Feb 15, 2024 City Council Zoning and Land Use Session

[ Roll Call  ]

[00:00:09]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ON THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, WE'LL CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. MADAM CLERK, COULD YOU READ THE ROLL.

[Public Hearing and Consideration of the following Adoption and Amendments of the Neighborhood, Community and Perimeter Plans as Components of the Master Plan and Zoning Cases. Plan amendments and Zoning cases presented by Roderick Sanchez, Assistant City Manager; Michael Shannon, Director, Development Services unless otherwise noted.  ]

HAVE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ITEMS 16 AND 17 HAVE BEEN PULLED FROM THE AGENDA, WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT WILL BE CONTINUED TO MARCH 7TH. THAT'S ITEMS 9 AND 12.

ITEM 11 WILL BE CONTINUED. I'LL ASK FOR THOSE EMOTIONS SHORTLY.

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE GOING TO BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY, 1, 2, 4, 5, 13, 14, AND 22 AND 23. ASIDE FROM ALL THOSE ITEMS THAT I JUST MENTIONED, THE REST ARE GOING TO BE HEARD ON CONSENT. I'LL ASK MY COLLEAGUES IF THERE ARE ANY ITEMS REMAINING ON CONSENT IF WE WANT TO HEAR THOSE INDIVIDUALLY, LET ME KNOW NOW. IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A

MOTION FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> COURAGE: SO MOVED.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT ZONING AGENDA. THESE ARE GOING TO BE HEARD RIGHT NOW ON CONSENT, NUMBER 3, 6, 7 AND 8, 10, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, AND 28.

THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE NOW HERE FOR DISCUSSION. WE'LL BEGIN OUR DISCUSSION FIRST WITH PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEMS THAT REMAIN ON CONSENT. I'LL CALL YOU NOW. FIRST WE HAVE JACK FINGER ON

ITEMS 3, 6, 15, 19 AND 20. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG, OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR ILLUSTRIOUS SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS JACK M. FINGER.

THERE ARE A FEW ITEMS THAT I THINK YOU SHOULDN'T CONSENT TO.

I THINK YOU SHOULD PULL THESE AND ACTUALLY DELIBERATE ON THEM.

ITEM NUMBER 3 IS IN MS. KAUR'S YOUR DISTRICT, DISTRICT 1.

IT'S ABOUT THE IDEA ON NORTH ST. MARY'S STREET OF PUTTING ANOTHER BAR OR TAVERN DOWN THERE. MS. KAUR, ST. MARY'S STRIP IS OVERLOADED WITH BARS AND TAVERNS. MS. KAUR. DO WE REALLY NEED ANOTHER ONE OVER THERE? SO I WOULD ASK YOU, MS. KAUR, TO PLEASE PULL THIS ONE AND SAY NO TO IT. YEAH, JEEZ, HOW MANY -- HOW MANY TIMES DOES A PERSON NEED TO GET DRUNK THAT NIGHT? ITEM NUMBER 6 IS IN MS. VIAGRAN'S DISTRICT, SHE'S NOT HERE TODAY. I'M SORRY TO SEE THAT.

I WISH SOMEONE WOULD PLEASE TELL HER THAT ITEM NUMBER 6 IS ABOUT PUTTING AN INCREASING BY 100% OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS IN A PARTICULAR PROPERTY OVER ON GOLIAD STREET. GOLIAD ROAD. WHY DO WE NEED TO PUT THE EXTRA DENSITY IN THERE? I MEAN THE -- THERE WAS ACTUALLY -- WHEN YOU HAVE AS MANY AS A THIRD, OVER A THIRD OF THE PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS SAYING THEY DO NOT WANT IT CIRCULATING AROUND THAT AREA, THAT'S SIGNIFICANT.

USUALLY IT'S SIGNIFICANT IF YOU ONLY GET 5 OR 10%. HERE YOU GET OVER A THIRD.

THAT'S ITEM NUMBER 6 THERE, YEAH. ITEM NUMBER 18, I THINK IT IS HERE. JUST WANT TO GET MY -- SO MANY SCANDALS, SO LITTLE TIME HERE. ALLOW ME TO JUST DOUBLE-CHECK IT HERE.

YEAH. ITEM NUMBER 18. YEAH, OKAY.

[00:05:04]

THE LACKLAND TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THOUGHT IT WAS A BAD IDEA.

WHY? LACKLAND TERRACE IS PRETTY DILIGENT, BUT THEY DO NOT LIKE THE EXTRA DENSITY AND KNOW THE BAD EFFECTS COULD LEAD TO IT.

MS. HAVRDA, WHEREVER YOU MAY BE, THEY DON'T WANT IT. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. FINGER. ON ITEM NUMBER 6, JAMES MCKNIGHT. YOU WILL BE FOLLOWED BY ARTHUR LONGORIA.

I'M SORRY, JAMES WILLBURN ON ITEM 19. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

JAMES MCKNIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE COUNCILWOMAN WHO IS NOT HERE FOR HER LEADERSHIP ON THE PROJECT.

WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE PROJECT BUT WANTED TO ENTER A LIST OF COMMITMENTS WE HAVE MADE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS SEVERAL LETTERS OF SUPPORT WE RECEIVED INCLUDING FROM BROOKS AND THE UIW SCHOOL OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE.

WE'RE EXCITED AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK

YOU, MR. MCKNIGHT. JAMES WILLBURN ON ITEM 19. >> HELLO, I LIVE AT 4223 WILLARD DRIVE. I'M HERE EXPRESSING MY CONCERN ON SOME RENTAL UNITS THAT ARE GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT 4119 WILLARD DRIVE.

AND WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS SHOW YOU ALL WHAT RENTAL UNITS HAVE BROUGHT TO MY STREET, WILLARD DRIVE, AND FROM THE SOUTHERN PART OF WILLARD DRIVE BEHIND ALL THEIR FENCES, I'VE GOT AN ENTIRE POLICE REPORT OF INCIDENT REPORTS OF WHAT GOES ON AT THE RENTAL UNITS THERE. BANDERA ROAD, WHICH IS JUST NORTH OF WHERE THE NEW UNITS ARE GOING TO BE BUILT, I HAVE INCIDENT REPORTS FROM THE SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT OF WHAT GOES ON IN THOSE RENTAL UNITS.

AND I WANTED TO SHOW THAT THIS IS WHAT RENTAL UNITS HAVE BROUGHT TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOW MUCH OF THAT ARE WE GOING TO GET FROM ANOTHER ONE BEING BUILT. AGAIN, NO PROBLEM IF IT'S RESIDENTS, BUT WHEN IT'S A RENTAL UNIT, PEOPLE COME AND GO AND THIS IS SOMETHING I THINK CITY COUNCIL SHOULD REVIEW. THIS IS THE FACTS. ONE OF THE MOST PRECARIOUS THINGS ABOUT WHERE THIS UNIT IS GOING TO BE BUILT RIGHT ACROSS IS THE BRAG DRAGON BAR. ASSAULT, YOU NAME IT. WHEN YOU HAVE AN APARTMENT BUILDING LIKE THAT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DRINK AND DRIVE, YOU CAN WALK AS MUCH AS YOU WANT. THIS IS NEXT TO AN AREA WHERE WE HAVE SCHOOLS.

THE WOODLAWN HILLS ELEMENTARY AND A DAY CARE CENTER.

AND THIS IS MY CONCERN AND I HAVE STUFF HERE YOU SHOULD REVIEW BEFORE YOU OKAY 4119.

THAT'S IT. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. WILLBURN.

DANIEL ARUTIA, FOLLOWED BY ARTHUR LONGORIA, ITEM 20. >> THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY. I'M GOING TO BEGIN BY THANKING MRS. GAVITA.

I KNOW THE WORST CASE SCENARIO -- I'M PASTOR OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

OUR CONCERN IS -- OUR OTHER NEIGHBOR MENTIONED IS THE CRIME AND VANDALISM.

I GUESS OUR MAIN CONCERN SO MUCH RESIDENTS, PEOPLE WOULD MOVE IN THERE, LIVE THERE, THAT THEY WOULD BE NEIGHBORS, BUT WHEN IT BECOMES A RENTAL PROPERTY, WE ALSO KNOW THERE'S PROBLEMS GOING TO ARISE FROM THAT AS WELL.

