[00:00:04]
[CALL TO ORDER]
THE DECEMBER 15TH, 2025, CITY OF PLANO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.THERE IS
GOOD EVENING, WE DO HAVE A FULL COMMISSION NIGHT.
COMMISSIONER BRUNO IS ON ZOOM WITH US.
CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY? COMMISSIONER? COMMISSIONER BRUNO? CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY? OH, I THOUGHT I HEARD HIM A SECOND AGO.
COMMISSIONER BRUNO, CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY? YES, I CAN.
ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE ALL PRESENT AND ACCOUNTED FOR.
UM, COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS TONIGHT? THERE ARE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS.
[CONSENT AGENDA ]
CONSENTS AGENDA.THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION AND CONTAINS ITEMS THAT ARE ROUTINE AND TYPICALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL ITEMS MAY BE REMOVED FROM THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONERS OR STAFF COMMISSION.
WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO REMOVE ANYTHING FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER.
I WAS JUST GOING TO MOVE THAT WE, UH, APPROVE THE CONSENT, UH, CONSENT AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND PLEASE VOTE.
AND COMMISSIONER BRUNO, IF YOU WOULD JUST SAY YOUR VOTE OUT LOUD, PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO I'D FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
[1. (JC) Discussion: Presentation and discussion on updated locations of identified heavy industrial uses in relation to recent state legislative actions. Project #DI2025-016. Applicant: City of Plano. (No action required)]
ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL PERMIT LIMITED PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA NOT POSTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.THE PRESIDING OFFICER WILL ESTABLISH TIME LIMITS BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF SPEAKER REQUESTS, LENGTH OF THE AGENDA TO ENSURE MEETING EFFICIENCY AND MAY INCLUDE A TOTAL TIME LIMIT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, DISCUSSION, PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON UPDATED LOCATIONS OF IDENTIFIED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES IN RELATION TO RECENT STATE LEGISL LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS.
THE APPLICANT IS THE CITY OF PLANO.
I'M A PLANNER IN THE HERITAGE AND INFORMATION DIVISION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, TONIGHT I'M PROVIDING AN UPDATE TO THE COMMISSION ON THE MAP THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE CITY, UM, OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES IN RELATION TO SENATE BILL EIGHT 40.
THE MAP WAS PRO, THE MAP WAS PROVIDED ON AUGUST 6TH FOR ZONING CASE 20 25 0 0 7.
THE MAP IDENTIFIES ZONING DISTRICTS IMPACTED BY SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 IN LOCATIONS THAT ARE ACCEPTED FROM THE BILLS REQUIREMENTS.
EXCEPTIONS APPLY FOR SITES THAT QUALIFY AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AND WITHIN A BUFFER OF 1000 FEET FROM THOSE SITES.
AND JUST TO RECAP, AN EIGHT FORTY'S HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE STIPULATIONS.
UM, IT DEFINES A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AS A STORAGE PROCESSING OR MANUFACTURING USE WITH PROCESSES USING FLAMMABLE OR EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS WITH HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS OR THAT IS NOXIOUS OR OFFENSIVE FROM ODORS, SMOKE, NOISE, FUMES OR VIBRATIONS.
AND WHAT WE DID TO IDENTIFY THESE SITES IS WE USED TCEQ AND EPA DATA.
WE LOOKED AT COMPLAINTS AND WE REACHED OUT OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, UM, FOR COMPLAINTS FROM CITIES LIKE FRISCO AND THE TCEQ.
AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY WE WENT OUTSIDE THE CITY AT THE NEXT SLIDE.
UM, WE COMPLETED AN, AN ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS AFTER THAT FIRST MAP OF AREAS THAT ARE WITHIN A, WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF THE CITY OF PLANO.
SO WE LOOKED AROUND THE CITY LITERALLY.
UM, SO IN GRAY ON THIS MAP IS A BUFFER FROM THE CITY WITH A THOUSAND FEET, UM, AREA.
AND THEN THERE ARE TWO SITES IN FRISCO THAT WE IDENTIFIED, UH, IS HAVING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES.
BOTH SITES ARE CONCRETE AND ASPHALT MIXING PLANTS, UH, THAT ARE WITHIN FRISCO.
AND BOTH SITES HAVE A 1000 FOOT BUFFER THAT EXTENDS ACROSS 1 21 AND AND GOES INTO PLANO.
UM, SO THAT'S HOW WE'RE RELATED TO THOSE.
UM, THIS IS A, A NEW UPDATED MAP THAT BUILDS ON THAT PREVIOUS VERSION THAT WAS PRESENTED IN AUGUST.
UM, AND IT REFLECTS THOSE TWO FRISCO SITES THAT WE DID FIND
[00:05:01]
ALONG WITH THEIR 1000 FOOT BUFFERS.AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY DO EXTEND INTO PLANO.
ALSO ON THIS MAP ARE THREE SITES THAT ARE POTENTIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE SITES AND THEY'RE ALL IN PURPLE AND THEY'RE ALL TOWARDS THE LOWER SOUTHERN, UH, PART OF THE CITY.
UM, YOU CAN SEE NEAR PLANET PARKWAY AND KOIT, UH, AND IN 14TH AND LOS RIOS AND 14TH.
UM, THOSE THREE SITES ARE A CONCRETE MIXING PLANT, UH, TWO CONCRETE MIXING PLANTS AND ONE IS A RECYCLING CENTER.
AND, AND THERE'S SOME POTENTIAL HEAVY USE, UH, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE CLASSIFICATIONS THAT WE CAN, UH, APPLY TO LAND USE IN THE CITY.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE LISTINGS, CONCRETE ASPHALT BATCHING PLANTS, WHICH IS WHAT TWO OF OUR POTENTIAL SITES ARE.
UH, INDUSTRIAL USE LIKE HAZARDOUS WASTE OR NUISANCE, UH, PRODUCING ACTIVITIES, HEAVY INTEN, HEAVY INTENSITY MANUFACTURING, SALVAGE OR RECLAMATION OF PRODUCTS LIKE AUTO SALVAGE, UH, SAND GRAVEL STONE OR PETROLEUM EXTRACTION FROM THE GROUND.
OR, UH, A LARGE WRECKING YARD MIGHT BE AN EXAMPLE OF A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE WITHIN THE CITY.
THOSE POTENTIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL SITES AND PLANAR THAT I I JUST WENT THROUGH WHERE ONE IS REPUBLIC SERVICES AT 4214TH AND WHICH IS WAY OUT EAST BY LOS RIOS.
THE PLANO ALREADY MAKES CONCRETE BATCHING PLAN AT 1200 NORTH END AVENUE, WHICH IS JUST SOUTH OF 14TH IN THE THE TRACKS.
AND THE SRM CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT AT 600 FULHAM ROAD, WHICH IS WAY SOUTH OF PLANO PARKWAY, WEST OF KUWAIT IN KIND OF AN INDUSTRIAL AREA.
UM, WE'RE ASKING FOR RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW WE APPLY THESE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES TO SITES.
UM, WE'RE ASKING THE COMMISSION FOR SOME DIRECTION ON THE FOLLOWING, UM, ABOUT THESE FIVE ADDITIONAL SITES THAT WE ADDED SINCE THAT INITIAL MAP IN AUGUST, UM, ARE THE FIVE ADDITIONAL SITES HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES CONSISTENT WITH THE DEFINITION, UH, IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN STATE LAW.
AND I CAN GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE AND REPEAT THE DEFINITION.
WE'RE ALSO ASKING, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION, UH, ARE ANY OF THE PRESENTED USES AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES, UH, WHEN WE ADMINISTER THE ORDINANCE, ARE, ARE ANY OF THESE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES? AND FINALLY, UH, ARE ANY OTHER USES LISTING LISTED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES IN ADMINISTERING THE ORDINANCE? SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS SOME CLARIFICATION AND SOME DIRECTION ON HOW WE, UH, APPLY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE USES TO SITES IN THE CITY.
