Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

This is the pre-meeting briefing for the City of Keller Planning and Zoning Commission on August 11th, 2026. And it is 6.31. For administrative comments, Ms. Hensley, do you have anything for us?

Well, I think Mr. Bresinger would like to know what happened with the amendment. I do know. I watched it.

Moving on to the agenda items for this evening. D1 is to consider the minutes for the July 28th P&Z meeting. Are there any additions or corrections to that? Okay, seeing none, let's move on to item E1, new business. consider a request for an SUP for an approximately 1,883 square foot accessory structure at 715 Barber Lane. And that's Mr. Edelman's.

Okay, thank you. Any questions? All right. Item E2, by the way, the previous one's a public hearing, and this is going to be a public hearing. Consider a request for a major subdivision final plat with variances at 304, 308, 312, 316, 320 Cal-A Drive. and 1516 Willis Lane. And that's Ms. Zimmerman?

Okay, a thought just occurred to me is we're adding some room to the south end of the lots that go along Calais Street. Has that property already been sold to those homeowners, to that development? Or is this... That's all built. I understand they're built, but we're going to add this unimproved land to the back of their lot. Have they already purchased that property? Because what my question I'm thinking is, are we creating platting

So they're not going to sell it to them. You're just going to say, here it is.

But I think he's asking, did they sell it to...

It's to redraw those property lines. I'm sorry? They're replatting so they get past that legal. Correct.

So the square footage of the lot stays about the same. They make up what they're asking for with the debt.

I think when we see the presentation we have a schematic up there we can explore it any further if we need to.

This is interesting though because this neighborhood has been there for a long time and the house that's asking for the variance has been on that lot for a long time. What if we say no? I don't know why we would, but it's a great question. What happens?

I don't know why we would deny it, but it just looked interesting. And I was, if the people along Calais Drive are actually buying the land to make their lots bigger, okay, they made that choice, I get it. But part of me said, If I was there, I can't build anything on it anyway. Why do I want to pay more in property tax? It's going to look the same. But if they decided to buy it, they made that decision.

It's just unusual. Okay. Item E3 is to consider an SUP for an indoor entertainment facility at 721 Keller, Unit 100. That's Mr. Edelman again?

Okay. Any questions? Item E4 is to consider a request for a special exception to the City of Keller UNC Article 9 development standards.

I didn't notice, but are any of these signs internally lit?

It's just the one sign looks out of proportion to the chalk and steel. The billiards and darts just look so much larger.

So if these were two individual buildings, this is as big as the sign could be if this was subdivided and they were separate.

Right, that's the sign, because it just looks so out of place. I mean, size-wise. Yeah. Yeah. looks bigger than if you go to that.

So you're taking the three and combining them.

I don't think they need a variance for the sign materials. When I read those words, they meet it. It's aluminum. Because if they didn't meet it, every sign in the city that's painted would need to come before us. Because paint is not on that list. Neither is anything else that can make a letter or a number. So I think we're... They had to come anyway for the SUP, so they would have been here. But I'm... I don't think they need a variance for that material when I read our crappy code.

I'm not going to argue with you on your priority. You're good at that. And this is not the biggest issue in the city, but it is something I think we should fix. But I don't think we should interpret it in a way that makes people need a variance if the words don't say they do. And the words doesn't say they need a variance.

And the variance is because it says the word that they want to come in with the word vinyl?

But they can't have paint either. Or they can't have wooden sticks that make out letters. There's nothing in that code that lets you put any message on any sign. Stucco. I don't know how you make a stucco sign. But you can have a stucco sign, but you can't put any words on it. Because there's nothing in that list that makes a word or a number. I'm just reading a thing.

I'm trying to pull up that email that you sent and Did you send it to me through the city? No, I sent it to your home one. Okay. That's why I can't see it. But do you happen to have a copy of it in your computer there where you can, we have a couple minutes we can spend on this, where the verbiage for the sign ordinance is the materials, but does it say it has to be made of those five materials? It says, such as these five materials. Is that correct?

So are they really just talking about the construction of the sign itself?

The words only list substrates. Yeah. They don't list anything that can make a word.

Yeah, that gets applied to those materials.

And do we take, when someone wants to put like a lit sign on top of that substrate, do we make them come in for a variance? Yes. Remember the emergency room? Well, they wanted two signs and they wanted, it was the size and the lighting. Well, I thought it was because they wanted two signs and they already had signs on the building.

That wasn't a variance request, but I couldn't remember. I know we talked about it.

