[0:03] >>> good evening. It is 6:00 p.m., tuesday
[0:10] july 14th. I call the council to order.
[0:16] councilman coffman, please lead us in the invocation and the pledges. >> bow with me, if you would.
[0:23] father, we come before you this evening, humbly lord, we come before you asking for your guidance and direction as we
[0:32] attempt to do what's in the best interest of the city and its citizens. God, I lift up this meeting.
[0:37] I pray that you would have your way in us and through us, god,
[0:43] that your will would be done in the city of midlothian. I pray that tonight would be a good night for them.
[0:49] lord, I lift up all of the citizens of midlothian and the surrounding areas. God, I pray that you would touch
[0:55] those that need to be touched and bring healing to those that need your healing touch. Lord, be with us as we make
[1:02] decisions for this city, and be us as we exit these facilities
[1:10] tonight. Amen. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of
[1:14] america. And to the republic for which it
[1:18] stands, one nation, under god, indivisible with liberty and
[1:23] justice for all. >> honor the texas flag, I
[1:28] pledge allegiance to thee, texas, one state under god, one
[1:41] and indivisible. >> good afternoon or evening.
[1:48] agenda item 2020-225. Citizens to be heard. The council invites citizens to address the council on any topic
[1:55] not already scheduled on the agenda. If you wish to speak, complete a form with the city secretary,
[2:04] you will have three minutes. Please identify your name and
[2:08] address before you speak. We have one speaker signed up,
[2:16] alan horman. >> rugged trail.
[2:25] I just wanted to take a moment. Last week I know that I was
[2:30] listening to some of the discussion around the most
[2:38] recent governor's order as far as how it should be interpreted and how that pertained to the city here in midlothian and
[2:44] leading up to that moment, there was a lot of concern not only
[2:48] from our business but a lot of businesses in the community around how some of those interpretations may be applied
[2:57] to the city and I just wanted to take a moment tonight as I heard
[3:03] from a lot of folks in the community. I know there's a lot of appreciation to the city and the
[3:09] council along with the city staff around just the due diligence that was placed on digging into the interpretation
[3:15] on how that applies to the community and then how it is
[3:20] enforced on the back end. And so I appreciate the
[3:25] council's diligence along with city staff and putting in that
[3:31] due diligence to find that interpretation.
[3:37] so thank y'all. >> public hearings.
[3:43] I open item 2020-226. Conduct a public hearing and
[3:49] consider and act upon an ordinance for a specific use permit for a contractor's shop and storage yard relating to the
[3:56] use and development of 13.5 acres plus or minus of land in
[4:01] the j. Watson survey, zoned light industrial along shiloh
[4:09] road and highway 67. Trent, it's good to see you again. It's been a while. >> it has. Appreciate it.
[4:22] a contract facility requires specific use permit within the
[4:28] industrial light zoned district. The property is located in the northern portion of midlothian of highway 67 frontage road.
[4:35] this portion of property, the future land use model is an
[4:41] industrial module. The proposed use of a contracted
[4:46] facility is consistent with the future land use of industrial
[4:50] module. Within the comprehensive plan it says industrial module provides for a combination of uses that
[4:55] support industrial activities, for industrial uses often
[4:59] features large structures with large floor plates, used for
[5:04] manufacturing, shipping, and storing materials and products. As previously mentioned this is use that's consistent with this
[5:13] module. The proposed use, I'll give a little more description of this property.
[5:19] this property abuts the city limits, the most northern
[5:24] portion, abuts the city limits. Just on the other side is the city limits for cedar hill. If you look right here, you'll
[5:33] see this blue line, that cuts the property right here, this is
[5:38] cedar hill and the rest of this is the city of midlothian. Everything that you have in front of you that we'll be
[5:44] discussing tonight will be concerning the city of midlothian side. We have not seen any plans or
[5:49] anything in regards or heard anything in regards if any of
[5:53] this will be developed for anything regarding the
[5:58] contractor's facility. However if they were to develop right here, we have no jurisdiction over that portion.
[6:03] so once again we will be addressing this. But we do have provisions in order to protect our aesthetics
[6:13] because we do look at this as a gateway to the city, especially
[6:17] on highway 67 being very visible to the incoming traffic. Right here you'll see the proposed landscape plan shows
[6:25] the premier trees going all the way out to the blue line and
[6:31] actually extends north into cedar hill. We worked very closely with the applicant.
[6:36] I also worked closely with the city of cedar hill and let them know about what was coming just to be good neighbors to them.
[6:43] right now the plan is to have trees right here that meet our
[6:47] screening requirements and the purpose of this is to screen from the outside storage right here.
[6:51] so you have that view from this outside storage right here. We have a provision that in any case these trees are not here,
[6:59] they're required to have trees going all the way down the city limit lines to continue to provide that screening that we
[7:05] would require. So as that additional protection to protect that gateway. Working with the client, we've
[7:13] worked with them and explained to them that we do care about the aesthetics especially in this area.
