[00:00:01]
READY.[Work Session]
VERY GOOD.UH, IT IS 1231 AND I BELIEVE WE WILL BEGIN OUR WORK SESSION STAFF.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRESENTATIONS TODAY, DO WE? NO SIR.
THERE ARE NO PRESENTATIONS TODAY.
ALRIGHT, SO IN THAT CASE, UH, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY CASES, UH, FOR WHICH PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, COUNTS, UH, ANYTHING THAT INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO PULL? COMMISSIONER ROME? UM, YEAH.
THEY'LL BE ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE TO MAY 4TH.
UH, YEAH, 19 IS ALREADY HERE AS POSTPONED.
SO STAFF, WE CAN MOVE THOSE TO COMBINE HEARING NUMBER TWO AND COMBINE THEM WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS ALSO SEEKING A MAY 4TH, UH, CONTINUANCE.
UH, OTHER COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS COUNTS.
UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE HAS JOINED US YET, BUT I DO HAVE QUESTIONS ON ITEM EIGHT, WHICH IS THE, UH, REZONING ON LOCUST AND GRAYSON STREETS.
CAN I HAVE COUNSEL ON THOSE? YES MA'AM.
AND THIS ONE'S GONNA BE PULLED DOWN FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
UH, THERE WERE 45 NOTICES MAILED.
TWO WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, 17 WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION.
TWO WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR OUTSIDE OF THE 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION AREA AND THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION.
SO THAT'S GOING TO INDIVIDUAL.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS COUNTS.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, CAN I GET COUNTS FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX? YES MA'AM.
THERE WERE 21 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, TWO RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION.
NO RESPONSE FROM CENTRAL LOS ANGELES HEIGHT OR NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
COMMISSIONER SIPES, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR YOU'RE JUST LEANING
UH, COULD I GET A COUNT ON, UH, ITEM NUMBER 17? ITEM NUMBER 17.
THERE WERE 23 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION.
AND COLLINS GARDEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
GREAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, ITEMS TO BE PULLED? MR. CHAIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO JUST COVER THE ITEMS THAT I HAVE ON INDIVIDUAL JUST TO BE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
MS. RE, I HAVE ITEM NUMBER SIX, EIGHT, AND 14.
THOSE THREE HAVE ALL BEEN MOVED TO INDIVIDUAL.
AND THEN FOR CONTINUANCES, ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE AND ITEM TWO, SO TWO, FOUR, AND FIVE FOR A CONTINUANCE TO MAY 4TH.
AND THEN ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS ON COMBINED HEARING NUMBER TWO AS WELL.
THAT ONE IS FOR A RECUSAL FROM COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE IS, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THAT COMPORTS WITH WHAT MY NOTES REFLECT, UM, WITH THE RECUSAL, YOU KNOW, BUT WITH RESPECT TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, BUT FOR THE RECUSAL, UH, THAT IS ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT OTHERWISE, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO MOVE IT TO INDIVIDUAL.
[00:05:01]
GREAT.ALRIGHT, IN LIGHT OF THAT, UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? SORRY, I DID FIND ONE OTHER ONE THAT I HAVE QUESTIONS ON AND THAT'S GONNA BE, UH, ITEM 18 ON RICE ROAD.
DO WE HAVE COUNSEL ON THAT ONE? YES.
ITEM NUMBER 17, NO, 18? YES MA'AM.
ITEM NUMBER 18, THERE WERE 17 NOTICES MAILED, UH, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
AND THE DEL CREST AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM INE ORCHARD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THAT LETTER OF SUPPORT JUST CAME IN, UM, A LITTLE BIT AGO.
AND SO I'M GONNA FORWARD THAT TO YOU AS WE'RE GETTING READY TO, TO START THE MEETING AT ONE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
AND TO THE EXTENT THAT, UH, I, I LOOKED LIKE I WAS FRUSTRATED THERE FOR A SECOND, THAT WAS A TECHNICAL ISSUE.
UH, I WAS HAVING TO GO THROUGH EACH INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER TO SEE IF ANYONE HAD ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS.
ARE YOU, ARE YOU HAVING PROBLEMS SHAPING? I MEAN, UH, DOING YOUR SCREEN? I USUALLY AM ABLE TO PUT EVERYBODY ON THE SIDE.
SO USUALLY I HAVE MY LARGER MONITOR UP.
I'VE GOT UH, BABY YODA OR GRO GU OVER MY SHOULDER.
UM, BUT UH, I, I HAD JUST UH, BEEN FORCED INTO A DIFFERENT FORMAT THAT I DID NOT CARE FOR, BUT NOW I'VE GOT A, A LITTLE MORE SPACE.
I'M NOT ABLE TO PUT MINE THE WAY I USUALLY PUT IT, BUT, OKAY.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COUNTS, POLL, THINGS OF THAT NATURE? UH, I THINK I HAVE EVERYONE HERE AND I DON'T SEE ANY.
SO, UH, IN LIGHT OF THAT, UH, THE TIME IS APPROXIMATELY 1239 AND WE'LL STAND IN RECESS TILL ONE O'CLOCK WHEN WE WILL BEGIN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, IF WE CAN GET COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL AND COMMISSIONER WHITE BACK ONLINE AND IF WE COULD GO ON AIR PLEASE MR. CHAIR.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
MY NAME IS JOHN BUSTAMANTE AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT FIVE ZONING COMMISSIONER.
I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICED MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION.
CAN WE HAVE OUR INTERPRETERS READ THE INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THIS MEETING? THANK YOU.
[Roll Call]
PLEASE CONDUCT THE ROLL CALL.CHAIR BUSANTE PRESENT SIR, YOU HAVE A QUORUM.
UH, PRIOR TO STARTING WITH OUR ITEMS, UH, I WOULD LIKE OUR STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT STAFF, IF YOU WOULD, TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF COVID 19.
THE ZONING COMMISSION IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE.
THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON THE VARIOUS SUSPENDED
[00:10:01]
PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID 19 CRISIS AND ARE IN PLACE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH AND LISTEN TO THIS MEETING BY VISITING WWW SAN ANTONIO GOV DSD WHEREBY CALLING IN FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 6 5 4 8 3 TO IN TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
THESE INCLUDE EMAIL OR MAIL OF COMMENTS, DROPPING OFF COMMENTS, LEAVING VOICEMAIL OR ASKING TO BE CALLED DURING THE MEETING.
STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS RECEIVED ARE PART OF THE OFFICIAL WRITTEN RECORD FOR ITEMS ON INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT.
STAFF WILL PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL.
LASTLY, FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, WE WILL CALL THEM TO STATE THEIR TWO MINUTE COMMENT.
SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS NEEDED.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION.
QUESTIONS MR. CHAIR? GREAT, THANK YOU.
STAFF, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE REVIEW UH,
[Items 7, 9 - 13, 15 - 18, & 20]
THE CURRENT LIST OF CONSENT COMBINED INDIVIDUAL AS WELL AS ANY POSTPONED OR WITHDRAWN ITEMS. ITEMS NUMBER ONE AND 19 ARE BOTH POSTPONED.AND THEN AND ON COMBINED HEARING NUMBER ONE, WE HAVE ITEM 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, AND 20 FOR COMBINED HEARING NUMBER TWO WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER THREE FOR A RECUSAL AND ITEMS NUMBER TWO, FOUR, AND FIVE FOR A CONTINUANT OR FOR CONTINUANCES.
AND LASTLY, ON INDIVIDUAL HEARING WE HAVE ITEMS NUMBER SIX, EIGHT, AND 14, MR. CHAIR.
UH, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PULL ANY FURTHER ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? SEEING NONE.
UH, STAFF IF YOU WOULD PLEASE READ UH, THE COMBINED HEARING.
NUMBER ONE, CONSENT ITEMS INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C THREE AND C2 TO MF 25 OVERLAY REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 2383 NORTHEAST LOOP 4 10 13 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE WAS RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.
VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED.
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C TWO A H O D TO C TWO C D A H O D WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR FACILITY WITH OUTSIDE STORAGE LOCATED AT 45 15 STALL ROAD AND 44 97 STALL ROAD.
