[3.A. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding an ordinance amending the text of the City’s zoning ordinance codified in Appendix B of the City of Burleson Code of Ordinances relating to liquor sales. (Staff Contact: Tony D. McIlwain, Development Services Director)]

THAT'LL MOVE US ON TO SECTION 3, GENERAL.

FIRST THING I WILL DO IS CALL BEFORE THIS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ITEM 3A, THAT'S TO RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE CODIFIED IN APPENDIX B OF THE CITY OF BURLESON CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO LIQUOR SALES.

AT THIS TIME, I SHALL ALSO CALL FORWARD ITEM 3A FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.

THIS IS ALSO TO RECEIVE A REPORT, HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE CODIFIED IN APPENDIX B OF THE CITY OF BURLESON CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO LIQUOR SALES.

THE PRESENTER THIS EVENING IS TONY MCILWAIN, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR. MR. MCILWAIN.

>> THANK YOU. GETTING UP ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND COMMISSIONERS.

AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE, STAFF PRESENTED TO YOU SOME TEXT AMENDMENT PROPOSALS THAT HAVE CULMINATED IN US BEING HERE TONIGHT FOR THIS JOINT PUBLIC HEARING.

I'M GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO GO THROUGH THE SLIDES.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND YOU WANT TO INTERRUPT ME THROUGH THE MAYOR OR THE CHAIR, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO SO.

JUST BY WAY OF BACKGROUND WITH REGARD TO LIQUOR AND PACKAGE STORES, AS YOU ALL AWARE, OUR CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT ADDRESS LIQUOR PACKAGE STORES.

THEREFORE, THEY'RE NOT AN ALLOWED USE.

AS YOU ALSO ARE AWARE, THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE IS IN RECEIPT OF A PETITION FOR THE GATHERING OF SIGNATURES IN SUPPORT OF A LOCAL OPTION ELECTION TO ADDRESS LIQUOR SALES.

THIS ELECTION WOULD TAKE PLACE IN NOVEMBER.

BACK ON FEBRUARY, 5TH, THE COUNCIL AND PNC MET AND CONDUCTED TOGETHER BUT SEPARATE MEETINGS AND APPROVED RESOLUTION SETTING TODAY'S MEETING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES AND DETAIL SOME OF THE STANDARDS THAT STAFF IS PROPOSING.

THE FIRST OF WHICH IS ALLOWING LIQUOR AND PACKAGE STORES IN THREE ZONING DISTRICTS BY RIGHT AND INDUSTRIAL WITH SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS.

THEN, PER COUNCIL'S PREVIOUS DIRECTION, WE'VE TWEAKED THE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO PUT LIQUOR AND PACKAGE STORES AS AN SUP IN THE GENERAL RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? ESSENTIALLY, ANYONE THAT IS INTERESTED IN OPERATING THIS TYPE OF USE WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU AS COMMISSIONERS AND AS COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GET APPROVAL OF AN SUP.

IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, THAT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY.

I PROVIDED THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS BASED ON WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION AND THE NEXT DISCUSSION FOR THIS ITEM.

AS A REFRESHER, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY PACKAGE STORES BE LOCATED WITHIN THE OLD TOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT OR WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE IH-35 FRONTAGE.

I KNOW THAT I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH ANY NUMBER OF YOU ALL ABOUT SOME OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS.

I'M GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE CAME TO THOSE STANDARDS.

WHEN WE WERE ASKED TO PUT FORWARD AN ORDINANCE, STAFF REVIEWED SEVERAL CITIES AND THERE WERE NO REGULATIONS.

[00:05:01]

THEY WERE EITHER SIMPLY ALLOWED OR NOT ALLOWED, AND THERE WERE NO STANDARDS THAT ADDRESSED APPEARANCE OR MINIMUM THRESHOLDS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AT THE TIME, THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS WHAT WOULD WE LIKE TO CONSIDER AND WHAT WOULD WE THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE COMMISSION AND FOR THE COUNCIL.

CONSIDER IF YOU HAD A LARGER FOOTPRINT ENTITY, ALMOST A BIGGER BOX RETAILER, AND WE CAME TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET, THOSE PICTURES GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF WHAT 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS NOT YOUR SMALLER HOME GROWN RETAILERS AS MUCH AS IT WAS FOR SOME OF YOUR LARGER ONES THAT COME IN AND OCCUPY A LOT OF SPACE.

WE HAVE THAT THE EXISTENCE OF SPIRITS, ALCOHOL WILL REQUIRE FIRE SPRINKLING ANYWAY BECAUSE OF THE FIRE VOLATILITY INVOLVED WITH WHAT'S BEING HOUSED ON SITE.

BUT WE'VE GIVEN YOU AARONS RENTALS, RIO BRAVO, AND QUEST CARE, JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF HOW THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE LOOKS.

I'M NOT RAVOCATING 7,500 SQUARE FEET FOR EVERY SINGLE RETAILER THAT'S INTERESTED IN DOING A PACKAGE STORE BECAUSE THAT VARIES DEPENDING ON WHO THE PERSON REQUESTING IT IS.

YOU'VE GOT SOME PEOPLE THAT WANT SOMETHING THAT IS MUCH SMALLER, MORE BOUTIQUE.

SO PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS IS GIVING SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR YOU TO CONSIDER EITHER SCALING THAT UP OR DOWN, AND ALSO GIVING YOU A WAIVER PROCESS THROUGH THE SUP TO GET SOME MORE CONSIDERATIONS IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A SMALLER FOOTPRINT FOR A BUILDING, SO TO SPEAK.

FOR THE BENEFIT OF TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION, AND I THINK IT'LL BE EASIER, AS WE GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, I WANT TO GET YOUR CONSENSUS ON WHAT IS COMFORTABLE WITH YOU ALL FROM THE INDUSTRIAL ASPECT, MEANING THAT STEPS ALLOWED BY RIGHT, AND THEN WE'LL DOVETAIL INTO THOSE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS THAT YOU THINK ARE MOST APPROPRIATE PER SUP IN THE COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL RETAIL.

I WANT TO DIVVY IT UP.

INDUSTRIALS BY RIGHT, COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL RETAIL IS PER SUP.

IN BOTH OF THOSE INSTANCES, YOU HAVE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS.

I'M GOING TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS AS FAR AS YOUR COMFORT LEVEL AT THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT VERSUS THE GENERAL RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.

>> TONY, FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, JUST WITH REGARD TO THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND THE 7,500 SQUARE FOOT PROPOSED REQUIREMENT, I BELIEVE UNDER OUR CURRENTLY ADOPTED CODE, THE TRIGGER MECHANISM FOR SPRINKLER IS NOT SOLELY BASED ON SQUARE FOOT, BUT MORE BASED ON THE OCCUPANCY TYPE, WHAT'S BEING STORED.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR THAT THE 7,500 SQUARE FOOT ISN'T NECESSARILY THE TRIGGER MECHANISMS THERE.

THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY TOO IS THAT THESE ARE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT THIS IS FOR OPEN DIALOGUE FOR THE BOARD AND THE COUNCIL TO HAVE DISCUSSION.

IF WE NEED TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.

WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

BUT BEFORE TONY'S SOLICIT FEEDBACK, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR TOO THAT ALL OF THESE PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS, AT LEAST IS CURRENTLY RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

AN SUP COULD BE USED AS A VARIANCE FOR ANY ONE OF THESE AND BE CONSIDERED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR AS WELL.

>> CITY MANAGER IS CORRECT. IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FABRICS AND UPHOLSTERY, YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT BUILDING SPRINKLER JUST BECAUSE OF WHAT COULD CATCH FIRE IN THERE.

WE INITIALLY BROUGHT FORWARD A 300-FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN PACKAGE STORES DURING OUR LAST BRIEFING TO THE COUNCIL.

THE CONSENSUS AT THAT TIME WAS TO PROJECT THOSE USES A LITTLE FURTHER APART TO 1,000 FOOT, WHICH IS BASICALLY 1,000 FOOT RADIUS.

WHAT WE DID IS WE PROVIDED THE MAP GRAPHIC SHOWING THAT FIGURE IN LIGHT GREEN.

IF THAT WERE A PACKAGE STORE, WHAT WOULD WE BE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS THE NEXT AVAILABLE SPATIAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ANOTHER PACKAGE STORE? EVERYTHING TO THE OUTER SIDE OF THE YELLOW RING IS OUTSIDE OF THE 1,000-FOOT BUFFER, AND THAT WOULD BE YOUR NEXT AVAILABILITY FOR A PACKAGE STORE IF YOU WERE INCLINED TO GO WITH A 1,000-FOOT BUFFER.

