YOU UP? YEAH, YEAH. IT IS 635. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
[A. Call to Order and Announce that a Quorum is Present.]
[00:00:07]
WE HAD A LITTLE TECHNICAL GLITCH UP HERE THAT WE HAD TO IRON OUT.I CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. IT IS TUESDAY, JANUARY 21ST, 2025.
[B. Approval of Minutes]
AND I'M READY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. COMMISSIONERS.QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MINUTES ON PAGE THREE.
THERE IS A STATEMENT THAT I GUESS IT'S THE THIRD OR FOURTH SENTENCE.
THEY SAY THAT SOME STANDARDS REQUIRE A 50 FOOT WITH PARTICULAR PLANTINGS AND BERMS. I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY IS THE AT THAT PARAGRAPH IS THAT 50 FOOT CORRECT OR IS WAS THERE A TYPO? THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? IF NOT, I WILL CALL FOR A MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE. MOTION BY FRANCESCA. SECOND.
SECOND. SECOND BY RICK. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
[C. Public Hearing]
A CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING. CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPY ON APPROXIMATELY 1.1601 ACRES, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT TO BLOCK A LEWISVILLE PLAZA.PHASE TWO, LOCATED AT 1010 EDMOND'S LANE. ZONED LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS REQUESTED BY YANG YUN ZHAO. TOP MASSAGE ON BEHALF OF JAY MAHARAJ LLC, THE PROPERTY OWNER.
CASE NUMBER 2409 DASH 16 DASH SUP. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONER.
SO THIS REQUEST IS TO OPERATE A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPY BUSINESS AT 1010 EDMONDS LANE, SUITE 107.
THIS SPACE WAS PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED BY ANOTHER LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPY BUSINESS.
THIS WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY SEVENTH MEETING.
BECAUSE WE WERE WAITING ON SOME DOCUMENTATION FROM FLOWER MOUND.
AND SO WE DIDN'T QUITE GET THAT. BUT I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN MY PRESENTATION TODAY.
SO AS WE GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WE LOOK AT COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING USES IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES, WHICH A LEGITIMATE LICENSED MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH.
WE LOOK AT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ANY ADOPTED LONG RANGE PLANS IN THE AREA.
THE 2025 PLAN CALLS FOR DIVERSE AND THRIVING NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH CAN INCLUDE PROVIDING AREAS OF SERVICES AND RETAIL SHOPPING TO SERVE THE NEARBY NEIGHBORHOOD. A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPY USE CAN SUPPORT THE LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE LOOK AT THE ENHANCEMENT AND PROMOTION OF THE AREA.
AND SO AND WHETHER THE USE WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE.
AND WHILE A LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPY CAN PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE WHEN IT IS AN ILLEGAL ESTABLISHMENT THAT HAS ACTIVITIES SUCH AS PROSTITUTION AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING. OBVIOUSLY THAT IS DETRIMENTAL TO THE AREA.
SHE RUNS IN FLOWER MOUND. THERE IS ONE ALLEGATION OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT FROM THAT ESTABLISHMENT IN FLOWER MOUND, AND THAT IS JUST AN ALLEGATION. AND THEN WE ALSO LOOK AT CONFORMITY WITH ALL ZONING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS.
THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO LIMIT THEIR HOURS TO THE OPERATIONAL HOURS OF 7 A.M.
[00:05:02]
VISIBILITY INTO THE RECEPTION AREA. SHE HAS PROVIDED A COPY OF HER LICENSE AS A STATE MASSAGE THERAPIST, AND HER LICENSE FOR THE THE FOOT SPA AND FLOWER MOUNT.STATE REGULATION DOES REQUIRE THAT ALL MASSAGE THERAPISTS BE LICENSED AND PROHIBITS PROVOCATIVE CLOTHING, REQUIRING MEDICAL SCRUBS AND HIRING ONLY MASSAGE THERAPISTS, AND LIMITING THE WINDOW SIGNAGE AND PROHIBITING WORKROOM DOORS FROM BEING COMPLETELY SHUT ARE STEPS TO HELP PREVENT FURTHER VIOLATIONS OF THE TEXAS PENAL CODE.
HOWEVER, AS STAFF, WE DON'T FIND THAT THESE ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY MORE ISSUES RELATED TO PROSTITUTION OR HUMAN TRAFFICKING AT THIS ESTABLISHMENT. WE'VE HAD AN ISSUE IN LEWISVILLE AND A PATTERN WHERE A BUSINESS THAT HAS THAT ACTIVITIES IS CLOSED, IT IS TAKEN OVER ANOTHER OWNER, AND THE SAME ACTIVITIES HAPPEN AGAIN.
THE APPLICANT, HOWEVER, COULD OPEN A LICENSED MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT AT A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAT HAD NOT HAD PREVIOUS ISSUES WHERE THE OWNER OR A NUMBER OF STAFF WERE PREVIOUSLY ARRESTED ON RELATED CHARGES.
I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE THIS EVENING AND IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
THANK YOU. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU.
IF NO QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
PLEASE COME FORWARD. MY NAME IS TRUSTEE CHU. ADDRESS IS 9915 CORINTH LANE IN FRISCO, TEXAS. THANK YOU.
I'M THE TRANSLATOR FOR MISS CHOW, WHO IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE SGP SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE 1010 EDMONDS LANE. I, I PRETTY MUCH KNOW THE, THE PROCESS AND I HAVE SPOKEN TO MR. CHOW EXTENSIVELY, SO I'M GOING TO JUST BRING A FEW POINTS.
BRIEF POINTS. AND FIRST OF ALL, THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THE OF THE BUSINESS IS TAO SPOUSE.
I BELIEVE HER CASE WAS DROPPED. SO YES, SHE SHE WAS ARRESTED, BUT I THINK THE COUNTY DECIDED TO DROP THE CASE, AND SHE EVEN MISUNDERSTOOD THAT SHE WAS ALLOWED TO REOPEN SINCE HER CASE WAS DROPPED. SO AND I NEED TO ALSO BRING UP THE POINT THAT THE ISSUES IN LEWISVILLE THAT THERE ARE CASES THAT THAT A LOT OF ESTABLISHMENTS A LOT OF PEOPLE GOT ARRESTED AND A NEW OWNER SIGNED UP, AND THEN THEY, THEY, THEY OPERATE IN THE SAME MANNER. BUT IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT MISS ZHAO. WILL OPERATE IN THE SAME MANNER.
SO I, I, I WANT TO URGE THE PANEL, THE COMMISSION TO RECONSIDER AND DON'T STEREOTYPE.
AND AS MICHELLE HAS MENTIONED, THAT MICHELLE HAS TRIED TO TO, TO, TO. TO, TO FOLLOW AND TO CONFORM TO THE, TO THE RULES. LIKE HER HOURS OF OPERATION SCRUBS, HIRING ALL LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPISTS. EVEN THE STATE DOES NOT REQUIRE REFLEXOLOGY TO HAVE LICENSED.
AND SHE'LL SHE'LL REQUIRE THAT. AND THE MAXIMUM OF 10% STOREFRONT POSTER AND ADS TO TO ENSURE MAXIMUM VISIBILITY. AND SHE AGREES TO THAT ALSO.
SO REGARDING REGARDING HER STORE, HER CURRENT STORE IN, IN FLOWER MOUND.
[00:10:09]
FREE LUNCH, AND AT THE END OF THE SERVICE THEY WILL SAY SERVICE IS NOT GOOD.YOU GOT TO GIVE ME A DISCOUNT. YOU GOT TO GIVE IT FOR ME FOR FREE.
OR SOME CUSTOMERS MAY ASSUME THERE ARE ILLICIT ACTIVITIES GOING ON AND DEMAND SUCH ACTIVITIES.
AND SHE WILL ABRUPTLY REFUSE. AND THESE CUSTOMERS WILL EITHER GO GO BACK TO THEIR BANK ACCOUNT, BANK, BANK AND DEMAND A REFUND, DECLINED TO CHARGE OR EVEN CUSTOMERS FROM TIME TO TIME.
WE'LL SAY WE'LL THREATEN OUR GOAL TO FILE A REPORT WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT OR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
IF YOU DON'T GIVE ME THESE DISCOUNTS OR OR FREE SERVICE.
AND OF COURSE, THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY. EVERYBODY CAN GO FILE A POLICE REPORT AGAINST ANYBODY.
AND WE CANNOT STOP THAT. WE ONLY LEARN ABOUT THE POLICE REPORT FROM MICHELLE IN AVIS.
AS SHOCKING TO HER AS, I GUESS TO THE COMMISSION.
SO. HAVING SAID ALL THAT, I THINK THESE ALLEGATION OR THESE BIASED, GROUNDLESS, UNSUBSTANTIATED ASSUMPTION STEREOTYPING WILL ONLY PRECLUDE A LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. AND LIKE MISS CHOW FROM SERVING THE COMMUNITY.
AND I HAVE TO ALSO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE ILLICIT ACTIVITIES THE HUMAN, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, MONEY LAUNDERING PROSECUTIONS ARE SERIOUS, SERIOUS CRIMES.
AND WE ONLY LEARN ABOUT THIS REPORT FROM MICHELLE FROM LAST TIME WHEN WE CAME TWO WEEKS AGO.
AND MISS CHOW HAS NEVER HAD A POLICE VISIT OR CALL TO ANSWER TO THAT REPORT. SO IF THERE WAS SUCH ACTIVITY, THE POLICE WOULD HAVE COME TO ARREST SOMEONE AT LEAST TO TRY TO MAKE MISS OUT TO.
TO ANSWER TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON. BUT NO, THERE IS NO POLICE ACTIVITY.
SO I URGE. WE URGE THE COMMISSIONER AND THE PANEL MEMBERS TO RECOMMEND AN APPROVAL BASED ON HER PAST, CURRENT AND FUTURE PLANS TO OPERATE A LEGITIMATE ILLEGAL BUSINESS.