15 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE WAS RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM BREYER WICK OR PEPPERIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C ONE A H O D TO M X D A H O D GENERALLY LOCATED IN A 3,500 BLOCK OF BDD ROAD.
ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 11 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RMM FIVE A H O D TO I D Z ONE A H O D WITH USE AS PERMITTED FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT 2 0 2 MASON STREET.
28 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RMM FIVE A H O D TO R THREE A H O D LOCATED AT 1622 NORTH HACKBERRY STREET.
33 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 13 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C THREE NA TO C THREE NA H L WITH THE OTHER OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 7 26 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
22 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.
AND BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
ITEM NUMBER 15 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM OH TWO UC ONE AND OH TWO TO C TWO NA UC ONE AND C TWO NA.
ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 69 29 CAMP BOLUS ROAD 47 NOTICES WERE MAIL ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 16 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C THREE A H O D AND C THREE TO C THREE CD, A H O D AND C THREE
[00:15:01]
CD.ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR MANUFACTURED HOME SIZED HOME SLASH OVERSIZED VEHICLE SALES AND SERVICE OR STORAGE.
FOUR NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM I TWO TO RM SIX.
ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME LOCATED AT THREE 13 PENDLETON DRIVE.
23 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.
AND COLLINS GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
ITEM NUMBER 18 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C TWO TO C TWO S.
ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A HOSPITAL WITH A BEHAVIORAL CARE UNIT LOCATED AT EIGHT 19 RICE ROAD.
NOTICES WERE MALE, ZERO OR RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.
THE DEL CRET AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM HEIN ORCHARD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND LASTLY, ITEM NUMBER 20 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM I D Z WITH USE OF PERMITTED AN NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND RMM SIX TO R FOUR R FIVE AND R SIX TO R FOUR ON PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN BLOCK 1610 T B 5 21 LOCATED AT 10 12 NORTH HACKBERRY STREET 5 0 9 AND FIVE 11 LAMAR STREET TO R FIVE ON PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN BLOCK 24 AND CB FIVE 20 LOCATED AT 1003 1007 1011 1017 AND 1021 NORTH HACKBERRY STREET AND TO R SIX ON PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN BLOCK 14 N C B FIVE 30 AND BLOCK NINE NNC B 5 49 LOCATED AT 5 0 2, 5 0 4 5 0 6 AND 5 0 8 LAMAR STREET AND 7 0 5 NORTH PINE STREET.
88 NOTICES WERE MAIL 30 WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
ZERO WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, DIGNITY HILL AND DIGNITY HILL TERRACE.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE IN FAVOR MR. CHAIR.
BEFORE I ENTERTAIN A MOTION, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE TWO VOICEMAILS RELATED TO 13 AND 20 TO BE PLAYED.
IF WE COULD PLAY THOSE PLEASE.
WE ARE JUST WAITING FOR IT TO LOAD.
I'M LEAVING A MESSAGE IN MY SUPPORT OF THE REZONING OF THE PARCEL PROPERTY AT 7 2 6 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
AGAIN, I'M IN SUPPORT OF MAKING THIS A HISTORIC LANDMARK AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS BEING PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
HI, MY NAME IS CYNTHIA STEELMAN.
MY UH, PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 396-3688.
I AM CURRENTLY SERVING AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
[00:20:01]
LIKE TO ADDRESS THE LARGE AREA REZONING IN THE CASE 0 6 3 OF THE LAST THREE DIGITS, INDI WHIT HILL AS BEACON HILL PREPARES FOR ITS OWN LARGE AREA REZONING EFFORT, WE WANT TO BE ASSURED THAT THE HARD WORK OF THE RESIDENTS AND OF CITY STAFF IS NOT IN VAIN.WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU SUPPORT THE LARGE AREA REZONING REQUEST IN IGN HILL, WHICH YOU WILL HEAR ON APRIL 20TH.
THIS LARGE AREA REZONING JUST ZONING, WHICH IS INCONSISTENT WITH CURRENT LAND USE REINFORCES CONVENTIONAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS FOR OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION? THIS IS COMMISSIONER SIPES.
I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEMS NUMBER 7 9 10 11 12 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, AND 20.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND GREATHOUSE.
UH, I HEARD GREATHOUSE FIRST, SO WE'LL GO WITH THAT.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
[Items 2 - 5]
TO OUR COMBINED HEARING.NUMBER TWO ITEMS. UH, I BELIEVE WE'RE GONNA START WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT UH, PRO TIM GREATHOUSE HAS TURNED OFF HER CAMERA AND MUTED HER MICROPHONE.
IF WE COULD BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R M FOUR N C D ONE A H O D TO TWO RMM FOUR HL CD LOCATED AT ONE 18 LOTUS AVENUE.
AND THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO IS IN FAVOR, MR. CHAIR.
AND, UH, I THINK THE RECORD SHOULD ALSO REFLECT THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS IN FAVOR AS WELL.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION? IS COMMISSIONER SIPES I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND MCDANIEL.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE BY COMMISSIONER SIPS WITH A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
IF WE COULD TAKE THE NEXT THREE ITEMS ON THE COMBINED HEARING.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE ALL REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE TO MAY 4TH, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
THEY'RE ALL REQUESTING TWO WEEK CONTINUANCES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO R SIX HL.
ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 1206 WEST AGARITA AVENUE.
24 NOTICES WERE MAILED TO OR RETURNED IN FAVOR? ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR WAS A REQUEST.
THE REQUEST
[00:25:01]
MF 33 UC AND ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 14,000 BLOCK OF VANCE JACKSON ROAD.
11 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
ZERO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND LASTLY, ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A DANCE HALL WITH LIVE ENTERTAINMENT C THREE AND C TWO CD GC ONE WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A DANCE HALL FOR LIVE ENTERTAINMENT AS WELL AS MF 50 GC ONE TO MF 50 AND MF 50 GC ONE.
ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 5,000 BLOCK OF U T S A BOULEVARD.
TWO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR, ONE WAS RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.
AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND BEFORE I FORGET, FOLLOWING THE RESOLUTION OF ITEM NUMBER THREE, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, RETURN TO THE MEETING AT APPROXIMATELY ONE 17.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION THIS COMMISSIONER SES? I MAKE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TO MAY 4TH FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEMS NUMBER TWO, FOUR AND FIVE.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO MAY 4TH FOR ITEMS TWO, FOUR, AND FIVE BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
UH, MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO FOR A CONTINUANCE TO MAY THE FOURTH FOR ITEM TWO, FOUR, AND FIVE.
IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST INDIVIDUAL ITEM.
[6. 21-2817 ZONING CASE Z-2021-10700031 S (Council District 1): (Part 1 of 2)]
A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM M MS 33 TO C TO S OVERLY REMAINING THE SAME WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A CAR WASH LOCATED AT 1846 BASSEY ROAD.NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR.
TWO WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.
THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM CENTRAL LOS ANGELES HEIGHTS OR NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTION.
UH, IF THE APPLICANT WOULD THEIR CASE, UH, IF, IF YOU'RE TALKING, UM, YOU MAY HAVE TO HIT STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF BECAUSE WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? AND AS STAFF INDICATED, IF UH, YOU ARE CURRENTLY TALKING WE CANNOT HEAR YOU, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
UM, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, POSTPONE OR NOT POSTPONE, THAT'S THE WRONG WORD.
I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS ITEM UP A LITTLE LATER IN THE MEETING, UH, WHEN WE CAN GET THE APPLICANT PRESENT, IF THAT'S OKAY WITH STAFF.
WE WILL GET READY FOR THE NEXT ITEM.
IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
WE WILL RETURN TO ITEM NUMBER SIX AND STAFF IF YOU COULD PLEASE WORK ON GETTING THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE LINE.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS A REQUEST TO
[8. 21-2819 ZONING CASE Z-2021-10700037 (Council District 1):]
REZONE FROM IDZ.TWO WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 50 UNITS PER ACRE AND I D Z TWO UC WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 50 U UNITS PER ACRE TO I D Z THREE
[00:30:02]
UC.FOUR WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 113 DWELLING UNITS AND I D Z THREE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 113 DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT SEVEN 15 EAST LOCUST STREET AND THREE 18 WEST GRAYSON STREET AND 3 26 WEST GRAYSON STREET.
