ARE YOU UP? ARE YOU ASKING ARE YOU UP? YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. IT IS 635. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
[A. Call to Order and Announce that a Quorum is Present.]
[00:00:11]
PATIENCE. 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. THIS IS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.[B. Approval of Minutes]
AND OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS WE DO HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT, AND I'M READY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. COMMISSIONERS. QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION 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
[C. Public Hearing]
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 TWO, BLOCK A LEWISVILLE PLAZA, PHASE TWO, LOCATED AT 1010 EDMONDS LANE. ZONED LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS REQUESTED BY YANG YANZHAO. TOP MASSAGE ON BEHALF OF JAY MAHARAJI, LLC, THE PROPERTY OWNER. CASE NUMBER 20 409 DASH 16 DASH SUPP. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 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. HOWEVER, THE PREVIOUS BUSINESS OWNER AND OTHER PERSON WERE ARRESTED WITH CHARGES RELATED TO PROSTITUTION, WHICH TRIGGERS NOW FOR ANY HEALTH OR MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT WISHING TO OPEN IN THE SPACE THE REQUIREMENT TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THIS WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 7TH 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 AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES, WHICH A LEGITIMATE LICENSED MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH. WE LOOK AT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND 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. AS PART OF HER SUP APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE HER ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE FOR ESTABLISHMENT. 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. TO 10 P.M. AND WHILE SHE SAID SHE WOULD LIMIT HER HOURS FURTHER, WE WOULD ONLY RESTRICT HER TO THE 7 A.M. TO 10 P.M. ALL OF HER MASSAGE THERAPISTS HIRED WOULD BE LICENSED, INCLUDING THOSE THAT DO FOOT REFLEXOLOGY.
SHE HAS STATED THAT ALL THERAPISTS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEDICAL SCRUBS, AND NO PROVOCATIVE CLOTHING WOULD BE ALLOWED. SHE HAS STATED THAT WORKROOM DOORS CANNOT BE COMPLETELY SHUT DURING MASSAGE SESSIONS, AND THAT SIGNAGE WOULD COVER A MAXIMUM OF 10% OF HER
[00:05:05]
STOREFRONT WINDOWS TO ALLOW BETTER VISIBILITY INTO THE RECEPTION AREA. SHE HAS PROVIDED A COPY OF HER LICENSE AS A STATE MASSAGE THERAPIST, AND HER LICENSE FOR THE FOOT SPA AND FLOWER MOUND. 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. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT IS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST. 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. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK. COME.
COME FORWARD. PLEASE SPEAK CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE. COME FORWARD. MY NAME IS RUSTY CHEW. ADDRESS IS 9915 CORINTH LANE IN FRISCO, TEXAS. THANK YOU. I'M THE TRANSLATOR FOR MISS CHOW, WHO IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE SUP.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE 1010. EDMONDS LANE. I PRETTY MUCH KNOW THE PROCESS, AND I HAVE SPOKEN TO MR. CHOW EXTENSIVELY, SO I'M GOING TO JUST BRING UP A FEW POINTS. BRIEF POINTS. AND FIRST OF ALL, THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THE OF THE BUSINESS, MISS TAO, SPELLED T A O. 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 CHOW SPELLS 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 COME. TO FOLLOW AND. TO CONFORM TO THE, TO THE RULES, LIKE THE HOURS OF OPERATION SCRUBS, HIRING ALL LICENSED MASSAGE THERAPISTS, EVEN THE STATE DOES NOT REQUIRE A REFLEXOLOGIST TO HAVE LICENSE. AND SO SHE'LL REQUIRE THAT. AND THE MAXIMUM OF 10% STOREFRONT POSTER AND ADS TO ENSURE MAXIMUM VISIBILITY. AND SHE AGREES TO THAT ALSO. SO. REGARDING REGARDING HER STORE, HER CURRENT STORE IN IN FLOWER MOUND, ONE THING I WANT TO BRING UP IS IN
[00:10:06]
THIS BUSINESS. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THERE ARE SOME CUSTOMERS WHO COME IN AND WANT A FREE MEAL, 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, OR DECLINE THE CHARGE OR EVEN CUSTOMERS FROM TIME TO TIME WILL SAY WILL THREATEN OUR GOAL TO FILE A REPORT WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT OR POLICE DEPARTMENT. IF YOU DON'T GIVE ME THESE DISCOUNTS 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 LEARNED ABOUT THE POLICE REPORT.FROM MICHELLE. AND IT WAS AS SHOCKING TO HER AS I GUESS TO THE COMMISSION. SO. HAVING SAID ALL THAT, I THINK THESE ALLEGATIONS OR THESE BIASED, GROUNDLESS, UNSUBSTANTIATED ASSUMPTION STEREOTYPING WILL ONLY PRECLUDE A LAW ABIDING CITIZEN LIKE MISS CHOW FROM SERVING THE COMMUNITY. AND I HAVE TO ALSO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE ILLICIT ACTIVITIES THE HUMAN HUMAN TRAFFICKING, MONEY LAUNDERING, PROSTITUTION ARE SERIOUS, SERIOUS CRIMES, AND WE ONLY LEARNED 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 MICHELLE TO ANSWER TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON. BUT NO, THERE IS NO POLICE ACTIVITIES. 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 A LEGAL 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 WILL THEY BRING HARM TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, IT WILL ALSO CAUSE PROPERTY VALUES TO DECLINE. THEY WILL ALSO ATTRACT OTHER CRIMES. SO AND WE STAFF 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. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK? COMMISSIONERS. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MY CONCERN WITH THIS SOUP IS IT'S NOT AGAINST MISS SALLY 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. QUESTIONS?