AND I'M SURE SHE CAN BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY.
AND SURE, THE CITY NEEDS TO WEED OUT WEED OUT THE BAD APPLES BECAUSE THE BAD APPLES.
NOT ONLY WOULD THEY BRING HARM TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, IT WILL ALSO CAUSE PROPERTY VALUE TO DECLINE.
THEY WILL ALSO ATTRACT OTHER CRIMES. SO AND IS COMMITTED TO BE A GOOD CITIZEN, TO BE A GOOD BUSINESS PERSON, TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU MA'AM. THANK YOU.
SO MY CONCERN WITH THIS SUP IS IT'S IT'S NOT AGAINST MISS AL OR HER BUSINESS.
IT IS AROUND A LOCATION THAT HAS A HISTORY, AND THERE ARE CLIENTELE THAT ARE GOING TO SHOW UP FOR A SERVICE WITH CERTAIN EXPECTATIONS IN THIS LOCATION. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MISS OUT OPEN UP A THIS BUSINESS IN ANOTHER SPOT WHERE AN SUP IS NOT REQUIRED. SO WITH THAT, I JUST WANT THAT TO BE ON RECORD.
THANK YOU AINSLEY. QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK?
[00:15:04]
IF NOT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS.I RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
SECOND MOTION BY AINSLEY, SECOND BY AARON. YOU MAY VOTE NOW.
THE SECOND ONE IN FEBRUARY, WHICH WOULD BE THE 17TH.
OCEAN CARRIES SEVEN ZERO. COMMISSIONERS. THIS ITEM WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEY'LL BE MAKING A FINAL DECISION ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU RICHARD. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.
[D. Regular Hearings]
ITEM THREE IS A REGULAR HEARING PANEL SUBDIVISION PHASE FOUR.LOT FOUR ARE ON .935 ACRES. ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT BEING A REPLANT OF PARNELL SUBDIVISION PHASE FOUR LOTS FOUR, SIX AND EIGHT LOCATED AT 587 AND 591 BENJAMIN'S WAY.
COMMISSIONERS STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS PLOT AND FOUND A LIST OF LIST OF DEFICIENCIES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DENY THE PLOT AND GIVE STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THE PLOT ONCE ALL THE LISTED DEFICIENCIES HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. THANK YOU. JONATHAN.
COMMISSIONERS. QUESTIONS. COMMENTS. MOTION. I MOVE TO DISAPPROVE THE REPORT DUE TO DEFICIENCIES AND DELEGATE STAFF, THE AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT AND APPROVE ONCE DEFICIENCIES ARE CORRECTED.
MOTION BY ARAM. SECOND BY JACK.
MOTION CARRIES SEVEN ZERO. ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION OF THREE ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS RELATED TO ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS ON THE I-35E CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT ON A 1.13 ACRE PORTION OF HOFHEINZ CHEVROLET WAREHOUSE ADDITIONS BLOCK A LOT ONE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BENNETT LANE, APPROXIMATELY 890FT EAST OF I-35 EAST. ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, AS REQUESTED BY TRENT CLARKE OF A+ DESIGNING GROUP. THE ARCHITECT ON BEHALF OF HOFHEINZ LEWISVILLE PROPERTY, L.P., THE PROPERTY OWNER. CASE NUMBER 20 501-1. ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS.
THEY ARE LOOKING TO SUBDIVIDE THEIR LOT ON A PORTION OF IT THAT IS LOCATED OFF OF BENNETT.
RIGHT NOW, THE ENTIRE LOT GOES ON THE I-35 FRONTAGE ROAD ALL THE WAY TO BENNETT.
THEY'RE LOOKING TO SUBDIVIDE A PORTION OFF OF BENNETT AND BUILD A PART STORAGE BUILDING.
NOW, THIS PROPERTY, BOTH PORTIONS OF IT OFF I-35 OVERLAY AND IN BENNETT, IS LOCATED IN THE I-35 CORE OVERLAY DISTRICT, WHICH HAS SOME OF THE HIGHEST DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOUND IN LEWISVILLE.
THEY ARE REQUESTING THREE ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS WHICH REQUIRED THAT ALL BUILDINGS OF THIS SIZE, ESSENTIALLY ANY BUILDINGS UNDER 50,000FT², CONTAIN 80% BRICK OR STONE.
SO THEY ARE REQUESTING ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS FOR THE THREE PHASES OF THE BUILDING ON THE EAST, WEST AND SOUTH SIDES. NOW THE NORTH SIDE, WHICH DOES FACE BEN AND LANE, MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE I-35 OVERLAY.
[00:20:07]
SO THE THREE ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS ARE TO ALLOW 95% MASONRY.SO IT WOULD BE CMU BRICK IN LIEU OF BRICK OR STONE, AND 1.3 BRICK IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED 80%, WHICH IS 98.375 REDUCTION. ON THE EAST FACADE IS 80% MASONRY, 17% BRICK, WHICH IS A 78.75 REDUCTION. AND ON THE WESTERN I APOLOGIZE. BOTH MY EXHIBIT AND STAFF MEMO INCORRECTLY LISTS AN ALTERNATIVE STANDARD C AS EAST.
IT IS THE WEST FACADE, 83% MASONRY AND 14% BRICK, IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED 80% BRICK OR STONE, WHICH IS AN 82.5% REDUCTION. THE APPLICANTS HERE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE REGARDING THIS.
COMMISSIONERS. QUESTIONS. COMMENTS? YES. IS THERE A I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE REASONING WHY WE'RE SEEING SUCH A LARGE REDUCTION TO THE STANDARD.
RIGHT. SO THIS IS WE'VE SUPPORTED SIMILAR ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS FOR THESE TYPES OF USES.
SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS FROM BENIN LANE AND IN RELATION TO THE BUILDING SURROUNDED, SO MANY OF THE BUILDINGS, ALL HAVE BEEN IN LANE ARE EITHER METAL BUILDINGS OR TILT WALL, WHICH THE CMU WAS A HIGHER QUALITY MATERIALS THAN BOTH OF THESE.
SO IT'S STILL A MASONRY AS OPPOSED TO BRICK OR STONE, WHICH IS A LARGE REDUCTION WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PERCENTAGE, BUT IT'S STILL A HIGHER QUALITY MATERIAL THAN ELSEWHERE IN LEWISVILLE WHERE YOU COULD YOU COULD BUILD A METAL BUILDING AND MEET OUR STANDARDS.
THANK YOU JONATHAN. ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU. JONATHAN.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE HERE. WE HAVE A PERSON WHO WISHES TO SPEAK.
MISTER VAN ZANDT, WOULD YOU? IF YOU'RE READY TO SPEAK, YOU MAY COME FORWARD.
THAT WAS ON ANOTHER ITEM OH, IS THAT ON ITEM FIVE INSTEAD OF FOUR? OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT STRAIGHTENS THAT OUT. WE ALSO HAVE THE DESIGN GROUP.
IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE DESIGN GROUP COMMISSIONERS.
IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE THE ALTERNATIVE STANDARD AS PRESENTED.
SECOND MOTION BY RICK. SECOND BY JOSH. SECOND BY JOSHUA.
MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 1. COMMISSIONERS. THIS ITEM WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL DURING A REGULAR HEARING. WILL BE MAKING A FINAL DECISION ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY THE 3RD, 2025 AT 7:00 PM.
THANK YOU. OUR NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS THE TABLED ITEM.
FROM OUR LAST MEETING, OUR JANUARY LAST JANUARY MEETING.
CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING ARTICLE EIGHT USES PARKING REQUIREMENTS, SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS AND CERTAIN DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS OF VOLUME TWO OF THE LEWISVILLE CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 7.3 SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS, SECTION 7.3.2 FOR MANUFACTURING LIGHT INTENSITY MANUFACTURING, MEDIUM INTENSITY MANUFACTURING, HEAVY INTENSITY, AND WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL STANDARDS, AND AMENDING EXHIBIT 7.2.3 DASH FOR NONRESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS TO CLARIFY APPLICABILITY OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH USES IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS.
THANK YOU RICHARD. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
WE'D LIKE TO THANK THE COMMUNITY FOR THE INPUT THEY HAVE PROVIDED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.
WE'VE STAFF HAS PROBABLY RECEIVED CLOSE TO 200 EMAILS, PHONE CALLS, WALK INS.
[00:25:04]
WE'VE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS WITH A WITH A LOT OF CONCERNED BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS HERE IN LEWISVILLE.SO WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME VISITING WITH WITH A LARGE VARIETY OF FOLKS.
AND AGAIN, WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S INPUT ON THIS MATTER.
AND I HAVE PREPARED A SHORT PRESENTATION. BUT FIRST, I WANT TO GIVE YOU JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TO KIND OF EXPLAIN WHY THIS HAS COME ABOUT. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF OF THESE REGULATIONS ARE TO POTENTIALLY REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR NEW MANUFACTURING OR DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE FACILITY USES, AND THAT USUALLY THAT HAS THE POSSIBILITY OF KICKING IN IF YOU'RE DEVELOPING ONE OF THESE USES ON VACANT PROPERTY OR ON PROPERTY THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN USED FOR A LESSER INTENSITY AND IS BEING TORE DOWN WHEN I SAY A LESSER INTENSITY. I'M SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT WOULD BE OFFICE, RETAIL, RESTAURANTS, HOTEL SERVICE TYPE USES. THOSE ARE USES THAT ARE TYPICALLY FOUND IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL OR GENERAL BUSINESS.
THOSE ARE DEFINITELY MUCH LESSER INTENSITY USES.
