Aug 11, 2026 Planning &amp; Zoning

MY NAME IS KATHY CAEL.

I LIVE AT 4 0 5 BROOKSIDE ROAD.

AND, UH, I JUST WANTED TO COME IN AND, AND THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH, UH, THANK YOU.

PLANNING AND ZONING AND CHAIRMAN JOHNSON FOR MEETING AND CONSIDERING THE RESIDENTS OF WAXAHATCHEE.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, ESPECIALLY LETTING Y'ALL LISTEN TO ME RANTING, WAVE AND FUSS ABOUT STUFF.

OKAY? AND, UH, SO MY HOME AND DRIVEWAY WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET, 300 FEET FROM THIS MAJOR, UH, ARTERIAL FOR THE MENTAL DEVELOPMENT.

AND I WANTED TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN, AND I KNOW THAT SOME OF THIS STUFF HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF THE AGENDA HERE TONIGHT.

UH, BUT ABOUT ALL THE MENTO STUFF, OKAY.

AROUND BROOKSIDE ROAD, AGAIN, THERE'S NOT BEEN ANY SIGNIFICANT COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE RESIDENTS ON BROOKSIDE ROAD.

THEY HAVE YET TO COME AND SAY, WHAT CAN WE DO? YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT WE PLAN.

ANY KIND OF ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

NOTHING.

AND I HAVE MANY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS CONGLOMERATE.

NOT ONLY WHAT IT WILL DO TO MY HOUSE VALUE, BUT WHAT IT WILL IT DO TO THE WILDLIFE AROUND US.

I HAVE HOGS THAT COME IN MY FRONT YARD.

I HAVE COYOTES, I HAVE BOBCATS, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE CHICKENS AND STUFF.

I DO HAVE THAT.

AND SNAKES.

AND Y'ALL HAVE SEEN PICTURES OF THE SNAKES AND STUFF THAT I HAVE.

AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE WILDLIFE TOO, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO CONCERN FOR US.

THEY'RE CERTAINLY NOT GONNA HAVE ANY CONCERN FOR THAT KIND OF STUFF EITHER, IN MY OPINION.

AND, UH, AND THEN ALSO, NOT JUST THE VALUE OF MY HOUSE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE NOISE THAT OUR HOMES ON BROOKSIDE WILL BE SUBJECTED TO, UH, THE LACK OF MEDICAL FACILITIES HERE? OKAY.

WHEN YOU GO TO EMERGENCY ROOM, WHAT DOES A VISIT LOOK LIKE RIGHT NOW? THREE TO FOUR HOURS.

YOU BUILD ALL THESE PEOPLE IN HERE.

WHAT'S IT GONNA DO TO OUR MEDICAL FACILITIES? YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, HELICOPTER 'EM TO DALLAS SOMEWHERE OR SOMETHING.

ANOTHER, I GUESS AT, AT SIX OR $18,000 FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR A HELICOPTER TRIP.

SO, YEAH.

AND AGAIN, OUR HOMES WILL BE SUBJECT TO EASY ACCESS TO ASSAULT AND BURGLARY TO THOSE HAVING BEEN DALLAS PD.

I'M TELLING YOU, I KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT THAT.

WHEN YOU HAVE A ROAD THAT HAS A ACCESS, EASY ACCESS, AND IT'S JUST OUR ROAD, JUST OUR HOUSES RIGHT THERE, IT'S IN AND OUT VERY QUICKLY, VERY, VERY QUICKLY.

AND IT WILL BE EASY ACCESS TO ASSAULT THOSE OF US ON ROAD, ON BROOKSIDE, AS WELL AS BURGLARY OF THE OLDER CITIZENS THAT ARE ON THERE.

'CAUSE I'VE BEEN THERE OVER 30 YEARS, AND MY HOUSE WAS ONE OF THE FIRST SIX HOUSES ON THE BLOCK.

AND BY THE WAY, MY HOUSE QUALIFIES FOR ONE OF THOSE LITTLE SIGNS IN THE FRONT YARD.

OKAY? AND, UH, OKAY, WHAT ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THAT'S GONNA BE ON BROOKSIDE THAT RESIDENTS WILL HAVE TO NEGOTIATE? THAT'S PART OF THIS PROBLEM HERE.

THEY WANT THE ROAD, THE ENTRANCE ROAD TO BROOKSIDE FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO COME DIRECTLY INTO MY FRONT DOOR, INTO MY HOUSE, THE LIGHTS IN THE EVENING OR WHATEVER.

NOW GRANTED, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THERE, BUT HOW MANY TIMES ARE THEY GONNA MISS THE ROAD AND COMING DOWN OUR ROAD AND STUFF TOO.

AND THE LIGHTS DIRECTLY INTO MY FRONT ROOMS. AND IF YOU'LL WAIT AND LOOK WHEN YOU SEE THE PLAT, YOU'LL SEE WHAT IT IS.

MY HOUSE IS RIGHT ON THE END OF THAT ENTRANCE.

[00:05:01]

I'M NOT EVEN SURE IT'S GONNA BE THAT MUCH.

AND THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO ME IS EVEN CLOSER.

IT'S RIGHT SMACK ON THEIR, ON THEIR DRIVEWAY.

SO THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE EITHER WITH THAT AND I DON'T KNOW, BUT, YOU KNOW, TO TURN, TO GET ON BROOKSIDE DIRECTLY COMING INTO MY HOUSE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'D WANT THAT HAPPENING TO YOUR HOUSE.

WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU WANT THAT HAVE DRIVE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE DRIVING DIRECTLY INTO YOUR FRONT DOOR? I WOULDN'T, I CERTAINLY DON'T.

AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF Y'ALL WOULD WANT THAT EITHER.

AND ALL THE INCONSIDERATE AND LACK OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEVELOPER, AS I SAID, IS A CONCERN.

THEY'VE NOT TALKED TO ANY OF US.

AND I HAVE AN EXAMPLE HERE.

I CAME HOME LAST MONTH AND THERE WERE BIG TRUCKS ON BROOKSIDE, BIG TRUCKS THERE.

THEY WERE REPLACING THE EXISTING ELECTRIC POLES, OKAY? AND I ASKED THE HEAD PERSON THAT WAS THERE, WHAT'S GOING ON? OH, WE'RE REPLACING ALL THE ELECTRIC POLES ON BROOKSIDE.

I SAID, OH, REALLY? AND I SAID, REALLY? HOW MANY? OH, WE'VE GOT A ORDER FOR FOR SIX.

I SAID, EXCUSE ME, SIR, THERE'S NOT BUT TWO POLES ON BROOKSIDE.

I SAID, HE SAID, NO, NO, NO, WE'VE GOTTA ORDER FOR SIX.

I SAID, THERE'S TWO POLES ON BROOKSIDE TWO.

AND HE KEPT SAYING, NO, I'VE GOT THE ORDER RIGHT HERE.

IT SAYS SIX.

AND I SAID, SIR, THERE'S TWO POLES, ELECTRIC POLES ON BROOKSIDE, AND YOU'VE JUST REPLACED, YOU'RE WORKING ON THE LAST ONE RIGHT THERE.

BUT NO, NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT MY THING SAYS.

I SAID, SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GET IN MY CAR AND LET ME DRIVE YOU DOWN THE ROAD AND LET YOU COUNT THE POLES? OH NO, I'LL DO THAT.

HE GETS IN HIS TRUCK, GOES TO THE END OF BROOKSIDE AND COMES BACK AND HE SAYS, UM, UH, I THINK I NEED TO CALL THE PERSON AHEAD OF THIS.

I SAID, YES, SIR.

THERE'S TWO POLES ON BROOKSIDE ROAD.

AND I, YOU KNOW, HERE.

SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IF THAT DEVELOPER DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT HE'S ORDERING ABOUT HERE, HOW CAN I BE CON, YOU KNOW, NOT CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT ELSE THEY WANT TO DO TO US WHEN THEY CAN'T EVEN DECIDE.

AND I SAID, SIR, WHERE DO YOUR OTHER FOUR POLES GO? I DON'T KNOW.

AND I SAID, LET ME TELL YOU WHERE I THINK THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GO RIGHT THROUGH THIS VACANT LOT RIGHT THROUGH HERE.

UH, COMES BACK, YOU'RE RIGHT.

I SAID, TWO POLES ON BROOKSIDE.

I'M SERIOUS.

AND WHY THEY REPLACED 'EM, I HAVE NO CLUE.

THE TWO THAT WERE THERE WERE FINE, AND THEY'RE STILL STANDING THERE.

BUT ANYWAY, AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I'M SO CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PROJECT THAT THEY HAVE HERE.

THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERING US AT ALL.

THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERING BROOKSIDE PEOPLE AT ALL.

THEY'VE NOT TALKED TO US.

THEY'VE NOT CALLED US IN.

THEY'VE NOT SAID ANYTHING.

AND I STILL HAVE NOTHING, YOU KNOW, MOWED BEHIND MY HOUSE YET.

I CAN'T WAIT FOR THEM TO HAVE TO DO THAT.

IT'S STILL STANDING.

IT'S ABOUT THIS TALL NOW, ALL THE WEEDS AND STUFF BEHIND MY FENCE LINE THAT THEY HAVE YET TO MOW AND TAKE CARE OF AND STUFF.

AND I'M GOING LIKE, IS THIS WHAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE? IS THIS WHAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE ALL THESE NEXT YEARS COMING UP? IS THIS WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO TO US? NOT ANY CONCERN AT ALL.

YOU KNOW, THE, THE BIG TRUCKS ON THE ROAD, NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.

AND I'M GOING, LIKE, THIS IS JUST REALLY TOTALLY OUT OF LINE IN THAT.

BUT THAT'S JUST MY CONCERN WITH THAT.

AND I KNOW THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT.

THEY'RE BEING TAKEN OFF, THANK GOODNESS, .

AND, UH, ANYWAY, BUT I WANNA THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME ABOUT, UH, THE CONCERNS ON BROOKE'S SIDE AND ABOUT HOW IT'S GONNA AFFECT US AND THE, THE RESIDENTS HERE AND STUFF.

