Sep 24, 2026 Planning & Zoning Commission

[CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL]

[00:00:03]

AT 6:00. CALL TO ORDER THE REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE BEDFORD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR TODAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH, 2026. ROLL CALL PLEASE. ROGER GALLENSTEIN PRESENT.

DOROTHY CRAWFORD. PRESENT. KATE BARLOW. PRESENT.

TOM JACOBSEN. PRESENT. BRUCE EMERY. PRESENT.

PRESENT. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL HAVE THE INVOCATION AND THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

PLEASE STAND. OUR HEAVENLY FATHER, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO SERVE THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS. WE ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE AND YOUR WISDOM AS WE MAKE DECISIONS TO THE BENEFIT OF ALL OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS.

WATCH OVER OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND OUR POLICE AND OUR CITY OFFICIALS AS THEY DO THEIR DUTIES TO SUPPORT US ALL.

IN CHRIST'S NAME. AMEN. AMEN. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE A MAGIC TOUCH? WELL, GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE WERE ALL TOGETHER.

WITH THE ABSENCE OF COMMISSIONER SMITH OUR ALTERNATE WILL, MR. INGRAM WILL BE A VOTING MEMBER THIS EVENING. OUR FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS IS TO.

WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WELCOME EVERYBODY BACK. AS YOU ALL KNOW, TUESDAY NIGHT COUNCIL REAPPOINTED THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE UP FOR CONSIDERATION AND. I WAS TOLD THAT THEY COULDN'T FIND AN UPGRADE TO THE PEOPLE THEY ALREADY HAVE.

SO HERE WE ARE. SO WELCOME EVERYBODY. APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

[APPROVAL OF MINUTES ]

LIKE I SAID, IT'S BEEN A LITTLE WHILE. SO STAFF, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS THAT YOU WANT TO PLACE IN FRONT OF US? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 23RD, 2026. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. MINUTES OF JULY 23RD HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

[2. Consider approval of a Final Plat of Gateway Village consisting of 106 Lots & 9 Open Space Areas being 11.275 acres out of the W. Jasper Survey, Abstract No. 860. The properties are generally located west of Industrial Blvd and north of Airport Fwy / State Hwy 183. (PLAT-26- 4) ]

THE PROPERTIES ARE GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF AIRPORT FREEWAY.

STATE HIGHWAY 183. THIS IS CASE PLAT 26-4. STAFF, PLEASE.

GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING CHAIRMAN. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

SO THIS ITEM IS THE FINAL PLAT FOR GATEWAY VILLAGE.

IT COVERS APPROXIMATELY 11.275 ACRES. ZONED MD4 THIS ZONING WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2024.

IN ITS ZONING CASE, I BELIEVE 24-1. THIS FINAL PLAT CONSISTS OF 106 RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH NINE OPEN SPACES, AND THAT INCLUDES SIDEWALK TRAILS AND LANDSCAPING.

THE ACCESS WILL BE PROVIDED THROUGH FM 157 NORTH INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD WITH CONNECTIONS TO WIGGINS AND THE ADJACENT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

THE PLAT IS ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLETE, SO STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.

AND THIS JUST KIND OF SHOWS YOU WHAT THE PLOT LOOKS LIKE WITH THE ROADWAYS.

THE ZONING WAS APPROVED. THE PLAT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY SUBDIVISION REGULATION, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 212. IF THE PLAT MEETS ALL PROVISIONS OF THE LOCAL PROVISION ORDINANCE AND TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, THE APPROVAL BODY MUST APPROVE THE PLAT. THANK YOU.

A QUESTION BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT THING IS, IN THE PAST, WE HAVE DISCUSSED, AS WE'VE LOOKED AT ORDINANCES AND PROCEDURES, WHETHER OR NOT THESE FINAL PLATS CAN BE CONSIDERED ADMINISTRATIVE AND NOT COME BEFORE P AND Z.

IS THERE ANY PROGRESS ON THAT MOVE AND WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GET THAT DONE? I ACTUALLY JUST SPOKE TO OUR LEGAL TEAM, AND WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MOVE IT TO JUST ADMINISTRATIVE WITHOUT BRINGING IT FORTH TO PLANNING AND ZONING,

[00:05:02]

WE'D HAVE TO DO THAT ON A FUTURE AGENDA. YES.

OKAY. WELL, THEN IT'D BE GREAT IF THAT WAS ON A FUTURE AGENDA.

I HAVE A QUESTION. UP ON THE SCREEN THERE IT SAYS THAT IT MEETS ALL PROVISIONS OF THE LOCAL SUBDIVISION.

ON PAGE ONE OF OUR SHEET, IT SAYS IT'S IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE, WHICH TO ME IS NOT THE SAME THING.

IS THAT AN ERROR OR? IF IT'S STATED, IT'S PROBABLY AN ERROR.