SO THEY'RE NOW THAT THE CITY IS BUILDING OR IS NEARING BUILDOUT, WE HAVE VERY FEW VACANT PROPERTIES LEFT TO DEVELOP INDUSTRIAL USES SUCH AS WAREHOUSE AND MANUFACTURING. AND BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF OUR CUMULATIVE ZONING, WE HAVE A LOT OF THESE LESSER INTENSITY AREAS THAT HAVE THE ZONING THAT HAVE WERE NEVER DEVELOPED FOR THAT.
SO THAT IS THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THESE OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, LIKE I SAID, I WANT TO REALLY WANT TO COVER THE NEW LANGUAGE.
I KNOW THAT WAS PASSED OUT TONIGHT, SINCE IT DOES DIFFER FROM WHAT WAS IN THE PACKET.
AND AND THAT IS IF THAT PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN 500FT OF ONE OF THOSE LESSER INTENSITY USES, WE DO HAVE PROPERTIES IN THE CITY THAT DO NOT HAVE ANY OF THOSE LESSER INTENSITY USES.
SO THEREFORE THIS PROVISION WOULD NOT APPLY. ANOTHER PROVISION ARE ARE FOR PROPERTIES THAT CURRENTLY HAVE AN APPROVED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN PLACE. THAT IS THAT WAS A A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS THAT WAS REVIEWED BY THE PSC AND THE COUNCIL AND REVIEWED BY STAFF AND HAD BUILT IN THOSE PROTECTIONS, LOOKED AT THOSE MORE SENSITIVE USES.
SO THEREFORE THOSE WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISION.
ALSO, A NEW PROVISION THAT WAS PUT IN IS FOR PROPERTIES WITH A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR MANUFACTURING OR WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES AS OF EFFECTIVE ON MARCH THE 3RD, 2025. AND THAT DATE IS OUR ESTIMATED EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE.
IF THIS ITEM IS ACTED ON, IS RECOMMENDED TONIGHT, AND IS PASSED ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WOULD BE ON FEBRUARY THE 17TH. IN REVIEWING IF A, IF A PROPERTY HAS OR IF A PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT THEY COULD PRODUCE, THEN STAFF WOULD HAVE TO REVIEW RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION TO DOCUMENT THAT, THAT THAT DOCUMENT THE USE OF THE BUILDING ON THAT DATE.
ALSO, WE WANT TO CLARIFY TOO, THAT EXISTING PROPERTY.
PROPERTIES CURRENTLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ARE CONSIDERED VESTED.
NOW THAT'S A STATE OF TEXAS RULE THAT WE MUST ABIDE BY, AND THAT THAT IS DETERMINED BY THE DATE OF THEIR FIRST APPLICATION OF A SERIES OF APPLICATIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. SO AGAIN, THEY WOULD BE VESTED AND THEY WOULD NOT REQUIRE AN ISSUE, BUT THEN THEY WOULD BE A LEGAL NONCONFORMING UPON COMPLETION.
LEGAL NONCONFORMING IS NOT A BAD THING. PROBABLY MORE THAN HALF OF THE PROPERTIES IN THE IN THE COMMUNITY ARE CURRENTLY LEGAL NONCONFORMING, WHICH MEANS THEY DEVELOPED MANY YEARS AGO UNDER OLDER STANDARDS, AND THEY DON'T MEET THE CURRENT STANDARDS.
[00:30:04]
AND THAT IS AGAIN BEING RECOGNIZED BY THIS ORDINANCE.THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS. I HAD TO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD.
AND I HAD SENT MICHELLE SOME QUESTIONS BEFOREHAND.
AND ESSENTIALLY THE THE PARAGRAPH A. ONE B IS ESSENTIALLY LIKE THE GRANDFATHERING CLAUSE.
SO THE THAT STATES THAT THE REGULATION, THIS REGULATION DOES NOT APPLY FOR ITEM B IF THE WHEN THE USE IS IN A BUILDING LOCATED IN A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE IN USE AS A MANUFACTURING LIGHT INTENSITY MANUFACTURING MEDIUM INTENSITY MANUFACTURING HEAVY INTENSITY OR WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY USE ON MARCH 3RD, 2025, AS EVIDENCED BY A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WHICH WAS CURRENT AND VALID ON THAT DATE.
YES, THAT WHOLE SECTION. CORRECT. MOVING ON TO THE PART TWO.
IF THERE IS NO CO ON FILE, AND THEN ITEM THREE STATES THAT BASICALLY THIS PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY IF YOU'VE HAD A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
OKAY. THAT BASICALLY OUTLINES AND I COULD STATE THE ACTUAL WORDING THERE.
IT'S A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE WITHIN A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT THAT AUTHORIZES THE USE OR STATES THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS TO ALLOW LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND MANUFACTURING USES. OKAY. THAT'S A LOT TO TAKE IN.
THEY HAVE TENANTS THAT HAVE THAT MANUFACTURER WIDGETS.
AND THREE YEARS FROM NOW, TEN YEARS FROM NOW, WIDGETS MOVES OUT IN ONE GOES MOVES IN USES.
THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM FOR THE TENANTS. CORRECT? CORRECT. AS LONG AS ONE OF THESE USES IS DOCUMENTED ON MARCH 3RD.
AND WE WILL HONOR THAT. THAT ABILITY THAT THEY HAD ON THAT DAY BEFORE THAT ORDINANCE TOOK EFFECT.
SO AN SUPP WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED IF AN ENGINEERING SITE PLAN, A NEW ENGINEERING SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED THAT IS EITHER APPLIED ON OR EXPANSION OR REDEVELOPMENT, OR THERE IS A CERTAIN THE THE ORDINANCE DOES STATE WHEN AN, YOU KNOW, A VERY SMALL EXPANSIONS CAN OCCUR. I BELIEVE IT'S 10% OR 5000, WHICHEVER IS LESSER.
AND THAT IS A RULE CITYWIDE THAT TRIGGERS AN ENGINEERING SITE PLAN.
SO IT'S ONLY WHEN THEY EXCEED THAT PERCENTAGE OR THEY TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD, THAT THEY WOULD NEED AN SUPP IF THEY WANTED TO GO TO A HIGHER INTENSITY MANUFACTURING OR WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION. NOW KEEP IN MIND.
OKAY. AND THEN BUT ALSO KEEP IN MIND MEDIUM INTENSITY TODAY AND HEAVY INTENSITY MANUFACTURING BOTH REQUIRE AN SP. AND THAT WOULD THAT WOULD STILL STAND.
THAT WOULD NOT CHANGE. OKAY. SO IF YOU'RE OPERATING A BUSINESS TODAY YOU'RE GOOD.
YES. OR IF YOU OWN A BUILDING AND YOU HAVE TENANTS THAT DO SUCH, YOU'RE RECOGNIZE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO DRAW TENANTS FROM THAT POOL OF PERMITTED USES THAT THEY, THAT THEY, THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO DO.
SO TODAY. OKAY, SO PIGGYBACKING OFF OF WHAT AINSLEY HAS ASKED, AND I LOVE IT WHEN SHE GOES BEFORE ME BECAUSE 90% OF MY QUESTIONS GET ANSWERED. BUT I JUST NEED A LITTLE HELP VISUALIZING THIS.
OR LIKE, TALK TO ME LIKE I'M IN FIFTH GRADE BECAUSE MY MIND IS REALLY JUMBLED RIGHT NOW.
CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES OF WHEN THIS SOUP WOULD KICK IN? LIKE SAY, THERE'S A BUSINESS THAT'S MAKING SCREWS RIGHT NOW AND THAT TENANT DECIDES TO MOVE OUT AND SO THE SCREW MAKER IS GONE.
WHAT TYPE OF BUSINESS COMING IN WOULD TRIGGER THIS PROCESS? LIKE I GUESS LIKE THE DIFFERENT INTENSITY LEVELS AS WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
[00:35:02]
WHICH COULD KICK IN WITH THE 500 FOOT REQUIREMENT IS REALLY THE 500 FOOT REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT APPLY AT ALL.SO THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO BACK, LET'S SAY FILL THE SPACE WITH ANOTHER TENANT THAT'S WITHIN THE CURRENT TODAY'S LIST OF USES OR LIST OF USES AS AS OF MARCH 2ND.
SO A PROPERTY OWNER, PROPERTY MANAGER, LANDLORD, IS THIS GOING TO CREATE KIND OF LIKE A RUSH FOR THEM TO PUT ON RECORD A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT USES THAT AREN'T LIKE, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE GOTTEN IN THE EMAILS AND PEOPLE WHO SPOKE AT THE LAST MEETING, ESPECIALLY FROM THE LANDLORD SIDE, WERE LIKE SCARED THAT IT'S GOING TO PUT A DAMPER LIKE PROHIBIT THEM FROM LEASING TO FULL POTENTIAL, RIGHT, THEIR PROPERTY. IF THERE'S JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE HEAR THE SUV AND THEY GET SCARED AND THEY'RE LIKE, OKAY, I DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS, ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE TO RUSH TO SAY, OH, WAIT A MINUTE, I DON'T WE DON'T HAVE A RECORD OF A CO FOR THIS, THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS. LET'S HURRY UP AND GET THIS ON THE RECORD. IS THAT HOW IT WORKS, OR LIKE WHAT I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE A WAY TO DOCUMENT THAT THEY HAVE ONE OF THESE USES CURRENTLY OPERATING, AND THAT MIGHT MAKE THINGS EASIER FOR THEM IN THE FUTURE SO THAT STAFF DOESN'T HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, SPEND A LOT OF TIME RESEARCHING WHAT THE USES WERE ON MARCH 3RD.
SO WE ALWAYS WE HAVEN'T BEEN ENCOURAGING FOR MANY, MANY YEARS FOR ALL BUSINESSES TO GET CLOSE BECAUSE THAT PRACTICE WAS DISCONTINUED FOR SOME TIME. BUT IT WAS IT WAS PICKED UP AGAIN AND REINSTITUTED, I WANT TO SAY ABOUT 5 OR 6 YEARS AGO.