If they didn't need the SUP for having two signs, would we make them come in for a variance? Because they've got the aluminum substrate, and everything is going to be attached. So if they had wanted it lit, I guess, you know... What would they have required a variance if they just came in for one sign with an aluminum backing?

It was actually proposed by the city for use in the sports park when they originally talked about some of the signs there.

So if they had not needed to come before us and it had vinyl plus the aluminum, you would have probably made a staff decision or talked to the manager. And if they said, I don't know, take it to the commission, you'd have brought it. That is correct. And I would think that a lot of people don't use vinyl just because it probably not. In Texas heat, maybe more adorable. That's what I'm worried about.

Let me ask this question. and maybe somebody here knows, these wraps that go on these vehicles, where they, you know, they put a rapid, and they'll have their name, and maybe they have artistic license there. Is that not vinyl? Isn't that a vinyl wrap?

So then maybe if we're going to ever look at this sign ordinance, we need to think about potentially the grades of the vinyl for this. We'll leave it out and just say it's quality materials, right?

My recommendation is we delete it. And we do things like we do with the fence ordinance. You can't have a dilapidated fence. I don't care what the sign's made of. I only care what it looks like. You just don't want it.

No, but the part of the fence ordinance is, I believe, this is going by my faulty memory, that if a fence gets dilapidated, it's a code violation.

Yeah, but what she's saying, though, is we can't allow vinyl fences everywhere.

But my point is, I don't care about vinyl. I don't care about aluminum. I don't care about titanium. I care about what it looks like. If it looks dilapidated, it's a code violation, and we should go get them to fix it. And think about it some more. Who has a sign? Who's forced to have a sign? Absolutely nobody. People have signs because they want them, because they want to be seen, because they want to promote their business. Who wants a crappy sign? We're solving a problem that doesn't exist.

Yeah, I'm kind of, you know, I think that if we deal with the substrate and you tell them it's quality and that the backing, you know, what we put on the front should be left to your discretion and the applicants as to is it durable, is it quality, does it look good, does it represent the business in Keller?

We're not going to solve it tonight, and I didn't expect to, and I don't think we need to. But we can have some fun next year when Sarah pulls this one up on the list.

Okay, well, I appreciate that. Let's move on to item E5. We're getting pressed for time. Consider a request to approve amendments to the City of Keller UDC relating to automobile electric charging stations. Mr. Edelman?

And the cutoff switch. Does that one require like a permit? The electrical code requires a cut-off switch. Right. No, remember it has to be with an X amount of feet. When we talked about the one at Town Square and then they made retrofitted, had to go back and do that at the ones at the apartment complex. So it's not in code. It has to be there at the site so that someone can see what it is. It just has to be with an X amount of feet. But we required it in those two.

That's where it should be, because it's a health and safety thing. Oh, I agree.

Okay, I'm going to cut this. meeting of the Color Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for, let me get this correct, August 11th, 2026. And with this, the time is 7.03. If you'll stand, we'll do the pledges to the flags.

under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Honor the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. All right, thank you, everybody. And I'd like to introduce our commission this evening, starting at my far right, please.

Ross Brensinger. And I'm John Baker, your chairman for this evening. On the agenda, the next item is persons to be heard. Now, before we start this, let me go ahead and read this. This is a time for the public to address the commission on any subject. However, the Texas Open Meetings Act prohibits the commission from discussing issues which the public has not been given three days' notice. Issues raised may be referred to the city staff for research and possible future action. Each speaker will be allowed three minutes to speak. Now we have three, now we have four public hearings this evening.

We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? OK, let's vote. Okay, those minutes have been approved. Moving on to new business, item E1 is a public hearing. Consider a request for a special specific use permit for an approximately 1,883 square foot accessory structure on approximately 11.24 acres. Located on the north side of Barbara Lane approximately thirteen hundred and fifty feet from the intersection of Barbara and roof snow Legally described as lot five a home site of the black edition zone single-family 36,000 square foot and the address 715 Barbara Lane sup dash 2607 day 0022

All right. Thank you very much. Is the applicant here and wish to say anything? All right. Thank you. He... is available, but doesn't want to say anything at this time. This is a public hearing. This is a time for anybody in the public that wishes to come forward and speak on this issue. Now is your time, please. Okay, seeing no movement. Commissioner Farner?

I move that we close the public hearing.

Thank you. Commissioner Bresinger? Second. We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Any further discussion? All right, let's vote. That public hearing is closed. The vote was 5-0. All right. At this time, we'll call on any interest in speakers. Okay, Commissioner Farner.

I think that the plan is appropriate to the use and for the location and the size of the yard. I motion that we approve the request as submitted.