UM, AND THAT IS THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION, UM, ABOUT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES.
UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE AND, UH, HAPPY TO RETURN TO THE DEFINITION IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IT AGAIN.
UM, I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.
SO THIS IS BASED ON CURRENT LAND USE AS OPPOSED TO ZONING, CORRECT? YES.
SO ARE SOME OF THESE BASICALLY EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USES THAT ARE NOT LOCATED IN A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION? UM, THE SITES THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY FROM AUGUST, THEY'RE KIND OF ONE-OFF SITES.
ONE IS THE, THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AT LOS RIOS AND 14TH, AND THAT'S AN SUP, UM, THAT IS ZONED AG.
UM, THE OTHER ONE IS LIVING LIVING EARTH, WHICH A LOT OF YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH AT SPRING CREEK IN 75 YOU SMELLED THAT.
UM, THAT ONE IS ZONED CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND THESE ARE ALL EXISTING SITES.
AND THE LAST ONE IS THE KUSTER ROAD TRANSFER STATION, AND IT'S ABOUT 14 ACRES.
IT'S AT CUSTER RIDGE VIEW AND IT'S THE DUMP, IF YOU WILL.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF NOISE BEING GENERATED THERE.
SO ALL OF THOSE ARE EXISTING SITES THAT THAT CONFORM TO WHATEVER ZONING POLICIES THAT WE HAVE.
SO THOSE ARE NOT NECESSARILY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING.
THEY'RE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES.
YES, THEY'RE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES.
AND I'LL GO BACK TO THE DEFINITION AGAIN SO Y'ALL CAN LOOK AT IT.
SO THE STATE LAW DEFINES IS, IS ABOUT USES NOT ZONING, RIGHT? IT'S ABOUT THE USES.
AND SO THE THE POINT OF OF THAT DEFINITION IS TO PROVIDE A BUFFER FOR THE MULTIFAMILY ZONING THAT'S NOW ALLOWED BY RIGHT.
IN CERTAIN NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONES.
SO IT THERE'S ALSO A 3000 FOOT BUFFER FROM AIRPORTS, WHICH WE HAVE THAT IN THE SOUTHWEST PART OF THE CITY FROM DALLAS PARK AIRPORT.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF COMMISSIONER BRONSKI? SO TURNED OFF.
SO ON THE, UM, SINCE IT IS USES, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE AREA AROUND THE, UH, LIVING EARTH WOULD COMPLY WITH THIS AND
[00:10:01]
SHOULD BE LABELED AS SUCH? WOULD IT COMPLY? WOULD IT BE A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE? YES.SO WE'RE ASKING FOR THE COMMISSION'S INPUT, UM, ON HOW, HOW WE DEFINE THOSE.
BUT CURRENTLY FOR US, THAT IS A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE BECAUSE ACCORDING TO THE DEFINITION IT IS, IT PRODUCES ODORS.
WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT PROVIDES FOR IS A THOUSAND FOOT BUFFER FROM THAT SITE, WHICH IS 14 ACRES.
THE SITE GOES ACROSS 75, IT GOES EAST OF K.
SO IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A LARGE SITE, UM, THAT WE CAN BUFFER.
AND SO THAT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR ANY OF THE SB EIGHT 40 PROVISIONS TO BE, UH, APPLIED WITHIN THAT EXCEPTION ZONE.
SO FOR ME, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I, I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS AND, UM, VERY RESPECTFUL OF OUR CITIZENS AND INCLUDING AND, UH, LABELING THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AREAS, UH, INCLUDING THINGS LIKE THE LIVING EARTH AND THESE OTHERS, UM, TO BE CERTAIN THAT OUR RESIDENTS AS WELL AS OUR BUSINESSES GET WHAT THEY EXPECT.
COMMISSIONER LOLLY, MY QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, LIKE ARE WE JUST DEFINING THOSE AREAS AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, UH, OR, UH, THE PEOPLE, THE OWNERS HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ZONING CHANGE TO CHANGE THEM TO INDUSTRIAL, AND ONCE THEY CHANGE THE ZONING, IF IT'S REQUIRED, WHAT OTHER, YOU KNOW, LIKE, UH, IMPLICATION THAT IS GONNA GO FOR THE SURROUNDING AREAS? SO THIS ISN'T CURRENTLY ZONING, THIS IS JUST THE STIPULATIONS OF SENATE BILL EIGHT 40.
AND I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 WAS WRITTEN INTO LAW AS, UM, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TWO 18.
SO IT IS LAW, BUT THE WAY WE PACKAGED IT WAS AS A SENATE BILL.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M REFERRING IT TO THAT MM-HMM
BUT WHAT IT DOES IS IT ALLOWS FOR EXPANDED AND MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN ZONES THAT WERE NOT ZONED FOR THAT BEFORE.
AND WHAT THESE SITES ARE, ARE SIMPLY EXCEPTIONS TO THAT AREA IN SB EIGHT 40.
SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ZONING, THE ZONING WOULD REMAIN THE SAME.
ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN ALLOWED BEFORE OR APPROVED BEFORE IS GONNA BE OKAY.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S JUST A RESTRICTION ON THAT FUTURE SB EIGHT 40 INFLUX OF DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD HAPPEN.
SO THE OWNERS AREN'T AFFECTED.
THE OWNERS CAN CONTINUE TO DO WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
IT'S JUST A CLASSIFICATION ON OUR PART WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO BUILD SOMETHING IN ONE OF THOSE AREAS WHERE WE SAY YOU'RE CLOSE TO A, A SMELLY PLACE OR A LOUD PLACE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
MR. KARD, IF I COULD, UH, I THINK THE SITES IDENTIFIED ON YOUR MAP ARE EXISTING SITES TODAY.
THEY'RE NOT ASKING TO DO FOR PERMISSION TO DO THIS USE.
THEY'VE ALREADY GOT THAT EITHER THROUGH THEIR ZONING OR THROUGH THEIR LEGAL NONCONFORMITY.
SO ON THIS MAP HERE, WE, THEY'RE IN PINK ON THIS MAP.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE THREE SITES WITH THEIR ASSOCIATED BUFFERS, THE, THE DUMP AT THE TOP LIVING EARTH AND THE THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR THE DIRECTION ON IS HOW TO CLASSIFY FUTURE SITES.
AND THERE'S TWO KIND OF WAYS WE CAN GO ABOUT IT.
WE CAN LOOK AT THE LAND USE AS A BLANKET AND SAY, IF IT'S A CONCRETE PLANT, IT'S A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE PLANT, THERE'S ANOTHER WAY WE CAN DO IT.
AND WE CAN LOOK AT EACH SPECIFIC SITE AND DETERMINE IF IT'S HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE OR NOT, WHICH IS WHAT WE DID WITH THESE, BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE DID IT AND THERE'S NOT A HUGE LIST OF EXISTING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL SITES IN THE CITY.
WE KINDA HAD TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING.
UM, AND THE, THE PROBLEM WITH NOT GOING WITH LAND USE IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT EACH SITE SPECIFICALLY, YOU'RE RELYING ON EXTERNAL FORCES.
YOU'RE RELYING ON ON NEIGHBORS TO COMPLAIN AND US TO HAVE LIKE A WRITTEN COMPLAINT.
SO WHEN WE ADDED THESE SITES, WE WERE ADDING THEM BY THEIR USES, UM, FOR THE MOST PART.
SO WE'VE GOT THE CONCRETE READY MIX PLANT IN FRISCO ON THE NORTH SIDE, UH, AT INDEPENDENCE IN 1 21, AND WE'VE GOT ONE WAY ON THE WEST SIDE.
THOSE ARE BOTH CONCRETE MIXING PLANTS.