17 WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.
THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION AND TWO RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR OUTSIDE THE 200 FOOT BUFFER.
THE EXISTING I D Z TWO BASED ZONING DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED I D Z THREE IS ALSO APPROPRIATE AND ACHIEVES THE PLAN'S GOALS OF INCREASING THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS IN THE MIDTOWN AREA REGIONAL CENTER.
THE SITE IS LOCATED BETWEEN WEST GRAYSON STREET AND EAST LOCUST STREET NEAR NORTH ST.
THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES REQUESTED TO PERMIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT OF THE SITE FOR USES PERMITTED FOR 113 DWELLING UNITS.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND ADVERSE IMPACT.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? I AM.
UH, THIS IS ASHLEY FAIRMONT WITH KILLING GRIFFIN IN FAIRMONT.
UM, I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF URBAN GENESIS DEVELOPERS.
UH, WE'RE REQUESTING REZONING, AS YOU HEARD, FOR 113 ACRES, THE I D Z THREE, UH, FOR AN INFILL PROJECT NEAR THE PEARL.
UM, JUSTIN, CAN YOU PULL UP MY PRESENTATION? UH, IT IS CURRENTLY UP.
SO YOU CAN CONTINUE, IF WE CAN GET RID OF THAT POP-UP THOUGH STAFF.
UM, SO IF YOU COULD GO TO SLIDE TWO PLEASE.
THIS WILL GIVE A, A GENERAL IDEA OF THE OVERVIEW OF THE AREA.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS THE PEARL AREA.
WE, WE ARE TO THE, THE WEST SIDE OF THE PEARL.
SO JOSEPHINE STREET IS TO THE NORTH, THE PEARL TO THE EAST, AND THEN ST.
UM, IT, IT FRONTS ON GRAYSON AND LOCUST.
THE, I'LL GET INTO IT IN A LITTLE BIT, BUT THE, THE PRIMARY ACCESS TO THE SITE WILL BE EXCLUSIVELY FROM GRAYSON.
UM, AND AS I MENTIONED, OUR REQUEST IS FOR AN I D Z THREE WITH THE ALLOWANCE FOR THE 113 UNITS.
UM, ALL OF THE UNITS WILL BE ONE BEDROOM, SO THEY'RE ABOUT 650 SQUARE FEET EACH, GIVE OR TAKE.
UH, SO, SO WE'RE INCREASING UNITS, BUT NOT NECESSARILY INCREASING, UH, THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT, WHICH IS ALREADY PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS A VIEW OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY FROM LOCUST.
THIS, SOME OF THIS WAS IN STAFF'S PRESENTATION, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE.
IT WAS USED TO BE AN INDUSTRIAL SITE, UH, AND, AND NOW IS PRIMARILY VACANT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF, OF THE WAREHOUSE SEEN ON THIS SITE.
THIS IS A VIEW OF THE SITE FROM ST.
UH, YOU HAVE THE INDUSTRIAL THAT STILL EXISTS TO THE LEFT.
THERE'S A BAR AT THE CORNER OF ST.
MARY'S IN GRAYSON, AND THEN SOME EXISTING TOWN HOMES BEHIND THAT BAR.
SLIDE SIX IS, IS REALLY JUST THE SAME VIEW.
AND THEN SLIDE SEVEN, HERE'S A VIEW OF THE SITE, UH, FROM WEST GRAYSON.
SO THIS WILL BE WHERE THE, THE PROJECT FRONTS.
SO THIS IS JUST AN, AN OVERVIEW OF THE ZONING OF THE AREA.
YOU CAN SEE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF I D Z, UH, WE ARE ALREADY ZONE I D Z, BUT I D Z TWO AND REQUESTING THAT CHANGE TO, TO THE THREE.
SO JUST A ZOOMED IN VIEW OF, OF THE PROJECT SITE.
UM, SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS AN UNDERUTILIZED PART OF PARCEL THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY.
UH, THIS IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL AN IDEAL SITE FOR INFIELD DEVELOPMENT AND FOR DENSITY.
UM, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THE DENSITY IS WHAT WILL HELP TRANSFORM THIS AREA AND ENCOURAGE FURTHER REDEVELOPMENT AS A PEARL AREA CONTINUES TO GROW.
UH, IT'S AN ATTRACTION AS YOU ALL KNOW, AND AN AMENITY FOR, FOR US SAN ANTONIANS FOR VISITORS TO OUR CITY.
AS THE EMPLOYEES, UH, MOVE TO THIS AREA, THEY, THEY NEED SOMEWHERE TO, TO LIVE.
SO HOUSING IS DEFINITELY IN, IN DEMAND FOR THIS AREA, IN PARTICULAR, IN DEMAND FOR THIS CITY AS A WHOLE.
UM, SO THE ZONING WILL ALLOW THE SITE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE HERE.
THEY CAN GO TO THE PEARL, HANG OUT, UH, AND WE WANNA PROVIDE A PROJECT WHERE PEOPLE CAN WALK OR BIKE, UH, BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY NEED TO GO.
SO WE REALLY FEEL THAT THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS WHAT WE WANNA ENCOURAGE AND WHAT WE WANNA SUPPORT IN OUR CITY AND IN THIS AREA.
AND IT IS A GOOD USE OF THE PROPERTY AND ALSO PROMOTES, YOU KNOW, A MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TYPE OF HOUSING AND LIVING.
[00:35:01]
SLIDE 10 PLEASE.SO THIS IS A CURRENT I D Z PLAN THAT IS APPROVED FOR THE SITE.
UM, THIS WAS SUPPORTED BY THE COMMISSION IN REZONING LAST YEAR.
UM, IT DOES SHOW SOME BUILDINGS ON THIS, BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR AN ENTIRE BUILD OUT OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT, AT THE NOTES TO THE PLAN.
SO IT COULD BE DEVELOPED, UM, ALL BUILDINGS AND THEN IT COULD ALSO, THIS DOES ALLOW FOR FOUR STORIES ON THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
UM, SO THE, THE PREVIOUS PLAN WAS TO HAVE A LARGER, LARGER SIZED UNITS.
UM, SO A MIXTURE OF UNITS WITH THE BIGGER, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGES.
AND SO WHILE THIS CURRENT PLAN ALLOWS FOR 50 UNITS AN ACRE, THAT COMES OUT TO ABOUT 58 UNITS, UM, THESE UNITS WOULD ALL HAVE MULTIPLE BEDROOMS. OUR PROPOSAL IS 113 UNITS WITH ONE BEDROOM EACH.
SO IT, IT'S LIKELY TO BE A SIMILAR NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO WHAT'S CURRENTLY PERMITTED.
SO HERE I JUST WANTED TO SHOW SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THIS AREA AND ALONG WITH WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
SO, UM, FURTHER DOWN LOCUST AND GRAYSON AT ELMIRA.
ALONG THE SAME BLOCK THERE IS THE EAST EUCLID PROJECT.
SO THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR AND THAT ALLOWS FOR, UM, OH TWO USES C THREE USES AND UP TO 176 UNITS.
AND THEN ACROSS WEST GRAYSON IS JOSEPHINE STREET PROJECT, UH, THAT ALLOWS FOR, UH, 300 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS AND THAT IS A, AN AFFORDABLE PROJECT AS WELL.
SO HERE'S AN EXHIBIT, UM, VIEWING NORTH, SHOWING THE PROPERTY AND, AND IT SHOWS BASICALLY THE HEIGHTS AND, AND WHAT'S PERMITTED.
I JUST WANTED TO GIVE SOME CONTEXT OF HOW OUR PROPOSAL, HOW THIS PROJECT IS GONNA FIT IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THE JOSEPHINE STREET PROJECT IS ALLOWED UP TO 95 FEET IN HEIGHT.
UH, EUCLID PROJECT IS 120 FEET IN HEIGHT OR 15 STORIES.
AND THEN, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE TOWN HOMES KIND OF MID-BLOCK.
THOSE ARE THE SOJO COMMONS TOWN HOMES.
AND THEN OUR PROJECT IS IN THE MIDDLE.
AND THEN THE THREE STORY TOWN HOMES UP FRONT ON, UH, ST.