AND MY ONLY CONCERN IS, IS THAT I KNOW THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BRING IN, UM, MONEY TO, UH, TO WAXAHATCHEE, BUT I DON'T SEE IT DOING THAT MUCH.

I'M SORRY.

NOT WHENEVER THEY HAVE ALL THIS STUFF COMING IN AND ALL THE EXPENSES THAT IT'S GONNA COST WAXAHATCHEE.

I DON'T SEE IT HELPING US THAT MUCH AS FAR AS REVENUE COMING INTO THE CITY AND ALL.

AND AGAIN, HAVING DONE THIS FOR SEVERAL YEARS, TAKING ON THE FIRST GROUP EMORY LAKES, AND THEN TAKEN ON THE, THE TULIP GUY AND STUFF LIKE THAT, TOOK HIM ON TOO, KIND OF THING.

AND I'M STILL JUST WAITING TO HAVE ANYBODY SIT DOWN AND TALK TO US WITH A DECENT CONVERSATION.

AND IT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN WHERE THEY SIT DOWN, BECAUSE I SAID THE ONLY THING IS, IS THE CITY CAME AND THEY SAID, WELL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE A, A TURN LANE ONTO THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE? AND I LOOKED AT THEM, I SAID, THAT'S REQUIRED.

[00:10:01]

YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, COME AND OFFER THAT AND CALL US AND SAY, OH, WE, WE CAN DO THAT FOR YOU.

OR WE CAN JUST LET IT GO STRAIGHT IN.

I DON'T THINK SO.

NOT ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

IT REQUIRES A TURN LANE.

I'M GOING, I MAY LOOK STUPID, BUT I'M NOT STUPID.

YOU KNOW, I MAY BE OLD AND I DO HAVE A BRAIN CELL THAT WORKS EVERY NOW AND THEN .

BUT, UH, BUT YOU KNOW, HAVING BEEN WITH DALLAS PD, I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THE STUFF ABOUT ROADS AND STUFF, AND I'M LIKE, I JUST AM CONCERNED ABOUT ALL THIS STUFF HAPPENING AND ESPECIALLY WHAT IT'S GONNA DO TO MY HOUSE AND THE OTHER RESIDENCE ON BROOKSIDE AND ALL.

AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU MS. CASTLE.

[4. Consent Agenda ]

IS THE CONSENT AGENDA, AND I DO WANNA CONFIRM WITH THE DIRECTOR OF THE TWO ITEMS. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTOR, THE TWO ITEMS FOR INTEL.

ARE THEY B AND C? UH, YES MA'AM.

THOSE TWO ITEMS WILL BE TAKEN OFF THE CONSENT HOLD.

I'M SORRY, JUST ONE SECOND.

IT'S D, D, C, D.

WHICH ONE? C AND D.

C AND D.

BRIAN'S GIVING ME HONEST.

OKAY, SO C AND D UM, WILL BE COMING UP.

CONSENT, AGENDA, ALL OTHER MATTERS LISTED UNDER ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

CONSIDER ROUTINE BY PLANNING AND ZONING AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION.

THERE WILL NOT BE A SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE MATTERS.

APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AUTHORIZES THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER TO EXECUTE ALL MATTERS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT EACH ITEM.

ANY ITEM MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION BY ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF.

SECOND MOTION.

DON'T YOU HAVE TO SAY A AND B SINCE WE'RE TAKING C AND D OUT FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION? YEAH, THAT'S FINE.

MISS, IF YOU'RE AGREEABLE TO AMEND YOUR MOTION TO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF C AND DI, MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA OF REMOVING ITEMS FOR C AND D.

SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF, WE HAVE A MOTION.

SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

I'LL IN FAVOR.

RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN.

NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE, A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY GRBK EDGEWOOD, LLC FOR PETITION TO RENAME A PORTION OF HARRINGTON ROAD.

REAL, REAL QUICK, WE NEED TO GO BACK TO ITEM, UH, I'M SORRY, C AND THEN FOLLOWED BY D ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SAY, SAY AGAIN.

OH, WE'LL NEED TO DISCUSS ITEM C AND D.

AND ELIJAH BELLOW SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 1 0 1 IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF WAXAHATCHEE PROPERTY IDS 1, 9 8, I'M SORRY, 1 9 3 8, 2, 3, 1, 8, 9, 3, 2, 3, 1, 8, 9, 3, 2, 6, 1, 8, 9, 3, 3, 6, 1, 8, 9, 3, 3, 3, 1, 8, 9, 2, 4, 8, 3, 0 3, 5, 6, 5 1 AND 3 0 3 6 5.

AS INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. SO FOUR, FOUR C AND FOUR D.

NEXT ON THE

[4.c. Consider request by Brian Landry, KFM Engineering & Design, for a Replat of the Kelly Bend Addition, to create a Mixed-Use lot, Block A & to dedicate 11.10 acres of Right-of-Way, being a total 16.22 acres, located at west of Interstate 35 E and north of Brookside Road, situated in the John Barker Survey, Abstract No. 40 and Elijah Bellow Survey, Abstract No. 101, an addition to the City of Waxahachie (Property ID(s): 193823, 189323, 189326, 189336, 189333, 189248, 303651, & 303652 ) – Owner(s): Minto KR LLC (SUB-84-2026) ]

AGENDA IS ITEM FOUR C.

CORRECT.

CONSIDER A REQUEST BY BRIAN LANDRY, KFM, ENGINEERING AND DESIGN FOR A REPL OF RIGHT OF WAY, BEING A TOTAL 16.22 ACRES LOCATED AT WEST OF INTERSTATE I 35 E AND NORTH OF BROOKSIDE ROAD, SITUATED IN THE JOHN BARKER SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER 40.

TWO OWNER'S MINTO, K-R-L-L-C SUB DASH 84 DASH 2026.

MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM FOUR C AS READ BY OUR ILLUSTRIOUS CHAIR.

CAN I ASK JUST A QUICK QUESTION ON THAT REAL QUICK? UM, I SEE A LOT OF REFERENCES IN HERE TO KELLY, BEN, SPELLED K-E-L-L-Y, UH, BUT THE PROPOSED ROAD NAME, AND I'LL, MAYBE IT DOESN'T MATTER, BUT IT'S REFERENCED AS BEING SPELLED AS K-E-L-L-E-Y, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE LAST NAME OF THE KELLY FAMILY, FORMER OWNER, A LOT OF THIS PROPERTY WHERE A LOT OF THIS GOES THROUGH.

SO JUST WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THE CORRECT SPELLING ACTUALLY IS.

UH, WE CAN GO BACK AND, UH, VERIFY THE CORRECT SPELLING AND MAKE SURE AS, AS PART OF THE CONDITION, WE CAN ADD THAT, THAT THE CORRECT SPELLING KELLY ROAD THAT FOR YOU, HE ADDED IT'S K-E-L-L-E-Y MM-HMM .

I JUST SEE BOTH ON HERE.

JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, WE'LL, WE'LL MAKE SURE TO GO AHEAD AND, UH, CORRECT IT, UH, PRIOR TO THE SIGNATURES, UH, LAST YEAR.

SO I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM FOUR C AS WRITTEN WITH THE ADDENDUM OF ENSURING THAT KELLY

[00:15:01]

IS SPELLED CORRECTLY.

WE HAVE A MOTION.

SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

[4.d. Consider request by Brian Landry, KFM Engineering & Design, for a Plat of Kemp Ranch MI Phase 1B, being 12.276 acres, located at west of Interstate 35 E and north of Brookside Road, situated in the John Barker Survey, Abstract No. 40 and Elijah Bellow Survey, Abstract No. 101, an addition to the City of Waxahachie (Property ID(s): 179534 and 193822) – Owner(s): Minto KR LLC (SUB-85-2026)]

IS FOUR D.

CONSIDER A REQUEST BY BRIAN LANDRY, KFM, ENGINEERING AND DESIGN FOR A PLAT OF KEMP RANCH MI, PHASE ONE B BEING 12.276 ACRES LOCATED AT WEST OF I 35 EAST AND NORTH OF BROOKSIDE ROAD.

SITUATED IN THE JOHN BARKER SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 40 AND ELIJAH BELLOW SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 1 0 1 IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF WAXAHATCHEE PROPERTY IDS 1 7 9 5 3 4 AND 1 9 3 8 2 2 OWNERS MINTO, K-R-L-L-C SUB DASH 85 DASH 2026.

THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM D AS WRITTEN.

SUBJECT TO, UM, WELL, NO, NOT SUBJECT TO ANYTHING, JUST AS WRITTEN.

SORRY.

WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

NEXT WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY GRBK EDGEWOOD, LLC FOR A PETITION TO RENAME A PORTION OF HARRINGTON ROAD TO BRICKMAN LANE, STARTING AT WATERFRONT DRIVE TO THE BEGINNING OF TREELINE DRIVE DIRECT TO ROBERTSON.

[5. Public Hearing on a request by GRBK EDGEWOOD LLC, for a Petition to Rename a portion of Harrington Road to “Brickman Lane”, starting at Waterfront Drive to the beginning of Treelyn Drive]

IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR, UH, STREET NAMING PROVISIONS, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT.

UH, WE DO HAVE AN ORDER THAT DOES REQUIRE ANY KIND OF REQUEST TO, UH, RENAME A STREET.

UH, THEY HAVE TO GET A PETITION WITH ALL, WITH A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF PROPERTY OWNERS SIGNING OFF ON THE REQUEST.

UM, THE ACT, THE APPLICANT HAS GONE AHEAD AND DONE THAT.

UM, THEY ARE, UH, REQUEST TO RENAME A PORTION OF HARRINGTON ROAD TO BRICKMAN LANE.

UM, THE PROPOSED REQUEST, YOU, IN YOUR, IN YOUR PACKET, YOU HAVE THE DETAILS OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WERE CONTACTED AND THAT ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED, UH, NAME CHANGE REQUEST.

UM, ALSO YOU'LL SEE WHICH PROPERTIES, UM, THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO GET EITHER IN CONTACT WITH OR THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO GET, UM, GET ANY SORT OF RESPONSE BACK.

