Richardson City Plan Commission Meeting April 2nd, 2024
Six of the seven regular commissioners are present, Chairman Marsh, Vice-Chair Southard, Commissioner Costantino, Commissioner Roberts, Commissioner Keller, and Commissioner Bohnsack. Commissioner Walraven is absent. No alternates are present.
March minutes include one correction and are approved unanimously.
The lone item on tonight’s agenda is a public hearing on ZF 24-01, a special permit and development plan request for a bottling facility for Lockwood Distillery at 816 S. Sherman St. This request was approved unanimously by Council on April 8th without any discussion.
Staff presents a background of the request. The applicant is requesting to add an overhead door to the east façade and reconstruct the fire lane/driveway with additional landscaping. Staff notes that over a dozen exceptions to development standards are being requested since this is an existing nonconforming site and building. No correspondence was received for this request.
Chairman Marsh asks why the Railside subdistrict requires the ground floor of nonresidential buildings to have over 50% of the façade covered by windows. Staff answers that the vision for the subdistrict makes the area commercial instead of industrial. The applicant comes forward and explains that the business has run out of space and needs a second location to continue growing. Commissioner Roberts asks if this second location will also have a tasting room. The applicant answers that they have no immediate plans to open this location to the public. Vice-Chair Southard asks how many additional staff they plan to hire for this facility. The applicant answers that they plan to hire at least ten initially with future plans for additional staff. Staff clarifies that a tasting room with retail sales would be allowed under this request. Special events would need a special permit.
Much of the discussion revolves around the needs of the business vs. the vision for the subdistrict. Staff prioritized health and safety in the recommended modifications and exceptions. The applicant obviously wants the needs of the business to be prioritized. He states that after they move in, they can assess the cost of form and façade improvements such as painting and sidewalk enhancements. But, he acknowledges that some of these requirements are more beneficial to the future nonindustrial vision for the subdistrict than this manufacturing use. Vice-Chair Southard asks how many trucks will be in and out every day. The applicant answers that it should only be one truck a day. No other speakers are present for the hearing.
The CPC discusses the merits of the applicant’s desire to stay in Richardson. Most of the commission seems to view the additional development standards as too burdensome for a lessee such as this. The applicant has shown a good faith effort to work with the city on the health & safety aspects and has also agreed to get as close as possible to some of the walkability and landscaping requirements. Commissioner Keller agrees with the commission’s comments on not overburdening a lessee with over a dozen building and site modifications to meet development standards for a use that is not desired by the subdistrict’s vision. However, noting that this situation of ignoring the district’s vision in favor of occupancy of a space has and will continue to come up often, he sees it as dangerous to continue to ignore these future land use visions. He wants to require some aesthetic modifications in the motion to better fit the vision for the subdistrict. Commissioner Keller also notes that, though this applicant will be a lessee, their plans for the property are not temporary. They have long-term future growth plans revolving around this additional location. He cautions the commission not to treat the request as though it were a temporary leased use.
Vice-Chair Southard suggests that the success of the business could lead to some of the aesthetic items being taken care of in the future. He doesn’t agree with requiring too much in this motion. Since Lockwood Distillery has been a good neighbor, he proposes that the commission trust the applicant without dictating too many requirements. Chairman Marsh asks staff to prioritize which modifications are most important. Staff answers that establishing amenity zones with a wider sidewalk and a landscape buffer are most important. These would need to be added to the motion since they are not included in the concept plan. Commissioner Costantino proposes an 8 or 10-year time limit to reevaluate the special permit, giving the business a chance to have enough revenue for these additional elements, and then deciding if the applicant should be required to make these improvements at that time. Chairman Marsh disagrees with this approach.
Commissioner Costantino and staff explain that the 10-year time limit approach has been used before. In 2020, the Qualifying Nonconforming Use was a class created to allow uses previously allowed by zoning to exist for 10 years and then be reevaluated as a true nonconforming use requiring a new special permit. This allows time to see how the business grows and impacts the surrounding area. Chairman Marsh doesn’t agree with this approach for a zoning case where an entire building isn’t being redeveloped. Furthermore, he thinks this request fits the character of the neighborhood. The applicant is asked for his opinion on the time limit approach. The applicant answers that he would have to explore spaces outside of Richardson if a time limit was placed on the request. He has concerns about being able to obtain proper licenses with this approach. He further guarantees that they will make façade improvements to match their existing location’s look.
After nearly an hour and a half, the CPC recommends approval as presented 5-1 with Commissioner Keller opposed. Meeting adjourned.