THIS IS JUST GOING INTO SOME OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS.

NO WALK UP WINDOWS, AND NO ACCESS THROUGH DRIVE THROUGH OR DRIVE UP.

THIS GIVES YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'RE NOT PROPOSING,

[00:10:02]

BASED ON OUR INITIAL BLUSH, IF YOU WILL, WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS.

INDEPENDENT ENTRANCES FOR DELIVERIES AND CUSTOMERS.

WE'VE DISCUSSED PARTITION WALLS BASICALLY SEPARATING ANY PACKAGE STORE, LIQUOR STORE, FROM OTHER RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHED.

I THINK ANY NUMBER OF US HAVE GONE INTO GROCERY STORES OR OTHER ESTABLISHMENTS, AND YOU'VE SEEN A PARTITION WALL THAT REQUIRES YOU TO EXIT THE BUILDING TO GET INTO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS THAT ARE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.

WINDOWS. POLYCARBONATE OR PROTECTIVE SHATTERPROOF FILM INSTALLED ON BOTH SIDES AND GLASS WINDOWS.

WITH ANY ESTABLISHMENT THERE'S ALWAYS THE THREAT OF CRIME.

THIS WAS MEANT TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD MITIGATE SOME OF THE INSTANCES OF BURGLARY AND CRIME.

IT'S AN IDEA, IF YOU FEEL THAT IT SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME AS ANY OTHER RETAIL USE AND THIS REQUIREMENT NOT APPLY, IT'S FINE.

WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE THINKING BEHIND THIS IDEA.

WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DRIVE UP THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION OF DEVELOPMENT, BUT RATHER GIVE YOU A FULL RANGE OF OPTIONS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER TONIGHT.

LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THE FRONT FACADE AND THE PARKWAY.

PLANNING STAFF PUT TOGETHER A GRAPHIC TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF YOU WERE ESSENTIALLY DOING A NEW BUILD OR A FULL SALE REDEVELOPMENT OF A SITE.

THIS IS TO SOFTSCAPE THE PROPERTY AND THE USE.

ANYTIME WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE MAKE THE CITY A LITTLE MORE ATTRACTIVE FROM A LANDSCAPING STANDPOINT, PLANNING STAFF WILL ALWAYS TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT WITH YOU.

BUT THE LANDSCAPING IS ESSENTIALLY, AGAIN, PROVIDE FOR A BETTER VISUAL PRESENTATION OF THE USE AS SEEN FROM THE PUBLIC, RIGHT AWAY OR REGARDING OF TREES.

AGAIN, WE'VE GOT TO NOTE, ALL OF THESE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS ALLOW AN INDIVIDUAL TO SEEK A VARIANCE OF WAIVER THROUGH THE [INAUDIBLE] SEP PROCESS.

TONIGHT IS ABOUT FUTURE-PROOFING.

WE DON'T HAVE A LOCAL OPTION ELECTION BEING HELD IN THE NEAR TERM, BUT ONE IS EXPECTED TO BE HELD IN NOVEMBER.

PART OF THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT IS TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AS COMMISSIONERS TO THE COUNCIL, AND THEN TO RECEIVE THE FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION FROM ULTIMATELY THE COUNCIL AS TO THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO UNDERTAKE.

VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE, NOTHING TONIGHT ENTITLES ANYONE TO OPERATE A PACKAGE STORE TOMORROW.

THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION ABOUT ZONING.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE DEFINITELY WANT TO RECEIVE YOUR IDEAS.

I KNOW THAT ANY NUMBER OF YOU HAVE BEEN CONTACTED FROM INDIVIDUALS REGARDING ANY NUMBER OF INSTANCES AND CONCERNS ABOUT PACKET STORES.

THEY ARE AT THEIR HEART OF RETAIL USE, HEAVILY REGULATED BY THE STATE.

WHAT THE CITY IS LOOKING TO DO IS TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE SAY IN HOW THEY LOOK, WHERE THEY GO.

JUST A QUICK RECAP PROPOSAL IS BY RIGHT AND INDUSTRIAL PER SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IN COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL RETAIL, SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS APPLY TO ALL.

YOU CAN SUP YOURSELF OUT OF ANY SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARD, THROUGH A WAIVER PROCESS.

ADDITIONALLY, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO, VIA AN SUP, PUT IN OTHER CONDITIONS THAT YOU THINK ARE RELEVANT AND NECESSARY FOR THE PROPERTIES ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.

ONE THING I DO WANT TO ASK IS THAT, WITH REGARD TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS THAT WE DISCUSSED, THE 1,000-FOOT SEPARATION, THE 7,500 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING, THE WINDOW TREATMENTS.

ONLY IN INDUSTRIAL, WHICH IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT, IS THERE ANY HEARTBURN? ARE THERE ANY CONSIDERATIONS THAT YOU WOULD WANT US TO LOOK AT SUCH AS SCALING ANY OF THOSE THRESHOLDS UP OR DOWN? INDUSTRIAL IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT WITH REGARD TO THE SCOPE AND NATURE OF WHAT IS IN THE AREA.

THE BUILDINGS TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER.

WE WOULD THINK THAT FROM A VISIBILITY STANDPOINT THE INDIVIDUALS LOOKING TO LOCATE OUT THERE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A BIGGER FOOTPRINT THAN SOMEONE LOOKING TO GO IN AN AREA COMMERCIAL OR GENERAL RETAIL.

I WANT TO START OUT WITH JUST A DISCUSSION ABOUT AN INDUSTRIAL, SEE WHERE WE LAND, AND THEN WE CAN GET INTO WHAT THE MAYOR WITH THE COUNCIL,

[00:15:01]

AND CHAIRMAN, YOUR BODY'S INDULGENCE, T HAT'S WHAT STAFF WOULD LIKE TO DO.

SEE IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS AND THEN MOVE FORWARD ACCORDINGLY WITH ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THE SEP PROCESS FOR THE GENERAL RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL.

>> HOW DO WE COME UP WITH THE SPRINKLERS ON THIS PARTICULAR SIZE? WE ALREADY HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT SAYS WE NEED TO SPRINKLE.

>> YES, YOU WILL NEED THE SPRINKLER REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE, JUST BECAUSE THE CONTENT OF THE ESTABLISHMENT WILL BE ALCOHOL, AS THAT'S HIGHLY FLAMMABLE.

WE HAVE REQUIRED FIRE SPRINKLING.

IT REQUIRES FIRE SPRINKLING REGARDLESS.

THE SIZE THRESHOLD IS NOT THE TRIGGER POINT, IT'S THE CONTENT OF WHAT'S IN THE BUILDING. MR. MAYOR?

>> MAYOR, JUST TO ADD TO THAT.

THE BUILDING CODE IS GOING TO BE WHAT DETERMINES WHEN AND WHERE A SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS REQUIRED.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO RECOMMEND OR PROPOSE AS PART OF THE ZONING THAT SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED, IT'S GOING TO BE THE BUILDING CODE THAT DETERMINES THAT.

>> WHAT ABOUT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS PUTTING IT IN A STRIP CENTER.

HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THAT? DO WE SPRINKLE JUST THAT STORE? WHAT ABOUT ON EACH SIDE OF IT?

>> MUCH AS THE CITY MANAGER SAID, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, REVIEW THAT AGAINST THE BUILDING CODE.

IF IT'S REQUIRED TO BE SPRINKLER, IT'LL BE LIMITED TO THAT LOCATION.

THEN YOU'VE GOT THINGS SUCH AS FIREWALLS AND THINGS OF THAT IN TERMS OF SEPARATION TECHNIQUES.

THE ONE THING THAT YOU ARE LEADING INTO, MR. MAYOR, IS THAT IF YOU HAVE A REDEVELOPMENT OR A INFILL OPPORTUNITY, AND THE BUILDING IS ALREADY STANDING, THE QUESTION IS, AND BEYOND, JUST THE FIRE SPRINKLING, IS HOW MUCH OF A RETROFITTING OF THE ESTABLISHMENT ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH.

IF THE BUILDING IS NOT DOESN'T HAVE THE REQUISITE LANDSCAPING WE'RE PROPOSING, IF IT DOESN'T HAVE SOME OF THE OTHER STANDARDS, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH SOMEONE OCCUPYING THAT LOCATION AND BRINGING UP JUST THAT LEASE SPACE TO WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED? THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION.

BUT IT GOES BEYOND SPRINKLING AS YOU WERE LEADING INTO.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET TO TONIGHT BECAUSE THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET A BIG RUSH ON, PEOPLE OCCUPYING EXISTING LEASE SPACES.

