Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council removes church‑parking exception from PD‑179 amendment after debate over Lot 10

Midlothian City Council · July 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After staff and applicant presentations, council debated a PD‑179 amendment that consolidates lots and updates signs and landscaping; council voted 6–0 to strike a provision (section 2.e.7.c) that would have allowed places of worship to exceed parking standards for Lot 10, saying parking ratios for churches should be handled at site plan review.

The council considered an amendment to Planned Development District 179, a 33.399‑acre site at West Main/US‑67/US‑287, that would consolidate lots, update landscaping to avoid utility conflicts, revise signage (including two 35‑ft pylon signs), and modify parking and sign requirements.

Marion Spencer, assistant director of planning, said the amendment updates the concept plan, landscape plan and unified sign plan, consolidates multiple lots into a single Lot 10 footprint, and adjusts impervious coverage calculations (including use of pervious pavers to account for 5%). She recommended approval and noted property owners within 200 feet were notified. Tim Thompson, the site developer, said construction has begun and that users were showing leasing interest.

Council members debated a specific draft provision (section 2.e.7.c) that added parking flexibility for places of worship, with several council members arguing the language was premature and that parking for churches should be handled in detailed site plan review. After discussion and questions about how carving out Lot 10 could affect multiple lots and site plan sequencing, Councilman Weaver moved to strike section 2.e.7.c; the motion passed 6–0. Staff noted any building over 20,000 sq ft will require separate review before administrative approval.