AND THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. OKAY. BECAUSE IN COMPLETE COMPLIANCE VERSUS SUBSTANTIAL IS A DIFFERENCE IN MY MIND.

SO THAT'S ON PAGE ONE, BY THE WAY, UNDER STAFF FINDINGS.

IT'S IN THE LAST SECOND TO LAST PARAGRAPH. THE FINAL PLAT IS IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING.

OKAY. IT JUST CAUGHT MY EYE WAS SAYING DO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REJECT THIS IF IT'S ONLY IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE? NO. IT IS IN FULL COMPLIANT COMPLIANCE. IT IS IN FULL COMPLIANCE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM TWO, PLEASE.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PLAT APPLICATION NUMBER PLAT 26-4.

SECOND. I SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY. WE HAVE PASSED THE FINAL PLAT FOR THAT PART OF GATEWAY VILLAGE. THANK YOU. ON TO NUMBER THREE.

[3. Consider making a recommendation to City Council regarding application for a Special Signage Program for Lots 1-R1, 1-R2, 1-R3, and 1-R4 of Gateway Village being 7.49 acres. The properties are generally located west of Industrial Blvd and north of Airport Fwy / State Hwy 183 and are commonly known as 209, 213, 217, 221, 225, and 229 N Industrial Blvd, Market at Gateway. (SSP-26-1) ]

THE PROPERTIES ARE GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF AIRPORT FREEWAY.

STATE HIGHWAY 183 AND ARE COMMONLY KNOWN AS 209, 213, 217, 221, 225, 229 NORTH INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD MARKET AT GATEWAY. THIS IS CASE SSP-26-1.

THANK YOU. AND DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A NEW SIGN ORDINANCE, THIS IS OUR FIRST SSP CASE REPORT.

PLEASE. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL SIGNAGE PROGRAM AT MARKET.

MARKET AT GATEWAY. THE COMMERCIAL PORTION OF GATEWAY VILLAGE.

TONIGHT, THE COMMISSION IS BEING ASKED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL, AND THEN CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION.

THE AERIAL SHOWS THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS ME COVERED BY THE REQUEST.

AND THEN THE PLAN IDENTIFIES THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED FOR THE VARIANCE.

SO THE RENDERING SHOWS THE PROPOSED MULTI TENANT SIGN.

AND I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE SINGLE TENANT SIGN IS NOT REQUESTING A VARIANCE.

IT DOES MEET OUR CITY ORDINANCE. THE VARIANCE IS BEING JUST REQUESTED FOR THE MULTI TENANT ONE.

SO THE TABLE HERE KIND OF COMPARES BEDFORD STANDARD REQUIREMENTS WITH THE PROPOSED MULTI TENANT.

THE REQUESTED DIFFERENCES CONCERNS EFFECTIVE SIGN THE MAXIMUM TOTAL SIGN AREA THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT AND THE BASE SIZE.

I'LL JUST LEAVE IT UP HERE FOR A MINUTE. AT THE COMMISSION'S REQUEST, STAFF INCLUDED EXAMPLES FROM EULESS FOR COMPARISON.

SO THE AERIAL HERE IS FOR GLADE PARK. THE RED MARKERS SHOW THE PYLON SIGNS AND THE YELLOW SHOWS THE MONUMENT SIGNS.

SO THE WAY THAT THEY'RE SET UP IS THAT THE YELLOW SIGNS, THE MONUMENT SIGNS ARE USED FOR ANY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT IS FRONTING THAT ROADWAY UP FRONT. AND THEN THE RED PYLON SIGNS ARE USED FOR ANYTHING IN THE BACK.

SO THIS WAY THEY CAN PUT THOSE SIGNS UP FRONT.

WHENEVER WE REACHED OUT TO THE CITY OF EULESS, THEY DID SPECIFY THAT THEIR REQUIREMENTS FOR PYLON SIGN CAN GO ACTUALLY UP TO 50FT IN HEIGHT. SO THAT IS WHAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE OUT THERE.

SO THAT IS THEIR TYPICAL STANDARD. SAME THING APPLIES FOR THE VINEYARD VILLAGE.

IT'S A PYLON SIGN. AND THEY HAVE ALL THE MULTI-TENANT FOR THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES UP ON THESE SIGNS.

AND IT'S THE SAME HEIGHT AS WELL. AND THESE ARE WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE.

SO UNDER BEDFORD SPECIAL SIGNAGE PROGRAM PROCESS, THE COMMISSION MAKES THE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL, AND THEN THE COMMISSION MAY CONSIDER HOW THE PROPOSED SIGN RELATE TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND ANYTHING SURROUNDING IT, INCLUDING THE SCALE, MATERIALS, APPEARANCE, VISIBILITY AND ANY EFFECT TO TRAFFIC SAFETY.