[7:18] what we came up with and what they came up with, let me pull
[7:22] up the aesthetics is showing a building not typically seen for
[7:26] a contractor facility. They've used various
[7:32] architectural elements such as burying of building heights, columns, cornice detailing, wainscotting, different
[7:39] materials to offset the building, both vertical and
[7:46] horizontal articulation for the building's architectural
[7:53] features. They are all meeting all screening and fencing requirements. This project is built into phases.
[7:58] they have two different phases, they have phase one which encompasses the trc building which is the elevations that I
[8:03] just showed you. And then phase two would be the
[8:08] rest of this and any future expansion of this trc building.
[8:13] any future phase will be required to come before you for
[8:18] adoption of those future elevations and expansion.
[8:22] they did provide a plenary site plan of what phase two would look like. Once again once those building
[8:28] elevations come in, they would be required to bring the building elevations for future approval from the planning and
[8:36] zoning commission and city council.
[8:40] once again they did meet all of our architectural requirements,
[8:45] all of our elevation requirements on all sides of the building, not just the front of the building, they actually went
[8:52] above and beyond and made sure that even the rear of the building was meeting our architectural requirements.
[8:59] the rooftop equipment was being screened in accordance with their code. The roof is prominently flat but
[9:08] there is a slight slope to it in order for proper drainage off the roof. With this development, staff
[9:14] does recommend approval of the proposed specific use permit. We do find this consistent with meeting all of our requirements
[9:19] and I can answer any questions at this time.
[9:30] >> the city limits line would be trees on that as well? >> yes. So right here we have tree going
[9:36] all the way up here. >> the one on the blue line? >> if in the event these trees right here are not planted on
[9:43] the cedar hill side, they would be required to provide screening
[9:50] -- >> okay. >> the 13.5 acres is that just land in midlothian?
[9:57] >> correct. The acreage shown in the
[10:04] ordinance the 13.5 acres is only in the city limits.
[10:09] >> and what about the piece in cedar hill -- >> I think the owner is here. I believe it was seven acres or
[10:16] so. >> it looks like 1/4 maybe.
[10:22] a piece of concrete is in cedar hill? >> a portion of it, this little portion right here.
[10:28] >> do they have to get permits for that? >> they actually meet all of cedar hill's requirements for that little corner right here. We did look at a state law
[10:38] seeing if we could do everything in parlance with permitting,
[10:43] unfortunately we can't unless we came up with some sort of agreement with the city of cedar hill.
[10:47] the majority is concrete going to be our standards for the outside storage pad right here. >> I'm just glad they put the
[10:54] expensive part in midlothian. >> the drive, the access off of
[10:59] shiloh, are we getting that in phase one?
[11:03] >> phase one does not include that. Phase one will go up here. But they will be providing all
[11:09] of the screening around shiloh. Phase one does meet all of our
[11:15] fire requirements for access. So phase one, the road, the fire
[11:20] lane does not continue on, it stops at this perimeter line. >> so just a single access point off of the service road?
[11:31] >> right. >> do I hear a motion?
[11:42] >> this does require public hearing.
[11:48] >> don myers. I'm the applicant, our teams worked hard to address the staff comments and worked with trent.
[11:55] so if you have any questions for me, I'm available. >> I don't think so. Thank you.
[12:00] >> thank you. >> do you have a motion? >> I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.
[12:12] >> second. >> we vote. It passes 5-0. >> motion to approve.
[12:18] >> I have a motion to a prove. >> second. >> a second. Item passes 5-0.
[12:24] thank you. Trent, if you give me a moment,
[12:30] we've had two people citizens to be heard that filed applications
[12:35] that weren't noted. We have brent ratcliff.
[12:42] you have three minutes and your name and address please.
[12:49] >> thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm here on behalf of residents of midtown.
[12:55] over 70 households compromising about 100 people signed a petition that I'd like to enter into the record requesting a
[13:02] landscape median be built on george hopper between 9th street
[13:08] and 14th street. We have three real goals in this, number one is safety. As you're aware midlothian has
[13:13] grown dramatically, the population has swelled and
[13:18] that's nowhere more evident than on the thoroughfares of 8th,
[13:22] 9th, 14th street, george hopper. This increase in traffic on the
[13:27] seven years I've lived on george hopper has been dramatic. The building of homes and businesses has in addition to
[13:33] the expansion of the schools has increased the number of people walking, biking, driving, the increased pedestrian traffic
[13:41] includes people of all ages and stages riding bikes and skate
[13:45] boards, walking dogs, pushing strollers, those sorts of things. Some citizens have used this
[13:51] road as a conduit for recreation of travel and commerce. Some have attempted to test the speed and handling of their
[14:01] motor vehicles through reckless driving and street racing. There have been multiple accidents on our street over the
[14:06] past few years. We've had many close calls
[14:10] involving vehicle on vehicle, vehicle and pedestrian.
[14:15] we would like a median built. We notice that when the on
[14:21] street parking is full, vehicles are slower. We're hoping the median will accomplish those same goals and
[14:28] slow traffic down in that area. Second it will define our area as a residential area instead of an overall commercial area.