Thank you. Commissioner Brunsinger? Second? Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve item E1. Any further discussion? Okay, let's vote. That motion is approved five to zero. Thank you very much, sir. You'll be before the city council on September 1st. We are in a recommending body, but they will make the final decision. But we wish you well. Thank you. All right, let's move on to item E2. Again, a public hearing. Consider requests. for a major subdivision final plat with one variance for lots 3R through 7R block A and lot 1 block B of the CalA estate subdivision being 6.63 acres located

All right, thank you very much. Is the applicant here and wish to say anything? Sir, if you would, your name and address. Thank you.

All right. Thank you very much. If you'll just stay nearby. There may be a few questions. And at this time, it is a public hearing. Is there anybody here that wishes to speak on this issue? Commissioner Farner.

I motion that we close the public hearing.

Okay. Do you wish to say anything? Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Commissioner Farner?

I motion that we close the public hearing.

Okay. We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Any further discussion? And let's take a vote. Okay. The public hearing is closed, five to zero. With that, I am now open for questions from the commission or comments. All right. Commissioner Brenzinger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to move to approve item E2 as presented. I think it's a reasonable request. All the neighbors are in agreement. I mean, they're part of it.

So I see it looks like a good change. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Farner.

OK. We have a motion and a second to approve item E. Am I correct? E2, yes. Any further discussion? With that, let's take a vote. Okay, that item is approved, 5-0. And you too, sir, will be before the City Council September 1st. And again, we're a recommending body, but occasionally they... take our recommendation. But anyway, we wish you luck with your project and thank you for being here. Okay, moving on to item E3. This also is a public hearing. Consider requests for a specific use permit for Eagle Tavern to operate an indoor entertainment facility in an existing lease space On approximatel

All right, thank you. Item E3 is a public hearing. Excuse me, before we get to that, the applicant, if you're here, do you wish to say anything? I see no movement. So with that, Commissioner Farner?

I move that we close the public hearing. We are public, though. We wanted to...

Your what? We're not the outskirts. Ah, okay. Got you very much. Okay. Thank you very much for that. We'll hold your motion in a moment here, Commissioner. And if you would please come forward and identify name and address, please.

Okay, so your point is you're within 400 feet and you own a similar business, is that it?

All right. With that, have we closed? We haven't closed it. All right. I would like to entertain your motion.

I motion that we close the public hearing.

Thank you very much. Commissioner Johnson. Okay, we have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Let's go ahead and vote, please. Okay, that motion carries 5-0. At this time, we're open for comment. And Ms. Commissioner Farner.

So I had a similar question for staff about if we approve this, what prevents them from adding additional items or equipment and especially knowing that Chuck and Steel Co. had been approved several weeks ago to go into the space 400 feet down.

So if I continue to keep my kitchen and I continue to offer food, am I still a restaurant with a bunch of pool tables or am I an indoor facility that happens to serve, to have a kitchen? So I guess mine, I have a little bit of a problem with this and also why he put them in before he started as a restaurant, he was approved as a restaurant. And, you know, is there, are those tables have yellow tape on them right now? Because you're saying that he's continuing to operate as a restaurant while this is going on. So do those, I mean, how are we stopping him from letting someone use the pool tables

So I guess they're not the old Atari Pac-Man gaming machines. I guess it's something different than that, huh? You are correct. Yes, ma'am.

All right. Thank you. Commissioner Johnson?

Well, I appreciate it, Erin. You kind of opened up a little bit of what my concern was. It is concern for the other... Facility that we just gave approval to it's still being Built so I do have definitely share your concerns. My other concern was I've looked at what these gaming Machines are and they are casino style gaming machines they're Giving your winnings and tickets it appears from the pictures and that's all that I can go from so that definitely concerns me and in bringing it to Keller even if they can get around some of the laws because it's not actually exchanging money. I don't know

Yeah, I guess, and I share the concern of, well, what if the whole place turns into pool tables and gaming, and we just keep the kitchen because we're going to serve? If that still meets the SUP that we allowed them to have, then... I have concerns there because it's not a restaurant anymore where people are sitting down. And actually the majority, do we have like a percentage that we have to have seated restaurant style to allow for it to be a restaurant that just has accessory table tables?

And I appreciate that because I can see that we could potentially go down that route. If I was going to go down that route, though, I would want to include something about this potential for the gaming and what we find out. I'm wondering if it would be appropriate for us to maybe deny even so that we can get more information about the gaming facilities and on what maybe the best amount to put for two tables, no more than two, or for the square footage that we want to put on the floor for tables. But that's kind of my thinking at the moment to share with my fellow commissioners.