[00:15:02]
COMMENTS? ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK? 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. ACCOUNT OF THE SECOND ONE. IN LESS THAN THREE WEEKS. MOTION 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.[D. Regular Hearings]
THANK YOU. THANK YOU RICHARD. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. ITEM THREE IS A REGULAR HEARING PENAL SUBDIVISION PHASE FOUR LOT FOUR ARE ON .935 ACRES. ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. BEING A REPLAT OF FINAL SUBDIVISION PHASE FOUR LOTS FOUR, SIX AND EIGHT LOCATED AT FIVE, EIGHT SEVEN AND 591. BENJAMIN'S WAY. CASE NUMBER 24 DASH 1214 ARP. 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 PLAT. ONCE ALL THE LISTED DEFICIENCIES HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. THANK YOU. JONATHAN. COMMISSIONERS. QUESTIONS.COMMENTS. MOTION. I MOVE TO DISAPPROVE THE REPLAT DUE TO DEFICIENCIES AND DELEGATE STAFF.
THE AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT AND APPROVE ONES 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 HUFFINE CHEVROLET WAREHOUSE ADDITION BLOCK A LOT ONE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BENNETT LANE. APPROXIMATELY 890FT EAST OF I EAST ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, AS REQUESTED BY TRENT CLARK OF A+ DESIGNING GROUP. THE ARCHITECT ON BEHALF OF HUFFINES LEWISVILLE PROPERTY LP. THE PROPERTY OWNER, CASE NUMBER 20 5-01-1. ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. HUFFINES CHEVROLET IS A LARGE AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP THAT'S LOCATED OFF OF THE I-35 FRONTAGE ROAD. 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 PARTS STORAGE BUILDING. THEY FIRST CAME TO STAFF ABOUT THIS PROJECT BACK IN MAY OF 2023, AND SUBMITTED THIS FOR REVIEW IN APRIL OF 2024. NOW THIS PROPERTY, BOTH PORTIONS OF IT OFF OF 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 REQUIRE THAT ALL BUILDINGS OF THIS SIZE, ESSENTIALLY ANY BUILDINGS UNDER 50,000FTā !S, CONTAIN 80% BRICK OR STONE. THIS BUILDING WILL LARGELY BE USED TO STORE AUTOMOTIVE PARTS, AND THE MAJORITY OF THIS BUILDING IS NOT VISIBLE FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO THEY ARE REQUESTING ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS FOR THE
[00:20:01]
THREE PHASES OF THE BUILDING ON THE EAST, WEST AND SOUTH SIDES. NOW THE NORTH SIDE, WHICH DOES FACE BENNETT LANE, MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE I-35 OVERLAY. 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 AND 70% BRICK, WHICH IS A 78.75 REDUCTION. AND ON THE WESTERN I APOLOGIZE. BOTH MY EXHIBIT AND STAFF MEMO INCORRECTLY LISTED ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS. SEE AS EAST. IT IS THE WEST FACADE, 83% MASONRY AND 14% BREAK IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED 80% BRICK OR STONE, WHICH IS AN 82.5% REDUCTION. THE APPLICANT IS 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. AND TYPICALLY WITH THE I-35 CODE, WHEN STAFF GIVES A RECOMMENDATION WE LOOK AT BASICALLY WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS FROM BENNETT LANE AND IN RELATION TO THE BUILDING SURROUNDED SO MANY OF THE BUILDINGS, ALSO BENNETT LANE ARE EITHER METAL BUILDINGS OR TILT WALL, WHICH THE CMU IS A HIGHER QUALITY MATERIAL THAN BOTH OF THESE. SO WE LOOK AT THE CONTEXT OF THIS BUILDING AND THEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE VIEW FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 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 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. MR. VAN ZANDT, WOULD YOU? IF YOU'RE READY TO SPEAK, YOU MAY COME FORWARD. I BELIEVE THAT WAS ON ANOTHER ITEM. THAT WAS ON. OH. IT'S ON. IS THAT ON ITEM FIVE INSTEAD OF FOUR? ITEM? 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. WE'LL 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 NON RESIDENTIAL 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.