YOU SAID MEDIUM AND HEAVY ALREADY REQUIRED THIS.
SO THAT'S A MOOT POINT. IT DOES RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, LET'S SAY, OUR WAREHOUSE DISTRICT OR OUR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THOSE ARE THOSE, LET'S SAY MEDIUM OR HEAVY.
ARE ARE ALLOWED BY. RIGHT. CURRENTLY, IT COULD POSSIBLY KICK IN AN SUP IF THERE IS A REDEVELOPMENT KNOCK DOWN WHAT'S THERE, CLEAR THE LAND AND REBUILD SOMETHING NEW.
IF IT'S WITHIN 500FT OF A PROPERTY WITH ONE OF THE LESSER INTENT USES, LIKE A RESIDENTIAL OR A RETAIL OR RESTAURANT, TYPE A SMALLER SHOP. AND AGAIN, THAT'S A CASE BY CASE, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S JUST GOING TO BE OUTLAWED.
THERE MAY BE THE PURPOSE OF THE SUP IS JUST TO GIVE US STAFF IN THE CITY AND THE COUNCIL A CHANCE TO LOOK AT ALL THE PARTICULARS ABOUT A SITE AND SEE IF YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME IMPACTS, THEN MAYBE SOME MITIGATING FACTORS COULD BE INCORPORATED THAT MAKES IT MORE COMPATIBLE AND NOT CREATE THOSE IMPACTS ON THOSE THOSE MORE SENSITIVE USES.
SO WHEN AN APPLICANT COMES TO YOU WITH YOU KNOW, AN APPLICATION TO OBTAIN THIS SDP JUST BALLPARK.
HOW LONG IS THIS BEFORE IT COMES TO US? BECAUSE WE JUST SEE YOU KNOW, WHAT'S ON OUR AGENDA.
WE DON'T ALWAYS KNOW THE BACKSTORY HOW LONG IT TOOK TO GET TO THIS POINT.
BUT WE FIND STAFF DOESN'T HAVE IT THAT LONG. OUR FIRST REVIEW IS USUALLY 2 TO 3 WEEKS, AND THEN SUBSEQUENT REVIEWS ARE, YOU KNOW, USUALLY 1 OR 2. USUALLY THE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS WORKING FOR THE APPLICANT MAY HAVE IT FOR A MONTH BEFORE THEY RESUBMIT, AND THAT'S WHERE THE TIME. OKAY. BUT WE HAVE WE DO HAVE SOME DESIGN PROFESSIONALS THAT DO, YOU KNOW, RESUBMIT WITHIN A WEEK OR TWO. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT TEND TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS MUCH FASTER.
OKAY. GENTLEMEN. SO I HAVE A QUESTION. SO OKAY. IF SOMETHING IS DESIGNATED AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TODAY, WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF THAT? SOMEONE BRINGING IN SAY IT'S A BUILDING. THEY'VE GOT 4 OR 5 TENANTS IN THERE.
IT'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF THAT SWITCHING TO, LIKE A HIGH INTENSITY OR SOMETHING OTHER THAN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL? UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO BUY THE WHOLE BUILDING, WANTS TO TEAR IT DOWN AND DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
BUT I MEAN, BECAUSE THE THE WE GOT A LOT OF COMMENTS LAST TIME ABOUT, WELL, I'VE HAD TENANTS AND THEY COME AND THEY GO AND I'M JUST AFRAID WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW TENANT COMING IN AND IT'S GOING TO TRIGGER THIS SUP PROCESS.
AND I MEAN, WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF THAT REALLY HAPPENING? I MEAN, JUST IN A STANDARD REGULAR BUILDING OUT HERE SOMEWHERE IS THESE REGULAR BUILDINGS THAT MAY HAVE 5 OR 10 DIFFERENT TENANTS, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN USED. IF WE HAVE CEOS THAT DOCUMENT THE WAREHOUSE OR THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND IT'S ZONED LIGHT, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, IT'S REALLY BUSINESS AS USUAL.
[00:40:03]
THEY CAN CONTINUE SWAPPING OUT TENANTS AS LONG AS THOSE ARE PERMITTED USES.THAT USUALLY GOES INTO MUCH LARGER FACILITIES.
PARTICULARLY A GOOD EXAMPLE WAS THE MOVIE THEATER THAT YOU HAD APPROVED ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS FOR.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE WORKED WITH THAT DEVELOPER TO TRY TO MINIMIZE THOSE IMPACTS.
BUT LUCKILY, BECAUSE SOME SITE CONDITIONS, WE WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE A PROJECT THAT WE FEEL WILL PROBABLY BE ON THE ON THE LOWER INTENSITY SCALE OF DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE. BUT THERE'S REALLY NO GUARANTEES WHERE WITH THE SOUP THERE IS COMMITMENTS THAT THE APPLICANT MAKES ARE BASICALLY LOCKED IN AS PART OF THEIR PROPOSAL AND CAN BE ENFORCED.
SO AGAIN, THIS IS TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR MOM AND POP BUSINESSES, OUR RETAIL BUSINESS, OUR SERVICE BUSINESSES THAT WE ALREADY HAVE FROM THE IMPACTS OF, YOU KNOW, HIGH INTENSITY TYPE USES, 24 HOUR TRUCKING THAT CAN HAVE A VERY DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON ON EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH WITH MORE LESSER INTENSITY OR MORE SENSITIVE USES. RICHARD, WAS THAT POINT WHAT YOU JUST SAID, ALL THESE PHONE CALLS AND EMAILS AND PEOPLE WALKING IN? IT'S REALLY THE MOM AND POP BUSINESSES IS WHAT I'M, I AM WORRIED ABOUT.
WE'VE HAD A LOT THAT ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING AS LIKE A CLOCK REPAIR OR SOME, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOME SMALL, SMALL MANUFACTURING. IF THEY DON'T MAKE ANY CHANGES, THEN NOTHING WILL CHANGE, FOR THEIR STATUS HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO THEM IN BETTER LANGUAGE THAN THAT CONFUSING POSTCARD THAT WENT OUT.
YES. IS THAT POINT TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE CONCERNED? IS THAT COMMUNICATION REALLY? ARE WE HEARING THEM, OR ARE THEY RECEIVING THAT INFORMATION THAT WE'RE NOT REALLY LOOKING TO PROTECT YOU, THAT WE'RE TRYING TO LESSEN THE IMPACT ON YOUR BUSINESS? LIKE YOU SAID, WITH A 24 HOUR TRUCKING OR, YOU KNOW, LOUD, GREGARIOUS, LIKE HEAVIER, INTENSIVE USES, WE WANT TO PROTECT YOU FROM THAT SO YOUR BUSINESS DOESN'T SUFFER BECAUSE THE PERCEPTION OUT THERE IS IT'S THE MOM AND POP BUSINESSES THAT ARE GOING TO SUFFER.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY GAUGE WHAT THE HOW THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE SCARED ARE GOING TO BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED, HOW THEY'RE RECEIVING A GOOD PERCENTAGE OF THE FOLKS THAT THIS DOESN'T EVEN, YOU KNOW, IMPACT.
ONCE WE EXPLAINED, YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF IT, THEN.
YEAH, WE HAD A LOT OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK SAYING EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THAT TO TAKE TAKE AN EXTRA LOOK, TAKE OUR TIME AND TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THOSE AREAS OF TOWN WITH THE LESSER INTENSITY USES.
RICHARD, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. WHAT IS THE COST FOR THIS SUPP, FOR THE APPLICATION FOR OUR SMALL BUSINESSES OR BUSINESSES IN GENERAL AND ANY FEES THAT MAY BE APPLIED? SGP APPLICATION IS $750. AND THEN WE DO REQUIRE SIGNPOSTING AT $35 PER SIGN, DEPENDING ON THE SITE DETERMINES THE NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT ARE NEEDED.
SO THEN IF A BUSINESS IS REQUIRING AN SUP, THEN THEY IF IT GETS DECLINED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING AND THEY HAVE TO RESUBMIT THE APPLICATION, IS THAT ANOTHER $750? IF THE P AND Z RECOMMENDS DENIAL, IT STILL GOES ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHO MAKES THE ULTIMATE DECISION.
IT DOES TRIGGER A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE. AND IF IT IS DENIED THERE, LIKE I SAID, THEN THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN IT'S FINAL. BUT THE THE COUNCIL CAN OVERTURN THE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S ALL CASE BY CASE BASIS. WELL, AND I THINK THAT THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE NOT THE FINAL SAY HERE. I MEAN, WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND IT MOVES ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO? SO THIS IS NOT THE END OF IT FOR SOMEONE.
[00:45:05]
AND GET THEM TO EITHER APPROVE IT OR DISAPPROVE IT.THAT IS CORRECT. THIS IS NOT THE FINAL DECISION.
THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION. Y'ALL ARE GIVEN YOUR HONEST OPINION ON IF THIS SHOULD, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE APPROVED OR NOT. IT'S ULTIMATELY THE CITY COUNCIL'S DECISION.
THEY WILL HAVE A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS? I HAVE MANY THINGS TO DO HERE.
FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.
OKAY. BUT THE PUBLIC THIS IS AN OPEN MEETING.
SO THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
BUT TO DO SO YOU MUST HAVE FILLED OUT A CARD.
SO ANYONE THAT IS HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK BUT HAS NOT FILLED OUT A CARD, PLEASE GO TO THE TABLE OUTSIDE OF THE DOOR AND FILL OUT A CARD AND BRING IT TO ANY STAFF MEMBER AT THESE FRONT TABLES, AND WE WILL MAKE SURE THE CHAIR RECEIVES THAT CARD.
THE CHAIR WILL CALL EACH PERSON'S NAME TO COME FORWARD.