SO FOR OUR PROJECT, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE TOWN HOMES ON EACH SIDE, A BUILDING HEIGHT WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE STORIES OR 35 FEET.
SO THAT GIVES THE THREE STORY TOWN HOMES, 50 FEET OF THREE STORIES.
AND THEN OUR PROJECT WILL GO UP TO FOUR STORIES AND THEN BACK DOWN TO THREE STORIES ADJACENT TO, UH, THE TOWN HOMES ON, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE PROJECT.
SO WE FEEL THAT THIS IS, IS PRETTY THOUGHTFUL AND BEING COMPARABLE IN HEIGHT, UH, AND ALSO SHOWS A REDUCTION TO WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ON THE LAST ZONING CASE.
SO THIS SLIDE HERE, THIS IS OUR I D Z PLAN AND, AND WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING, YOU CAN SEE THE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, UH, THAT WE'VE ADDED TO THE PLAN.
SO THAT WILL BE ENFORCEABLE BY THE CITY.
UM, AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY FEEL LIKE WE'VE TRIED TO BE THOUGHTFUL IN, IN THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT.
UM, 'CAUSE IN ADDITION TO THE HEIGHT, THE PROJECT ALSO IS SUFFICIENTLY PARKED.
I KNOW THAT'S ALWAYS A CONCERN WITH I D Z ZONING IS, IS WHERE WILL RESIDENTS PARK.
SO THERE'S 113 UNITS, UM, AND 122 PARKING SPACES, SO OVER ONE PARKING SPACE PER UNIT.
AND ALL OF THAT PARKING WILL BE CONTAINED WITHIN A PARKING GARAGE.
AND, AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT IN THE PLAN IN JUST A SECOND.
UH, BUT THIS REALLY KEEPS PARKING OFF OF THE STREET.
UM, WHEN WE, WE SPOKE WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF TOBIN HILL AND SOJO COMMONS TOWN HOMES, WE UNDERSTOOD THAT, THAT THERE'S SOME ON STREET PARKING ON LOCUST, AND THAT WAS, UM, PRETTY IMPORTANT TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN HOMES.
UH, THOSE ARE LARGER UNITS WITH MULTIPLE BEDROOMS AND THEY NEED SOME ADDITIONAL PARKING, SO, SO THEY DO USE FOR THAT.
UM, OUR PROJECT IS, IS FULLY PARKED, AS I MENTIONED, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEW PROJECT DON'T PARK ON LOCUST AND TAKE AWAY ANY PARKING, UM, THAT'S BEING USED BY THE TOWN HOMES.
WE'VE AGREED TO LIMIT ALL ACCESS TO THE SITE FROM GRAYSON.
SO VEHICULAR ACCESS WILL ONLY BE FROM GRAYSON AS WELL AS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS UN UNLESS THERE'S A, A FIRE EXIT OR SOMETHING OF THAT KIND.
BUT THAT WOULD KEEP ALL VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ON GRAYSON.
UM, ALL PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ON GRAYSON AND AWAY FROM THE PARKING ON LOCUSTS AND ALSO ENTRANCES, UH, TO THE TOWN HOME PROJECTS AS WELL.
SLIDE 14 INCLUDES, UH, SOME ELEVATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, THE IDEA WAS TO DO SOMETHING IN CHARACTER WITH THE PEARL, SO YOU CAN SEE THE BRICK AND, AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY USING FOR THIS PROJECT.
ARCHITECTS THAT ARE, ARE VERY EXPERIENCED AT THE PEARL.
UM, SO THIS IS THE FRONT VIEW OF THE SITE.
AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS ON THE, ON THE LEFT WE HAVE THE THREE STORIES TO THE
[00:40:01]
CENTER.WE GO UP TO THE FOUR, AND THEN ON THE RIGHT WE GO BACK DOWN TO THE THREE.
UM, SO QUALITY, HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS COMPARABLE, UM, AND REALLY SUPPORTIVE OF EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS HAPPENING AROUND IT.
UH, SLIDE 15 INCLUDES OUR SITE PLAN, NOT OUR I D D SITE PLAN, BUT JUST THE PROJECT SITE PLAN.
UM, TO THE LEFT IS THE GROUND FLOOR PARKING.
THAT AGAIN, IS ALL THE GARAGE WITH THE A HUNDRED TWO TWENTY TWO SPACES.
UH, ONE THING I DID FAIL TO MENTION IS, YOU KNOW, IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT OBVIOUSLY IS, IS WALKABILITY.
UM, AND THEN ALSO BEING ABLE TO BIKE, UM, AND USE ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION INSTEAD OF A CAR.
SO IN ADDITION TO THE PARKING, WE WILL INCLUDE 26, UM, BIKE PARKING SPACES IN THE GARAGE AS WELL.
UM, SO, AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE, THE ONE ACCESS POINT AT GRAYSON AND POLK.
UM, ALSO IN ADDITION TO KEEPING PARKING OFF OF LOCUSTS AT THE STREET LEVEL, THERE WILL BE STREET SCAPE IMPROVEMENTS, LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS.
UH, THE CITY ALSO IS, UM, IMPROVING THOSE STREETS.
CURRENTLY, I THINK THERE'S A, A, A PROJECT THAT'S ABOUT TO GET UNDERWAY THAT WOULD REPAVE THOSE STREETS, YOU KNOW, UPDATE THE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS AS WELL.
UM, WE HAVE HEARD SOME RUMORS THAT PEOPLE THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE CRAZY POOL PARTIES, UM, OR LOUD NOISE COMING FROM THIS PROJECT.
AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, UM, THAT, THAT THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
UM, THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE NO AMENITIES.
SO, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY APARTMENT PROJECTS WE BRING TO YOU HAVE POOLS, GYMS, BUSINESS CENTERS, COMMON AREAS, ALL OF THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, UH, WHERE PEOPLE CAN HANG OUT, INVITE PEOPLE TO HANG OUT.
UM, BUT THIS PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE ANY OF THAT.
SO THE FOCUS HERE IS REALLY JUST A COMMUNITY WHERE PEOPLE LIVE.
UH, THE AMENITY FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE AREA, IT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S THE PEARL, IT'S THE WALKABILITY.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE ACCESSIBLE FROM HERE.
SO I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THERE WAS ANY NEED TO PROVIDE, UM, THE POOL OR THE PARTY ROOM OR THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP IN CHARACTER WITH THE AREA.
SO ALSO THAT MONEY THAT MAYBE COULD BE INVESTED IN AMENITIES IS ALSO GOES BACK INTO THE PROJECT IN THE FORM OF IMPROVED, UM, YOU KNOW, TENANT FINISH OUTS.
SO L E D, LIGHTING, PORTS, COUNTERTOPS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, AS WELL AS BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, AND THAT WAY THEY CAN KEEP THE QUALITY OF THE PROJECT VERY, VERY HIGH WITHOUT INCREASING THE RENT AND KEEPING THIS OPEN TO MAYBE A MORE DIVERSE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT COULDN'T NECESSARILY LIVE, UM, IN ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, DOWN IN THE CENTER OF THE PEARL.
THANK, THANK YOU MS. BERRYMAN.
UM, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT COMING RIGHT UP LIVE AT TWO ONE? GOOD MORNING.
MARY'S STREET ON THE CORNER OF ST.
MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 4 2 2 6 5 7 9.
AND I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER 0 3 7.
MARY'S PLACE WOULD LIKE TO VOICE OUR OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING REQUEST THAT IS BEING BROUGHT IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY, SPECIFICALLY TO THE FACT THAT THE PROPOSED REZONING IS NOW THE THIRD REQUEST FOR THIS PROPERTY.
MOST RECENTLY IN JUNE OF 2020.
AND NOW THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY IS ASKING FOR YET ANOTHER INCREASE TO THE TUNE OF OVER 240% OF THE ORIGINAL ZONED AMOUNT.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY FOUR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, INCLUDING THIS ONE THAT HAVE BEEN ANNOUNCED IN THE ONE BLOCK RADIUS OF EACH OTHER.
WHAT SETS ALL THESE PROJECTS APART IS THAT THE OTHER THREE PROJECTS ARE ALL ON CURRENTLY INDUSTRIAL ZONE PROPERTIES.