[14:38] this is the same as the median built on main street for those residents. One of the benefits of living in
[14:44] midtown is the proximity to schools and businesses, but it deserves to be differentiated from those areas.
[14:49] and finally midlothian spent a considerable amount of time as you know achieving the goal of being dfw's southern star.
[14:57] city leaders like y'all, planning and zoning, parks and recreation, police and fire departments, misd have tried to
[15:04] create a safe, thriving home for the thousands of people who live here and an exciting opportunity for businesses wishing to expand
[15:10] this beautify occasion effort would further that vision. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have and I'd also
[15:17] invite you to come sit on my front porch with me to get a first hand look at the source of our concerns.
[15:26] thank you very much. >> the second speaker amonds,
[15:40] pardon me. >> good evening, council members. I'm here on behalf of the developer at midtown. And we wanted to let you know
[15:48] that we support all of our midtown residents and we support them in the george hopper median project.
[15:53] thank you. >> thank you very much.
[16:01] we'll return back to the public hearings. Open item 2020-227. Conduct a public hearing and
[16:09] consider and act upon an ordinance accepting a petition
[16:14] for voluntary annexation and annexing 18.45 acres out of the
[16:19] william morgan survey. All inhabitants and owners of
[16:26] the territory and all rights and privileges of the citizens and binding all inhabitants by all acts.
[16:34] >> back in december 12, 2017, the city of midlothian entered
[16:38] into a bond agreement with the property owner.
[16:42] the developer agreement did state at that time that they
[16:49] promised to meet certain regulations regarding the
[16:54] development that they would not develop on this property that
[17:00] they would maintain their special evaluation which allowed them to be annexed in the first place.
[17:06] this property was located in that southeast annexation, the three year south's annexation that did occur on december 12,
[17:14] 2017. The property owner did approach the city and they did request to come into the city to be annexed
[17:22] into the city limits. Within the development agreement
[17:27] there is a provision within the plan that does state that there
[17:31] is development that does occur that the development agreement would act as their petition to voluntary annex in the city
[17:41] limits. However the city did not act on the petition. Once again this is a request by
[17:45] the property owner to voluntary annex themselves into the city
[17:51] limits. In accordance with section 212
[17:56] and 43.016, and 43.035 with texas government local code,
[18:00] this item does require public hearing to officially annex --
[18:07] accept this petition annexing this into the city limits. If the city does recommend approval this would close up
[18:13] some of the gaps within those holes out in the southeast annexation area. Staff does recommend approval
[18:20] and I can answer any questions at this time. Once again this does require public hearing.
[18:35] >> motion to close the public hearing. >> second. >> motion to close the public
[18:39] hearing. Please vote. Public hearing is closed. 5-0.
[18:44] is there any discussion? >> move to approve. >> second. >> move to approve.
[18:49] please vote. Final passes 5-0.
[19:10] open item 2020-228, conduct a public hearing and consider and
[19:14] act upon an ordinance accepting a petition for voluntary
[19:19] annexation of 2.3 acres in the a. Jenkins survey. >> thank you. In accordance with the previous
[19:25] codes mentioned in the last case, this item is another
[19:30] voluntary annexation under the same circumstances. They have requested to build a single family residential home
[19:38] per the development agreement. However they came and filed a
[19:42] petition themselves to voluntary annex into the city limits.
[19:48] this item does require a public hearing. This was formerly located in the southeast annexation area.
[19:54] staff does recommend approval and I can answer any questions
[19:58] about this item. >> this is totally unrelated.
[20:08] >> do I have a motion? >> motion to close the public hearing. >> second.
[20:12] >> please vote. Public hearing closed 5-0.
[20:17] discussion or move to approve? Motion to approve. >> second. >> please vote.
[20:26] item passes 5-0. Open item 2020-229 conduct a
[20:36] public hearing and consider upon an ordinance accepting a petition for voluntary annexation for 2.5 acres.
[20:42] >> thank you. This one is related to the previous item. Same owner of the property.
[20:53] they decided to have this as a separate case due to that
[20:59] reasoning. They are once again under the same sections of code as previously mentioned in the
[21:04] aftermentioned cases. This item does require a public hearing. This was a petition by the
[21:10] applicant instead of acting upon a development agreement
[21:15] regulations. Staff does recommend approval and this does require a public hearing. I can answer any questions at this time.
[21:22] >> move to approve. >> second. >> motion to close the public hearing seconded.
[21:29] please vote. Passes 5-0.
[21:34] do I have a motion to accept this? >> move to approve. >> second. >> okay. Please vote.
[21:40] item passes 5-0. Thank you, trent.
[21:49] item 2020-230 consider and act upon the minutes from the city
[21:54] council meeting of june 23rd and 29, 2020.
[22:00] >> move to approve. >> second. >> motion to approve, seconded. Any discussion?
[22:08] please vote. All in favor say aye.
[22:23] >> aye. >> any opposed?