[00:25:01]
WE'VE STAFF HAS PROBABLY RECEIVED CLOSE TO 200 EMAILS, PHONE CALLS, WALK INS. WE'VE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS WITH A WITH A LOT OF CONCERNED BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS HERE IN LEWISVILLE. AND LIKE I SAID, WE LISTEN TO THEM AND EXPLAINED HOW THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE MIGHT APPLY OR MIGHT NOT APPLY. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT SITUATIONS ON HOW DIFFERENT ORDINANCES DO IMPACT A CERTAIN SITUATION. 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. SO BEFORE YOU IS A PAPER COPY OF REVISED LANGUAGE THAT IS EVEN A REVISED FURTHER FROM WHAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET ON FRIDAY, 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 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 THERE NOW THAT THE CITY IS BUILDING OR IS NEARING BUILD OUT, 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 BUT HAVE WERE NEVER DEVELOPED FOR THAT. AND SO WHEN YOU DO INTRODUCE HIGHER INTENSITY USES WITH LESSER INTENSITY, THEN THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH COMPATIBILITY AND THE IMPACTS WITH THAT. SO THAT IS THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THESE OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, LIKE I SAID I WANT TO I REALLY WANT TO COVER THE NEW LANGUAGE THAT WAS PASSED OUT TONIGHT, SINCE IT DOES DIFFER FROM WHAT WAS IN THE PACKET AND THE 500 FOOT RULE IS KIND OF THE MEASURE THAT DETERMINES IF A, A NEW PROJECT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET AN SP 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 FOR PROPERTIES THAT CURRENTLY HAVE AN APPROVED PLAN DEVELOPMENT IN PLACE. THAT IS THAT WAS A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS THAT WAS REVIEWED BY THE PNC 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 CAN 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 SUP, 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. BUT THAT'S OKAY. AS LONG AS THEY'RE
[00:30:03]
OPERATING IN UPKEEPING THEIR PROPERTY, THEY CAN CONTINUE DOING SO AS LONG AS THEY WANT TO. AND THAT IS AGAIN BEING RECOGNIZED BY THIS ORDINANCE. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE BEFORE YOU TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. THANK YOU. RICHARD.COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS I HAD TO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD. AND I HAD SENT MICHELLE SOME QUESTIONS BEFOREHAND. AND ESSENTIALLY 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. OH, AND MOVING ON TO THE PART TWO AND PART THREE. YEAH, THE PART TWO IS THE PROVISIONS THAT THAT ALLOWS US TO USE WHATEVER OTHER DOCUMENTATION TO DETERMINE WHAT THE USE OF THE BUILDING WAS ON THAT DATE. 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. SO BASICALLY AS LONG AS THE USE. SO THE LAST TWO WEEKS AGO WE HAD PEOPLE SPEAK THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED WITH. THEY HAVE TENANTS THAT HAVE THAT MANUFACTURE WIDGETS.