IT'S CHEAPER THAN BRINGING A BUILDING UP OUT THE GROUND, FOR SURE.

>> ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I WOULD THINK THAT ANY BUSINESS LIKE THIS WOULD WANT TO SPRINKLER SYSTEM.

EVERY RESTAURANT HAS AN ANSUL SYSTEM WHICH WOULD STOP A FIRE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.

I WOULD THINK YOU WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO ASK THEM TO DO THIS BECAUSE THAT COULD SAVE THE BUILDING PART OF THEIR CONTENTS.

FOR ME, I WOULD BEFORE THAT FOR THAT VERY REASON.

AS I SAY, EVERY RESTAURANT IN THIS TOWN HAS AN ANSUL SYSTEM.

SAME TYPE DEAL.

AS FAR AS THE TREES IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING, I COULD PROBABLY LEAVE THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT STRICTLY UP TO ME.

>> COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, TYPICALLY, DON'T HAVE THAT MANY WINDOWS OR ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE NARROW.

THEY MIGHT HAVE A STORE FRONT GLASS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

I'M AT THE COST OF SCHEMING THE WINDOWS WITH THE FILM WOULD BE FAIRLY MINIMAL.

I THINK CHANGING THEM ALL OUT WOULD BE PRETTY EXPENSIVE.

THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS, THEY GO TO RETROFIT A BUILDING.

IF THEY WERE TO BREAK THE BUILDING UP, SAY IF IT WAS 15,000 SQUARE FEET, CAN THEY PARTITION IT OFF TO 7,500 OR SO AND SPRINKLE JUST THAT? THESE COSTS MAY GET UP THERE PRETTY HIGH.

I KNOW THEY'LL GET INSURANCE DISCOUNT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY'S WILLING TO MAKE CONCESSIONS WITH SOME OF THESE BUILDING OWNERS.

>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M BEING VERY CLEAR.

THE ZONING ACTION TONIGHT ISN'T GOING TO TRUMP WHAT'S REQUIRED FROM THE BUILDING CODE.

WITH REGARD TO IT BEING SPRINKLERED, THE ZONING ACTION ISN'T THE TRIGGER FOR THE SPRINKLERING OF THE BUILDING.

IT IS MORE OF GIVING YOU A NODE TO WHEN YOU GET TO A CERTAIN SIZE AND A CERTAIN USE, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS DYLAN WHITEHEAD STAFF IS GOING TO LOOK AND SAY, YOU NEED TO HAVE THIS AND THIS TO OCCUPY, THAT THE SAME AS WE DO RIGHT NOW.

YOU CAN GO IN WITH ANY RETAIL USE.

YOUR TYPICAL CONVENIENCE STORE HAS BEER AND WINE AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO JUST US TALKING ABOUT THE PACKET STORE WITH REGARD TO THE COST PROHIBITIVE NATURE.

[00:20:01]

LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.

IF YOU ARE A PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS OWNER AND YOU NOW ARE LOOKING AT A SITE AND YOU COME TO MEET WITH THE STAFF, WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE ON FILE FOR THAT PROPERTY.

IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO YOU TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR YOU TO GO AT A CERTAIN LOCATION.

GETTING ENTITLED IS THE EASY PART.

IT COMES BEFORE YOUR TWO BODIES, AND IT'S A YAY OR NAY.

THE HARD PART COMES IN WITH BRINGING IN ENOUGH CAPITAL TO GET THE PROJECT TO WORK.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT TRYING TO PUT IN IMPEDIMENTS TO THE MARKET, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF HOW THIS IS GOING TO LOOK.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF WAYS TO LOOK AT IT.

YOU CAN HAVE NO STANDARDS ALL BY RIGHT, WHICH IS WHAT WE INITIALLY STARTED OUT WITH.

WE THOUGHT IT WAS A LEAP TOO FAR IN THE BEGINNING, AND SO WE SCALED IT DOWN TO, WELL, LET'S DO SOME THINGS BY RIGHT, SOME THINGS PER SUP.

LET'S GET AT LEAST SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT MR. JANISH.

IF APPLYING THE FILM TO THE GLASS IS IN YOUR DETERMINATION COST PROHIBITIVE, THAT'S THE TYPE OF FEEDBACK WE WANT TO GET FROM YOU ALL TONIGHT SO WE CAN REDIRECT OUR EFFORTS TO EITHER TAKE IT OUT MODIFIED AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

STAFF IS NOT LEADING OR DOESN'T WANT TO GIVE AN IMPRESSION OF LEADING YOU AS TO WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO.

WE JUST GIVE YOU A RANGE OF OPTIONS.

IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE, YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT.

BECAUSE ULTIMATELY WE WANT TO HAVE A CODE THAT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WORKING WITH.

ALSO TOO, IF YOU DON'T GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME, GUESS WHAT? WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO COME BACK AND REVISIT IT AND TWEAK IT AS NECESSARY.

I SAY ALL THAT JUST TO SAY THAT IF YOU HAVE SOME CONCERNS, I'D LIKE TO HEAR THOSE.

CITY MANAGER WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THOSE.

WHETHER IT'S THE WINDOWS, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE 1,000 FOOT SEPARATION.

SOME OF YOU MAY THINK IT'S TOO MUCH, SOME OF YOU MAY THINK IT'S NOT ENOUGH.

BUT THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING TONIGHT.

WE'RE ALL EARS.

>> TONY, AS FAR AS THE BY RIGHT INDUSTRIAL 7,500 SQUARE FEET, I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE.

I APPRECIATE HAVING THE SUP AVAILABLE TO US FOR GENERAL RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL.

IF A OWNER DECIDES TO BUILD A 3,000 SQUARE FOOT IN GENERAL RETAILER COMMERCIAL, THEN WE HAVE THE OPTION TO APPROVE IT OR DISAPPROVE IT, DEPENDING ON THE OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES.

I APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK THAT'LL WORK REALLY GOOD.

AS FAR AS THE SPRINKLER, I KNOW THAT'S BEEN A BIG TALK ALREADY TONIGHT.

THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE HAS A NEW CODE IN IT CALLED DISTILLED SPIRITS.

IT'S 903.2.9.3, AND WE ADOPTED THAT OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR, THE COUNCIL DID AS OUR NEW FIRE ORDINANCE.

IT SAYS THAT YOU'LL HAVE AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER IN GROUP S-1 FIRE AREA, AND THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE OF 2021 BACKS THIS UP.

THEY'RE HOOKED AT THE HIP.

S-1 IS BEVERAGES STORED AND THEY'RE LIQUOR GREATER THAN 16% ALCOHOL.

THAT'LL TAKE CARE OF THAT, NOT THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

IT'LL BE THE COMMODITY IN THE BUILDING CODE AND THE FIRE CODE.

THAT'S NOT AN OPTION HERE.

THAT'S LIKE YOU SAID, TOMMY, UNDER THE CODES FOR BUILDING CODES.

THE ONLY HEARTBURN I HAVE IS THE WINDOW TREATMENT.

>> YES, SIR.

>> I THINK THAT WHENEVER A BUSINESS OWNER BUILDS A LIQUOR STORE, HE'LL GET IT INSURED.

I THINK WHEN THE INSURANCE AGENT COMES OUT AND DOES THE RISK ASSESSMENT, I THINK IT SHOULD BE UP TO HIM AND THE BUSINESS OWNER TO MAKE A DECISION WHAT SECURITY WINDOW TREATING WINDOW BARS OR WINDOW PROTECTION THEY NEED, OR EVEN SIZE OF WINDOWS IN THE BUILDING.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO GET INVOLVED IN THAT PART OF THE BUSINESS.

BUT EVERYTHING ELSE YOU PRESENTED TODAY IS THE SUPPLEMENTAL AND INDUSTRIAL I AGREE WITH.

>> IF I MAY.

>> SIR.

>> I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE 1,000 FEET.

I WOULDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH 500 FEET.

PERSONALLY, 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT.

I WOULDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH 5,000 SQUARE FEET BUT I PREFER THEM COMING AND ASKING FOR THE SUP TO REDUCE THAT.

THE WINDOW FILM I PERSONALLY LIKE BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IS A BUNCH OF BARS OVER THE WINDOWS.

I THINK IF YOU HAVE THE WINDOW TREATMENT, IT'S A PERSONAL CHOICE FOR THEM, BUT I WOULDN'T REALLY WANT TO SEE LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, STORES ON THE WRONG SIDE OF TOWN WHERE THEY STICK BARS OVER THE WINDOWS AND I THINK THE WINDOW TREATMENT WOULD HELP WITH THAT.