THE FIRST ONE, MY NAME IS LANCE KENT AND I AM AN OWNER OF A SMALL OFFICE WAREHOUSE IN OLD TOWN AREA.
WHEN I RECEIVED A NOTICE THAT SAID THE CITY OF LEWISVILLE IS HOLDING A HEARING THAT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER YOU MAY LOSE THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE USING YOUR PROPERTY FOR CURRENT USE. I WAS SURPRISED THAT WAS EVEN POSSIBLE.
NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, IF SOME OF MY OPTIONS FOR THE USE OF PROPERTY WILL BE REDUCED BY THIS CHANGE, SO WILL ITS VALUATION. WILL THE CITY COMPENSATE ME FOR THIS REDUCTION IN VALUATION? SO I CALLED THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, AND I SPOKE WITH JOHN BECKHAM TO FIND OUT WHAT THE INTENTION OF THIS ZONING CHANGE WAS.
HE WAS VERY HELPFUL AND TOLD ME THE CITY RECEIVED A NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS FROM A FEW LARGE, ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES ABOUT SEMI-TRUCK TRAFFIC, NOISE AND AIR POLLUTION CREATED BY NEW LARGE MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENTS ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY. IT WOULD SEEM IF YOU CREATE A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO A PROPERTY.
CURRENTLY, PROPERTY ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HAS THE RIGHT TO BE USED FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING OR WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION, AMONG A NUMBER OF OTHER USES. UNDER THE AMENDMENT, THESE PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD LOSE THAT RIGHT AND WOULD REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL TIME AND EXPENSE AND ULTIMATELY MAY NOT BE APPROVED.
THIS DEVALUES THE PROPERTY AND IS NOT FAIR TO THE CURRENT OWNERS.
FINALLY, IN MEMORANDUM WRITTEN BY RICHARD LUEDKE, A PLANNING DIRECTOR, ON JANUARY 7TH, 2025, TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE, WHICH SUMMARIZES MR. LUEDKE ANALYSIS OF THE NEED FOR THIS AMENDMENT, STATES TO MITIGATE HARMFUL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT AND MANUFACTURING LIGHT INTENSITY.
THIS IDEA THAT THERE ARE HARMFUL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH LIGHT MANUFACTURING IS TOTALLY WRONG.
WE AS A COUNTRY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO ATTRACT MANUFACTURING.
EXCUSE ME, AS A COUNTRY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO ATTRACT MANUFACTURING JOBS BACK TO OUR SHORES FOR YEARS.
NOT MORE BARRIERS TO BLOCK IT. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING CREATES JOBS.
THESE JOBS ARE NOT ONLY ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR, BUT ALSO JOBS IN ENGINEERING, ACCOUNTING, SALES, MARKETING, PURCHASING, IT, MAINTENANCE, SECRETARIAL AND QUALITY CONTROL.
THIS AMENDMENT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR SMALL MANUFACTURERS TO LOCATE IN LEWISVILLE.
[00:50:08]
PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE CLOSE TO WHERE THEY WORK.IF YOU WANT TO ATTRACT PEOPLE TO LEWISVILLE TO LIVE, THEN CREATE POLICIES THAT ATTRACT LIGHT MANUFACTURING JOBS TO LEWISVILLE AND PEOPLE WILL FOLLOW. MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO VOTE NO ON THIS AMENDMENT, AND DEVOTE YOUR TIME AND ENERGY TO CREATING POLICIES THAT WILL ATTRACT MORE LIGHT MANUFACTURING JOBS TO OUR CITY AND NOT DISCOURAGE THEM.
I HOPE THIS EMAIL FINDS YOU WELL. I ATTENDED AND SPOKE AT THE MEETING ON ONE 725.
I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PATIENCE.
KAREN LOCKE WAS MOST RESPECTFUL AND IT WAS APPRECIATED.
I WRITE YOU BECAUSE THE PROBLEM WITH THIS REQUEST BY STAFF IS NOT FINISHED.
IF I COULD TAKE A MOMENT OF YOUR TIME TO GIVE A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE ON THIS TOPIC AND VERBIAGE.
MOST OF US WHO OWN COMMERCIAL PROPERTY UNDERSTAND THE CITY WANTS TO CLEAN UP LEWISVILLE.
THERE ARE MANY PLACES WHERE THE TOWN IS TRASHY AND OLD.
IN AN EFFORT, THEY HAVE MADE IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DO ANYTHING CAR RELATED ACTIVITIES IN TOWN.
IT'S A SLOW, GRINDING, CONSTANT PRESSURE OF CHANGING REQUIREMENTS.
NEVER ONE BIG MOVE, JUST A STEADY STEP TO CHIP AWAY AT WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.
EIGHT. BELOW I HAVE A LISTED. I HAVE LISTED KEY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.
BELOW THAT IS SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION. HARD TO DO IT IN A LETTER, BUT IT'S ALL I HAVE.
THE GOAL IS TO STOP BUILDINGS FROM BEING TORN DOWN AND REPLACED WITH WAREHOUSES.
MOST OF US HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. THERE ARE RULES TODAY.
IF A STRUCTURE IS CHANGED BY SOME PERCENTAGE, UPDATE THAT SECTION.
THEY CAN ADD WORDING FOR PREEXISTING NON-CONFORMING TO SAY ALL PREEXISTING NON-CONFORMING WILL CONTINUE TO BE SUBJECT TO ZONING, ZONING, PERMITTING, AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCIES AS WE'RE IN EFFECT AS OF ONE ONE 2025, OR THAT PREEXISTING NON CONFORMING WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO OR ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES UNLESS THE STRUCTURE IS CHANGED, ALTERED IN SIZE BY SOME PERCENTAGE, OR WE REQUEST SOMETHING NOT ALLOWED WITHIN THE CURRENT ZONING.
THIS WOULD COME INTO PLAY IF THEY TEAR IT DOWN.
THE STAFF LIKE TO USE TERMS LIKE MAJOR SITE CHANGE OR THE USE CHANGES TO SOMETHING ELSE.
THESE ARE TERMS THAT THEY USE TO TRIP US UP. THE USE CHANGES.
DO YOU KNOW HOW WE GOT PUT INTO THIS CATEGORY? THE CITY CHANGED THE RULES AROUND US OVER TIME AND FORCED US TO BE PUT INTO IT.
WHEN WE WERE BUILT, THE BUILDERS COMPLIED TO THE RULES.
IF YOU REMEMBER, I SAID THAT FOR MOST OF OUR TENANTS, THEY STAY 3 TO 5 YEARS AND THEN THEY MOVED ON.
MY TENANTS LAST LONGER, BUT ONLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE FEWER OXYGEN OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THEM.
BUT ALSO LOOK TO THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST AND YOU SEE HOMES.
NONE OF THIS HAS BEEN BUILT OF OR CHANGED IN DECADES.
THE PROPOSED GRANDFATHERED WORDING TO COVER FOR IF A TENANT MOVES OUT.
WE CITY STAFFERS CAN CHECK IN AND PREVENT THINGS WE DO NOT LIKE.
IT SOUNDS CRAZY, RIGHT? BUT IT'S HOW IT WORKS.
STAFF CAN STALL A REQUEST FOR WEEKS, IF NOT MONTHS.
TENANTS DO NOT PLAN THAT MUCH TIME, SO THEY HAVE TO PASS.
THEY HAVE EXISTING LEASES SOMEWHERE THAT IS EXPIRING AND THEY NEED TO MOVE SOON.
THE SUP PROCESS IS ANOTHER BLACK HOLE. FIRST, THE PROCESS TAKES MONTHS.
EVERYONE KNOWS IT, SO WE ALL TRY TO JUST STAY AWAY FROM IT.
BUT IF THE STAFF DOES NOT LIKE WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING, THEY WILL NOT SUPPORT IT TO COUNCIL.
I MEAN, IF THEY DO NOT LIKE IT, EVEN IF IT IS LISTED AS ALLOWED WITH SOUP, THEY WILL KILL IT.
[00:55:03]
IT'S ALL UP TO TASTE AND WHAT PEOPLE WANT. WE WANT TO WORK WITH CLEAR RULES.IF YOU DO THESE THINGS, WE WILL ALLOW X. BUT SOUP DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.
NEITHER WILL SOME TYPES OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.
PLEASE DO NOT SUBJECT US TO THIS. I FINISH BY SAYING, LET'S BE FAIR.
THINGS GET RUBBER STAMPED AND ALL OF YOU MOVE ON.
WE ARE STUCK TRYING TO LIVE WITHIN CODE AND IT IS NOT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN TAX CODE TO UNDERSTAND.
YOU'RE AT THE MERCY OF THE IRS. WE ARE AT THE MERCY OF CITY STAFF.
MOST OF THE GOOD. MOST ARE GOOD PEOPLE, BUT MOST OF THE TIME THEY DO NOT WORK WELL WITH US.
MAKE A SIMPLE AND DIRECT CHANGE TO PREVENT ONE TIME A TYPE OF BUILDING FROM BEING TORN DOWN FROM ANOTHER WITHOUT THE CITY HAVING SOME INPUT, BUT STOP THEM BY ADDING THE ABILITY TO ALTER EXISTING ZONING PROCESSES, FORCING US AND OUR TENANTS TO JUMP THROUGH HOOPS.
SIMPLY SAY NO. LAST ONE TO READ INTO THE RECORD.
THIS IS AN EMAIL FROM MERLE RICHARDSON. IT WAS ADDRESSED TO CITY STAFF AND MICHELLE AND JOHN.
I AM NOT CERTAIN IF YOU WILL BE SUPPLEMENTING INFORMATION TO THE PNC THIS EVENING, BUT I DO WANT TO REITERATE MY RECOMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT REFERENCED BELOW, AND THE REQUIREMENT SHOULD BE REMOVED IF THE NEW PROJECT IS COMPLIANT WITH DEVELOPMENTAL REQUIREMENTS. AND I'M LOOKING TO SEE IF HE SAYS ANYTHING ELSE.