STAFF IS REQUESTING THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSED PROGRAM AND IDENTIFY ANY DEVIATIONS THAT'S ALLOWED OR NOT ALLOWED.

[00:10:07]

THE MONUMENTS, ALL OF THE SIGNS. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YES, MA'AM. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

THAT WAS THAT HAD BEEN ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IN THE ORIGINAL DRAWING THAT THEY DIDN'T LOOK LIKE THEY WERE PARALLEL.

SO THEY'LL BE PERPENDICULAR TO 157 OKAY. COMMISSIONERS.

QUESTIONS THOUGHTS COMMENTS. ARE WE REVIEWING AND POTENTIALLY APPROVING THE THREE MONUMENT SIGNS AND THE MULTI TENANT SIGN? THAT IS CORRECT. SO IF IT IS APPROVED AS IS, THEN ONCE THEY GO TO CCOUNCIL AND WE TELL THEM THAT THEY'RE APPROVED AS AS THEY WOULD HAVE TO PULL PERMITS FOR EACH PERMIT SEPARATELY. SO FOR EACH MONUMENT, JUST BECAUSE YOU'VE APPROVED IT TONIGHT DOESN'T GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO JUST GO AND INSTALL IT. THEY WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY APPLY FOR PERMITS FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL SITE.

CAN WE HAVE THE PRIOR ONE THAT HAS THE YES PLEASE. SO THEY NEED VARIANCE FOR THE SIGN AREA AND FOR THE HEIGHT? FOR THE HEIGHT THE SIGN AREA THE TOTAL SIGN AREA AND THE BASE.

IT'S JUST SMALLER. YES. THAT'S OKAY. THAT IS OKAY.

SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THEY WANT TO GO HIGHER WITH A SHORTER BASE WITH A SMALLER BASE.

THAT IS CORRECT. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT THAT SOUNDS BAD.

YOUR ENGINEERS THOUGH, RIGHT? AND THAT'S OKAY.

WELL ISN'T IT. ISN'T IT. ISN'T IT NARROWER? NOT NECESSARILY.

IT IS. YES. NARROWER RATHER THAN THE BASE IS KIND OF NARROWER, BUT THE HEIGHT IS TALLER.

AND FOR COMPARISON WITH EULESS, THAT WAS MY QUESTION WANTING TO SEE.

SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR. THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A 25 FOOT SIGN, A PYLON SIGN, AND THE ONE THAT THE COMPARABLE PYLON SIGNS IN. GLADE PARK. GLADE PARKS AND VINEYARD VILLAGE ARE 50FT.

CORRECT. I WANTED THAT AS A COMPARISON BECAUSE WE ARE IN COMPETITION WITH OTHER TOWNS.

SO PART OF MY REASONING WAS THERE'S CONCERN ABOUT THE SIZE, WHICH IS BASICALLY DOUBLE OUR SIGNAGE, BUT I'M VIEWING IT RELATIVE TO OUR COMPETING TOWNS AND HOW THESE BUSINESSES MIGHT COMPETE.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA ABOUT COMPETING SIGNS FROM THOSE PARTICULAR AREAS AS TO THEIR MAXIMUM TOTAL SIGN AREA AS WELL AS THEIR BASE SIZE.

SO IS THERE A COMPARISON THERE? BECAUSE LIKE WE'RE SEEING WHAT'S PROPOSED WITH OUR ORDINANCE VERSUS WHAT'S THERE IS.

BUT FOR THE SIGNS IN THOSE OTHER AREAS, DO WE HAVE A COMPARISON AS TO WHAT THAT DIFFERENCE IS? I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU, BUT THE ONE THAT GOT APPROVED BACK IN APRIL, WHICH IS THAT SIGN TOWARD THAT HIGHWAY THAT WAS 45FT IN HEIGHT.

AND THAT WAS PRIOR TO US ADOPTING THE NEW ORDINANCE SIGN ORDINANCE.

BUT THE USAGE, THE SIGN USAGE AND ALL OF THAT WAS WITHIN OUR PREVIOUS.

CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, SINCE WE'RE ON THE SUBJECT, SO THE EXISTING SIGN THAT'S ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF 183, THE BASE OF IT, IS IT AT THE SAME PERCENTAGE, DO YOU THINK? I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION. DO YOU KNOW? THE GENERAL PERCENTAGE OF SIGN AREA AS TO THE ONE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? THE ONE THAT'S UP THERE. THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S STANDING NOW. I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFICS ABOUT THAT SIGN RELATIVE TO OTHERS, BUT THE SIGN ON THE FREEWAY AND THEN THE SIGN THAT WILL GO ON 157 KIND OF SERVE TWO SEPARATE PURPOSES.

THE ONE ON THE FREEWAY WAS DESIGNED TO BE SEEN FROM CARS THAT ARE MUCH FARTHER AWAY, JUST GIVEN IT'S ON THE FREEWAY.