LIQUOR BEING A MORE, I DON'T KNOW, DESIROUS THEFT PERHAPS FROM AN UNDERAGE PERSON IF THEY CAN BUST A WINDOW AND GO IN AND GET IT, I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK THAT THE WINDOW TREATMENT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE VERY EXPENSIVE,

[00:25:06]

IN RELATIVE TERMS, CHANGING OUT WINDOWS WOULD BE.

BUT I DON'T THINK WINDOW FILM WOULD BE ALL THAT EXPENSIVE TO ADD.

I WOULD LIKE THE WINDOW TREATMENT PERSONALLY BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT TO SEE BARS OVER THE WINDOWS AND THAT WOULD BE MAYBE PERHAPS ANOTHER ADDITION TO NOT ALLOW BARS, BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT THE WIND PLACE BEING BROKEN INTO MUCH A REGULAR BASIS. [LAUGHTER]

>> SURE

>> I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.

I'M GLAD TO KNOW ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE.

I THINK THAT'LL REALLY HELP OUT IN THE FUTURE WITH SOME OTHER BUSINESSES THAT WILL BE CARRYING LIQUOR TO SOME DEGREE.

THE WINDOW FILM I DO, I'M A GENERAL CONTRACTOR.

I'VE DONE QUITE A FEW REPAIRS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE KNOCKED OUT WINDOWS.

USUALLY THEY GO THROUGH THE DOORS.

I CAN GET THROUGH MOST COMMERCIAL DOORS WITH THEM IN JUST A FEW MINUTES.

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WINDOW FILM YOU FOLD IT.

I WOULDN'T FIT THROUGH A LITTLE WINDOW EASY ENOUGH, I JUST GO THROUGH THE DOOR.

>> SURE. THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE.

>> IT'S JUST A COST.

LIKE LARRY SAID, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE LEFT UP TO INSURANCE, BETWEEN THEM AND THEIR INSURANCE COMPANY.

I DON'T KNOW OF ANY BANKS OR JEWELRY STORES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THEY HAVE THIS FILM, THEY MAY HAVE IT ON THERE.

I'VE DONE QUITE A LOT OF WORK ON REPLACING WINDOWS AND STUFF ON THESE BUILDINGS AND I HAVEN'T RUN ACROSS IT.

I AM GLAD TO KNOW ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE.

LIKE I SAID, I THINK THAT WILL COME IN HANDY.

THE FIRE SUPPRESSION, I THINK IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE IF IT CAN SAVE A LIFE OR SAVE OUR FIREMEN FROM GETTING BURNT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I THINK THAT'S A REAL BIG DEAL TO ME.

>> [BACKGROUND].

>> WHAT ABOUT THE COMPROMISE OF DOING THE FILM BUT NOT THE POLYCARBONATE WINDOW? BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE EXPENSE COMES.

>> THERE'S ALWAYS CHANCE FOR COMPROMISE.

IF THE DIRECTION IS THAT YOU WANT US TO GO BACK AND EVALUATE THAT, IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION, IF THAT'S A REPORT THAT YOU GIVE TO THE COUNCIL AND THAT'S THE DIRECTION, THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE'LL DO.

THAT'S THE BEAUTIFUL THING ABOUT THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS IS IT ALLOWS A FULL RANGE OF DISCUSSION.

YOU MAY SAY YOU DON'T WANT ANY SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, BUT WE WANT TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK.

I THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION.

I DO WANT TO KNOW IF THERE ARE SOME MUST HAVE FROM YOU ALL, LIKE YOU FEEL THAT YOU MUST HAVE A CERTAIN THING.

WE DEFINITELY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS.

I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE HEARD FROM YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND YOUR NEIGHBORS REGARDING CONCERNS AND BRING THOSE TO THE FOREFRONT SO WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

ARE THERE ANY CONCERNS WITH THE STANDARDS AS PROPOSED IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT OR DO YOU WANT US TO HAVE A STRONGER CONSIDERATION FOR THE WINDOW TREATMENT IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE AREAS? MEANING, IF SOMEBODY SAYS, I WANT TO PUT BARS UP INSTEAD OF THE TREATMENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, ARE YOU FINE WITH THAT IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONED AREA IN THE CITY?

>> I THINK BARS, IT WOULD BE UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BUILDING OWNER.

IF THEY WANT TO DO IT. THEY COULD STILL DO IT EVEN IF THEY HAD A PARTY CARBON.

I KNOW COUNSEL CAN BE THE AUTHORITATIVE BODY ON THIS, AND I'M FINE WITH WHATEVER THEY'RE GOING TO END UP DECIDING. I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

WHEN THIS GOES A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BEFORE THE FIRST AND FINAL READING, ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE A MAP WHERE IT'S GOING TO SHOW CHURCHES AND SCHOOL? LAST THING I WOULD WANT TO DO IS SEE A SCHOOL PROPERTY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DEVELOP SOMEWHERE WHERE THE OVERLAY MAY PREVENT THEM FROM BUILDING.

>> THE LAW IS PRETTY CLEAR HOW WE TREAT THOSE THINGS.

WE'RE GOING TO JUST FOLLOW THE TBC REGULATIONS.

THERE WILL BE AN ITEM AT UPCOMING COUNCIL MEETING HERE WHERE YOU CAN REQUEST VARIANCES TO SETBACKS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

BUT NONE OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NIGHT GIVES SOMEBODY CARTE BLANCHE TO NOT MEET THOSE STANDARDS.

IF THERE IS ANOTHER USE THAT COMPROMISES SOMEONE'S ABILITY TO PUT IN A PACKET STORE WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE, THEN IT'S COMPROMISE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO CIRCUMVENT THAT THROUGH ANYTHING TONIGHT.

WHAT WE'LL DO IS THERE IS AN AVENUE FOR CONSIDERATION.

WE'LL TAKE IT THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS.

I CAN BRING YOU A MAP OF CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS.

IT'S GOING TO BE DOTTED ALL OVER THE MAP, AND WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE THESE USES MAY GO.

I CAN TELL YOU WHERE THEY CAN GO VIA THE THREE ZONING DISTRICTS UNDER CONSIDERATION, BUT IT WOULD BE A SUCH A MICRO SCALE.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL FOR YOU IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, WITH ALL THE CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS THAT ARE IN THE CITY.

>> I JUST DON'T WANT TO SEE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COME UP AND SAY, WE'RE PLANNING ON BUILDING HERE.

WE'VE KNOWN FOR YEARS WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT THERE.

IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO PREVENT THAT.

THE IDEA IS THAT YOU GUYS CAME UP WITH ABOUT GOING TO STEP DOOR FRONT TO DOOR FRONT.

[00:30:01]

>> YES.

>> THE PROPERTY LINE.

I THINK THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GO.

>> MR. MAYOR, WE WANT TO CHANGE IT.

THAT'S JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY, CORRECT? ON COUNSEL BEHALF, WE WANT TO SUP COME IN AND WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT TO SIMPLE MAJORITY.

>> YES, SIR. UNLESS YOU PUT IN A MECHANISM OTHER THAN THAT.

YES. LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS NOT A REZONE REQUEST.

THIS IS JUST CONSIDERATION OF A TEXT AMENDMENT.

AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN MAKE THE CHANGE WHICH IS HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW.

NOW, IF SOMEONE COMES THROUGH WITH AN SUP REQUEST, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS DENIAL.

THAT'S TREATED LIKE A ZONING REQUEST.

IF YOU WANT SOME CONSIDERATIONS, WHAT WE NORMALLY DO IS IT'S A SUPERMAJORITY IF YOU GET A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.

YOU CAN JUST FOLLOW THE TYPICAL PROCESS BECAUSE BASICALLY IT'S A ZONING REQUEST.

IT MAY BE AN SUP, BUT IT'S STILL GOING TO COME TO YOU AS A ZONING REQUEST.

IT MAY BE THAT YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THE USE, BUT NOT IN FAVOR OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING A WAIVER FROM AND THAT'S FINE.

I THINK THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS IS WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR GREATEST FLEXIBILITY.

>> WHEN YOU'RE SAYING THE MINIMUM BUILDING SIZE IS 7,500, THAT IS SET IN STONE.

IS THAT NOT SET IN STONE?

>> IT'S UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

>> TO GET THE NATIONAL VARIANCE, THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING

>> YES. EXACTLY. ALL OF THOSE STANDARDS ARE UP FOR A VARIANCE OF WAIVER THROUGH AN SUP.