AND WE'VE GOT TWO CONCRETE MIXING PLANTS IN PLANO AND A RECYCLING CENTER.
SO THOSE ARE THE USES THAT WE WOULD NEED DIRECTION ON.
SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE CALL ALL OF THESE USES HAVE THE INDUSTRIAL USE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SB EIGHT 40? OR SHOULD WE LOOK AT EACH SITE WHEN WE SEE IT AND, AND DETERMINE IT FROM THAT POINT? ALI, IS THAT QUESTION? NO, I, YEAH.
COMMISSIONER ALI, LET ME MAKE A COUPLE OF STATEMENTS JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY.
CURRENTLY, THIS IS NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, WHICH PRIOR TO SB EIGHT 40, WE DIDN'T HAVE RESIDENTIAL USES IN THERE.
THE WAY THAT ZONE CORRIDOR, COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, DIFFERENT CATEGORIZATIONS, WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE IS ESSENTIALLY NOW THAT BYR, THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE ALLOWED TO BE RESIDENTIAL, WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE A BUFFER FROM CURRENT USAGE DEPENDING ON HOW WE
[00:15:01]
CATEGORIZE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE SO THAT ANYBODY WHO'S GONNA BUILD RESIDENTIAL KNOWS THAT THEY GOTTA GIVE SOME SPACE ESSENTIALLY.SO THOSE BLUE ZONES DIDN'T ALLOW MULTIFAMILY BY RIGHT BEFORE AND NOW THEY DO.
SO THERE'S SOME, THERE'S SOME RESIDENTIAL IN THE BLUE AREAS, BUT IT WAS DIRECTED BY THE CITY.
NOW IT'S CAN KIND OF BE ANYWHERE IN THOSE BLUE ZONES.
SO IF YOU NOTICE OUR POTENTIAL SITES, THOSE ARE ALL IN AREAS WHERE WE WOULDN'T HAVE ALLOWED THAT MULTIFAMILY BY RIGHT BEFORE.
UM, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? IT DOES.
UH, SO ONE QUESTION, WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE DEFINITION OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE, IS THERE A TIME ASPECT TO IT? SO FOR INSTANCE, DO I HAVE TO BE PRODUCING NOISE OR FUMES OR WHATEVER OVER AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE IT'S QUALIFIES? DO I HAVE TO PRODUCE IT ONE TIME? YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T BE ONE TIME, IT WOULDN'T BE LIKE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER MAKING NOISE.
IT WOULD BE LIKE A PERMANENT CONCRETE, CONCRETE BATCH PROCESSING PLANT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT YOU COULD HEAR, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE, THAT WOULD PRODUCE NOISE, UM, SMOKE FUMES, ODORS LIKE THAT.
SO IT WOULD BE A LONGER TERM SITUATION AS A FEATURE OF THE BUSINESS, NOISE FUMES, WHAT HAVE YOU.
SO IF SOMEONE'S LIVING NEARBY, THEY WOULD BE MAYBE DISTURBED BY THE NOISE OF LOADING TRUCKS OR THE SMELL OF PEOPLE DUMPING THINGS FOR THE TRANSFER STATION.
SO, UM, I DIDN'T LIKE DRIVE THROUGH THE WHOLE CITY AND KIND OF LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER SITES AND THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE
BUT, UH, SO THESE ARE, THESE ARE THE ONLY ONES IDENTIFIED.
I MEAN, LIKE I SAW YOU MENTIONED TRANSFER STATION, LIKE I DIDN'T SEE THE ONE THERE AT BEHIND THE ANIMAL ANIMAL PLANET PARKWAY, UH, ATLAND PARKWAY.
IS DOES THAT LOOK AT, DO WE WANNA LOOK AT, BECAUSE THAT KIND OF FALLS IN THE SAME KIND OF YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION FROM, FROM THE COMMISSION ON IS, IS THOSE KIND OF ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS.
WHAT WE DID INITIALLY IS WE HAD A, AN AUGUST 6TH MEETING AND THEN THE BILL TOOK EFFECT SEPTEMBER 1ST.
AND SO WE KIND OF CHOSE THE, THE BIG ONE OFF THINGS THAT WE WERE SURE WERE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE.
UM, WE'RE ASKING FOR GUIDANCE ON HOW TO DEFINE THAT IN THE FUTURE.
SO WE WOULD SAY IF THE LAND USE IS FOR EXAMPLE, A TRANSFER STATION, THEN IT WOULD BE A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE SITE.
UM, WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS THE ONE ON CUSTER IS CLOSE TO MULTIFAMILY.
IT'S GOT ITS BUFFER, INCLUDES MULTIFAMILY, UM, IT, IT'S GOT COMPLAINTS, PEOPLE HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT IT.
THE OTHER OTHER ONE IS ON PLANO PARKWAY AND IT'S, THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL NEARBY.
BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU IS TO GUIDE US ON DO YOU WANT US TO CONTINUE TO DO IT THAT WAY AND LOOK AT EACH SITE AS IT STANDS ALONE OR DO YOU WANT US TO KIND OF, UH, JUST BLANKET ANY TRANSFER STATION IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL 'CAUSE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WITH THIS NEW LAW, A NON INDU, A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CAN ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY TO SOME DEGREE.
SO, SO YEAH, CURRENTLY THERE'S NOT ANY RESIDENTIAL, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE COMMERCIAL LAND AND, AND OTHER THINGS AROUND IT THAT, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY DOWN THE ROAD COULD POTENTIALLY BE A MULTIFAMILY, UH, SITUATION.
FOR EXAMPLE, ON ONE OF THESE SITES ON FULHAM ROAD, UH, IT'S A CONCRETE MIXING PLANT AND THERE'S UNDEVELOPED LAND ADJACENT TO IT ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACK THAT COULD BE USED FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT BY RIGHT.
BUT THAT CONCRETE MIXING PLANT HAS NOT HAD ANY NOISE OR ODOR COMPLAINTS BECAUSE THERE'S NOT REALLY, I I'M SPEAKING ANECDOTALLY HERE, BUT THERE'S NOT PEOPLE LIVING NEARBY TO COMPLAINT ABOUT IT.
BUT THAT'S NOT TO SAY THERE WOULDN'T BE IN THE FUTURE.
YEAH, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS KINDA LOOKING AHEAD, YOU KNOW? YEAH, CURRENTLY THAT'S THE CASE, BUT NOW THAT THE DOOR'S BEEN OPENED FOR, FOR OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTS TO, TO POTENTIALLY BE ADDED TO THOSE AREAS AT SOME POINT.
SO, SO I THINK BACKING WHAT, UH, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, UH, BROSKY HAD HAD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, WE, WE SHOULD LOOK AT WHAT THE, THE RESONANCES AND, AND BE TRUE TO THEM AND MAKE SURE THAT WE PROTECT THEM EVEN FOR THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW.
AND, UM, TO ME, I DO THINK A BLANKET USE IS IMPORTANT.
AND THEN TO KIND OF, UH, GO BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER LEY WAS TALKING ABOUT, YOU MENTIONED SMELLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, HOW DO WE KIND OF POLICE THAT KIND OF THING BECAUSE HE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT THAT, YOU KNOW, EXTENDED PERIOD.
DO WE, DOES IT SMELL BAD FOR SO LONG? AND THEN THAT'S HOW WE DETERMINE IT OR, UM, 'CAUSE IF SOMEBODY COMES BEFORE US AND, AND THEY WE'RE GONNA DO THIS USE, WE'RE GONNA DO THIS THING AND WE KNOW WE MIGHT ASK HIM ARE, IS THIS GONNA SMELL BAD? THEY,
[00:20:01]
THEY NOW WE'RE AT THEIR MERCY, ARE THEY GONNA BE HONEST WITH US? OR THEY EVEN KNOW.UM, SO WE'D HAVE TO EXPLORE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UM, ONE QUESTION WOULD BE IF WHAT IF SOMEBODY CAME IN AND REMOVED THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE FROM THE SITE? YOU KNOW, HOW WOULD WE CHECK THAT? HOW WOULD WE MAKE SURE THAT MAYBE ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION HAS BEEN DONE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT FOR NOW IT'S IDENTIFYING THE SITES AND IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE IF SOMETHING FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD FOR US TO DETERMINE IF IT, IF IT WAS GONNA FALL OFF THAT LIST.