AND SO PART OF THE BASE WERE ANY SMALLER.CERTAINLY. YEAH. YEAH. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I FOLLOW PROCEDURES.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS WEBB ELLIOTT WITH THE DEVELOPER ON THE COMMERCIAL PIECE OF THIS PROJECT AT 5950 BERKSHIRE LANE DALLAS, TEXAS 75225. THE PYLON SIGN ON THE FREEWAY WHERE THE BASE ENDS AND THE PANELS MEET. IF WE WERE TO HAVE PANELS ANY LOWER THAN THAT, BECAUSE THE BASE OF IT IS LOWER THAN THE FREEWAY LEVEL, THEY WOULD NOT BE VISIBLE. WE UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE THAT IS ON THE ON THE MAJOR FREEWAY.

THE BENEFIT WE'RE GETTING HERE TO COMMISSIONER JACOBSEN'S POINT IS BECAUSE OF THE SIGN AS REFERENCED IN EULESS.

THAT'S RIGHT ALONG BOTH SIDES OF 121, WHEREAS 157 DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT KIND OF LONG DISTANCE.

[00:15:05]

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S WE'RE TRYING TO STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN BEING BIG ENOUGH TO BE VISIBLE, ENOUGH SO THAT THE BUSINESSES ARE SATISFIED, AND THAT WE CAN USE THE SIGNAGE THAT WE HAVE AT THE SHOPPING CENTER TO ATTRACT NEW BUSINESSES TO IT AS WELL, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME NOT PUTTING SOMETHING IN THE GROUND THAT'S UNNATURALLY LARGE AND DOESN'T FIT THE SURROUNDING AREA. THANKS. WHEN I DROVE DROVE BY, I DID NOTICE ALL ALL AROUND IN THAT AREA.

LOTS AND LOTS OF VERY LARGE SIGNS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE HIGHWAY.

JUST AS A POINT OF FACT. AND IN YOUR DEVELOPMENT, YOU HAVE SPROUTS AND YOU HAVE THE STRIP MALL AND THE STRIP MALL BASED ON COUNTING THE DOORS COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE EIGHT DIFFERENT CUSTOMERS OR TENANTS IN THEM.

OF COURSE, YOU MIGHT WIND UP SHARING SOME TENANTS, LIKE GIVEN THE DOORS.

LET'S SAY THE QUESTION I HAD IS, DO YOU REALLY NEED EIGHT SPACES BEYOND SPROUTS? DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL BE EIGHT DIFFERENT LEASES IN THE OTHER STRIP MALL? YES, MA'AM, I DO. WE HAVE TWO TENANTS THAT ARE SIGNED RIGHT NOW IN THE STRIP MALL PORTION.

AND I THINK BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FEET THAT EACH OF THOSE TAKE UP, IT IS FEASIBLE OR PRESUMABLE THAT WE'LL HAVE ANYWHERE FROM EIGHT TO UP TO EIGHT TENANTS IN TOTAL. I WILL TELL YOU, MY INITIAL REACTION WHEN I SAW IT WAS I WASN'T PLEASED.

I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS NOT A GOOD IDEA. AND THEN A THOUGHT AND I DROVE AND I DROVE AND I THOUGHT AND BECAUSE 157 IS ALSO A MAJOR ROAD, YOU'RE NOT ACROSS FROM PEOPLE LIVING WITH IT.

IT'S REALLY THE INTERSECTION OF TWO HIGHWAYS.

ANYWAY, I BECAME MORE OPEN TO THE VARIANCES THAT YOU WANT.

THANK YOU. I NOTICED IN THE SUBMISSION OF THIS REQUEST, YOU ALSO INCLUDED THE LANDLORD REQUIREMENTS OF TENANTS AS IT HAD TO DO WITH SIGNS.

AND I WAS GLAD THAT YOU INCLUDED THAT. AND YOU REFERENCED THAT LANDLORD REQUIREMENTS OF TENANTS WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT ARE AS STATED, BUT ALSO TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL CODE.

THAT'S RIGHT. WHEN WE WROTE THAT SIGN ORDINANCE, WE PUT IN THERE ABOUT DIRECTIONAL LIGHTING AND FLASHING, NOT FLASHING, ALL THOSE THINGS. WILL THIS TO YOU AND STAFF, WILL THIS LARGE SIGN ALSO COMPLY WITH THOSE OTHER PIECES OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE AS FAR AS LIGHTING AND TYPE, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T. WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY KIND OF A CHANGE OR EXCEPTION TO THOSE LIGHTING AND TYPE OF SIGN REQUIREMENTS. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. ANY TYPE OF LIGHTING OR OR PANELS THEMSELVES WERE NOT REQUESTING ANY TYPE OF VARIANCE TO THAT.

NO NO, SIR. WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT THAT. AND WE WANT SOMETHING THAT'S CLEAN AND CONSISTENT.