[22:27] item passes 5-0. Thank you. Item 2020-231. Consider and act upon a charity
[22:34] care policy that will enable the city of midlothian to apply for
[22:40] reimbursement payments from the texas ambulance service
[22:45] supplemental payment program. Chief? >> good evening, mayor and counsel.
[22:52] I'll introduce kevin cunningham, our ems chief. I've asked him to present this agenda item because of his
[22:57] experience and involvement in this arena. So kevin. >> mayor, council, it's an honor
[23:04] to be with you tonight. The fire department is asking for adoption of the charity care program.
[23:10] this is in relation to the texas ambulance supplemental payment
[23:16] program which the city has been involved in for approximately the last two years. It has brought forth about a
[23:22] little bit over $200,000 into the city. This year from our latest forecast we're estimating
[23:28] somewhere around hopefully $100,000. During the last session the state did adopt some changes to
[23:35] the program that would require us to start a charity care
[23:40] program. And what that literally means is that they are requiring, in the past they've gone in and looked
[23:48] at medicaid expenses, medicare, the write offs that the city
[23:52] had. With the new charity care program, they're looking at a person's ability to pay.
[23:57] as you all know we've seen an increase in people without
[24:03] insurance and the private pay sector and we're not getting
[24:10] reimbursed the same amounts that we used to. And that's specifically what this program is meant to
[24:15] address. What it does mean for us is right now as you know the city does not send out.
[24:22] we don't do balanced billing for residents in the city.
[24:26] but we do balance bill or bill fully for individuals within the
[24:31] est and over in ovilla. This policy would do away with
[24:39] that. We collect very little on private pay. I think right now for this fiscal year, we've collected about $3,000 from what I ran
[24:47] before. So enacting this policy allows
[24:51] us to stand a better chance of being able to reimburse or I
[24:56] should say be able to get back some of these expenses that
[25:02] we're putting forth. >> are there any strings that
[25:08] come with this type of program? >> there are not, sir. It's strictly, it's showing up there it's through a federal
[25:16] fund which is the 1115 waiver. When they set it it's good for
[25:25] only every two years. So in two years it will go back and at that point the feds can come back and say we're not
[25:30] going to fund it anymore. But there are no other strings
[25:34] attached to it that we would be responsible for returning.
[25:40] >> any questions or comments? Do I have a motion?
[25:47] I have a motion to approve. >> second. >> seconded. Please vote. Okay and chief, is this your first time --
[25:55] >> it is. >> welcome. You've been with us what. >> four months. >> okay. Well welcome.
[26:00] >> it's an honor to be here with y'all. Thank y'all so much. >> item 2020-232 consider and
[26:14] act upon a bid award to mcmahon contracting, lp for farm to
[26:21] market 663 southbound main lane and deceleration road project
[26:27] for a bid price not to exceed $938,008.83.
[26:33] >> thank you, mayor. Good evening, council. If council recalls back a few years back we started this
[26:40] project and working with txdot, it was essentially the extension
[26:46] of a southbound lane from just south of harvest hill drive in this general location on down south to bird ranch road.
[26:54] we are looking into adding a free right turn along with this
[27:00] lane as it transitions to the south. It will actually fall out and become a free right turn lane
[27:06] into bird ranch road as well. And then you'll have it transitioning back into the single southbound lane.
[27:12] again this project went through the txdot process, we did get a permit for it that allows the city to go ahead and administer
[27:19] this project. And so that's really what we have planned at this point. One thing I was going to show
[27:25] you is this is the plan to give you an idea of the area, that's
[27:31] the additional lanes that's going to be added. When you look back this is harvest hill right here in this
[27:38] general vicinity. So as you continue to go south you'll have the lanes, you'll still have the left turn lane
[27:46] along 663 southbound into hawkins run or onto hawkins run road. And then as you continue past
[27:52] that, you'll continue on to the south with that lane continues. Then it starts falling out roughly in this area.
[27:59] folks that want to continue south will have to merge back over to the left. It's approximately 2200 feet in
[28:04] length so it's a little more than .4 mile. So there is room again to make that maneuver.
[28:12] the way this project was set up, it was set up as the base was
[28:18] doing the actual lane construction and aprovments.
[28:22] so we do have funding for service area 6.
[28:32] we also included an alternate bid. And that alternate bid would include coming in close to
[28:40] harvest hill and doing an overlay down to bird ranch. When you come in and you start having to remove striping on
[28:48] asphalt, it starts making kind of a mess. We wanted to put that in because we wanted council to have the
[28:55] option to do it. But because we could not fund it as a roadway impact fee project because it's just a maintenance
[29:01] item there's a separate funding item that we have for that particular project as well or that component of the project.
[29:06] and so that's included in here as well.
[29:12] so the base bid was for $750,000 which also includes a $100,000
[29:20] owner contingency built into that. Then the alternate bid which would include the overlay and
[29:24] restriping if council so desired was $187,300.