THIS PROPERTY IS NOT ONLY THE SMALLEST OF ALL, BUT IT IS ALSO THE ONLY ONE WITH A RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
ALL IN ALL, THESE PROJECTS WILL BRING OVER 900 UNITS IN THE NEXT 48 MONTHS THAT ARE ALL WITHIN FEET OF EACH OTHER.
IN AGGREGATE, THE MEDIA DENSITY OF THIS AREA IS ONE THAT WILL ULTIMATELY RIVAL LARGER METROPOLITAN CITIES SUCH AS NEW YORK CITY OR CHICAGO.
WE ASK THE ZONING COMMISSION TO UPHOLD THE MS 50
[00:45:01]
DESIGNATION GRANTED IN THE SUMMER OF 2020.AND MAY THE RECORD SHOW THAT DEVELOPER ECONOMICS SHOULD NOT DICTATE PUBLIC POLICY, BUT THAT PUBLIC POLICY SHOULD DICTATE DEVELOPER ECONOMICS.
MY ADDRESS IS THREE 18 WEST GRAYSON STREET, UNIT ONE OH ONE.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (919) 672-2375.
AND I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO CASE NUMBER 0 3 7, UH, ON SEVEN 15 EAST LOCUST WEST LOCUST STREET.
UM, WE ARE, UH, NOT OBJECTING TO THE PROJECT, BUT WE ARE OBJECTING TO THE, THE NUMBER OF PLANNED UNITS.
UH, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN BEEN REZONED THREE TIMES IN RECENT YEARS.
AND, UH, FOR THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, THE NUMBER OF PLANNED UNITS WELL OVER A HUNDRED IS, IS WAY TOO DENSE.
UH, AS AN EXAMPLE, UH, THE PROPERTY JUST TO THE EAST OF IT, UH, IS, UM, UH, OF SIMILAR OR SLIGHTLY LARGER SIZE AND ONLY HAS 27 UNITS ON THAT ENTIRE LOT.
UM, WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT, UH, THE AS PLANNED HAVING, UH, ENTRANCE, UH, ENTRANCE AND EXITS FROM THIS PROPERTY ONLY ON GRAYSON STREET, UH, SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, WILL, UH, REALLY CREATE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AS WELL AS PARKING PROBLEMS FOR OTHER RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES IN THE AREA.
UH, WE ENCOURAGE THE, UH, ZONING COMMISSION TO, UH, UH, NOT, NOT DISAPPROVED THE PROJECT, BUT UH, UH, REIGN IN THE NUMBER OF PLANNED UNITS, UH, TO SOMETHING THAT IS MORE ACCEPTABLE AND IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD SIZE.
THAT'S ALL WE HAVE, MR. CHAIR.
UH, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE SOME TIME FOR REBUTTAL.
I I DID TALK TO OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, PAT DAWSON, UM, ABOUT PROPOSED TRAFFIC.
UM, THIS PROJECT DOES NOT EVEN RISE TO THE LEVEL OF REQUIRING A LEVEL ONE TRAFFIC STUDY.
THE TRAFFIC COUNT IS ACTUALLY VERY, VERY LOW FOR 113 UNITS.
UM, SO, SO THAT'S ONE COMMENT.
SECOND, UM, I, I KNOW THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH THE NUMBER OF UNITS, BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE ALL ONE BEDROOM.
AND WHILE 58 UNITS ARE PERMITTED NOW WITH 58 UNITS HAVE TWO BEDROOMS, UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS MORE BEDROOMS AND POTENTIALLY MORE PEOPLE THAN WHAT WE ARE.
DENSITY IS CALCULATED BY UNITS, SO BY DOORS.
AND, UH, SO I DO WANNA POINT THAT OUT.
AND ALSO WE ARE THEORETICALLY REDUCING, UH, THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING THAT COULD GO ON THE PROPERTY WITH OUR REZONING.
SO WE DO THINK THAT THE CHARACTER AND THE MASSING IS, IS EQUIVALENT TO, UM, THE AREA.
SO WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, THIS, LIKE EVERY OTHER CASE TODAY IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE, SO COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, YOU HAVE THE HONORS.
MAYBE I SHOULD PLAY THE LOTTERY.
SEEMS LIKE, UH, I'M, I'M THE ONE THAT LEFT OUT TODAY.
UM, SO, UH, JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, UM, ON THIS.
UM, SO I WAS LOOKING AT THE PLAN, UM, AND, AND KIND OF FOR THE BENEFIT OF, OF ALL OF US, COULD YOU TELL US WHY THERE IS NO PLAN AMENDMENT REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT? UH, I D D THREE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE MIDTOWN REGIONAL CENTER PLAN.
AND I THINK, UM, IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN ONLINE, AS IT AS IT'S CURRENTLY DRAFTED, IT SAYS THAT THE EMPLOYMENT MIXED USE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS FOR, UM, THE EMPLOYMENT MIXED USE IS 33 UNITS AN ACRE.
SO COULD YOU EXPLAIN HOW WE GET TO, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR A HUNDRED OVER A HUNDRED UNITS? I THINK IT'S LIKE 95 UNITS AN ACRE ON THIS PROPERTY.
RIGHT? SO PART OF THE I D Z THREE LAND, UH, EXCUSE ME, ZONING CATEGORY, THERE IS, UH, WITHIN THE ORDINANCE REGULATION THAT SAYS THAT IN IDZ THREE YOU CAN SPECIFY THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE BEYOND THE, IN ORDER TO STATE THE DENSITY
[00:50:01]
FOR THAT, UH, SITE PLAN.AND SO HERE IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE REQUESTING IDZ THREE WITH 113 UNITS, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 55 MORE UNITS THAN THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TODAY.
THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE 58 UNITS.
AND SO, UH, WITH THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THIS PLAN, IT SEEMED APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA.
BUT I'M, I'M GETTING ASKED THAT, I'M GETTING AT THE, THE FACT THAT IT SAYS UNDERNEATH, UM, IF YOU'RE READING THE PLANETS UNDER, IN THE BOTTOM UNDERNEATH EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE, THAT ANY I D Z PROPERTIES WILL BE, ARE ACCEPTABLE IN THAT AREA, IN THAT LAND USE CATEGORY.
SO LONG AS THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE USES THAT WERE SET FORTH ABOVE.
AND THE MOST DENSE USE THAT'S SET FORTH IS MF 33.
SO HOW ARE WE GETTING FROM MF 33 TO MF 95 HERE? SO IN THAT SECTION THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, I'M SORRY, I HAD TO GET THERE REAL QUICK.
UM, IF, IF YOU NOTICE THERE IS, UM, RED LINED OR SCRATCHED OUT, YOU MAY NOT SEE THIS IN YOUR PLAN, BUT THERE WAS A RULE INTERPRETATION DETERMINATION THAT WAS DONE.
AND SO IT SCRATCHED I D Z AND M X D AND LITERALLY ADDED THE CATEGORIES OF I D Z ONE, I D Z TWO AND I DZ THREE TO THE EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE.
SO THERE WAS, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED FOR EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE.
BUT IDZ THREE COULD STILL TECHNICALLY BE MF 33? NO, BECAUSE NOW IT, IT'S JUST SAYING THAT YOU CAN GO WITH THE ZONING OF IDZ THREE AND FOLLOW THE REGULATIONS THAT ARE PRESCRIBED UNDER IDZ THREE.
SO THEN IF YOU GO INTO THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE AND LOOK AT THAT, IT SAYS THAT YOU CAN SPECIFY ANY DENSITY THAT YOU WANT IN IDZ THREE.
AND SO HERE THERE IS SPECIFYING 113 UNITS.
AND THAT RULE INTERPRETATION TERMINATION THAT WAS MADE, WHEN WAS THAT? IT WAS IN JULY OF 2019.
AND WHEN WAS THE PLAN ADOPTED? THE PLAN BEING THE MIDTOWN PLAN OR THE PLAN BEING THE ORDINANCE WHICH ADOPTED THE I D Z THE MIDTOWN PLAN? SO JUST TO CLARIFY, UH, THE I D Z, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, THE LAND USE CATEGORIES WERE ADOPTED PRIOR TO ANY ADOPTION OF THE PLAN, THE I D Z NEW CATEGORIES I D Z TWO AND THREE, THAT ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE LAND USE CATEGORY IN 2018.