WE JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IT WAS WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SIZE.

CORRECT? YES, SIR. JUST THE SIZE AND THE STRUCTURE TO THAT ONE SIGN.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST ONE OTHER THING WHILE WE HAVE YOU ASSUMING THAT THE SIZE OF WHATEVER BASE ON THESE SIGNS.

YOU'VE GOT THESE ENGINEERED THINGS WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE FINE.

YES, SIR. WE'RE WORKING WITH THE SIGN SPECIALIST COMPANY, AND THEY HAVE A TEAM OF ENGINEERS THAT IS MAKING SURE THAT THE STRUCTURES ARE STURDY AND ENGINEERED APPROPRIATELY. AND FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, AS STAFF MENTIONED, IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THE PERMIT TO BUILD THE SIGNS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS HAVE TO FALL IN TO BE GO THROUGH OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND MAKE SURE WE'VE SIGNED THE STAFF HAS SIGNED OFF ON THE BUILD OF THE SIGN AND THAT IT COMPLIES IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS. CORRECT? YES, SIR.

ABSOLUTELY. EACH INDIVIDUAL SIGN WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT ENTIRE PROCESS.

THIS IS MORE JUST THE FOR THE CONCEPT. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR RE-INDEXING THE DIRECTION OF THE SIGNS SO THAT THEY'RE PERPENDICULAR TO 157. CERTAINLY WHEN MARAH POSED THE QUESTION, NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S PRESENTED THAT WAY.

IT'S I UNDERSTAND WHYYOU MAY HAVE THOUGHT THAT JUST LOOKING AT HOW IT IS ON THE PAPER, BUT THAT'S JUST MORE FOR A VISUAL.

OKAY. NO, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE GOT TO READ WITH WHAT WE GET.

CERTAINLY. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. I DON'T WANT TO BEAT A DEAD HORSE HERE, BUT WE JUST CAME UP WITH.

WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME COMING UP WITH THIS ORDINANCE, AND I'M NOT LET ME JUST COME OUT AND SAY.

[00:20:07]

WE'RE MAKING AN EXCEPTION. AND, YOU KNOW, THE EXCEPTION OVER TIME BECOMES THE RULE.

AND THEN THE RULE BECOMES EVERYTHING'S AN EXCEPTION. SO I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE AS SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE WANT TO KICK AROUND A LITTLE BIT AND THINK ABOUT.

I HAVE BEEN THINKING QUITE A BIT ABOUT THAT ALSO JUST IN RESPONSE.

THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO DOCUMENT WHY I WAS OPEN TO IT AS IT'S NOT IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

IT'S REALLY ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY. EULESS IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR.

AND THEY ALLOW ALL OF THAT. I JUST ALL OF THE FACTORS, BUT I HATE THAT WORD RIGHT OUT THE BAT.

WELL, AND I WAS ONLY SAYING THAT ALSO BECAUSE MAYBE THAT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO RETHINK.

AND I'M NOT, I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M GOING TO SAY THIS, MAYBE REVISIT THAT PARTICULAR PIECE.

AND IF WE FIND THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE WANT TO ADJUST, WHY NOT DO IT NOW? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN. YOU KNOW, JUST A THOUGHT.

WE I THINK WE ALL WRESTLED WITH THAT ISSUE AS WE LOOKED AT THE DIMENSIONS AND WE SAID, WOW, EVERYTHING IS ABOUT DOUBLE, WHICH IS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT EULESS, BECAUSE THAT WAS MY RELATIVE TEST.

ARE WE WAY OUT OF BOUNDS IN LOOKING AT THIS 25 FOOT SIGN, OR ARE WE NOT? SURE. AND I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION, BASED ON THE NEED TO BE COMPETITIVE, THAT I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE LARGER SIGN.

BUT YOU'RE NOT ALONE THAT WE JUST PASSED THIS SIGN ORDINANCE.

WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING WITH THIS. [LAUGHTER] AND DO WE TAKE THE FIRST POSITION OUT OF THE OUT OF THE BOX AND SAY, OH YEAH, THAT'S WE CAN MAKE AN EXCEPTION. BUT I MADE MY DECISION ON THAT BASIS.

AND BUT YOU ARE CORRECT. IT'S A TOUGH BALANCE BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING FOR A SIGN THAT CAN BE SEEN BY THE HIGHWAY.

WE'RE ACTUALLY TEARING DOWN. THE OTHER DAY I SAW IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ALL THE WAY DOWN. SO THAT SPROUTS HAS VISIBILITY.

LOOKING FOR THE GENTLEMAN FROM SPROUTS TO SAY YES.

I THINK HE TURNED AROUND. OH. I'M SORRY. OKAY, I'M TRYING TO READ YOUR SHIRT.

AND SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND SO MAYBE WE NEED TO NOT MAYBE TONIGHT.

