The safety of children of all races should be given the same consideration when a Garland makerspace site is proposed again

All of Garland's children of all ethnicities need to be taken into account when discussing makerspace sites.

So that the city won't "end up in the same tailspin all over again", Councilmember Scott LeMay has wisely proposed adopting specific zoning criteria regulating makerspaces in Garland—where they should be situated, how much parking is needed, and other such requirements for an operation in Garland.

I concur with the councilmember, who noted that even if a location other than the controversial armory site is found, it well could spark a repeat of Monday night's marathon council meeting—a site "next to something" that yet another group of citizens would oppose.

The city needs to think long and carefully about exactly whether we really want a makerspace in Garland, where exactly it should be situated if one indeed is created in this city, and what the precise and enforceable governing rules for it should be. (The Dallas Morning News' Ray Leszcynski this week gave a good "makerspace" definition: "places for do-it-yourself projects or business ventures that don't necessarily fit a garage.")

On this issue everybody needs to slow down, take a deep breath, and think further.

Monday night's debate was so fraught with dramatic moments on both sides that a "time out" to think this through clearly needs to occur. Developing a zoning use category for makerspaces could be that appropriate recess on the issue. It would give councilmembers time to clear their heads and carefully weigh everything that is concerned.

As I have often said during my nearly 10 years on the Garland Plan Commission, "Reasonable people, working for a reasonable amount of time on an issue, ought to be able to find a reasonable solution."

Much of the debate during the Council session centered on the appropriateness of using the old abandoned armory buildings along Glenbrook in Garland's Central Park for makerspaces. The majority of council members said they support having a makerspace in Garland but not in the old armory buildings, which the city had planned before the makerspace issue suddenly erupted to demolish to make way for a new dog park and skateboard park in Central Park but which the makerspace supporters said was perfect for their enterprise.

One issue in the debate leaped out at me with red lights flashing and red flags waiving.

Much was said about the inappropriateness of locating a makerspace operation close to the nearby historic Embree neighborhood, situated within hundreds of feet from the armory. Points were scored about the possibility of noise, dangerous propane fires, etc., occurring near homes, especially with children in them.

All are very valid concerns.

However, twice during the discussion it was suggested that a Garland makerspace could be located in an old, near-town manufacturing building that has been for sale for more than a year but that now is under contract. That vintage 1947-era facility, which is still occupied and used for light industry, is surrounded on the south and west by homes, some whose back yards are situated less than 20 feet from that building. Most of the houses that are closest to that facility have children living in them. Most of those children are Hispanic or other nonwhite groups.

That last fact points out another major reason not to act in haste but to carefully think through the issue fully. Otherwise the city could potentially end up in a major federal discrimination lawsuit, taking this current debate to an even worse level.

Though it has some Hispanic residents, Embree nearest the armory in Central Park is a predominantly white community. The houses surrounding the alternative site suggested Monday night are mostly Hispanic, especially the homes with children closest to the facility.

If a makerspace facility is inappropriate for a neighborhood mostly containing white children living hundreds of feet away, then it is also inappropriate for nonwhite children living and playing less than 20 feet away from this one alternate proposed facility.

All children are—or should be—precious to our community, too. 

The new ordinance must define clearly and carefully boundaries that do not favor one group in our community over another. I'd personally rather not have a makerspace facility in Garland than to have one nonwhite group of children be treated poorly—or more unfairly—than in contrast to another.

The discussion also pointed out the wide range of hobbyists that can use makerspaces. Like many others, I initially believed these were places where sewing, jewelry-making, woodworking, art, and other hobbies are advocated. Instead, opponents pointed out the list can be much wider. A video of racing cars and a noisy jet engine shown to the council definitely pointed out the need for guidelines to spell out noise and other limits on what occurs at a makerspace.

However, on the day when headlines around the world were reporting the deaths of 59 people and injury of more than 500 others in Las Vegas from an apparent lone gunman using a massive amount of guns and ammunition, Councilmember Robert Vera wisely asked proponents about the possibility of any guns or ammunition being at the makerspace facility. Much to my surprise, the makerspace proponents talked about a loophole in federal law that allows gun parts to be assembled into guns in such facilities as well as ammunition reloaded. They also talked about classes for citizens on cleaning guns, which means firearms (which they say would be unloaded) would be carried in and out of the facility.

In light of current circumstances, that matter raised more concerns than all the other noise and safety issues combined! At the minimum it needs to be discussed thoroughly and completely from all angles. It's another reason to slow down the process—think it through carefully and totally before any decision is made.

If we have a makerspace in Garland, we need Scott LeMay's proposal that a zoning design be written and adopted first to assure us citizens that it will be located in a safe place, operated in an appropriate manner, and respectful of all Garland citizens regardless of race, creed, color, or religion. 

Anything less is not acceptable!