AND THREE YEARS FROM NOW, TEN YEARS FROM NOW, WIDGETS MOVES OUT AND WAPCOS 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 SUP WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED IF AN ENGINEERING SITE PLAN, A NEW ENGINEERING SITE PLAN IS REQUIRED. THAT IS CORRECT THAT A PULL DOWN OR EXPANSION OR REDEVELOPMENT OR EXPANSION. THERE IS A CERTAIN THE ORDINANCE DOES STATE WHEN AN YOU KNOW, A VERY SMALL EXPANSION CAN OCCUR. I BELIEVE IT'S A 10% OR 5000FTā , 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 SUP IF THEY WANTED TO GO TO A HIGHER INTENSITY MANUFACTURING OR WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION. NOW, KEEP IN MIND FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS. THE VAST MAJORITY IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. SO TAKING THE EXAMPLE OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, CURRENTLY MANUFACTURING LIGHT INTENSITY IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT. SO IF THEY HAVE THAT CATEGORY ON MARCH 3RD, ONE OF ONE OF THOSE FOUR, THEY CAN THEY CAN CONTINUE AND THEY CAN EXPAND. OKAY. AND THEN BUT ALSO KEEP IN MIND MEDIUM INTENSITY TODAY AND HEAVY INTENSITY MANUFACTURING BOTH REQUIRE AN SUP. 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 GOING TO RECOGNIZE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY 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 AINSLIE 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. SO 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 SUP 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 SUP PROCESS. LIKE I GUESS LIKE THE DIFFERENT INTENSITY LEVELS IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. SO IF THEY'RE CURRENTLY IF THEY HAVE A CURRENT CO FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING, THEN THEY WILL
[00:35:03]
THEN THE SUP REQUIREMENT WHICH COULD KICK IN WITH THE 500 FOOT REQUIREMENT, IT'S 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 THIS IS GOING TO PUT A DAMPER LIKE PROHIBIT THEM FROM LEASING TO FULL POTENTIAL, RIGHT, THEIR PROPERTY. IF THERE'S JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE HEAR THE SUP 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 ARE WE 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 COS, OKAY. 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. AND THEN LAST QUESTION AGAIN, THIS SDP REQUIREMENT THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW IS PRIMARILY DEALING WITH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. YOU SAID MEDIUM AND HEAVY ARE 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 INTENSE USES, LIKE A RESIDENTIAL OR A RETAIL, A 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 PNC 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 SUP, 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. USUALLY ONCE AN APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED, THE REVIEW PERIOD IS, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY 3 TO 4 MONTHS FOR ONE THAT MOVES FAIRLY SWIFTLY. 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 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 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 COME 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, THESE REGULAR BUILDINGS THAT MAY HAVE 5 OR 10 DIFFERENT TENANTS, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN USED, IF WE HAVE CODES THAT DOCUMENT THE WAREHOUSE OR THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND IT'S ZONED
[00:40:04]
LIGHT, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, IT'S REALLY BUSINESS AS USUAL. THEY CAN CONTINUE SWAPPING OUT TENANTS AS LONG AS THOSE ARE PERMITTED USES. NOW, IF THEY WANT TO SWAP OUT TO, LET'S SAY, A MEDIUM OR HIGH INTENSITY MANUFACTURING THAT REQUIRES AN SEP TODAY, AND WE DON'T REALLY SEE A LOT OF THAT. THAT USUALLY GOES INTO MUCH LARGER FACILITIES. THOSE DEVELOPERS ARE REALLY, REALLY MORE COGNIZANT OF THE SURROUNDINGS, AND THEY DON'T WANT TO BE IN AREAS WHERE THERE'S THOSE SENSITIVE USES. SO LIKE I SAID, REALLY WHAT WE ARE EXPECTING NOW THAT WE MOST VACANT PROPERTIES ARE DEVELOPED IS THE TEARING DOWN OF AVAILABLE PROPERTIES. PARTICULARLY A GOOD EXAMPLE WAS THE MOVIE THEATER THAT YOU HAD APPROVED ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS FOR. THAT WAS ONE THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, AN ENTERTAINMENT USE FOR DECADES, BUT IT HAD THE UNDERLYING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING. 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. WE'RE WITH THE SUP, 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, VERY DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON ON EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE WITH THE 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. AND 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 WANT 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 SEE GAUGE WHAT THE HOW THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE SCARED THEY'RE GOING TO BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED, HOW THEY'RE RECEIVING. YEAH, A GOOD PERCENTAGE OF THE FOLKS THAT THIS DOESN'T EVEN, YOU KNOW, IMPACT JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE WHAT WHAT WHAT THE POSTCARD WAS ABOUT AND WHAT THIS AMENDMENT WAS ABOUT 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 SUP FOR THE APPLICATION FOR OUR SMALL BUSINESSES OR BUSINESSES IN GENERAL, AND ANY FEES THAT MAY BE APPLIED. IT SUP APPLICATION IS $750. AND THEN WE DO REQUIRE SIGNPOSTING. THAT'S $35 PER SIGN DEPENDING ON THE SITE DETERMINES THE NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT ARE NEEDED. WE DO PROVIDE THE SIGN. ARE THERE ANY OTHER FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BASED ON THE ACREAGE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? 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 THAT DOES TRIGGER A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE. AND IF IT IS DENIED THERE, LIKE I SAID, THEN THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN IT'S FINAL. BUT 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 THIS IS WE'RE NOT THE FINAL SAY HERE. I MEAN, WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND IT MOVES ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL. SO IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH WHAT WE DO HERE, YOU CAN STILL GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL, STAND UP AND MAKE THE SAME POINTS YOU MAKE HERE.[00:45:01]
SO THIS IS NOT THE END OF IT FOR SOMEONE. IF THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE OPPOSED TO THIS, THEY STILL HAVE ANOTHER AVENUE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL TO GO AND MAKE THEIR CASE AND, AND GET THEM TO EITHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE IT. THAT IS CORRECT. THIS IS NOT THE FINAL DECISION. THIS IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION. YOU ALL ARE GIVING 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. NO, IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. THIS ISN'T A PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT.NO. YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE LAST MEETING. SO THIS IS A TABLED ITEM. 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. THANK YOU, RICHARD, FOR THAT POINT. FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE THREE EMAILS I'M GOING TO READ INTO THE RECORD.