[29:30] between those two that's how you come up with the total not to
[29:35] exceed amount of $938,008.83. Out of the eight bidders that
[29:40] bid on the project, mcmahon was the apparent low bidder, so
[29:45] that's what the recommendation would be this evening. One thing that staff is working, we have worked with all of the
[29:50] franchise utilities, we are still w at&t to verify that they will be clear and if there are some conflicts
[29:56] we will not issue the notice to proceed to the contractor until
[30:01] at&t is clear. That way there won't be any delays, there might be a delay in the project getting started
[30:07] but we don't want to have it started and get delayed. With that I'll answer any questions the council has.
[30:13] >> txdot has approved it but don't want any of it?
[30:21] >> no, sir, that's on the city. >> that is a txdot portion of
[30:26] road? >> that is the city. >> I guess we dealt with close to a year or so ago, you've got
[30:35] burger king, oh aldi's, so this is sort of part of that relief?
[30:41] is this actually an extension past even that extension I think? >> yes, this actually is going
[30:46] to be, if we go back here, councilman, if you look right here, right now you have two lanes when you get past harvest
[30:53] hill and then it drops down to 1 single lane. We'll actually have 2 southbound lanes until you get to almost
[31:00] autumn run. We're adding 1 additional main lane and then a free right turn lane that's here.
[31:05] with the burger king and this development planned for right here, they're actually going to build their own deceleration or
[31:10] free right turn lane off of 663. That will be separate from our
[31:16] project, that will be at their cost. And that will be just outside of their project. Our project starts a little bit south to where those lanes end.
[31:24] >> do you know if these -- >> no if you go by there, aldi's
[31:29] has broken ground and burger king as well. Yes, sir, they both have started. >> very good, thank you. >> I have a question.
[31:35] is there any benefit to northbound traffic at all, any
[31:39] turn lanes or anything, any effect at all for northbound traffic? >> no, sir.
[31:43] I'm glad you brought that up. One thing we are doing too, one thing we did before right now we have that median right here.
[31:49] it's supposed to be a right in and right out that goes by the
[31:54] fuelling center and chilli's over here. We are extending that median all the way through.
[31:59] so you can see we get past there a pretty good ways. So this will truly be a right in and right out.
[32:06] the one thing that gains and it's not much to it, right now you'll pick up the second lane going northbound close to where
[32:12] that right in, right out is. And as it stands right now it picks up somewhere back here where the second lane comes into
[32:20] play. There's not much to do on the northbound at this point, it's primarily on the southbound
[32:24] side. >> that's true though I do people pull into the wrong lane out of that. >> these are really tough to enforce and when you design them
[32:31] again it's real easy for traffic unless you have some kind of physical barricade or barrier, it's real easy for traffic to
[32:39] utilize them inappropriately. >> this is one of the highest traffic spots in our city, and I think we need to get the extra
[32:48] striping and all of the deluxe package in my opinion. So I'll make a motion to approve.
[32:53] >> second. >> motion to approve and second. Please vote. Item passes 5-0.
[33:03] >> thank you. >> thank you.
[33:07] item 2020-233, consider and act upon agreement for professional
[33:11] services for design and related professional services for
[33:16] mcalpin road. Road improvements not to exceed
[33:22] $73,500. >> thank you, mayor. As part of the 2017 bond project or proposition that went out,
[33:30] one of the roadway projects was this project for mcalpin essentially looking to mimic or mirror what's on the west side
[33:36] going into rosebud which is a four lane divided roadway. So what was presented to the voters and approved by the
[33:43] voters was doing basically that same kind of concept on the east
[33:48] side of 663 for roughly 300 feet working within this area before we get to this business here. So with this we'll actually
[33:56] start the design work for this project before we actually do anything once the design is done, we'll come back to
[34:01] council. Our original hope is that maybe these properties would have some kind of development interest in
[34:07] that there would be right of way dedicated. Before we did that we would come back to council and get
[34:14] direction from council. We want to at least start the design work. The cost for doing the design
[34:21] was actually part of the bond issue that occurred last year.
[34:26] >> will we attempt to line that up because I know it's way off
[34:30] base right now if you're going west towards rosebud. >> yes, sir, we sure will. When txdot came in and put the
[34:37] signals in we were able to work them ahead of time so we actually placed them to where we do not expect us having to do
[34:42] any kind of work or relocation of the signal poles or anything like that. They were really set up for this
[34:50] configuration of the ultimate section there. One thing we are going to look at and we'll see when we do the
[34:54] design again, there will be a minimum of four lane divided here and it should match with rosebud.
[34:59] we'll see if there's a possibility to add in a left turn as well to go along with that.
[35:03] so maybe have a free right turn, then have a through, then have a left as well. That's one of the things we'll
[35:09] look at as part of that design. >> there's currently no right of way for either. >> that's correct.
[35:14] we'll have to split and get some from both of them to make this
[35:19] work and line up. We have to get some from the north and some from the south side because it is pushed a
[35:27] little bit further to the north at this point. >> move to approve. >> motion to approve.
[35:31] seconded. Please vote. Item passes 5-0. >> thank you.