MY CONCERN IS -- WELL, FOR OUR SERVICES IN PARTICULAR, I BELIEVE THAT I SAW THE PLANS AND THERE'S GOING TO BE HOUSE RIGHT ACROSS THE FENCE FROM WHERE OUR SANCTUARY IS. MY CONCERN IS WHETHER OUR MUSIC AND OUR NOISE WILL BE BOTHERING THEM AND IF THEIR MUSIC AND NOISE MIGHT BE BOTHERING US AND INTERFERING WITH OUR SERVICES AS WELL. THOSE ARE MY MAIN CONCERNS, YOU KNOW, FOR OUR CHILDREN, FOR OUR CONGREGATION AND ALSO FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR BLOCK THAT WERE AGAINST THIS AS WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU. ARTHUR LONGORIA.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M HERE IN REGARDS TO TIMBERHILL THING GOING ON.

THEY ARE PLANNING ON BUILDING SOME APARTMENTS DIRECTLY BEHIND OUR HOUSE.

[00:10:05]

NOW THERE'S -- IT'S GOING TO BE 100-FOOT FROM OUR PROPERTY TO THEIR FIRST BUILDING. AND THESE APARTMENT BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO HAVE A PARKING LOT IN BETWEEN. IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE STUCK WITH THAT.

THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO. THEY'VE GONE FROM BUILDING HOMES TO NOW I GUESS THERE'S MORE PROFIT IN IT FOR THEM TO BUILD APARTMENTS. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING -- I DON'T KNOW WHERE ELSE TO GO. WE'VE TURNED EVERYWHERE ELSE, TALKED TO MS. GAVITO AND ARGUING WITH THE TRAFFIC FOR FIVE YEARS, NOTHING GETS DONE. WE ASKED FOR SIMPLE SPEED BUMPS TO SLOW THE TRAFFIC DOWN AND THEY SAY -- THEY COME UP WITH ALL KINDS OF EXCUSES WHY THEY CAN'T DO IT. CAN'T GET TOO CLOSE TO THE BRIDGE, CAN'T GO ON THE BRIDGE. IF A SPEED BUMP IS TOO HEAVY FOR A BRIDGE, WE HAVE NO BUSINESS DRIVING OUR CARS ACROSS IT BUT YET THEY WON'T PUT THEM IN.

THESE SPEED BUMPS, I ANTICIPATE, WOULD COST THEM THREE TO $4,000.

BUT THEY'VE PUT IN $6,000 FOR THESE LITTLE STOP SIGNS WITH BLINKING LIGHTS WHICH DID NO GO AT ALL. IT'S LIKE WE'LL DO ANYTHING BUT WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO.

IT'S A LITTLE FRUSTRATING. NOW YOU ARE GOING TO ALLOW THESE PEOPLE TO BUILD BEHIND US AND TEAR UP OUR PROPERTY VALUE. AND WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO? WHO DO WE ARGUE WITH? YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE OUR LAST -- YOU KNOW, GOAL. WHAT DO WE DO? AND NOTHING GETS DONE.

I'VE GONE TO MEETINGS WITH THEM AND THE ONLY MEETING THAT I HAVEN'T GONE TO WITH THESE PEOPLE IS BECAUSE MY MOTHER DIED UP IN MINNESOTA AND I COULDN'T BE HERE, BUT I'D HAVE BEEN HERE. I'M TIRED OF IT. YOU GUYS, I MEAN IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS, THREE APARTMENT BUILDINGS COMPLEXES HAVE BEEN BUILT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THE STREET WAS NOT MEANT TO TAKE THAT MUCH TRAFFIC.

BUT YET YOU JUST KEEP ADDING TO IT. NOW THEY WANT TO PUT 288 APARTMENTS IN BEHIND US. THIS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T STOP THEM, I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN. SO WHAT DO YOU DO? WITH THAT, I THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. LONGORIA. THAT IS EVERYONE WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEMS THAT REMAIN ON CONSENT. WE'LL MOVE NOW TO COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY QUEUED UP AT THE MOMENT. COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO.

>> GAVITO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. FOR THE PAST FOUR AND A HALF MONTHS, OUR OFFICE HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THE RESIDENTS IN REGARDS TO ITEM 20, RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA TO BRING INFORMATION AND OPTIONS.

THROUGH THREE COMMUNITY MEETINGS WE HAVE MADE A FEW SIGNIFICANT CHANGES INCLUDING REDUCING THE DENSITY FROM 360 UNITS DOWN TO 280.

WE ESTABLISHED 11 ACRES OF GREEN SPACE. WE RECEIVED COMMITMENTS TO ADDRESS LONG STANDING TRAFFIC ISSUES THAT WERE REFERENCED AND A COMMITMENT TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS ISSUES IN THE AREA. WE LISTENED TO OUR RESIDENTS AND ADVOCATED FOR THESE CHANGES AND COMMITMENTS THROUGH SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT AND THE RESIDENTS OF TIMBERHILL COMMUNITY FOR THEIR PARTNERSHIP ON THIS

ZONING CASE. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY. HEARING NONE, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THOSE ITEMS I READ THAT REMAIN ON CONSENT.

PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, ITEM 9 AND 12 WILL BE MOVED, CONTINUED TO MARCH 7TH. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR

CONTINUING THOSE ITEMS. >> COURAGE: SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND TO CONTINUE ITEMS 9 AND 12 TO MARCH 7TH. I GOT ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THAT, JACK FINGER. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE HEARD TODAY.

[00:15:05]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME ONCE AGAIN IS JACK M. FINGER. ITEM NUMBER 9 IS IN DISTRICT 3.

THAT'S IN MS. VIAGRAN'S DISTRICT, AND ONCE AGAIN SHE STILL HASN'T RETURNED TO HER SEAT TODAY. WHOEVER IS DEALING WITH ITEM 9, YOU MIGHT TELL MS. VIAGRAN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DO NOT LIKE THIS PROPOSAL HERE.

IT'S ABOUT PUTTING A SO-CALLED SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS, YEAH, SUPPORTING HOUSING CAMPUS OVER ON THE SOUTH PRESA STREET. YEAH.

THEY GOT -- FOR ONE THING, THE HOT WELLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES THIS THING. YOU HAD AS MANY AS 83 SIGNATURES PETITIONED AGAINST THIS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. CAMPUS.

AND THE BACKUP DOCUMENTS DON'T TELL US WHAT KIND OF SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IT IS.

WE DON'T KNOW. NOBODY TELLS US THESE THINGS.

IS IT A HALFWAY HOUSE? WHAT KIND OF SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IS THIS? ANYWAY, MAYBE SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO SQUELCH THIS THING SINCE THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF OPPOSITION FROM THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO LIVE NEXT TO THAT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAMPUS THERE. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. FINGER. THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE OF ITEMS 9 AND 12. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. COUNCILMEMBER PELÁEZ. >> PELÁEZ: YES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 11 WILL BE CONTINUED TO MARCH 21ST. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THAT.

>> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE OF ITEM 11 TO MARCH 21ST.

NO ONE IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THAT. ANY DISCUSSION?

HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. COUNCILMEMBER PELÁEZ? >> PELÁEZ: YES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: MOTION CARRIES. WE'LL GO NOW TO THE

INDIVIDUAL ITEMS STARTING WITH ITEM 1. >> APPLICANT IS AMENDING TO USES PERMITTED IN FM -- MF # 3 WITH AMENDED SITE PLAN.

45 NOTICES MAILED, FOUR IN FAVOR, 25 OPPOSED. THIS WILL REQUIRE SUPER MAJORITY AS OPPOSITION IS 31%. UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN IN SUPPORT, BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.

OUTSIDE THE 200-FOOT BOUNDARY, FIVE IN FAVOR AND TEN OPPOSED?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE HAVE A FEW FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1.

WE'LL START WITH BETH SHOLAMER. YOU WILL BE FOLLOWED BY JACK

FINGER. >> I'M SHARING TIME WITH BETH?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WHAT'S YOUR NAME? >> RAY SALINAS.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: MR. SALINAS AND BETH, YOU ARE CEDING YOUR TIME.

YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES. >> THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, RAY SALINAS.

I LIVE AT 206 AVENUE WITH MY WIFE MONICA. I'M HERE TO VOICE THE CONCERNS FOR THE COMMUNITY IN CASE ENDING 303 AT 137 UNIVERSITY.

AVENUE. WE ARE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, FOR THIS ZONING REQUEST.

DR. KAUR MET WITH US AND GAVE US SOME INFORMATION. MR. WILSON FROM THE CASE ZONING OFFICE HAS BEEN EDUCATING US AS WELL SO WE'RE LEARNING AS WE GO.

WE'RE NEW TO THIS. I DON'T GO OUT FOR ZONING. WE ARE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT WE NEED TO INCLUDE OUR CONCERNS THAT STARTED IN JANUARY

[00:20:01]

THE OWNER/DEVELOPER OF THIS PROPERTY JUST PHILADELPHIA US THE DRIVEWAY ON FREDERICKSBURG ROAD -- I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAP CAN COME BACK UP, THEY ARE SAYING IN FREDERICKSBURG IN PRIOR YEARS HAVE ONLY BEEN USED FOR IN ACCESS.

AT THE TOP CENTER THEY ARE SAYING THAT DRIVEWAY WOULD BE IN ONLY OR LOCKED UP FOR FIRE ENTRANCE MAKING THE MAIN DRIVEWAY ON BRAZOS WHICH INCREASES CONCERN.

SO IT DOESN'T RAISE ANY HARM TO CURRENT RESIDENTS OR FUTURE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE THERE. AS WE DID, WE WANT TO ASK FOR UPDATES TO SITE PLANS.

WE ASKED THEM TO CHANGE TO MF-33. THEY MADE SOME CHANGES TO MEET WHAT THEY COULD GET APPROVED TODAY. AND WE WANT APPROVAL, BUT WE WANT THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE HOLD OWNERSHIP OF WHY THEY ARE CHANGE CHANGING AND WHAT THE STORY IS. SINCE THEY ARE GOING IDZ-2 WITH FEDERAL FUNDING, THAT CAN GO FOUR STORIES. WE HAVE PROPERTIES ON UNIVERSITY AND HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT A FOUR-STORY UNIT RIGHT THERE.

THEY ARE COMMUNICATING WITH US, THE DEVELOPER AND OWNER, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE BETTER COMMUNICATIONS. IN AN IDEAL WORLD, MAYBE THERE COULD BE A CONTINUOUS LOOK AT THIS WITH THE DEVELOPER AND DETAILS. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE TIA, THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND ADDITIONAL PUBLIC WORKS THAT DR. KAUR'S OFFICE HAS SAID THEY ARE GOING TO WORK WITH THE COSA DEPARTMENTS, THAT SITE HASN'T BEEN USED WITH SEWER AND ELECTRICITY AND GAS IN OVER 30 YEARS. WE DON'T WANT THINGS TO BACK UP, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. PLEASE, IF WE COULD WORK THROUGH THAT TOGETHER TO ENSURE POST-ZONING, POST THE ZONING IF WE GET APPROVED TO MAKE SURE THIS INFORMATION IS SHARED WITH NEIGHBORS, DEVELOPERS AND ANY DUE DILIGENCE SUCH AS SIDEWALKS, DRAINAGE, ELECTRIC GAS METERS, LIGHTING, COM, INTERNET, PHONE, SOME PEOPLE STILL USE PHONE. AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE ARE LEARNING EVERYTHING ON THE ZONING PROCESS AT AN APPROPRIATE SAFE ZONING LEVEL IF APPROVED. WE WOULD HATE FOR ANYONE TO BE HARMED, HURT OR WORST, KILLED. WE ARE FOR THIS ZONING REQUEST. WE JUST NEED OPEN AND HONEST COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEVELOPER AND OWNER. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

I'M REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORS OF UPTOWN COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. SALINAS. JACK FINGER. MR. FINGER, YOU WILL BE

FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL SHACKLEFORD. >> YES, MAYOR NIRENBERG, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. ONCE AGAIN, MY NAME IS JACK M. FINGER AND AS MENTION -- THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME MENTIONED, THERE ARE WAY TOO MANY QUESTION MARKS WITH THIS CASE. THE PROPONENTS CAME TO SOME NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS EARLIER AND THERE WERE -- LET'S JUST SAY THERE WAS NO OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR THIS PROPOSAL. THE IDEA OF PUTTING -- WELL, WHAT'S -- WHAT DOES IT SAY EXACTLY? INFILL DEVELOPMENT -- INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE HERE. RIGHT IN THE -- ON FREDERICKSBURG ROAD NEAR CINCINNATI, NEAR THE OUTSKIRTS OF BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

YES, MS. KAUR, THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT ONCE AGAIN, AND THE --T WE SEE THE INCREASED DENSITY IN AN AREA WHERE THERE IS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES. THE RESIDENTS DON'T APPRECIATE THAT. THE -- ALSO, AT LEAST FOUR PEOPLE VOICED THEIR CONCERNS TO THE ZONING COMMISSION MEETING WHEN THIS THING CAME UP.

JUST CALLED IN TO DO IT. YOU HAD AT LEAST TWO PEOPLE SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT THERE AT THE TIME. DOING GOOD TO HAVE ANYBODY THERE SPEAK ON ANYTHING FOR ANY PARTICULAR CASE. IT MENTIONS THAT STAFF ARE HERE EARLIER MENTIONED THAT THE BEACON HILL AND THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ARE -- SUPPORT IT, BUT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE EARLIER. YOU LOOK AT THE RECORDS THAT SAYS THEY BOTH OPPOSE THIS THING. WHY? WELL, FOR THE REASONS I JUST NOW MENTIONED. ALSO THE QUESTION DID COME

[00:25:03]

AND THE QUESTION WAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED ARE THERE GOING TO BE ANY SET-ASIDES FOR, SAY, THE ELDERLY? THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOUR GRANDMA IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO LIVE THERE. ARE THERE GOING TO BE ANY SET-ASIDES FOR, SAY, MILITARY OR RETIRED MILITARY? NO.

NO SET-ASIDES FOR THEM. AND I WON'T GO INTO WHETHER THERE IS -- THEY ARE GOING TO CHECK IF THERE ARE GOING TO BE AMERICAN CITIZENS LIVING THERE.

YES, THIS THING JUST -- DOES NOT HAVE THE SUPPORT YOU THINK IT HAS, MS. KAUR.

I THINK, QUITE FRANKLY, YOU NEED TO SAY NO TO IT. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. FINGER. MICHAEL SHACKLEFORD.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M WITH PARTNERS IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF AMERICAN AGAPE FOUNDATION AND THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER YES. FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A 2.7-ACRE LOT.

THIS CURRENT ZONING IS A -- ACTUALLY THIRD REVISION, I WOULD SAY.

ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST, WE RELOOKED AT NUMBERS AND REDUCED IT TO 119. IN ADDITION IN FURTHER TALKS, WE'VE NOW REVISED AND EDITED AND REQUESTING MF-33 GOING DOWN TO 100 UNITS. THAT WILL ACTUALLY LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF UNITS AND REMOVE ALL OF THE PARKING ACCORDING TO SOME REQUEST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OFF-STREET PARKING, AND WE'VE INCREASED THE PARK ON THE PROPERTY. THIS DIE NEW HAMPSHIRE MAY NOT -- DIAGRAM MAY NOT SHOW THAT. WE WILL CONTINUE TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOTH UPTOWN AND BEACON TO DISCUSS NEEDED CHANGES.

THIS PROCESS IS A LONG PROCESS, AS MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE DURING THE TAX CREDIT PROCESS. AND SO ANSWER SOME OF JACK'S CONCERNS, WE WILL HAVE SENIOR CITIZENS. YOU JUST LEGALLY CANNOT SET ASIDE SPECIFICALLY A CERTAIN DEMOGRAPHIC UNLESS YOU SET -- YOU JUST CAN'T DECLARE -- THIS IS A GENERAL POPULATION SO IT'S OPEN TO EVERYONE. HOWEVER, THIS PROJECT SERVES 30%, 50% AND 60% OF THE AMI, WHICH IS VERY SPECIFIC. IT HAS THE DEEPEST AFFORDABILITY ON ANY PROJECT RIGHT NOW, SO I'D LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. SHACKLEFORD. COUNCILMEMBER KAUR.

>> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR WORKING WITH OUR OFFICE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. I KNOW IT WAS NEW FOR YOU ALL AND YOU ALL ENGAGED WITH AN OPEN MIND. LIKE YOU MENTIONED, YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHICH IS SUCH A BIG NEED FOR OUR COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW AND WE NEED MORE RESIDENTS LIKE YOU ALL. AS I MENTIONED TO YOU ALL ON THE PHONE LAST WEEK AND AS MY STAFF HAS BEEN SHARING, WE HEAR YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT HONESTY AND TRANCE PARAPHERNALIALY AND THE DEVELOPERS TO MAKING SURE YOU ALL RECEIVE THE MOST UP TO DATE INFORMATION AND THAT YOUR CURRENT LIVING IS NOT CHANGED. I SHARED THAT I LIVE DOWN THE STREETS SO WE'LL BE NEIGHBORS IN THIS TOGETHER. I REALLY WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING AND THANK THE DEVELOPERS FOR WORKING, RIGHT? YOU GUYS DID MENTION YOU CHANGED THIS TO 33. WITH THAT, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. COUNCILMEMBER PELÁEZ.

>> PELÁEZ: THANK YOU. USUALLY I DON'T JUMP IN AND COMMENT ON OTHER PEOPLE'S CASES, BUT I WANT TO TELL COUNCILMEMBER KAUR'S CONSTITUENTS SHE'S DOING THE

[00:30:02]

MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER PELÁEZ.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ITEM NUMBER 1? HEARING NONE, THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. PLEASE VOTE.

>> PELÁEZ: YES. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: PHOG MOTION CARRIES.

MOTION NUMBER 2.

IN FAVOR, TEN OPPOSED. A SUPER MAJORITY IS REQUIRED AS THIS HAS 20% OPPOSITION.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMEMBER KAUR. >> KAUR: THIS IS ANOTHER CASE WHERE THE FIVE POINTS NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

WE UNDERSTAND THERE IS ONE CONSTITUENT WITH MULTIPLE PROPERTIES AND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO WORK WITH THEM AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WORKING WITH THEM.

WITH THAT I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 2.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NUMBERS 4 AND 5. >> FAVOR, ZERO RETURNED IN OPPOSITION. WOODLAWN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD

ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE DO HAVE A FEW FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEMS 4 AND 5 SO I'LL CALL THEM IN ORDER. JACK FINGER.

MR. FINGER, YOU'LL BE FOLLOWED BY JAMES WILLBURN. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. ONCE AGAIN, I AM JACK FINGER AND ONCE AGAIN THIS CASE IS ONCE AGAIN IN MS. KAUR'S DISTRICT. YES, MS. KAUR. THIS THING HAS SO MANY RED FLAGS I DON'T SEE HOW YOU WOULD WANT TO PASS ANYTHING ON IT TODAY. THE PLANNING STAFF SAID THIS IS A BAD IDEA. THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAID IT WAS A BAD IDEA.

THE ZONING STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL ON THIS. WHAT ARE THEY ALL IN A DITHER ABOUT HERE? IT'S THE IDEA OF PLACING RESIDENTIAL MIXED -- THAT'S THE KEY WORD, MIXED HOUSING IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. IN THEIR OWN WORDS THEY SAID THAT, QUOTE, IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE HOMES SURROUNDING THE AREA, MS. KAUR. DO WE REALLY HAVE TO DISRUPT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THIS TYPE OF HOUSING? WHEN THEY SAY IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE, IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE.

PEOPLE HAVE TO LIVE IN THOSE AREAS, MS. KAUR. WHY NOT JUST, WELL, AS THEY SAY DO THE RIGHT THING AND SAY NO TO THIS. AND THAT STATEMENT ACTUALLY GOES TO EVERY ONE OF YOU. MS. GAVITO, MS. HAVRDA. I WOULD ASK Y'ALL TO SAY NO TO

THIS ONE TOO. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

MR. FINGER. JAMES WILLBURN. >> I WAS UP HERE EARLIER.

I WAS STANDING UP HERE EARLIER AND I BROUGHT STAT REPORTS FROM THE SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT INCIDENT REPORTS ON WHAT RENTAL PROPERTIES HAVE BROUGHT TO MY STREET AND

[00:35:01]

DAYCARE CENTER AND A WOODLAWN HILLS ELEMENTARY. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

MR. WILLBURN. COUNCILMEMBER KAUR. >> KAUR: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

THANK YOU TO THE WOODLAWN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR THEIR SUPPORT IN THIS AND THE NINE MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 4 AND 5. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 13.

6:30 P.M. . NO OUTDOOR AMPLIFICATION OF SOUND.

21 NOTICES MAILED, FIVE IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE ONE CITIZEN SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM 13. JACK FINGER.

MAYOR NIRENBERG, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. ONCE AGAIN, MY NAME IS JACK FINGER AND THIS IS ITEM NO. 13 IS IN -- I BELIEVE THAT'S IN DISTRICT 5, MS. CASTILLO.

THAT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT THERE. YES, MS. CASTILLO. THE ZONING STAFF, MS. CASTILLO, THE ZONING STAFF, MS. CASTILLO. THE ZONING STAFF, MS. CASTILLO, RECOMMENDED DENIAL ON THIS.

WHY? WELL, BECAUSE THE USED CAR LOT -- DO WE REALLY NEED ANOTHER USED CAR LOT? THERE'S ONE OVER ON HAWTHORNE. YES, ANOTHER USED CAR LOT IS TOO INTENSE FOR THE NEARBY RESIDENCES. AND I LOOKED AT THE MAP ON THAT.

THERE ARE REALLY NO BUFFERS BETWEEN THAT USED CAR LOT AND THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, MS. CASTILLO. SO WHY NOT SAY NO TO THIS ONE TOO BEFORE -- I MEAN, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT DISTRICT 5 TO JUST BECOME OVERRUN WITH USED CAR LOTS AND TATTOO PARLORS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE THERE, YOU KNOW? SAY NO TO IT, RIGHT?

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. FINGER.

COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. >> CASTILLO: THANK YOU, MAYOR. ABOUT A WEEK AGO, BEFORE THE EWDC MEETING, I HAD A NAIL IN MY TIRE AND I TEXTED THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE AND SAID, HEY, I MAY BE LATE. I STOPPED BY RAMON'S TIRE SHOP, GOT THERE BEFORE THE CHAIR AND THE COMMISSION MEETING STARTED. WHILE I WAS GETTING MY TIRE FIXED I WAS THINKING WHAT JACK FINGER DOESN'T LIKE, I LOVE. AND I GOT TO MY COMMITTEE MEETING ON TIME.

WITH THAT, I MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NO. 13. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NO. 14.

>> CLERK: RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. THERE IS A UDC PERMISSIBLE EIGHT-FOOT SOLID SCREEN FENCE ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE WITH NO ACCESS ITEMS OR GATES BETWEEN 442 NEW LAREDO HIGHWAY AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. 11 NOTICES MAILED, THREE IN FAVOR AND FIVE OPPOSED. THIS WILL REQUIRE SUPERMAJORITY AS THE OPPOSITION IS AT 34% AND QUINTANA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED. OUTSIDE THE 200-FOOT BOUNDARY

THERE ARE SIX IN FAVOR AND ONE OPPOSED . >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT.

THERE ARE A FEW FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM 14. I'LL CALL THEM IN ORDER.

WE'LL START WITH LARRY GARCIA. MR. GARCIA, YOU'LL BE FOLLOWED BY JERRY ARREDONDO.

[00:40:13]

>> YEAH, MY NAME IS LARRY GARCIA. I'M WITH THE WESTWOOD SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE STAND IN OPPOSITION WITH THIS REZONING.

THIS IS A LONG HISTORY. THIS WAS AN ACTUAL RESIDENCE, 2235 WAS A HOUSE THAT WAS TORN DOWN. THAT PROPERTY HAS A HISTORY OF VIOLATIONS.