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. THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN USED FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING, WHICH IS WITHIN ITS ZONING CLASSIFICATION, EVER SINCE IT WAS PURCHASED OVER TEN YEARS AGO, THE PROPERTY'S VALUE WAS AND IS DETERMINED BY ITS LOCATION, ITS IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE USES ALLOWED BY ITS ZONING 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 ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, YOU SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISED OR COMPLAINED IF IT IS DEVELOPED WITH ONE OF ITS INTENDED PURPOSES. PERHAPS THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CREATING THE BARRIER BETWEEN IT AND WHO IT PERCEIVES TO BE AN OFFENSIVE NEIGHBOR. 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. MANY POTENTIAL BUYERS OR RENTERS OF THE PROPERTY WILL LOOK ELSEWHERE TO AVOID THIS BUREAUCRATIC RED TAPE. THIS DEVALUES THE PROPERTY AND IS NOT FAIR TO THE CURRENT OWNERS. FINALLY, IN MEMORANDUM WRITTEN BY RICHARD LUKE, ACP PLANNING DIRECTOR, ON JANUARY 7TH, 2025 TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE, WHICH SUMMARIZES MR. LUKE'S ANALYSIS OF THE NEED FOR THIS AMENDMENT, STATES TO MITIGATE HARMFUL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT OF 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. IT BECAME A NATIONAL ECONOMIC GOAL. WE SHOULD BE CREATING INCENTIVES TO ATTRACT MANUFACTURING TO OUR CITY, 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, I.T, MAINTENANCE, SECRETARIAL
[00:50:02]
AND QUALITY CONTROL. THIS AMENDMENT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR SMALL MANUFACTURERS TO LOCATE IN LEWISVILLE. 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. THE SECOND ITEM I'M READING INTO THE RECORD IS FROM JEFF TRAYLOR, OWNER OF SEVERAL PROPERTIES AT OR AROUND 418 JONES STREET. 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. ALSO, PLEASE, IF ONE OF THE MEMBERS WOULD CONFIRM THAT YOU RECEIVED THIS, IT WOULD BE GREATLY 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. BELOW I HAVE 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 NONCONFORMING TO SAY ALL PREEXISTING NONCONFORMING WILL CONTINUE TO BE SUBJECT TO ZONING, ZONING, PERMITTING, AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AS WE'RE IN EFFECT AS OF ONE ONE 2025 OR THAT PREEXISTING NONCONFORMING WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO C.U.P 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. IF YOU HAVE A GUY MAKING SCREWS AND THAT GUY WANTS TO MAKE HOT SAUCE, THEN IT'S A USE CHANGE INTO AN SUP. THEY START OFF BY SAYING MAJOR EXPANSION OR NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN THEY START INCLUDING US. ALL PREEXISTING NONCONFORMING. 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 OPTIONS, OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THEM. IF YOU LOOK UP MY ADDRESS FOR 18 JONES STREET, IT'S A CLUSTER OF BUILDINGS NEXT TO THE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY, BUT ALSO LOOK TO THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST AND YOU SEE HOMES. MOST OF THESE HOMES WERE IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREAS, SEVERAL WITHIN 500FT OF MY AND OTHER COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. NONE OF THIS HAS BEEN BUILT 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
[00:55:06]
SUP, THEY WILL KILL IT. 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 SUP DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY. NEITHER WILL SOME TYPES OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS. PLEASE DO NOT SUBJECT US TO THIS. I FINISHED 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 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, SPEND MONEY AND SO MUCH TIME. IT IS NOT MAKING LEWISVILLE A BETTER PLACE. IT'S MAKING A MORE CONTROLLED STATE. 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 P AND Z THIS EVENING, BUT I DO WANT TO REITERATE MY RECOMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT REFERENCED BELOW. AND THE SUP 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, TO STATE THAT YOU WERE HERE AND YOU DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK. WINSTON EDMONDSON, KEITH MCDANIEL. DONNIE, TRAYVON. I'M NOT SURE OF THAT WRITING ANDREW BOWMAN.