[35:39] >> item 2020-234 review and discuss the potential exchange of certain water services within the sardis-elm water supply
[35:54] corporation and within the city of midlothian. >> I think this is the third attachment in your agenda item. But if you look, the areas that we show, this is called our
[36:01] service area boundary, the certificate of convenience and
[36:06] necessities essentially established by the state, and this is the water service area we have on file with puc.
[36:10] and looking at it again you can see the areas shown as blue,
[36:18] blue is city of midlothian exclusive. The area that's gray is mt. Peak.
[36:23] this is really the area that we're going to be focussing on is on this area off of mockingbird and also an area
[36:30] that you can see that's right along this area back in here and here and also down here. I'll kind of show that in a
[36:37] better format here. When really kind of necessitated
[36:44] or brought this to light there will be a zoning for property
[36:50] off mockingbird lane. They're coming in with this property, and this property goes all the way up through here.
[36:56] so in looking at it, they're looking at doing a minimum one acre type development. So it will be on site sewage
[37:02] facilities, that's what they're proposing. And so again coming back and looking at it, we determined
[37:08] well this green area would be sardis' to serve water and the
[37:14] red area would be midlothian to serve water. After looking at that and looking at some other areas that
[37:18] popped up that we weren't aware of, staff got together with
[37:22] sardis management and started looking to see okay, are there areas that look like they might make sense to do some kind of
[37:29] exchange. So this is what staff has come up with and was going to propose to council.
[37:33] this would be the areas that are currently within our ccn
[37:37] boundary that we would look to potentially swap or exchange with sardis. When you look at the acreage the
[37:44] one thing we'll need to see is the acreage that we would be
[37:48] swapping is considered higher than we would be getting from sardis. However what we're getting is
[37:54] currently zoned at high density. On the sardis area right now,
[37:59] all of these properties are currently zoned ag. What that means is without them coming back before council with
[38:07] a zoning change it would be one to own unit per four acres.
[38:11] I assume in doing these calculations that you're looking at a minimum one acre. So essentially still keeping the
[38:17] rural character and falling in line with what the comprehensive plan is showing for these areas. So the red areas right now
[38:25] currently are, so we'd be looking at roughly 434 acres. The area that's right in this area off of onward road, that's
[38:32] 175 acres. This walnut grove road area at the corner of walnut grove and mocking bird is 118.
[38:38] and then this mockingbird lane which is the one that started
[38:43] this with the zoning request with council is 141 acres.
[38:48] that would be what staff is proposing we exchange with sardis. And in exchange we're looking at
[38:53] these areas in yellow. Yeah 434 total acres, we're
[38:59] looking at 134 acres in exchange. I'll show you another table combing up that shows how we
[39:03] work that -- coming up that shows how we work that. This area right in here and up this is redden farms, it's
[39:11] already zoned now so it's a higher density. This is the back part of the grove I think phase five that
[39:18] recently got approved by council and zoning.
[39:23] everything else in this blue area is midlothian. So to try to have this area being served by sardis and
[39:29] everything else served by the city would be pretty difficult. It really doesn't make much sense.
[39:33] this other area is the area within redden farms that's shown
[39:38] as light industrial as well as I think community retail. So we couldn't put a lot count to this area but that would be
[39:45] something that would be exchanged as well. So we would serve that light industrial and the community
[39:50] retail. The area down to the south, right now I was calling it mid lake I believe they call it
[39:56] lakes at somercrest, that was recently zoned for 98 lots.
[40:02] when you look at that 113 acres you see how that's broken up
[40:07] with redden farms and grove and the industrial area and community retail within redden farms and then the 36 acres
[40:12] within the somercrest area. So when you kind of go through and break it down and again this is, this should be fairly
[40:21] accurate in what we would get lot count from sardis. We're looking at 225 lots in exchange for that 113 acres.
[40:31] when he we came through and looked at the 434 the only one
[40:35] we could go off was being proposed on mockingbird. We're able to figure on that because we don't know exactly
[40:40] where that line cut across but we were pretty close. So anywhere from 58 to 75 lots would be in that development
[40:48] being proposed. Going back and looking at the other two areas, if you look there's quite a bit of
[40:53] floodplain here. There's quite a bit of floodplain here as well. So when we kind of took that and
[40:59] discounted and took the floodplain out, when you look at what's actually developable and looking at one acre per, I'm
[41:06] sorry, one lot per acre, we equated about 100 lots on the
[41:11] one that would be off of onward road and about 60 lots that
[41:16] would be on the one that is right in this area again when you look at the floodplain and then have to take out the roads
[41:22] and things like that. When you look at the total lot count, again we were looking at roughly 225 that we would gain.
[41:28] we would be looking at exchanging roughly 228 to 235.
[41:33] so fairly close. Again the thing that council needs to realize is really this lot count is going to be
[41:40] dependent upon what council does because council would be the one that would approve zoning on the property.
[41:45] again it can be four acres per unit which would be considerably
[41:50] less. You divide this roughly by four or it could be one acre per lot. It could be something that's
[41:55] higher density. So again just kind of taking and looking at it as roughly the one acre.