UM, AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, THE STAFF, THE CITY DOES SEND OUT, UH, NOTICE TO THESE PROPERTY OWNERS.

UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO SEND OUT NOTICES, UM, SEND OUT A NOTICE.

UH, THEY DID SEND OUT MULTIPLE NOTICES TO THESE PROPERTY OWNERS.

I BELIEVE THEY'RE ALL CERTIFIED, UH, THREE SETS OF CERTIFIED LETTERS, UH, TO THESE, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS LISTED, UM, THAT ARE DIRECTLY BEING IMPACTED BY THE STREET NAME CHANGE.

UM, AFTER THIS, UH, PLAIN ZONING COMMISSION, UH, ONCE YOU MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, THIS IS, WE WILL BE GOING FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL DECISION.

UM, AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU, TRENTON.

UH, IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE TWO INDIVIDUALS, UM, WE'RE CONTACTED.

SO IT LOOKS, I THINK THIS PERSON CAN SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE GROUP THAT HOLDS ALL THOSE PROPERTIES.

I THINK IT SAID THAT SOMEWHERE.

YEAH, THERE WE GO.

IS THE MANAGER, WERE YOU ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT, UM, THE OWNER WAS ABLE TO NOTICE THE SURROUNDING? WE, WE DID NOTICE ALL OF THEM, AND THEY ALSO SENT OUT THOSE CERTIFIED LETTERS AS WELL.

THAT WAS CONFIRMED.

UH, WE WERE REQUIRED TO GET AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THIS, WITH THE COUNTY, UM, AND THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE THE ONES THAT NAME EITHER DECIDE IF WE WANT TO NAME THE ENTIRETY OF THE ROAD OR TO DENY IT.

UM, WHAT CERTIFIED MAIL? IT SHOWS THAT IT, IT WAS, WE GET RECORD OF IT BEING DELIVERED.

UM, NOW IF THEY ACTUALLY OPENED IT UP OR NOT, WE'RE UNSURE.

UM, THAT'S HARDER TO CONTROL.

UM, SO IT, IT'S BEYOND WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO WHEN WE SEND OUT JUST A LETTER.

UM, THE NOTICES THAT WE SEND OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT LIKE A ZONING CASE, WE USUALLY DON'T SEND OUT CERTIFIED.

AND SO, UM, THAT, THAT'S KINDA THE DIFFERENCE.

THIS, THIS IS A GUARANTEE.

IT WAS DELIVERED AT THAT ADDRESS AND THEY WERE ABLE TO DO THAT THREE TIMES AND THE CITY REACHED OUT AS WELL.

UM, ALSO, I, I FAILED TO MENTION, SO IF YOU CAN SEE THE STREET, UH, IN FRONT OF YOU, THIS PROPERTY DOES, UM, HAVEN RANCH HAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF WAXAHATCHEE.

UM, HOWEVER, PORTIONS OF THIS PROPERTY ARE STILL LOCATED OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

UM, THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY AT A LATER POINT IN TIME AS DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES TO OCCUR.

UM, WITH THE STREET NAMING PORTION,

[00:20:01]

UM, THAT ALSO GOES WITH ALL BUILDING PERMITS.

THAT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WILL COVER ANY BUILDING PERMITS INSIDE THE ETJ, PRIOR TO ANNEXATION.

SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU WERE ALL AWARE OF THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, TRENTON, JUST ONE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THE BEGINNING OF IT TALKS ABOUT BRICKMAN VERSUS BRICK LANE AND THEN THE SIGNER ENUMERATED AT THE VERY BOTTOM BRICK, BUT THEN THE MOTION LOOKS LIKE IT'S IN THE NAME OF BRICK MEN.

I THINK WE CAN DECIDE BETWEEN THE TWO.

THE, THE ROAD IS GONNA BE, UH, WHAT'S PROPOSED IS BRICKMAN LANE IS WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED, UM, BY THE REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT.

UM, AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WHEN SOMEONE COMES IN FOR A NAME CHANGE, THERE'S VARIOUS THINGS THAT ARE GIS DEPARTMENT GOES THROUGH.

THERE'S CERTAIN, UM, REQUIREMENTS THAT COG HAS FOR ADDRESSING.

UM, IT MEETS THOSE 9 1 1 REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS, UM, IT DOESN'T, THIS HAS TO BE SPELLED A CERTAIN WAY AND THERE'S OTHER PROVISIONS OF IT CAN'T, THERE CAN'T BE ANOTHER STREET NAMED SIMILAR OR EVEN SPELLED DIFFERENTLY, BUT PHONETICALLY IT SOUNDS THE SAME.

SO IT DOES MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

SO NOT TO BE OVERLY PICKY, BUT THEN WHO WROTE IN PENN BRICK LANE AT THE BOTTOM WHERE THE SIGNATURES ARE IS WHERE THEY SIGNING FOR? YEAH, THIS PAGE IS FROM THE APPLICANT.

UM, AT THE TIME THAT THEY WERE DOING THIS, THEY WERE GOING THROUGH THE, UM, THE VERIFICATION PROCESS WITH THE CITY GIS TEAM.

UH, THEY GO THROUGH A PRETTY THOROUGH PROCESS.

AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE, WE USUALLY GET A COUPLE OPTIONS AND A COUPLE THAT WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING WAS EITHER BRICKMAN LANE OR BRICK LANE.

AND IF YOU CAN SEE THE, UM, THE PEN ON THE BOTTOM AND ALSO THAT PAGE, THE PETITION THAT CAME FROM, THAT'S WHY THEY MENTIONED BOTH NAMES.

'CAUSE THEY WERE STILL IN THAT REVIEW PROCESS.

THE REVIEW OF A STREET NAME TAKES QUITE A WHILE.

WE'RE REACHING OUT TO, WE GO THROUGH ALL OF OUR STREETS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, THROUGHOUT NEIGHBORING CITIES TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOTHING THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE ANY CONFLICT WHEN WE HAVE A 9 1 1 CALL.

UM, AND THEN IT GOES THROUGH, UM, WE DOUBLE CHECK WITH COG AND VARIOUS STEPS AND RENAMING A STREET.

THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

SO TRENT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC POLICY, UM, IN REGARD TO NAMING STREETS AFTER PEOPLE.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

SO WE DO HAVE ONE POLICY IN PLACE AS IT REGARDS TO STREET NAMING.

IT DOES STATE THAT IF A STREET IS NAMED AFTER HISTORICAL FIGURE, UM, THAT THERE'S EXTRA PROVISIONS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO TO BE ABLE TO RENAME IT FROM THAT HISTORICAL FIGURE.

UM, FOR EXAMPLE, MARTIN, IF THERE WAS A STREET NAMED MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD AND WE WANTED TO RENAME THAT STREET, THERE'S EXTRA STEPS WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE TO RENAME IT 'CAUSE HE WAS A HISTORICAL FIGURE.

GOT IT.

BUT THAT, THAT'S THE ONLY THING.

IT, IT, THERE'S OTHER PROVISIONS ABOUT STREET NAMING IN OUR POLICY, BUT IT DOESN'T DICTATE ANYTHING ABOUT THE PERSON BEING ALIVE OR DEAD.

UM, IF THEY'RE ALLOWED TO NAME IT AFTER SOMEONE WHO IS CURRENTLY LIVING OR WHO IS DECEASED.

SO I, I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN WITH IT JUST BEING NAMED AFTER A LAST NAME BECAUSE I'M SURE LOTS OF PEOPLE HAVE THE LAST NAME BRICKMAN.

UM, I DO.

AND WE ONLY HAVE ONE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER HERE TONIGHT.

SO I PERSONALLY THINK THAT THE CITY SHOULD HAVE SOME KIND OF A POLICY, UM, TO, IF SOMEONE COMES IN AND THEY WANNA NAME A STREET, CHRIS WRIGHT AVENUE, WE NEED TO, WELL WE NEED TO NOT DO THAT .

BUT NO, WE NEED TO, TO DO A VERY, UM, IN DEPTH CHECK JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO NAME A STREET, CHRIS WRIGHT AVENUE.

AND OF COURSE IT WOULD BE IN CHRIS WRIGHT'S CASE.

BUT, UM, I, I JUST, I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE BOOKS THAT JUST GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF PROTECTION AS FAR AS THAT GOES.

BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY, ARE YOU MORE REFERRING TO, UM, JUST FOR EXAMPLE, UM, DOING HISTORY ON A NAME THAT WE RESEARCH, MAKE SURE THEY DON'T HAVE A EXACTLY.

THAT PASS AND WE ARE NOT NAMING UP TO SOMEONE THAT HAS IT.

NAME A STREET, A FIRST NAME AND LAST NAME, SO LIKE A MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BOULEVARD.

AND IT, YOU KNOW, NOT YOU, CHRIS.

I THINK IF SOMEONE PROPOSES, UM, TO

[00:25:01]

BUT OBVIOUSLY THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT, IT IS NOT A HISTORICAL FIGURE, BUT JUST SOMETHING THAT MAYBE NEEDS TO BE VETTED BEFORE WE GO TO ALL OF THE TIME AND EXPENSE OF NAMING A STREET AFTER THAT PERSON.

AND THEN MAYBE WE FIND SOMETHING THAT ISN'T SO GREAT, THEN WE DON'T REALLY WANNA HAVE A STREET NAMED AFTER THEM.

SO JUST SOME KIND OF PROCESS LIKE THAT IN PLACE.

UM, THAT JUST BROUGHT THAT UP IN MY MIND.

IT'S REALLY NOT HERE OR THERE RELATED TO THIS PARTICULAR ONE.

'CAUSE I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH BRICKMAN COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. UM, YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.

UM, TRENT, AND TO PIGGYBACK OFF JIMMY, THEY DO HAVE IT SEVERAL PLACES WHERE IT'S BRICKMAN OR BRICK MM-HMM .