UM, WE'RE NOT SURE YET AND WE WOULD TAKE DIRECTION ON THAT AS WELL.
UM, COMMISSIONER BRUNO, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.
I'M NOT SURE IF I GOT YOU IN THE RIGHT ORDER OR NOT.
UM, I WANNA MAKE SURE, IS IT YOUR CONTENTION THAT EACH OF THE SIX PROPOSED NEW OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES MATCHES AT LEAST ONE OF THE CRITERIA OF SENATE BILL EIGHT 40? YES.
IF IT DOES, I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S NOT A NEED, UH, THIS IS TAKING, UH, COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER COMMENTS.
UM, IS THERE A NEED TO DOCUMENT THE FACT THAT, UH, THEY DO MATCH SENATE BILL EIGHT 40, FOR EXAMPLE, DO YOU HAVE TO DOCUMENT THAT A USE MIGHT INVOLVE, UH, FLAMMABLE OR EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS OR A CONDITION THAT IS OBJECTIVELY HAZARDOUS? UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU OBJECTIVELY MEASURE NOXIOUS OR OFFENSIVE EMISSIONS, PERHAPS GO TO THE NEIGHBORS AND SEE IF THEY'RE BOTHERED BY IT.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I MEAN, IS IS THERE SOME NEED TO GO AROUND AND TRY TO FIND SOME OBJECTIVE SUPPORT, UM, FOR THE MATCH BETWEEN THE PROPOSED USES IN SENATE BILL EIGHT 40? YEAH, I, I THINK, LIKE I SAID, WE'D HAVE TO RELY ON AN EXTERNAL SOURCE FOR COMPLAINTS.
AND IT'S NOT LIKE A SURVEY WE WOULD BE DOING, WE WOULD BE SAYING IF IT'S A CONCRETE BATCH PLANT, IT IS A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE BECAUSE THAT USE PRODUCES NOISE AND IT'S NORMAL DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY OR THE, THE, THE STRUCTURAL CAPABILITY TO GO RUN AND, AND AND CHECK THEM.
I COULD SEE A A, A PROPERTY OWNER COMING IN AND SAYING, WELL, THERE'S SOME NOISE, BUT IT'S NOT OBNOXIOUS, YOU KNOW, OR WE, WE DON'T HANDLE EXPLOSIVES OR FLAMMABLE MATERIALS.
UM, THAT'S WHY THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, IF THESE SIX USES ARE DEFINED IN THE ORDINANCE AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES, BUT THEY ARE IN ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE NOT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, HAVE YOU NOT CREATED A NON, A NON-CONFORMING USE SITUATION? UH, NO.
THE USES, FOR EXAMPLE, A SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT IS ALLOWED AS AN SUP IN, IN ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, AND AND THIS ISN'T A ZONING ISSUE PER SE.
IT'S, IT'S A LAND USE ISSUE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO SB EIGHT 40.
SO IT'S NO, NO, NO, NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT IF THEY'RE, IF THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY DOES NOT PERMIT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES AND YET THEY'RE CARRYING ON HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES, DON'T YOU HAVE A NON-CONFORMING USE? WELL, IF I COULD INTER INTERJECT HERE, WHY DON'T WE GET A LEGAL OPINION ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD BE EITHER INTERPRETED OR APPEALED? OH, SURE.
SO, UM, OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HANDLING ANY KIND OF APPEALS OF OFFICIAL DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE AT A DIRECTOR LEVEL.
SO IF, UM, THE DEPARTMENT DECIDED THAT SOMETHING'S A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AND SAY A NEIGHBOR WHO WANTS TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY IS IMPACTED BY THAT, THEY COULD BRING THE QUESTION TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A DETERMINATION.
JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW, THERE, THERE IS A BUILT IN PROCESS FOR HANDLING THIS.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER BRENNO? YEAH, NO, YEAH.
MY, MY POINT IS I DON'T WANNA SEE A CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER WHO'S CARRYING ON A, A, A PRESENTLY LAWFUL USE DISADVANTAGED BY, BY DEFINING HIS USE OUT OF, OUT OF HIS ZONING.
UM, COMMISSIONER TONG, MR. CHAIRMAN, UM, SO MY QUESTION IS, I LIKE, UH, I FIRST OF ALL THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I LIKE THE, UH, CATEGORIES THAT YOU'RE PRESENTING HERE.
UM, THE ONLY THING I, UH, I'M THINKING I'M THINKING ABOUT THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE IS REGARDING THE NOISE LEVEL.
AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD SET A CERTAIN NUMBER, SOMETHING MEASURABLE, EVEN THOUGH FOR THESE IDENTIFIED SITES, MAYBE WE DIDN'T DO THE TEST, BUT IN THE FUTURE FOR US TO IDENTIFY ANY SITES THAT HAS A CERTAIN NOISE LEVEL WITHIN CERTAIN DISTANCE, I MEAN, THESE ARE
[00:25:01]
CONCRETE NUMBERS THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH.WE CAN DO A TEST OR WE CAN CONSULT THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST AND SAY, YOU KNOW, HOW FAR, LIKE WHAT'S THE NOISE LEVEL IS SUITABLE OR, UM, ACCEPTABLE TO THE NEIGHBORS, THEN WE CAN SET THAT.
IF IT'S ABOVE THAT THRESHOLD, THEN THEY CAN, WE CAN IDENTIFY THEM AS HEAVY USE, BUT IF NOT, UM, YEAH, THESE ARE THE DATA THAT, UM, GREAT.
THAT YOU USE THEM, BUT DO YOU HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER ALREADY SET OR NOT? WE DON'T HAVE A DECIBEL THRESHOLD SET THAT WOULD REQUIRE A SURVEY OF, UM, MAYBE A CONSULTANT TO COME IN LIKE WE DID WITH OUR EXPRESSWAY DECIBEL CORRIDORS.
UM, TO DETERMINE NOISE LEVELS.
AND THE, THE WHY I WENT BACK TO THE DEFINITION IS THAT A SITE IS OFFENSIVE FROM NOISE, FOR EXAMPLE.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A CONTINUOUS NOISE.
IT COULD BE LOADING TRUCKS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT WITH ROCKS.
SO MAYBE WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MEASURE THAT.
SO WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A WAY TO CONSISTENTLY GET A DECIBEL LEVEL FOR NOISE FOR THAT.
WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT THIS USE IS IN GENERAL A, A NOISY USE.
AND WE DO HAVE, WE DO HAVE SITES WITH COMPLAINTS.
UM, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH RECEIVES COMPLAINTS ABOUT CERTAIN SITES ABOUT THEIR NOISE.
UM, BUT WE DON'T HAVE HAVE A, A QUANTIFIABLE NUMBER FOR THAT NOISE, UNFORTUNATELY.
WELL, WE DON'T HAVE ONE NOW, BUT IS A GOOD TIME TO SET UP ONE BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE EVEN THOUGH DUMPING DRUGS COULD BE, UH, UM, MAYBE ONE TIME ON ONE DAY, HOWEVER, IF THIS IS A SITE THAT DUMPS ROCKS LIKE FIVE TRUCKS A DAY OR YOU KNOW, 15 TRUCKS A WEEK, THAT'S A CONSISTENCY.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TEST.
RIGHT? SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT.