[42:01] this is fairly close from the lot count. Our lot count again does not take into account the industrial
[42:08] or the community retail that's going to be within redden farms.
[42:12] there's some value to that as well that we couldn't put a lot count number on. This just kind of shows real
[42:18] quick what our facilities look like within areas. So we were definitely able to serve the areas that will
[42:24] develop. This is sardis, you can see
[42:30] sardis does have lines adjacent to the areas that we would be looking to potentially exchange with them.
[42:35] and one thing I wanted to touch on real quickly with council is
[42:39] we have kind of a master sewer plan, when we look at it and
[42:43] this is within our impact fee of study, we look at areas and say if we were to sewer these areas what would that look like and
[42:49] how would we get the lines up. When you look at this particular area, the line right now in north prong creek is right here.
[42:56] it stops just to the south of walnut grove road, I'm sorry the walnut grove middle school. It serves the middle school.
[43:02] it serves areas over here in kensington. This line could potentially get extended in the future.
[43:07] the thing you look at though is normally when those lines do get
[43:11] extended and you do have sanitary sewer you typically have higher density. Again we're kind of looking at
[43:17] it full belt if the desire was to get sewer up into these areas, then could you do it, and you can do it and that would
[43:23] include the areas that we would be exchanging with sardis.
[43:27] when you look at our comp plan, our comp plan really calls for these to be more rural and high density.
[43:33] the community wants more rural in the areas that are farther out from the city then the higher density.
[43:39] and so typically to run sewer and to use sewer to serve one acre or larger developments typically does not work
[43:45] financially. So you normally don't see that. So in order for this development to happen, they'll be asking for
[43:50] an exception from council because we do have a requirement that says if you're within 2,000 feet of existing sanitary sewer,
[43:56] you have to tie on or you have to get an exception from council. And that would be brought to you
[44:03] with pd, that will be coming forward. I wanted to briefly touch on that that these areas can be
[44:13] sewered, again then they would be in conflict with the comp plan and the direction that the community and the council has
[44:17] been taking on these areas that are farther out from the city. And with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.
[44:23] we do not have an agreement, this is just to get direction from council at this point. And if council wants staff to
[44:28] move forward, we will put together the actual agreement and bring it before sardis' board and this council.
[44:37] sardis has reviewed this particular exchange and they are
[44:42] in favor of it. >> is our utility advisory
[44:46] committee reviewed this? >> we have not. We have not been able to hold a meeting. We were going to have one back in march and covid hit.
[44:55] we thought it would be hard to do the web ex. We want to be safe with that board.
[45:01] we have not had time to discuss it. >> looks like a win, win situation to me.
[45:06] >> it can be. If we leave them split, it's going to be really difficult. And when you're out there and
[45:11] your neighbor across has sardis water and you have city water across the other side and you also have sewer, and sardis is
[45:19] billing them for sewer, it would make it pretty unique.
[45:24] again we were trying to come up with something we thought was equitable. On the acred side it looks more
[45:30] in sardis' favor but looking at lot counts and the customers
[45:34] we're pretty close to it being the same. Again the area developing within the sardis area council has the
[45:40] authority to say how they want that property zoned and served.
[45:45] >> I would think that also from at least what I've been told by folks within the community as we travel north of 287 what you're
[45:54] proposing provides for at the higher density areas which with
[46:03] the acception on the south side and then if you follow our
[46:12] comprehensive plan on the north side of mockingbird it provides for in its own way protecting the sanctity of what the balance
[46:19] of that zoning development and density levels are so I think
[46:23] it's great. Good idea.
[46:30] >> what, in your mind what are the major benefits of doing this and what are the drawbacks if any in your opinion?
[46:38] >> I think, mayor, really the benefits on this, one is really
[46:42] kind of having developments where they're going to have one provider. I think when you look again,
[46:47] when you start getting back down to these areas, these are already zoned. We know there's higher density
[46:52] here and again this is lakes at somercrest, this is 98 lots in
[46:57] that development. So it's already zoned. So that's going to develop at some point it has our sewer so
[47:03] if we're providing sewer within these areas it also makes better sense for us to also provide the water.
[47:09] I think on the drawback side, I think if something really
[47:13] dramatically changed whether a different view on council or a different council altogether in the future and this became a
[47:19] whole lot higher density, then we look at we're going to have a lot more lots that sardis would gain versus what we gained.
[47:26] however we're still wholesaling water to sardis so we still
[47:31] would get a benefit from additional customers on sardis' side. >> there's no action to take.
[47:36] does anybody have any other comments for mike?
[47:45] thank you. Yes the direction is to go as you proposed. >> we'll bring an agreement back
[47:52] to council. Thank you. One more, sorry. >> you get to close this half of
[47:59] the show. Item 2020-235 consider and act
[48:03] upon an ordinance of the city council of the city of
[48:08] midlothian, texas amending the city of midlothian standard construction detail ordinance no.  2013-51.
[48:16] mike. >> thank you, mayor. I'm pinch hitting for items tonight so I'll do my best.
