Case Date:

9/17/2026

Thank you for continuing to investigate this and for forwarding the truck traffic question to Engineering. I wanted to provide some additional information and also clarify a few questions. First, I am not entirely clear on how 2615 S. Kendall Drive relates to the FBM operation or to the semi-truck traffic I originally reported. Could Planning clarify what commercial use was found to be occurring on that residentially zoned parcel? Is that property being used by FBM for access, truck circulation, storage, staging, parking, or some other part of its operations? My concern about truck traffic is also not limited to S. Kendall Drive. Semi-trucks serving FBM continue to travel through the residential neighborhood, including Watson Street and Bryan Street. My broader concern is why semi-trucks serving this commercial facility are routinely entering and traveling through the residential neighborhood at all, rather than accessing the commercial property from Country Club Drive. For Engineering, I would appreciate clarification about whether semi-trucks serving this facility are permitted to routinely use Watson Street, Bryan Street, S. Kendall Drive, and other residential neighborhood streets as access routes. If there are currently no restrictions, does the City have the ability to establish an appropriate truck route or otherwise restrict commercial truck traffic through these residential streets? I also wanted to make Planning and Engineering aware of a significant change in ownership since the property's historic use was established. Lowe's Companies completed its $8.8 billion acquisition of Foundation Building Materials in October 2025. In announcing the acquisition, Lowe's specifically described plans to enhance its Pro business through expanded capabilities, faster fulfillment, improved digital tools, and cross-selling opportunities. I understand that a corporate acquisition alone may not necessarily require new local approvals. However, given the recent change in ownership, Lowe's stated goals for FBM, and Planning's discovery that part of the current operation has expanded onto a residentially zoned parcel, I think it is important to ask whether the nature or intensity of this location's operations has changed or may change enough to require additional City review. I am also unclear how substantially increased fulfillment, truck traffic, or other commercial activity could be accommodated at this particular location without further affecting the surrounding residential neighborhood. If operations at this facility increase, what zoning, site-plan, traffic, access, or development review would be required to determine whether this location and its existing access points can accommodate that activity? Here is Lowe's announcement regarding its acquisition of FBM: https://corporate.lowes.com/newsroom/press-releases/lowes-completes-acquisition-foundation-building-materials-10-09-25 Thank you again for looking into this. I appreciate Planning pursuing the Title 20 issue and Engineering investigating the truck traffic. I would especially appreciate clarification about how the Kendall property fits into FBM's operation and whether commercial semi-truck traffic through Watson, Bryan, Kendall, and the surrounding residential neighborhood is permitted.

Case Date:

7/24/2026

ATT came onto my property to install fiber via a utility easement with the city and left my yard damaged per attached photo. ATT said they are not liable for the damage. The installers had stated they would return the following day to level the ground, seed and straw the area. That was over a month ago and they never returned. Who is liable for this property damage? I am prepared to file a claim against whomever that may be. Thanks.

Case Date:

7/24/2026

Follow up to report # 211915 Thank you for reviewing my report. I appreciate the time Planning and BPD took to look into my concerns. I understand BPD's explanation that noise from vehicles operating at a business is not something they can cite as an ordinance violation. However, I don't believe that fully addressed the questions raised in my original report. I understand the property dates back to 1980 and that there may not be an approved site plan on file. However, if the intensity or nature of the business's operations has changed significantly since that time—particularly with increased semi-truck traffic, early morning unloading activities, or the regular use of residential neighborhood entrances—I was wondering whether those changes would require any additional review, approvals, or compliance with current zoning or development standards. I also noticed my question regarding truck circulation was not addressed. Specifically, are semi-trucks permitted to routinely access the property through the Broadview neighborhood entrances, or are they expected to use the primary entrance on Country Club Drive? If there is no site plan, is there another document or approval that governs truck access and circulation for the property? I recognize that businesses have a right to operate and that some level of noise is expected. My concern is not with the existence of the business itself, but whether its current operations and traffic patterns remain consistent with applicable City regulations and whether there are reasonable ways to reduce the impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood. I would appreciate any clarification you can provide regarding these questions. Thank you again for your time.

Case Date:

2/13/2025

AT&T has two dead trees in front of its building. They have been dead so long one has splintered from rot and is now on the ground in numerous shards right next to the sidewalk.

Case Date:

4/17/2015

We are the landlord of this commercial building and have a shared alley way. There are two white trash bags leaning against our building (left by students across the alley most likely) - trash is strung out of it due to animals and there is some broken glass as well. Can you please take care of cleaning this up??