Arlington Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Session - February 4, 2026
Arlington Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Session - February 4, 2026
The Arlington Planning and Zoning Commission met on Wednesday, February 4, 2026, at 5:35 PM in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 101 West Abram Street. The meeting lasted approximately 2.5 hours. Commissioners considered three zoning cases, approved minutes, and received public testimony. One item was withdrawn before the meeting.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes of January 14, 2026 Regular Session – Approved 9-0 (motion by Commissioner Finley, second by Commissioner Blake).
- Minutes of January 21, 2026 Regular Session – Approved 9-0 (motion by Commissioner Blake, second by Commissioner Maddox).
Public Comments & Testimony
SUP10-23R4 (Liquitek – 408 113th Street)
- Support: Applicant representatives (Armando Garcia, architect; Aaron Nation, general contractor; and Sydney Hangler, company representative) spoke in favor, noting the need for a maintenance shop and truck wash to improve operations. No opposition speakers appeared.
SUP25-10 (2102 Prestonwood Drive) – Secondary Living Unit
- Support: Applicant Shelley Chambers (property owner) stated the unit is intended for her elderly mother and later for disabled children, with no plans for rental. Builder Jeff Carr confirmed flexibility on placement, materials, and drainage engineering.
- Opposition: Twelve letters of support and 13 letters of opposition were received, plus a petition with 40 signatures. Opposition speakers (Laura Matthews, Janice Medlin, Keith Herman, Vicky Keir, Bob Hankins, Beatrice Stein) raised concerns about:
- Drainage: Keith Herman (adjacent neighbor) described repeated flooding events from the property; Vicky Keir said runoff has caused property damage.
- Neighborhood character: Laura Matthews (next-door neighbor) said a second dwelling changes the single-family character; she cited a nearby vacant house that became a rental nuisance.
- Future rental risk: Janice Medlin and Beatrice Stein argued that even with current good intentions, future owners could rent the unit illegally, citing crime examples from rental properties.
- Traffic/parking: Some neighbors worried about increased parking on narrow streets.
- Rebuttal: Chambers reiterated her commitment to drainage improvements, offered to add brick to match the house, and said she would consider moving the structure if feasible.
ZA25-6 (4232 Kelly Elliott Road) – Zoning Change to Neighborhood Commercial
- Support: Applicant representative Nikki Moore argued the 2.717-acre site on a hard corner at I-20 and Kelly Elliott is best suited for neighborhood commercial (NC) to improve marketability. Broker Bill Beasle said residential developers rejected the site as too small, and two prior commercial contracts fell through. He noted NC zoning would attract buyers without requiring them to bear the risk and cost of a Planned Development (PD).
- Opposition: Five speakers (David Love, Sharon Love, Sam Shank, Becky Hearn, Dwayne Pace) opposed, citing:
- Drainage: David and Sharon Love said clear-cutting the property caused severe flooding on their property; they showed photos of standing water.
- Traffic: Sam Shank said the only access off Kelly Elliott Road, near the I-20 intersection, is already congested and unsafe for high school pedestrians; he criticized limited sight lines and one northbound lane over I-20.
- No specific plan: Becky Hearn and Sharon Love requested a plan with known uses, buffers, and engineered drainage before rezoning.
- SB 840 risk: Several speakers feared the NC zoning could later be used for multifamily housing under state law if adjacent parcels were combined; Dwayne Pace (owner of an adjacent 1.7-acre property) said he would consider selling if zoning changed, raising the possibility of a larger development.
- Rebuttal: Moore argued that drainage issues are separate from land use, that engineering reviews would occur at permitting, and that NC zoning restricts uses to low-intensity options like offices, clinics, or religious assembly—not gas stations or heavy commercial. She urged the commission to vote based on highest and best use, setting aside SB 840 speculation.
Discussion Items
SUP10-23R4 (Liquitek – 408 113th Street)
Staff planner Kevin Charles presented a request for a fourth revision to a Specific Use Permit to add a 10,537-square-foot maintenance building and truck wash on an existing 2.379-acre industrial site. The building would match existing structures, add 38 parking spaces, and improve landscaping. Two original letters of opposition (from 2014, regarding odor) were noted; no new opposition was received. The Commission asked about operations (no oil changes) and approved without further debate.
SUP25-10 (2102 Prestonwood Drive) – Secondary Living Unit
Staff planner Alex Van Amberg presented the request for a 1,000-square-foot secondary living unit on a 0.749-acre lot zoned RS-7.2. The unit would be used by a family member, as required. Commissioners discussed visibility, drainage, and the risk of future rental. Commissioner Sumpter suggested adding landscaping along the south property line to screen the unit from the neighbor. The applicant agreed to use brick to match the primary residence and to consider moving the structure to minimize visibility. Chairperson Nunez emphasized that neighbors should report any rental violations to code enforcement.
ZA25-6 (4232 Kelly Elliott Road) – Zoning Change to Neighborhood Commercial
Senior Planner Virginia Renteria presented the request to rezone three parcels totaling 2.717 acres from RS-7.2 to NC. The site is vacant and located on a hard corner at I-20 and Kelly Elliott Road. Staff noted that NC permits uses like offices, clinics, religious assembly, and restaurants (no drive-through), but is also subject to Senate Bill 840, which could allow multifamily housing under certain conditions if the site meets state criteria (minimum 100-foot right-of-way, 35% tree preservation, 10-foot buffer). Commissioners debated:
- Concerns: Commissioners Ware, Maddox, Finley, and Nunez cited the lack of a specific plan, traffic congestion at the single access point, potential drainage impacts, and the risk of SB 840 being used for apartments—especially if the adjacent 1.7-acre property were combined, as suggested by owner Dwayne Pace.