RIGHT. BUT GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE AT THE TIME WE DIDN'T KNOW.

I THINK THAT MAKES. SO WE DON'T ALWAYS GET INTO AN EXCEPTION.

RIGHT. AND THAT'S YOU KNOW THAT FROM MY PAST EXPERIENCE WITH SIMILAR ITEMS, WHAT BECOMES AN EXCEPTION OVER TIME BECOMES THE RULE.

SO LET'S JUST FIX THE RULE NOW. I WOULD NOT WANT TO APPROVE I WOULDN'T LIKE ALL OF OUR INTERNAL [INAUDIBLE].

BUT THIS IS RIGHT BECAUSE OF LOCATION. AND I MEAN, WE COULD DELINEATE THE POCKETS OF AREAS THAT WE'D BE WILLING TO ACCEPT IT, YOU KNOW, AND I LET ME JUST GO ON RECORD. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT.

RIGHT? LIKE, LIKE I'M WITH YOU GUYS. I'M LIKE, HECK YEAH, I LIKE THE SIGN.

IT LOOKS GOOD. MY PROBLEM IS MORE STRUCTURAL IN THAT I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO DO THIS MULTIPLE TIMES.

CAN I. TAKE YOUR APPLICATION AND COME BACK? CAN I CLARIFY SOMETHING REAL QUICK? SO FOR THE SPECIAL SIGNAGE PROGRAM, NOT ANYBODY CAN JUST APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.

IT IS SOLELY WITH AN AREA WITH MORE THAN 150FT OR CONTINUOUS STREET FRONTAGE COMPRISED OF TWO OR MORE PROPERTIES OR FIVE ACRES.

SO IT'S NOT JUST ANYBODY CAN APPLY FOR A VARIANCE AND THEN WE CAN TAKE THAT AND PROCESS IT SOLELY.

YOU HAVE TO MEET THIS CRITERIA IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO BRING YOU IN FOR A SPECIAL SIGNAGE PROGRAM.

SURE. AND MY POINT IS JUST SIMPLY THAT THERE'S SEVERAL POINTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY WHERE THAT WOULD APPLY, RIGHT? YES. SO MAYBE FOR THOSE SPECIFIC ONES, WE READDRESS THIS AT A DIFFERENT TIME ON A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW. WHAT WILL THE PASSAGE OF TIME GAIN US? WHAT WHAT WILL WE LEARN THAT WILL BE NEW THOUGH? I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I THINK HE, I THINK HE MEANT TIME TO REWRITE THE SIGN ORDINANCE. I DON'T MEAN. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT LIKE, WELL, LET'S JUST SEE HOW IT WORKS, YOU KNOW.

NO, NO, NO, LET'S NOT WING IT. I'M JUST SAYING FOR THE POLICY, MAYBE WE NEED TO REVISIT THAT IN THE FUTURE.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. HISTORICALLY, THIS COMMISSION HAS DONE A REALLY EXCELLENT JOB OF STAYING WITH PRECEDENT THAT WE HAVE SET ON ALL KINDS OF THINGS. WE'VE HAD THINGS RECYCLED BACK IN FRONT OF US.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I THINK THIS REALLY IS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS WHERE WE WILL BE ABLE TO SAY, WELL, WHEN YOU BECOME THE LARGEST COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S EVER HAPPENED IN THE CITY OF BEDFORD AND YOU WANT A BIGGER SIGN, IT'S OKAY OR SOMETHING. BECAUSE OF THE SCALE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, I THINK WE WILL BE ABLE TO SAY, WELL, EXCEPT THAT THIS AND THERE'S ALREADY THE THINGS THAT STAFF MENTIONED, BUT JUST IN THE FACT THAT THIS IS,

[00:25:04]

I MEAN, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME ROOM DOWN THE ROAD TO BE ABLE TO SAY IN THIS CASE, IF SOMEBODY COMES IN THE FUTURE AND SAY, WELL, DO YOU GUYS LOOK LIKE GATEWAY VILLAGE? WELL, SORRY, NO SIGN ORDINANCE APPLIES. SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE DIGGING OURSELVES A HOLE.

OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT. WHAT I'M HEARING IS A LOT OF FACTS SPECIFIC SITE SPECIFIC FACTORS FOR WHY ALL OF US ARE COMING TOWARDS A YES.

YEAH. AND WE JUST GET THAT IN THE RECORD. AND THEN NEXT TIME SOMETHING COMES UP, WE CAN JUST SAY, WELL, YOU DON'T MEET ANY OF THE. THEY HAD MULTIPLE FACTORS THAT MADE US GO THAT WAY.

AND. AND THAT'S WHAT THE NOTES ARE FOR. YES, MA'AM.

NO, NO, JUST FOR SINCE THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.

AS COMMISSIONER MENTIONED, WE SPENT A BUNCH OF MEETINGS WRITING THE NEW SIGN ORDINANCE IN THE CITY THAT NEVER HAD A SIGN ORDINANCE.