WHAT'S FOR DISCUSSION THAT IS IF YOU'RE EVEN COMFORTABLE WITH 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

>> WELL, IF IT'S THE WAY I'M LOOKING AT IT.

WE CAN SAY 10,000 SQUARE FEET IF WE WANTED TO.

WE'RE GOING TO SET THAT MARKER.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, AS WELL AS I DO THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE PEOPLE COMING IN ASKING FOR VARIANCES AND GIVING US ALL REASONS WHY.

>> SURE. I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOMEBODY WHO'S GOING TO BE UNHAPPY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT DECISION IS TO REACH ULTIMATELY, BECAUSE YOU CANNOT GET IN THE MIND OF EVERY INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS OWNER THAT WANTS TO BRING IN SOMETHING TO THE CITY.

YOU PUT IN CERTAIN STANDARDS.

YOU PUT IN ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY TO GIVE YOU AND AT LEAST GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET IN FRONT OF YOU TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.

YES. SOMEBODY MAY WANT TO PUT IN A 1,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL USE.

IT MAY BE A BOUTIQUE RETAIL USE THAT'S PERFECTLY FIT FOR THAT AREA.

I THINK THAT YOU ALLOW THAT FLEXIBILITY THROUGH THE SEP PROCESS AND AT LEAST YOU CAN COME IN AND YOU'LL GET A FULL DISCUSSION FROM THE PETITIONER, FROM THE SU.

IF YOU THINK IT FITS IN WITH THE CONTEXT OF THE COMMUNITY, YOU CAN GIVE IT A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN RENDER A DECISION IF YOU'RE ON THE COUNCIL.

BY RIGHT, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT ANIMAL BECAUSE YOU PROBABLY WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING YOU CAN HANG YOUR HAT ON WHERE YOU CAN SAY, IF YOU'RE INDUSTRIAL, I KNOW YOU HAVE TO DO THE FOLLOWING THINGS SO YOU DON'T GET A NEGATIVE OUTCOME, SO TO SPEAK.

>> THIS IS ALSO REGARDING THE SIZE BECAUSE I DID DO SOME RESEARCH FROM LOCAL LIQUOR STORES.

THIS IS CONCERNING HOLIDAY LIQUOR TWO BUCKS, WHICH IS ALSO OWNED BY SPEC'S AND THEN LIQUOR DEPOT DOWN IN ALVARADO.

THEIR STORE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS DEFINITELY NOT 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

THEY TYPICALLY AVERAGE AROUND 3,500, THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT THEY AVERAGE AROUND.

THIS GOES IN WITH WHAT DAN WAS MENTIONING ABOUT HOW THERE'S GOING TO PROBABLY END UP BEING A LOT OF VARIANCE REQUESTS CONCERNING THAT.

I THINK WITH THE LANGUAGE SAYING THAT THE MINIMUM OF 7,500 IS INFERRING TO ONLY THE BIG STORES, WHICH THE TWO MAIN BIG LIQUOR STORES THAT I KNOW OF ARE TOTAL WINE AND SPEC'S AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SPEC'S ON THE BURLESON FORT WORTH WINE GOING UP PRETTY SOON.

MOST LIKELY WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING HOPEFULLY MAYBE A TOTAL WINE.

BUT FOR THE SMALLER ONES, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO OPEN UP A LIQUOR DEPOT, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S ONE IN ALVARADO AND I'M PRETTY SURE THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER ONE AROUND THERE AS WELL.

WHAT IF THEY WANT TO COME OVER HERE AS WELL AND THEN THEY SEE THAT LANGUAGE AND THEY'RE LIKE, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO DO THAT.

I'M WONDERING IF WE COULD PROBABLY TALK ABOUT MAYBE LOWERING THAT A LITTLE BIT OR TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT OTHER LOCAL LIQUOR STORES WHAT THEIR SQUARE FOOTAGE TAKE AN AVERAGE OF THAT AND SEE WHAT THOSE ARE AND NOT NECESSARILY THE BIG ONES LIKE SPEC'S AND TOTAL WINE.

[00:35:06]

>> ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF CAN CONSIDER.

LET'S TALK ABOUT JUST A MARKET IN GENERAL.

YOU HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR THESE ESTABLISHMENTS.

IF YOU THINK ABOUT EACH ESTABLISHMENT DRAWING IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CUSTOMERS, ESSENTIALLY THE MARKET IS GOING TO SET ITSELF.

WHAT YOU DON'T WANT IS ANY IMPEDIMENTS OR A CODE THAT MAYBE IT'S FAVORING A CERTAIN TYPE OF RETAILER OVER ANOTHER.

I KNOW HOW THAT CAN BE A CONCERN FOR BUSINESS OWNERS WHERE YOU MAY SAY, WELL, THIS IS CLEARLY WRITTEN TO KEEP THE SMALL GUYS OUT.

WE THINK IT'S WRITTEN IN A WAY TO GIVE ALL THE OPTIONS AND ALL THE CONSIDERATION TO YOU ALL SO THAT IF A SMALL ENTITY COMES IN, YOU CAN SAY, WELL, I NEVER THOUGHT I WOULD SUPPORT SOMETHING THAT'S SMALL BUT IT WORKS IN THIS LOCATION.

TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU CAN CHANGE THE MINIMUM BUILDING SIZE, OF COURSE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE GET DIRECTION FROM WHAT WE CAN DO.

BUT AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A BAROMETER, IF YOU WILL.

WE CAN ADJUST THE TEMPERATURE SETTING UP OR DOWN TO YOUR COMFORT LEVEL.

BUT I WILL JUST AGAIN SAY I DO WANT TO DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND WHAT'S ALLOWED BY AN SUP.

BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET A RUN ON PROPERTIES THAT ARE OWNED, COMMERCIAL, AND GENERAL RETAIL AS OPPOSED TO INDUSTRIAL.

>> COMMISSION COUNSEL I JUST WANT TO REITERATE SOMETHING TO YOU.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THESE ARE YOUR STANDARDS.

IF YOU TELL STAFF THAT YOU WANT TO SEE IT CHANGE FROM 7,500 SQUARE FEET TO 4,000 THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR TONIGHT.

BUT PROCEDURALLY, AT LEAST FOR THE ACTION ITEMS THAT ARE ON HERE, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF YOU GUYS ULTIMATELY CHOOSE THAT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE IN MAKING A RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING, WE WOULD LOOK FOR YOU TO MAKE SPECIFIC MODIFICATIONS IN THOSE MOTIONS SO THE COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS WHAT PNC IS RECOMMENDING.

>> WHEN YOU'RE SAYING 7,500 SQUARE FEET, ARE YOU SAYING THE RETAIL PART OF THAT HAS TO BE 75 SQUARE FEET OR CAN THE ESTABLISHMENT HAVE A 75 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND USE 1,500 SQUARE FEET OF THAT IS THE DISPLAY AREA AND THE REST AS STORAGE.

>> WE'RE TALKING SPECIFICALLY FOR THE BUILDING SIZE.

THAT'S WHERE WE ARE DRAWN THE DISTINCTION.

THE PROPOSAL AS PUT FORTH WAS A MINIMUM FOR THE BUILDING SIZE.

THAT TENDS TO PUSH YOU INTO A POSTURE WHERE IT'S WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A TARGET FOR YOUR LARGER RETAILER.

THE BEAUTIFUL THING WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS AND THE SEP PROCESS IS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, PEOPLE ARE NOT BASHFUL ASKING FOR VARIANCES AND WAIVERS AND THAT'S THE MECHANISM BY WHICH THEY CAN DO THAT.

IF MISS BROOKMAN SAYS, HEY, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT SIZE AND SHE HAS A PROPOSAL, MUCH AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, LET'S HAVE YOU AS COMMISSIONERS GIVE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL AND TAKE IT FROM THERE.

>> I CAN'T THINK RIGHT OFFHAND OF MANY, IF ANY, 75 OR 100 SQUARE FOOT BUILDINGS THAT ARE AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW THAT SOMEBODY WOULD ALMOST HAVE TO COME IN AND BUILD SOMETHING.

>> WE DID ANTICIPATE EVENTUALITY.

IF YOU GET A BIG ENOUGH RETAILER TO COME IN FROM THE GROUND UP, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.

MOST OF YOUR INFIELD WILL NOT BE 7,500 SQUARE FEET.

I DON'T EXPECT TO SEE THAT AT ALL.

I EXPECT THOSE PEOPLE TO UTILIZE THE SUP PROCESS.

>> TONY, BY RIGHT. SOME OF THESE OTHER CITIES THAT YOU LOOKED AT, HOW MANY OF THOSE IN THE INDUSTRIAL DID YOU RUN ACROSS THAT KEPT WITH THE 7,500.

