The GAF asphalt shingle manufacturing factory in West Dallas has been an example of nonconforming use for some time now, and a resident named Janie Cisneros is trying to get the company to stop its operations through amortization. The problem for Cisneros and residents of a similar mindset, however, is that the amortization process could soon change.
Through amortization, a nonconforming use can be given a compliance date by which whatever is creating the nonconformity must end. A section of the city’s code says that any person who resides or owns real property in the city may request that the Dallas Board of Adjustment consider establishing a compliance date for a nonconforming use. Once the board receives this request, it will hold a public hearing to determine whether continued operation of the nonconforming use will have an adverse effect on nearby properties.
A recent change in Texas law has the city reconsidering this whole amortization idea. Senate Bill 929 requires municipalities to provide compensation to a property owner whose nonconforming use was shut down due to amortization. “This could put taxpayer funds at significant risk,” Casey Burgess, a city attorney, told the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee in October when it took up the proposed change.
Some have been strongly supportive of the bill, such as Dale Davenport, who you might remember as the owner of Jim’s Car Wash, which was shut down through amortization. “This new law needs to be put into effect and protect small business people,” Davenport told The Dallas Morning News in November. “The city of Dallas, they cannot be trusted, and they cannot be given too much power.”“This could put taxpayer funds at significant risk.” – Casey Burgess, city attorney
tweet this
The city is amending the amortization process in light of SB 929. Here’s where it gets a bit controversial: the city wants to take away residents’ right to file for amortization. Under Dallas’ initial proposed change, only the City Council member for the district the property is in could file for amortization.
But it’s not all doom and gloom. When the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee moved to send the proposal to the City Plan Commission, it did so on the condition that city staff consider the addition of an application process for residents to ask the City Council to authorize an amortization request to the Board of Adjustment. This requirement was unanimously approved by four members of the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee.
Even though the city code hasn’t been changed yet, Dallas has ceased taking applications to establish compliance dates for nonconforming uses. Cisneros tried to submit an application for amortization for the GAF factory with the city twice but was denied both times. That’s why she’s suing the city, claiming it had no right to refuse her application.
Cisneros said of the process: “It’s a service. It’s a right. It’s on the books.”
Davenport told the Observer this week that he didn’t know how to feel about the city’s proposed changes.
“I have kind of mixed feelings about that because I am for the residents being a part of the process instead of it all being political and politics,” he said. “But those that have invested heavily, they’re the ones that should be rewarded and the citizens need to know that.”
He said he tried to work with the city to keep his car wash open to no avail, which is why a law like SB 929 might be necessary.
“We tried hard,” he said. “It was the city that failed us.”
