Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise Pud Conflict topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press city over Tri‑State industrial noise; officials warn changing PUD could prompt lawsuit
Summary
Maloney Gardens residents urged the Texarkana Board of Directors to act on persistent noise from a nearby Tri‑State facility, but city officials said recent decibel studies were below the ordinance threshold and warned altering a planned unit development (PUD) without the owner’s consent could trigger litigation.
Maloney Gardens residents urged the Texarkana Board of Directors on June 15 to address prolonged industrial noise they said runs through the day and evening, and to change zoning rules that currently allow the neighboring Tri‑State machine extended hours of operation.
"Y'ALL GOT THE POWER. Y'all was voted in to do this," one resident, identified in the transcript as Lidell, told the board while describing multiple neighbors who suffer noise 16 hours a day and asking officials to intervene.
Board members and staff told residents the property at issue operates under a planned unit development (PUD) that sets its hours and other conditions. The PUD was approved through the planning commission, and city staff said any party may apply for a PUD change but the city typically cannot unilaterally alter a PUD without the property owner’s agreement.
The police chief told the board past sound studies showed decibel readings were below the ordinance threshold. "They were below them," the chief said when asked about measurements.
City legal counsel warned that changing PUD terms without the owner’s consent could prompt immediate legal action from the developer or property owner. Counsel discussed possible outcomes, including injunctions, damages and attorney's fees, and cautioned that prevailing in court is uncertain.
Board members acknowledged residents’ frustration and the community member’s request for more direct action. Staff said they have data from past decibel tests and offered to attempt on‑site readings when available. The board also discussed the distinction between residential noise rules and commercial or PUD‑regulated operations, noting enforcement depends on where the sound originates and the legal constraints of existing approvals.
The exchange left residents seeking a path forward: staff encouraged gathering proof (meter readings and documented complaints) and exploring planning‑level options, while legal warnings highlighted the fiscal risk of unilateral ordinance changes.
What's next: staff said they have the decibel data and will try to arrange supplementary measurements; the board did not adopt any immediate ordinance changes during the meeting.