AND ALSO, I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME MANUFACTURERS, THEY, EVEN THOUGH THEY, THEY MANUFACTURE LITTLE THINGS, MAYBE THEY MANUFACTURE A, A, YOU KNOW, PLASTIC BOTTLE.
THE THING ITSELF COULD BE REALLY, UM, LIGHT.
IT'S NOT HEAVY, BUT THE MACHINE CAN BE REALLY NOISY.
HOW DO WE JUST, HOW DO WE IDENTIFY THE NOISE LEVEL? IT'S POSSIBLE THEY HAVE A, UM, NOISE CANCELLATION ALREADY OUTSIDE THEIR WALLS BECAUSE THEY KNEW THEIR MACHINES ARE NOISY, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE THEY DON'T.
SO HOW DO WE DO, YOU KNOW, JUDGE, WHETHER THAT IS A HEAVY USE OR NOT, WE HAVE TO FALL BACK ON THE DEFINITION IN THE LAW, UH, WHERE IT SAYS THE SITE IS NOXIOUS OR OFFENSIVE FROM ALL THESE THINGS, NOISE BEING ONE OF THEM.
AND WE HAVE TO GET DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSION ON, ON HOW WE MR. MR. COZART.
I, I THINK WHAT, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS TO DO IT ON A SIDE BY SIDE BASIS.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE OPTIONS, RIGHT? WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO DO THAT STUDY FOR EVERY USE AND WHAT NOISE COULD BE CREATED.
SO THE DIRECTION WOULD BE TO JUST THEN TAKE THEM ON CASE BY CASE AND EVALUATE THE INDIVIDUAL NUISANCES CREATED FROM A SPECIFIC SITE.
OPTION TWO IS WE'RE JUST CONSIDERING EVERYTHING THAT COULD MAKE THOSE FUMES AND NOISES AS AN INDUSTRIAL USE, AND THEREFORE WE'RE GONNA APPLY THE LIMITATIONS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE HAVING ODORS AND SMOKE AND NOISE.
THE TCEQ MAY HAVE PERMITS OR MITIGATION THAT REQUIRES THEM TO MITIGATE THOSE, BUT IF THEY'RE NOT MET OR IF THERE'S A FAILURE, THEN THEY CREATE THOSE ISSUES FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
AND SO THAT'S, UH, THAT'S KIND OF THE APPROACH FOR THE OPTION B.
LOOK AT THESE USES THAT COULD RESULT IN THESE, UH, POTENTIAL USES AND LABEL THEM AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
SO LET ME, LET ME OFFER SOMETHING.
UM, IN THE, IN THE RACK COMMITTEE, WE WENT THROUGH A VERY DETAILED DISCUSSION ABOUT DEFINING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE, TRAFFIC NOISE, NOXIOUS ODORS.
UH, IF YOU'LL GO BACK TO YOUR LIST OF THE USES THAT YOU WERE LOOKING AT, I AM PRETTY SURE THAT ALL OF THOSE ARE CONSIDERED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL IN OUR CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE, CORRECT? NO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT.
WE DON'T HAVE A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY CURRENTLY.
WE HAVE A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, BUT NOT A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL LAND USE.
BUT WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A DEFINITION THOUGH OF HEAVY MANUFACTURING IS WHAT WE HAVE.
MAYBE THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING OF.
WOULD ALL OF THESE FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY? NO.
ONLY THE MANUFACTURING HEAVY INTENSITY, THE BULLET 0.3, THE OTHERS ARE INDIVIDUAL USES.
THEY ARE CLASSIFIED AS INDUSTRIAL, BUT WE DON'T DIFFERENTIATE THE HEAVY, MEDIUM, OR LIGHT CURRENTLY.
ALRIGHT, UH, UM, SORRY, ONE MORE THING.
SO WE ALSO, I AM ALSO THINKING THAT UH, THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO CONSIDER TO PUT INTO THE, UM, THIS CLASSIFICATION.
WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN ONE RIGHT NOW FOR EXISTING BUSINESSES, ONCE WE PUT THE CLASSIFICATION
[00:30:01]
IN PLACE AND WE IDENTIFY, NOW WE IDENTIFY THESE FIVE, RIGHT? MAYBE WE'LL FIND ANOTHER ONE, SIX OR WE'LL FIND ANOTHER ONE SEVEN.WHAT IF THESE CLASSIFICATION WITH THE NEW LAW PUT THEM OUT OF COMPLIANCE? SO WHAT DO WE DO TO MITIGATE THAT COM? UH, IN COMPLIANCE, THE SITES THEMSELVES ARE NOT AFFECTED AND THE OWNERS ARE NOT AFFECTED.
ALL WE'RE DOING IS SAYING THAT THIS SITE, UM, MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE DEFINITION AND IT CREATES A BUFFER AROUND THE SITE THAT LIMITS THAT SB EIGHT 40 ACTIVITY BY WRIGHT.
SO THE OWNERS, NO, NOBODY'S BEING PENALIZED.
UM, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE SITES THEMSELVES, IT'S ABOUT THE RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT YOU CAN DO AROUND THE SITES.
SO WHATEVER EXISTING RIGHT NOW IS NOT IMPACTED.
IT WILL NOT PUT THE SITE ITSELF OUT COMPLIANCE? NO.
WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT FOR EXAMPLE, LIVING EARTH IS AN ROUS SITE AND WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF THAT WE CAN'T BUILD MULTIFAMILY BY RIGHT.
BECAUSE IT'S IN THAT ZONE THAT A EIGHT 40 ALLOWS IT FOR, BUT WE'RE CREATING THAT ENVELOPE AROUND IT TO SORT OF SHIELD FUTURE RESIDENTS OR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FROM THAT THINK IN PRACTICE, WHAT IF THERE'S ALREADY ONE? WHAT IF THERE'S ALREADY ONE? RIGHT NOW WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE WE NEVER IDENTIFIED THESE INDUSTRIES OR MANUFACTURE AS HEAVY INDUSTRY BEFORE.
WHAT IF THERE'S ALREADY AN APARTMENT ACROSS THE STREET? YEAH, IT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON EXISTING MULTIFAMILY SHOULD THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE THERE AS AS THEY ARE, BUT IT MIGHT, IT MIGHT IMPACT THEIR ABILITY TO EXPAND OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AS A ESSENTIALLY BECOMING NONCONFORMING.
USE NO LONGER BEING PERMITTED.
SO WHEN WE IDENTIFY THESE USES, SHOULD WE CON TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHETHER IT WILL PUT THEM OUTTA COMPLIANCE OR NOT? OR WE DOESN'T MATTER? IT DOESN'T MATTER.
WE'LL JUST CLASSIFY THEM THERE.
THERE'S STILL GONNA BE A CONFORMING USE.
IT'S REALLY ABOUT AFFECTING THE PROPERTY AROUND THEM, NOT THEIR, NOT THE ACTUAL.
SO THE BATCH PLANT ISN'T OUT OF COMPLIANCE.
IT'S ALREADY AS FAR AS THEIR ZONING IS CONCERNED, IT'S THE, LET ME, AM I IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS RIGHT, IT'S ABOUT THE USE BY RIGHT.
FOR THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
NOW THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T COME IN AND ASK FOR A ZONING CASE FOR MULTIFAMILY RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
THEY JUST HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
THEY DON'T HAVE A USE BY RIGHT.
FOR MULTIFAMILY WITHIN THOUSAND THAT'S CORRECT.
FOR A NEW MULTIFAMILY USE COMING IN.
I THINK THE QUESTION WAS IF THERE'S AN EXISTING MULTIFAMILY WITHIN THIS BUFFER AREA, RIGHT.
ARE THEY IMPACTED? AND THE ANSWER IS THEY COULD BE.
WELL IF THEY COULD STILL GET A ZONING CASE, THEY JUST WOULDN'T HAVE A USE BY, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO THEY COULD STILL APPEAL TO US AND WE COULD STILL GRANT THEM A CASE.