SOME OF THEM ARE, I KNOW 10,000.

>> I'M GOING TO BRING UP LIDON PIERCE, WHO DID A LOT OF THE LAYMAN EFFORT, I SHOULD SAY, ON SOME OF HIS RESEARCH, AND SEE IF WE FOUND ANYTHING IN OUR RESEARCH.

>> GOOD EVENING, LIDON PIERCE, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE CITY.

IN LOOKING AT MULTIPLE CITY CODES IN THE AREA AND IN VARIOUS CITIES, THE MAJORITY OF CITIES ALLOW LIQUOR AND PACKAGE STORES BY RIGHT, IT'S JUST CONSIDERED RETAIL.

THEY DON'T HAVE ANY STANDARDS RELATED TO SIZE OR ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT'S IN THEIR NORMAL ZONING DISTRICT.

FOR GENERAL RETAIL, COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ARE VARIANT.

FORT WORTH DOESN'T ALLOW THEM IN CERTAIN NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, BUT THEY'RE PRIMARILY YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OR YOUR COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TYPE STUFF THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN AN ACTUAL SUBDIVISION.

[00:40:03]

CITIES LIKE WEATHERFORD, IT'S JUST CONSIDERED RETAIL.

THEY MAKE NO DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN A PACKAGE AND A LIQUOR STORE THAN YOU WOULD A GROCERY STORE.

LOOKING THROUGH A LOT OF CODES, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FIND A SPECIFIC SIZE FOR A BUILDING TIED TO A LIQUOR PACKAGE STORE.

WHEN YOU GET INTO BARS AND TAVERNS, YOU START TO SEE THAT IN CODES, BUT GENERALLY IT'S JUST TREATED AS RETAIL.

NOW, THERE'S ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS, SOMEONE WILL PULL ONE UP AND FIND A CITY.

BUT YOU KNOW ALL THE RESEARCH THAT I'VE DONE IN TWO ZONING CODE UPDATES, NOW MOST OF IT'S BY RIGHT AS A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT.

>> THE 7,500 IN INDUSTRIAL, I'M FINE WITH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> IF I MAY, I HAVE A VERY BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF STATE LAW REGULATION FOR LIQUOR STORES.

THERE'S A BUNCH OF VERY STRICT LAWS, I BELIEVE, ABOUT SORT OF WHERE YOU CAN PLACE A LIQUOR STORE.

MY QUESTION COMES IN TO 1,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM AS FAR AS LIKE DISTANCE, NOT SQUARE FOOT BUT 1,000 FOOT DISTANCE.

HAS ANYONE DONE ANY RESEARCH TO SEE WHERE IT WOULD BE LEGAL WITHIN BURLESON GIVEN STATE LAWS WHERE THERE COULD POSSIBLY BE A LIQUOR STORE? THEN THE QUESTION BECOMES, IF THERE'S ONE SPOT IN BURLESON, THEN DOES THAT MEAN THE FIRST PERSON THAT GETS THERE THAT'S THE ONLY LIQUOR STORE ALLOWED WITHIN 1,000 SQUARE FOOT?

>> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS, AND THE LAW ESTABLISHES MINIMUM STANDARDS WITH REGARD TO YOUR DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS, A CITY CAN GO BEYOND THAT.

THEY CAN'T TYPICALLY GO BELOW THAT.

WHO SETS THE MARKET? WHO SETS THE PACE, SO TO SPEAK, WITH THE LOCATION? IT IS TYPICALLY THE FIRST ONE THERE.

FIRST COME, YOU NOW GET THE SITE, WE START DRAWING CIRCLES, RADIUSES, THE NEXT PERSON COMES IN, YOU'RE TOO CLOSE BASED ON A SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARD.

BUT REMEMBER, IF 1,000 FOOT DISTANCE IS A SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARD, WHAT CAN THEY ASK FOR? THAT'S THE POINT I'M TRYING TO DRIVE HOME.

NONE OF THIS GIVES SOMEBODY THEY'RE NOT CHAINED IN.

HOWEVER, YOU AS A COMMISSIONER CAN SAY, WELL, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

A COUNCIL MEMBER CAN SAY I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

NONE OF THESE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS ARE NO TOUCH UNLESS YOU DEEM IT TO BE.

IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT 1,000 FOOT BUFFER, SOMETHING THAT IS NON-NEGOTIABLE, THAT WILL BE BORNE OUT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. CARLOS?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, ARE THOSE HIGHER THAN WHAT'S ALREADY REQUIRED BY CURRENT BUILDING CODE, JUST BECAUSE IT'S A LIQUOR STORE, OR IS THAT CONSISTENT FOR ANY TYPE OF RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL?

>> MAYOR PRO TEM, THOSE ARE HIGHER.

THOSE ARE ADDITIONAL.

THERE'S NO CONSISTENCY WITH REGARD TO US ROLLING THOSE OVER.

IF YOU WANTED TO SAY, FOR INSTANCE, STANDARDIZE THE APPROACH, WE WOULD BASICALLY GO IN AND CHANGE THE LANDSCAPING STANDARDS TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY REQUIRED IN THE CITY CODE.

WHETHER THAT BE THE BUFFER OR THE NUMBER OF TREES.

>> WHAT IS YOUR RATIONALE FOR THE INCREASED LANDSCAPING STANDARD?

>> BEAUTIFICATION ONLY. I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU.

WE TOOK IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT IN AND TRY TO SEE IF WE COULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT IN AN ATTRACTIVE TREATMENT FROM THE STREET.

NOW, GRANTED, WHEN WE SEE THIS, IF SOMEONE'S DOING A COMPLETELY BRAND NEW SITE.

IN YOUR INFIELD SITES, THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO RIP UP THE PAVEMENT AND THIS IS GOING TO PROBABLY BE A STANDARD.

THEY'RE GOING TO REQUEST A WAIVER OR A VARIANCE FROM.

THE RATIONALE WAS JUST STRICTLY APPEARANCE SAKE.

>> I'M TRYING TO GET TO THE KERNEL OF WHAT WE'RE AFTER HERE AND IF THIS ELECTION TAKES PLACE AND THIS PASSES, THEN THE CITIZENS HAVE PRETTY MUCH SPOKEN THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH HAVING LIQUOR STORES WITHIN THESE AREAS.

BUT WHAT WE SET UP IN OUR ZONING TODAY MAY HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE ELECTION.

IF WE MAKE IT APPEAR TOO EASY TO POPULATE THE ENTIRE CITY WITH LIQUOR STORES, THEN PERHAPS SOME OF THE CITIZENS ARE GOING TO BE MORE RELUCTANT TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT.

I WOULD AGREE WITH THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS AT 1,000 FEET, OR PERHAPS EVEN GREATER.

BUT THE EFFORT THERE IS JUST TO MAKE SURE

[00:45:01]

THAT THE CITY DOESN'T WIND UP BECOMING OVERPOPULATED WITH SMALL LIQUOR STORES.

AT 7,500 FEET IT'S NOT GOING TO BECOME OVERPOPULATED.

IT MAY NOT EVEN GET ONE AT ALL, WHICH IS LEADING TO MY NEXT CONSIDERATION, THAT IF THE CITIZENS HAVE SPOKEN TO US BY VOTING AND TOLD US THAT THEY WILL ACCEPT A LIQUOR STORE, THEN IN OUR MINDS WE NEED TO THINK, WELL, WHAT ARE THE OPTICS OF THAT GOING TO BE? WHAT IS IT GOING TO LOOK LIKE TO US? IS THIS GOING TO BE A BUSINESS THAT'S ATTRACTIVE TO US? I VISIT THE LIQUOR DEPOT IN ALVARADO.

I'M GIVEN TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S QUITE A BIT SMALLER THAN THE 7,500 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE.

AND FROM MY MIND, THE OPTICS OF THAT STORE WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE WITHIN THE CITY OF BURLESON.

SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S THAT BIGGER THING THAT WE SHOULD PERHAPS LOWER THE 7,500 FOOT REQUIREMENT SOMEWHAT THEN MY ONLY THOUGHT THERE IS IF THE REQUIREMENT IS 7,500 FOOT AND THIS OR SOME FUTURE P AND Z COMMISSION AND COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING A WAIVER, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE EASIER TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO DROP FROM, SAY, 5,000 SQUARE FEET DOWN TO 3,500, THEN TO GO FROM 7,500 FEET ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 3,500.

BUT THEN AGAIN, YOU'RE LOOKING AT HOW THAT LOOKS TO THE CITIZEN.

