Lewisville planning commission tables proposed UDC changes that would require special-use permits for new manufacturing and distribution near lower‑intensity用途

The Lewisville Planning & Zoning Commission on Jan. 7 voted unanimously to table proposed amendments to the city’s Unified Development Code (UDC) that would require a special‑use permit for new or redeveloped light, medium and heavy manufacturing or warehouse/distribution facilities located within 500 feet of lower‑intensity uses such as retail, office or residences.

City planning staff told the commission the changes stem from City Council direction in late 2024 and that council approved related supplemental standards on Dec. 9, 2024. The draft before the commission would expand those standards to trigger an SUP when any of the four uses are proposed within 500 feet of lesser‑intensity uses, allowing the city to evaluate potential site‑specific impacts and require mitigation where appropriate, staff said. “The SUP is a very good tool that the city can use to evaluate each proposal on a case by case basis,” said Richard (staff member), who presented the item.

Why it matters: property owners, developers and tenants told commissioners the draft language, as written, could depress property values, limit refinancing and sales, and make it harder for established businesses to expand. Multiple speakers said notice language required by state law alarmed recipients and produced a high volume of public inquiries; developers and owners asked for clearer grandfathering rules and tighter definitions so routine tenant turnovers or re‑tenants would not trigger an SUP.

During the public hearing, attorneys and developers described concrete consequences they said would follow if the ordinance is adopted without additional clarifications. Tommy Mann, land‑use attorney for Transwestern Development Company, warned that several projects relied on prior approvals and financial commitments made without the expectation of additional discretionary city approvals. “If this is passed, that will become inaccurate,” Mann told the commission, describing contracts with lenders and investors that assumed no further city council approvals would be required.

Owners and operators of existing industrial buildings described projects under construction or recently completed that could be affected. Greg Smith, general manager of Owens Machine & Tool, said his company is within 500 feet of residences and would struggle to meet a 50‑foot landscape buffer or reorient loading docks to meet the proposed standards. “We would have a hard time meeting requirements if we were to expand our business,” Smith said, adding that the company might expand elsewhere if constraints make Lewisville expansion infeasible.

Multiple speakers, including Murray Richardson and Robert Allen of First Industrial Realty Trust, asked the commission to delay any recommendation so staff could produce revised language that better protects existing uses and clarifies when an SUP would be required. Staff acknowledged the need for further edits and told commissioners new draft language would be in their meeting packet two weeks later.

Commissioners voiced similar concerns about ambiguity and the potential for unintended impacts. Commissioner Francesca said she was “not comfortable making the decision on this tonight” and requested clearer grandfathering language and specifics on how certificates of occupancy would be handled. Commissioner Ainsley echoed the need for research before forwarding a recommendation to council.

On a motion recorded by the chair, the commission voted to table the item for further review and to receive revised ordinance language in advance of the Jan. 21 meeting. The motion passed 6‑0.

What remains: staff said the matter is scheduled for a second public hearing before City Council on Jan. 27. Staff also said it will work with the city attorney to refine language addressing concerns raised by property owners and developers, including clarifying whether changes of tenant that require a new certificate of occupancy should trigger an SUP and whether administrative alternatives to full SUP hearings would be feasible.

Commissioners encouraged continued public engagement and asked staff to include clarifying language and legal analyses in the next packet so commissioners can make an informed recommendation to council.