WE COULD STILL GRANT AN APPROVAL ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
THEY JUST WOULDN'T HAVE THE, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE USE BY, RIGHT.
UM, I'M GONNA GET TO YOU MR. BROSKI.
COMMISSIONER ALI, I I I THINK WE'RE SOLVING FOR THE WRONG THING.
UM, RIGHT NOW THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY MULTIFAMILY IN THE BLUE AREAS BECAUSE THEY WERE NON-RESIDENTIAL BEFORE SB EIGHT 40.
AM I CORRECTING THAT? THERE SHOULD NOT BE.
THEY WERE NON-RESIDENTIAL BEFORE SB EIGHT 40.
SB EIGHT 40 HAS OPENED IT UP FOR RESIDENTIAL USERS.
AND NOW WE ARE TRYING, WE HAVE TO SAY THAT AGAIN.
THERE, THERE COULD BE LOCATIONS WITH MULTIFAMILY, IT WAS ABOUT THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT DID NOT ALLOW MULTIFAMILY, BUT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWED THE MULTIFAMILY USE ON A SPECIFIC SITE.
BUT EVEN IF WE HAD A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WE ALREADY HAD THINGS ON THE BOOKS THAT REQUIRED BUFFER FROM OPEN STORAGE.
AND A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS WHERE I'LL BE VERY SURPRISED IF WE HAVE ANYTHING WITHIN, FOR THE MAPPING EXERCISE THAT WAS PREPARED BACK IN AUGUST, WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH EACH PD AND IDENTIFY WHICH ONE ALLOWS MULTIFAMILY USE.
IT WAS BASED ON THE, THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT.
UM, I STILL THINK THE, IF, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, THESE BUSINESSES ARE NOT NONCONFORMING TO THEIR ZONING CURRENTLY.
UH, WE ARE NOT BRINGING ANY UNDUE BURDEN ON THESE BUSINESSES WHERE BASICALLY IT'S, UM, MAPPING OUT A BUFFER FOR ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO BUILD NEXT TO THEM HAS TO ADHERE TO THIS BUFFER, NOT THE EXISTING BUSINESS.
IF SOMEBODY HAS COMES IN, THEY HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE BUFFER OR GO THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROCESS TO GET A WAIVER.
UM, IF THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SOLVING FOR, I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK WE NEED THRESHOLDS NECESSARILY.
UM, BECAUSE WHAT IS NOXIOUS TO ME MIGHT BE NOT NOXIOUS TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
UM, WHAT WHAT WE ESSENTIALLY SHOULD DO IS DEFINE ON A LAND
[00:35:01]
USE BASIS, AND IF THE INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS MITIGATES AND WHAT HAVE YOU, IT AGAIN DOES NOT AFFECT THEM BECAUSE THE RESIDENTIAL THAT IS GONNA BE BUILT HAS TO ADHERE TO THE BUFFER REGARDLESS.AM I READING THAT RIGHT? IN A NUTSHELL? YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOING TO A QUESTION I WAS ABOUT TO ASK TOO, BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST A QUESTION FOR MIKE.
IT'S, IT'S NOT ABOUT, WE'RE NOT CREATING A BUFFER NECESSARILY.
WE'RE CREATING A ZONE WHERE THERE IS NOT A USE BY RIGHT.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T STILL HAVE A ZONING CASE TO ASK FOR MULTIFAMILY UN UNDER THE NORMAL PROCESS.
IT'S JUST THEY DON'T HAVE A USE BY RIGHT INSIDE THAT BUFFER ZONE WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A ZONER CASE.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO EITHER COME TO US OR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR A WAIVER.
THEY WOULD'VE TWO, TWO AVENUES GO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS TO HAVE IT DECLARED NOT A NOXIOUS USE OR COME TO US FOR A ZONING CASE.
AND I THINK WHAT THEY COULD STILL BUILD THERE IF THEY GOT ONE OF THOSE APPROVALS.
AND IF, AND IF THEY WANT TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE THE SMELL AS PART OF THEIR BUILDING
UM, BUT IF THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SOLVING FOR, THEN I WOULD PROPOSE WE GO BACK TO THE SIX.
UM, AND BASICALLY WALK THROUGH THOSE AND DETERMINE IF WE WANT TO CLASSIFY THEM AS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AND GIVE UH, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED FOR.
LET ME GO TO COMMISSIONER BRONSKI FIRST AND THEN WE CAN GO THROUGH THOSE.
'CAUSE YOU'VE, OKAY, SO I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS BY YES SIR.
GOING IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS HERE.
SO FIRST I WANT TO ASK, UH, FOLLOWING, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, OLLIE AS WELL AS, UH, TONG'S QUESTIONS, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE NOXIOUS SMELLS AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS? THE DEFINITION? YES.
SO I, I'VE GOT A CONCERN I ON, UH, THE OBJECTIVITY OF THE DEFINITIONS.
UM, IF I LOOK AT HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS, UM, UH, IN SOME CASES NOXIOUS AND OFFENSIVE ODORS, UM, I MEAN I, I COULD LOOK AT THE COLLIN CREEK MALL DEVELOPMENT AND SAY THAT THAT SHOULD BE LABELED A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE BECAUSE IT QUALIFIES UNDER TWO OF THOSE THREE.
UM, SO I'VE GOT SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.
IS THERE A WAY TO, UM, MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T CREATE THESE LITTLE ZONES ALL ACROSS OUR CITY WHENEVER WE'RE TRYING TO FIT THINGS INTO ANYTHING THAT COULD APPLY AND THEN WE'D HAVE THESE LITTLE THOUSAND FOOT POCKETS ALL OVER THE CITY.
WELL, FOR CUL CREEK MALL, JUST TO USE YOUR EXAMPLE, IT BEGINS WITH, UH, THE DEFINITION OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AS STORAGE OR PROCESSING OR MANUFACTURING USE.
SO IT'S NOT GONNA APPLY TO ANYTHING THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVES AS FAR AS ZONING AND CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BECAUSE THAT WOULD JUST BE, YOU KNOW, TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION.
AND IT SMELLS PROBABLY, BUT IT'S GONNA, IT'S TEMPORARY.
UM, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A LONG TERM STORAGE PROCESSING OR MANUFACTURING USE.
SO, BUT I, I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE, UM, SO AS I'VE SAT HERE AND LISTENED, I'M KIND OF LEANING IN THE DIRECTION USING MR. BELL'S, UH, IDEAS OF OPTION ONE AND TWO.
I MEANT LEANING IN THE IDEA OF GOING WITH OPTION TWO, BUT FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH OPTION ONE TO KIND OF MERGE THEM TOGETHER.
BECAUSE I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE OBJECTIVITY AND THE, THE ABILITY TO SKEW THE DEFINITION A LITTLE BIT THAT I THINK THAT NONE OF US WANT TO HAVE.
UM, MY SECOND QUESTION IS THESE HEAVY USE, UH, AREAS, MITIGATION DOESN'T MATTER, DOES IT? NO.
IT'S, SO IF THEY'RE, IF THEY HAVE A WAY TO MITIGATE THE SMELL, IT'S STILL A THOUSAND FOOT BUFFER AROUND THERE, WHETHER THEY CAN MITIGATE THE SMELL OR THE SOUND NO MATTER WHAT.
I, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, COMMISSIONER, UH, UM, OLLIE HAD ASKED ABOUT THAT AND, AND TALKED ABOUT MITIGATION AND I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT IT MITIGATION IS IRRELEVANT TO WHAT WE'RE BUFFERING.
SO IT WOULD BE RELEVANT IN THE SENSE THAT IF, UH, AN APPLICANT OR A DEVELOPMENT WERE IN THE 1000 FOOT BUFFER OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AND THEY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME TO YOU SURE.
