Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Liquor PD24 23 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arlington commission rejects planned development to allow liquor store near Forest Hills
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted down a request to rezone 2425 Northeast Green Oaks Blvd. to permit a package liquor store after residents and commissioners raised concerns about neighborhood compatibility, proximity to schools and parks, and outlet concentration; motion failed 1–7 with 1 absence.
The Arlington Planning and Zoning Commission declined to recommend approval of PD24‑23, a planned‑development request that would have allowed a package liquor store at 2425 Northeast Green Oaks Boulevard.
Chair Dr. Ignacio Nunez opened the public hearing after staff planner Alex Van Amberg described the proposal: a change from community commercial zoning to a PD to permit a roughly 2,574‑square‑foot packaged‑liquor use in an existing multi‑tenant building on a 3.13‑acre site. Staff noted the site’s surrounding mix of single‑family homes, apartments and commercial uses and identified landscaping and signage deficiencies that would need correction at certificate of occupancy.
Applicant representatives said the store would bring investment and jobs. Attorney Mike Kelly told commissioners the business would generate tax revenue “over $100,000 per year” and include security, upgraded lighting and 24‑hour surveillance. Owner Amir Mumtaz said he operates four liquor stores in the region and provided signed petitions and printed copies he said show substantial neighborhood support.
Residents who live adjacent to the shopping center objected. Moji Haddad, who said he owns the nearby shopping center and lives in Forest Hills, told the commission the center is embedded in a residential neighborhood and that the location is not comparable to other nearby liquor stores that front major thoroughfares. Jude Plache and Phil Martin, long‑time residents, cited a nearby elementary school, a bus stop used by students, a dog park and past crime incidents; Martin said neighborhood cameras had been installed after armed‑robbery incidents.
Commissioners probed whether online letters were verified (staff said the portal does not require addresses or IP tracking) and clarified that setbacks and protected‑use reviews (for schools, churches, hospitals) are enforced at the liquor‑permit stage by TABC and city reviewers. Staff noted parks are not a protected use under TABC.
After deliberation, Commissioner Ware moved to approve the PD as presented with Commissioner Blake seconding; the motion failed. The commission recorded the outcome as: “Motion fails. 1 yes, 7 no’s, and 1 absence.”
The chair moved to the next agenda item. The applicant may pursue council review or a future resubmittal if he chooses.