WE'VE HAD -- I THINK THERE'S 64 VIOLATIONS -- 64 CITATIONS AND 82 VIOLATIONS ON THOSE PROPERTIES. SOME OF THEM WERE FOR METAL RECYCLING ENTITY.

SOME OF THEM WERE FOR USED AUTO PARTS, MOSTLY FOR FENCING. NO PERMITS, NO C OF OS.

I FEEL IF WE ALLOW THIS WE'RE ALLOWING BAD BEHAVIOR, BAD NEIGHBORS.

WE THINK THAT IT SHOULD HAVE STAYED RESIDENTIAL. THE REASON THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WAS TO GO AHEAD AND EXPAND THEIR BUSINESS, WHICH WAS THEIR SALVAGE YARD AT THE TIME.

CURRENTLY THEY'RE SAYING THAT IT'S NOT BEING USED FOR A SALVAGE YARD BUT IT'S BEING HOUSED, ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT IS GOING TO BE HOUSED ON IT SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. WE'RE JUST CALLING IT A DIFFERENT THING.

I WOULD URGE THE COUNCIL TO VOTE NO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. GARCIA. JERRY ARREDONDO FOLLOWED BY

ELIZABETH RUSSELL. >> MY NAME IS JERRY ARREDONDO AND THE REAL ISSUES HERE ALSO ARE I HAVE RIGHT HERE OVER 64 CITATIONS FOR BAD BEHAVIOR. THESE RIGHT HERE ARE ALL THE CODE VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON FOR SEVERAL YEARS. THE FOLKS RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEY ALREADY HAD TOOK DOWN A HOUSE, OKAY, WHICH, MAYOR, I KNOW YOU HAVE SOME FOLKS THAT ARE TRYING TO INCREASE HOME OWNERSHIP, WHICH WE'RE INVOLVED IN ALSO.

YOU DON'T GO IN AND TEAR DOWN A HOUSE WITHOUT PERMITS, START USING THE PROPERTY FOR THE, IN EFFECT, METAL RECYCLING, WHICH IS PATRON METAL RECYCLING, WHICH IS ADJACENT AND ABUTTING THIS PROPERTY. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID. THEN THEY GOT CAUGHT, AFTER THEY TORE DOWN THE HOUSE, CODE COMPLIANCE CAME IN AND SAID YOU HAVE ALL THESE THINGS YOU HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF . THESE ARE ALL THE VIOLATIONS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.

SO WHAT THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO DO, WHAT THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO DO AND WHAT THEY DO ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. WE'VE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT WAS COMMITTED TO US FOR EVERYBODY THAT WOULD, IN DISTRICT 5 AND ESPECIALLY DISTRICT 4 AND 5, THERE'S MORE METAL RECYCLING FACILITIES IN THOSE DISTRICTS THAN ANY OTHER PART OF SAN ANTONIO. IF WE HAVE THOSE THAT WE DO HAVE, LET'S MAKE SURE THEY'RE CLEAN, ORDERLY, AND THEY SERVE A PURPOSE, WHICH THEY SHOULD BE. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THAT HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE. AGAIN, I EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT THEY TORE DOWN A HOUSE, MADE IT A PARKING LOT, USED IT ALREADY UNTIL THEY WERE CAUGHT, OKAY? AND SO WHEN WE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, WE SAY, OKAY, THE QUESTION TODAY IS HOW ABOUT IF THEY THEN JUST USE IT FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLES. I HAVE A PICTURE RIGHT HERE OF SOME OF THE OVERSIZED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT -- CAN YOU PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN? THAT'S OVERSIZED EQUIPMENT, OKAY? NEXT PAGE, IF YOU WOULD. THOSE ARE OVERSIZED VEHICLES.

NEXT PAGE, PLEASE. THOSE ARE OVERSIZED VEHICLES AND IF YOU SEE THOSE ARE FOR -- YOU OPEN THEM UP, YOU DROP YOUR MATERIALS IN THERE AND THEN YOU TAKE THOSE MATERIALS AND THEN YOU WAIT UNTIL THE TIME IS RIGHT AND THEN YOU TAKE THEM OVER TO WHEREVER THEY'RE GOING TO BE PROCESSED. BUT THAT'S AN EXTENSION, IF YOU WILL, OF A METAL RECYCLING FACILITY. WE'RE SAYING NO EXTENSIONS AND WE'RE COMMITTED THAT NO MORE

EXTENSIONS. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. ARREDONDO.

THANK YOU. >> ANYWAY, THE LAST POINT IS WE ARE ASKING FOR THE REQUEST TO BE

DENIED. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ELIZABETH RUSSELL. MS. RUSSELL, YOU WILL BE FOLLOWED BY VICKY KATE.

[00:45:06]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. SO JUST AS A BRIEF TIMELINE OF HOW WE GOT HERE.

THE APPLICANT SAYS HE STARTED WORKING IN THE RECYCLING AND AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESS IN 2000.

HE PURCHASES THE PROPERTY IN 2021. GETS A LICENSE FOR THE MRE UNDER HIS WIFE'S NAME BECAUSE HIS CRIMINAL HISTORY PRECLUDES IT THE PROPER PERMITS FOR DEMOLITION, FENCING AND FAILS TO REQUEST ZONING AT THAT TIME.

THEN IN 2023, ALL THESE VIOLATIONS ARE PUT ON HOLD WHILE HE STARTS THIS ZONING APPLICATION PROCESS. HE PURCHASED A SECOND LOT, DIDN'T GET THE PROPER ZONING ON THAT LOT AS WELL, CREATED A NEW ENTRANCE, ALSO WITHOUT APPROVAL. WE WERE ORIGINALLY HERE IN 2023 WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS REMOVED AND REFILED FOR THE REZONING ON BOTH PROPERTIES.

THIS IS THE HOUSE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE. HE THEN DEMOLISHED IT, PUT UP AN UNPERMITTED COMMERCIAL FENCE. THIS IS THE COMPLETED FENCE. I REPRESENT THE CLIENTS THAT OWN THIS PAVED LOT. IT'S ACROSS THE STREET. IT'S DANNY'S AUTO RECYCLING.

THIS PAVED LOT IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE UNPERMITTED NEW ENTRANCE THAT WAS CREATED.

SO HE THEN REPAVES THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL TOGETHER.

AGAIN, STILL WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS. I DON'T NEED TO TELL Y'ALL WHAT AN MRE IS. AND SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS LOT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MIDDLE PHOTO, YOU'RE SEEING THE ENTRANCE THAT'S CREATED. MY CLIENT ALSO HAS AN MRE, HAS LICENSES AND TAKES COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, 18-WHEELERS OUT OF THIS ENTRANCE.

BY OPENING UP THIS AREA AND CREATING A NEW ENTRANCE, IT'S GOING TO CREATE EVEN MORE PROBLEMS, EVEN MORE ACCIDENTS IN AN AREA THAT IS ALREADY OVERLOADED.

AT THE LAST ZONING HEARING HE WAS REPRESENTING HIMSELF. HE TOLD US HE SHOULD BE GIVEN SOME LEEWAY BECAUSE HE'S A NEW BUSINESS OWNER. THIS IS NOT TRUE.

HE HAS BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS FOR OVER 20 YEARS. HE WAS PLANNING TO MOVE THE ENTRANCE TO SOUTHCROSS BUT NEVER GOT PERMISSION FOR THIS. THERE WAS NO OTHER RESIDENTIAL IN THE AREA. THERE'S RESIDENTIAL RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE LOT THAT HE ALREADY DEMOLISHED. AND THROUGH HISTORY, CAN HE BE TRUSTED TO GET PERMISSION FIRST OR PERMISSION AFTER HE'S MADE HIS OWN DECISIONS? WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T APPROVE? ZONING COMMITTEE WAS CONCERNED IF THEY DIDN'T APPROVE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE LAND. HE CAN CHANCE THE BUSINESS TO SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE APPROVED. HE CAN SELL LOTS TO ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL AND RETURN THE PROPERTY TO THE CONDITION IT WAS ORIGINALLY EXISTING IN. WE JUST NEED TO REMIND THE COMMUNITY THAT THERE ARE REQUIRED STEPS TO MAKE THESE CHANGES.