SO WHAT, AND I'M SORRY IF YOU SAID THAT, WHAT WAS THE PROCESS OF DECIDING? BECAUSE LIKE NOT ONLY DID THE PERSON RIGHT BRICK LANE ON THE SIGNATURE PAGES, THE ACTUAL EXHIBIT SAYS TO CHANGE IT TO BRICK LANE.

SO THEY GAVE US BOTH OPTIONS, WHAT THEY WANTED.

THEY DID GIVE US, YOU KNOW, IF THEY CAN USE BRICKMAN, THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD PREFER IS BRICKMAN LANE.

THAT'S THEIR, THAT WAS THEIR NUMBER ONE REQUEST.

WE ASKED IF FOR SOME REASON WE CAN'T RENAME A BRICKMAN LANE BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER NAME, THERE'S SOMETHING SIMILAR.

WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE? AND THAT'S WHEN THEY GAVE US THE SECOND NAME OF BEING BRICK LANE.

SO SHOULD THAT, THAT PAPER TRAIL OR THAT DISCUSSION BEEN INCLUDED WITH THIS? UH, BECAUSE IT'S ON THE PETITION? UM, I, I'M NOT OVERLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ADOPT THIS, UM, WE HAVE IT IN THE ORDINANCE WHERE IT NOTATES HARRINGTON ROAD TO BRICKMAN LANE AS AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE.

THE CHAIR WILL CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION OF NAMING A PORTION OF HARRINGTON ROAD TO BRICK OR BRICKMAN LANE.

THAT WILL BE RECORDED.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE HAVE ZERO PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.

[6.Consider recommendation of renaming a portion of Harrington Road to Brickman Lane]

I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE TO RENAME A PORTION OF HARRINGTON ROAD TO BRICKMAN LANE BETWEEN WATERFRONT DRIVE AND THE PROPOSED TREELINE DRIVE AND AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR AND OR CITY COUN CITY MANAGER.

I'M SORRY TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS.

SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? SH SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE AMEN THAT? 'CAUSE YOU SAID BRICK OR BRICKMAN AND SHE SAID BRICKMAN, SHE CHOSE.

OH, SHE CHOSE.

SO, SO THE MOTION BRICK BRICKMAN MAIN.

YES, MA'AM.

UM, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND PLEASE.

NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AND I WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF ON THIS ITEM.

NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY DAVID MCDILL DAVIS AND MCDILL LLC FOR A REPL OF LOT THREE BLOCK A OF THE TED CROSSING PHASE ONE EDITION TO CREATE LOTS.

ALRIGHT, SO NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

OH, REAL QUICK.

WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE SHE OUTTA THE ROOM.

[7.Public Hearing on a request by David McDill, Davis & McDill, LLC, for a Replat of Lot 3, Block A of the Teddo Crossing Phase One Addition, to create Lots 3-A, 3-B, and 3-C, Block A of the Teddo Crossing Phase One Addition, three nonresidential lots, being 8.695 acres located at the northwest corner of US Highway 77 and West Butcher Road, (Property ID 310843) – Owner(s): Crux Jefferson LLC (SUB-75-2026)]

THREE A, THREE B, AND THREE C BLOCK A OF THE TED CROSSING PHASE ONE EDITION.

THREE NON-RESIDENTIAL LOTS BEING 8.695 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF US HIGHWAY 77 AND WEST BUTCHER ROAD.

PROPERTY ID 3 1 0 8 4 3.

OWNER CRUX JEFFERSON, LLC.

AND TRENTON, ARE YOU PRESENTING THAT? YES.

THE RECORD, PLEASE? THANK YOU.

I, UNFORTUNATELY YOU GUYS HAVE ME ALL NIGHT, SO I APOLOGIZE.

UM, WHAT WHAT ARE THE REQUESTING FOR YOU FROM YOU TODAY IS TO REPL THIS EXISTING, UH, PIECE OF PROPERTY? UH, PART OF THIS REPL AND THE REASON WHY IT'S BEING, UM, HELD IS THEY ARE REQUIRING A VARIANCE FROM OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

UH, OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS DO STATE THAT A, A LAW HAS TO HAVE DIRECT ACCESS ONTO A, A THOROUGHFARE OR ONTO A ROAD, UM, DUE TO HOW THE LOTS ARE LAID OUT.

UM, AND DUE TO THEIR CONFIGURATION, UH, THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT THE LOTS SHARE AN ACCESS POINT.

UM, STAFF DOES FEEL THAT THIS IS, THIS WOULD BE A BETTER DECISION, UH, DUE TO SAFETY PURPOSES.

UM, IT WOULD ELIMINATE, IT WOULD ELIMINATE THE NUMBER OF INGRESS EGRESS POINTS ONTO IT, UM, AND STILL GIVE, UH, EACH LOT THE PROPER ACCESS THEY NEED.

UH, SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST.

UM, AND THIS ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

ALRIGHT, ANY, UM, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? YES, I'M, HI, WOULD YOU MIND COMING UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR

[00:30:01]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

YOMI FA 1111 WEST MAIN, WAXAHATCHEE, TEXAS.

THANK YOU, DR.

FAA.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY.

WE MADE YOU GET UP FOR NOTHING.

DR.

FGA, THANK YOU.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

WHY DID THE CHAIRMAN RECUSE HERSELF? UH, SHE, SO, UM, I I WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU, UM, GET A OPEN RECORDS REQUEST FOR THAT.

SO SHE'LL BE SUBMITTING HER REASONING.

OH, OKAY.

RECOMMEND.

I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW.

I SURPRISED THAT ALL.

SO THERE'S, THERE'S USUALLY SOME SORT OF POINT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THEY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOTHING AND I, I APPRECIATE HER WILLINGNESS TO DO THAT.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT IT WAS.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION, MOVE YOUR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF SU 75 20 26 FOR FLAT OF BLOCK, A LOT THREE OF THE TED CROSSING PHASE ONE ADDITION AND THE ASSOCIATED PETITION OF RELIEF WAIVER REQUEST TO CREATE THREE NON-RESIDENTIAL USE LOTS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS ACCORDINGLY.

ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE HAD ZERO PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AGENDA ITEM, UM, SUB 75 DASH 2026.

AND, UM, SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED AND

[8. Consider approval of SUB-75-2026 ]

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY 70 20 WAXAHATCHEE LP FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR HEAVY MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL SALES OR STORAGE USE WITHIN A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONE ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 70 20 NORTH I 35.

I TRIED TO MAKE YOU PROUD MS. CHAIR.

[9.Public Hearing on a request by 7020 Waxahachie LP, for a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for Heavy Machinery and Equipment, Rental, Sales or Storage use within a Light Industrial-1 zoning district located at 7020 N Interstate 35 (Property ID 185396) - Owner: Waxahachie LLC (ZDC-64-2026)]

PROPERTY ID 1 8 5 3 9 5.

OWNERS WAXAHATCHEE, L-L-C-Z-D-C DASH 64 DASH 2026 DIRECTOR.

YEP.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

UH, THIS PROPERTY IS REQUESTING, UH, REQUESTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, UH, TO ALLOW FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT RENTAL CELLS AND DISPLAY.

UM, WHAT, AS PART OF THIS REQUEST, UM, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET CERTAIN LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, ET CETERA.

UM, ON THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, UM, PRIOR TO THE SUV BEING APPROVED, UH, BEING APPROVED, UM, THEY HAVE PLANTED, UM, LANDSCAPING THAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY AS PART OF THIS ORDINANCE.

WHAT WE HAVE WRITTEN A PROVISION IN THERE IS, UM, THAT IF FOR SOME REASON TEXTILE WERE TO COME IN AND REMOVE THAT LANDSCAPING IN THERE THAT'S EXISTING RIGHT NOW, THAT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PLANT SOMETHING SIMILAR OR, OR OF SIMILAR, UH, DESIGN AS WHAT WAS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY ON THE ACTUAL SUBJECT PROPERTY.

UH, THE REASON FOR THIS IS WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IN THE EVENT IT DOES GET REMOVED, WE HAVE A PROVISION THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO STILL HAVE IT.

UM, WE JUST DON'T FEEL IT'S NECESSARY FOR THEM TO PLANT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING WHEN IT DOESN'T REALLY SERVE A PURPOSE AT THIS POINT ON THE PROPERTY.

UM, ADDITIONALLY, GIVEN SOME HISTORY ON THIS, THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE.

UM, ONE OF THE VARIANCES THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING AS PART OF THE SCP IS THE, CAN YOU GO BACK A SECOND RIGHT THERE? UH, GO DOWN THE SITE PLAN.

UM, IF YOU CAN SEE THE DRIVE ON THIS PROPERTY, THE GATE, UM, DISTANCE FROM THE GATE TO THE ENTRY OF THE PROPERTY DOESN'T MEET OUR, OUR DEPTH REQUIREMENTS INTO THE SITE.

HOWEVER, THEY HAVE BEEN OPERATING THIS FOR QUITE A WHILE.

UM, IN, IN FURTHER REVIEW, STAFF DOESN'T HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO THE, TO ALLOWING THEM TO CONTINUE TO USE THAT AND KEEP THAT GATE.

UM, IT'S SOMETHING THAT ONCE AGAIN HAS BEEN ON THE PROPERTY FOR, UH, 10 PLUS YEARS AND THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY ISSUES REGARDING BACKING UP TRAFFIC OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

UM, THERE WAS WORK DONE, UM, WITHOUT PERMITS, UH, TO THE FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE THAT THEY WERE UNAWARE THAT THEY HAD TO PULL PERMITS.

AS SOON AS WE LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THAT WORK THAT WAS REQUIRED, THAT PERMITS WERE REQUIRED, THEY DID GO OUT AND IMMEDIATELY REQUEST PERMITS FOR THAT.

UH, THEY ALSO HAVE PERMITS FOR, UH, CIVIL PERMITS FOR THE SITE, FOR THE IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING AND SOME CIVIL DESIGN

[00:35:01]

ON THE SITE.

UM, THE WORK IS, I BELIEVE NEAR COMPLETION HAS NOT FULLY BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY.

UM, HOWEVER THOSE PERMITS WERE PULLED, UM, PREVIOUSLY ON THE SITE.