All right, thank you. And Commissioner Schlegel. Thank you, Chairman.

Yeah, with all due respect to you guys and how you articulated your vision, I'm not concerned about the competition because you guys obviously know what you want in your facility. My concern about this place, you know, living here, lived here for quite a while, remembering how busy the previous tenants in that place were at time of dinner or any food, lunch, dinner, whatever, if the focus now is on an area that has pool tables and other games, is there restaurant business off or are they concentrating more on the bar portion and Miss Hensley, I think I thought of this one Commissioner Johnson

So that, I mean, that's my concern, that it just doesn't seem to pass the sniff test, that it doesn't seem to really be concentrating on the restaurant aspect.

Okay. I really don't have the concerns to the degree that my fellow commissioners do. If, in fact, two small pool tables in that room and it looks like, in fact, I'll ask this as a question, the area available for pool tables and any other machines looks rather small. Is the photograph we've seen 100% of the area that they could have pool tables or could they put another 5 or 20 pool tables in this room?

So I see this as an addendum to the restaurant business and even though these are concerns, I don't think they outweigh the fact of having a restaurant with a couple of pool tables meets the level of that concern. So I would support it, but is there anybody else that wishes to speak on this? All right. With that, Commissioner Farner.

I motion to deny item E3 as presented at this time.

All right. Thank you. Commissioner Johnson?

All right. And we have a motion and a second to deny. So if everybody's clear on that, any further discussion? Let's go ahead and vote. Okay, that motion passes 3 to 2, and this will be before the City Council on September 1st as a recommendation. Okay, with that, let's move on to item E5. E4, thank you, guys. This is a public hearing. Now, consider a request for a special exception to the CETI of Keller Unified Development Code Article 9 Development Standards Section 9.05, signed regulations for Chalk and Steel Company, an indoor entertainment facility in an existing 7,310 square foot lease s

All right. Thank you very much. Is the applicant here and wish to say something? Thank you. And again, your name and address, please.

All right, if you would stay nearby, we may have some questions for you here in a moment. All right. This is... At this point, we have a few questions from our commission and Ms. Farner.

I have no questions. I think that it's appropriate for the width of the space and understand the desire to have a sign over the main entrance and then a sign over the other part of it. So I have no issue with that nor of the materials that the sign is made of. So I plan to vote in the affirmative on this.

Okay, thank you. And Commissioner Brenzinger.

I concur with Commissioner Farner, but I do want to state for the record, I don't believe you need a variance for the signed materials based on my reading of the code, but I'm going to support it, and I also think there'll be good signs from the way you've described them. Thank you. All right.

Thank you much. Commissioner Schlegel. Thank you.

And I agree with both comments so far. The shape of the building, I think, isn't conducive to a 200-square-foot sign. I think it's appropriate the way it's laid out. It's less than the max. As far as the construction, our code says to use aluminum, and it's aluminum. I definitely would support it.

Commissioner Johnson? And I am in support of it also. I thank you for the 10-year kind of, I think for the public would have been when they hear vinyl, would want to hear that. So I always try to remember that I'm addressing the public, not just the people that are sitting in the audience. So thank you for that. I too, and for the public knowledge, all three signs still meet the code for if you had one big sign. So you're still under the square footage that would be for that. So I think that's important to let the public know also. But I do think with that space when you drive by, it does look

Okay, thank you. And I will comment, we've done this before. I can remember DeVivo Brothers when they expanded, they took over an additional space next door and they ended up with two signs on their building, which was appropriate. And I do agree with Commissioner Bresinger on that. The verbiage in this particular ordinance is unclear, to say the least. And even when you read what we saw there, examples, it says examples of quality construction. It doesn't say it's limited to that. It just says these are examples. So assuming, in fact, I saw an email from Somebody that says, you know, that sig

I recommend approval of item E4 as presented.

All right, thank you. Commissioner Johnson?

