Irving planning commission recommends denial of Tesla robotaxi land‑use change after fire, police say more review needed

The Irving Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6–2 on May 4 to forward a comprehensive‑plan amendment and companion zoning case related to a proposed Tesla robotaxi cleaning, maintenance and charging facility to city council with a recommendation for denial.

Adam Koinga, president of Hoffman Planning Associates, and Michael Hugh, a Tesla design manager, told the commission the proposal would repurpose an end‑cap of an existing warehouse‑style building into a purpose‑built robotaxi facility. Hugh said the building is about "36,000 square feet" and the project would use a nearby off‑site lot with roughly 200 stalls for queuing. He described the site as dedicated to robotaxis — "daily safety checks and interior cleaning," light tire and wheel work, parts storage and an office area for staff — and said Tesla estimates "approximately a few thousand" vehicles could be serviced from a facility of this scale while using multiple facilities regionally.

"What's proposed here today is a purpose built facility in Irving that's utilized for cleaning, service, maintenance and charging of our robotaxis," Hugh said during his presentation. He added the company has deployed robotaxi operations in other Texas markets and said Tesla's first‑responder outreach and fire protection engineering teams have been contacting local departments to schedule training.

Fire Chief Jeff Hogan urged the commission to delay action so departments could obtain more substantive materials and evaluate operations and what would be stored on site. "The fire department is requesting a delay," Hogan said, adding contacts to date had been limited and the department needs additional information to evaluate public‑safety implications.

Commissioners debated whether to postpone to allow more time for police and fire review, and staff noted a three‑month postponement had been discussed as an option. Applicant representatives said they were willing to work with the departments but expressed concern that a firm council policy against the requested change could make months of work fruitless.

After hearing the presentation and discussion, a commissioner moved to send the comprehensive‑plan case (2026‑52‑CP) to city council with a recommendation for denial; the motion passed 6–2. The commission followed procedural formality and likewise sent the companion zoning case (2026‑51‑ZC) to council with a recommendation for denial by the same margin.

The votes are recommendations; city council will take final action. Commissioners and staff noted that sending the recommendation to council does not prevent the applicant from seeking postponement or presenting further information to address police and fire department concerns.

The commission also heard other agenda items and adjourned at 7:39 p.m.