UM, WITH THIS, UH, KIND OF, WITH SOME OF OUR SPECIFIC USE PERMITS, WE DO PUT PROVISIONS IN THERE THAT A SO SPECIFIC USE PERMITS DO HAVE EXPIRATION DATES WHERE IF A SEP STOPS BEING USED FOR A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, UM, THE SEP WILL GO AWAY.

WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.

UM, WHAT WE ARE STARTING TO DO NOW, WITHS ARE PUTTING TIME LIMITS ON THE SPS, REQUIRE THEM TO POSSIBLY COME BACK, UM, TO RENEW THOSE SUVS.

UH, SOME OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THAT IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES AND CONDITIONS AND THAT THERE'S NO CONCERN ABOUT THESES STILL ACTIVELY OPERATING.

UH, THE S THE TERM THAT WE'VE GENERALLY PUT ON SOME SUVS HAS BEEN THREE YEARS.

SO AFTER THREE YEARS THAT THEY'D HAVE COME BACK AND REAPPLY, THAT'S THE CONDITION THAT WE PUT ON THIS ONE.

THEY ARE REQUESTING TO EXTEND, THEY ARE REQUESTING DO THE TYPES OF TENANTS THAT THEY HAVE, UM, FOR A LONGER EXPIRATION DATE THAN THREE YEARS.

UM, GENERALLY I BELIEVE THEIR LEASES ARE A MINIMUM OF 10 YEARS FOR THESE HEAVY MACHINERY OPERATORS.

UM, SO I DO KNOW THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING FOR A LONGER SUP EXPIRATION DATE, UM, AS PART OF THEIR REQUEST AS WELL.

UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO PROPOSE A REQUEST AND CONDITIONS.

WE MAIL THAT TO, UH, PROP.

WE MAILED THAT NOTICE THAT ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET ZERO CAME BACK IN FAVOR ZERO, CAME BACK IN OPPOSITION.

UM, WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD ANY CALLS TO THIS PROPERTY.

UM, ANY ISSUES IN THE PAST AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU SO MUCH TRENT.

AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

SO HOW DOES THE STAFF FEEL ABOUT EXTENDING, UM, THE USE OF THE SUP BEYOND THE THREE YEAR? UM, I, I FEEL WE'RE OPEN TO IT.

UM, I THINK THERE'S OTHER PROVISIONS IN PLACE.

UM, THE ONLY THING THAT ALWAYS HAS ME CONCERNED IS WHEN SUP EXPIRES UNDER OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE AND PROVISIONS, UM, WE HAVE TO GO BACK UP AND REOPEN THE SEP AND GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS IN THIS WAY WHEN IT EXPIRES IN THREE YEARS, UM, IT AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRES OR THIS TIME PERIOD AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRES AND THEY HAVE TO COME BACK.

UM, SO WE'RE FINE EXTENDING IT PAST THREE YEARS THAT TIMEFRAME.

I MEAN, I, I COULD SEE DOUBLING IT.

UM, IT IS REALLY UP TO, I I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO IT.

THEY HAVEN'T SHOWN US ANYTHING IN THE PAST WHERE WE WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR OPERATIONS AND HOW THEY'VE SITE DESIGNED AND WHAT THEY'VE DONE, HOW THEY'VE FOLLOWED THROUGH.

SO IF WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, DOES THAT BECOME A, A NEW CONDITION? IT WOULD BE A NEW CONDITION.

IT WOULD, YOU COULD EITHER KEEP THE CONDITION, YOU CAN REMOVE THE CONDITION ALTOGETHER, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO HAVE IT.

UM, IT WOULD BE UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEN CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE FINAL VOTE.

I, I, I APPRECIATE, UM, STAFF'S CONCERN ABOUT KIND OF OVEREXTENDING THE CITY BEYOND, UH, THE THREE LIMIT, THREE YEAR LIMIT AT THIS POINT.

HOWEVER, UM, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICANT, UH, JUST STATING IT FOR THE RECORD, I WOULD RECOMMEND A FIVE YEAR MM-HMM .

SUP, UM, WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT COMES BACK FOR RENEWAL AT THAT POINT.

UM, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? AND I WOULD, I WOULD JUST ADD TO WHAT YOU SAID.

I, I WAS THINKING FIVE YEARS.

UM, AND THEN AFTER THAT, AFTER THAT FIVE YEARS, IF THERE HAS BEEN NO CONCERN FROM THE CITY, TRENTON, WOULD YOU USUALLY MAKE IT A SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER PERIOD BEFORE THEY HAVE TO RENEW IT AGAIN? UM, GENERALLY, YEAH.

I MEAN IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'VE SHOWN IT REALLY IS THAT FIRST ONE IS TO SHOW THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING THROUGH MM-HMM .

WITH WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GONNA DO, THAT THEY'RE BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT IN VIOLATION.

WE HAVEN'T HAD MULTIPLE CALLS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT GOING OUT THERE, CODE ENFORCEMENT GOING OUT THERE.

IT'S NOT AN ISSUE FOR THE CITY.

UM, THEY'VE HAD THIS PROPERTY FOR A WHILE.

UM, WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE CALLS FOR THIS PROPERTY.

IT WAS MORE OF A FACELIFT.

UH, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE DID, WE DID RESEARCH.

ANY CODE ENFORCEMENT, UH, ANY ACTIVE CODE OR, OR POLICE CALLS, WE, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY.

UM, SO NO CODE VIOLATIONS AT ALL.

SO THE CODE VIOLATION WAS THE FRONT FACADE WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT.

UM, THEY WEREN'T AWARE THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT.

WHEN WE LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THAT, THEY IMMEDIATELY CAME IN TO RECTIFY THE ISSUE.

AND IT WASN'T A FIGHT OR ANYTHING.

THEY IMMEDIATELY ASKED WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE NEEDED.

THEY, THEY SUBMITTED 'EM AND WE'RE CURRENTLY IN THE REVIEW.

SO ANYTHING THAT IN THAT PERMIT, THEY'D BE REQUIRED TO BRING IT UP TO CODE, PROVIDE THOSE DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THAT IT WAS DONE PER CODE AND EVERYTHING THAT WAS DONE.

IT WASN'T, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, IT WASN'T STRUCTURAL,

[00:40:01]

IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

IT DOES.

AND, AND ANOTHER THING I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND, UM, SUVS EXPIRING, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT'S SOMETHING LIKE A TATTOO PARLOR WHERE IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE BUSINESSES AROUND IT.

I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE WITH A LONGER SUP EXPIRATION IN THIS CASE BECAUSE EVERYTHING THAT SURROUNDS IT IS THE SAME TYPE OF BUSINESS, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

YEAH, FOR SURE.

AND THIS ITEM DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YES, MA'AM.

PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

HEY GUYS.

THANKS Y'ALL FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.

MY NAME'S CALEB BATES.

I'M HERE WITH MY FATHER FLOYD BATES AND MY PARTNER GARY RANDOLPH.

COULD YOU STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? FLOYD BATES.

GARY RANDOLPH, UM, ADDRESS IS 70 20 WAXAHATCHEE.

UM, WE CAN USE OUR MONROE OFFICE ADDRESS.

WHICH ADDRESS WOULD YOU LIKE? DO WE YOUR, YOUR BUSINESS IS FINE.

YOUR BUSINESS ADDRESS IS WELL, UH, 24 15 CONVERSE STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS.

WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION? WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE SUP EXPIRATION.

EVEN AT FIVE YEARS, THESE TYPE OF TENANTS.

UM, FOR INSTANCE, WE'RE REVIEWING A PROPOSAL RIGHT NOW WITH AN INITIAL TERM OF 10 YEARS.

SO WHAT THAT MEANS PRACTICALLY IS WE WOULD HAVE A LEASE COMMITMENT FOR, UH, NO LESS THAN 10 YEARS AND THEY WANT THREE SUBSEQUENT FIVE YEAR RENEWAL OPTIONS.

AND SO CONTRACTUALLY WE WOULD BE NERVOUS ABOUT ENTERING INTO SOMETHING WITH THAT, KNOWING THAT WE HAVE A, UM, UH, A HOVERING LEASE EXPIRATION.

'CAUSE IF, FRANKLY, IF THIS REGIME CHANGES OR TRENT'S NO LONGER HERE IN SEVEN YEARS, WHICH I WOULD, I DON'T WANNA SEE THAT HAPPEN.

I LIKE TRENT AWFUL LOT.

UM, WE, IT MAKES US NERVOUS THAT WE WOULD BASICALLY BE IN DEFAULT OF OUR LEASE IF THAT SUP WASN'T REISSUED.

UM, I CAN SAY THIS, DAD AND I LIVE AND WORK HERE AND I WAS RAISED IN THIS TOWN AND WE HAVE TO PASS THIS SITE EVERY DAY ON OUR WAY TO OUR OFFICE IN NORTH DALLAS.

SO KEEPING THE SITE AND UPKEPT AND IN GOOD CONDITION, UM, THAT'S OUR PREROGATIVE.

AND SO I WOULD JUST LIKE YOU TO KNOW THAT IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER A LONGER TERM, IT'D BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.

OUR REQUEST WOULD BE TO AMEND THE THREE YEARS TO 25 YEARS.

AND I KNOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LONG TIME, BUT, UM, OUR GOAL IS TO BACKFILL THE PROPERTY WITH A NATIONAL OR AN EQUIVALENT CREDIT TYPE TENANT.

AND, UH, YOU HAVE OUR WORD THAT WE'LL KEEP IT UP KEPT AND IN GOOD ORDER.

ANYTHING FROM YOU SIR? REAL QUICK? SOMETHING I WOULD RECOMMEND, UM, WE COULD DO A SUP WITH A 10 YEAR EXPIRATION AND THEN YOU CONDITION THE CO.

SO IF THE CO CHANGES, IT WOULD REQUIRE THEM TO COME BACK.

Y YES.

THE, WE'RE LOOKING, WE HAVE EX REALLY, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THREE TENANTS THAT WANTS THIS PROPERTY.