IF HE GETS TO SKIP THESE STEPS, HOW ARE HIS COMPETITORS SUPPOSED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THESE SAME ISSUES? HIS WIFE AND HE ARE TRYING TO DISTINGUISH THE FACT THAT PATRON RECYCLING IS SEPARATE FROM WHAT HE'S CREATING BUT OVER THE COURSE OF HISTORY WE HAVE SEEN

THAT HE HAS EXISTED AS AN ENTIRE ENTITY OPERATING TOGETHER. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

MS. RUSSELL. >> THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: VICKY CADE

FOLLOWED BY JAMES MCNIGHT . >> I'M VICKY CADE AND I WOULD LIKE TO DONATE MY TIME TO JERRY

ARREDONDO. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: JERRY ALREADY SPOKE.

>> I THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO CALL US AT THE SAME TIME. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: IF ANYBODY ELSE IS IN THE SAME SITUATION, LET ME KNOW. JERRY, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MORE

MINUTES. >> A COUPLE OF FINAL THINGS, REALLY.

AND THAT IS, AGAIN, THIS IS ONE OF THE TRUCKS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

ONE WAY OF GETTING AROUND. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE VEHICLES. YOU'LL SEE THAT VEHICLE BY ITSELF SHOWS ALL THE DEBRIS OF THE METAL RECYCLING ITSELF IN THE TRUCK ITSELF.

AND, AGAIN, THESE ARE OVERSIZED TRUCKS. AND AT ONE POINT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT OVERSIZED TRUCKS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HEAVY EQUIPMENT, FAY STREET, WHICH IS THE VERY NEXT STREET OVER FROM SOUTHCROSS , THAT STREET, THE CITY HAS SIGNS ON IT THAT SAYS NO OVERSIZED TRUCKS. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THE CITY THEN WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE POTHOLES THAT WOULD BE MADE BY HEAVY EQUIPMENT LIKE THIS.

SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT, THE POTHOLES, IT'S BACK TO THE CITY TO RUN THE EXPENSE OF DOING THE FIXING UP WHEN YOU TAKE HEAVY EQUIPMENT LIKE THIS AND PUT IT THERE.

[00:50:01]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. ARREDONDO. JAMES MCKNIGHT.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. JAMES MCKNIGHT, ORTIZ MCKNIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. FIRST OF ALL I'LL START BY SAYING TODAY WE'RE ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE. AND THAT IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THIS CASE REQUIRES A SUPERMAJORITY AND IN THE CODE, THE UDC, STATES THAT WHEN A CASE REQUIRES A SUPERMAJORITY THAT AN APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO AN AUTOMATIC CONTINUANCE. IF NOT ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE HERE. SO WE DON'T HAVE A FULL COUNCIL SO I AM ASKING FOR THAT CONTINUANCE. BUT I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO A FEW THINGS WHILE I'M HERE AND, ONE, IT SEEMS LIKE THE ISSUE OF THE ZONING HAS BEEN LOST IN ALL OF THIS.

THE OWNERS DID HAVE VIOLATIONS FOR THEIR ADJACENT PROPERTY FOR METAL RECYCLING AND THEY'VE CLEARED THEM ALL UP. WE HAVE HAD ISSUES WITH CODE COMPLIANCE ON THAT.

WE'RE DEALING WITH THOSE ISSUES. THEY PUT UP A FENCE WHEN THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE, THEY TOOK THAT FENCE DOWN. THEY DID MAKE THOSE VIOLATIONS. THE ZONING, ONCE THEY HIRED US, WE HAVE BEEN ON THEM TO FIX EVERYTHING AS IT SHOULD BE. THE VEHICLES THAT MR. ARREDONDO SHOWED, THAT'S FOR PARKING LARGE VEHICLES ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S NOT FOR RECYCLING IT'S FOR PARKING LARGE VEHICLES. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT SITE IT'S ENTIRELY INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL. EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE RESIDENTIAL AND BEING USED FOR OUTDOOR PARKING LOTS. OTHERWISE, IF YOU LOOK AT JUST THE ZONING AND THE LAND USE, IT IS ALL INDUSTRIAL. ALL COMMERCIAL AND ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR IS A C-2 USE TO PARK SOME VEHICLES. IT'S VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD BUT I HAVEN'T HAD THE CHANCE TO PITCH THAT DIRECTLY. WE'VE TALKED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD A FEW TIMES. THEY ARE CONVINCED THAT THE OWNERS CAN'T BE TRUSTED BUT THAT IS AN ISSUE TO DEAL WITH THE PERSON, NOT TO DEAL WITH ZONING ITSELF.

ALL WE WANT IS A CHANCE TO KEEP PITCHING THAT IDEA. I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'VE BEEN HEARD. I DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO SAY THAT DIRECTLY AND I WANT A CHANCE TO SAY THAT WE CAN MAKE THOSE THINGS RIGHT. WE ALREADY HAVE MADE THOSE CODE VIOLATIONS RIGHT. ON ITS FACE, THE ZONING IS CORRECT.

WE'RE ASKING FOR C-2 SURROUNDED BY I-1. THAT'S NOT INCOMPATIBLE.

AND ACCORDING TO THE UDC, I'M ENTITLED TO THIS AS AN AUTOMATIC CONTINUANCE AND I'D LIKE A CHANCE TO MAKE THAT PITCH AND HAVE A FULL COUNCIL TO VOTE ON A SUPERMAJORITY LIKE THIS.

THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, MR. MCKNIGHT.

COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. >> CASTILLO: SURE. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO GAVE THEIR INPUT TODAY. BUT THE INPUT THAT'S MOST IMPORTANT TO ME ARE DISTRICT 5 RESIDENTS. ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, OVER SEVEN DISTRICT 5 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ALONG WITH PUBLIC CITIZENS FACILITATED A COMMUNITY MEETING TO DISCUSS METAL RECYCLERS IN GENERAL. DISTRICT 4 AND 5 HAVE THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION OF METAL RECYCLERS THAN ANY OTHER PART OF THE CITY.

WITH THAT, YES, THIS IS A CONVERSATION ABOUT ZONING BUT THIS ISN'T A ZONING FOR A YOGA STUDIO. THIS IS A REZONING FOR METALS TO BE COMPRESSED AND CHOPPED UP THAT GO INTO THE SOIL AND GO INTO THE AIR AND HAS VERY REAL IMPACTS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT LIVE AROUND THERE. SO, WITH THAT, I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION IN THIS CASE. MY STAFF HAS GONE OUT TO THE SITE AND HAS BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THEIR REPRESENTATION, INCLUDING THE CONCERNS RAISED BY THE NEARBY RESIDENTS ASSOCIATED WITH APPROVING THIS CONDITIONAL USE. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE INDIVIDUAL SITE CONSIDERATIONS OR UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS ARE PRESENT IN THIS CASE TO SUPPORT THE REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE A CONTINUANCE BUT GIVEN THE IMPORTANT CONCERNS RELATED TO APPROVING THE USE FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT STORAGE IN THIS LOCATION, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT A CONTINUANCE IS APPROPRIATE AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE WAIVER OF ANY CONTINUANCE PROVISIONS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE CERTAINTY THAT TODAY THROUGH A FINAL VOTE.

I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY ITEM 14. >> SECOND. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DENIAL OF ITEM 14. COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE.

>> WHYTE: ALL RIGHT. SO I'M LOOKING FOR SOME LEGAL ADVICE OR ANALYSIS HERE.

AND I'LL TELL YOU THAT AS I'VE MADE CLEAR ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS IN THE PAST, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LAWS. WE HAVE ORDINANCES. WE HAVE CODES AND I EXPECT THEM TO BE FOLLOWED. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.

BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I WANT TO JUST READ WHAT I SEE THE CODE AS HERE, THE UDC.

[00:55:09]

DOES THAT MEAN THEY GET AN AUTOMATIC CONTINUANCE OR AM I MISSING SOMETHING?

>> THAT PROVISION IS IN THE CODE. YOU ARE CORRECT.

THE COUNCILWOMAN IS ASKING FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER C A WAIR OF THAT PROVISION AND MOTION FOR

DENIAL. >> WHYTE: AND SO HELP ME ON THE WAIVER OF THE CODE.

