Weatherford council tables conditional-use permit for Weatherford Implement Company to March 11

The Weatherford City Council on Feb. 25 tabled action on Ordinance 02025-07, a conditional-use permit request by Pamela Willis for Weatherford Implement Company (listed on a Coyote dealership page) that would allow display, storage and sale of new tractors, UTVs, compact construction equipment, utility trailers and lawnmowers on an approximately 2.48-acre tract at 1435 Fort Worth Highway. The motion to table to a date certain, March 11, was made by the mayor pro tem and seconded by Councilmember Zach Smith.

Council members said they wanted the applicant present to answer technical questions about what the permit would allow and how the city would enforce limits. The request to amend a permit originally considered in December 2023 would expand the business’s product line beyond the previously approved items, staff said. Planning and Zoning unanimously recommended approval on Feb. 12 subject to the staff-recommended conditions, with one revised condition labeled item 4.

Staff member Mr. Kettner told the council the applicant had already made building improvements and added fencing as required under the prior approval. Council members pressed for clarity on how the phrase “compact construction equipment” would be enforced; during the discussion council members and staff characterized that category as smaller equipment such as skid steers and small loaders rather than full-size backhoes. Councilmembers also asked whether the permit’s language limiting display, storage and sales to new equipment would exclude used sales, trades or on-site repairs; staff said the permit as written was limited to new equipment on site.

Council members raised corridor-design concerns tied to an established corridor policy: display and outside storage had been restricted in the corridor, and the fence and façade had been conditions intended to keep excess outdoor storage out of public view. Members also asked about tax and road-impact implications for heavier equipment and whether some product lines would be sales-tax exempt under agricultural exemptions. Staff said those were technical questions better answered by the applicant and suggested the council could require written responses or the applicant’s presence.

Because the applicant was not present to answer those questions, council voted to table the item to the March 11 meeting and asked staff to notify the applicant and request either in-person attendance or written responses to the outstanding questions. The matter will return to council on March 11 for further consideration.