SO THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN BETWEEN THAT POINT.
SO THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED PRIOR TO THE I DZ ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
AND SO AT THAT POINT AFTER THE I D Z ONE, TWO AND THREE WERE APPROVED, THEN THERE WAS THE R THE RULE INTERPRETATION DETERMINATION THAT WAS MADE AFTER THAT.
AND WAS THERE ANY COMMUNI, WAS THERE ANY COMMUNITY INPUT OR MEETINGS WITH STAKEHOLDERS IN THE AREA WHEN THAT HAPPENED? UH, WHEN THE R WAS ADOPTED, THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PROCESS FOR R IN THE CODE.
THAT IS, THAT IS THE AUTHORITY THAT IS GRANTED TO THE DIRECTOR.
UH, WHAT WE DID DO IS WE PARTNERED WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT INTERPRETATION, UH, THAT IT WAS DISCUSSED DURING THE, UH, TASK FORCE MEETINGS FOR I D Z BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT WE NEEDED TO, UM, AMEND THE LAND USE CATEGORIES IN ORDER TO ADOPT THESE NEW CATEGORIES OF I D Z AS WELL AS THE CHANGES TO M X D R ONE, R TWO, AND R THREE A R IS, IS BASICALLY THE ABILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ADD THESE THINGS, UH, INTO THE CODE UNTIL THE FORMAL U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS THAT FORMALLY ADOPTS THEM INTO THE CODE.
UM, ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, ON THE SITE PLAN, I NOTICED, UM, AND, AND MS. FAIRMAN ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ACCESS WILL BE LIMITED TO GRAYSON STREET AND THERE WOULD BE NO ACCESS ON LOCUST STREET.
UM, AND I, AND I SEE THAT THE SITE PLAN SAYS THAT BECAUSE THIS IS I D Z, UM, AND, AND THERE ARE THE MAJOR AND THE MINOR AMENDMENTS.
UM, I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND IF THAT WOULD BE, IF THEY WERE TO CHANGE THAT AND MAKE THERE
[00:55:01]
BE ACCESS ON LOCUST STREET, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED A MAJOR AMENDMENT OR A MINOR AMENDMENT? THAT WOULD BE A MINOR AMENDMENT.SO THERE WOULD BE NO PUBLIC PROCESS AND NO, NO OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS TO HAVE A SAY.
SO THAT WOULD BE JUST AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.
AND WOULD THERE EVEN BE NOTICE TO THE FOLKS? NO, MA'AM.
IT, IT'S, UH, SOLELY AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.
UM, AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, THE LAST PLAN THAT, UM, WAS APPROVED IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR, UM, HAD FOUR STORIES NEXT TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THIS ONE HAS NOW THREE STORIES.
UM, SO IS THERE ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE DEVELOPER'S DESIRE OR, YOU KNOW, HAVING WORKED SOMETHING OUT WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT IS KEEPING THAT THREE STORY? SO LIKE IF, IF THEY HADN'T DECIDED TO DO THAT, WOULD THERE STILL BE A THREE STORY LIMITATION BECAUSE OF THE SITE PLAN? YES, BUT THE, THE, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITATION IS 35 FEET, TWO AND A HALF WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE SINGLE FAMILY.
AND UM, JUST ONE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WOULD BE LESS BUILDING THAN THE PREVIOUS PLAN.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN? DID YOU MEAN, DO YOU MEAN LESS SQUARE FOOTAGE BECAUSE IT LOOKS ON THE PLAN LIKE WE'VE GOT MORE COVER? RIGHT.
AND THE OTHER PLAN, IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WERE KIND OF A FEW BUILDINGS THAT WERE SEPARATED OUT.
THIS ONE APPEARS TO BE KIND OF ONE BIG BUILDING.
UM, SO, AND, AND I APOLOGIZE IF, I APOLOGIZE IF I WAS UNCLEAR, WHAT I MEANT WAS, UH, BUILDABLE POTENTIAL BUILDABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO, UM, THE PLAN, THE CURRENT I D Z PLAN DOES SHOW BUILDINGS, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE NOTES OF THAT PLAN, AND I BELIEVE THE WAY THAT I D Z UM, FUNCTIONS, UM, THE NOTES INCLUDE BUILDABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH BASICALLY COVERS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
UM, SO, SO THAT BUILDABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE ALONG WITH THE, THE FOUR STORY LIMITATION THAT WAS APPROVED WITH THAT PROJECT.
I HAVE NO, NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UM, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS.
SEE, SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE MIGHT BE YOUR LUCKY DAY BACK TO YOU.
UM, SO I'VE HAD, UM, CONVERSATIONS WITH, UM, FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY, UM, ALSO WITH, UM, THE APPLICANT, WITH THE DEVELOPER.
UM, AND, UM, I, I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE, THE DENSITY HERE AND, AND THE PRECEDENT, UM, THAT WE'RE SETTING.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED THAT ARE LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THIS, UM, THAT ARE, ARE MUCH CLOSER TO AND OR LOCATED IN THE AREA THAT WAS DESIGNATED BY THE REGION, BY THE MID USE PLAN AS REGIONAL MIXED USE, WHICH IS THE KIND OF HIGHEST DENSITY, UM, LAND USE CATEGORY THAT'S AVAILABLE.
SO THOSE, THOSE PROJECTS AND THIS ONE I FEEL LIKE HAVE SOME DIFFERENCES BEING NUMBER ONE, THE LOCATION AND, AND THE PROXIMITY TO, UM, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND TO AN AREA THAT IS, THAT IS TRANSITIONING FROM DENSER, MORE INTENSER USES TO MORE OF OUR TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO I DO HAVE CONCERN ABOUT THAT AND, AND CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, NOT HAVING A LOT OF NOTICE, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY, THAT THEY DID NOT RECEIVE, UH, YOU KNOW, REALLY ANY OUTREACH OR, OR THEY MAYBE FOLKS MISSED EACH OTHER BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC.
BUT, UM, I, I'D LIKE TO, IF THE DEVELOPER IS AMENABLE TO IT, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE A TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE FOR THIS CASE TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORS TO WORK TOGETHER.
'CAUSE THERE WAS A, A QUITE A LARGE NUMBER OF FOLKS IN OPPOSITION.
SO I'D LIKE TO SEE IF, UM, IF THERE'S SOMETHING, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO GET EVERYONE ON THE SAME PAGE.
SO, UM, UH, TO THE APPLICANT, ARE YOU AMENABLE TO A CONTINUANCE FOR TWO WEEKS?
[01:00:01]
UH, COMMISSIONER? UH, YES, WE'D BE AMENABLE.I I DO WANNA NOTE THOUGH THAT, I MEAN WE, WE DID OUTREACH.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME PEOPLE THAT, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN REACHED OR MISSED, EXCUSE ME, IN THAT PROCESS.
UM, BUT, BUT I DON'T WANT IT TO SEEM LIKE WE DIDN'T WORK WITH ANYONE.
UM, BUT THOSE WHO WERE MISSED, THOSE WHO STILL HAVE QUESTIONS, WE ARE, WE'RE DEFINITELY HAPPY TO CONTINUE, UH, TO WORK WITH THEM OR START TO WORK WITH THEM IN THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS.
SO, UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, UM, MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT TO THE MAY 4TH MEETING.
AM I CORRECT ON THAT? STAFF? YES MA'AM.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UH, THERE IS A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TO MAY 4TH FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
SECOND, DANIEL, WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL ON THAT ONE.
UM, I KNOW THERE WERE A NUMBER.
ALRIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? UH, COMMISSIONER GIBBONS.
WAS THAT, IS THAT YOUR REASONING THAT YOU, YOU WANT THE COMMUNITY TO TALK MORE? I'D LIKE THERE TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORS TO HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATIONS.
WHAT KIND OF CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PARTICIPATION WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF DISTRICT ONE, UM, OFFICE? I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU HAD CONVERSATIONS I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO TALK WITH IN THE PRESENCE OF THE DISTRICT ONE OFFICE.
