE OF THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. THIS MODULE DOES CALL FOR LOTS THAT HAVE AT LEAST 1 TO 3 ACRES IN SIZE. SO BASED ON THE LOT SIZES THAT ARE PROPOSED ON THE SIDE PLAN THAT YOU SEE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN, THIS DOES CONFORM TO OUR COUNTRY MODULE WITHIN THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS SITE ALSO DOES SHOW THE PROPOSED STREETS AND LOT CONFIGURATION THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT FORTH. THIS STAPLE HERE SHOWS A BREAKDOWN OF THE EXISTING AGRICULTURAL ZONING VERSUS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. THIS IS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. A COUPLE OF THINGS I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT, I'VE NOTED THOSE IN RED. OUR SETBACKS WOULD BE AT LEAST 50 FEET. GARAGE ORIENTATION, THE APPLICANTS ARE ASKING FOR ALL SIDE ENTRY AND J ENTRY GARAGES BE PERMITTED. FRONT ENTRY GARAGES WOULD ACTUALLY BE PROHIBITED. OPEN SPACE WOULD CONSIST OF ABOUT 39 ACRES ALTHOUGH ONLY SEVEN OF THE 39 ACRES FALL OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN AND ARE CONSIDERED USEABLE. THIS TABLE HERE IS ALSO SHOWN WITHIN THE ORDINANCE. IT BREAKS DOWN THE NUMBER OF LOTS. WE HAVE IT BROKEN UP BY TYPE A, TYPE B, TYPE C, AND TYPE D. WE'RE LOOKING AT A 50-FOOT SETBACK. ALL DWELLING UNITS WILL HAVE A SIDE OR J ENTRY TYPE GARAGES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT ALL LOT TYPES BE EXEMPT FROM THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF LOTS PERMITTED BUT IN NO CASE SHALL THEY HAVE MORE THAN 129 LOTS. I THINK FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE WE JUST WANTED TO LIMIT THIS TO ONLY REALLY TYPE C AND TYPE D. ALL THIS IS REALLY SAYING IS THAT IF SOMEBODY FALLS OUTSIDE OF THIS ALLOTTED AMOUNT LIKE FROM 1.5 TO 1.75 LET'S SAY AFTER THEY LAY ALL OF THE LOTS THEY END UP A LITTLE BIT UNDER OR A LITTLE BIT OVER THAT'S OKAY. WE DID NOT WANT TO HAVE THAT FOR ALL OF THE LOTS MAINLY BECAUSE AGAIN LOT TYPE A, WE DON'T WANT TO SEE ALL OF THESE LOTS JUST DOWN TO ONE ACRE IN SIZE, NOT THAT THAT CAN REALLY ULTIMATELY HAPPEN BECAUSE WHEN YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN IT IS ALREADY PRETTY MUCH LAID OUT. YOU CAN'T GO OVER 129 LOTS. STILL THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR THAT. SO WE'LL DIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER ON WITH THE PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SOME ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS TO ENSURE THAT ARTICULATED FRONT ENTRANCES WILL EXIST ON ALL OF THESE HOMES. I WANT TO KNOW THAT THE DWELLING UNITS ON LOT 9 AND 10 ARE LOCATED AT THE VERY NORTH SIDE OF MOCKINGBIRD LANE. THOSE LOTS WILL ACTUALLY FACE OUTWARD TOWARD MOCKINGBIRD LANE. BUT DIRECT DRIVE ACCESS ONTO MOCKINGBIRD LANE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE SEEKING A VARIANCE THROUGH THIS REQUEST ALSO. THE CITY'S CUL-DE-SAC REQUIREMENTS CANNOT EXCEED MORE THAN 600 FEET, THAT'S WHAT'S WRITTEN WITHIN OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. IN THIS CASE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO CUL-DE-SACS, ONE BEING 910 FEET IN LENGTH, THE OTHER ONE BEING 993 FEET IN LENGTH AND THAT IS SHOWN UP HERE [00:10:06] ON THE SCREEN. THE APPLICANT PLANS TO INSTALL A 6-FOOT IRON FENCE WITH VEGETATIVE SCREEN. THAT'S GOING TO BE ALL WITHIN A 20-FOOT WIDE BUFFER. THEY ALSO PROPOSE A 6-FOOT VEGETATIVE SCREEN ADJACENT TO THAT FENCE. THE PLANTING WILL CONSIST OF ORNAMENTAL TREES SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN. IN ADDITION THEY ARE ADDING A TREE PRESERVATION AREA, SO ALL VALUABLE TREE CANOPIES WITHIN THAT TREE PRESERVATION AREA WILL BE RETAINED AS A NATURAL AMENITY. SINCE THE PROPERTY WILL CONSIST OF LOTS THAT ARE GOING TO RANGE FROM ONE ACRE TO OVER THREE ACRES IN SIZE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT AMENITIES SUCH AS PLAY AREAS, PLAY EQUIPMENT, TRAIL SYSTEMS, TYPICALLY WHAT YOU SEE IN MORE DENSE TYPE DEVELOPMENTS NOT BE REQUIRED FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. I DID WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS, THE CITY ORDINANCE DOES REQUIRE THAT LAND THAT IS IMPACTED BY ANY TYPE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT CONNECT TO THE CITY SEWER SYSTEM IF YOU ARE WITHIN 2,000 FEET OF AN EXISTING SEWER LINE. THIS DEVELOPMENT SHOULD REALLY ACTUALLY EXTEND AND CONNECT TO THE CITY SEWER SYSTEM OR A SEPTIC WAIVER MUST BE APPROVED TO ALLOW FOR ON SITE SEWAGE FACILITIES TO OCCUR. SO EXTENDING THE SEWER LINE NORTH OF MOCKINGBIRD, THIS ACTUALLY HELPS SERVE FUTURE HIGH DENSITY TYPE DEVELOPMENTS. BUT LOOKING A LITTLE CLOSER AT IT ON THE OTHER HAND, THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES DOES LIE WITHIN THAT COUNTRY MODULE WHICH ENVISIONS MORE LOW DENSITY, REFLECTING MORE OF THAT RURAL SETTING THAT OBVIOUSLY THE COMP PLAN IS CALLING FOR. SO CONNECTING TO CITY SEWER NOT VERY TYPICAL FOR THESE TYPES OF LOTS, PROBABLY COST PROHIBITIVE AS WELL, AND WOULD ACTUALLY REFLECT WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THIS AREA. THE APPLICANT IS NOT LOOKING TO CONNECT TO CITY SEWER, NO, SIR. ABSOLUTELY. SO FOR THESE PARTICULAR REASONS, WE'RE ACTUALLY SUPPORTING THIS SEPTIC WAIVER IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. STAFF HAS RECEIVED A NUMBER OF COMMENTS SINCE THIS PACKET HAS GONE OUT, WE DID RECEIVE THREE IN OPPOSITION, TWO THAT WERE NEUTRAL, AND THEN ONE IN OPPOSITION BUT THEY ARE OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY. OUTSIDE IN THE COUNTY. ALTHOUGH THIS DOESN'T PROVIDE AMENITIES SUCH AS PLAY AREAS, PLAY EQUIPMENT, TRAIL SYSTEMS, AGAIN YOU FIND THAT MORE IN THESE MORE DENSE TYPE COMMUNITIES. IT DOES CONTAIN LARGER LOTS, IT'S GOT ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS, THEY DO PROVIDE A TREE PRESERVATION AREA NOT FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT BUT ALONG CERTAIN AREAS AS OUTLINED HERE, WHAT I HAVE ON THE SCREEN. STAFF DOES SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO EXCEED THE STANDARD CUL-DE-SAC LENGTHS ON STREET C AND F. AND WE WILL ALSO SUPPORT THE WAIVER. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONE REQUEST WITH EXCEPTION THAT ALL HOMES HAVE SIDE ENTRY GARAGES NOT J GARAGES. THE APPLICANT REACHED OUT TO ME TODAY, THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION, AND I TOUCHED ON THAT EARLIER, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL LOTS WOULD ACTUALLY BE EXEMPT FROM HAVING THAT MAXIMUM NUMBER HELD TO IT, AGAIN WE FEEL THAT TYPE C AND TYPE D WE CAN LIVE WITH THAT. I DON'T REALLY WANT TO SEE THAT ON TYPE A OR TYPE B. THE OTHER ITEM WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, WE DID TALK ABOUT THE TREE RESERVATION AREA, THEY WANTED TO ADD THIS ONE ADDITIONAL SENTENCE IN THERE THAT THE CLEARING IF IT'S NEEDED FOR DETENTION, ROADWAY, OR UTILITY CROSSINGS, THAT THAT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE ALLOWED. SO AGAIN WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TREE PRESERVATION AREA, THEY WANT TO BE SURE THAT AS THEY CLEAR TREES FOR ROADS, UTILITIES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, DETENTION, THAT THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS WELL. AND WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> GO AHEAD. >> ASSUMING THE WAIVER IS GRANTED, AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE IF A DEVELOPMENT IS PUT IN ADJACENT TO THIS OR BEYOND, EXCUSE ME, AND AT SOME POINT THIS ADDITION, THESE ARE PARTIALLY OR WHOLLY WOULD LIKE TO HOOK UP TO THE SEWER, HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> WELL, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO [00:15:01] HOOK UP TO THE SEWER, I BELIEVE THEY ACTUALLY CAN HOOK UP TO THE SEWER BUT IT'S AN EXPENSE ON THEM IF THEY'RE WANTING TO HOOK UP TO THE SEWER. ABSOLUTELY, IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY PER HOMEOWNER OR I HAVE HEARD THAT IF A DEVELOPMENT, A SUBDIVISION, THEIR HOA COLLECTIVELY COMES TOGETHER AND THEY DECIDE WHOLEHEARTEDLY TO COME UP WITH THE FUNDS TO CONNECT TO OUR SEWER LINE, THEY ABSOLUTELY CAN. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL. >> OKAY. SECOND QUESTION IS YOU SAID TYPE C AND D. >> YES, SIR. >> SO WITHIN YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS A AND B LEFT OUT OF THIS? >> A AND B IS LEFT OUT OF THIS. WE WOULD PREFER THAT TYPE A, TYPE B THEY ARE COMMITTING TO 84 LOTS AND THEY ARE COMMITTING TO 17 LOTS. WHAT THE APPLICANT IS STATING IS THAT ONCE THEY GET EVERYTHING ON THE GROUND THERE'S ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY THAT 1.24 MAY ACTUALLY TURN INTO 1.26 AND THAT ACTUALLY PUSHES THIS 84 NUMBER DOWN, BUT THE OPPOSITE COULD HAPPEN ALSO WHERE THE TYPE B MIGHT END UP IN THE TYPE A SIDE OF IT. >> I DIDN'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS WHOLE TABLE. IT WAS MORE OF JUST A NOTE FOR ME TO LOOK AND JUST COMMENT ON THOSE. THOSE ARE JUST TO GIVE EVERYBODY ASSURANCE THAT THE APPLICANT ORIGINALLY WANTED TO GO IN SF2 BECAUSE SF2 ZONING IS WHAT WE CALL A STRAIGHT ZONE ONE ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE. WE ENDED UP GOING PD. IF THEY HAD TRIED GOING SF2, 35 FEET WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN THE SETBACK. SO BY THEM GOING PD THEY'RE EXCEEDING THE SF2 STANDARD IF THEY WERE TRYING TO GO ONE ACRE MINIMUM, YOU KNOW. IN THIS CASE THEY AGREED TO STICK TO A 50-FOOT SETBACK WHICH WE ABSOLUTELY PREFER. >> WILL THE TREE PRESERVATION, ARE THERE JUST CERTAIN AREAS LIKE IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE FLOODPLAIN WHERE THE TREES ARE BEING PRESERVED OR DO WE HAVE THE TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS ON THE PARTICULAR LOT AREAS THAT IT ARE BEING BUILT ON? >> YES, SIR, I WISH I HAD PUT THE FLOODPLAIN ON HERE. SOME OF THIS TREE PRESERVATION I BELIEVE GOES OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN. I PROBABLY NEED THE ENGINEER, DO YOU KNOW IF SOME OF THIS FALLS OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN? IT'S THIS PART THAT COMES OUTSIDE THE FLOODPLAIN. OKAY. >> ARE WE GOING TO BE TRYING TO PRESERVE TREES IN THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS. I KNOW WE HAVE SOME LARGER LOTS OR WILL WE CLEAR EVERYTHING AND COME BACK AND LANDSCAPE? THANK YOU. >> HAVE WE ACCEPTED -- THE ISSUES. >> IN THE PAST, SIR? >> IN REASONING. >> I THINK THE LAST ONE WAS LA PAUSE, THEY DID A CUL-DE-SAC THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABOUT 900 FEET ALSO. OF COURSE THEY HAD SOME TOPOGRAPHIC COMPLICATIONS TO GET ACROSS WHERE THEY WERE ULTIMATELY TRYING TO GET UP TO POPPY LANE. BUT THAT WAS GRANTED BY CITY COUNCIL. >> AND THIS IS SERVED BY MIDLOTHIAN FIRE? >> THIS IS SERVED BY MIDLOTHIAN FIRE, YES, SIR. THEY ORIGINALLY HAD AND I'LL JUST THROW THIS OUT THERE ALSO. THE ORIGINAL PLAN CALLED FOR AN ADDITIONAL, THEY HAD AN ADDITIONAL CUL-DE-SAC IN THIS LOCATION WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN 2,000 FEET IN LENGTH, WE CONVINCED THEM TO GO AHEAD AND PUNCH THAT THROUGH, OPEN THAT UP. THEY ACTUALLY MET THE DRIVEWAY SPACINGS OR SHOULD I SAY THE STREET SPACING REQUIREMENTS AS WELL FROM MAGGIE LANE TO WHERE THEY WILL BE PUNCHING OUT. THEY ALSO MET THE STREET FACING REQUIREMENT TO THE STREET TO THE NORTH AS WELL. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK, IS THE APPLICANT PREPARED TO SPEAK? OKAY. ABSOLUTELY. GREAT, THANK YOU. PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> CAN I TAKE THIS OFF? >> YES, PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS MICHAEL WEST PAUL, I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER. DO YOU NEED MY ADDRESS? >> THAT WOULD BE GOOD. >> 791 CREEK WOOD DRIVE NORTH, FAIRVIEW, TEXAS. I THINK YOU DID A GREAT JOB. JUST TO CLARIFY A LITTLE, SOME OF THE ROADWAY PLACEMENT WAS [00:20:01] DONE IN A WAY TO ALIGN AS CLOSELY AS WE COULD WITH THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. SO FOR INSTANCE THE TOP SECTION WE WERE TRYING TO GET IT WHERE THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN WAS SHOWING UP. THERE WAS AN OPTION WHERE THINGS COULD GET SHIFTED BUT IT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. WE TRIED TO BALANCE THOSE PLANS WITH DESIGN AND CAME UP WITH THE BEST SOLUTION. WE ALSO WORKED WITH MARCOS IN TRYING TO KEEP THE ROADS FROM BEING STRAIGHT SHOTS. FOR INSTANCE ON THE SOUTH SIDE WHERE THE ROAD KIND OF CURVES AROUND, THE ORIGINAL PLAN HAD IT COMING STRAIGHT UP. WE WORKED WITH CITY STAFF TO TRY AND CHANGE THAT TO HAVE IT WHERE IT WASN'T JUST A STRAIGHT SHOT, TO HAVE IT MORE OF A RURAL KIND OF CALMING EFFECT. THAT'S WHY THAT CUL-DE-SAC GOT INCREASED IN LENGTH AS WELL. >> PART OF IT TOO WITH THE GRADE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT FOLLOWS THE NATURAL GRADE OF THE LAND TOO. >> THAT'S CORRECT. EVERYTHING GENERALLY GOES TO THE CREEK AND FLOWS FROM THERE DOWN TO THE SOUTH. I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ENGINEERING QUESTIONS OR ANY OTHER ITEMS. >> ARE YOU GOING TO PUT SIDEWALKS IN? >> RIGHT NOW IT'S GOING TO BE BAR DITCH, SO WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID HAVING CURB GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, AND REAL DENSE LOOKS, SO WE'RE DOING BAR DITCH WITH NO SIDEWALKS. >> HOW ABOUT STREET LIGHTS? >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE GOTTEN THAT FAR. AND AT WHAT DISTANCE? 600 FEET. OKAY. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, THE APPLICANT WAS ASKING FOR J SWING AND SIDE ENTRY AND CITY STAFF IS REQUESTING SIDE ENTRY ONLY, CORRECT? DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT? >> I DON'T KNOW IF ANDREW WANTS TO SPEAK TO I■T. I THINK WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THE OPTION FOR J ENTRY, WE THINK IT PROVIDES SOME VARIETY. BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRING THEN CERTAINLY -- >> THANK YOU. >> THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ACTUALLY WHAT CALLS FOR GARAGES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO BE OBSCURED FROM THE FRONT SIDE OF HOMES. IT'S REALLY PUSHING FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS TO HAVE THOSE GARAGES EITHER AS FAR FROM THE FRONT AS POSSIBLE OR ACTUALLY HAVE REAR ENTRY. IN ADDITION TO THAT LAST YEAR IN 2019, THE CITY COUNCIL ACTUALLY PASSED A GARAGE REQUIREMENT THAT ACTUALLY AFFECTED ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. THOSE GARAGES IF I'M NOT, WAS THAT LAST YEAR? YEAH, THOSE GARAGES CAN'T GO FORWARD OF THE FRONT FACADE. WHICH ALMOST INADVERTENTLY DOESN'T ALLOW FOR J SWINGS BECAUSE MOST J SWING GARAGES ARE GOING TO BE IN FRONT OF THE FRONT FACADE. AGAIN WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP TRUE TO WHATEVER EXISTING ORDINANCES WE HAVE OUT THERE REGARDING GARAGES AND WHATEVER IS IN THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. >> THAT'S CORRECT, THREE EXISTING ACCESS POINTS WITH THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. THERE WOULD BE TWO ON MOCKINGBIRD, ONE ON THE SOUTH, ONE ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER, AND THEN ONE ON MAGGIE LANE. MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD, IT WAS CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING ROADWAYS? >> YES. >> SO THERE WOULD BE THREE. BUT THERE WOULD BE POTENTIALLY TWO TO THE NORTH. >> MAGGIE LANE, WE HAVE THIS TYPE OF ISSUE COME UP TYPICALLY WHEN NEW DEVELOPMENTS COME IN ADJACENT TO EXISTING HOMES. IF IT WAS A CUL-DE-SAC THEN THAT USUALLY MEANS IT'S NOT A ROAD THAT'S GOING TO CONTINUE, BUT WHEN A ROAD IS STUBBED THAT TYPICALLY MEANS THAT THE ROAD IS GOING TO CONTINUE ON IF THE LAND ADJACENT TO IT IS DEVELOPED. JUST FOR CONNOTATIVE PURPOSES THAT'S WHAT OUR SUBDIVISION RULES REQUIRE. >> IS THE PROPERTY GOING TO BE MAINTAINED BY AN HOA OR BY THE CITY? >> THERE IS SOME HOA LOTS SPECIFICALLY THE CENTER WHERE THE OPEN SPACE WOULD BE AND THEN ALSO ALONG MOCKINGBIRD ON THE SOUTH SIDE THERE'S A 20-FOOT [00:25:07] WIDE LANDSCAPING THAT WILL -- >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CITIZENS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. AS YOUR NAME IS CALLED IF YOU WOULD APPROACH THE PODIUM AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS. THE FIRST MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS BEAU DAVIS. GOOD EVENING, MR. DAVIS. >> HOW ARE YOU GUYS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YEAH I'M HERE REPRESENTING ROSE ESTATES, SORRY IT'S BEAU DAVIS AT 1911 GEORGIA WAY. I'M AT THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC. AND THERE'S A FEW OTHER HOMEOWNERS JOINING ME FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD HE WAS JUST DISCUSSING AND THE ONLY REASON I WAS OBJECTIVE TO THAT IS I DON'T CONSIDER MAGGIE AN EXISTING, IT'S A PROPOSED, IT'S NOT AN EXISTING ENTRANCE RIGHT NOW. THEY'RE WANTING TO MAKE IT THAT WAY TO GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH AND JUST A FEW COMMENTS, I MEAN I THINK MYSELF AND MR. JOHNSON BACK HERE, WE SENT IN SOME LETTERS. AND OUR BIG POINT IS IN A PERFECT WORLD MAGGIE WOULD NEVER BE OPENED UP. THE REASON FOR THAT IS WE'RE A SMALL, CLOSE-KNIT 16 HOME COMMUNITY. TEN OF THOSE HOMES OUT OF 16 HAVE SMALL CHILDREN. THE THREE OF US, GRANDCHILDREN, AND THEN MR. JOHNSON AND I BOTH HAVE SMALL CHILDREN. AND RIGHT NOW THEY LIVE IN A CAREFREE WORLD, THEY CAN RIDE THEIR BIKES, THEIR GO CARTS, PLAY WITH THEIR FRIENDS AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO WORRY ABOUT BECAUSE THE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC IS EXTREMELY MINIMAL. THEY'RE PROPOSING 129 HOMES, YOU DO THE MATH ON THAT, THAT'S A MINIMUM OF 129 CARS, OBVIOUSLY HOMES ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE CAR AND OUR BIG THING IS THE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GROW EXPONENTIALLY CAUSING A MAJOR SAFETY CONCERN FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S OUR BIG THING, SO AGAIN IN A PERFECT WORLD IT STAYS CLOSED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. IF IT IS, THAT'S WONDERFUL. AT AN EXTREME MINIMUM AND I'M IN CONSTRUCTION, OKAY, MAGGIE LANE CANNOT BE USED AS A CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. IF IT IS GOING TO BE OPENED UP, IT ABSOLUTELY CANNOT BE USED FOR DUMP TRUCKS, TRAILERS CARRYING EXCAVATORS WHATEVER, BECAUSE THAT'S INEXCUSABLE FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE IS OUR OPINION. THE OTHER THING AND I GUESS YOU ALLUDED TO, SIR, WAS THERE'S 129 LOTS IN THERE, I JUST DON'T SEE HOW IF THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE AN ACRE OR GREATER, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY YOU GUYS HAVE DONE THE MATH BUT I JUST DON'T SEE HOW THAT'S POSSIBLE BUT I MAY BE WRONG. BUT I WON'T RAMBLE, THAT'S OUR BIG THING. WE WOULD STRENUOUSLY OBJECT TO MAGGIE BEING OPENED UP PERMANENTLY IS OUR BIG THING AND AT A MINIMUM DEFINITELY NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC PERIOD. >> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. YOU DIDN'T GO OVER YOUR TIME, BUT MAKE SURE WE KEEP COMMENTS TO LESS THAN THREE MINUTES. >> JUST A QUICK QUESTION TO ADDRESS THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IN AND OUT OF THIS, DO WE HAVE A PLAN? >> YEAH, AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC NO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT PLAN IS. NORMALLY WHEN THESE FOLKS BRING IN THEIR CIVIL PLANS IT'S FIGURED OUT EXACTLY WHERE THEY'RE STARTING IF THEY'RE STARTING DOWN HERE FIRST OR IF THEY'RE STARTING UP HERE. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE ACTUAL APPLICANTS. THE ONE THING I DID WANT TO ADDRESS WAS ABOUT MAGGIE LANE, ORIGINALLY AGAIN THESE FOLKS WERE LOOKING AT A CUL-DE-SAC, WHAT WE KIND OF FIGURED IS THAT IF FOLKS ARE WANTING TO TRY TO GET UP TO THE SCHOOL OR THEY'RE WANTING TO ACCESS MAGGIE LANE, NOT MAGGIE LANE, THEY'RE TRYING TO ACCESS MOCKINGBIRD LANE, ODDS ARE THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO GO THIS DIRECTION AND NOT COME ALL THE WAY DOWN AND THEN GO THROUGH MAGGIE LANE. WE THINK THAT OPENING THIS UP ACTUALLY LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY TRAVEL THROUGH MAGGIE LANE. NOW IF FOLKS ARE TRYING TO TO FRANK SEALE ELEMENTARY OR GO SOUTH, OBVIOUSLY THESE FOLKS OR ANYONE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO TRAVEL TO THE SOUTH I WOULD THINK DIRECTLY BEFORE TRAVELING OVER THROUGH MAGGIE [00:30:01] LANE TO GET TO MOCKINGBIRD. IT ISN'T TO SAY THAT TRAFFIC HERE ISN'T GOING TO STRAIGHT AND HEAD THROUGH THIS ROSE DEVELOPMENT, IT'S OBVIOUSLY 100% POSSIBLE. BUT BY OPENING UP THIS ROAD TO THE NORTH WE THINK THAT THESE FOLKS UP HERE ARE OBVIOUSLY GOING TO USE THIS AND NOT TRAVEL DOWN THROUGH MAGGIE LANE. >> SO THEN I'LL REDIRECT THAT QUESTION THEN, THANK YOU, TO THE APPLICANT. DO YOU GUYS HAVE A CONSTRUCTION -- >> YOU WANT TO WAIT AND BRING THE APPLICANT UP AT THE END. LET'S GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC SPEECH. THAT WAY WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT ALL AT ONCE. ALL RIGHT. ROD DUBON IS THE NEXT SPEAKER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MEMBERS OF THE ZONING COMMISSION I'M RODNEY DUBON, 2704 NORTH WALNUT GROVE. I HAVE 60 ACRES JUST TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY. FULL DISCLOSURE I'M A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, I'M DEVELOPING SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OF REAL ESTATE PRESENTLY. A SMALL FAMILY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY. IF I KNEW THIS WAS FOR SALE, I WOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT. I'LL OFFER TO BUY IT NOW FOR 10% OVER WHAT THEY HAVE ON THEIR CONTRACT. AND IF I OWNED THE PROPERTY, I WOULD LEAVE IT AT THE FOUR ACRES PER HOUSE AND DEVELOP ABOUT THE NORTHERN 70% OF IT, LEAVE THE SOUTHERN PART IN AG. HOWEVER A COUPLE OF THINGS I DO OBJECT TO IS THAT 90% OF THEIR HOUSES ARE IN THAT ONE ACRE OR JUST BARELY ABOVE ONE ACRE CATEGORY. SO IT'S A LITTLE DISCONCERTING WHEN MENTIONED GUYS LIKE C AND D BUT ONLY 10% OF THE HOUSES FALL IN C AND D. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ROAD IS CALLED BUT THE ROAD YOU GOT DEADHEADING INTO MY PROPERTY UP THERE, YOU MIGHT AS WELL CUT THAT OFF AND SAVE SOME MONEY BECAUSE AS LONG AS I KNOW THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A ROAD GOING THROUGH MY PROPERTY. AND I WOULD ALSO REQUEST THERE'S A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT ON A SCREENING WALL AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON MOCKINGBIRD, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS? I'VE GOT HORSES AND CATTLE OVER THERE AND DON'T REALLY RELISH THE IDEA OF LOOKING IN SOMEBODY'S BACKYARD. MOST DEVELOPMENTS THAT YOU SEE IN MIDLOTHIAN EVEN WITH THE ONE ACRE DEVELOPMENTS THEY'VE GOT A MASONRY WALL AROUND THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT. AND THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION TO SCREEN THE NEIGHBORS WITH A MASONRY WALL -- >> GENERALLY MASONRY IS BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL. THE STANDARD BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL IS WOOD FENCING, NOT STEEL POSTS. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> AND BOTH PLAINVIEW MANOR ESTATES AND MCALPIN MANOR ESTATES ARE SET UP MUCH LIKE THIS WITH THE LARGER LOTS AND NEITHER ONE OF THOSE DEVELOPMENTS HAVE MASONRY WALLS. >> I KNOW THERE'S A NEW DEVELOPMENT RIGHT DOWN THE END OF I GUESS SHILOH AND NORTH WALNUT GROVE, THOSE GUYS HAVE MASONRY AROUND AND THEN ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT JUST RIGHT THERE BY THE SCHOOL HAS MASONRY AROUND THAT ONE AS WELL. BUT AS A MINIMUM LIKE I SAY I WASN'T JOKING, IF YOU GUYS WANT ME TO TAKE OVER YOUR CONTRACT, I'LL DO IT NOW. >> WE'VE GOT THREE MINUTES SO WE MAY LET YOU TAKE THAT CONVERSATION ON THE PRIVATE RECORD. >> BUT THE ROAD DEAD ENDS TO MY PROPERTY, THAT'S JUST GOING TO ALLOW FOR SOMEBODY TO PARK CARS AND VEHICLES AND TRAILERS RIGHT THERE AND IT'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE AND SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT NOT BE PUT IN. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. THE NEXT APPLICANT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS AMY BLACK. >> HI, AMY BLACK, 2310 NORTH WALNUT GROVE. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT THEY HAVE ONE OF THOSE FANCY LITTLE ROADS. I BELIEVE AND ONE OF THOSE CUL-DE-SACS, OH, OKAY. I THINK IT'S RIGHT THERE, I'M NOT 100%. I'M ASSUMING THEY WANT THAT TO GO RIGHT THROUGH TO WALNUT GROVE IS WHAT I SAW MARCUS SENT ME THE PLAN FOR THIS. >> AS A POTENTIAL THOROUGHFARE. [00:35:03] >> YES. THAT'S NOT OKAY WITH ME, I LIVE THERE. I MOVED THERE ON TEN ACRES. BOTH OF MY NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE OF ME, ONE HAS TEN ACRES, O ONE HAS 20, THAT WOULD GO RIGHT THROUGH THE CENTER OF THEIR AG PROPERTY, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY WOULD DO THAT UNLESS THEY BUY IT FROM US. >> THEY CONDEMN IT. >> THEY CONDEMN IT AND TAKE IT THROUGH MY PROPERTY. >> THEY PAY FOR IT. >> IF I ACCEPT IT. >> IT'S A LONG PROCESS. >> LET ME TELL YOU OKAY I'M NOT OKAY WITH THAT. >> OKAY. >> AND I WOULD HOPE THAT Y'ALL WOULDN'T THINK THAT WAS OKAY THAT THESE PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED THERE FOR DECADES BESIDES MYSELF THAT IT'S OKAY FOR THEM TO JUST PLOW A ROAD TO THEIR NEW FANCY NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH MY AG PROPERTY. AND MY QUESTION IS DOES THAT TAKE AWAY MY AG -- >> NO, AS LONG AS YOU'RE USING YOUR AG FOR AG, YOU CAN HAVE A ROAD THROUGH IT AND CONTINUE TO HAVE YOUR AG. >> AND IF THEY THINK THEY'RE GOING TO PUT A ROAD ON IT I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY PLAN ON DOING. >> OFTEN TIMES THEY DON'T KNOW. THEY REQUIRE THE DEVELOPERS TO BASICALLY PAY FOR THE COST OF PAYING THESE LARGER ROADS SO THE TAXPAYERS DON'T BEAR THAT BURDEN. AND IF YOU DECIDE YOUR TEN ACRES IN THE FUTURE, YOU MAY FIND A DEVELOPER, AND THAT DEVELOPER WOULD PAY YOU A PREMIUM PRICE EVEN KNOWING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE TO PAY TO EXTEND THE THOROUGHFARE AT HIS EXPENSE OR HER EXPENSE. >> AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KNOW WHAT Y'ALL THINK ABOUT THAT SPILLING ON TO WALNUT GROVE RIGHT NOW, THAT'S ONLY A 2 LANE ROAD RIGHT NOW. >> PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE ROADS THAT GO IN BETWEEN AND CONNECTING NEIGHBORHOODS IS SO ALL OF THE TRAFFIC DOESN'T SPILL OUT ON TO WALNUT GROVE. PEOPLE CAN GO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONNECT MORE EASILY TO THE LOCATION THEY'RE GOING. AND WE'VE KIND OF HEARD THIS SEVERAL TIMES, WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WHERE PEOPLE DON'T WANT ROADS DEAD ENDING AT THEIR PROPERTY. WELL EVENTUALLY SOMEONE PASSES AWAY, THEY SELL THEIR PROPERTY AND THEN EVEN ON MY PROPERTY I HAVE A DEAD END INTO MY 20 ACRES I HAVE LEFT AND THAT IS WAITING FOR WHEN I GO AWAY MY KIDS PROBABLY SELL THE PROPERTY FOR DEVELOPMENT TO COME IN BECAUSE IT IS IN THE CITY AND AT SOME POINT, YOU HAVE TEN ACRES, THEY'RE VERY VALUABLE, YOU'RE GOING TO WANT THAT DEAD END SO YOUR PROPERTY EASILY CONNECTS AND YOU'RE NOT ARGUING ABOUT THE CITY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN HAVE ACCESS TO WALNUT GROVE. >> WE ALSO HAVE AG OUT THERE AND RUN ANIMALS ON THAT, SO PUTTING A ROAD THROUGH MY PASTURE ISN'T OKAY EITHER. >> IT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN UNTIL YOU'RE READY TO DEVELOP THAT. >> THAT WON'T BE EVER. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING ON DOING AT THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY. ALL THREE PROPERTIES BACK UP TO THE NORTH SIDE THERE. WHAT THE FENCING WILL LOOK LIKE, WHAT KIND OF ACCESS THOSE HOMEOWNERS HAVE TO THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTY? >> THAT WILL BE A QUESTION WE'LL BRING UP WITH THE APPLICANT. >> AND HOW CLOSE THEY PUT THOSE PROPERTIES TO OUR PROPERTY LINE. >> SOMETIMES WITH AG PROPERTIES, THEY WOULD RATHER KEEP THEIR BARBED WIRE FENCE THAN HAVE SCREENED FENCES. THAT'S A CONVERSATION TO HAVE WITH THE APPLICANT. WE'LL BRING THE APPLICANT UP WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED WITH YOUR COMMENTS. >> OKAY. AND THEN THE TIMELINE, WHEN THEY'RE TIMELINE FOR ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN IF THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS WHICH I'M SURE EVERYONE HERE HOPES IT DOESN'T. >> RIGHT. THAT WILL PROBABLY BE A QUESTION WE'LL POSE TO THE APPLICANT THEN. THE TIMELINE. >> TIMELINE, FENCING, AND ALSO OUR TREES BACK THERE, WE HAVE A LOT OF TREES AND WE DON'T WANT TOUCHED EITHER. >> ON YOUR PROPERTY? >> CEDAR TREES GALORE BACK THERE. >> THAT'S YOUR PROPERTY, THEY WON'T TOUCH YOUR PROPERTY. >> THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS THEY COULD LOOK AT THAT FENCING BACK THERE. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, I'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN BEFORE. >> OKAY. >> AND THE ROAD GOING THROUGH OUR PROPERTY. >> THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PUT A ROAD THROUGH YOUR PROPERTY, THAT WOULD BE THE CITY COMING TH THROUGHAT A LATER DAY OR YOU SELLING YOUR PROPERTY. >> I THINK WE MAY HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THIS. THAT'S ALMOST A NONISSUE AT THIS POINT AND FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE BECAUSE IN YOUR PROPERTY AS WE SPOKE BRIEFLY IF IT'S NOT ALREADY DEDICATED ON YOUR PLAT. >> IT'S DEFINITELY NOT. >> THAT MEANS THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND FIND A WAY TO EITHER PURCHASE IT AND PULL IT FROM YOU. AND WE'RE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF PULLING LAND FROM PEOPLE. AND AGAIN THAT WOULDN'T COME BEFORE US, THAT WOULD GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND OUR LEGAL. BUT WE'RE TALKING YEARS DOWN THE ROAD AND TYPICALLY THE CITY WANTS TO WORK IN HARMONY WITH THE RESIDENTS AND NOT AGAINST THE RESIDENTS. >> RIGHT. >> SO I WOULD REST EASY TONIGHT WITH THE THOUGHT THAT NO ONE IS COMING IN TO BULLDOZE THROUGH YOUR PASTURE. >> RIGHT AND I'M SUPPORT OF THOSE ON MAGGIE LANE ALSO. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE NEXT MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC IS SCOTT LOPER. >> HELLO. I'M SCOTT LOPER. WE LIVE ON THE PUBLIC USE AIRPORT. WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE HERE. THERE WAS A LETTER THAT WAS SENT [00:40:02] THAT WAS HAND DELIVERED AND POSTED ONLINE, DID Y'ALL READ THOSE LETTERS? >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION THAT GOES OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. >> YEAH, AND THEN WE'VE GOT A RESPONSE LETTER HERE. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU GOT THAT LETTER. >> I DID NOT GET THAT. >> WE OUTLINED WHAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT. PRIMARILY WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT SAFETY ISSUES. AS A PUBLIC USE AIRPORT WE FOLLOW THE RULES OF THE FAA. SO WE HAVE CERTAIN -- WE SEE THEY GAVE US THE 400-FOOT EASEMENT FOR DEPARTING AIRCRAFT. BUT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS ROAD RIGHT HERE, THE ELEVATION OF IT, THE END OF THE ROADWAY COMES DOWN AND WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A SLOPE THAT'S DEFINED BY THE FAA FOR SAFETY ISSUES. >> SO DO YOU HAVE, I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, DO YOU HAVE THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE END OF YOUR RUNWAY AND THE -- >> WE CALCULATED WE NEEDED IT TO BE -- >> I'M ASKING THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE END OF YOUR RUNWAY OR WHERE YOU WOULD REACH D1 SPEED, RIGHT, AND THE ELEVATION OF THAT ROAD THAT YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION OF -- >> IT'S ACTUALLY DELINEATED HERE IN OUR LETTER. THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT OF MAGGIE LANE IS 756 FEET. WE CAN'T REALLY GO MUCH BELOW THAT. WHEN THE VEHICLE IS CROSSING OVER HERE THEN WE CAN POTENTIALLY RUN INTO THEM. >> JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I'M IN AVIATION. >> GOOD. >> SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS FROM THE END OF YOUR RUNWAY, THE USUAL SPACE OF YOUR RUNWAY TO THAT ROAD, YOU HAVE A 400-FOOT BUFFER AS YOU SAID, RIGHT? THE ELEVATION CHANGE DIFFERENCE FROM YOUR RUNWAY TO THAT ROAD IS HOW MUCH? >> MAGGIE LANE, WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE NEW ROAD IS BECAUSE IT'S NOT THERE BUT MAGGIE LANE SINCE IT'S 756 FEET, THE END OF OUR RUNWAY IS 746 FEET. >> OKAY. SO IT IS COMMON IN AVIATION TO TRAIN FOR A 50-FOOT OBSTACLE OFF THE END OF THE RUNWAY, RIGHT? >> SURE. >> SO 400 FEET FROM THE END OF YOUR RUNWAY TO THAT ROAD WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A POTENTIAL OF TEN FEET. >> YES. >> SO YOU ADD ANOTHER CAR IN, THAT'S SEVEN FEET, WE'RE TALKING 17 FEET, CALL IT 15 FEET. SO NOW WE'RE 25 FEET BUT THE AVERAGE EXPECTED CLIMB RATE IS TO BE ABLE TO CLEAR AN OBSTACLE AT 50 FEET. >> SO WE'RE GOING OFF DIAGRAMS, WE'RE NOT PROFESSIONALS AT THIS. WE ARE A PUBLIC USE AIRPORT. SO WE DO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES THAT THE FAA SETS. THAT WAS CONCERN ONE, WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT ELEVATION IS GOING TO BE. AND THAT'S SOMETHING HE CAN HOPEFULLY ANSWER FOR US. THEN THE NEXT THING, THIS LOT, I THINK IT'S LOT 11 AND 12, IT'S NOT DEPICTED ON HERE BY NUMBERS. BUT THESE HOUSES ARE DEPICTED TO BE 25 FEET FROM THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTY. AND WE HAVE AIRCRAFT THAT ARE RUNNING UP THERE THAT ARE MAKING A LOT OF NOISE. AND WE DON'T WANT TO SEE FUTURE COMPLAINTS. >> I'M WITH YOU THERE. >> WE ALREADY HAVE ISSUES AND I GET A LOT OF PHONE CALLS AND A LOT OF COMPLAINING. >> IS THIS THE AREA YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? HERE'S THE 400-FOOT. >> YES, 11 AND 12. AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE EVEN GO BACK A COUPLE MORE LOTS TO DO THEIR RUNS. BUT WE WANT TO AVOID COMPLAINTS FOR SURE. THE OTHER REQUEST WE HAVE IS THAT THE FENCE THAT IS AT THE END OF OUR RUNWAY IS NOT RAISED, THAT THERE'S NO TREES, NOTHING BLOCKING THAT 400-FOOT BUFFER. >> NOW THE FLIGHT PATH FOR THE PLANES WILL ALWAYS BE OVER THAT 400-FOOT EASEMENT, CORRECT? >> RIGHT. >> BUT DO YOU HAVE PARTICULAR HOUSES, FOR EXAMPLE THE CEMENT INDUSTRY WHEN THERE'S BEEN LOTS THEY WANT TO BUILD UP NEXT TO THE QUARYS WE'VE HAD A DISCLAIMER THAT THE DEVELOPER HAD TO PUT IN THE SALE OF CERTAIN LOTS ON THE PLAT THAT IT WOULD STAY THIS IS AN AREA RIGHT NEXT TO THE QUARY SO PEOPLE COULDN'T COME BACK LATER AND SAY THEY DIDN'T GET NOTICE. THE COMPLAINT IS ALWAYS THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T TELL ME I WAS GOING TO BE NEXT TO AN AIRPORT OR A CEMENT PLANT. >> WE WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE IN THERE, TO LET ANYBODY IN THIS ENTIRE COMMUNITY KNOW THAT THEY'RE MOVING NEXT TO AN AIRPORT COMMUNITY. >> THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PUT, WE'LL VISIT WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. THE NEXT PERSON WHO HAS SIGNED [00:45:01] UP AND SUBMITTED A FORM IS STEPHEN GATES. MR. GATES, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? >> NO, SIR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT DID NOT SIGN UP TO SPEAK OR DID SIGN UP TO SUBMIT A FORM THAT I HAVE NOT CALLED? IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, YES, SIR? >> MAY I SPEAK WITHOUT FILLING OUT A FORM? >> YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT A FORM. YOU CAN SPEAK FIRST AND THEN GO FILL OUT THE FORM. GREAT. COME UP AND SPEAK AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> I'M PATRICK JOHNSON AND I RESIDE ON MAGGIE LANE AT 5251. AND WE ARE JUST BELOW EAGLE'S NEST. OUR PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THAT. WE HAVE THREE ACRES. YOUR PROPOSED SETBACK OF 25 FEET TO MY PROPERTY LINE IS NOT GOING TO WORK. BUT THE OTHER PART IS WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT OUR THREE ACRES WE HAVE AN ACRE AND A HALF THAT NEEDS TO BE CLEARED FOR EMERGENCY LANDING. SO WE'VE NEVER BUILT ANYTHING OVER THERE. BUT NOW WE'RE SAYING THAT YOU CAN BUILD HOMES SO CLOSE TO OUR PROPERTY AS WELL AS CLOSE TO EAGLE'S NEST THAT NOW EVERYBODY IS GETTING CLOSED IN. THE OTHER PART IS, SO THAT'S ONE THING. BUT WE ALSO HAVE OUR CLOSED OFF AREA THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, WE'VE REITERATED THAT. WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT CLOSED OFF. RIGHT NOW IT WOULD BE EASY TO MAKE THAT A CUL-DE-SAC IF WE WANTED TO JUST SO THAT TRAFFIC WOULD NOT GO THROUGH. AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE DO ANOTHER CUL-DE-SAC. THERE'S ROOM THERE. WE SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE IF YOU HAD THAT SLIDE AVAILABLE FOR THE BIG PLAN, WE SEE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE RIGHT HERE IS MAGGIE LANE. EVERYBODY COMING HOME FROM SCHOOL, EVERYBODY COMING UP FROM NORTH DALLAS TO SOUTH DALLAS ARE GOING TO TAKE THIS ONE RIGHT HERE AND COME TO THEIR HOME RIGHT DOWN THIS WAY JUST SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME ALL THE WAY DOWN TO HERE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THE OTHER THING IS THESE LOTS ARE VERY TINY. THIS IS OUR LOT RIGHT HERE. I'M SORRY I'M RUNNING OVER MY THREE MINUTES. BUT THESE LOTS HERE, YOU HAVE THREE HOUSES BACKED UP TO MY HOUSE. 1, 2, AND 3 I BELIEVE. THAT IS A LOT OF FAMILY RIGHT THERE. AND WITH YOU SETTING THAT HOUSE BACK TO ONLY 25 FEET OFF OF THAT LINE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A 15-FOOT SET BACK FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THAT IS A TINY HOUSE AND I DON'T SEE THAT SOMEBODY IS GOING TO SPEND THAT MUCH MONEY ON A HOUSE AND ONLY GET LIKE A QUARTER OF AN ACRE IS WHAT IT'S LOOKING LIKE. >> NO, THEY'LL HAVE AN ACRE AND THE SET BACK IS THE CLOSEST THEY CAN BUILD, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO BUILD, MOST PEOPLE DO NOT BUILD RIGHT UP TO THE SET BACK, THEY'LL USUALLY PUT IT IN THE CENTER OF THE LOT OR IF THEY WANT TO SAVE MONEY ON RUNNING UTILITIES AND UNDERGROUND LINES THEY'LL PUT IT UP CLOSER TO THE ROAD WHERE THE UTILITIES ARE SO YOU'LL USUALLY HAVE MORE OF A SET BACK THAN THAT. >> AGAIN THE FENCING WE HAVE A BARBED WIRE FENCE BETWEEN US, AND WE LOVE THAT OPEN SPACE. SO WE WOULD LOVE TO CONTINUE THAT AND NOT BE FENCED IN BY A WOODEN FENCE. >> AND THAT KIND OF DEPENDS ON WHAT THAT LANDOWNER WANTS AND MAYBE THEY WANT A WOOD FENCE IN THEIR BIRTHDAY. THANK YOU, SIR. AND MAKE SURE YOU FILL OUT A FORM. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO RETURN AND ANSWER A FEW OF THESE QUESTIONS? OH WE HAVE ONE MORE PERSON THAT DID NOT SIGN UP. OKAY, GREAT. PLEASE APPROACH, GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, SIR. >> 5261 MAGGIE LANE. >> OKAY. >> WE MOVED OVER ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. I HAVE TWO BOYS. 7 AND 5. OUR CONCERN IS THE TRAFFIC COMING DOWN MAGGIE LANE WILL BE A HIGHWAY, NUMBER ONE. IT'S A HORRIBLE ROAD NO ONE IS GOING TO TAKE IT, THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THE BIG ROAD. IF THIS IS GOING TO BE OPEN, GIVE US SOMETHING HERE TO SLOW PEOPLE DOWN. GIVE US SPEED BUMPS, ONE RIGHT THERE AND ONE RIGHT THERE, GIVE US SOMETHING BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE TRAFFIC COMING UP AND DOWN [00:50:04] THIS, COMING DOWN MOCKINGBIRD REALLY FAST AT NIGHT. WE HAVE FRIENDS THAT ARE POLICE OFFICERS THAT COME OUT THERE PULLING PEOPLE OVER GOING 55. SO THEY'RE GOING TO COME DOWN THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO TURN IN HERE AND USE THIS AS A THOROUGHFARE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE THE BETTER ROAD. >> AND LOOK THERE'S NEIGHBORHOODS SIMILAR TO THIS, LAKE GROVE IS A PRIME EXAMPLE, IT HAD 1 TO 1.5 ACRE LOTS, THEY EVENTUALLY PUT STOP SIGNS IN AND AS SOON AS YOU START PUTTING STOP SIGNS AT EVERY ONE OF THOSE INTERSECTIONS PEOPLE DON'T TAKE THAT ROUTE. AND THERE WILL BE A STOP SIGN -- >> WHERE IS THERE A STOP SIGN BETWEEN HERE AND HERE? >> NOT ON MAGGIE LANE BUT THAT FIRST INTERSECTION THERE WILL BE A STOP SIGN RIGHT THERE. >> RIGHT THERE? >> AND THEN YOU GO UP FURTHER TO THE NEXT INTERSECTION. >> SO HAVE YOU DRIVEN THIS? >> THERE'S NO ROADS THERE YET, I'VE DRIVEN MOCKINGBIRD BEFORE. >> HAVE YOU DRIVEN MAGGIE? >> I HAVE NOT. >> YOU CAN ACCELERATE FROM HERE TO HERE REALLY QUICK. >> YOU CAN PUT SPEED BUMPS IN THERE, THAT'S AN OPTION THE CITY CAN DO. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. >> THAT'S A DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY AT A LATER DATE. TO KIND OF EXPLAIN NOT IN RESPONSE TO YOURS BUT IN TERMS OF PLANNING FOR NEIGHBORHOODS, ONE WAY OF DOING NEIGHBORHOODS IS HAVING FEEDERS WHERE EVERY LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS A CUL-DE-SAC OFF IT OR ROADS OFF IT THAT ALL FEED INTO ONE THING. THE OTHER, WHAT'S WORKED HISTORICALLY BETTER AND WHAT PEOPLE TEND TO LIKE ONCE THEY LIVE IN IT AND EXPERIENCE IT, IF WE TIE NEIGHBORHOODS TOGETHER, WHEN YOUR KIDS, YOU'VE GOT FOUR BOYS. >> I UNDERSTAND, I RUN A BANK. >> SO YOU GET IT. >> THE DIFFERENCE IS THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE. >> OKAY. >> AND TO ME IT'S HOW DO WE SLOW THE TRAFFIC DOWN HERE. >> OKAY. AND THAT WILL BE SOMETHING AS WELL. THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS NOT SPOKEN AND PLEASE BE SURE TO FILL OUT ONE OF THE FORMS BEFORE YOU GO. ANYONE ELSE? WOULD THE APPLICANT NOW LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS? I THINK THE CONCERNS ARE FENCING MATERIAL, TIMELINE, THE ELEVATION OF THE ROAD AND A POTENTIAL FOR SOMETHING ON THE PLAT REGARDING A DISCLOSURE ABOUT AIR TRAFFIC AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. >> I'LL TRY AND DO IT IN ORDER, IF I FORGET SOMETHING HOLLER OUT AT ME. THE FIRST THING I HAD WAS THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. WE HAVEN'T GOT THAT FAR, BUT SAFETY IS GOING TO BE OUR PRIMARY THING. I AGREE IN LOOKING AT THIS MAGGIE LANE WILL PROBABLY NOT BE THE IDEAL PLACE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THERE EITHER. LOOKING AT IT IT WILL LIKELY BE ON MOCKINGBIRD, THERE WILL PROBABLY BE TWO ON EITHER SIDE SO THERE'S TWO POINTS OF ACCESS, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WILL BE A PROBLEM TO SAY NO CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE OFF OF MAGGIE LANE. THERE WAS QUITE A FEW DISCUSSIONS OFF OF MAGGIE LANE AND THE PUNCH THROUGH TO THE WEST. WE ORIGINALLY HAD IT AS NO PUNCH THROUGH BUT WHEN WE LOOKED WITH THE CITY THE PLAN WAS TO GO MUCH FARTHER TO THE WEST SO WE WERE ASKED TO STUB IT OUT. IN THE FUTURE, IT COULD BE A VERY LONG TIME IN THE FUTURE, BUT IN THE FUTURE IT WILL LIKELY GET STUBBED OUT FARTHER. WE HAVE NO PLANS TO TAKE IT ANY FARTHER THAN WHERE YOU SEE ON THIS DRAWING RIGHT NOW. THERE'S NO ROAD WEST OF THE COLOR THERE THAT WOULD SERVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AT THIS TIME. BUT IN THE FUTURE IT'S AVAILABLE TO MATCH THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. THERE WAS SOME FENCING QUESTIONS AS WELL. INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD DO THEIR FENCING, THOSE WOULD ALL HAVE TO MEET THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. THERE MIGHT BE SOME WOOD FENCES, MAYBE SOMEONE PUTS ROD IRON, BUT IT WILL BE A PROPERTY OWNER DECISION AS THEY COME IN AND BUILD. >> SO WILL EACH PROPERTY OWNER HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE ADJOINING OWNER BEHIND THEM TO DECIDE WHAT KIND OF FENCE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT UP, BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BARBED WIRE, ARE THEY GOING TO REPLACE THEM, WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THE DEVELOPERS ARE NOT, DON'T HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SO WE COULD HAVE PIECEMEAL TYPE FENCING? >> THERE IS NO PROPOSED SINGLE FENCE RIGHT NOW TO BE BUILT AT THE GET GO. >> LET ME TAKE THIS REAL QUICK. TO ME THAT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S OUTSIDE OF AN HOA OVERSIGHT. IF I WANT TO BUILD A FENCE AND MY NEIGHBOR DOESN'T WANT ME TO BUILD A FENCE, I JUST MAKE SURE THE OUTSIDE OF MY FENCE POST OR THE OUTSIDE OF MY POST DOESN'T CROSS THAT LINE AND THERE'S NOTHING THEY CAN DO. >> THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO. >> I THINK THAT'S JUST NORMAL. I'M ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF NOT REQUIRING, MUCH LIKE I SAID IN PLAINVIEW MANOR OR MCALPIN MANOR THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER BUILT THE FENCE THAT SUITED THEM AND YOU WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO FIND A SERIES OF LOTS THAT DON'T TEND TO BLEND TOGETHER. [00:55:01] ONE PERSON BUILDS A FENCE AND THEN THE NEXT PERSON BUILDS A FENCE IN THE SAME LINE AND MANNER AND THEY LIKE IT AND THEY DON'T WANT TO BE THE ONE THAT STICKS OUT. OKAY. >> THERE WAS A BIT OF TALK ON THE RUNWAY. WE WERE AWARE THAT THE RUNWAY IS THERE. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM BRINGING MORE ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS AN AIRPORT NORTH OF US. IF WE NEED TO LABEL IT OR SHADE IT OR COLOR IT SOMEHOW, THERE'S NO ISSUES WITH SHOWING THAT MORE CLEARLY ON THERE. WE DID KNOW ABOUT THE 400-FOOT EASEMENT SO WE PLANNED FOR THAT. WE SHOWED THAT ON THE DRAWINGS. WE HAVE NO PROPOSED HOMES WITHIN THAT. WE HAVE ALREADY LOOKED AT SOME CROSS SECTIONS THERE, WE WERE ALSO CONCERNED OF HOW THAT WOULD LOOK WITH A PLANE TAKING OFF, AND IT DIPS DOWN TO A CREEK AND COMES BACK UP. BUT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO THE DESIGN OF THAT. BUT THE ROAD ITSELF WILL BE LOWER THAN THE RUNWAY, IT KIND OF SLOPES DOWN AND COMES BACK UP AND WE'LL LOOK AT THAT MUCH MORE CLOSELY, THE DESIGN. WE'LL CERTAINLY MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AIRPORT AND MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT ENCROACHING ON AREAS WHERE WE SHOULDN'T ENCROACH. THERE WILL LIKELY BE SOME FENCES THAT CROSS IT, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOWN BELOW WHATEVER THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION IS OF THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. THERE WAS SOME TALKS ABOUT SET BACKS, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY REDUCED SET BACKS. WE'RE INCREASING IN THE FRONT. WE ARE SHOWING THE REAR AT 25, BUT I AGREE MOST PEOPLE PROBABLY WON'T BUILD TO THE 25. BUT IT'S SHOWN THERE AS KIND OF THE FARTHEST THEY COULD POSSIBLY GO. DID I MISS A QUESTION? >> WHAT IS KIND OF YOUR IDEA OF THE TIMELINE OF YOUR PROJECT? >> THAT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR ANDREW, BUT I BELIEVE THE PLAN IS TO BEGIN ONCE WE GET THROUGH ZONING AND PROCEED STRAIGHT INTO CONSTRUCTION AFTER PLANS WERE APPROVED. BUT IT WOULD TAKE MULTIPLE MONTHS TO GET PLANS DRAWN UP, GO THROUGH ROUNDS OF REVIEW WITH THE CITY'S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. SO MANY MONTHS OUT BEFORE STARTING CONSTRUCTION, BUT RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO PLAN TO DELAY THAT, AND WE WOULD GO STRAIGHT INTO CONSTRUCTION. JUST IN CASE YOU DIDN'T HEAR IT, WHOEVER WAS LISTENING, HE SAID WE'RE FINE WITH THE SIDE GARAGE WHICH I THINK WE MENTIONED BEFORE AS OPPOSED TO THE EARLIER REQUEST FOR J ENTRY. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. ANY DISCUSSION, DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> SO MOVED. >> YOU HAVE TO APPROACH AND -- YEAH, YOU CAN APPROACH. I'LL GIVE YOU ONE MORE MINUTE. >> I WON'T TAKE THAT. >> OKAY. >> LET'S ASSUME FOR A MOMENT THAT MAGGIE CAN'T STAY CLOSED PERMANENTLY, OKAY. IS THERE A WAY TO LEAVE IT CLOSED PERMANENTLY DURING CONSTRUCTION TO ALLEVIATE THE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC BECAUSE IF WE'RE BEING HONEST WITH EACH OTHER, YOU KNOW DANG WELL THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN AND THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN HAS TO COME FIRST. SO IF WE CAN'T LEAVE IT CLOSED PERMANENTLY, IT NEEDS TO STAY CLOSED PERMANENTLY WHILE THEY BUILD EVERYTHING AND THEY CAN USE THE MOCKINGBIRD AND THE TWO ENTRANCES OFF MOCKINGBIRD. >> DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE AN ANSWER, I SEE THE APPLICANT LOOKING LIKE THEY'RE READY TO PROVIDE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. >> WE AGREE. WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. IT WOULD OBVIOUSLY CONNECT WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, BUT IT WOULD BE BARRICADED OFF TO WHERE IT'S NOT USED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACCESS. >> OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? WE HAVE A MOTION FROM BATEMAN ALREADY. OH OKAY, YOU HAD A QUESTION. >> DOES IT DEAL WITH AIRPORT NOISE AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT? >> NO, SIR. IT DOES DEAL WITH RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. IT DEALS WITH STRICTLY DEVELOPMENT, NOT NECESSARILY AIRPORT NOISE. IN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCE, WE HAVE A SECTION THAT TALKS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WORK HOURS, WHEN CONSTRUCTION CAN OCCUR, AND THEN I BELIEVE ONLY WITHIN INDUSTRIAL AREAS DO WE HAVE A D DECIBAL LEVEL. THERE'S HOURS THAT THESE GUYS WILL BE ABLE TO WORK ON SITE. AND I WANT TO SAY THIS IS RIGHT OFF THE CUFF HERE BUT I WANT TO SAY IT'S FROM MAYBE 7:00 IN THE MORNING TO 7:00 AT NIGHT, [01:00:02] SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT. >> IF SOMEBODY AT THE AIRPORT BUYS AN AIRPLANE AND IT'S A JET AND MAKES A WILL THE OF NOISE -- >> RIGHT. >> -- A LOT OF NOISE. >> RIGHT. >> WHAT'S THE CITY'S POSITION GOING TO BE, SINCE THE AIRPORT WAS THERE BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT STARTED ENCROACHING INTO THE AREA, DO WE HAVE AN ISSUE? >> SO I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THAT ONE BECAUSE THAT IS MY INDUSTRY. SO THE CITY CAN'T AT THIS POINT GOVERN NOISE ABATEMENT AT THE AIRPORT, THAT'S GOVERNED BY THE FAA. THE AIRPORT IS CERTIFIED BY THE FAA FOR CERTAIN TYPES, WEIGHTS, AND CAPABILITIES, RIGHT? SO I THINK EAGLE'S NEST IS IT STILL GRASS -- IT'S PAVED, OKAY. AND HOW WIDE IS IT? SO IT'S 37 FEET. SO YOUR CAPABILITY TO LAND ON THAT LEGALLY IS VERY MINIMAL AND AS FAR AS OPERATING HOURS, NOISE LEVELS, AND NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES, I'M FAIRLY CERTAIN AND I'M NOT A LEGAL EXPERT BUT I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT, BUT THERE ARE OPERATING MINIMUMS THAT THE FAA WOULD OVERSEE NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES. >> I COULD BE WRONG ON THAT BUT I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT IS WHICH WOULD SEVERELY LIMIT YOUR JET TRAFFIC. >> THINGS CHANGE OVER TIME. >> THE AIRPORT IS ALSO OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS SO THERE'S NOTHING WE COULD DO. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO I DID NOT HEAR A MOTION, I JUST HEARD THAT. I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> ALL OPPOSED. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. DISCUSSIONS OR MOTIONS? >> SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECT, MAGGIE LANE IS PART OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN? >> YES, SIR. THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN ACTUALLY CALLS MAGGIE LANE HEADING IN AN EAST WEST DIRECTION AS A 60-FOOT MINOR COLLECTOR ROADWAY. IT ALSO CALLS FOR A NORTH SOUTH MINOR COLLECTOR ALSO. THAT'S 60-FOOT WIDE. REALLY 60-FOOT WIDE IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE BUILDING ANYWAY THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT IS ALL BAR DITCH. AND OUR RURAL SECTIONS ALREADY CALL FOR 60-FOOT WIDE. BUT THE 60-FOOT WIDE CAN'T ALLOW FOR UP TO THREE LANES TECHNICALLY. IN THIS CASE MAGGIE LANE IS ON OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND HAS BEEN ON OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND THEN WE HAVE THAT NORTH SOUTH ALSO AS WELL. >> SO A MINOR COLLECTOR ON OUR THOROUGHFARE PLAN CALLS OUT FOR SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES AS WELL, CORRECT? >> NO, SIR, IT DOES NOT. >> IT DOESN'T? A 60-FOOT RUNWAY AND 5-FOOT SIDEWALKS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE COLLECTOR. >> IN A RURAL SECTION, IT WON'T DO THAT. I KNOW WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT SIDEWALKS EARLIER GOING THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. UNFORTUNATELY AGAIN OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS CALL OUT THAT ANYTHING OVER AN ACRE DOES NOT NECESSARILY NEED SIDEWALKS. WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE SIDEWALKS GO THROUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT, OUR [01:05:01] COMPREHENSIVE CALLS FOR MORE CONNECTIVITY, MORE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. BUT WHEN YOU GET TO THESE SIZED LOTS TO DO THAT WOULD BE MORE OF AN AMENITY THAN A REQUIREMENT. BUT NO, SIR, IT ACTUALLY DOES NOT CALL OUT FOR THE SIDEWALKS. >> AND DOES MAGGIE LANE CURRENTLY STUB AT THE PROPERTY LINE? >> IT DOES STUB AT THE PROPERTY LINE, YES, SIR. >> SO EVER SINCE IT WAS BUILT. >> EVER SINCE IT WAS BUILT -- >> AND IT'S CONSTRUCTED TO THE ACTUAL THOROUGHFARE SIZE AS IT IS? >> 60-FOOT WIDE, YES, SIR. IF YOU'LL NOTICE AND YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE IT HERE BUT WE DO HAVE TEMPORARY TURN AROUNDS FOR THE ONE TO THE NORTH. TEMPORARY TURN AROUNDS FOR THE ONE GOING TO THE WEST. AND IT'S DEVELOPER DRIVEN. IT MAY NEVER GET DEVELOPED EVER UNLESS THESE PEOPLE SELL THEIR LAND AND A DEVELOPER GOES IN AND DOES EXACTLY WHAT THE DEVELOPER IS DOING RIGHT NOW TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. >> RIGHT. >> IT COULD BE 50 YEARS FROM NOW. IT COULD BE THREE YEARS FROM NOW. YOU JUST NEVER KNOW. WE PLAN FOR CONNECTIVITY ALL THE TIME. >> ONE, WHAT WOULD YOU CONSIDER THE AVERAGE SIZE LOTS IN ROSE ESTATES VERSUS THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT. >> THOSE ARE ALL LARGER LOTS. >> AND THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE SMALLER LOTS POTENTIALLY. >> YES, SIR. IF YOU TOOK SOME OF THESE LOTS DOWN HERE AND PUSHED THESE UP AGAINST ROSE ESTATES THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY. THESE LOTS DOWN HERE OBVIOUSLY GO FROM OH GOSH ACRE AND A HALF TO 3.5 ACRES. IF YOU HAD THOSE LOTS PUSHED UP AGAINST THIS AREA, THEN YOU'D BE DOING THE OPPOSITE OBVIOUSLY. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE APPLICANT IS SHOWING 1.75 FOR THIS ONE AND THIS IS MORE THAN 1.75, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT SIZE IT IS. OKAY SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, MOST OF THESE LOTS ARE ABOUT 1.4, 1.2, 1.1, THEY DO GET LARGER, THESE TWO LOTS ARE AT LEAST THREE ACRES IN SIZE. YOU DO HAVE A TWO ACRE DOWN HERE IN THE CORNER. AND YEAH, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY HOW IT'S LAID OUT. >> AND I GUESS THE ONLY OTHER THING BECAUSE I HAVE LIMITED EXPERIENCE WITH THE AIRPORT SITUATION. ROSE ESTATES HAS LIMITS FOR SOME OF THE LOTS ON EMERGENCY LAND -- THE EMERGENCY LANDING SITUATION CAUGHT MY ATTENTION. THAT'S WHAT'S MAKING ME HESITANT ON THE SITUATION. IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY LANDING ON ROSE ESTATES AND HOUSES ARE THAT BUFFER, THAT DRAWS A CONCERN TO ME. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY IS COMING DOWN IN FLIGHT THEY SEE OPEN LAND AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN TWO HOUSES, IS THAT NOT ALARMING? >> THESE LOTS WILL NOT CONTAIN HOUSES AT ALL. >> JUST TO BE CLEAR THE DEVELOPMENT AROUND AN AIRPORT IN AN EMERGENCY ISLE IS 100% GOVERNED BY REGULATION. THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PUT A POPSICLE STICK IN THE GROUND THERE IF THE FAA SAID THAT IS WITHIN THE EMERGENCY LANES. >> I'M JUST GOING TO APPROACH THE SCREEN. AUTHORITY. >> AND TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST [01:10:01] THERE'S FENCES AROUND EVERY AIRPORT EVERYWHERE. SO THERE'S REQUIREMENTS TO THAT SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT REGULATION EAGLE'S NEST FALLS UNDER. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, ANY DISCUSSION, COMMENTS? >> I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I'M ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT SURPRISED AND I DEFINITELY WANT TO BE CAREFUL AS I TREAD INTO THIS WATER. I'VE HEARD OVER THE SEVERAL MONTHS I'VE BEEN DOING THIS, IF YOU HAVE 20 ACRES AND SOMEONE IS COMING IN TO PUT A SUBDIVISION WITH FIVE ACRE YOU THINK THAT'S SMALL AND NOT GOING TO BE CONDUCIVE TO THE WAY YOU'RE USED TO LIVING AND YOU THINK IT WILL BRING YOUR PROPERTY VALUE DOWN. AND IF YOU'RE LIVING ON ONE ACRE AND THEY PUT 1.9 ACRE TRACKS ON THERE, SAME THING. IT'S REALLY A NO WIN SITUATION. BUT HAVING REVIEWED ALL OF THE SUBDIVISION PLANS AND ALL OF THE PROPOSED PD'S THAT COME ACROSS OUR TABLE, THIS TO ME SEEMS TRULY LIKE A SLAM DUNK. AND I UNDERSTAND THE HESITATION, TRUST ME, I DO. BUT IN A CITY WHERE WE ARE DEVELOPING HUNDREDS OF HOUSES A YEAR AND WE HAVE SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE PLATTED FOR THOUSANDS OF HOUSES, IF I HAD 129 ACRES IN MY BACKYARD AND A DEVELOPER WANTED TO COME IN AND PUT WAVY ROADS IN AND PUT LARGER LOTS AND ASK FOR A SEPTIC WAIVER TO ENSURE THAT HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENTS DON'T COME INTO THAT AREA, IT'S A SLAM DUNK, RIGHT? THEY ALWAYS SAY YOU KNOW, I MOVED IN HERE AND HAD THIS BEAUTIFUL FIELD AND I LOVED LOOKING AT IT AND THERE'S COWS. WELL I'VE LEARNED OVER THE YEARS IF YOU LIKE THAT FIELD, YOU BETTER BUY IT. AND IF YOU CAN'T BUY IT, THIS IS THE NEXT BEST THING, IT TRULY IS. NOW I ONLY LIVE ON AN ACRE, I'VE GOT 3 ACRES ACROSS THE STREET THAT WHEN IT CAME AVAILABLE I PAID WAY MORE THAN I WAS SUPPOSED TO FOR IT, BUT I WANTED IT. WHEN I LOOK AT THIS I LOOK AT AN APPLICANT THAT CLEARLY IN THIS MEETING HAS ADDRESSED EVERY CONCERN AND IS WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PRODUCT THAT THEY BRING FORWARD IS ONE THAT EVERYBODY IS GOING TO LIKE. NOW I CAN TELL YOU ROUTING TRAFFIC UP AND DOWN, REMIND ME THIS NAME. >> MAGGIE. >> MAGGIE LANE, IT'S AN UNKNOWN. SO YOU GUYS HAVE LIVED ON A STUBBED OUT ROAD FOR HOWEVER MANY NUMBER OF YEARS. BUT I CAN TELL YOU WE'VE GOT ROADS GOING IN EVERYWHERE FEEDING THOUSANDS OF HOUSES AND WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT 129 HOUSES ON 220 ACRES. I MEAN THAT'S A DREAM. BECAUSE WE'VE GOT SUBDIVISIONS IN THIS TOWN THAT ARE BEING BUILT OR HAVE BEEN BUILT WE'RE TALKING 50, 60 HOUSES ON 10 TO 15 ACRES. SO MY QUESTION FOR RESIDENTS AS A WHOLE IS IF NOT THIS, THEN WHAT? THAT'S THE ULTIMATE THING. BECAUSE IF THIS WERE NOT TO FILL THAT LAND, THERE'S A VERY GOOD CHANCE THAT SOMEONE COMES IN AND TRIES TO PUT 400 PLUS HOUSES HERE. THIS IS THE BEST THING THAT I THINK COULD FILL THIS LAND IN A WAY THAT PEOPLE SAY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE SURROUNDING LOTS, YOU'RE LOOKING AT LARGER LOTS IN RURAL OR AG AREAS AND HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE SEEN DEVELOPERS COME IN AND THEY WANT TO TAKE AG AND TURN IT INTO HIGHER DENSITY, SUPER HIGH DENSITY, I DON'T SEE IT. I KNOW THAT THERE'S CONCERNS AND I ASK THAT YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TONIGHT AND YOU ALLOW THE WHEELS OF OUR CITY TO WORK. BECAUSE I THINK WHAT YOU WILL SEE IS WHEN THIS IS DONE AND THIS IS IN, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF LIKE MINDED RESIDENTS, YOU'RE GOING TO GET PEOPLE THAT MOVE TO THESE LOTS THAT THINK LIKE YOU, THAT ACT LIKE YOU, THAT HAVE FAMILIES LIKE YOU, AND IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE IT WAS NEVER ANY DIFFERENT WHEN IT'S DONE. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. >> AND I WANT TO ECHO WALTER'S COMMENTS. WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF DEVELOPERS EVEN ON THE FRONT END PUSHING US TELLING US THESE TYPE OF ONE ACRE AND LARGER LOTS CAN'T BE DEVELOPED AND WE HAVE TO DEVELOP 3 AND 3 UNITS PER ACRE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO GET LEFT BEHIND AND THEY'RE ALL GOING TO MOVE TO WAXAHACHIE AND MANSFIELD AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET QUALITY DEVELOPMENT. THIS LOOKS LIKE A QUALITY DEVELOPMENT. I'M VERY IMPRESSED AS WELL. AND I THINK WE CAN MAKE THE [01:15:03] ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TRAFFIC FLOW ISSUE THAT WILL CONCERN, I THINK YOU'LL BE VERY PLEASED WITH THE QUALITY OF NEIGHBORS YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH COMING OUT OF THIS SUBDIVISION. WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO, NOT ANYMORE. YOU CAN WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR. WE DON'T ACTUALLY GET THOSE EMAILS, THEY GO TO THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE FUTURE HERE YOU'RE FREE TO BRING IT BUT WE NEED YOU TO FILL OUT THE APPLICATION AND PRESENT IT TO US IN THAT MANNER. THANK YOU. >> I DO WANT TO SAY ONE MORE THING AND IT'S JUST TO REITERATE MAGGIE LANE STUB OUT INTO YOUR PROPERTY DIRECTLY, THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOUR PROPERTY. AND THE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO STUB AT THAT LINE IS JUST FURTHERING THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND JUST LIKE YOU SAID IF YOU DON'T SELL IT, I GUARANTEE YOU THE CITY IS NOT COMING AFTER IT UNLESS THERE'S A DIRE NEED TO DO SO. AND I CAN PROMISE YOU THERE'S NOT A DIRE NEED WHEN A DEVELOPER SAYS I WANT TO PUT SOME HOUSES IN HERE, YOU KNOW. ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT WHEN -- ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT EVERYBODY WHO HAS LAND SAYS THEY WILL NEVER SELL AND THEN ONE DAY IT COMES AND THEY SELL. AND THEY SAY NOT FOR A MILLION DOLLARS AND THEN SOMEONE COMES AND OFFERS THEM $2 MILLION. SO I MEAN I'VE SEEN IT ALL OVER THE CITY. SO WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE CAN'T DO THIS ANYMORE. >> PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR OBSERVATIONS BY STAFF OR EXCUSE ME BY THE COMMISSION. >> I WANT A CLARIFICATION FOR MYSELF. >> OKAY. >> ON THE EMAILS, I ASSUME THEY JUST SEND A NORMAL EMAIL IN TO THE CITY. BUT IF THEY PUT IN THAT EMAIL THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE READ AT THE HEARING, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT? I MEAN I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THAT THAN IF THEY GO ONLINE WHERE THEY'RE GIVEN THE INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND AND MAKE A STATEMENT BY A CERTAIN TIME THEN IT'S READ? >> I THINK AS THE COMMISSIONER I CAN MAKE A DISCRETION WHETHER OR NOT I WANT TO HEAR IT, IF IT'S PRESENTED IN THE PACKAGE IF I WANT TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD, I CAN DO IT. WE CAN HAVE IT IN THE WRITTEN RECORD. THE LAST TIME WE HAD WRITTEN COMMENTS WE HAD PEOPLE WHO WROTE FOUR PARAGRAPHS OF ABSOLUTE JUST CUT AND PASTE STUFF. I THINK IT WAS THE -- >> SO YOU ALSO MAKE THE DECISION OF WHETHER THE REST OF THE COMMISSION SEES IT OR NOT? >> NO, I DON'T MAKE THE DECISION. YOU CAN STILL SEE IT, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT ARE WE ACTUALLY GOING TO SIT HERE AND READ IF SOMEONE PUTS A TEN PAGE LETTER INTO THE RECORD, WE ASK PEOPLE TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK, THEY SUBMIT IT. WE'VE HAD PEOPLE DO IT BEFORE, THEY CAN COME DOWN AND SPEAK, FILL OUT THEIR CARD AND THEN THEY CAN PRESENT THINGS TO US AND WE CAN HAVE A QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO IN MY OPINION AS THE CHAIR, WE'RE NOT GOING TO LET PEOPLE SUBMIT LONG LENGTHY LETTERS AND THEN NOT SHOW UP IN PERSON. BECAUSE WE BOIL IT DOWN, WE PROVIDE THREE MINUTES OF OPEN SPEECH TIME BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET IS WHEN YOU START OPENING UP TO THAT, WE COULD HAVE GROUPS THAT ARE GOING TO WRITE ENTIRE DIATRIBES EVERY TIME THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT. WE READ INTO THE RECORD 20 PAGES OF TEXT AND THAT'S NOT -- >> BUT I GUESS I WOULD SUSPECT THAT AN EMAIL SENT TO STAFF IS NOT 20 PAGES. >> USUALLY WE GET AND I DON'T KNOW, IF STAFF WANT TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE BECAUSE WE HAVE INCLUDED IN THE PAST AND SOMETIMES IT'S NOT. >> DEPENDING ON HOW THEY SUBMIT THEIR FORM. WE HAVE A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION FORM ONLINE IT SAYS DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK, WE HAVE THAT AND THEN PLAIN EMAILS SENT TO CITY STAFF. IN THIS CASE THEY CAME AFTER THE AGENDA PACKET WAS ALREADY OUT. WE RECEIVED A MAJORITY OF THEM SUNDAY, MONDAY, SOME ON FRIDAY. [01:20:01] SO WE TRY FOR THOSE, WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PUT OUT COPIES FOR EACH OF YOU. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF TIMES WE'RE UP UNTIL 5:59 SO WE TRY TO PRINT THOSE ALL OUT AND GIVE THEM TO YOU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. >> I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC FOR WRITTEN MATERIALS THERE NEEDS TO BE A CUT OFF AT THE TIME WHAT IS IT THREE DAYS AHEAD OF TIME? >> IT'S ON MONDAY BEFORE NOON. >> OKAY. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO CREATE A PROBLEM BUT IT MAKES ME A LITTLE UNEASY AS A MEMBER TO SIT UP HERE AND HEAR A CITIZEN SAY THEY HAVE MADE A COMMENT TO THE CITY WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT THE PEOPLE SITTING UP HERE MAKING THE DECISION THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT THEM HAS SEEN THAT AND IT MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE, ALMOST IF I WERE THEM IT WOULD LOOK LIKE I DON'T CARE. >> WE WILL DEFINITELY FORWARD THAT. >> THERE'S NOT A PERSON SITTING, I CAN TELL YOU PEOPLE OUT HERE, THERE'S NOT A PERSON SITTING UP HERE THAT DOESN'T CARE. I THINK WE JUST HAVE MAYBE THE NEED TO CLARIFY SOME COMMUNICATION HERE. I DON'T WANT TO PROJECT THAT KIND OF IMAGE TO THE PEOPLE, THEY NEED TO FEEL COMFORTABLE IN MY OPINION THAT THEY'RE BEING HEARD BY THE PEOPLE THAT'S MAKING THE DECISIONS. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> RIGHT. AND I THINK THE BETTER PROCESS IS IF IT'S A SPEAKER, THAT THEY ARE VERY CLEAR THAT IF THEY WANT TO PRESENT MATERIALS THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT HERE AT THE HEARING SO THAT THAT WAY THEY'RE CLEAR BECAUSE I KNOW THAT FROM THE HOA I DON'T THINK HE UNDERSTOOD THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A COPY AND HE COULD HAVE DONE THAT AT THE HEARING. THERE'S NO DEADLINE, THEY CAN COME IN AND THROW A PILE OF PAPER IN FRONT OF ME AT THIS HEARING. >> THAT IS SAID ON THE NOTICE. >> OKAY, GOOD. >> SO THEN I WOULD JUST SAY THAT MOVING FORWARD IF WE MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE WEBSITE THAT SAYS EMAILS FORWARDED INTO THE CITY, ALTHOUGH WE WILL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO PASS THAT ONTO THE COMMISSION UP UNTIL THIS DATE AND TIME. >> WALTER, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO CUT YOU OFF BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING INTO AN ITEM THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. WE'VE RAISED THIS CONCERN AT THIS POINT, AND WE'LL PUT IT ON THE END OF THE AGENDA NEXT MONTH SO WE CAN COVER NOTICE AND STUFF. WE'RE GETTING OFF IT'S NOT GERMANE TO THE TOPIC. IF WE HAVE NO MORE DISCUSSION GERMANE TO THE TOPIC, ARE WE PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION? >> THIS PLAN WAS REVIEWED BY OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. IS THERE ANY LOT TO LOT DRAINAGE HERE? >> IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DID NOT PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS REGARDING THAT. I CAN'T REALLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT OFF THE BAT. I WOULD REALLY NEED OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> OKAY. THIS WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK IF THEY DECIDED THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS. >> THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. HEARING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THIS TIME TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. FIRST WE WILL, THE CONDITION THAT THERE SHOULD ONLY BE SIDE ENTRY GARAGES ALLOWED. NO J SWING OR FRONT ENTRY. THERE SHALL BE NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC ON TO MAGGIE ROAD AND THAT ROAD SHALL BE BARRICADED UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE. THE PLAT SHALL BE LABELED TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OF THE AIRPORT AND PROVIDE NOTICE OF THE FLIGHT PATHS IN A FORM FOUND SATISFACTORY TO STAFF AND TO LEGAL OF THE CITY IN A MANNER I WOULD SUGGEST ANALOGOUS TO WHAT WE'VE DONE FOR THE CEMENT INDUSTRY. THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN AND I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THOSE CONDITIONS. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE A BREAK. [009. Consider and act upon a request for a special exception to Section 4.5602 (Off-Street Parking Requirements) to allow for additional parking spaces over the maximum number permitted, for a new Medical Office Building (USMD). The property is on 2.886± acres of land situated on Lots 7A and 7B, Block 1, of Walnut Grove Center South Addition. The property is located at 4430 East U.S. Highway 287 (Case No. M13-2020-89).] >>> IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 4.5602 FOR A MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING THAT REQUIRES ONE PARKING SPACE PER 600 FEET. [01:25:05] IT'S LOCATED AT 4430 EAST US HIGHWAY 287. THE PROPERTY IS UNDEVELOPED. THEY ARE PROPOSING A 17,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING. UNDER THE CURRENT STANDARDS FOR A MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING, THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR PARKING, JUST TO REMIND YOU ALL WE HAVE MINIMUM ACTING PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THE MINIMUM PARKING FOR THE MEDICAL OFFICE THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE 43 PARKING SPACES. MAXIMUM WE ALLOW THEM TO GO 25% THE MINIMUM. WHICH WOULD ALLOW THEM A MAXIMUM 54 PARKING SPACES. THEY ARE REQUESTING A TOTAL OF 88 PARKING SPACES WHICH IS AN ADDITIONAL 34 FROM WHAT THE MAXIMUM REQUIREMENT IS. THIS HAS BEEN CONSISTENT WITH SOME OF OUR OTHER MEDICAL USES, MEDICAL OFFICE USES IN THE AREA. ESPECIALLY IN THIS AREA ALONG PRESIDENTIAL PARKWAY, WE'VE HAD A FEW THAT HAVE COME BACK, THE DENTAL OFFICE THAT HAVE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL PARKING TO SUIT THEIR NEEDS. THE ANNOUNCEMENTS THEY DID PROVIDE FOR US, THIS IS USMD, THEY ARE COMPARING THE NEED OF PARKING THROUGH THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEY HAVE IN THE DFW AREA. DUE TO WHAT THEY HAVE SEEN IN OTHER FACILITIES THEY HAVE SHOWN THAT 88 IS THE PRIME NUMBER TO MAKE THEIR OPERATIONS RUN SMOOTHLY. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. [011. Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon a request for an amendment to Planned Development District No. 113, to provide for adoption of a sign plan, commonly known as 1201 E Highway 287, to allow for additional signage and restate the Planned Development regulations. (Case No. Z19-2020-082).] THANK YOU THIS LITTLE DEVELOPMENT IS KNOWN AS METHODIST HOSPITAL, THAT'S A SLIGHT JOKE I GUESS, DIDN'T WORK. WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING, BACK IN 2017 THEY DID COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR THE METHODIST HOSPITAL TO BE CONSTRUCTED. IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THEY DID HAVE SIGNS THAT THEY DID PROPOSE THE MINIMUM SIGNAGE AND AT A LATER TIME THEY WOULD BRING FORTH A SIGN PLAN. THE SIGN PLAN THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING, THEY ARE REQUESTING A THAT SAYS METHODIST ON EACH CORNER OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THEY ARE REQUESTING VARIOUS MONUMENT SIGN, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. THROUGH ANALYSIS OF THE SIGNS WHAT WE DO REQUIRE IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, A MAJORITY OF THE SIGNS ARE VERY TYPICAL OF OTHER MEDICAL COMPLEXES, MEDICAL PARKS I GUESS I WOULD CALL IT WHERE A LOT OF THESE SIGNS ARE DIRECTIONAL AND FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES SO PEOPLE CAN GET TO THE PROPER BUILDING IN EFFICIENT TIME. THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE WOULD ALLOW FOR NOT ONLY PEOPLE GOING FOR THE REGULAR DOCTOR VISITS BUT IT WILL HELP EMERGENCY PERSONNEL GET TO THOSE LOCATIONS QUICKLY, ALSO PEOPLE WHO ARE VISITING THE EMERGENCY ROOM GET TO WHERE THEY NEED TO GO. A LOT OF THE ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING ONCE AGAIN IS OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE NORMALLY WOULD PERMIT IN OUR SIGN WARRANTS BUT DUE TO THE USE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER HOSPITALS. WE FEEL THAT THIS IS STILL WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE. THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE TO BROADCAST WHO THEY ARE BUT MORE FOR DIRECTIONAL AWARENESS. ACCEPTED BY PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET. 0 CAME BACK IN FAVOR, 0 CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION. THEY WILL HAVE LANDSCAPING AROUND THEM. THEY HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF MONUMENT SIGNS SHOWING BUILDING NUMBER ONE, OFFICE, THEY HAVE THE SMALLER DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, THEY HAVE THE MAIN METHODIST PLACARD SIGNS. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS -- ALLOWED FOR DEVIATIONS, A GREAT EXAMPLE IS STONEGATE HAD DEVIATIONS WITH THEIR SIGN PLAN. STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL [01:30:04] CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THEY HAVEN'T EVEN APPROACHED US ON THAT. THIS DOES REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. [012. Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance to rezone a part of Lot 4, Block 52, of the Town of Midlothian Addition, from Residential Three (R3) District to Urban Village Planned Development District No. 130 (UVPD-130) for Professional Office uses. The property is located at 716 West Avenue G (Case No. Z20-2020-084).] >>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND 2ND STREET WHICH IS ALSO WEST AVENUE G. THE APPLICANT WILL CONVERT THIS EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT I HAVE UP HERE ON THE SCREEN INTO A NEW OFFICE BUILDING FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE USES ONLY. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED R3 AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT'S ON THE LOT RIGHT NOW WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT IN THE 1940S. THE LOT DOES CONTAIN TWO UNIMPROVED PARKING LOTS AS THIS LOCATION WAS PREVIOUSLY USED AS A CHURCH. THIS LOCATION IS WITHIN THE ORIGINAL TOWN MODULE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THERE ARE OTHER SIMILAR RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE CONVERSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED NEAR THIS LOCATION. MAIN STREET TENDS TO BE AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR THESE TYPES OF CONVERSIONS. THIS SLIDE HERE, LET ME GO BACK ONE. THIS SLIDE WILL BE A 3,000 SQUARE FOOT HISTORIC THEMED STRUCTURE TO APPEAR RESIDENTIAL WITH A MAJORITY OF A FEW DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS. THE ELEVATION PROVIDED THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN US DOES PROVIDE A LOT OF ARCHITECTURAL ENTRANCE. THIS INCLUDES A MIX OF CEDAR SHAKE WITH DECORATIVE SIDING, DORMERS ALONG THE FRONT AND REAR SIDE. THERE'S ALSO A DECORATIVE STONE ENTRYWAY WITH COLUMNS FACING 2ND STREET. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN. ACCESS FROM THE ALLEYWAY IS ALSO BEING IMPROVED BY AN ADJACENT PD THAT WILL ALSO BECOME FUTURE OFFICE SPACE AS WELL. ON THE BACKSIDE OF THIS PROPERTY, ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY THERE IS A RESIDENTIAL HOME. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN 8-FOOT CEDAR OR BOARD ON BOARD FENCE THAT THAT BE PERMITTED. IT CONTAINS ANTIQUE BRICK MASONRY COLUMNS, THOSE WILL BE SPACED ABOUT 22 FEET APART FROM EACH OTHER. NOTIFICATIONS WERE PROVIDED TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET. TO DATE WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES FROM THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. WITH THAT I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >>> IS THIS A TEAR DOWN AND NEW CONSTRUCTION OR ARE WE REHABBING THIS BUILDING, DID I MISS THAT? >> IS IT A FULL TEAR DOWN? OKAY. THAT'S FINE. >> THIS IS 716 MAIN STREET, WE ALSO HAVE 617 MAIN STREET. WE WANTED TO BUFFER THE RESIDENTIAL BESIDE IT. SO WE THINK THAT JUST LIKE THE FUNERAL HOME, THE OLD FUNERAL HOME THAT'S DIAGONAL TO THIS PROPERTY, IF WE TAKE THAT LITTLE BOX, THE 3,000 SQUARE FOOT BOX, TAKE THE HOUSE AWAY AND REMODEL IT LIKE IT WAS AN OLD HISTORIC MANSION FACING THE SIDE STREET WE THINK THAT THAT WILL LOOK APPROPRIATE TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. WE ACTUALLY REALLY TRIED TO WORK HARD TO MAKE IT ARCHITECTURALLY INTERESTING ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING AND NOT MAKE IT A BEAUTIFUL FACADE THAT'S PRETTY ON THE FRONT AND JUST A BOX ON THE BACK. SO THIS WAS OUR PLAN LITERALLY WHEN WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY TO REMODEL IT. IT EXISTED AS CHURCHES, FOUR DIFFERENT CHURCHES THROUGH ITS HISTORY AND A CHIROPRACTOR'S OFFICE. [01:35:03] WE THINK IT WILL BE A REALLY NICE ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE THINK IT WILL LOOK HISTORICALLY ACCURATE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> JUST ONE MORE OFF THE CUFF, TIMETABLE FOR THAT PROJECT HERE? >> WE'RE READY TO GO. WE'LL BE DOING IT AT THE SAME TIME. SO ONE OTHER INTERESTING SIDE NOTE, NOT THAT IT MATTERS, NOT THAT WE'RE DOING THIS FOR VALUE, BUT THIS DID APPRAISE AT CLOSE TO $1 MILLION. $960,000 IS WHAT THE APPRAISAL CAME BACK AT. SO AS FAR AS ADDING VALUE TO OUR COMMUNITY I'M SUPER PLEASED THAT THIS OFFICE BUILDING WILL HAVE A MILLION DOLLAR VALUE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. JUST TO ADD ONTO WHAT STEPHEN WAS SAYING AS FAR AS IT BEING A CHIROPRACTOR'S OFFICE. WE PROBABLY WANT TO CHANGE OUR ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE MEDICAL AS WELL, IS THAT NECESSARY? WE HAVE IT AS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE USES ONLY. I KNOW A WHILE BACK WE HAD A BARBERSHOP AND WE ENDED UP HAVING TO COME BACK FOR THAT PARTICULAR USE. CAN WE CHECK THAT? >> I THINK WE MAY BE FINE. I TAKE BACK MY COMMENT. I THINK WE'RE FINE JUST LEAVING IT AS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. THAT SHOULD COVER MEDICAL OFFICE USES. >> CAN WE ADD THAT OR DOES THAT AID IT? >>> AND THE PARKING ON YOUR PROJECT HERE IS ALL PAVED TOO, IS THAT RIGHT? >> WE HAVE NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK OR BE HEARD ON THIS MATTER THAT HAS NOT SUBMITTED A FORM? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SO MADE. >> I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OSBORNE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. [013. Conduct a public hearing to consider and act upon an ordinance relating to the use and development of 56.432± acres out of the Samuel Frederick Survey, Abstract No. 357, and the A.J. Lawrence Survey, Abstract No. 625, by changing the zoning from Agricultural (A) District to a Planned Development District (PD) for single-family residential uses. The property is located to the west of North Walnut Grove Road, between Steeple Chase Court and Shiloh Court (commonly known as 2823 and 3101 N Walnut Grove Road) (Case No. Z21-2020-087).] THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA NUMBER 13 IS PUBLIC HEARING ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO 56 ACRES FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENTS -- YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO HAVE 45 [01:40:42] LOTS ALL OVER ONE ACRE IN SIZE. SO THE APPLICANT IS SAYING BY GIVING US THESE LARGER LOTS -- NOT BE REQUIRED. THE ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW FOR VARIOUS SCREENING OPTIONS AS THE SCREENING PLAN HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED OR PROVIDED TO US. EITHER WAY THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO INSTALL MASONRY WALL OR COMMERCIAL IRON FENCE. THE DRAFT ORDINANCE REQUIRE THAT THE -- DURING THAT PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE. TO DATE WE HAVE RECEIVED VARIOUS COMMENTS REGARDING THIS REQUEST. TWO IN OPPOSITION. WE ALSO RECEIVED ANOTHER THAT WAS FROM OUTSIDE THE LIMITS. IN THIS CASE I DID PROVIDE THOSE AT EACH PERSON'S DESK. >> DID YOU SAY THE AVIARY HOA WAS IN OPPOSITION? >> YES, SIR. >> I'M READING HERE THEY'RE IN SUPPORT WITH CONDITIONS. >> OH, I APOLOGIZE. I THINK THEY HAD CONDITIONS, I APOLOGIZE, NOT IN OPPOSITION. >> OKAY. >> I THINK THEY'RE IN SUPPORT, THEY JUST HAVE CERTAIN CONDITIONS. >> OKAY. >> I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ON THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE CONDITION THAT THEY MAY EXCEED THE -- AND THE TREES BE PRESERVED. >> MARCUS, I HAVE NOT SEEN THIS IN MY TIME HERE, BUT DO WE HAVE A HISTORY OF NEIGHBORING HOA'S MAKING OR REQUESTING CONDITIONS ON A DEVELOPMENT? >> I THINK IT DEPENDS. >> OH STEEPLE CHASE THEY CAME IN AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO OPEN UP THEIR, THEY WANTED THE STUB OUTS TO STAY BLOCKED OFF. >> YOU'RE THINKING OF TWIN CREEKS. >> TWIN CREEKS, YES. THE ENTIRE HOA CAME OUT. WE'VE HAD INSTANCES, IT'S NOT THAT OFTEN. >> DOES STAFF HAVE ANY COMMENT OR POSITION ON THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORTH BY THE AVIARY HOA? >> NO, I REVIEWED THAT. AND I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, AND I ALLUDED TO THIS EARLIER, I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALWAYS TALKS ABOUT CONNECTIVITY, PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY. IT'S VERY RARE YOU DON'T SEE THESE LARGE LOT BAR DITCH DEVELOPMENTS WITH SIDEWALKS. WE CAN'T SAY THAT THAT CAN'T HAPPEN, IT CAN ABSOLUTELY HAPPEN. IT CAN BE AN AMENITY ESPECIALLY FOR THESE LARGER LOTS. MAINLY BECAUSE AGAIN YOU DON'T HAVE ANY TRAILS WITHIN THE SYSTEM. YOU DO ONLY HAVE ABOUT 45 LOTS. BUT SIDEWALKS CAN'T BE ACCOMPLISHED, TYPICALLY SIDEWALKS ARE BUILT WHEN THE HOMEOWNER IS BUILDING THE HOMES, NOT NECESSARILY THE DEVELOPER. SO WHEN EACH HOME IS BEING BUILT A SIDEWALK IS BEING PUT IN PROBABLY WITH LIKE A PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT THAT NEEDS TO SIT ON THE PROPERTY BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT THAT SIDEWALK IN THE BAR DITCH OBVIOUSLY IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO SIT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITH AN ACCESS EASEMENT. NEVERTHELESS AS FAR AS TREES, FOLKS TEND TO NOT WANT TO SEE THINGS CLEAR CUT. LEAVING A LOT OF THE TREES HELPS CREATE THAT ESTABLISHED LOOK, THAT ESTABLISHED FEELING. I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN REMEMBER [01:45:01] SOME OF THE OTHER AVIARY REQUESTS. I THINK THEY WERE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THAT EVERY SINGLE HOME NOT MATCH, NO ELEVATION MATCH. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, MR. ADAMS HAS SHOWN THAT THE SAME EXTERIOR DESIGN SHALL NOT BE REPEATED FOR ANY DWELLING UNIT ON THE SAME OR OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET. SO ESSENTIALLY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS WHOLE STRETCH NOT HAVING THE SAME ELEVATION. SO THAT'S PRETTY CUSTOM IN OUR OPINION. THAT'S WHY WE DID NOT INCLUDE THAT IN OUR CONDITIONS. THEY DO HAVE SIDEWALKS THERE. THEY HAVE CURB AND SIDEWALKS. THEY'RE OVER AN ACRE IN SIZE. AND THEY HAVE A TRAIL SYSTEM. BUT THEY ARE ONLY MADE UP OF, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN, BUT I THINK IT'S 15 LOTS. THEY ARE BAR DITCHES I BELIEVE. CURBING GUTTERS, SORRY. THEY ARE CURB AND GUTTER. THEIR MAIN ENTRANCE DOES NOT HAVE A MEDIAN. >> WHICH NEIGHBORHOOD ARE THEY IN? >> FACING THE SOUTH. >> ARE THEY THE SOUTH OR TO THE -- THE EAST OKAY. >> THEY HAVE TWO ENTRANCES, THEY HAVE ONE OFF OF SHILOH. >> I DON'T NORMALLY SAY THIS, I NORMALLY PUT IT ON THE DEVELOPER. BUT IN THIS CASE WHERE THEY'RE NOT OVERLOADING THE LAND, THERE ARE LARGER LOTS AND IT IS IN MY OPINION PROPERLY DESIGNED FOR THE AREA THAT IT IS IN, I'M ALMOST CONCERNED THAT IF WE WERE TO PROPOSE A REQUIREMENT OF CURB GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IT MAY BECOME COST PROHIBITIVE TO WHERE WE TURN IT INTO SOMETHING WITH HIGHER DENSITY RATES OR JUST TOTALLY KABASH THE WHOLE THING. . >> SO WITH THAT SAID ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK -- >> MY NAME IS CHAD ADAMS. I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE STAFF ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR ABOUT SIX MONTHS. I'M JUST KIND OF GOING THROUGH DIFFERENT IDEAS, DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THIS WORK. AND WE'VE COME TO THIS PROPOSAL, IT'S 46 LOTS. I KNOW FOR A WHILE IT WAS 45 BUT WE WERE ABLE TO GET ANOTHER LOT ON IT, 46. AND WE'VE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME TALKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS. GOT A GOOD DOSE OF CHIGGERS LAST NIGHT ON STEEPLE CHASE AND WE WALKED THE FENCE ROW WITH THEM AND JUST TALKED WITH THEM. THEIR CONCERNS ARE THAT WE DO CLEAR CUTTING AND NOT HAVE ANY REGARD FOR THEIR TREES. OUR INTENTION IS JUST TO BE ABLE TO GO IN AND HAND CUT THOSE TREES AND PRESERVE AS MANY AS WE CAN. AT THE SAME TIME BE FAIR TO THE RESIDENTS WHO COME INTO THE AREA ALLOWING THEM TO PUT UP A FENCE IN THAT AREA. SO WE'VE ALSO SPENT SOME TIME WITH THE AVIARY HOA. WE REALLY LIKE THAT DEVELOPMENT, WE THINK THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB. WE WISH WE COULD DO CURB AND GUTTER. IT HAS A NICE CLEAN LOOK TO IT. WE HOPE TO MIRROR OR I SHOULD SAY EXCELLENT THE ENTRANCE THAT THE AVIARY HAS. IT'S A VERY NICE ENTRANCE. SO AS THINGS PROGRESS DEPENDING ON WHAT WE CAN DO, WE WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK MAJESTIC IN THAT AREA. I THINK ALL OF THE EXPECTATIONS THAT THE AVIARY HAS EXPRESSED WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REASONABLY MEET OUTSIDE OF OBVIOUSLY THE LARGE INFRASTRUCTURE CONCERNS THAT THEY HAVE. SO I THINK WE'VE MET WITH EVERYBODY AND MET EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS ON THIS. AND DON'T KNOW REALLY WHAT MORE WE COULD DO AND YET HAVE A SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> WE HAVE ONE PERSON WHO SUBMITTED AN ONLINE PARTICIPATION FORM, JASON BOND. MR. BOND SAYS I AM NOT EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS PROJECT. I AM A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER SO I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. MY CONCERN IS WALNUT GROVE IS UNDERDEVELOPED ALREADY. IF THIS GETS APPROVED THERE WILL BE ANOTHER 45 FAMILIES TRAFFIC [01:50:05] ON WALNUT GROVE. WE ALL KNOW WALNUT GROVE NEEDS AN UPGRADE AT SOME POINT FOR SURE. AND THEN WE HAVE ONE PERSON SPEAKING IN SUPPORT, TAYLOR GRAHAM OF 2960 AMERICAN SPARROW DRIVE. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> TAYLOR, 2960 AMERICAN SPARROW IN THE AVIARY THERE. SO THE LETTER CAME, CHAD DID A GREAT JOB AND MET WITH US. I'M A DEVELOPER AS WELL. SO WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. IT REALLY FROM US, IT IS SUPPORT. OBVIOUSLY SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT AGAIN WHEN THE WHOLE DISCUSSION A FEW MINUTES AGO ABOUT THE LETTER MAY NOT GET IT, THAT'S WHY I SIGNED UP. WE HAD NO INTENTION WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT MY NEIGHBORS, I AM THE HOA PRESIDENT, SO MAKING SURE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT MET WITH CHAD AND STUFF AND THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAD ALL GOT TO Y'ALL. SO SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE COST PROHIBITIVE AND I THINK CHAD HAS DONE A GOOD JOB. THE ONLY THING I WANT TO SPEAK TO ON THAT AND AGAIN WE TRUST EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THE PD AND EVERYTHING HE'S SAID ABOUT MAKING IT COMPARABLE TO THE AVIARY ENTRANCES AND STUFF LIKE THAT. OBVIOUSLY I THINK CURBED ROADS WOULD BE NICE, SOMETHING TO BREAK UP THAT STRETCH THERE. IF THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, I UNDERSTAND THAT. THE ONLY THING OF CONCERN TO US AND MYSELF AND AGAIN AS A TRUE DEVELOPER HE'S GOING TO SELL IT OFF TO A BUILDER, OBVIOUSLY THAT MAKES THE MOST SENSE. SOME OF THE BUILDERS YOU NAMED IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT IT IS NOT EVEN SEMICUSTOM. SO OUR CONCERN IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT THIS, A ONE ACRE BAR DITCH KIND OF THAT COUNTRY FEEL, SHILOH FOREST, FOUR TREES, ANY OF THAT, THINK ABOUT MORE OF LIKE A KIND OF SEMI-CUSTOM TRACK HOME NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU HAVE A LOT OF THE SAME HOUSES. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THAT DOESN'T FIT WITH NORTH MIDLOTHIAN. I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE WHAT WE'RE DOING IN ZOE HOLLOW OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S JUST SIMPLY, WE DON'T LIKE MASSEY MEADOWS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, WE CAN'T ENVISION ONE ACRE LOTS. WE JUST HOPE THAT THERE'S STILL SOME KIND OF CUSTOM ELEVATION. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 46 DIFFERENT ONES, IT COULD BE 23. HOPEFULLY THAT ENDS UP WHAT IT'S BEING EVERY OTHER STREET. BUT I JUST WANT Y'ALL TO ENVISION KIND OF LIKE A LILLIAN TYPE HOME OR A GLACIER TYPE HOME EVERY THREE LOTS, THAT'S REALLY MORE OF LIKE A TRACK HOME NEIGHBORHOOD ON BAR DITCH LOTS AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE OUR OWN COMPS. WE HAVE STRUGGLES WHEN WE BUILD OUR AUGUSTA HOMES GETTING COMPS. AND AGAIN NO ONE HAS TO BE IN THE TWO HUNDREDS BUT UP THERE WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO GET INTO THE 150S TO THE 200'S. WE DON'T WANT 125 PER SQUARE FOOT HOUSES THERE. THERE'S A TON OF AREAS IN MIDLOTHIAN THAT HAVE THAT. WE WANT Y'ALL TO THINK ABOUT, IT'S COOL WITH THE BAR DITCH AND ALL OF THAT. IT'S JUST THINKING ABOUT NOT HAVING THE TRACK HOMES AND MAYBE THAT'S MORE THROUGH THE DEED RESTRICTIONS BUT THAT WAS OUR BIGGEST CONCERN. >> I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT. I THINK 15 YEARS AGO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE. BUT I'M THINKING SOMEWHERE MORE LIKE JORDAN RANCH WHERE THEY HAVE THE BAR DITCHES AND STILL HAVE VARIOUS HOUSES. THE LAND PRICES IN MIDLOTHIAN HAVE BEEN SO HIGH, THAT TO BUY AN ACRE HOUSE AND THEN BUILD A HOUSE THE BANKS JUST WON'T -- >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, THANK YOU. >> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK BUT HAS NOT SIGNED UP? HEARING NONE I'LL ENTERTAIN MOTION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SO MADE. >> A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. DO I HAVE A SECOND. THE MOTION IS WITH OR WITHOUT RECOMMENDATIONS BY STAFF? SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONS PRESENTED BY STAFF. >> SECOND. >> AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? NO. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CONSIDER ITEM NUMBER 014 WHICH [014. Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian’s Zoning Ordinance and map by establishing the initial zoning classification as Agricultural (A) District, for a property that is approximately 18.45± acres out of the William Morgan Survey, Abstract No. 723. Located at 1867 E. Ashford Lane (Case No. Z22-2020-98).] IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND ACT UPON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIDLOTHIAN'S ZONING ORDINANCE AND MAP BY ESTABLISHING THE INITIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT FOR A PROPERTY THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 18.45 ACRES LOCATED AT 1867 EAST ASHFORD LANE. >> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THE CITY COUNCIL DID ADOPT AN [01:55:04] ORDINANCE FOR A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF THIS 18 ACRES. ALL TERRITORY ANNEXED WITHIN THE CITY IS ALWAYS TEMPORARILY CLASSIFIED AS AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT UNTIL A PERMANENT ZONING IS ESTABLISHED BY COUNCIL. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE SINCE WE'VE ALREADY DONE THE ANNEXATION, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT THE PROPERTY BE PERMANENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. WE DID SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES BY MAIL. THE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ZONING REQUEST AS PRESENTED. WITH THAT I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUICK QUESTION, MARCUS. I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM A PAUL CUNNINGHAM AT 2621 PERGOLA COURT EAST. HOW FAR AWAY IS THAT PROPERTY? >> THAT'S ACTUALLY FOR ANOTHER ITEM. >> OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, I HAVE RANDY HAMPTON. HEY, RANDY. COME ON UP. >> HELLO. RANDY HAMPTON 1875 ASHFORD LANE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THIS WAS GOING TO BE STRICTLY ZONED AS AGRICULTURE NOT ANY DEVELOPMENT. >> ONE HOUSE. >> THERE'S A HOUSE ON THAT DEVELOPMENT. >> OKAY. >> BUT IT WOULD BE ON 2.4 ACRES, AND THAT WOULD KEEP IT FROM BEING A GAS STATION OR ANYTHING ELSE. >> OKAY. SO THEY CAN'T CUT THROUGH OUR PROPERTY AT 1875 TO GET TO THEIR -- >> OKAY. >> AND THAT WAS JUST MY CONCERN WAS IF THERE'S GOING TO BE MAJOR TRAFFIC THROUGH THERE IN A SUBDIVISION GOING IN THERE THAT I WOULD HAVE TO DO BECAUSE MY PROPERTY, I MEAN WE PAY TAXES ON THE DIRT ROAD WHICH IS, IT WASN'T CONSIDERED A ROAD BY THE COUNTY. >> RIGHT. >> AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS BY THE CITY OR NOT. >> I'M CONFUSED. >> ARE WE ON -- >> ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS ROAD? >> YES. >> OKAY. >> I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE THE COUNTY WE LOOKED AT PUTTING A HOUSE FOR MY PARENTS, THE COUNTY SAID IT DIDN'T EXIST. SO I'M GOING OKAY. >> MARCUS, IF YOU CAN RECAP THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE A LITTLE CONFUSION. THIS IS HOW MANY ACRES, 18 ACRES. >> I READ OFF THE WRONG THING, I APOLOGIZE WHEN I ANNOUNCED IT. I MISREAD SO TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD WE ARE ON NUMBER 014 WHICH IS, NO I READ THE RIGHT, 18 ACRES. YES. >> SO THIS APPLICANT WANTS TO VOLUNTARILY ANNEX 18 ACRES AND BUILD ONE HOUSE ON IT? >> YES, SIR. >> MORE POWER TO HIM. >> NOW IF THEY WERE TO EVER, TO KEEP THIS IN LINE, IT'S ZONED AGRICULTURAL, YOU COULD SIMPLIFY THIS BUT EVEN IF YOU DID DO THAT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO -- SHOULD HAVE A PRIVATE DRIVE ACCESS EASEMENT THAT ALLOWS THIS PERSON TO ALL ACCESS OFF OF THAT SHARED DRIVE. >> SO TO ALLEVIATE, I'M SORRY, YOUR NAME AGAIN, SIR? MR. HAMPTON'S CONCERNS IN ORDER FOR THAT TO DEVELOP ANY FURTHER, ONE, WE WOULD HAVE TO EITHER IT WOULD DEVELOP AS YOU JUST SAID OR GO THROUGH A PD OR SOME OTHER FORM OR FASHION AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAMMER OUT THE ACCESS OF IT WHICH IS NOT A PROCESS THAT WE SEE FORTHCOMING AT THIS TIME? >> ABSOLUTELY. YES, SIR, CORRECT. >> RANDY, WHERE EXACTLY ARE YOU? >> I'M AT THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT. >> THIS HOUSE RIGHT HERE. >> RIGHT, OKAY. AND THAT ROAD, DRIVEWAY WHATEVER IT IS IS ACTUALLY ON YOUR PROPERTY? >> YES. >> AND THEY HAVE AN EASEMENT FOR IT? [02:00:05] >> ACCORDING TO THE COUNTY THAT ROAD DOESN'T EXIST. AND THEY GO THAT ROAD DOESN'T EXIST. >> AS FAR AS COUNTY ROAD, THERE IS NO COUNTY ROAD BUT THERE ARE TONS OF PRIVATE DRIVES. >> SURE. >> THAT WE SHARE. >> BUT THERE'S A WAY IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S SPLIT OUT OVER HERE. >> IS THERE SEWER SERVICE WITHIN 2,000 FEET OF THAT PROPERTY? >> WITHIN, NO, SIR, NOT SEWER SERVICE WITHIN 2,000 FEET OF THIS PROPERTY. >> SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TREAD THROUGH THIS WITH THE PRESUMED ASSUMPTION AT SOME POINT SOMEONE IS GOING TO TRY TO PUT 50 HOUSES ON THAT LAND THROUGH A PD? >> NO, SIR. >> ONE HOUSE ON IT, THAT'S FINE. I DON'T HAVE A COMPLAINT. >> THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I WAS GETTING AT. I WAS GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CONCERN IS ADDRESSED IF WE BRING THIS INTO THE CITY, I DON'T WANT TO SEE SIX MONTHS FROM NOW A DEVELOPER COME AND SAY HEY I WANT TO PUT 50 HOUSES AND THEY'RE ALL GOING TO DRIVE BY YOUR FRONT DOOR. >> THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR IT EITHER. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SHOWS THIS AREA, THIS MAY BE THE RURAL SECTION OF OUR COMP PLAN. BUT I BELIEVE IT'S EITHER THE COUNTRY OR RURAL, I DON'T KNOW IF I MARKED THAT ON HERE. I THINK I SAID YEAH PART OF THE COUNTRY MODULE. >> PD'S ARE A FICKLE THING. >> ONCE YOU START EXTENDING SEWER THINGS -- SEWER LINES, WHERE IS THE SCHOOL IN RELATION TO WHERE WE'RE AT? I THINK THE SCHOOL IS WAY THAT'S THE CLOSEST SEWER LINE OFF OF RIGHT WHERE THAT SCHOOL IS. >> AND THEN THE NEW ONE IS RIGHT BEHIND -- >> YES, SIR. >> THEY DID LA RUE MILLER'S ENTRANCE AND OFF THE OTHER ROAD. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE NO OTHER INDIVIDUALS REGISTERED TO SPEAK. IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE TO SPEAK, NO WE HAVE NOT CLOSED. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SO MADE. >> A MOTION. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HILL. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> OPPOSED? NO ONE OPPOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ANY MOTIONS? A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN, ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. [015. Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian’s Zoning Ordinance and map by establishing the initial zoning classification as Single Family-One (SF-1) District, for a property that is approximately 2.338± acres out of the A. Jenkins Survey, Abstract No. 554. The property is located 500± feet north of Pergola Court West and directly to the west of Ledgestone Lane (Case No. Z23-2020-99).] NOW WE'RE ON TO 015 WHICH IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH AN INITIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT ONE DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED PROPERTY THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 2.338 ACRES LOCATED AT PERGOLA COURT WITHEST AND DIRECTLY TO THE WEST OF LEDGESTONE LANE. >> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. THIS IS A VERY SIMILAR SITUATION. ON THE 14TH OF JULY CITY COUNCIL ALSO BROUGHT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY INTO THE CITY. IT ALSO DID RECEIVE THAT TEMPORARY CLASSIFICATION OF THE ZONING OF AGRICULTURAL. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY NOT BE ZONED AGRICULTURAL BUT ACTUALLY BE ZONED SINGLE FAMILY ONE. THAT WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES JUST TO THE SOUTH OF IT. IN ADDITION TO THAT, ZONING AND AGRICULTURAL REQUIRES IT TO BE FOUR ACRES IN SIZE. THIS IS 2.5 ACRES IN SIZE. SO REALLY THAT IS THE ONLY OPTION IS A SINGLE FAMILY ONE ZONING DESIGNATION. NOW IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THIS AREA IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER AREA IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S ACTUALLY FALLING WITHIN THE SUBURBAN MODULE LOW DENSITY AREA. SO LOTS CAN BE WITHIN A RANGE OF 15,000 TO 20,000 SQUARE FEET. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HALF ACRES IN THIS AREA. BUT THIS APPLICANT IS PLANNING TO PUT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE 2.5 ACRES. THEY DO HAVE ACCESS. THIS ROAD HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY JUST YET. I FORGOT THE NAME OF THIS ROAD. >> SUNNYVALE? >> SUNBEAM. THIS ROAD SHOULD BE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY SOON. AND THE APPLICANT WHEN THIS LAND, WHEN WE ACTUALLY PURCHASE RIGHT AWAY FOR LEDGESTONE LANE RUNNING THROUGH HERE, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT THAT WE ALLOWED FOR ACCESS FOR THIS PROPERTY TO ACCESS LEDGESTONE LANE AND THIS PROPERTY TO ACCESS LEDGESTONE LANE. THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO ACTUALLY ACCESS SUNBEAMS WHICH [02:05:01] IS MORE IDEAL TO GET THEM OFF OF THAT MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. OTHER THAN THAT WE DID SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS ON THIS ONE. DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES FOR THIS PARTICULAR ONE. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. WITH THAT I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. >> BASICALLY THIS APPLICANT WANTS TO VOLUNTARILY ANNEX THE PROPERTY TO UTILIZE AN SF1, RIGHT? SF1 TO ADEQUATELY AND PROPERLY BUILT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE OUTSIDE OF STRAIGHT ZONING OR OUTSIDE OF HIS CAPABILITY. >> I'LL GO ONE STEP FURTHER. HE ACTUALLY HAD A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND WHEN WE DID THE THREE YEAR ANNEXATION IN THIS AREA IN ORDER FOR HIM TO BUILD A HOME, IT AUTOMATICALLY TRIGGERS THAT THEY VOLUNTARILY ANNEX IT IF THEY WANT TO CONSTRUCT OR DO, OTHER THAN THAT THE LON HAS TO STAY AGRICULTURALLY EXEMPT OR THEY HAVE TO HAVE A TIMBER EXEMPTION. THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER EXEMPTIONS THAT HAVE TO EXIST IN ORDER FOR THAT LAND TO STAY IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THAT'S KIND OF FORCING IT TO COME INTO THE CITY IN ESSENCE. >> AND JUST FROM MY OWN CLARIFICATION, THERE'S NO WAY AROUND THAT REQUIREMENT? >> WELL THE APPLICANT DOESN'T WANT TO KEEP THE AG EXEMPTION ON IT. THEY DO WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE. >> OKAY. >> SO THIS WAS THE OPTION THEY OPTED FOR. >> OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT. >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 15. SEEING NONE I'LL ENTERTAIN -- >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HILL. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> THE MOTION FOR PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. DO WE HAVE DISCUSSION, MOTIONS? >> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> SAME SIGN IF YOU'RE OPPOSED. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. WE'RE NOW ON TO AGENDA ITEM 016 [016. Conduct a public hearing and consider and act upon an ordinance amending the City of Midlothian’s Zoning Ordinance and map by establishing the initial zoning classification as Single Family-One (SF-1) District, for a property that is approximately 2.502± acres out of the A. Jenkins Survey, Abstract No. 554. The property is located 500± feet north of Pergola Court East and directly to the east of Ledgestone Lane (Case No. Z24-2020-100).] WHICH IS KIND OF A MIRROR IMAGE. >> ABSOLUTELY. SAME SCENARIO HERE. ON THE 14TH THEY MOVED FORWARD WITH THE ANNEXATION OF THIS PROPERTY. WE ARE RECOMMENDING SF1 BECAUSE IT DOES FALL IN LINE WITH THE 2.5 ACRES. THIS ALSO IS A PART OF THAT SUBDIVISION MODULE, SUBURBAN MODULE LOW DENSITY. SO THIS IS OBVIOUSLY EXCEEDING THOSE REQUIREMENTS. NOTIFICATIONS WERE PROVIDED, WERE SENT OUT BY STATE LAW. WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION FROM A SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER. BUT THE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS PRESENTED AND WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. THAT SAME EMAIL THAT WE'RE ALL HOLDING HERE FROM PAUL CUNNINGHAM SAYS HE DIDN'T RECEIVE A NOTICE BUT I GUESS HIS MAIN CONCERN IS THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A FLOODPLAIN WILL MOVE THE FLOODPLAIN CLOSER TO OTHER DEVELOPED PROPERTIES, I ASSUME HIS PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THIS AND HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT FLOODING. >> I BELIEVE THE PERSON IN QUESTION MIGHT LIVE IN THIS LOCATION HERE. THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FLOODPLAIN BACK HERE. THERE IS ONE AREA HERE THAT IS COMPLETELY OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN. THAT WOULD BE THE AREA THAT LEGALLY, TECHNICALLY IS BUILDABLE. THE ENTIRE LOT IS NOT WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN. >> TO BE CLEAR WHEN THIS PROPERTY OWNER COMES TO BUILD A HOUSE, HE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THE PROCEDURE AND APPROVAL PROCESS TO DO SO WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT? >> ABSOLUTELY. IF HE'S GOING TO, YOU REALLY CAN NEVER ALTER THE FLOODPLAIN. IF YOU DO ALTER THE FLOODPLAIN YOU HAVE TO -- >> BUILD ABOVE IT. >> EXACTLY. YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO BUILD ABOVE I THINK I FORGET, 2-FOOT FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION ABOVE. AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, YEAH, YOU CANNOT ALTER THE FLOODPLAIN IN ANY WAY. I CAN SAY THAT SEWER LINES DO RUN TO ABOUT THIS LOCATION HERE THAT'S SERVING THIS NEW BUILDING. THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE THAT ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO IF YOU WANTED TO HE COULD ACTUALLY CONNECT TO OUR SEWER LINE. AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TALKED TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT IF THEY DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR NOT. >> BUT BECAUSE OF THE FLOODPLAIN LIKE WE WERE JUST TALKING, THE ACTUAL USEABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY IS PRETTY MINIMAL. >> VERY MINIMAL. HE HAS TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE ACRE OUTSIDE THE FLOODPLAIN. IF HE'S GOING TO USE ON SITE SEPTIC. IF HE'S NOT GOING TO USE ON SITE SEPTIC, HE CAN ACTUALLY TIE IN [02:10:01] TO THE SEWER AND BE UNDER AN ACRE AND THAT'S LEGAL TO DO. >> HOW MUCH OF THIS PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN? >> WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A PLAT. WE RECEIVED THE METES AND BOUNDS TO DO THE ZONING OF IT. BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN OFFICIAL PLAT HAS NOT OCCURRED JUST YET. THAT USUALLY DELINEATES WHERE EXACTLY THAT FLOOD LINE IS AS WELL. >> MR. CRAWFORD IS NOT HERE. OH ACTUALLY I KNOW THE APPLICANT. >> ARE YOU MR. CUNNINGHAM? WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK AND PRESENT ON THAT? AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS PAUL CUNNINGHAM. I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR WHAT MY ADDRESS IS BUT I'VE ALREADY HAD MY PERSONAL INFORMATION FROM THAT EMAIL SENT OUT TO THE APPLICANT WHICH IS A SAFETY CONCERN FOR ME. ONE OF MY ISSUES THAT I HAD TO BRING UP. BUT BASED ON FEMA I DON'T SEE HOW THEY CAN GET A HOUSE BUILT IN THIS LITTLE AREA WHICH WOULD BE THE FLOODPLAIN. >> MY POINT TO THAT WAS IN THE END NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE THIS PROPERTY THERE'S GOING TO BE JUST ONE HOUSE ON THIS THING FOREVER AND EVER AMEN. RIGHT. >> MY ISSUES ARE WE NEVER RECEIVED NOTICE AS THE LETTER THAT Y'ALL SENT OUT SAYS IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR OUR NEIGHBOR COMING TO US AND SHOWING US THEIR LETTER, WE WOULD HAVE HAD NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON. >> WE ONLY PROVIDE NOTICE TO KNOWS IN THE 200 FEET SO IF YOU WERE NOT WITHIN 200 FEET YOU WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN NOTICE. OKAY. OKAY. THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. >> I MAY HAVE GOTTEN NOTIFICATION THAT YOUR INFORMATION WAS REDACTED WHEN YOU REACHED OUT TO THE CITY. IS THAT TRUE? >> AS FAR AS I KNOW NONE OF MY INFORMATION WAS REDACTED BECAUSE I RECEIVED A PHONE CALL ON A PERSONAL CELL NUMBER WHICH I WAS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT. I DON'T LIKE RECEIVING THEM. BECAUSE I'M A PUBLIC SERVANT, I'M NOT ENTITLED TO NOTIFICATION? >> NO IT'S BECAUSE YOUR ADDRESS WASN'T ON THE IMPACT LIST. >> YES, SIR. YOU MAKE A CHOICE. WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NOTICE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE TAX ROLL. SO FOR EXAMPLE PEOPLE THAT FORM CORPORATIONS AND HAVE AGENTS, WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT DO THAT, SOMETIMES THEY COMPLAIN THEY DON'T GET NOTICE BECAUSE THEY'RE AN AGENT OF SERVICE. SO IT'S A CHOICE YOU MAKE. YOU TRADE OFF ON THAT. THE SECURITY ISSUE IF YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW YOUR ADDRESS. BUT WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH PEOPLE ESPECIALLY WITH DEVELOPERS, WE DO WANT THEM TO TRY TO WORK THINGS OUT WITH THAT. THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THE CITY WOULD HAVE PROVIDED YOUR ADDRESS TO THE DEVELOPER. MR. CRAWFORD ISN'T A SECURITY RISK TO ANYONE, HE'S A LOCAL RESIDENT TRYING TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY. >> I DON'T KNOW HIM. >> TO ADDRESS THAT CONCERN YOU SAID WHERE I PUBLISHED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, YOU SIR WOULD HAVE DONE THE EXACT SAME THING WHEN YOU APPROACHED THAT PODIUM, YOU WOULD HAVE GIVEN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> I ASKED NOT TO. IT WAS DONE, I DIDN'T SAY THAT YOU PUBLISHED IT. SOMEBODY RECEIVED THAT EMAIL AND SENT IT OUT. THAT'S WHAT I KNOW BECAUSE I'VE NEVER HAD DEALINGS WITH MR. CRAWFORD. THERE'S NO WAY HE WOULD HAVE MY PHONE NUMBER. >> SIR, WE UNDERSTAND. BUT I MEAN WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE CRIMINALS OR HAVE AN INTENT TO HARM ANYONE. WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IS PEOPLE TRYING TO DEVELOP PROPERTY AND TRYING TO REACH OUT TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM ABOUT THE PROPERTY AND WHAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND THAT'S THE INTERCHANGE THAT WE ALL HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT HOW THE CITY OPERATES. >> I HAVE NO IDEA WHO HE IS AND IF HE WAS TRYING TO REACH OUT TO ME, IF HE'S TRYING TO REACH OUT TO ME, Y'ALL KNOW MY HOUSE IS THERE WHETHER IT'S ON THE TAX ROLLS OR NOT. >> YES, SIR. >> I MEAN, MY CONCERN IS THAT [02:15:03] WITHIN FOUR HOURS OF MY SENDING THAT EMAIL I WAS RECEIVING PHONE CALLS. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> I'D LIKE TO KNOW WAS MY INFORMATION SHARED? >> RIGHT, IT'S NOT FOR DISCUSSION. WE CAN BRING THAT UP WITH THE CITY LATER. IF YOU WANT TO BRING THAT UP WITH THE CITY COUNCIL, YOU CAN BRING THAT UP WITH THEM, NOT THE COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL, THE COUNSEL FOR THE CITY IS WHO YOU WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT CONCERN WITH. >> I THINK CLYDE HAD HIS HAND UP. >> SO THE CONCERN IS THE FLOODPLAIN, ANY OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT? >> I AM CONCERNED THAT ANY CONSTRUCTION IN THE FLOODPLAIN IS GOING TO MOVE THE FLOODPLAIN WHICH IS GOING TO CAUSE DAMAGE TO MY PROPERTY. I'M CONCERNED WHAT'S GOING TO BE DONE BY THE OWNER OR THE CITY OR WHOMEVER TO KEEP THE FLOODPLAIN FROM BEING DISTURBED. >> AND THAT WILL BE, ALL WE'RE DOING TO DO IS DECIDING WHAT THIS PROPERTY WILL BE. THAT MAKES IT SOUND MORE DETAILED, WE'RE SAYING WHAT ZONING IT WILL FALL INTO. SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT WHETHER IT'S GOING TO BE ZONED SINGLE FAMILY ONE WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT OUT OF THIS 2.5 ACRES YOU COULD HAVE ONE HOUSE AND THAT WOULD BE ON THIS SIZE LOT. FOR EXAMPLE WE COULD HAVE HAD A DEVELOPER THAT CAME IN AND DECIDED THAT THEY WANTED TO PUT THREE UNITS ON THAT ACRE AND THEY WERE REQUESTING A HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT SO YOU HAVE 6 OR 7 HOUSES ON THAT SPACE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE MAKING IS HOW DENSE IS YOUR NEIGHBOR GOING TO BE. I'M SURE THE PERSON WHO DID IT LOOKED AT IT AND SAID IT'S 2.5 ACRES WITH TREES IS THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S RELATIVELY KIND OF LOW IMPACT, THEY'LL KEEP THE TREES, THEY WILL NOT, THEY'LL UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEMS WITH DRAINAGE. THEY'LL BE JUST AS CONCERNED AS YOU ARE PROBABLY ABOUT PRIVACY AND SECURITY. THAT'S WHY THEY ARE PICKING THIS PARTICULAR LOT FOR PURCHASE. >> THERE'S NO PRIVACY -- >> IT CHANGES THE LOT BUT IT'S STILL MORE THAN A HOUSE IN LAWSON FARMS OR ANY OTHER SUBDIVISION. >> ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE TOLD WHEN WE WERE PURCHASED WAS BECAUSE OF THE FLOODPLAIN NOTHING COULD EVER BE DEVELOPED THERE, IS THAT NOT THE CASE? >> OBVIOUSLY THAT IS WHAT THE DEVELOPER TOLD YOU AND THAT IS NOT, THAT IS NOT A -- THAT'S A DEVELOPER. SO I DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT. >> WHICH IS WHY IF YOU'VE NOTICED THROUGH THIS MEETING AND THROUGH OTHER MEETINGS, WE HAVE ACTUALLY PUSHED TO INCLUDE VERBAGE IN THE NOTIFICATION PROCESS IN THE PURCHASE PROCESS FOR POTENTIAL ISSUES MOVING FORWARD WHERE WE CAN WHICH IS WHAT WE DID WITH THE AIRPORT JUST NOW AND WHICH WE'VE DONE WITH THE QUERY AND THE CEMENT PLANS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE TRY AND DO WHAT WE CAN THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT RESIDENTS THAT PURCHASE THERE KNOW THAT THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT IT. BUT WE CAN'T CONTROL IF A DEVELOPER OR REAL ESTATE AGENT OR ANYONE ELSE IN THAT FACT LIES. >> AND I APPRECIATE THAT. >> GENTLEMEN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS DOING WHAT Y'ALL DO, YOU COULD GO INTO A FLOODPLAIN, A 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND YOU COULD COVER WHATEVER YOU TOOK OUT. SO IF THEY WANTED TO CHANGE THE FLOODPLAIN THEY COULD AS LONG AS THE QUANTITY OF WATER REMAINS THE SAME AS IT PASSES THROUGH THAT PROPERTY, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. >>> THOSE COSTS START AROUND $50,000 FROM THE PROJECTS I'VE HAD AND GO UP FROM THERE. YES, IT'S A VERY COSTLY LITTLE PROJECT. >> I AM CONCERNED THAT Y'ALL ARE SHOWING PROPERTY LINES ON MY PROPERTY. >> IT'S AN APPROXIMATION. >> AS LONG AS WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT. >> YES. >> HOW WILL THIS BEING REZONED FROM AGRICULTURAL AFFECT MY TAX VALUES? >> IT WILL NOT. THAT'S SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT [02:20:01] FROM THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW. >> THANK YOU, MR. CUNNINGHAM. >> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, RAISE YOUR HAND. SEEING NONE. >> MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ANY DISCUSSION. >> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> MOTION TO APPROVE. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BATEMAN. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE. >> OPPOSED? NONE OPPOSED, THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT ATTENDED THIS EVENING. ANY NEW BUSINESS OR DISCUSSION? [Staff and Commissioner Announcements] ANNOUNCEMENTS? YES, PLEASE PUT ON THE AGENDA TO DISCUSS NOTICE AND HOW WE HANDLE WHAT THE EXPECTATION OF THE PUBLIC IS IN TERMS OF SUBMISSIONS SO THAT THEY KNOW AND I THINK WE WOULD PROBABLY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF HOW WE WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE OUR PROCEEDINGS AND THEN THEY WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO REVIEW IT AND THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS. BUT OUR LAWYER MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION. BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO AT LEAST OPEN THE DISCUSSION ON THE AGENDA WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN AND THEN HAVE STAFF'S INPUT ABOUT WHAT WORKS FOR STAFF WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE A BUNCH OF THINGS AT THE 11TH HOUR AND ALSO IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC, THE TIMELINE WHERE WE LIMIT THE 20 PAGE. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO SUBMIT 20 PAGES, THEY SHOULD AT LEAST DO IT THREE DAYS AHEAD OF TIME OR A WEEK AHEAD OF TIME SO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THAT. SO HEARING NO OTHER NEW BUSINESS OR NO OTHER ITEMS OF COMMENT * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.