LARRY ROSE. JEFF TRAYLOR, LANCE VAN ZANDT DOES. WE WISH TO SPEAK. WILL YOU HOLD UNTIL I FINISH WITH THE NAMES AND THEN I'LL CALL YOU FORWARD? THANK YO, SIR RUSSELL JINX. JENKINS.
TOMMY, MAN. SPEAKER LOUIS PEDRAZA, IF YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK, COME BACK. WELL, YOU CAN COME IN AFTER I FINISH READING THIS STACK. THANK YOU. LUIS PEDRAZA. ELSIE MILDENBERGER.
HENRY. RIGHT. MELBA HOUSTON, PATRICIA WRIGHT, MIKE GREEN. GEORGE WRIGHT. ALAN. MEYER, LARRY MEYER. DIXON. RICH. RICK. STINO. CHASTITY BEARD AWARD. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. TO TANAKA. POWELL, JOYCE. POWELL AND RONNIE BERNACKI. NOW, ANY OF YOU, IF I READ YOUR NAMES AND YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK, YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO COME FORWARD. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE.
MR. VAN ZANDT, THANK YOU. HI. GOOD EVENING, LANCE VAN ZANDT, 512 WEST HICKORY IN DENTON, TEXAS. I REPRESENT THE LEATHERWOOD FAMILY WHO OWN AND HAVE OWNED AND OPERATED LEATHERWOOD PLASTICS ON CRESCENT DRIVE SINCE APPROXIMATELY 1984. THEY'RE IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THEY'RE OPERATING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT ZONING CATEGORY AND HAVE BEEN IN CONTINUOUS OPERATION FOR GOING ON 40 YEARS NOW. I BELIEVE THE DRAFT 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. THE CITY MAY HAVE SOMETHING IN
[01:00:01]
ITS FILES, BUT WE'RE NOT ABLE TO FIND ANYTHING. BUT IF JUST IF I UNDERSTAND NOW 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 PROCEDURE. IS IT 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'D 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. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. TOMMY MAY HAVE 500 WINSTEAD BUILDING 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 AS 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 ABOUT 15 MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING BEGAN. IT MAY HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THAT, BUT NOT SIGNIFICANTLY BEFORE THAT. AND THERE WERE 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 IN 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 IS 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 ROMANETTE 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. OBVIOUSLY, A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY OCCURS MUCH LATER IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THAN THOSE THINGS. 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 IS AMENDED NOW, POTENTIALLY RENDERS THEM NON-CONFORMING, WHICH THE WAY IT WAS DRAFTED ON FRIDAY WOULD NOT HAVE RENDERED THEM NON-CONFORMING. 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 AND 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 WE KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER THE DENOMINATOR IS RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE JUST CHANGED TO CALCULATE THAT 20%. 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 MAYBE 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. I'M
[01:05:10]
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 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 NON-CONFORMING. 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 IT ENCUMBERS ALL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THE EXISTING BUILDINGS IS WHAT MANY PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.BUT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND PARCELS IN THE CITY ARE GOING TO BE ENCUMBERED BY THIS AND, AND WILL BE HARDER TO DEVELOP, 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 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 THEY. IT GETS A LITTLE BIT MORE SUCCINCT, BUT THE WORDING IN THIS SPECIFICALLY POINTS OUT THAT THE USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY HAVE A USE WITHIN 500FT. SO AGAIN, USE ME AS AN EXAMPLE. AND I'M RIGHT. HIS PROPERTY IS 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 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THAT'S MAYBE I SHOULD SAY IT 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 LIGHT 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'VE NEVER LOOKED AT THEM. I MEAN THAT'S THEIR DEAL WITH THE CITY. BUT NOW IT'S MY DEAL BECAUSE I HAVE TO GO OUT THERE AND MAKE SURE THAT THEIR CEO SAYS THAT THEY ARE USING ONE OF THE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED UNDER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. WELL, I ALSO HAVE A TENANT WHO HAS A HE HAS AN SP, SO I UNDERSTAND THAT HIS TIME AS THAT IS LIMITED TO ONLY HIM ONCE HE MOVES OUT THAT SP DIES, BUT HIS CO WILL HAVE AN SP VERSUS I'M ASSUMING HIS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL STATE SOMETHING TOWARDS THE SUP REQUIREMENTS VERSUS THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL REQUIREMENT. THE ONES THAT WERE LISTED HERE AS HAS TO BE ONE OF THESE. YOU YOU GET MY