AND THAT'S THAT'S THAT ONE. NOW I HAVE A STACK OF NAMES MANY OF THE PEOPLE DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT I WILL READ YOUR NAME INTO THE RECORD TO KNOW THAT THE STATE THAT YOU WERE HERE AND YOU DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK.
WINSTON EDMONDSON KEITH MCDANIEL. DONNY YOUNG I'M NOT SURE OF THAT WRITING. ANDREW BOWMAN.
LARRY ROSE. JEFF TRAYLOR. LANCE VAN ZANT DOES WISH TO SPEAK. WILL YOU HOLD UNTIL I FINISH WITH THE NAMES AND THEN I'LL CALL YOU FORWARD.
THANK YOU. SIR. RUSSELL JENKINS. TOMMY. MAN.
SPEAKER LEWIS PEDRAZA, IF YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK, COME BACK.
WELL, YOU CAN COME IN AFTER I FINISH READING THIS STACK.
THANK YOU. LUIS PEDRAZA, LC, MIDLAND BURGER, HENRY.
WRIGHT, MELBA HOUSTON, PATRICIA WRIGHT, MIKE.
GREEN. GEORGE. WRIGHT, ALLEN. MEYER, LARRY. MEYER.
DIXON. RICH. RICK. STEINER, CHASTITY BEARD AWARD.
THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. TO TANAKA POWELL, JOYCE POWELL, AND RONNIE BERNANKE. NOW, ANY OF YOU, IF I READ YOUR NAMES AND YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK, YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO COME FORWARD.
MR. VAN ZANDT, THANK YOU. HI. GOOD EVENING. LANCE VAN ZANT, 512 WEST HICKORY IN DENTON, TEXAS.
I BELIEVE THE THE GIRAFFE THAT I'VE RECEIVED, JUST THAT I'VE READ JUST BEFORE THE MEETING THAT WAS HANDED OUT, I THINK MAY HAVE CLARIFIED SOME OF OUR CONCERNS BEING THAT THIS WAS THIS WAS PERMITTED OR BUILT BACK IN THE EARLY 80S.
WE DON'T ARE CURRENTLY NOT IN POSSESSION OF ANY ZONING PLAN OR OR SITE PLAN.
[01:00:01]
A CO IS ADEQUATE THAT'S EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 2025.WE OBVIOUSLY DO HAVE THAT SINCE WE'RE OPERATING.
SO I GUESS I DON'T KNOW IF ANY QUESTIONS COULD BE ANSWERED BY STAFF, BUT I GUESS WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE PROCEDURES AT JUST A MATTER OF TURNING THAT INTO STAFF AND ANY ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION, JUST SO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS AND HAVE THIS BUTTONED DOWN BEFORE THE MARCH DEADLINE.
SO I THINK I MARKED ON MY CARD THAT I WAS IN OPPOSITION.
THAT WAS MAINLY BASED ON THE EARLIER DRAFTS OF THE OF THE ORDINANCE.
SO I THINK YOU MAY HAVE CLARIFIED THAT TO SOME EXTENT.
TOMMY, MAY I HAVE 500 WINSTEAD BUILDING? I THE CLIENT I APPEARED BEFORE YOU ON BEHALF OF LAST TIME.
THIS LANGUAGE RELATED TO PDS ADDRESSES THEIR CONCERN.
HOWEVER, I NOW HAVE OTHER CLIENTS WITH CONCERNS ABOUT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S PRESENTED.
AND I WANT TO TRY TO SURFACE THE MOST SALIENT OF THOSE FOR YOU TONIGHT.
THERE WAS LANGUAGE RELEASED ON FRIDAY THAT THEN CHANGED.
I RECEIVED IT ABOUT 15 MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING BEGAN.
IT MAY HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THAT, BUT NOT SIGNIFICANTLY BEFORE THAT.
AND THERE ARE TWO CHANGES FROM FRIDAY UNTIL RIGHT BEFORE THIS MEETING THAT I WANT TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO, THAT I THINK ARE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT. THE FIRST IS THE LIST OF USES THAT YOU HAVE TO BE WITHIN 500FT OF. THE PREVIOUS VERSION SAID IF YOUR PROPERTY LINE WAS WITHIN 500FT OF THOSE USES, IT'S POTENTIALLY ALLOWED.
IT'S NOW BEEN CHANGED TO SAY EVERY PROPERTY WITHIN 500FT MUST CONTAIN ONE OF THESE USES, SO THE LANGUAGE HAS REVISED 15 MINUTES BEFORE THIS MEETING POTENTIALLY APPLIES TO A LOT MORE LAND THAN THE LANGUAGE THAT CAME OUT ON FRIDAY, OR THAT YOU CONSIDERED LAST TIME.
I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T DONE AN INVENTORY OF THE CITY TO WHERE THIS WOULD APPLY, BUT OBVIOUSLY HAVING A REQUIREMENT THAT EVERY PROPERTY WITHIN 500FT HAVE THESE USES VERSUS ADJOINING THE PROPERTY LINE IS GOING TO CIRCLE A LARGER NUMBER OF PROPERTIES.
SECOND, THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS RELEASED ON FRIDAY THAT BEGINS UNDER B, WHICH STARTS WITH THE USES LOCATING IN NET ONE ON FRIDAY, RECOGNIZED LEGAL STATUS FOR ANY PROJECT THAT HAD SUBMITTED A CONCEPT PLAN OR ZONING PLAN OR ENGINEERING SITE PLAN BEFORE THE MEETING THAT WAS CHANGED TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
SEVERAL OF THE CLIENTS I'M APPEARING BEFORE YOU TONIGHT HAVE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN DEVELOPMENT.
YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY APPROVED PLANS. THEY MAY BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THIS LANGUAGE, AS AMENDED, NOW POTENTIALLY RENDERS THEM NONCONFORMING, WHICH THE WAY IT WAS DRAFTED ON FRIDAY, WOULD NOT HAVE RENDERED THEM NONCONFORMING. I DISAGREE WITH STAFF'S CHARACTERIZATION OF NONCONFORMING STATUS AS BEING NOT A BIG DEAL IN THE WORLD OF COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE.
IT'S A VERY SIGNIFICANT THING, AND IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN FINANCING, REFINANCING, SALES, LEASES AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. SO WE WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONSIDER THE LANGUAGE FROM FRIDAY TO AT LEAST CAPTURE WHAT SHOULD BE A RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER OF PROJECTS, THE ONES THAT ARE IN DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW, THAT'S A SHORTER LIST CERTAINLY, THAN EXISTING BUSINESSES ARE NOT YET CONSTRUCTED.
BUT THAT LANGUAGE HAS CHANGED IS SIGNIFICANT.
ALL OF THAT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE UNDER STATE LAW, IF WRITTEN OPPOSITION OF 20% OF THE LAND THAT'S AFFECTED BY A CHANGE TO A ZONING REGULATION REGISTERS OPPOSITION, IT TRIGGERS A THREE FOURTHS VOTING REQUIREMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'M NOT SURE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE GIVEN FEEDBACK TO DATE HAVE SEEN THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS RELEASED 15 MINUTES BEFORE THIS MEETING TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY CALCULATION OF THAT 20% IS ACCURATE AND FAIR. AND SO I GUESS THEORETICALLY, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT COULD BE CURED BETWEEN NOW AND CITY COUNCIL, BUT THOSE ARE REALLY SIGNIFICANT ISSUES. I THINK IT POINTS TO THE OVERLYING POINT THAT'S THIS MAY BE MOVING A LITTLE TOO FAST WHEN WE'RE GETTING NEW LANGUAGE 15 MINUTES BEFORE A MEETING, AND THERE'S INTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AND YOU NEED TO AVOID CATEGORY TWO.
WE MAY NOT LIKE CATEGORY ONE, BUT IF THAT'S THE PROCESS AND THAT'S WHAT YOU INTEND TO HAPPEN OKAY.
BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT'S WHERE WE ARE YET WITH THIS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. HENRY WRIGHT, 1403 SEMINOLE DRIVE, RICHARDSON, TEXAS. I SPOKE AT OUR LAST MEETING ON THIS.
[01:05:04]
I'M LIKE TOMMY HAD MENTIONED I, I FALL IN THE SAME CATEGORY THAT THAT HE HAD MENTIONED.I'M CURRENTLY DEVELOPING A SITE THAT WHEN I REVIEWED THE LANGUAGE EARLIER TODAY WAS NOT GOING TO BE AS NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THIS LANGUAGE AND THEN THIS UPDATED REVISION NOW IMPACTS MY SITE IN A NEGATIVE WAY. AGAIN, WHEN WE SET FORTH TO DEVELOP THE SITE, IT WAS COMPLIANT WITH THE WITH EVERYTHING WITHIN THE THE UNIFIED CODE PERMIT, CIVIL PERMIT WAS ISSUED AND A BUILDING PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED.
AND NOW BASED ON WHAT'S WRITTEN, I CAN DELIVER THIS PRODUCT AND BE NONCONFORMING, BUT AND HAVE SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO GET THERE AND THAT JUST DOESN'T SIT WELL WITH ME.
AND SO THIS CURRENT LANGUAGE IS STILL AMBIGUOUS TO ME.
THE STATE LAW IS A LITTLE BIT CLEARER. AND THAT WOULD THAT WOULD TAKE PRECEDENT HERE.
BUT BUT WHY WHY DO WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT. WHY WHY WOULD I HAVE TO COME AND FIGHT FOR THAT LATER IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE? IF MY TENANT HAS AN ISSUE GETTING A CEO. WHY DO I NEED TO? AS A DEVELOPER, TRY TO GO AND LIST EVERY POTENTIAL USE THAT MIGHT COME IN HERE WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THAT MIGHT BE.