IS THIS ALL CODES AND ALL ORDINANCES? I MEAN, WHAT CAN THE COUNCIL

WAIVE AND NOT WAIVE? >> THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION IS SOLELY WITHIN THE CITY CODE.

MUCH, AS I'M SURE YOU'RE WELL AWARE, MUCH OF ZONING WE HAVE DIRECTION FROM STATE STATUTE.

THIS PROVISION IS NOT IN THE STATE STATUTE. IT IS COMPLETELY WITHIN THE CITY CODE, WHICH CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS. CITY COUNCIL IS A LEGISLATIVE BODY WITH THE AUTHORITY TO WAIVE

SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED. >> WHYTE: SO CITY COUNCIL CAN

WAIVE ANY CITY CODE PROVISION? >> COUNCILMAN, I'M NOT PREPARED TO COMPLETELY, WITHOUT EVERY PROVISION IN FRONT OF ME. BUT AS A GENERAL RULE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROVISION YES, THEY CAN WAIVE THAT. I WOULD HATE TO MAKE SUCH A GLOBAL STATEMENT BUT POTENTIALLY

WE COULD LOOK AT THAT, YES. >> WHYTE: I MEAN, THAT MAKES IT TOUGH BECAUSE THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE IS, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY, INCLUDING PROPERTY OWNERS, DEVELOPERS, ET CETERA, THEY NEED SOME LEVEL OF CERTAINTY AND THAT'S HOW THEY OPERATE.

AND IF THEY'RE OUT THERE LOOKING AT THESE CODE PROVISIONS AND SEE IT WRITTEN ONE WAY, ONLY TO SHOW UP HERE AND THEN BE TOLD THAT COUNCIL ISN'T GOING TO FOLLOW THEIR OWN CODE THAT THEY ADOPTED, THAT MAKES IT TOUGH FOR THEM. AND I THINK REGARDLESS OF THE MERITS OF THE CASE I HAVE A HARD TIME TELLING A PROPERTY OWNER THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO DISREGARD THE CODE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE HARM WOULD BE IN DELAY.

AND I BALANCE THAT WITH OF COURSE ALL DUE RESPECT TO OUR DISTRICT 5 CITY COUNCILWOMAN WHOSE LEAD I CERTAINLY WANT TO FOLLOW ON THIS. BUT I DO THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO ADHERE TO THE CODE AND THE ORDINANCES AS THEY'RE WRITTEN.

THANKS, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE.

COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE COUNCILWOMAN. I DO HAVE A QUESTION JUST PROCESS-WISE. IS IT PROPER FOR US TO TAKE ONE VOTE TO WAIVE A CODE AND TAKE

THE ACTION ON ZONING OR IS IT TO BE TWO SEPARATE ACTIONS? >> IF HER MOTION INCLUDES THE WAIVER AND THE DENIAL, IT CAN BE ONE VOTE, YES. AND IT SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS ONE.

IF YOU WANT HER TO CLARIFY THAT THAT WAS HER INTENT, THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: COOL, COOL, COOL. I HEAR YOU.

JUST A LEARNING OPPORTUNITY FOR US, I THINK. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. COUNCILMEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO.

>> GAVITO: I HAD A -- THANK YOU, MAYOR. I HAD A QUICK QUESTION ON JUST WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON RIGHT NOW. DUE TO COUNCILMAN WHYTE'S QUESTION, YOU KNOW, FOLLOWING THE RULES OR THE ACTUAL ZONING CASE.

[01:00:03]

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THE MOTION WAS MADE TO DENY ITEM 14, WHICH IN ITS PROVISION WOULD REQUIRE US TO WAIVE THAT PROVISION IN THE CODE. SO IT'S ONE MOTION BUT EFFECTIVELY WE WOULD WAIVE THE PROVISION THAT REQUIRES A CONTINUANCE.

>> GAVITO: OKAY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ITEM 14? COUNCILMEMBER CABELLO HAVRDA.

>> HAVRDA: WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT VOTE FIRST? >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: NO, IT'S ONE MOTION SO ONE ACTION BY THE COUNCIL, EFFECTIVELY WAIVING THE PROVISION IN THE CODE THAT ALLOWS US TO DENY THE CASE, GIVEN THE PROVISION WOULD REQUIRE US TO TAKE A CONTINUANCE

IF REQUESTED. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ARE YOU

THROUGH? >> HAVRDA: YES, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG:

COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE. >> WHYTE: SO IF WE WANT TO MOVE TO CONTINUE THIS CASE, WE NEED TO MAKE THE MOTION RIGHT NOW? THAT'S HOW IT WORKED IN ZONING,

AT LEAST. YES. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: YOU COULD MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE. I WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE ATTORNEY WHICH MOTION IS PRIMARY.

THE CONTINUANCE? >> THE CONTINUANCE WOULD BE THE SECONDARY MOTION BECAUSE THE

PRIMARY MOTION IS TO DENY. THAT'S THE PRIMARY. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: SO WE

WOULD STILL TAKE COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO'S MOTION FIRST? >> WHYTE: CONTINUANCE FIRST.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE WOULD TAKE THE MOTION TO CONTINUE IF IT WAS MADE.

>> YES. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE, GO AHEAD.

>> WHYTE: SO, WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM 14.

>> SECOND. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WAS THERE A SECOND?

>> WHYTE: DATE CERTAIN BEING -- >>

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION WAS MADE TO CONTINUE ITEM 14 TO MARCH 7TH.

WAS THERE A SECOND? YES. THERE WAS A SECOND SO WE WILL TAKE THAT MOTION FIRST. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. GO AHEAD.

SO MY QUESTION -- AGAIN, SORRY, SUSAN, PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT. IF THIS PROVISION IS WITHIN THE CODE THAT ALLOWS US TO RESPECT A CONTINUANCE REQUEST, IS IT REQUIRED FOR US TO TAKE ACTION

ON THAT? >> REQUIRED TO TAKE ACTION ON THE MOTION?

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WELL, IF THE APPLICANT MAKES A REQUEST TO CONTINUE, DOES THAT REQUIRE AN

ACTION BY THE COUNCIL TO TAKE IT? >> YES.

BECAUSE THIS IS THE COUNCIL'S LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY. YES.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: GOT IT. COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. >> CASTILLO: SURE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. A COUPLE OF THINGS. I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT ABOUT PROCESS AND CODE. HOWEVER, MY ARGUMENT AGAINST A CONTINUANCE, RATHER, IS THAT I DON'T SEE COMMUNITY SENTIMENT CHANGING AND THEIR PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS CHANGING.

I DON'T SEE THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE IMPROVING THROUGH A CONTINUANCE.

THE APPLICANT BEING UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU ALL WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF POLLUTING MY COMMUNITY. I JUST DON'T SEE THE VALUE IN A CONTINUANCE WHEN MY COMMUNITY HAS BEEN VOCAL ABOUT THEIR OPPOSITION AND I'M HOPEFUL THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL BE ADVOCATES FOR DISTRICT 5 PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERNS AND BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE WAIVER AND OPPOSE THE

CONTINUANCE. THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

COUNCILMEMBER CASTILLO. COUNCILMEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT WAS SAID VERY ELOQUENTLY. I DON'T KNOW THAT I SEE MUCH CHANGING BETWEEN NOW AND THE PROPOSED DATE FOR A CONTINUANCE. I DO SHARE SOME OF THE SAME CONCERNS ABOUT PROCESS AND PROCEDURE AND IF WE ESTABLISH CITY CODES AND JUST CONSISTENTLY WAIVE THEM, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE AND DOES THIS OPEN DOORS. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT DOES.

I THINK THIS IS A VERY SPECIFIC SITUATION. I THINK THE COUNCILWOMAN IS ASKING US FOR SOMETHING SPECIFIC FOR A VERY SPECIFIC TYPE OF CONCERN FOR A VERY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE WIDESPREAD THROUGHOUT THE CITY OR THROUGHOUT HER DISTRICT, HOPEFULLY NOT. AND SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING A CONTINUANCE BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN -- SUSAN, I'M SORRY. I KNOW YOU'RE BEING PUT ON THE SPOT AND THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. I'M TRYING TO, IN MY HEAD,

[01:05:02]

ARE YOU ABLE TO THINK OF ANY? MAYBE EVEN ONE OR TWO? >> I KNOW THAT -- PERHAPS,

MAYOR, WE SHOULD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: IT'S FINE.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: I THINK THAT WOULD BE WISE. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: OKAY.

