An applicant seeking permission to operate a concrete batch plant on a 4.47‑acre parcel in Coppell withdrew that request during the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on Nov. 20 after staff said the use conflicted with the city’s 2030 comprehensive master plan and raised multiple technical issues.

Matt Steer, Coppell’s development services administrator, told commissioners the proposed special use permit (SD‑1270‑LI) would allow an operation expected to run longer than six months and that staff’s recommendation was denial. "Staff is recommending the SUP and the proposed future land use plan amendment from urban residential neighborhood to industrial special district be denied," Steer said, citing the "high intensity of the use" and the parcel’s intended redevelopment as urban residential.

Steer said the property lacks public road frontage and has been bought and sold without proper platting; staff said a plat and a 24‑foot fire/access easement across neighboring properties would be required before any permit could be issued. He also noted a Lone Star Gas easement across the front of the site and a 20‑foot sewer easement, and raised concerns about the feasibility of the proposed water line and requirements for pipe encasement where lines cross railroad right‑of‑way.

At the hearing the applicant, Phil Flink, executive vice president of Estrada Companies, asked for more time to provide information and explore a shorter, time‑limited SUP. "I'm here tonight to respectfully request a continuance," Flink told the commission, and later suggested a finite window "up to 60 months" might be an option while the property is evaluated and the applicant works with staff.

Commissioners and staff raised procedural and notice concerns about changing the application mid‑process from an indefinite SUP to a time‑limited SUP. After discussion about deadlines and hearing notice requirements, Flink chose to withdraw the application and resubmit at a later deadline. The chair accepted the withdrawal and the record was updated to reflect that the applicant voluntarily withdrew during the public meeting.

No members of the public spoke for or against the batch‑plant request during the public hearing portion of the item. Steer said that prior to any future submittal, platting and access issues would need to be resolved and that detailed engineering and permitting reviews would follow.

Next steps: The applicant indicated an intent to refile; staff advised a resubmittal aligned with the city’s submittal schedule (January for the February hearing) so the commission and staff can receive complete application materials before any new public hearing.