[01:10:05]
IDIOSYNCRASY THERE. IT'S MORE OF AN ISSUE OF THEY'RE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. BUT NOW DOES THAT BUILDING ONCE HE GOES AWAY, DOES THAT BUILDING FALL INTO THIS VAGUENESS WHERE IT SHOULDN'T BECAUSE IT'S A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND IT WAS BEING USED FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT ONE OF THE GENERAL USES. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? HEAD NOD MAYBE? NO. 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? WELL, YOU DIDN'T HAVE A 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 LIGHT 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. SO IF IT WAS VACANT DURING THAT, DURING THAT MOMENT OF THAT DATE, IT STILL SHOULD BE WITHIN THE SIX MONTH WINDOW OF THE CHANGE. I HOPE THAT MAKES SENSE.BUT AND AGAIN, YES, YOU ARE NOT THE FINAL WORD ON IT WITH THE CITY COUNCIL 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, WELL, 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 EDMONDSON, 1292 MARCHANT PLACE. SO WAREHOUSES IN LEWISVILLE. ANYONE THAT GETS ON SOCIAL MEDIA KNOWS THIS IS A PRETTY POPULAR TOPIC WITH THE PEOPLE OF LEWISVILLE. AND I WANT TO I WANT TO THANK THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE INVESTMENTS HERE IN LEWISVILLE.
WE ABSOLUTELY APPRECIATE FOLKS THAT WANT TO INVEST IN THE CITY, BUT A LOT OF THESE FOLKS LIVE ELSEWHERE. SO I WANT TO SPEAK AS A LEWISVILLE CITIZEN. I LIVE HERE, AND I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE FRUSTRATION THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE ABOUT WAREHOUSES. IT'S NOT THAT WE HATE WAREHOUSES. IT'S THAT SOMETIMES WAREHOUSES POP UP IN A SPOT THAT JUST DOES NOT FIT IN THE COMMUNITY. 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. SO AS WE'RE COMMUTING IN AND OUT OF LEWISVILLE, WE HAVE THIS JUST EYESORE THAT ACTUALLY AFFECTS OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. 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 I SAW THE LANGUAGE OF THIS, THIS CHANGE, I REALLY JUST WANT TO I WANT TO THANK CITY STAFF BECAUSE THEY WERE VERY THOUGHTFUL IN THE WAY THEY PUT THIS TOGETHER. I KNOW THE 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 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 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 STOP GAP.
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 MCCOY, 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. SO WITHOUT HAVING A STOPGAP, WITHOUT GIVING
[01:15:03]
YOU GUYS THE ABILITY IN VERY SPECIFIC SITUATIONS TO JUST PAUSE AND SAY, 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 THANK CITY 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. BUT I ALSO WANT TO TAKE A FURTHER STEP AT SOME POINT AND MAKE SURE THAT THE SAFETY OF OUR CITIZENS THAT ARE NOW WORKING IN THESE WAREHOUSES IS CONSIDERED. 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. I HOPE YOU WILL LOOK AT IT AS THE BALANCED PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT THEY'VE PUT TOGETHER AND SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS RICK STEIN, NO OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR ARCO MATERIAL HANDLING. I SPOKE WITH THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE.WE'RE AT 501 EAST PARNELL STREET HERE IN LEWISVILLE. IF I CAN MAYBE EVEN GET SOME CLARIFICATION WHILE I'M HERE WOULD HELP. MY CLIENT HAS A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, HAS BEEN HERE 30 YEARS, AND THEY ALSO HAVE A 3 TO 5 ACRE LOT RIGHT NEXT TO IT, EMPTY. SINCE THE TIME THAT THE BUILDING WAS FIRST CONSTRUCTED, CONSTRUCTED 30 YEARS AGO, THERE IS A LINE NOW OF RESIDENTIAL LOOKS LIKE APARTMENTS THAT WAS BUILT ON A STREET RIGHT OVER NEXT TO THEM.