>> MAYOR NIRENBERG: COUNCILMEMBER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GET INTO THAT DISCUSSION TODAY?

>> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: NO. I'M GOOD. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE

COUNCILWOMAN. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG:

COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE. >> COURAGE: THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING IN MY MIND. YOU KNOW, I'M A NEIGHBORHOOD KIND OF GUY SO I USUALLY GO ALONG WITH WHAT THE NEIGHBORS SAY. BUT ALREADY TODAY I DIDN'T GO ALONG WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS WHO WERE HERE. WHEN YOU HEAR A LARGE PERCENTAGE SHOW UP AND SAY THEY'RE AGAINST, I OFTEN WONDER HOW MANY PEOPLE DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING.

BUT IT CAUSED ME TO LOOK AT THE MAP AND MAYBE I CAN GET SOME CLARIFICATION, MELISSA.

THE MAP THAT IS INCLUDED IN OUR PRESENTATION SHOWS THE PROPERTY AROUND THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY AND A LOT OF THE ZONING AROUND ALL THOSE PIECES OF PROPERTY ARE C-1, C-2, AND I SEE

SOMETHING CALLED L. WHAT IS L? >> THOSE ARE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

>> COURAGE: LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. OKAY. AND IT ONLY LOOKS TO ME LIKE THERE IS ONE RESIDENCE INVOLVED IN THIS 200-FOOT CIRCLE. EVERYTHING ELSE IS NON-RESIDENTIAL. IS THAT RIGHT? I MEAN, JUST WHAT THE MAP SEEMS

TO SHOW. >> CLERK: I THINK THAT THE RM-4 THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, I BELIEVE THAT MIGHT BE BORDERING IT. I CAN'T TELL FROM THIS

PERSPECTIVE. >> COURAGE: NO, RIGHT NEXT TO THE PROPERTY.

>> CLERK: YES, TO THE LEFT. THAT IS RM-4. >> COURAGE: THE OTHERS ARE

RM-4 BUT THEY ARE VACANT. THE ONES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? >> CLERK: YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

>> COURAGE: IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE NOT DRASTICALLY AFFECTING THE PROPERTY IN THAT AREA BECAUSE A LOT OF IT'S VACANT OR COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL.

AND SOUTHCROSS IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE FOR TRUCK TRAFFIC AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN, TO MY WAY OF THINKING. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S SUCH THAT WE'RE GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORS IF WE TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO CONSIDER WHAT OTHER ALTERNATIVES IT COULD BE. BUT I JUST WANT TO GET CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

THANK YOU. >> CLERK: YES, SIR. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

COUNCILMEMBER COURAGE. COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA. >> GARCIA: THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE COUNCILWOMAN'S REQUEST TODAY. DISTRICT 4 SHARES THE SAME CONCERNS AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OTHERS IN THE AREA AS WELL WITH QUALITY OF LIFE.

THE REASON I FEEL SO COMFORTABLE IN HER SUPPORT IS BECAUSE IN OUR CHARTER UNDER DUTIES OF THE CITY, POWERS OF THE CITY UNDER PARAGRAPH 9 ON ZONING, IT STATES THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING THE HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY THE COUNCIL MAY, BY ORDINANCE, REGULATE THE LOCATION AND THE USE OF BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, AND LAND FOR [INDISCERNIBLE] AND THEREFORE I FEEL COMFORTABLE IN DOING THAT TODAY .

THANK YOU, MAYOR. THTHANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ROCHA GARCIA. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY.

WELL, I DO UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION OF THE APPLICANT IN REQUESTING A WAIVER BECAUSE THAT IS A COMMON PRACTICE WHEN THERE IS A REQUEST TO WAIVE -- EXCUSE ME, A REQUEST TO CONTINUE, THAT WE OBSERVE THAT. THE COUNCILMEMBER MAKES COMPELLING STATEMENTS AND I WOULD REMIND US ALL THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE SITUATION FOR US TO WAIVE PROVISIONS OF OUR CODE.

THE REALITY IS EVERY TIME WE PUT A CONDITION ON A ZONING CASE, WE ARE WAIVING PROVISIONS OF THE CODE SO THAT'S NOT A UNIQUE SITUATION FOR OUR ZONING MEETING.

BUT IN THIS CASE I WILL BE FOLLOWING THE LEAD OF THE COUNCIL DISTRICT.

WITH THAT, THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DENIAL OF ITEM 14. OH, DO WE TAKE THE CONTINUANCE FIRST? THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY.

SO WE'LL TAKE UP THE MOTION TO CONTINUE FIRST. AND SO THE MOTION WAS MADE TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO MARCH 7. SO THAT IS THIS VOTE. PLEASE VOTE.

MOTION FAILS. WE'LL MOVE NOW TO THE MAIN MOTION, WHICH IS THE MOTION TO DENY ITEM 14. PLEASE VOTE. THIS IS A MOTION TO DENY.

[01:10:13]

MOTION CARRIES. WE'LL NOW GO TO ITEM 22 AND 23. >> CLERK: CASE] WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR OFFICE WAREHOUSE FLEX SPACE.

GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 4600 BLOCK OF NORTH STAHL PARK. STAFF AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL. 41 NOTICES MAILED, 11 IN FAVOR, EIGHT OPPOSED.

PEPPERIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT . >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: WE DO HAVE

ONE CITIZEN SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. JACK FINGER. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. THAT WAS QUITE A LOOPHOLE THAT WAS CITED THAT LAST CASE.

I THINK WE NEED TO WORK ON THAT ONE THERE. I THOUGHT MAJORITY RULED.

ANYWAY, ITEM 22, 23, MR. WHYTE, THIS IS IN YOUR DISTRICT. IT'S ABOUT PUTTING AN OFFICE WAREHOUSE OVER ON NORTH STAHL ROAD . THERE'S SOME PROBLEMS WITH THIS HERE, SIR. OUT OF THE, OH, 41 NOTICES SENT OUT, AS MANY AS 22% OF THEM SAID NO. THEY DID NOT WANT THIS OFFICE WAREHOUSE HERE.

YEAH. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT THE PRELIMINARY BACK-UP DOCUMENTS HAVE TOLD US. PERHAPS BECAUSE THERE ARE NO BUFFERS TOWARDS THE RESIDENCES ALONG THIS AREA HERE. THAT'S WHAT I NOTICED, ANYWAY. AND I SAY THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD REASON. WHEN YOU HAVE OVER A FIFTH OF THE PEOPLE SAYING NO TO IT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ONLY GET 5% OR 10% AT THE MOST WEIGHING IN ON IT THERE. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO SAY NO TO THAT ONE, SIR, IN ALL DUE

RESPECT. THANK YOU. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: THANK YOU,

MR. FINGER. COUNCILMEMBER WHYTE. >> WHYTE: THANKS, MAYOR.

THANK YOU, JACK. WE ACTUALLY LOOKED INTO ALL OF THAT AND WE SPOKE WITH THOSE PEOPLE THAT DID HAVE ISSUES WITH THIS AT FIRST. AND THANKS TO THE APPLICANT, AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORS, WE ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE HEIGHT AND THE BUILDING COLOR AND THE NOISE AND THE HOURS OF OPERATION AND ALL THE THINGS THAT THEY HAD ISSUES WITH.

AND, AS A RESULT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THE NEIGHBORS ARE HAPPY. AND SO I'M GOING TO MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH THE

RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ATTACHED FOR THE RECORD. >> MAYOR NIRENBERG: OKAY.

THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 22 AND 23. SORRY.

NOW THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 22 AND 23.

DOCUMENTS IN THE RECORD FOR DEED RESTRICTIONS. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT.

THAT'S THE BALANCE OF OUR AGENDA. THE TIME IS 3:25 P.M. ON THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024. WE ARE A

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.