SO WE ARE A LITTLE BIT SENSITIVE TO OUR BABY.

BUT WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE, SO, YOU KNOW, PLEASE YOU KNOW, ACCEPT OUR APOLOGIES FOR, YOU KNOW, THRASHING THIS AROUND A LITTLE BIT. BUT EVERYONE ON THIS DAIS HAD THEIR FINGERS IN THE CURRENT SIGN ORDINANCE.

SO JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. YES. KATE.

LIKE, HOW IS IT? HOW IS IT, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, CARS PERMITTED PASSING BY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION. THAT IS A TXDOT ROADWAY.

IT IS NOT OUR ROADWAY. WE CAN COORDINATE WITH TXDOT TO TRY TO GET THAT TRAFFIC COUNT.

BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. BECAUSE, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER FACTOR THAT GOES IN THAT WAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE STAFF. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER INFORMATION.

COMMISSIONERS. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IF IT'S OKAY.

THAT'D BE WONDERFUL. I'D LOVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE TONIGHT. I'D LOVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SSP-26-1 SPECIAL SIGNAGE PROGRAM FOR LOTS 1-R1, 1-R2, 1-R3, AND 1-R4 OF GATEWAY VILLAGE. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

OKAY, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY. PASSES. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CLARIFICATION. THIS IS NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR.

BUT IF YOU ALLOW ME TO ASK MARAH A QUESTION, I'D LIKE TO GET A LITTLE CLARIFICATION.

THANK YOU GENTLEMEN. AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ANDREA ON MONDAY, AND I WAS REMINDING HER OF A CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD WAY BACK WHEN THIS WAS BEING PROPOSED. THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH INCLUDES THE, THE TOWNHOUSES AND AT THAT TIME, AND I REMEMBER THE PLAT COMING BEFORE US.

OKAY. AND DAVID WEEKLEY, WE WERE TOLD, WOULD BE THE BUILDER AND IS THE BUILDER.

AND THEN WE'VE RECENTLY SEEN, I THINK MR. JACOBSEN, MAYBE THE CHAIRMAN, BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO THINK BACK.

IT'S BEEN SO LONG SINCE WE MET. WE SAW SOME THINGS ONLINE OF WHAT THESE TOWNHOUSES WERE GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

MY CONVERSATION THAT I REMINDED ANDREA OF AND THAT SHE REMEMBERED IS HOW UGLY THE DEVELOPMENT OF TOWNHOMES WERE OVER IN EULESS, NEXT TO THE HOME DEPOT. BUT WHAT APPEARED ONLINE AND THIS COULD BE JUST AN ARTIST RENDERING WAS WHAT LOOKED LIKE TWO DIFFERENT SHADES OF HARDIE BOARD SIDING, A BLUE AND A GRAY.

THERE WASN'T A PIECE OF STONE, A BRICK OR ANYTHING.

NOW I REALIZE YOU'RE WEARING TWO HATS. OKAY. BEEN THERE, DONE THAT.

THAT'S NOT EASY. BUT MY FEELING WAS WE COULD DO BETTER THAN THAT.

NOW WE'VE HAD APPLICANTS COME IN FOR INSTANCE, BLOOMFIELD, WHO'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPING MEADOW PARK.

AND BASED ON, I THINK MOST OF THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD AGREE WHAT THEY DID, THE CORNER OF CHEEK-SPARGER AND CENTRAL REALLY LOOKS NICE.

AND THEY CAME IN AND THEY LAID SOME THINGS OUT, I DON'T REMEMBER.

AND MAYBE SOMEBODY ON THE BOARD DOES. I DON'T REMEMBER DAVID WEEKLEY COMING IN AND SHOWING US ANYTHING.

I THINK THERE WAS A FEELING, HEY, WEEKLEY DOES GOOD STUFF AND I HAVE TO AGREE WITH THAT.

BUT I DON'T KNOW IF NOR DID ANDREA KNOW IF THAT WHAT APPEARED TO ME ARTIST RENDERING OF JUST BLUE AND I'LL CALL IT GRAY HARDIE BOARD WAS WHAT THESE WERE GOING TO LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE MY FEELING IS, AND I'LL PUT IT ON RECORD, THEY WERE KIND OF BLAH. OKAY. AND ANDREA SAID, YES.

I REMEMBER THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD HAD WAY BACK.

SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE INFORMATION? IS THAT AN ARTIST RENDERING OR IS THAT WHAT THESE TOWNHOMES ARE GOING TO LOOK LIKE? AND I KNOW, LIKE I SAID, AND YOU'RE COMING IN NEW TO THIS, YOU KNOW, WES HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND YOU'VE JUST ASSUMED THE ROLE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

SO I KNOW I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU CAN FIND OUT.