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 IT? 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. SUP. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ALL THIS NEW FANCY STUFF TO LOOK GOOD, BUT THE NEW BUILDING COMES IN AND IT NEEDS AN SUP. 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. AND THERE'S A LITTLE DROP OFF RIGHT THERE. LOOKS SILLY. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? I DON'T I DON'T KNOW, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THAT, THAT EITHER WE CALL IT GRANDFATHERING OR EXISTING USE LANGUAGE BE TIGHTENED UP A LITTLE BIT. WE'VE GOT TO GET IT TIGHTENED UP A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. AND THIS IS A BIG ONE 3 TO 5 ACRES. IT KIND OF STANDS OUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GOOGLE MAP. WHAT WOULD 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 COUNCIL IF THE COMMISSION CAN ADDRESS IT. 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. I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONERS, BUT YOU DID NOT GIVE YOUR CITIZENS OF LEWISVILLE A VERY GOOD IMPRESSION TONIGHT ON THE SPECIAL USE PERMITTING 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 HIM DOWN
[01:20:04]
BASED ON AN INFERENCE. 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 SUP 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 AS YOU PROCESS SPECIAL USE PROCESS, WHEN THIS PERSON CAME IN HERE, COMPLIED WITH EVERYTHING YOU ASKED FOR, EVEN BEYOND 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. THANK YOU SIR. 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 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 PLAN 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 SUPP. SO AFTER MUCH DISCUSSION, STAFF PUT IN THE TERMINOLOGY OR THE REFERRED TO AS 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 THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE MEASURE AT, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME THAT THE ORDINANCE IS GOES INTO EFFECT. SO THE GENTLEMAN'S CONCERN ABOUT HIS PROJECTS ARE STILL IN THAT CONCEPT PLAN DEVELOPMENT STAGE, BUT HAVEN'T REACHED THE POINT WHERE THEY'RE EVEN REMOTELY READY FOR A CODE.
THEY WOULD BE EXEMPT, OR ANYONE IN THAT POSITION WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM THIS SUP PROCESS. OR ONCE THEY GET TO THAT POINT OF DEVELOPMENT WHERE THEY NOW HAVE TO HAVE A CO LIKE, I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IN THAT SPECIFIC SCENARIO THAT HE BROUGHT UP THE DEVELOPER GENTLEMAN IN HIS COMMENTS. THE STATE LAW IS VERY CLEAR ABOUT VESTING TO ZONING, AND THE SUP IS A ZONING REQUIREMENT. YOU KNOW, A ZONING TOOL. AND SO THE STATE LAW STATES THAT YOU'RE VESTED TO, TO ZONING INTO USES OR CLASSIFICATION OF LAND USES WITH THE DE 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
[01:25:10]
TO MOVE THIS FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONERS. AND THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. THANK YOU FOR COMMENTS AND ALL THAT. BEFORE WE GO ON, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE AUDIENCE. YOUR RESPECT HAS BEEN APPRECIATED. AND THANK YOU FOR COMING AND SPEAKING AND LETTING US KNOW HOW YOU FEEL.IT'S IMPORTANT TO US THAT YOU'RE THERE, THAT WE CAN HEAR YOU THANK 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. 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. ON 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. IF 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. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. CONTINUE. COMMISSIONERS. WELL, I DO HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY IN REGARDS TO THE GENTLEMAN THAT WAS HERE FROM LEWISVILLE THAT TALKED ABOUT WAREHOUSES POPPING UP IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE IMPACT THAT THEY HAVE. 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. SO I THINK WE DO HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THESE HOUSES, AROUND THESE WAREHOUSES AND THESE INDUSTRIAL SITES. AND I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE PROVISIONS IN PLACE TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE. THEY PAY PROPERTY TAXES, TOO. 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, TOO. PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE HOUSES HERE, OWN PROPERTY HERE, LIVE HERE AS WELL. SO TO WISH TO CONTINUE.
NO. I THINK WHAT'S WHAT'S BOTH. AND WE HAVE A MOTION. I HAVE A MOTION. A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED. MOTION BY RICK. SECOND, SECOND BY AINSWORTH.
YES. 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 ADAM. SECOND BY AINSLEY. ALL.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.