I DIDN'T INTEND TO DO THAT WHEN I STARTED. I, I READ THE CODE AND I UNDERSTOOD THE USES THAT THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED, AND IT NOW SEEMS LIKE I HAVE TO GO AND FIGHT FOR THOSE AND DEFEND THOSE.
AND THAT JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT. IT DOES FEEL LIKE IT IS RUSHED.
THIS VERBIAGE AGAIN JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT. AND THE PROCESS IT NOW AND STILL DOES AND COVERS ALL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
THE EXISTING BUILDINGS IS WHAT MANY PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.
WILL REQUIRE A PROCESS THAT TAKES 3 TO 4 MONTHS, THAT WILL REDUCE THE VALUES OF THOSE PROPERTIES, AND WILL DRIVE NEW DEVELOPMENT TO OTHER MARKETS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. MY NAME IS JEFF TRAYLOR.
I SPOKE AT THE LAST MEETING AND YOU ALL GOT MY LETTER.
NEXT TIME I PRODUCE A LETTER TO YOU, I'LL MAKE SURE I REMEMBER.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO READ IT OUT LOUD IN THE ENTIRETY.
IT'S ALL OKAY. UNFORTUNATE. I'M SORRY. IT'S ALL OKAY.
I RAMBLED A LITTLE BIT ON IT. SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, AND I HATE TO SAY, ARE THEY'RE BETTER, AND THEY REALLY ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE SUCCINCT.
SO AGAIN, USE ME AS AN EXAMPLE. AND I'M RIGHT.
HIS PROPERTIES REALLY NEAR MINE IS THAT WE'RE SURROUNDED EITHER BY GOVERNMENT STUFF, RAILROAD TRACK DISTANCE, BUT WE DO HAVE A SECTION OF HOMES THAT THEY'RE ALL LISTED AS GENERAL.
YEAH. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THAT'S ME, I SHOULD I SAY SO, BUT THEY'RE ALL BEING USED AS HOMES RIGHT NOW.
SO I'M CONCERNED THAT THAT SAYS THAT THOSE PEOPLE BOOM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE THEY'RE BEING USED AS RESIDENTS EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE IN, IN A LOT OF INDUSTRIAL AREA. THEY'RE GOING TO TRIGGER SOME PIECE BACK TO ME.
GOING OFF OF THE THEO, I'M OKAY WITH THE IDEA THAT THE CEO SHOULD ALREADY SAY ON IT THAT EVERY TENANT THAT I HAVE THERE IS ISSUED A CO, AND I DON'T I NEVER LOOK AT THEM. I MEAN, THAT'S THEIR DEAL WITH THE CITY.
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. WELL, I ALSO HAVE A TENANT WHO HAS A HE HAS AN SUP.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT HIS TIME AS THAT IS LIMITED TO ONLY HIM.
ONCE HE MOVES OUT THAT SOUPY DIES, BUT HIS CO WILL HAVE AN SUP VERSUS I'M ASSUMING HIS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL STATE SOMETHING TOWARDS THE SUP REQUIREMENTS VERSUS THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL REQUIREMENT.
THE THE ONES THAT WERE LISTED HERE IS HAS TO BE ONE OF THESE.
YOU GET MY IDIOSYNCRASY THERE. IT'S MORE OF AN ISSUE OF THEY'RE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
[01:10:04]
BUT NOW DOES THAT BUILDING ONCE HE GOES AWAY DOES THAT BUILDING FALL INTO THIS VAGUENESS WHERE IT SHOULDN'T BECAUSE IT'S A LOT INDUSTRIAL, AND IT WAS BEING USED FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT ONE OF THE GENERAL USES.DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT HAD NOT. AND MAYBE THE WHAT IF THE BUILDING IS VACANT? ON MARCH 3RD, 2025. SO WHAT IF A TENANT WERE TO MOVE OUT THE DAY BEFORE THE BUILDING IS VACANT, AND THEN YOU GO TO THE CITY AND SAY, HEY, I GOT A NEW TENANT ON THE FOURTH.
YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CUP ON FILE FOR THAT PLACE AT THAT TIME.
SO MY CONCERN IS THAT THE WORDING JUST BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CAREFUL THAT THESE, THESE HOLES DON'T OCCUR BECAUSE IT'S MUCH EASIER TO SIT THERE AND SAY IT'S A BUILDING IN THIS GENERAL LOT. INDUSTRIAL. AND IT WAS BEING USED FOR THAT THE LAST TIME IT WAS USED.
AND IT HASN'T BEEN BEYOND THEIR WINDOW OF SIX MONTHS OR WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS.
BUT THE CITY COUNCIL PUTS YOU IN CHARGE OF DOING THE TRUE DUE DILIGENCE, THE TRUE FACT FINDING THE TRUE NUTS AND BOLTS, WHICH IS PAINFUL IN THIS ENVIRONMENT TO COME UP WITH.
BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY GIVE IT TO YOU FOR, SO THAT YOU CAN DO IT AND COME TO THEM AND SAY, WE AGREE OR WE DON'T AGREE, AND VERY SELDOM WILL THEY. THEY SAY WE DON'T TRUST WHAT YOU SAID.
WE'RE GOING TO DO OUR OWN THING. SO YOU CARRY A LOT OF WEIGHT WITH IT.
SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR.
WINSTON EDMONTON, 1292 MERCHANT PLACE. SO WAREHOUSES IN LEWISVILLE.
ANYONE THAT GETS ON SOCIAL MEDIA KNOWS THIS IS A PRETTY POPULAR TOPIC WITH THE PEOPLE OF LEWISVILLE.
IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT WAS THE RIGHT SPOT.
AND WE'RE SCRATCHING OUR HEADS LIKE, HOW HOW DID THAT GET APPROVED? OR IT'S IN AN OKAY SPOT, BUT JUST THE WAY IT WAS SET UP IS JUST AN EYESORE.
THAT'S FRUSTRATING. AND THEN WHAT HAS BEEN EVEN MORE FRUSTRATING IS WHEN WE BRING THESE CONCERNS TO SOME OF OUR ELECTED LEADERS, THEY SAY THAT WE'RE POWERLESS. THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT.
AND SO WHEN WHEN I SAW THE LANGUAGE OF THIS THIS CHANGE.
AND OTHER FOLKS THAT HAVE INVESTMENTS AS THEY'RE FLIPPING THROUGH IT, THEY'RE NERVOUS BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THEIR LIVELIHOOD. BUT IF THEY KIND OF SLOW DOWN AND BREATHE AND REALLY READ IT.
CITY STAFF HAS BEEN REALLY THOUGHTFUL IN THE WAY THEY'VE PUT THIS TOGETHER TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS, BUT ALSO PROTECT OUR RIGHTS. IT'S IT'S IT'S A BALANCING ACT.
AND I THINK THEY'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB AT KIND OF GETTING EQUILIBRIUM.
SO ESSENTIALLY THIS DOESN'T SAY THAT WE DON'T WANT WAREHOUSES.
WE'RE GOING TO BAN WAREHOUSES. THAT'S THAT'S NOT THE SITUATION.
WHAT IT DOES IS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES IT GIVES US KIND OF A, A STOPGAP, YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY FOR YOU GUYS TO TAKE A LOOK FOR THIS CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE A LOOK AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? YEAH, THIS WILL WORK. WE'LL ALLOW THIS. OR THEY CAN SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WITH WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IN THIS, IN THIS SPOT.
THAT'S REALLY NOT A GOOD FIT. YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT WE NEED TO THINK OF.
AND WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO STOPGAP.
IF IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GO INTO A SPOT WITH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND POP UP A WAREHOUSE IT'S JUST AN AUTOMATIC GREEN LIGHT. SO, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT FOLKS THAT ARE TALKING TO ME AND SAYING, HEY, WHAT ABOUT THAT THAT SECTION OVER OFF OF 407 WITH THE OFF OF MACQUARIE WITH WITH THE STORAGE UNITS? WHAT IF THEY WANT TO BULLDOZE THAT AND PUT THIS GIANT WAREHOUSE RIGHT NOW? THEY COULD DO THAT. AND THAT'S RIGHT BEHIND A NEIGHBORHOOD.
[01:15:04]
IS THIS GOING TO BE A GOOD FIT FOR THE PEOPLE OF LEWISVILLE? TO ME, THAT IS A COMMON SENSE SOLUTION. AND AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO SAY THANKS TO THE STAFF.YOU GUYS DID A TREMENDOUS JOB IN PUTTING THAT TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT IS A GOOD BALANCE.
EVERYONE IS PROTECTED. YOU KNOW, I THINK IN THE FUTURE THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL SAFEGUARDS.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES WE TALK ABOUT WAREHOUSES AS BEING AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING IN EMPLOYMENT FOR LEWISVILLE CITIZENS, AND I'M ALL FOR THAT AS LONG AS IT FITS WITH THE COMMUNITY.
I'D LOVE TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL SAFETY ANNUAL SAFETY INSPECTIONS INVOLVED.
SO THIS IS A GREAT START. AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.
GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. RICK STEINER, OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR MATERIAL HANDLING.
I SPOKE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. WE'RE AT 501 EAST PARNELL STREET HERE IN LEWISVILLE.
IF I COULD MAYBE EVEN GET SOME CLARIFICATION WHILE I'M HERE WOULD HELP.
EMPTY. SINCE THE TIME THAT THE THE BUILDING WAS FIRST CONSTRUCTED, CONSTRUCTED 30 YEARS AGO.
SO THEY ARE WITHIN THE 500 FOOT SPECIFICATION RIGHT THERE.