INSTEAD OF IT BEING APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY RIGHT.
THEY'D HAVE TO COME TO YOU AND, AND SHOW YOU THESE MITIGATING FACTORS AND THEN YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE OR DENY THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING, IT WOULDN'T JUST BE APPROVED BY RIGHT.
LIKE IT WOULD BE IN OTHER PARTS
[00:40:01]
OF THE CITY.BUT IN TERMS OF THE LABELING OF WHAT WE'RE DOING ON THESE MAPS MM-HMM
THAT MITIGATION DOESN'T MATTER.
IT WOULD, IT'S A THOUSAND FOOT BUFFER REGARDLESS.
BASED ON THE USE OF THE PARCEL IN QUESTION AT THE CENTER, IF I COULD EXPLAIN HOW THIS MIGHT WORK IN PRACTICE, THE OPTION ONE OF DOING IT CASE BY CASE, THE WAY THIS REALLY WORKS AND THE REAL REAL LIFE DAY TO DAY IS SOMEBODY COMES IN WITH A REQUEST, A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING AND THEY SAY THEY WANNA DO THIS USE.
IF WE GO WITH OPTION ONE, IT'S UPON THE STAFF TO EVALUATE THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE AROUND AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED IF THERE ARE ANY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES AROUND OPTION TWO WOULD BE, WE WOULD HAVE A MAP AND WE WOULD SAY, BASED ON OUR LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS, WE'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED THIS AS A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE IN THE AREA.
THEREFORE OUR DIRECTION BACK TO YOU IS THAT THIS USE IS NOT PERMITTED.
THEN THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO SAY, WELL, WE AGREE, WE DISAGREE.
UM, AND THERE ARE PROCEDURES IN THE ORDINANCE TO ALLOW THEM TO MOVE FORWARD IF THEY DISAGREE.
AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON I THINK IT'S, UH, WISE TO START OFF WITH OPTION TWO, BUT THEN FOLLOW THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ALLOWING THE STAFF TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS IN OPTION ONE.
AND SO I LOOK AT OPTION TWO AS A STARTING POINT AND OPTION ONE AS THE FOLLOW THROUGH FOR IT.
SO MY, UH, MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE, WOULD THIS IDENTIFICATION AND DESIGNATION LIMIT OR HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE POTENTIAL FUTURE USE OF THE SITE ITSELF? SHOULD THEY DIS DECIDE TO CHANGE THEIR USE ALTOGETHER? AND I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE LIVING EARTH DECIDES THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT ANYMORE, BUT THEY WANT TO BUILD APARTMENTS OVER THERE.
WOULD, WOULD THE LABELING ON THE MAP AS A USE AND THE BRACKETING OFF OF THE THOUSAND FEET AROUND THAT HAVE ANY SORT OF NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE POSSIBLE FUTURE USES OF THOSE AREAS? NOT IN REGARDS TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
IT MAY BE DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PHASE IT WOULD, BUT IF SOMEONE WERE TO CEASE HEAVY THE INDUSTRIAL USE ON A SITE, IT WOULD BE REMOVED.
WE'RE ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT SITES THAT ARE PRODUCING, AGAIN, NOISE AND ODOR AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
PLANOS OVERWHELMINGLY QUIET AND RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE PARKS.
AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF THESE SITES IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT LITTLE DONUTS EVERYWHERE.
UM, BUT WE WOULD, WE WOULD REMOVE, UH, THE, THE SITE FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE IF IT WERE TO, IF IT WERE TO CEASE.
AND THAT WAS GONNA BE MY LAST QUESTION IS ONCE IT IS, UH, CEASED, IS, IS THERE A TIMEFRAME AS FAR AS HOW LONG IT TAKES TO BE REMOVED OR CHANGED? OR DOES IT HAPPEN AUTOMATICALLY? UH, I BELIEVE IT WOULD HAPPEN AS SOON AS THE USE CEASES.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR, UH, ENFORCEMENT WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR THAT IF WE WOULD GO LOOK AT IT IF, YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAVE TO REMOVE ALL THE ROCKS FROM THE PILES FOR THE CEMENT, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S A QUESTION THAT WE WOULD NEED TO EXPLORE FURTHER.
UM, BUT EVENTUALLY IT WOULD CEASE.
I DUNNO HOW AS SOON IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
I, I WOULD THINK THAT JUST THE SECESSION OF THE ACTIVITY WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH, BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME KIND OF, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, SOME KIND OF CLEANUP TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, WE HAVE EN ENVIRONMENTALLY HANDLED THE AREA SO THAT IF WE WANTED TO HAVE, UH, RESIDENTIAL BE A USE BACK IN ONE OF THOSE AREAS.
SO, UM, PART OF THE REASON I THINK WHY STARTING WITH OPTION TWO AND THEN GOING TO OPTION ONE ALLOWS US THAT FLEXIBILITY SO THE STAFF CAN MAKE SOME OF THOSE DETERMINATIONS AND DECISIONS, UM, BEYOND THE STARTING POINT OF SAYING, LET'S DO THESE INITIAL LOCATIONS AND THEN WE'LL DO EVERYTHING ELSE BY A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
SO THAT'S KIND OF, THAT'S MY TAKE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER LINGENFELTER.
I WAS JUST GONNA KIND OF GIVE MY, MY THOUGHTS AND OPINION AS WELL.
JUST, UH, KIND OF REITERATE WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER BROSKI MENTIONED.
UH, I DO THINK THE, THE, THE MAP IS, IS THE GOOD WAY TO GO.
THESE SIX SITES DO MAKE SENSE.
THE DEFINITION DOES MAKE SENSE AS FAR AS THE USES GO IS WHAT YOU'VE WRITTEN PER, PER STATE LAW.
UM, I DO THINK WE SHOULD MAKE SURE WE CONSIDER USES.
I I, AGAIN, I DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE WHOLE CITY MAP AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT EVERY SINGLE SITE, BUT FOR THE EXAMPLE THAT I PROVIDED WITH THE, WITH THE TRANSFER STATION, UH, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL AND THERE MAY MAY NOT BE ANY COMPLAINTS NOW, I DO THINK SOMETHING THOSE KIND OF SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT STARTING MAP, UM, AS, AS HAVING A BUFFER AROUND IT TOO.
BUT THEN ALSO GOING FORWARD, I, I DO THINK WE SHOULD EXPLORE, UM, A A DEFINING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE AND, AND WHAT THOSE COULD BE THAT COULD THEN BE USED FOR FUTURE AND, AND UNDERSTANDING SO THAT YOU KNOW, IT, IT MAKE IT EASIER ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
SO YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO TEST THE SITE OR, OR THEM COME IN AND, AND THEY HA
[00:45:01]
WAIT A YEAR AND HOW MANY COMPLAINTS COME IN AND THEN WE FIGURE IT OUT, LET'S HAVE A USE DEFINED.SO GOING IN, WE KIND OF SAY, OKAY, UH, CONCRETE PLANTS.
OKAY, THAT'S A HEAVY NET HEAVY NATURAL USE.
THAT'S, THAT'S A CATEGORY THAT'S, THAT'S CLEARLY DEFINED.
SO GOING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, WE HAVE TO KIND OF PICK AND CHOOSE OR DECIDE LATER AFTER THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE ACTUALLY KIND OF HAVE THE USE DEFINED, DEFINED WELL.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY DIRECTION.
COMMISSIONER BRUNO? MY DIRECTION WOULD BE TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT, BUT WITH AN ADDITIONAL PROVISION THAT SAYS THAT THIS ORDINANCE SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED, UH, TO RENDER ANY, UH, ANY EXISTING, UH, PROPERTY USE IN VIOLATION OF THEIR CURRENT ZONING.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION REAL QUICK, AND THEN COMMISSIONER LEY, I'LL GET TO YOU.