- Support: Commissioners Blake, Winkles, Greer, and Carter argued that NC is the highest and best use for a highway corner, that the UDC and city staff would mitigate drainage and traffic issues during development review, and that requiring a PD would impose excessive costs that discourage investment.
- Chairperson Nunez noted that the possibility of combining adjacent land (the “bomb” dropped by Dwayne Pace) introduced new uncertainty about future multifamily development, making it too risky to approve straight zoning without a plan.
Key Outcomes
- SUP10-23R4 (Liquitek) – Approved 9-0. Motion by Commissioner Blake, second by Commissioner Winkles.
- SUP25-10 (2102 Prestonwood Drive) – Approved 9-0 with conditions: applicant to move the structure as feasible from the west property line, add landscaping (trees) to screen the unit from the south neighbor, and use brick exterior to match the primary residence. Motion by Commissioner Sumpter, second by Commissioner Blake.
- ZA25-6 (4232 Kelly Elliott Road) – Motion to approve failed 4-4 (AYES: Blake, Winkles, Greer, Carter; NAYS: Nunez, Finley, Ware, Maddox; ABSTAIN: 0). The tie vote means the application is denied. No further action was taken.
- PD25-20 (2201 N Collins Street) – Withdrawn prior to the meeting.
Meeting Transcript
Again, good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Again, my name is Dr. Ignacio Nunez, and I serve as chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission for the City of Arlington. I hereby call this regularly noticed meeting of the City of Arlington's Planning and Zoning Commission regular session to order for February the 4th, 2026. This time I'll ask our administrators to read the speaker guidelines and general decorum for tonight's meeting. We ask that the citizens and other visitors in attendance assist in preserving the order and decorum of this meeting and to provide for attendance at and participation in the meeting without fear of intimidation, threats, or hostility. Any person making per personal, profane, hostile, slanderous, or threatening remarks who uses vulgar or obscene language, who engages in any other actions that disturb or are calculated to disturb the meeting, or who becomes disruptive while addressing the planning and zoning commissioners, or while attending the planning and zoning meeting, may be removed from the council chambers. All speakers shall address the commissioners and not the audience or city staff and shall not call out individually named members of city staff or the public. For speakers tonight, when your name is called, please come to the microphone at the podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. The applicant will be asked to speak first and then will be given 10 minutes to make a presentation. Speakers in support or opposition of the item will be given five minutes each to make their statements. If there are many speakers for each item, each speaker will be given three minutes to make their statements. Thank you very much. Next item is the approval of the minutes of January 14th, 2026 planning and zoning regular meeting. These were sent out in advance. Were there any changes? Seeing none, I have a motion to approve by Commissioner Finley and a second by Commissioner Blake. Please cast your vote. Motion passes nine to nothing. Next, we have a copy of the minutes of our January the 21st, 2026 regular agenda meeting. These were also sent in advance. Were there any changes recommended? If not, do I have a motion to approve the minutes of January the 21st? I do. Commissioner Blake and uh the second by Commissioner Maddox. Please cast your vote. Motion passes nine to nothing. Next on the agenda, we have three zoning cases. Uh tonight. The first one is uh for your information. There was a case that was listed but has been withdrawn. It's zoning case PD 25-20, located at approximately 2201 North Collins. It's been withdrawn. So if you're here to speak on that, we're sorry, but we're not going to be discussing that tonight. First in the agenda tonight is SUP 10-23R4. Uh located at uh 408, number 408, 113th Street. This is application for approval of a revised specific use permit for industrial manufacturing with a development plan on approximately 2.379 acres, currently zoned industrial manufacturing with a specific use permit for high impact use. Good evening, Chair and Commissioners for the record. This evening we're looking at SUP 23 R 4. Uh, you may be uh familiar with this case as this case was one that came before you previously back in March of uh excuse me, August of 2025, and it was continued indefinitely so that the applicant could go back and look at some of uh what he wanted to do with the site. Since that time, nothing has changed. The applicant wanted to remain consistent with what he uh submitted originally, and so now we are here moving forward with this after renotising the the project and and uh bringing it in and placing it on the agenda. The applicant is requesting a fourth revision to the specific use permit uh to add uh an approximately 10,000 square foot maintenance building on the existing liquid tech uh company property located at uh 408 113th Street. As you can see from the slide, the current zoning of the property is industrial man uh manufacturing. And again, the reason that we are here is because they would like to add a new building to the site. As you can see from the highlighted uh property line here, this is the uh aerial photograph of the site. Uh the site shares property lines with with uh other properties that are zoned industrial manufacturing and manufacturing uh on all four sides as well as uh right-away of 113th Street and the old rail spur that runs behind it. These are aerial photographs, excuse me, these are photographs of the site, looking uh at it from uh each direction, view east of the subject site there in the top left-hand corner, view of the property to the south, uh developed with the industrial use, view of the property across 113th Street as you can see, the overhead bay doors and loading ramps over there as well, and the property to the north of the site. Again, uh the proposal is for a new 10,537 square foot metal tilt wall and metal building. The use is for it to be a maintenance shop and truck wash.
openpublica.com