I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH FOLKS REACHING OUT TO ME, BUT THERE HAVE NOT BEEN CONVERSATIONS WHERE FOLKS HAVE SAT DOWN TOGETHER, WHICH IS TYPICALLY WHAT OUR PROCESS IS.
SO I GUESS, CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO ASHLEY? SO ASHLEY, THEY, THEY HAVE NOT TALKED TO DISTRICT ONE? UM, WE HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH DISTRICT ONE, YES.
SO YOU HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH DISTRICT ONE, YOU HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE COMMISSIONER AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE COMMUNITY.
I I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT THE CONTINUANCE.
I'M READY TO VOTE ON IT, BUT THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GIBBONS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUOUS 10 TO ONE.
UM, THE CONTINUOUS DATE IS MAY THE FOURTH.
UH, WERE WE ABLE TO GET THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX? YES SIR.
HE SEEMS TO THINK HIS CELL PHONE MIGHT WORK BETTER, SO, OKAY, LET'S, UH, IF YOU'D LIKE, WE CAN STAND BY TO HAVE HIM ON THE LINE.
IF WE COULD STAND BY AND GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER SIX.
[6. 21-2817 ZONING CASE Z-2021-10700031 S (Council District 1): (Part 2 of 2)]
JUST FOR, UH, THE PUBLIC RECORD, JUST SO THAT INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY BE STREAMING KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT.IT'S A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM MS 33 A H O D TO C2 S A H O D WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A CAR WASH AT 1846 B ROAD.
MR. COCHRAN, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, I'M HERE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. COCHRANE.
UH, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE, UH, PRESENT WHY YOU WOULD LIKE THIS ZONING CHANGE.
I GUESS WHEN WE HAD THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS PAST WEEK, EVERYTHING WORKED FINE.
I JUST USED THE SAME PHONE AND SAME PHONE NUMBER, SO NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED THERE.
BUT ANYWAYS, MY NAME'S ANN COCHRANE, I'M WITH G F R DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
WE ARE COMMERCIAL RETAIL DEVELOPERS AND CAR WASH BUILDERS HERE IN TOWN.
AND WE HAVE INTEREST IN PURSUING THIS SITE TO IN FACT KEEP THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE THERE.
AND THEN ON A VACANT PARCEL THAT CURRENTLY HAS NOTHING ON IT OTHER THAN A CONCRETE SLAB PURSUE A CAR WASH HERE.
WE FEEL THAT THIS IS A GOOD AREA FOR, YOU KNOW, TO SUPPORT THE CAR WASH BUSINESS.
AND WE THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW THE CHURCH DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S EXACTLY GOING INTO IT YET AND WE SEE VALUE IN THE PROPERTY AND
[01:05:01]
A GOOD INTENTION OF WHAT WE THINK COULD BE PRODUCTIVE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.SO I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS HAVE IN PARTICULAR.
UM, I WILL SAY TOO THAT I HAD REACHED OUT TO THE CENTRAL LOS ANGELES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GROUP AND I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING BACK.
UM, WHEN I CALLED THE PHONE NUMBER PROVIDED I SPOKE TO A GENTLEMAN ON THE PHONE AND KIND OF JUST WENT OVER WHAT WE WERE DOING AND HE ASKED IF I WOULD CALL BACK VOICEMAIL TO, UM, JUST EXPAND ON WHAT WE WERE WANTING TO DO SO HE COULD SHARE THAT INFORMATION, WHICH I DID AND I'VE SENT THE SITE PLAN AND I JUST HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK DIRECTLY.
SO WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT WITH YOU GUYS FIRST.
UH, WE'RE FIRST GONNA HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, AND THEN IF THERE IS PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL AND THEN THE COMMISSIONERS WILL ASK YOU QUESTIONS.
STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YES, SIR.
PLEASE IT? YES, MY NAME IS ARMANDO.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS SEVEN EIGHT SIX SIX FIVE.
I GOT HIS IN THE MAIL ABOUT DEVELOPMENT SERVICE DEPARTMENT, UH, ADDRESS 1840 FIFTH.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT, WHAT IS GOING ON AND WHAT PLAN TO DO BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SAY WHAT IT IS.
IF YOU CAN GIMME A CALL BACK AND LET ME KNOW WHAT IS YOUR AGENDA SO I CAN UNDERSTAND AND, AND MAKE A, A WIDE DECISION.
UM, AND THERE'S NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT STAFF? NO SIR.
DO WE KNOW IF ANYONE REACHED OUT TO THIS GENTLEMAN? YES, JUSTIN MALONE, OUR PLANNER DID, UH, TODAY.
UH, MR. COCHRAN, UM, YOU HAVE SOME TIME FOR REBUTTAL, ALTHOUGH IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SEE WHAT YOU'RE REBUTTING, UH, BUT IF YOU'D LIKE TO USE TWO MINUTES, YOU MAY SIR.
UM, WELL I WILL SAY THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I WAS MADE AWARE OF THAT PERSON REACHING OUT IN PARTICULAR.
UM, SO I'M HAPPY TO TRY AND WORK WITH PEOPLE AND GET THE MESSAGE OUT.
I KNOW RIGHT WHEN I HAD ORIGINALLY FILED FOR THIS VISA APPLICATION, I KNEW THAT I WAS REQUESTED ASKED THAT I WOULD REACH OUT TO THESE GROUPS INDIVIDUALS IN WHICH I HAD DONE.
UM, SO I'M HAPPY TO EXPLAIN THE PROJECT BETTER AND SENDING OUT THE SITE PLAN ALONG WITH THE RESO NOTIFICATION THAT WENT OUT.
I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO DO OUR PART BEFORE WE CAN TO JUST EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO MOVING FORWARD AND THIS IS THE, YOU KNOW, SITE PLAN THAT WE WANNA PURSUE AND IT'S REALLY JUST A NEW BUILD OF A CAR WASH AND KEEPING THE THREE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY IN PLACE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. COCHRANE.
AND COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, WE ARE BACK TO YOU.
UM, COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, COULD YOU GIVE ME THE TOTAL SIZE? UH, I, IT, I GUESS FIRST QUESTION BEING THE SITE PLAN THAT THAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW.
UM, IT SHOWS, UM, A PROPERTY THAT HAS A CAR WASH.
IT LOOKS LIKE A LAUNDRY, AN EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING, AND THEN MAYBE POTENTIALLY ANOTHER BUILDING, UM, WITH SOME, SOME PARKING SPACES.
THE REZONING WOULD APPLY TO THIS ENTIRE LOT, IS THAT CORRECT? IT DOES, YES.
SO THE CAR WASH BUILDING THAT YOU SEE HERE IS THE ONLY WOULD BE THE NEW BUILD.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS ALREADY IN PLACE AND THE PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY MULTIFAMILY RIGHT NOW.
AND THOSE OTHER THREE BUILDINGS THAT ARE SHOWN ARE OWNED BY THE PILGRIM PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T REALLY WORKED WITH THIS TYPE OF PROPERTY BEFORE WHERE WE SEE VALUE IN THE LAND THAT'S STILL BUILDABLE.
AND SO WE'VE ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, EVEN TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY USING THE EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING AS A, LIKE A SENIOR CENTER FOR THE AREA JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TO DO WITH IT.
IT'S A NICE BUILDING AND THERE'S VALUE IN IT, BUT IF WE COULD TRY AND, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH THE CITY ON THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST MORE OF AN INCENTIVE TO TRY AND MAKE THIS ALL WORK OUT FOR THE CITY, THE NEIGHBORS AND AS WELL AS OUR VISION FOR THE PROPERTY TOO.
SO, UM, SO BUT THE C TWO, YOU'RE ASKING FOR C TWO TO APPLY TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT'S SHOWN HERE, INCLUDING THE EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING, UM, AND THE OTHER EXISTING BUILDINGS? YES, CORRECT.
AND COULD YOU TELL ME THE SIZE OF THAT? UM, ENTIRE TRACT.
I'M SORRY, IT'S TWO AND A HALF ACRES, 2.5 ACRES.
UM, AND THEN SO LOOKING AT YOUR CAR WASH IT LOOKS LIKE, IS IT, ARE THERE GONNA BE A FEW BAYS? CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO
[01:10:01]
ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE OPERATION OF THE CAR WASH? SURE.SO THE COMPANY THAT WE RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF IS FOOT WATER OR CAR WASH.