ALL THREE OF THEM ARE GONNA BE VERY GOOD FOR THE CITY.

THEY ALL WANT A 10 YEAR COMMITMENT MINIMUM.

AND IT JUST MAKES US ANXIOUS ABOUT THAT.

WE'RE GONNA GO TO 'EM AND SAY, OKAY GUYS, WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU A, YOUR TERM LEASE, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'RE GONNA GIVE TWO FIVE YEAR RENEWALS ON A RENEWAL OPTION.

IT'S GONNA BE SUBJECT TO US GOING BACK TO GET AN SUP.

AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE FACED WITH THAT TIME.

SO THAT'S THE CONCERN.

THEY'RE GONNA PUT HUNDREDS, THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN THE PROPERTY AND WE JUST, THAT'S OUR, THAT'S OUR WORRY.

THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH.

YES, SIR.

DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR US? I LIVE IN RICHMOND, TEXAS, BUT I HAVE PROPERTY HERE IN WAXAHATCHEE AND UH, I'VE ENJOYED WORKING WITH FLOYD AND CALEB AND, UH, YEAH, LIKE THEY SAID, WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE CARE OF THAT PROPERTY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK, AND JUST ONE CLERICAL CORRECTION.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S CORRECTED.

IT'S 70 20 WAXAHATCHEE LLC, NOT LP.

UM, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S RIGHT.

WE'LL GET THAT AMENDED.

THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS FROM THE COMMISSION? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.

I NOTICED THAT, UM, IT SAYS THAT THIS, THE BUSINESS HERE MIGHT BE A 24 7 OPERATION AND I'M JUST FASCINATED TO KNOW DO PEOPLE HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS FOR HEAVY MACHINERY AT 3:00 AM

[00:45:01]

I DOUBT IT.

WELL, KNOWING THE AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, PROBABLY NOT GONNA BE AN ISSUE.

UH, IN FACT, IT MIGHT BE ADDITIONAL SECURITY.

HAVE SOMEONE COMING IN DOWN THERE THAT, THAT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE.

I JUST THOUGHT THAT, OH, I, THAT CAUGHT MY EYE AND I THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY.

YEAH, WE, WE, WE DISCUSSED THAT.

UH, THE CHANCES ARE IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

UM, BUT WE WERE JUST TRYING TO BE OPEN ON THEIR OPERATIONAL PLAN.

SURE.

UH, MR. BATES AND TRENTON AT THE SAME TIME, CAN WE MAKE THE CONTINGENCY ON OUR END SUBJECT TO THE RENEWAL OF THE LEASE? MEANING IF WE HAVE THE SAME USE, COULD WE CONTINUE THAT AS LONG AS THE LEASE AND IF THE LEASE DISC, I WOULD, I MEAN, THAT'S GONNA BE REALLY HARD 'CAUSE WE DON'T SEE THE LEASE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRIVY TO RIGHT.

THE, TO THE EXECUTION OF THE LEASE, I WOULD CONDITION THE CO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

SO IF, IF THE OWNERSHIP, IF THE CHA NAME CHANGES, OWNERSHIP CHANGES, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO GET AN SUP.

SO IF THE NAME OF THE BUSINESS CHANGES, YEAH.

SO IF THE USE OR THE OWNERSHIP CHANGES, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET A NEW CO THAT IS CONSIDERED A MATERIAL CHANGE.

AND I, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND SWINGING FOR THE FENCES 25 YEARS WOULD BE GREAT FOR ANY OF US.

THAT'S A LONG TIME SURE.

TO BE BOUND.

YES, IT IS.

TO AN AGREEMENT.

SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN ALMOST KIND OF, SORT OF SPLIT THE COST AND, UM, I'D BE HAPPY TO RECOMMEND A 10 YEAR IF APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.

SO BE IT.

TRENT, WHAT, WHAT KIND OF HISTORY DO WE HAVE FOR SUVS OF THIS TYPE OF NATURE OF BUSINESS? OOH, IT'S A ROUGH HISTORY.

UM, SO I KNOW THE HISTORY IN THE LAST FIVE, 10 YEARS, UM, WE HAVE HAD A MIXTURE OF HOW THES HAVE WORKED.

WE'VE HAD TO MAKE SURE WHERE THE SPS HAVE JUST BEEN GRANTED WITH NO EXPIRATION DATES.

UM, THE ISSUE HAS BEEN WE HAVE HAD CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES.

WE'VE HAD, UH, OWNERSHIP CHANGES WHERE, UM, THEY'RE STILL ALLOWED TO KEEP THE SUP.

AND UNFORTUNATELY YOU DIDN'T HAVE GOOD PLAYERS THAT WHO, WHO BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.

RIGHT.

AND THE PEOPLE WHO APPLIED FOR THE SP LIKE THE BATES, UM, WHO WERE WILLING TO FOLLOW THE CITY CODES REGULATIONS, MADE THE PROPERTY NICE, THEY WERE GREAT.

BUT WHEN THE SECOND USERS CAME IN, NOT SO GREAT AND WE'RE STUCK WITH AN SUP THAT, UM, IN ORDER FOR US TO GET RID OF THE CITY HAS TO INITIATE A ZONING PROCESS, WHICH IS A LOT HARDER WHEN IT'S A CITY INITIATE CASE TO REMOVE AN SUP FROM A PROPERTY.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.

SO, UM, YOU FOUND IN MY PERSPECTIVE AS A PLANNER AND THE DIRECTOR OF CITY.

SO MAKE SURE THAT CLAUSE IS IN THERE.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SO WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO APPROVE AN SUP WITHOUT AN EXPIRATION DATE SO LONG AS THE OWNERSHIP AND BUSINESS NAME STAY THE SAME? YES, YOU'D BE ABLE TO, I I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU CONDITIONING THE CO OKAY.

HAVING A CONDITION ON THE CO.

SO IF YOU DON'T WANT AN EXPIRATION DATE, THAT'S FINE.

I WOULD CONDITION IT.

IF THERE'S ANY CHANGE IN THE CO OWNERSHIP USE NAME A NEW SP WOULD BE REQUIRED.

YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

I LIKE THAT.

THAT'S A GOOD SOLUTION.

MM-HMM.

IS THERE ANY LANG I'M SORRY.

OH, SORRY, I'M SORRY CHAIRMAN.

IS THERE ANY LANGUAGE? UM, I'M JUST THINKING, NOT THAT OUR INTENTION IS TO SELL THIS PROPERTY ANYTIME SOON, BUT IF WE WERE TO, UM, THINK YOU'RE REFERRING TO A TENANT.

THAT THEY COULD LOSE THAT SUP THAT, UM, AND IT SHOULDN'T BE UNDER UNDERSTATED, THAT THAT VERY MUCH HINDERS THE VALUE OF THAT PROPERTY FOR US.

I THINK THERE REF THEY, I I THINK IT'S OWNERSHIP OR TENANT.

AND SO I, AND I, I WON'T SPEAK FOR THE ENTIRE BOARD.

I FEEL THAT IF IT'S SOLD, IT NEEDS A NEW SUP JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WE, WE KNOW HOW YOU GUYS ARE GONNA MAINTAIN IT.

WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW HOW A BUYER WOULD MAINTAIN IT.

IT, I, IS THERE A LANGUAGE THOUGH, LIKE NOT TO BE UNREASONABLY WITHHELD OR I'M JUST, JUST LIKE ANY OF US, IF YOU GO TO BUY A HOME OR A PROPERTY IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND, YOU'RE NOT GOING INTO THAT HOME THINKING YOU'RE GONNA SELL IT TOMORROW.

BUT RESALE VALUE IS TOP OF MIND OR PRESERVING AS MUCH OF THAT VALUE AS POSSIBLE.

AND SO WITHOUT THIS SUP, THAT PROPERTY IS BASICALLY RENDERED, UH, WORTHLESS.

AND THE VALUE IS IN THE OUTSIDE STORAGE COMPONENT OF THAT PROPERTY.

AND SO I CAN JUST, I KNOW HOW THESE GUYS, I KNOW HOW OTHER OWNER OPERATORS THINK.

I KNOW HOW THESE INVESTORS THINK IF THERE'S A RISK

[00:50:01]

NOW WHEN YOU SAY, IS THERE LANGUAGE, WE WE'RE NOT AT LIBERTY TO GIVE ANY ADVICE ABOUT LANGUAGE CONTRACTUALLY, SO I WOULD CERTAINLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU SPEAK WITH YOUR BUSINESS ATTORNEY TO SEE HOW TO KIND OF INCORPORATE WHERE THIS GOES.

I'M OPPOSED TO AN INDEFINITE SUP BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TOMORROW HOLDS.

I'M COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO IT.

IN FACT, IT'S GOING AGAINST WHERE THE CITY IS TRYING TO HEAD WHERE WE'RE PUTTING STIPULATIONS ON IT BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE VISIONS OF GRANDEUR ABOUT BUILDINGS AND BUSINESSES AND THEY SHOW US A BEAUTIFUL PICTURE.

WE DON'T GET THAT AT THE END.

SO WE'RE KIND OF LEFT HOLDING THAT BAG.

SO I'M STILL AT 10 WITH, UH, A CONDITION ON THE CO CHAIRMAN.

IF I COULD, UM, THIS IS NOT A PROPOSED PLAN.

THIS PROJECT IS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A COUPLE PERMITS, IS ARE IS DONE.

AND I THINK WE'VE GONE EVEN OVER AND BEYOND WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE REQUIRED.

UM, OTHER THAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK, WHAT COULD THE NEXT OWNER POSSIBLY DO DIFFERENT TO MAKE THE SITE ANY LESS APPEALING THAN IT IS NOW? I MEAN, I GUESS THEY COULDN'T PAY THEIR WATER BILL AND THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WOULDN'T WORK AND MAYBE SOME PLANTS WOULD DIE.

UM, IT'S HARD TO READ THE TEA LEAVES BECAUSE WE JUST DON'T KNOW.

WE DON'T, WE CAN'T MEASURE THE MOTIVE OF THE HEART.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT PEOPLE ARE GONNA DO.

WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GONNA DO BECAUSE YOU'VE DONE IT FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS.

WE HAVE A POINT OF REFERENCE.

AND, AND SO THERE'S A FEW THINGS I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT FOR THE SUP IS THAT GENERALLY ANY TYPE OF STORAGE IS REQUIRED TO BE ON CONCRETE.

SO THIS SUP, THEY'RE REQUESTING, UM, ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL FOR THAT.

UM, THE GATE REQUIREMENT OF HOW, HOW FAR AWAY IT HAS TO BE FROM THE DRIVEWAY, UM, IT DOESN'T MEET OUR CURRENT CODE.

AND SO THE SP WOULD BE FOR THAT, SAY IT'S JUST SO IT'S ON RECORD.

SAY IT'S COMPLETELY MEETING CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS? NO, UM, THEY ARE SEEKING A COUPLE OF VARIANCES AS PART OF THIS REQUEST, WHICH STAFF DOES SUPPORT.

UM, IN THIS INSTANCE.

BUT, UM, I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR, THAT AS THE PROPERTY STANDS NOW, THERE ARE SOME CODE ISSUES, UM, THAT CAN'T BE RESOLVED UNLESS THE SUP IS APPROVED.

SO TO SAY THAT THEY'VE, THEY'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT REQUIREMENT.

I, OUR CURRENT CODE WOULD REQUIRE SOME, SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS.

BUT DO I THINK ADDITIONAL, I THINK FOR THIS SITE, WHAT THEY HAVE IS, IS GOOD.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

BUT IF YOU WERE TO FOLLOW OUR LITERAL WORD OF THE, OF THE, THE LITERAL LANGUAGE OF THE CODE, YOU WOULD SEE MORE CONCRETE IN THE BACK.

YOU WOULD SEE MORE LANDSCAPING ALONG THE FRONT ON THE PROPERTY.

YOU'D SEE THE GATE FURTHER BACK.

UM, BUT WE AGREED WITH THE APPLICANT WHEN THEY APPROVED, WHEN THEY REQUESTED THESE VARIANCES, THAT WE ARE OKAY WITH IT.

SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S ON RECORD.

WOULD IT BE, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO REQUEST, UM, THE NEED TO GET AN UPDATED SUP TO BE AT THE STAFF LEVEL AND NOT A PUBLIC HEARING LEVEL? SO ACCORDING TO STATE LAW, AN SUP IS A ZONING.

ONCE AGAIN, I'M NOT ATTORNEY.

UM, , I JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR.

UM, BUT A AN SUP IS A ZONING PROCESS.

IT'S A, IT'S A PROCESS THAT REQUIRES PUBLIC HEARING STEP DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL ABILITY TO PROVE THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY.

UM, THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED THROUGH A CERTAIN DUE DUE PROCESS, WHICH IS GOING THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND THEN CITY COUNCIL, UM, WE ARE WRITING NEW LANGUAGE FOR OUR SUP REGULATIONS WHERE IF WE DO HAVE AN EXPIRATION ON THIS, WHAT I WOULD ASSUME WOULD NEED TO COME BACK IS SIMPLY IF NOTHING HAS CHANGED ON THE SITE, THEY'D BRING BACK, WE'D USE THE EXISTING SITE PLAN, WE'D USE EXISTING PLANS, EXISTING DOCUMENTS, AND IT'D JUST BE, LOOK AT US.

WE'VE BEEN A GOOD PLAYER, WE'VE DONE WHAT WE SAID WE'RE GONNA DO, AND NOW WE'RE ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION.

SO I'VE GOT A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

UM, THE CO'S GRANTED TO THE TENANT, RIGHT? YES, SIR.

SO THE, THE RECOMMENDATION BEFORE TO BASICALLY HAVE THE CO TIED TO THE SUP, SO BASICALLY IF THE TENANT CHANGES THAT WOULD, UH, TRIGGER THE SUP PROCESS IF, UNLESS THERE WAS AN EXPIRATION, RIGHT? CORRECT.

SO IN THIS CASE, IF, IF THE P AND Z WERE TO OBLIGE AND, AND NOT GIVE THEM AN EXPIRATION DATE, JUST, JUST SAYING IF, IF THEY DID NOT GIVE AN EXPIRATION DATE, 10 YEARS GOES BY, SAME TENANT, 15 YEARS GOES BY SAME TENANT, AND THEN THAT TENANT DECIDES TO LEAVE IT 15 YEARS NAME CHANGES AGAIN, NEW TENANT.

THE NEW SEP WOULD BE REQUIRED.

UM, IF WE REQUIRE THE SUP TO BE REVIEWED BY COUNSEL AFTER, AT WHATEVER TERM WE DECIDE, SO THAT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY EXPIRE, IT'S JUST RECONSIDERED BY COUNSEL.

UM, SECOND QUESTION IS WHAT ABOUT AS OPPOSED INSTEAD OF A, UH, EXPIRATION? THIS KIND OF MAY HAVE BEEN WHAT YOU WERE SAYING BEFORE.

[00:55:01]

SO IF THEY, UNLESS THEY REVOKE IT, UM, THE SUP WOULD STAND AFTER THEIR REVIEW.

I, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY LEGAL WAY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

OF HOW, 'CAUSE THAT WOULD BE AN ACTIVE SP THAT WE'D HAVE TO REVOKE AND GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS WHERE THE CITY WOULD INITIATE A CASE TO OPEN IT UP AND REVOKE THE SUP.

UM, IF YOU REMEMBER A COUPLE, MAYBE ABOUT A YEAR AGO, THE BAIL BOND AGENCY THAT WE MOVE FORWARD AND WE HAD TO, EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING TO REMOVE THE SEP FROM THE PROPERTY, THE CITY HAD TO INITIATE THAT CASE AND BE ABLE TO REVOKE THAT SEP FROM THE PROPERTY.

I I WOULD, I, SO I DON'T KNOW OF ANY PROCESS WHERE WE COULD JUST REVIEW THE SEP AND SEE IF IT'S IN GOOD SAYING THAT ALL OF DETERMINED, THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN OUR CODE WHERE IF A CITY MANAGER HAS DETERMINED THAT THEY'RE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR SUP, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE APPLICATION, BRING IT FORWARD AND GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO EVOKE THE SUP.

GOTCHA.

I THINK I, JUST SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, WOULD SUPPORT, 'CAUSE I UNDERSTAND WHAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING ABOUT THE LEASE AND YOU DON'T WANT TO SIGN A LEASE THAT YOU CAN'T, MAY NOT BE ABLE TO FULFILL MM-HMM .

THE OBLIGATION.

UM, EVEN IF YOU DO NOTHING WRONG.

'CAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHO'S GONNA BE SITTING UP HERE AND, AND MM-HMM .

HECK, EVEN THREE YEARS.

RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT.

UH, SAME THING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO I THINK JUST SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, UM, I LIKE THE IDEA OF TYING THE TERM OF THE SUP TO THE CO SO THAT WHENEVER THERE'S A CHANGE IN TENANT THAT WOULD TRIGGER THEM TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN MM-HMM .

HEY, HEY, TRI, I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, TO, TO SPEAK TO THAT.

SO EVEN THOUGH IF WE ENTERTAINED A NON EXPIRING SUP, IF IT'S TIED TO THE CO THERE'S AN IMPLIED EXPIRATION DATE BECAUSE IT TRIGGERS IT EVERY TIME THAT THE TENANT CHANGES.

SO THAT KIND OF WOULD BE, IN MY OPINION, A BETTER ASSESSMENT THAN JUST TYING IT TO EVERY 10 YEARS OR EVERY FIVE YEARS.

BECAUSE NOT SAYING IT WOULD HAPPEN LIKE THAT, BUT SAY A TENANT LEFT AFTER TWO YEARS, SOMETHING HAPPENED, YOU'RE GETTING A NEW SUP 'CAUSE IT'S GONNA BE A NEW CO.

SO I FEEL LIKE IF THE SUP IS TIED TO THE CO, THAT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THE CITY AS WELL AS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF THE TENANT COULDN'T GET THE SUP WITH THEIR CO, THEN OKAY, YOU CAN'T LEASE THE PROPERTY.

BUT IT DOESN'T PREVENT THEM FROM GIVING IT TO ANOTHER TENANT BECAUSE THIS, UM, SUP IS NOT TIED TO THEM SPECIFICALLY MM-HMM .

AND THEN IF YOUR TENANT DOES TAKE THE 10 YEAR AND THE THREE, FIVE YEAR OPTIONS, THEN YOU DON'T EVER HAVE TO, I MEAN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK FOR 25 YEARS BECAUSE YOUR TENANT'S NOT CHANGING.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE TIED TO THE CO AND THAT ALSO CURES THE OWNERSHIP ISSUE.

THAT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION.

IF, IF THE, YOU'RE REQUESTING OR SUGGESTING THAT THE CO PREVAILS EVEN OVER BEYOND THE OWNERSHIP MM-HMM .

SO THE, THE SUP FOLLOWS THE CO NOT THE OWNERSHIP.

MM-HMM.

CORRECT.

IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID, TRENTON? I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID.

SO THE CO I BELIEVE I HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHECK, MAYBE I CAN HELP MAKE ME HONEST.

UM, THE CO IS TIED TO THE TENANT AND THE OWNERSHIP.

OWNERSHIP AND THE USE.

THERE'S, THERE'S THREE THINGS IT'S TIED TO.

SO I, I'D HAVE TO ASK OUR BILLING OFFICIAL AND EXACTLY HOW THEY'VE DONE IT ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE.

SOMETIMES IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER AS SAY A LANDLORD MAY HAVE A CO JUST AS A LANDLORD.

AND THAT MAY BE, UH, CALEB'S CONCERN.

BUT WHAT I BELIEVE TRENT AND I WERE, UH, THINKING WAS MAYBE MORE ABOUT THE, THE BUSINESS OWNER WHO'S GONNA OPERATE, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I FORGET THE NAME OF THE COMPANY.

UM, BUT THE CO GIVEN TO THAT COMPANY THAT'S OPERATING THE HEAVY STORAGE MACHINERY BUSINESS, THAT'S THE CO WE'RE REFERRING TO.