I'M COMFORTABLE PROBABLY ANYWHERE BETWEEN 5,000 AND 7,500 SQUARE FOOT AS BEING THE SWEET SPOT RIGHT NOW, AS FAR AS SETTING SOMETHING OUT THERE THAT WILL ATTACH ITSELF THEORETICALLY TO THE ELECTION OUTCOME AND INFORM PEOPLE AS TO HOW WE SEE THIS THING PROGRESSING IF THEY VOTE FOR IT.

I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH MY CONCERN.

I THINK IF WE GO WITH A NUMBER SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 5,000 OR 7,500 AND KEEP 1,000 FOOT DISTANCE, I DON'T REALLY SEE WHY WE'RE ADDING THE FIRE SUPPRESSION TO THIS ANYWAY.

I DON'T THINK IT'S ANYTHING WE CAN REGULATE HIGHER OR LOWER BY THIS ACTION.

BUT THAT'S FINE. IF IT'S IN THERE, FINE.

IT MAY GET TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE.

AS THE FIRE CODE DEVELOPS THROUGH TIME, THERE MAY BE THE NEED FOR LONGER WALLS, SPACE PARTITIONING WALLS BETWEEN THIS BUILDING AND ADJACENT USES MORE THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED RIGHT NOW.

BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE REALLY NEEDING TO DO THAT.

ANYWAY, I THINK THAT'S ABOUT ALL MY NOTES.

I THINK I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING.

I'M FLEXIBLE ON SIZE.

IF A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THESE TWO BODIES WANT TO GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT ON THAT, I'M GOING TO BE FINE WITH IT.

I DON'T THINK I WANT TO GO UP, SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT WE DON'T WANT TO ERECT BARRIERS TO PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME IN AND DEVELOP THIS KIND OF USE SOMEWHERE IN THE CITY, ESPECIALLY IF THE CITIZENS HAVE ALREADY SAID IT'S OKAY, WE WANT THIS, I DON'T WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE WE'RE JUST A WALL UP THAT THEY CAN'T GET AROUND.

THAT'S THE REASON I WOULD ADVOCATE GOING SMALLER ON THE SIZE REQUIREMENT.

>> I LIKE THE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT RULE FOR THE INTERIOR OF THE CITY, 75 FINE FOR INDUSTRIAL LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.

WE JUST WANT TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CITIZENS AND THE APPEARANCE FACTOR AND SO I LIKE WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THAT.

>> WELL, THAT WAS ANOTHER COMMENT.

AS THINGS STAND RIGHT NOW AS I SEE IT, AS FAR AS THE AVAILABILITY OF LIQUOR TO PURCHASE OVER THE COUNTER, THE CITIZENS ARE ALREADY COVERED.

WE ALREADY HAVE ONE STORE LITERALLY WITHIN 500 FEET OF OUR CITY LIMITS.

WE HAVE A LARGER, MORE WELL SUPPLIED STORE COMING RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.

CITIZENS DON'T CARE. THEY'RE GOING TO GET TO BUY THEIR LIQUOR CLOSE TO HOME NO MATTER HOW THIS COMES OUT.

THE ONES MOST AFFECTED ARE OUR LOCAL BARS AND ESTABLISHMENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BUY THEIR LIQUOR FROM WITHIN THEIR COUNTY.

SO THEY ARE THE ONES THAT ARE MOST IMPACTED AND THE ONES FOR WHOM I FEEL THE MOST EMPATHY FOR, TO TRY TO GET TO SOMETHING IN HERE THAT THEY CAN USE.

THERE'S A MATTER OF CAPTURING THE SALES TAX OUTCOME OF THIS.

>> SURE. BUT I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE ECONOMIC IMPACT IS TO OUR LOCALLY OWNED SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE HERE HAVING TO PAY EXORBITANT PRICES BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMPETITION AND HAVING TO GO TO THE TROUBLE OF TRANSPORTING UP AND DOWN THE HIGHWAY.

I'D LIKE TO HELP THEM BY GETTING THIS FEASIBLE AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE CAN GET THIS IN TOWN FOR THEIR BENEFIT.

CITIZENS HAVE GOT WHAT THEY NEED.

>> DO WE KNOW WHAT THE SIZE OF THE FORT WORTH STORES ARE? WHAT THEIR CODE SAYS?

>> I DID NOT EVALUATE THAT.

LET ME SEE IF SOMEONE ON STAFF LOOKED AT ANY OF THE PARTICULAR STORES.

SO THEIR CODE DOESN'T HAVE A SIZE.

THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CODE ABOUT A SIZE.

IT'S JUST ALLOWED BY WRITING RETAIL.

SO THERE'S NO MINIMUM SIZE OTHER THAN WHAT THE BUILDING CODE REQUIRES FOR HABITABLE SPACES.

AS FAR AS SOME OF THE OTHER STORES,

[00:50:02]

WHEN WE START LOOKING AT THEM, SOME OF THEM ARE 3,000, 4,000 ALL THE WAY UP TO, I DON'T WANT TO CALL MEGA STORES, BUT YOUR LARGER STORES CAN SOMETIMES BE 6-8, 10,000 SQUARE FOOT, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A CODE RESTRICTION ON SIZE.

IT'S JUST TREATED AS RETAIL. [OVERLAPPING]

>> ONE OVER MCALLISTER AND I HAVE NOT BEEN IN THERE, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT SIZE IT IS AND ANYBODY ELSE HAS EITHER.

>> IN FORT WORTH AND ARLINGTON AND EVEN CEDAR HILL, YOU HAVE A LOT OF THEM THAT ARE ABOUT THE SIZE OF MAYBE A ROSS OR A COLES.

SOMETIMES THEY'RE ANCHOR STORES OR THEY'RE IN THOSE SAME SHOPPING STRIPS.

I HAVEN'T MEASURED THOSE SPECIFICALLY, BUT IF YOU CAN IMAGINE, ROSS OR COLES IS ABOUT THAT SIZE.

FOR YOUR LARGER ONES, YOU GO TO ALVARADO AND SOME OTHER SIZES ARE JUST YOUR TRADITIONAL MORE 2, 3,000 SQUARE FOOT.

>> I'D LIKE TO SEE THE TAX MONEY STAY IN OUR COUNTY NATURALLY AND IF FORT WORTH DOES NOT HAVE ANY GUIDELINES FOR SIZE.

THEN THEY COULD SURROUND US IF THEY WANTED TO WITH SMALLER LIQUOR STORES, AND WE MIGHT NOT EVER GET ONE.

BUT THAT'S JUST ME.

>> I THINK A NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF STAFF HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS EXERCISE IN THE MARKET IS A PARTICULAR THING.

IT TENDS TO SELF REGULATE AND SELF GOVERN AND YOU MIGHT HAVE AN INITIAL RUN ON STORES, BUT AS COMPETITION SETS IN AND THE MARKET SETS IN, SOME OF THESE USES NATURALLY GO AWAY BECAUSE THEY CAN'T COMPETE, I THINK, AND I'M SURE YOU ALL ARE ALL AWARE OF THAT.

>> MR. MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST IT MIGHT BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF BOTH BODIES IF WE HAD A BRIEF EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR ME TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE LEGAL ISSUES, IT WOULD CONSTITUTE ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY TO THE RESPECTIVE BOARDS, AND I WOULD RATHER NOT DO THAT IN A PUBLIC MEETING.

WE SAID WE CAN ADJOURN INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION HERE OF BOTH BODIES.

THEY CAN ADJOURN INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AND WE CAN CLEAR THE CHAMBER OF EVERYONE OTHER THAN THE BOARD MEMBERS AND THE REQUISITE STAFF MEMBERS.

I WILL GO THROUGH THE LEGAL ISSUES THAT MIGHT HELP YOU UNDERSTAND BETTER WHY IT IS STRUCTURED IN THE FORM THAT WE'VE CURRENTLY CHOSEN.

[4. RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> IS THERE A MOTION FOR [OVERLAPPING]

>> HOLD ON. SORRY, MR. MAYOR.

IF YOU'LL JUST ALLOW ME TO READ INTO THE RECORD WHAT WE NEEDED TO READ THE STANDARD LANGUAGE HERE.

THIS WOULD BE SECTION 4, RECESSING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

THERE IS A NEED FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

PURSUANT TO SECTION 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION HERE IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS IN CITY HALL, TO CONDUCT A CLOSED MEETING.

WE WILL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.071.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR, IF YOU WILL CALL FOR A MOTION A SECOND AND HAVE A VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> SECOND THAT.

>> WE'LL NEED A COMMISSIONER TO SECOND THAT MOTION, PLEASE.