I WOULD THINK MAYBE SOME OF THE OTHER. MR. JACOBSEN AND I HAD A DISCUSSION AFTER THE LAST MEETING.

[00:30:02]

I THINK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT THAT WE HAD SEEN SOME ARTIST'S RENDERING ON ONLINE.

BUT LIKE I SAID, IT'S BEEN SO LONG SINCE WE MET.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M EASY TO REACH. JUST GIVE ME A CALL OR YOU CAN SHARE IT WITH THE CHAIRMAN.

BUT I WAS A LITTLE TAKEN ABACK. MY WIFE LOOKED AT IT AND SHE WENT, OH, AND YOU'RE A LADY, SO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS TO MOVE THERE, BUT WE'RE VERY HAPPY WHERE WE LIVE.

AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERS WORK FOR YOU.

IT IS. WELL, WE DON'T HAVE ANY TRAFFIC ENGINEERS IN-HOUSE.

I REVIEW THE STUFF, OR I SEND IT TO A THIRD PARTY TO REVIEW IT.

WELL, I JUST WANTED TO, SINCE IT KIND OF FITS UNDER YOUR.

I GAVE A THANK YOU. A BIG THANK YOU TO ANDREA.

BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, 41 CUSTOM BUILT PATIO HOMES, FAIRMONT VILLAS, AND TWO OF OUR STREETS.

THE ONLY ACCESS IS TO CHEEK-SPARGER. AND YOU CAN ALMOST THROW A STONE FROM WHERE WE LIVE TO THE NEW HEB.

AND THE TALK AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WE'LL NEVER GET OUT. SO I KNOW BEDFORD WORKED ON THE TIMING OF THE LIGHTS.

I KNOW EULESS WORKED ON IT. I KNOW WE HAD ACCESS TO TXDOT AND I'LL LEAVE THAT ALONE.

BUT IT WORKED REAL WELL. AND SO I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU AND LET THE PEOPLE DOWN THE LINE KNOW THAT BECAUSE SOMETIMES THE WORKER BEES DON'T HEAR THAT.

YEAH, IT'S THE WHOLE CITY. I THINK ALL OF US.

IT WAS AN EFFORT OF ALL THE DEPARTMENTS AND OBVIOUSLY WORKS WITH EULESS AND TXDOT.

AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT. THAT WAS A CONCERN. SO I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT. YES. I'M SORRY.

SORRY. BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION. FOR GATEWAY RESIDENTIAL.

I BELIEVE THEY CAME IN AND I JUST KIND OF DID SOME DIGGING JUST BECAUSE I LIKE TO LOOK AT PREVIOUS CASES BEFORE I COME IN. I KNOW IT WAS A ZONING CASE, 241. IT WAS STRAIGHT ZONING TO AN MD4. SO I DON'T THINK THEY WERE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE YOU WITH ANY CONCEPTUAL.

THEY HAVE NOT PULLED ANY BUILDING PERMITS YET BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT ACCEPTED THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY ELEVATIONS RENDERINGS, BUT WE CAN REACH OUT TO DAVID WEEKLEY AND THE APPLICANTS AND TRY TO GET YOU INFORMATION OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING, SO I CAN'T SAY IT LOOKS LIKE THAT OR IT DOESN'T.

AND COLTON'S HERE. I DON'T. THAT'S THE ENGINEER FOR RESIDENTIAL PORTION.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SPEAK TO THAT OR I DON'T KNOW IF HE DOES NOT.

YEAH. HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY INFORMATION. SO WE WILL LOOK INTO THAT AND GET YOU ANY INFORMATION.

IT WAS ONLINE. IT WAS ON MULTIPLE TIMES LIKE ON FACEBOOK.

YOU KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM I DON'T KNOW. THERE WAS A FIGURE WITH IT STARTING AT X.

BUT LIKE I SAID, I WAS I'VE SEEN DAVID WEEKLEY STUFF AND IT LOOKS PRETTY GOOD.

AND I KNOW THAT THEY'RE BEING CONSIDERED FOR POSSIBLY BEDFORD COMMONS.

SO I WAS JUST A LITTLE TAKEN BACK. SO I KNOW I'D LIKE TO KNOW, I WOULD THINK THE REST OF THE COMMISSION MIGHT WANT TO KNOW ALSO.

UNDERSTOOD. WE'LL TRY TO GET YOU INFORMATION AND SHARE IT WITH EVERYBODY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU. YES, I'M GLAD TO BE HERE.

YES, WE HAVE OUR ATTORNEY BACK WITH US. THANK YOU.

OF COURSE. GLAD THAT YOU REMEMBERED HOW TO GET BACK TO US AFTER ALL THIS TIME.

[LAUGHTER] AND THAT YOU CHOSE TO COME BACK. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

COMMISSIONERS ANYTHING ELSE? IT IS 6:13. WE ARE ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU. 33. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.