Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council rejects special‑use permit for proposed Josie Ranch event center after parking and setback concerns

City of Carrollton City Council · September 9, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council declined to approve a special‑use permit to convert 2129 N. Josey into a 125‑person event venue, citing concerns about shared parking, long‑term impacts of a perpetual SUP and adjacent property owner rights; the motion failed 3–4.

The Carrollton City Council on Sept. 9 declined to approve a special‑use permit to convert 2129 N. Josey into a 5,077‑square‑foot event venue that the applicant said would host up to 125 guests.

Applicant Oscar Mendoza described the project as a needed smaller‑scale venue and presented a parking and traffic study he said showed sufficient spaces during proposed evening and weekend hours. Staff and independent consultants noted the property sits within an area governed by an earlier SUP that permits shared parking among four lots; staff reported a total of about 54–57 parking spaces on the shared parcel and expressed concern that an event use would be higher intensity than the mostly office uses originally contemplated. The traffic consultant said a conservative estimate of 2.5 people per car yields about 50 spaces required at full capacity, which would leave few spaces for other parcels in the shared area.

Neighbors and some councilmembers raised setbacks, screening and the legacy effect of a special‑use permit that "runs with the land." Supporters and local vendors emphasized economic benefits, vendor opportunities and the applicant's track record operating an existing venue. Councilmember Palomo moved to approve a modification to the hours requested by the applicant but to keep the SUP limits on alcohol service; that motion failed on a 3–4 vote (Fleming, Klein and Palomo in favor). The council indicated the site likely is not the right location given the shared‑parking constraints and the potential long‑term impacts on adjacent property owners.