UM, TO, I'M NOT GONNA REPEAT WHAT I THINK IS, I, I AGREE WITH THE USES, I AGREE WITH THE DEFINITION CONCEPT.
MY QUESTION WOULD BE, IF WE'RE GONNA DEFINE TODAY BASED ON A MOMENT IN TIME, ALL THESE USES THAT ARE OUT THERE TODAY, MOVING FORWARD SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR FROM NOW, IF, HOW ARE WE GONNA, IS SOMEBODY GONNA BE MONITORING ON A COMPLAINTS BASIS THAT WE'VE GOT A NEW SITE THAT IS DOING SOMETHING THAT WE WEREN'T AWARE OF OR THAT'S CHANGED ITS SYSTEM AND NOW IT'S CONSIDERED NOXIOUS? UM, HOW DO WE, SHORT OF HAVING A ZONING CASE THAT COMES IN NEXT DOOR AND THEN THE STAFF HAS TO GO OUT AND MONITOR IT OR CHECK IT, HOW ARE WE GONNA KNOW IF SOME OF THESE SITES COME OR GO OVER TIME? IS THERE, HAVE WE THOUGHT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF WHAT THE MOVING FORWARD PROCESS LOOKS LIKE? YEAH, I THINK THE, THAT WHAT IT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN PRACTICE IS SOMEONE WILL COME IN ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY AND WE'LL LOOK AND SEE, OH, THAT, THAT USE IS NO LONGER THERE.
OR, UM, OH, THERE'S A, A USE THAT WE MISSED.
SO WE NEED TO THEN APPLY THESE RULES.
IT'S THE ENFORCEMENT IS REALLY GONNA BE AT THE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING WHEN THEY NEED ADJACENT PROPERTY COMES IN WITH THEIR PROJECT TO DO AN SV EIGHT 40 USE, THEN YOU'LL LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING USES.
AT THAT POINT, JUST LIKE YOU DO NOW WITH SURROUNDING USES, WHEN YOU DO YOUR CASE ANALYSIS CORRECT? THE THE MAP GIVES US A STARTING PLACE.
AND IT GIVES THE PUBLIC SOME, THE DEVELOPERS, SOME UM, FOREWARNING OF THESE SITES HAVE ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED, BUT THERE MAY BE OTHERS.
THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION, COMMISSIONER ALI, MORE OF A LEGAL QUESTION.
I AM FAINTLY REMEMBERING FROM THE DRONE BUSINESS OPERATOR, UM, WE COULDN'T NECESSARILY REGULATE OPERATIONS, UH, WHICH IT KIND OF FEELS LIKE WE ARE ALMOST PLAYING AND TRYING TO DO A LITTLE BIT QUITE HERE.
SO FOR INSTANCE, A DRONES TAKEN OFF AND LANDING, THAT'S NOXIOUS NOISE.
DO WE PUT THAT AS EVERY INDUSTRIAL USE FOR INSTANCE? RIGHT.
BECAUSE IT, WE IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE THREADING INTO OPERATIONS.
AND I THINK IN THIS PARTICULAR CONTEXT, WE'RE OKAY WITH DOING THAT BECAUSE OF THE CRITERIA THAT THE STATE LAW PUT OUT FOR US.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE BASICALLY ALLOWING CITIES TO, UM, TO CREATE BUFFERS, UM, OKAY.
IN, IN ORDER TO, TO PROTECT, UM, RESIDENTS FROM, FROM THESE PARTICULAR THINGS.
AND SO IN THIS INSTANCE, WE ARE ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THEIR OPERATIONS.
WE WERE NOT ALLOWED IN THAT DRONE INSTANCE, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD SPECIFICALLY PREEMPTED US THERE.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PREEMPTED US, BUT NOW STATE LAW HAS GIVEN US THE POWER TO DO IT.
ALSO ADD, IT'S NOT THAT IT'S JUST THAT IT'S LOUD, IT ALSO HAS TO BE A STORAGE PROCESSING OR MANUFACTURING USE.
SO, YOU KNOW, BASEBALL FIELDS OR RECREATION CENTERS CAN BE LOUD.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE THEM A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE.
IT'S NOT THE NOISE ITSELF, IT'S THE NOISE AND COMBINATION WITH THE STORAGE PROCESSING OR MANUFACTURING.
SO LEMME SEE IF I CAN SUMMARIZE.
WHAT I'VE HEARD THE COMMISSION SAY IS THE USES THAT YOU HAVE LISTED, I THINK WE ALL AGREE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE MAP TODAY.
CORRECT? WE'RE SEEKING DIRECTION ON THESE USES.
YEAH, AND I THINK I, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S OBJECTED TO ANY OF THESE AS NOT BEING A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE UNLESS I MISREAD ANYBODY.
UM, AND MOVING FORWARD, IF A NEW ONE IS IDENTIFIED OR IS A NEW ONE IS SUSPECTED, OR IF A NEW ONE IS REPORTED, THE DEFINITION THAT YOU PUT UP ON THE SCREEN FROM EIGHT
[00:50:01]
40 WOULD BE USED TO EVALUATE IT? YES.WE, WE KEEP TRACK OF LAND USE IN THE CITY ON A WEEKLY BASIS ANYWAY USING BUILDING PERMITS AND PROJECTS THAT ARE APPROVED.
UM, AND SO WE WOULD LIKE TO THINK WE WOULD FIND ALL OF THESE USES, UM, AND KEEP TRACK OF THEM AS BEST AS WE CAN.
BUT, BUT I THINK MR. BELL MADE THE ARGUMENT THAT AS A CASE COMES IN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAND USE AROUND IT, THEN YOU WOULD USE THE DEFINITION TO EVALUATE THE SURROUNDING LAND USE.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA GO OUT THERE LOOKING FOR IT, DRIVING EVERY STREET IN THE CITY LOOKING FOR IT, BUT IF A CASE COMES IN THAT IT LOOKS LIKE MIGHT HAVE AN ISSUE NEXT DOOR, THEN YOU'LL USE THE DEFINITION OF EIGHT 40 TO DEFINE IT OR NOT.
WE WOULD USE THAT DEFINITION, YES.
IS THAT A GOOD SUMMARY OF KIND OF WHERE EVERYBODY IS? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER BRUNO, THUMBS UP.
YOU GOOD? WELL, DOES THAT ADEQUATELY PROTECT EXISTING USES? THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN.
IT DOESN'T REALLY, THE WAY I'M UNDERSTANDING IS IT DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT EXISTING USE AT ALL.
IT'S ABOUT, IT'S ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY HAS RIGHTS UNDER EIGHT 40 OR NOT BASED ON A NEIGHBOR'S USE.
BECAUSE THE USE ITSELF ISN'T BEING IMPACTED.
IT'S THE NEIGHBOR'S NEXT DOOR THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE RIGHTS UNDER SENATE BILL EIGHT 40, DEPENDING ON WHETHER THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR IS A NOXIOUS USE.
I I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S, THAT, UH, THAT'S THE INTENT.
I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF, UH, OF, UH, DEFINING SOMEBODY OUT OF THEIR ZONING.
THAT'S THE ONLY, THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE.
BUT IT'S NOT ABOUT, IT'S NOT DEFINING ANYBODY OUTTA ZONING.
IT'S ONLY DEFINING SOMEBODY OUT OF USE BY RIGHT UNDER EIGHT 40.
THEIR ZONING WOULD STILL BE THEIR ZONING.
THAT ADEQUATE DIRECTION FOR, IS IT CLEAR AS MUD GO BY THE LAND USE
ANY OTHER, AND THEN WHEN IN DOUBT, LOOK AT THE DEFINITION.
AND ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME TODAY? I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER LIGHTS ON.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING? NO, SIR.
ALRIGHT, THEN WE STAND ADJOURNED AT 6:52 PM THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BRUNO FOR JOINING US.