[48:23] we have to come back to council at some point with changes to
[48:31] our details. We came and amended several times. We repealed and came back
[48:35] in 2014 with a whole new set which is pretty comparable to what we had before with the budget changes.
[48:40] what we wanted to do here, there was some main things we were looking at. One was specifying the meter
[48:46] boxes that we need to require for our new meters that we have with that meter change out program.
[48:52] and I'll come back to this in just one second. But when we were doing this we also decided that there was some
[48:57] areas we needed to add a little bit more in our lift stations and a little bit in our clean up.
[49:01] we have identified them. The areas that we tried to include, the revisions, the call outs so council can see.
[49:09] but really the main point of this really was kind of twofold.
[49:14] one was with new development we're seeing a lot more ini in
[49:19] our sanitary sewage systems, any time you have this new
[49:23] construction you're opening yourself up. We're seeing that within the wastewater treatment plant and
[49:28] our lift stations. In the past we came back and did a liner on the mantles and made that a requirement which has
[49:34] helped. One of the things we wanted to
[49:39] do was require if they pour into a manhole they have to lift it
[49:44] because that causes problems for us. That is listed in here as a requirement.
[49:49] and also the type of connection that's made. So that will be basically water tight.
[49:53] so those were kind of the two things dealing with the manholes. The other item is really we
[49:58] wanted to include a requirement that you have to install a clay cut off dam or a clay wall within your trenches and
[50:05] essentially what we're having is when you get over to the east side of town which predominantly where the growth is we're
[50:11] dealing with a lot of the rock and limestone. You get in there and start excavating and putting sewer
[50:17] lines in and essentially you create a big fresh drain. So you basically have an area where there's lots of water,
[50:24] there's lots of groundwater in these areas. So we essentially create a big french drain that goes down to
[50:35] those trenches. Roughly every 1,000 feet or as we dictate you come in and you build a clay cut off dam that
[50:43] goes all the way down to where the pipe is and it helps stop
[50:47] that water infiltration getting into your system and your
[50:53] manholes. So really those were the main changes again dealing with the meters, dealing with the clay
[51:02] cut off, this was really more clean up.
[51:06] the one thing I would ask council if council does approve
[51:10] this, this note right here that was added to the water services really should read like this note and this note over here.
[51:16] and so what I would ask, if council is willing to adopt
[51:23] these changes, that that approval is contingent upon
[51:27] staff amending this language here to match what we have added for these two boxes on sheet 18, sd-18 and I apologize for that
[51:45] oversight. With that I'm happy to answer any questions the council may have.
[51:50] >> all right. Mike, we have one speaker on this topic. Damian mcclendon.
[51:59] you have three minutes to come up and your name and address
[52:05] please. >> mr. Mayor, city council, my name is damian mcclendon. 3233 lamont street.
[52:13] just a quick question. I'm trying to learn how the city does things here in the city dealing with contracts and
[52:20] things like that not against mcmahon contracting but it seems like a lot of the items that are on display today they pretty
[52:29] much have a strong vote or they're actually getting a jump
[52:34] on giving their bid as to what's going on. How do we get other companies to come in to get some of these
[52:46] contracts and where are these job postings or these contract
[52:50] bids posted so that other companies outside of midlothian per se or even in midlothian, how are those people able to bid
[52:59] on those contracts? >> we will get the gentleman's
[53:06] information. He can get with our purchasing department and get on a list and get to where the notifications
[53:13] go out on those contracts when they go out.
[53:17] so we'll get the information. >> okay.
[53:25] thank you, chris. Any questions or comments for
[53:34] mike on this topic? >> move to approve. >> motion to approve. Seconded.
[53:41] please vote. Oh that's right.
[53:46] we have motion to approve it as presented with the stipulation that the two items be addressed. >> yes, sir.
[53:52] thank you. >> and a second for that. Thank you. >> thank you, council.
[54:04] all in favor say aye. >> aye.
[54:10] >> any opposed? >> aye or no, not opposed.
[54:15] sorry. I was a sentence behind. Sorry. >> it passes unanimous 5-0.
[54:19] and mr. Mcclendon, city staff will be getting with you as
[54:24] indicated by the city manager. The last item will be handled in
[54:33] the next council session in two weeks. It deals with appointments to committees.
[54:37] I would like to make note that we interviewed 16 people over
[54:42] two days this last week. And the candidates were
[54:46] excellent. We have four positions to fill. These are vacancies because of vacancies in the committees.
[54:55] but we'll be doing this at the next council. At this time we're going to break into executive session to
[55:07] cover section 551.074 personnel matters to deliberate the
[55:16] appointment, employment, reassignment or duties of a public officer or employee-emergency management
[55:31] >>> good evening, it is 7:25, we're back in session from
[55:37] executive session. We have a motion to be made.
[55:41] >> I need the motion to approve employment of the emergency
[55:46] specialist with pay in the fourth quartile of the pay
[55:52] range. >> we have a motion to hire a person in the fourth quartile of the pay range.
[55:59] it's seconded. Please cast your votes. The item passes 5-0. Given there's no other business
[56:05] before us,