SO IT THAT WAY, BECAUSE I'M SURE Y'ALL HAVE SEEN IT BEFORE, SOMEONE DOES A GREAT BUSINESS, THINGS HAPPEN, THEY'RE OUT, THE PROPERTY OWNER DEFINITELY WANTS TO GET SOMEONE ELSE IN, BUT WILL THEY BE AS GOOD AS THAT LAST GUY WAS? RIGHT.

RIGHT.

AND AGAIN, THIS UH, TRENT MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE STAFF SUPPORTS, ESSENTIALLY THESE LEGISLATIVE VARIANCES.

SO I MEAN, IT'S, WE'RE COMPROMISE.

SO JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S NOT THE OWNERSHIP, IT'S THE OCCUPANT.

I, I I THINK WE'RE YES MA'AM.

I THINK WE'RE CLEAR.

SO THE, AND THEN SHOULD YOU SELL IT AS LONG AS THE SAME TENANT IS IN IT, THE SUP WOULD FOLLOW THE TENANT.

THE TENANT, I MEAN, IT WOULD, IT WOULD TRANSFER.

[01:00:01]

WOULDN'T TRANSFER.

IT WOULDN'T TRANSFER.

IT WOULD, IT WOULD REMAIN WITH THE TENANT EVEN UNDER THE NEW OWNERSHIP.

RIGHT.

SO THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WOULD WANT TO ALSO CONSIDER.

THEY CHANGE OWNERSHIP.

IS THE PROPERTY BEING MAINTAINED THE SAME WAY IN THE FUTURE? SO THE REASON WHY THE CITY STAFF PUT AN EXPIRATION DATE IS TO VERIFY THAT EVERYTHING IS STILL AS IT IS.

SO, I MEAN, THERE, THERE'S TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT IT.

YOU CAN, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT WAYS TO LOOK AT THE EXPIRATION DATE.

THERE'S ONE GOING WITH THE TENANT CO ONE AT THE, OR ONE WITH KIND OF LIKE A CHECKUP AND LIKE, UH, COUNCILMAN OR COMMISSIONER SIMPSON WOULD SAY.

BUT YEAH, SO EVEN IF YOU, EVEN IF YOU DO KIND OF WHERE I THINK WE'RE HEADED HERE OF HAVING THE TERM OF THIS SUP TIED TO THE CO, IF THEY BECOME, SAY, SAY THEY GET INTO THIS, YOU KNOW, 25 YEAR LEASE AND THEY BECOME BAD ACTORS, THE CITY STILL, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE A MORE ARDUOUS PROCESS, CAN STILL PURSUE REVOCATION OF THE SUP.

OR THE CO AND, AND IN MY, IN MY CAREER, HONESTLY, I I, I'VE HAD IT MAYBE DONE FIVE TIMES 'CAUSE OF THE TYPE OF PROCESS AND A CITY INITIATING A ZONING CASE ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY MM-HMM.

IS A LOT MORE DIFFICULT.

UM, LEGALLY IT'S A LOT, IT'S A LOT MORE DIFFICULT.

AND THERE, THERE'S VARIOUS REASONS WHY CITIES TEND TO TRY NOT TO DO THAT.

THAT'S WHY LAW OF CITIES HAVE INITIATED THE PRACTICE OF ANY EXPIRATION ON THAT, ON SUS.

UM, IT, IT IS DUE, DUE TO THAT REASON.

AND SO, UM, BUT YOU COULD ALSO REVOKE A CO PROBABLY EASIER THEN, RIGHT? UH, CORRECT.

BUT EVEN WHEN YOU DO REVOKE A CO, THERE'S, THERE'S VARIOUS PROCESSES THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH LEGALLY, UH, TO HAVE A REASON WHY WE PULL A CO.

AND SO, UM, AND THOSE, THOSE, THOSE REASONS COULD, CAN RANGE MM-HMM .

UM, BUT THERE ARE ALSO LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS WHEN YOU DO PULL A, WHEN YOU DO PULL A SEAL FROM A PROPERTY, THERE'S CERTAIN CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT HAVE TO BE IN PLACE.

UM, AND THAT'S SAME WITH IF A CITY IS THE ONE WHO DECIDES TO REVOKE AN SU P'S SIMILAR RAMIFICATIONS.

DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? I DID.

UM, NOT, NOT TO SPLIT HAIRS, BUT EVEN IF THERE, I, I DON'T THINK AN EXPIRATION DATE WOULD ALLEVIATE EVER HAVING TO REVOKE A CO OR A SUP.

SO I MEAN, I DON'T, CAN WE REALLY USE THAT AS THE ARGUMENT FOR NOT, SO ZONING IS DISCRETIONARY, RIGHT? UM, VARIOUS ARGUMENTS CAN BE USED TO EITHER WHAT YOU APPROVE, NOT APPROVE, APPROVE OF CONDITIONS, UM, WHAT CONDITIONS YOU PUT ON IT.

AND SO IT IS DISCRETIONARY, RIGHT? UM, AND SOMETIMES IT'S WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS, YOU KNOW, SO WHEN STAFF WAS WRITING THIS REPORT, WHEN WE'RE VIEWING PROPERTIES, CASES ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, ESPECIALLY WITHS OR PDS, UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT A VARIETY OF FACTORS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, ONLY A RECOMMENDATION.

GOTCHA.

UM, THE COMMISSION HAS THE ABILITY TO GO AGAINST OUR RECOMMENDATION.

UM, AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE OFFENDED IF YOU RECOMMEND SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY.

UM, IT'S, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL DECISION.

THEY COULD LOOK AT BOTH OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND DO SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

UM, THEY COULD DO, THEY COULD AGREE WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT CONDITION, OR THEY COULD, THEY COULD ALTER THAT CONDITION OR THEY COULD DENY IT ALL TOGETHER, SO UNDERSTOOD.

UM, IT'S, IT'S DISCRETIONARY YOU HAVE.

UM, I WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, UM, YEAH.

SO, UNDERSTOOD.

YES, SIR.

CHAIRMAN, CAN I MAKE ONE LAST COMMENT? YES, SIR.

UM, JUST FOR CLARITY, THESE, THIS LEASE WOULD BE STRUCTURED AS A TRIPLE NET LEASE, AND THAT'S WHY WE FEEL IT WOULD BE, IF THERE IS SOME KIND OF EXPIRATION ON THE SUP, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO FOLLOW THE TENANT CO AND NOT NECESSARILY THE OWNERSHIP.

THE OWNERSHIP IS MERELY A, A FORM OF CHECK AND BALANCE AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE ENFORCING THE LEASE, WHAT THE LEASE READS.

BUT KEEPING UP WITH THE PROPERTY AND KEEPING IT WELL MAINTAINED IN GOOD ORDERLY CONDITION WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TENANT.

UM, THE OWNER'S JUST THERE TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE DOING WHAT THE LEASE SAYS.

AND SO IF, IF THERE IS GONNA BE AN EXPIRATION, I THINK IT WOULD BE OUR PREFERENCE THAT IT FOLLOWS THE, THE TENANT CO, UM, AND NOT THE OWNERSHIP.

AND THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

OH, ONE LAST THING.

DR.

FIGA, UM, CORRECTED ME.

THERE'S TWO POINTS ON OUR PARAGRAPH NINE.

UH, IT HAS TWO DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP NAMES, BUT JUST FOR CLARITY, IT IS 70 20 WAXAHATCHEE.

[01:05:01]

ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE HAD ZERO PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING

[10.Consider approval of ZDC-64-2026 ]

I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ZDC 6 4, 20 26, AND SUP FOR HEAVY MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL SALES OR STORAGE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CONDITION FOUR.

STRIKING THAT AND REPLACING IT WITH A CONDITION THAT THE TERM OF THE SUP FOLLOWS THE CO OF THE TENANT, UH, WHENEVER THERE'S A CHANGE IN CO THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE SUP PROCESS TO START OVER AGAIN.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO AUTHORIZING END THE REST.

I'M SORRY, MAJOR, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH AS STATED HERE, YOU KNOW, OH, I HOPE WE PUT BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

NO, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS ACCORDINGLY.

I SECOND THAT.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

COMMISSIONER UNDERWOOD, NOTHING HERE.

WE WILL MOVE TO OUR CLOSING.

WE WILL NOW HAVE STAFF AND COMMISSION COMMENTS TREND.

AND BRIAN, UM, YOU'VE HEARD FROM ME ENOUGH TODAY, SO I, I HAVE NOTHING.

NO.

BRIAN, ANYTHING FOR US? UH, NO MA'AM.

THANK YOU, SIR.

COMMISSIONER SIMPSON.

UH, THANK YOU, THE STAFF FOR PUTTING THIS ALL TOGETHER.

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS, NOTHING FOR ME TODAY, VICE CHAIR.

I JUST AM SO GRATEFUL THAT PEOPLE LIKE ALL OF YOU, KEEP INVESTING IN OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE IT, IT TRULY IS.

UM, JUST, IT'S THRIVING HERE AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT A LOT.

COMMISSIONER PORCH.

UM, WHAT JENNY SAID, UM, THESE ARE GREAT BUSINESS PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WE HAVE AND CITIZENS COUNCILMAN.

UM, I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT.

UM, AND, UH, I, I'M JUST, UH, SUPER GRATEFUL TO BE ABLE TO KNOW THAT WHEN YOU SAY YOU'RE GONNA TAKE CARE OF A PROPERTY, YOU'RE GONNA TAKE CARE OF A PROPERTY BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE DONE IN THE PAST AND WHAT YOU DO EVERY SINGLE DAY.

SO WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THAT.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

COMMISSIONER CONNOR? YES.

AGAIN, AS USUAL, THANK YOU STAFF FOR THE WORK YOU PUT IN FOR US.

AND I WANT TO THANK ALL THE FOLKS OUT IN THE AUDIENCE HERE FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION AND, AND, UH, IT WAS A GOOD EVENING.

UM, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE TIME TO THANK OUR FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE IN BLUE.