>> I HAVE A MOTION BY DAVID AND A SECOND BY CLINT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, OPPOSE.

THE MOTION PASSES.

>> COUNCIL CHAIRMAN TAYLOR, IF YOU WILL STATE THE TIME THAT YOU'RE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PLEASED.

>> WE'RE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 05:54.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL [OVERLAPPING]

>> CONSIDER A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> I'LL SECOND, PHIL.

>> A MOTION BY PHIL, AND A SECOND BY ADAM.

PLEASE VOTE, PASSES UNANIMOUS.

WE'RE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 05:55. WE'RE GOING TO NEED CHAIR.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE, MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE FOR US TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT THIS TIME.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR, IF YOU COULD ASK FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION.

>> MOTION TO RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION.

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

>> THANK YOU. MAYOR FLETCHER, IF YOU COULD DO THIS OPEN [FOREIGN]

>> OPEN MEETING AT 06:25.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. MAYOR FLETCHER.

>> I MOVED.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

WE WILL RESUME WHERE WE LEFT OFF WITH ITEM 3A.

IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION?

[00:55:03]

>> DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY CHANGES YOU'D LIKE TO SEE ON THIS?

>> I'M FINE WITH MOVING DOWN TO 5,000 BECAUSE IT'S EASIER TO GET A VARIANCE THAT WAY.

>> WOULD YOU ALL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION? SO TAKE THE BALLS IN YOUR COURT.

>> ARE WE DONE WITH 3A, BECAUSE WE NEED TO MOVE ON TO 3B? CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT THIS TIME,

[3.B. Hold a joint public hearing with the Burleson Planning and Zoning Commission for the purpose of receiving public comment on proposed textual amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance codified in Appendix B of the City of Burleson Code of Ordinances relating to liquor sales. (Staff Contact: Tony D. McIlwain, Development Services Director)]

WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 3B.

3B IS TO HOLD A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING PUBLIC COMMENT ON PROPOSED TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE CODIFIED IN APPENDIX B OF THE CITY OF BURLESON CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO LIQUOR SALES.

I DO HAVE SOME SPEAKER CARDS.

THE FIRST SPEAKER CARD I HAVE WAS RECEIVED VIA ONLINE.

IT WAS MIKE COBB OF 1325 SHELLEY DRIVE.

>> [BACKGROUND].

>> I'M SORRY. YOU'RE RIGHT, MAYOR.

YOU CAUGHT ME. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR, IF YOU COULD OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> WE'RE GOING TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE BURLESON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT 6:27.

>> I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:27 ALSO.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT IT?

>> YES, SIR.

>> NOW AT 6:28.

I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:28 FOR THE CITY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. OUR FIRST SPEAKER, MIKE COBB, 1325 SHELLEY DRIVE.

DRUNK DRIVING, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, SUBSTANCE ABUSE, GENERAL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE PROVEN TO INCREASE IN DIRECT PROPORTION TO TWO FACTORS.

FIRST, THE PROXIMITY OF ALCOHOL SALES, AND SECOND, THE VOLUME OF ALCOHOL SALES.

THE CLOSER LIQUOR SALES GET TO OUR HOMES, BUSINESSES, AND PUBLIC SPACES, THE GREATER THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES TO OUR COMMUNITY.

PLEASE KEEP THESE FACTORS IN MIND WHEN DISCUSSING THE CRITERIA ON THIS ISSUE.

THE SECOND SPEAKER CARD I HAVE IS DAVID MILLER.

>> GREETINGS LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

I STAND OPPOSED TO THE PACKAGE LIQUOR SALES. A FEW THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL, THE PETITION THAT YOU ALL SAID Y'ALL HAVE RECEIVED, ADVOCATING THE SALES, WELL, I SPOKE TO THE LADY THAT WAS TAKING THE SIGNATURES OUTSIDE THE POST OFFICE THREE TIMES AND SHE WAS TELLING PEOPLE THEY WERE SIGNING TO OPPOSE ALCOHOL SALES AND THEY WERE SIGNING UP.

I DIDN'T CONFRONT HER BECAUSE IT WASN'T APPROPRIATE TIME.

NUMBER 2, LIKE THE PERSON BEFORE THAT SAID THESE THINGS INCREASE.

I SPENT YEARS AS A LETTER CARRIER TALKING TO PROSTITUTES IN LIQUOR STORES, PORN STORES, BURLESON IS GOING TO HEAD STRAIGHT DOWN THAT PATH WHETHER YOU WANT TO OR NOT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL ARE GOING TO BE BRINGING IN IF YOU ALL TO APPROVE PACKAGE LIQUOR STORES HERE.

IT'LL JUST BE EVENTUAL, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE.

THE THIRD THING IS I STAND AS A PASTOR.

I KNOW THERE'S AT LEAST ONE PERSON HERE THAT PUTS THE NAME CHRISTIAN BY THEIR NAME.

BUT IF YOU ADVOCATE AND YOU SUPPORT THESE SALES, THEN YOU ARE COMMITTING A SIN ACCORDING TO THE BOOK OF ROMANS.

YOU'RE ENDORSING IT TACITLY, OPENLY, AND THAT'S A SIN ON YOU.

YOU NEED TO RESPOND AND REPORT TO THAT.

BEFORE ALL MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS, I WANT Y'ALL TO STAND AND SAY, IS THIS THE CHRISTIAN THING TO DO? IF IT'S NOT, I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY TO YOU IF YOU'RE NOT A CHRISTIAN.

BUT IF YOU ARE, YOU SHOULD BE DISCIPLINED AND THINKING ABOUT IT.

THE THIRD PART, I LISTEN TO Y'ALL.

Y'ALL SOUND LIKE GREAT ADMINISTRATORS.

Y'ALL WERE ASKING ALL THE GREAT QUESTIONS, SIZE, IS IT GOING TO BE SPRINKLERS AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF.

THOSE WERE GOOD THINGS, BUT I WANT TO REMIND Y'ALL OF OTHER THING THAT LEADS TO DESTRUCTION, AND THE LAST THING TO SAY, AND I HOPE IT'S NOT TOO ROUGH, BUT YOU KNOW WHO WAS ALSO A GREAT ADMINISTRATOR IN THE LAST CENTURY? THAT WAS ADOLF EICHMANN. HE PUT IT TOGETHER.

DON'T BE AN ADMINISTRATOR WHO SAY THIS IS GOOD, LET'S BRING IN MONEY.

IT'S GOING TO DO GREAT FOR THE TOWN AND DESTROY THE INTEGRITY OF THIS CITY.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING?

[01:00:02]

I SEE NO OTHER. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR, IF YOU COULD CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:31.

>> I'LL CLOSE THE CITY'S PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:31 ALSO.

>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME,

[3.C. After receiving a final report and recommendation from the Burleson Planning and Zoning Commission, consider approval of an ordinance making textual amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance codified in Appendix B of the City of Burleson Code of Ordinances relating to liquor sales. (First Reading) (Staff Contact: Tony D. McIlwain, Development Services Director)]

I WILL CALL BEFORE FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ITEMS 3(C); CONSIDER MAKING A FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE BURLESON CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AN ORDINANCE MAKING TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE CODIFIED IN APPENDIX B OF THE CITY OF BURLESON CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO LIQUOR SALES.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO BE SURE THAT WE MAKE A STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD FOR THE PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE.

SOMETIMES THIS GETS CONFUSING.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS BEING ASKED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

THIS DOES NOT COMMENCE THE AUTHORIZATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES IN THE CITY.

THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE ASKED TO VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT.

THAT DOES NOT COMMENCE THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN THE CITY.

THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE, IN ITS INFINITE WISDOM, HAS ADOPTED AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CODE AND AN ELECTION CODE, AND SAYS IF A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SIGNATURES ARE SUBMITTED ON A PETITION REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOL, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MUST CONVENE AND HOLD THE ELECTION.

IF A MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS WHO GO TO THE POLLS IN THE CITY OF BURLESON VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES IN CONFORMANCE WITH THIS REQUEST WILL BE AUTHORIZED.

IF THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE SOME REGULATION IN PLACE, THOSE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES CAN OCCUR ANYWHERE IN THE CITY WITHOUT RESTRICTION.

THE REASON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL ARE BEING ASKED TO LOOK AT THIS NOW IS IF THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS DECIDE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS, WHICH YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER, THERE WILL AT LEAST BE SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE TO DETERMINE WHEN AND WHERE AND HOW IT CAN OCCUR TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT WE ARE PERMITTED TO DO SO BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

THEY ARE THE ENTITY THAT CREATED THIS.