YDHLGE Logo
YDHLGEYou Don't Hate Local Government Enough
Back to Docket Search
17 • Agenda ItemCity of Mesquite (Dallas County)

Public Hearing and Ordinance - Zoning Application No. Z0425-0391

Presented in: City of Mesquite City Council on 2026-01-20
Meeting Agenda PDFOfficial Minutes PDF

Official Roll-Call Vote

Expands Gov't • 6.5/10 Impact Weight
PASSED (7 - 0)
“A public hearing was held for Zoning Application No. Z0425-0391. Adam Bailey, Director of Planning and Development Services, stated that the applicant originally requested rezoning to Planned Development - Commercial to allow a building contractor's office with an accessory outdoor storage area. At the November 10, 2025, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission indicated a preference for the request to be considered as Planned Development - General Retail (PD-GR) with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The applicant agreed, and the case was re-noticed accordingly. The site historically functioned as a legal nonconforming outdoor contractor storage yard for decades. The property became vacant in May 2024. The applicant acquired the property unaware of its zoning and legal nonconforming status, which expired in November 2024. The proposed plan includes a 3,000-square-foot building for office and material storage, with approximately 9,500 square feet of accessory out”
DA
Daniel Alemán, Jr.
Mayor (At-Large)
YES
“Aye”
JC
Jeff Casper
Councilmember, Place 1 (Place 1)
YES
“Aye”
KG
Kenny Green
Councilmember, Place 2 (Place 2)
YES
“Aye”
ER
Elizabeth Rodriguez-Ross
Councilmember, Place 3 (Place 3)
YES
“Aye”
AH
Andrew Hubacek
Councilmember, Place 4 (Place 4)
YES
“Aye”
BS
B.W. Smith
Councilmember, Place 5 (Place 5)
YES
“Aye”
BM
Brandon Murden
Councilmember, Place 6 (Place 6)
YES
“Aye”

Staff Report & Agenda Item Details

A public hearing was held for Zoning Application No. Z0425-0391. Adam Bailey, Director of Planning and Development Services, stated that the applicant originally requested rezoning to Planned Development - Commercial to allow a building contractor's office with an accessory outdoor storage area. At the November 10, 2025, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission indicated a preference for the request to be considered as Planned Development - General Retail (PD-GR) with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The applicant agreed, and the case was re-noticed accordingly. The site historically functioned as a legal nonconforming outdoor contractor storage yard for decades. The property became vacant in May 2024. The applicant acquired the property unaware of its zoning and legal nonconforming status, which expired in November 2024. The proposed plan includes a 3,000-square-foot building for office and material storage, with approximately 9,500 square feet of accessory outdoor storage for company vehicles and trailers, representing about 12 percent of the site. The development meets parking, landscaping, height, and setback requirements, as well as an 8-foot precast screening wall along the perimeter. The proposed ordinance will establish GR as the base zoning district with restrictions on certain uses while allowing a CUP for the contractor business with accessory outdoor storage. The ordinance limits the CUP to the applicant and establishes limits on what can be stored outdoors. Applicant Braulio Camarillo stated that construction materials would be delivered to the site approximately twice a year. Operating hours will be 7:00 a.m. to 5;00 p.m. with vehicles stored on-site. 1. Sherri Neal, 3916 Hunters Trail, expressed opposition to the proposed application. 2. Tammy Jo Strong, 1713 Cool Springs Drive, expressed support for the proposed application. Mr. Green moved to deny Zoning Application No. Z0425-0391. Motion was seconded by Mr. Casper and approved unanimously.

Bastiat Liberty & Property Rights Analysis

This motion is scored as EXPANDS_GOVERNMENT (Impact Weight: 6.5/10). Under the Bastiat Liberty Watchdog Index, measures that increase tax rates or fee schedules, issue new debt or Certificates of Obligation, expand regulatory/zoning restrictions on private land use, or authorize unbudgeted spending expansions reduce an official's Freedom Score when voted YES (and reward dissenting NO votes).