Okay, we have a motion and a second. to approve item E4. Any further discussion? Let's go ahead and vote, please. Okay, that motion passes 5-0. You'll be before the City Council on September 1st. Wish you well with your project, and thank you very much. Now we get to do E5, which is a public hearing, consider a request to approve amendments to the City of Keller Unified Development Code adopted by Ordinance Number 1746, dated July 7, 2015, by amending Article 8 relating to automobile electric charging stations, providing penalties, authorizing publication, and establishing an effective date. U

Table the item or recommend denial and if a recommendation is provided tonight the item will go before City Council on September 1st If you have any questions staff is available All right, thank you very much This is a public hearing is there anybody here that wishes to speak and with that I May have cleared somebody miss foreigner I

I motion that we close the public hearing.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Further discussion? If not, let's vote. Okay, the public hearing is now closed 5-0. And with this, on my electronic... Cueing here. I may have cleared somebody before miss foreigner. Was there anybody you don't wish to speak? Okay All right. Thank you and Commissioner Bresinger.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman Old Town Keller neighborhood sub-district My memory says that includes houses so if somebody lives there and they want to put a charging station in their garage they need a sup and

Well, I'm really not too keen on writing another ordinance as good as our sign ordinance, so I think we should table this until you get it right, and then we'll look at it.

Well, isn't this... We're limiting this to retail, correct, in the various...

You don't think this is covered by the permitting that would be required to put in a...

It sounded to me that it would. I am an electrical engineer, so I know something about electricity. I think we should, my recommendation is we table this and rework it.

Okay. Could we make, in the motion, could we put that in there? That it add that language?

Since it's a recommendation to council, right? Could our recommendation is that we approve with that It's a question for you and the chair.

I'm thinking. OK. If staff is confident they could make that in time for the city council meeting so they could consider the actual wording, I'd be OK with that.

Wouldn't it be in here? Wouldn't it be on this chart to just state neighborhood, sub-district? exception for single-family residents?

If you're comfortable doing that before you get to city council, I'm okay... making a motion to approve it with that change.

Well, what we can do is, this is an example of where you use an amendment to the motion. And so, assuming that we have a motion on the table to approve, I don't know if you can do this through the electronic system, but Mr. Bresinger wants to make an amendment to the motion that says add a asterisk with the verbiage that we've just discussed that says this does not apply to residences in these areas.

Excuse me, Chairman, I don't think we're at a motion level yet. I think we're in discussion still. We're not at a motion level yet. We're in discussion at the moment.

What we can do in order to parse this sequentially, in fact, I'll tell you what, let's do this. Mr. Schlegel, do you have a motion to approve if you'll put the motion on the table? All right, thank you.

Yeah, I agree 100% with Commissioner Bransinger's comments. And I think, I mean, to clarify that, Ms. Hensley, I think it would be a great idea. It makes sense for consistency. You know, electric vehicles have proliferated. It will continue to expand. It will continue to get more awareness. I would make a motion to approve E5 with the caveat that private homes are excluded. They're not part of this requirement.

Okay. Let's put the motion on the table. We made a motion to approve.

So motion to approve with the caveat that... OK. Motion to approve, but you want to have a call out for.

I am, after we get the motion on the table. OK. We are then going to vote on the caveat. Thank you. Commissioner Johnson, would you second the motion to approve?

I'm going to be honest, I'm confused because are we going to approve this and then we're going to go back and amend it? Is that what you're wanting to happen?

You can vote on the amendment. And if the amendment fails, then the motion to approve stays on the table and we vote on it. If we approve the amendment, it's going to be a motion on the table with the amendment.

OK, thank you. So with that, oh, is there?

So Chair, I motion that we approve item E5.

Thank you. Is there a second? And does it show that I've? Yes. Yes. I have seconded it. So now that we have a motion on the table, now we are able to amend said motion. So would you please make your motion to amend, please?

Thank you. I move to amend the motion on the table to include changes as discussed to make it clear that residences are not required to have an SUP for an electric charging station.

All right. Thank you. Is there a second to the amendment? Second. OK. We're winging it. Now we're doing it.

OK. Mr. Schlegel seconded. Motion to amend. So with that, is there any further discussion on the motion to amend? Okay. I, too, agree with it. And with that, let's, by a show of hands, show me, do you, all those that vote in the affirmative for the motion to amend, show your hand, please. Thank you. That motion passes five to zero. Now we have on the table the motion to approve with the amendment. And with that, in my queue for speakers, I have Commissioner Brenzinger.

Did I withdraw my request to speak anymore? Everybody withdrew?

Yes. OK. Thank you very much. OK. With that, so we're back to the motion as amended. And I'm open for... Do we have to motion again? Yeah, we have to move again. Okay, Ms. Farmer?

Great. And Commissioner Johnson? Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve E5 as amended. Is there further discussion? All right, thank you. Let's take a vote. OK, that passes 5 to 0. So Sarah, I guess you have now an amended motion or recommendation to the council. And I think they can act upon that, maybe with even a little bit more clarification from you and your verbiage. So that looks good. All right. I think we have gotten to the end of our agenda, if there is not anything else. We are adjourned for the evening. Thank you. At 7.58.