SO WE UNDERSTAND WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE EXISTING BUILDING IS EXEMPT AS LONG AS THEY KEEP THEIR CONTINUED USE FROM THE 500 FOOT REQUIREMENT. BUT WHAT IF THEY WANT TO BUILD ANOTHER BUILDING? SAME THING RIGHT NEXT DOOR. SPECIAL USE OR NO SPECIAL USE? CAN YOU SAY. SOMETHING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK FURTHER INTO. OKAY. AND IF SO, CAN YOU IMAGINE? IT'S LITERALLY LIKE THIS. FROM HERE TO HERE IS THE OLD BUILDING AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GRANDFATHERED AND IT'S NOT REQUIRED.
IF THEY GET IT, THEY PUT IN SHRUBBERY TREES. OKAY, SO THESE PEOPLE IN THESE HOUSES RIGHT HERE, MAYBE THEY'RE HAPPY. THESE PEOPLE OVER HERE IN THESE HOUSES, THEY'RE NOT HAPPY.
THERE'S A LITTLE DROP OFF RIGHT THERE. LOOK. SILLY.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? I DON'T I DON'T KNOW.
WE GOT TO GET IT TIGHTENED UP A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.
AND THIS IS A BIG ONE 3 OR 5 ACRES. IT KIND OF STANDS OUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GOOGLE MAP.
WHAT THEY NEED TO KNOW. THEY NEED TO KNOW. THEY REALLY NEED TO KNOW.
AND I BROUGHT UP A POINT LATER, I DON'T KNOW IF THE THE COMMISSION CAN ADDRESS IT.
WE WE DID ASK ABOUT A NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS, AND I SHOWED ONE OF THEM EARLIER THAT SHOWED MY CLIENT'S BUILDING BUILT RIGHT OVER, BUILT, REDEVELOPED RIGHT OUT OF EXISTENCE.
YOU HAVE TO BE FAMILIAR WITH THEM. THEY NEED TO KNOW, IS THIS WHAT YOU HAVE PLANNED FOR THEM? AND OTHER BUSINESSES ARE RIGHT THERE. I MEAN, THERE'S PICTURE AFTER PICTURE AFTER PICTURE ANALYSIS.
AFTER ANALYSIS OF NEW RESIDENTIAL AND GREEN AREAS THAT ARE RIGHT ON TOP OF MY CLIENT'S BUILDING.
THEY DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT THE CITY IS UP TO. AND FINALLY, ON A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS.
YOU HAD A PERSON COME IN HERE WITH THE MASSAGE PARLOR THAT COMPLIED WITH EVERYTHING.
THE CITY ASKED, AS FAR AS I COULD TELL. AS FAR AS THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS PRESENTED.
THEY WENT BEYOND ALL OF THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, ALL OF THE YOU KNOW, THEY DID EVERYTHING THAT WAS ASKED OF THEM TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, AND YOU TURNED THEM DOWN BASED ON AN INFERENCE.
[01:20:02]
I'M AN ATTORNEY. I DEAL WITH EVIDENCE. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT THOSE PEOPLE WOULD OPERATE THAT BUSINESS IN ANY WAY OTHER THAN ETHICALLY AND WITH COMPLYING WITH THE LAW.BUT YOU HAD AN INFERENCE THAT SOMETHING MIGHT HAPPEN.
THAT'S NOT A GOOD LOOK. OKAY. THAT IS NOT GOING TO GIVE PEOPLE CONFIDENCE IN THE PROCESS, BECAUSE I HAVE A FEELING THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, SOME GOOD VERSION OF THIS IS GOING TO GET PASSED.
BUT AS OF NOW, FOR MYSELF, WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD FEELING FOR THAT.
HOW CAN WE TRUST THAT PROCESS? USE PROCESS. WHEN THIS PERSON CAME IN HERE, COMPLIED WITH EVERYTHING YOU ASKED FOR, EVEN BEYOND WITH THE WHOLE DRESS CODE THING. YOU TURNED THEM DOWN BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE IT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT. I DON'T LIKE LIQUOR STORES.
I DON'T LIKE SOME OTHER BUSINESSES AROUND TOWN. BUT IF THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW, THEY NEED TO BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR GOOD WORK.
ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COME FORWARD? COMMISSIONERS.
WITH NO ONE ELSE COMING FORWARD. COMMENTS. QUESTIONS? CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? RICHARD, MAYBE Y'ALL CAN HELP ME WITH THIS.
SO I, I SAW THE THE LANGUAGE CHANGE AS WELL. CAN YOU TELL ME THE DIFFERENCE IN FIFTH GRADE LANGUAGE? CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WAS SENT TO US FRIDAY AND WHAT WE RECEIVED TODAY? WELL, ONE THING THAT WAS CLARIFIED WAS PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS.
THE FRIDAY LANGUAGE TALKED ABOUT CONCEPT PLANS AND ENGINEERING SITE PLANS AND ZONING PLANS, WHICH ARE A CONCEPT PLAN OR A ZONING PLAN IS A COMPONENT OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
SO IT WAS MADE TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR THAT THAT A DEVELOPMENT THAT THAT WAS WITHIN AN EXISTING PD WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM THE 500 FOOT RULE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY TRIGGER AN SUP.
SO AFTER MUCH DISCUSSION, STAFF PUT IN THE THE TERMINOLOGY OR THE REFERRED TO A CO BECAUSE MOST A CO IS THE IS THE PERMIT THAT IS NEEDED FOR A BUSINESS TO OCCUPY A SPACE.
AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE, THE, THE, THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM WAS BEING ABLE TO OCCUPY SPACE.
SO THE GENTLEMAN'S CONCERN ABOUT HIS PROJECTS ARE STILL IN THAT CONCEPT PLANNING DEVELOPMENT STAGE, BUT HAVEN'T REACHED THE POINT WHERE THEY'RE EVEN REMOTELY READY FOR A CEO.
THEY WOULD BE EXEMPT, OR ANYONE IN THAT POSITION WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM THIS PROCESS.
OR ONCE THEY GET TO THAT POINT OF DEVELOPMENT WHERE THEY NOW HAVE TO HAVE A CEO.
THE STATE LAW IS VERY CLEAR ABOUT VESTING TO ZONING, AND THE SGP IS A ZONING REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, A ZONING TOOL. AND SO THE STATE LAW STATES THAT YOU'RE VESTED TO TO ZONING INTO USES OR CLASSIFICATION AND LAND USES WITH THE DAY YOUR VERY FIRST PERMIT OF A SERIES OF PERMITS IS, IS SUBMITTED.
SO THAT THAT IS VERY CLEAR. OKAY. I'M ASSUMING THAT THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE TODAY ARE HERE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT THIS TO BE APPROVED. IS THAT SAFE TO ASSUME THAT? OR FOR US TO NOT MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL? IS THAT TRUE? OKAY, BECAUSE I AM FEELING THAT SAME WAY AND I FEEL LIKE I'M A PRETTY SMART INDIVIDUAL. I HAVE A MASTER'S DEGREE, BUT IN THE IN THE PIT OF MY STOMACH, SOMETHING'S TELLING ME THAT THE DRAWBACKS OUTWEIGH THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF THIS TO BE FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
SO IT'S MY PERSONAL RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO NOT THAT I WILL NOT VOTE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD
[01:25:06]
TO CITY COUNCIL. AND THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. THANK YOU FOR COMMENTING ON THAT.BEFORE WE GO ON, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE AUDIENCE.
IT'S IT'S IMPORTANT TO US THAT YOU'RE THERE, THAT WE CAN HEAR YOU.
OKAY, COMMISSIONERS. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF IN TERMS OF TIMING.
WE'VE BEEN A COUPLE OF ROUNDS OF LANGUAGE COMING OUT RELATIVELY SHORT PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
DO WE HAVE AN ABILITY TO. BUILD IN SOME TIME FOR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION? MAYBE A WORKSHOP, MAYBE A PRESENTATION ON THIS? I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. I'VE. RICHARD, I'VE LEARNED A LOT.
I'M STILL TRYING TO PROCESS IT AND I. WAS THERE WAS THERE A LANGUAGE THAT CAME OUT THIS AFTERNOON? YES. WHAT WAS PASSED OUT TO YOU? THE HARD COPY TODAY WAS COMPLETED ABOUT 330.
SO WE AGREE THIS IS VERY COMPLEX. WE HAVE PUT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF THOUGHT, A LOT OF STAFF TIME TRYING TO ADDRESS AS MANY CONCERNS AS POSSIBLE. THE OBSERVATION IS A LOT TO PROCESS, A LOT TO UNDERSTAND. I THINK THE WORD BALANCE CAME UP IN SEVERAL COMMENTS.
AND THAT'S THE I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CHALLENGED WITH.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CONTINUE.
COMMISSIONERS. WELL, I DO HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.
I THINK IT'S I MEAN, I HAPPEN TO LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM ONE THAT'S BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW, AND THE TRAFFIC'S ALREADY BAD, AND THERE'S ALL KINDS OF ISSUES.
AND I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE PROVISIONS IN PLACE TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE THEY PAY PROPERTY TAXES TO, THEY PAY TAXES, THEY LIVE HERE AND SO FORTH. SO I JUST THINK WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS, TWO PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE HOUSES HERE, OWN PROPERTY HERE, LIVE HERE AS WELL.
SO DO YOU WISH TO CONTINUE? NO, I SAY LET'S LET'S VOTE.
WE HAVE A MOTION. I HAVE A MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED.
MOTION BY RICK. SECOND. SECOND BY AINSLEY.
MOTION CARRIES SIX ZERO 6 TO 1 COMMISSIONERS.
THIS ITEM WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, WHO WILL HOLD A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING AND WILL MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? NO ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS EVENING. THANK YOU. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ADJOURNMENT.
MOVE TO ADJOURN. SECOND MOTION BY SECOND BY AINSLEY.
WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.