AND THIS IS PRETTY MUCH OUR TYPICAL FOOTPRINT THAT WE USE.
THOSE ARE THREE SELF SURVEYS AND THEN THE ONE THAT'S FURTHER DEEP, IT'S JUST AN AUTOMATIC, IT'S NOT ON A CONVEYOR SYSTEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT ALL THE EQUIPMENT GETS HOUSED AND THE AUTOMATIC BAY, IF YOU WILL, THE CAR STATIONARY AND THAT ALL THE STATION MODULAR EQUIPMENT GOES AROUND THE CAR WASH WHILE THE CAR DOESN'T MOVE, IT JUST, IT LOOKS LARGER, LIKE IT COULD WHOLE HOUSE MULTIPLE CARS, BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
AND THEN AT KIND OF AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, I'M ALSO SEEING LIKE SOME, OR IS THAT, ARE THOSE VACUUMS? IS THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, AND SO THOSE ARE LOCATED ALONG BASSIE ROAD.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESSES OTHER THAN THE LAUNDRY, UM, CENTER PLANNED FOR THIS? I, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE HERE.
UM, SO WHAT ELSE ARE YOU PLANNING ON DOING? SO, NO, NOT EXACTLY.
I MEAN WE HAVE INTEREST IN THE, WHY THIS SITE WORKS FOR US IS IF WE PURSUE THE LAUNDROMAT AND THE CAR WASH AND YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING CHURCH WILL STAY IF WE CAN.
WE THOUGHT ABOUT WE TENDING IT TO ANOTHER PAIR.
IT'S JUST KIND OF NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE EXACTLY THAT FAMILIAR WITH.
SO IT'S KIND OF A MARKET THAT WE'LL HAVE TO KIND OF EXPLORE AND SEE.
UM, BUT TO THAT SAME POINT, IF WE DIDN'T EXACTLY FIND SOMEBODY WHO WOULD BE A GOOD TENANT, THAT'S WHY WE'VE TALKED WITH THE CITY ABOUT POTENTIALLY USING THE SAME BUILDING FOR, TO SERVE AS LIKE A SENIOR OR COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION.
UM, WOULD THERE BE A POSSIBILITY OF REZONING THIS PROPERTY IN A MANNER THAT ONLY ALLOWED FOR THE CAR WASH AND THE C TWO USES TO BE ON THAT PARTICULAR QUADRANT OF THE TRACT? UM, I THINK I REMEMBER THAT I'VE SEEN SOME, SOME PROJECTS BEFORE.
WE JUST HAVE REZONINGS JUST ON ONE PART OF A TRACT AND NOT NECESSARILY APPLICABLE TO THE ENTIRE TRACT.
IT WOULD REQUIRE FOR THEM TO HAVE FIELD NOTES FOR THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEING REZONED ALONE.
UH, SINCE THIS PROPERTY INCLUDED THE EXISTING CHURCH WITH THE, UH, ASSOCIATED USES.
BUT WE DIDN'T REALLY SEE AN ISSUE WITH THE SITE PLAN PROCEEDING AS IT WAS.
UH, BECAUSE THE CHURCH USES ARE WEREN'T GOING TO BE ALLOWED IN ANY ZONING DESIGNATIONS.
BUT, BUT IF THE CHURCH WAS NO LONGER IN EXISTENCE, THEN YOU COULD HAVE ANY C TWO USE COME IN.
SO A LIQUOR STORE OR A GAS STATION OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF, OF MORE INTENSE USE.
ALL, UH, RETAIL TYPE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN C2.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UH, QUESTIONS FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND IF POSSIBLE I WOULD LIKE THESE TO BE QUESTIONS, SO IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF, UH, NOW IS THE TIME TO ASK.
I'D LIKE TO RESERVE DISCUSSION FOR DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION, UH, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.
SO, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHEAT? THANK YOU SIR.
UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, I'M HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME SEEING IN YOUR PLAN WHETHER YOUR ONLY INGRESS AND EGRESS IS OFF BASSY ROAD.
UH, DO YOU INTEND TO USE THE PRIVATE ROAD AS WELL? NO.
SO THAT ACTUALLY THAT DRIVE SERVES THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE LOCATED BEHIND OUR PARCEL.
SO THAT WOULD REALLY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ACCESS TO THAT AT ALL.
I MEAN, WE KNOW THAT THIS SITE PLAN IS WHAT WE WANNA PURSUE AND YEAH, I MEAN THIS IS ALL WE'RE CONSIDERING AT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
SO YOUR ONLY INGRESS AND EGRESS IS OFF PASSY ROAD.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
I DID HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK.
UM, I WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO LIMIT THE C TWO USE TO THAT QUADRANT OF THE TRACT.
SO I'LL, I'LL GO BACK AND JUST EXPAND ON THAT TOO, JUST THINKING OUT LOUD AS WE GO THROUGH THIS.
BUT THEN FOR THE BUILDING THAT'S TO THE, UM, IT'S IN THE CENTER OF THE
[01:15:01]
PROPERTY THAT SHOWS THAT THE LAUNDROMAT WILL NEED A C TWO USE FOR THAT REGARDLESS.'CAUSE IT'S MULTIFAMILY RIGHT NOW.
AND SO WE'LL NEED TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, REZONING FOR THAT PORTION TOO.
SO WOULD WE, WOULD WE BE OKAY DOING JUST THOSE AREAS? I BELIEVE SO.
UM, I'M NOT, I DON'T REALLY SEE ANY REASON WHY THAT WOULD BE CONCERNING IMMEDIATELY RIGHT NOW.
UM, I DO THINK THAT I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT C TWO FOR THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, UNTIL I HAVE MAYBE MORE TIME TO DISCUSS IT WITH MY GROUP.
BUT I FEEL LIKE FOR ANYTHING THAT WE WOULD END UP DOING IN THE LONG RUN WOULD STILL BE OF COMMERCIAL USE.
AND SO I GUESS THAT'S KIND OF A BETTER QUESTION I HAVE FOR STAFF IS, YOU KNOW, THAT EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, LIKE I MENTIONED, I'VE ALREADY KIND OF DISCLOSED WHAT WE WERE SEEING OUR USE FOR IT TO BE.
I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT LATER ON IF WE WOULD EVER HAVE AN ISSUE WITH NEEDING TO RE ZONE FOR SOMETHING FURTHER ON AND HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN.
SO IF, IF UH, YOU ISOLATE JUST A PORTION THAT THE COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE IS TALKING ABOUT, WE WOULD NEED FIELD NOTES.
SO AS A RESULT OF THAT, THE CASE WOULD NEED TO BE CONTINUED TODAY IN ORDER FOR YOU TO GET THOSE FIELD NOTES AND CREATE A SITE PLAN THAT JUST HAS THAT SECTION OF THE PROPERTY INDICATED.
UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS IF THE USES THAT ARE THERE, THE CHURCH BUILDING AND THE LAUNDRY BUILDING, IF YOU PROPOSE TO USE THOSE FOR COMMERCIAL BUT THEY'RE NOT REZONED, UM, OR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AND THEN GO TO COUNSEL FOR APPROVAL, THEN THEY WILL HAVE TO BE REZONED AT ANOTHER TIME.
SO YOU WILL HAVE TO BRING THOSE BACK ON THEIR OWN.
UM, I DO THINK AT THIS POINT IN TIME I'D LIKE TO KEEP EVERYTHING COMMERCIAL JUST 'CAUSE I KNOW THAT WE GOING INTO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE THINKING AND IT WE'RE JUST NOT MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPERS.
AND SO I DON'T SEE THAT SOMETHING THAT MIGHT COME ON FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD IS GOING TO, YOU KNOW, BE SOMETHING THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO PURSUE JUST 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT EXACTLY THE TYPE OF PROJECTS THAT WE PURSUE.
THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, SINCE YOU ASKED SOME QUESTIONS, I'M GONNA ASK THE COMMISSIONERS IF THEY HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS IN LIGHT OF THAT.
UH, COMMISSIONERS SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UH, TO YOU.
UM, SO I STRUGGLED WITH THIS CASE, UM, MORE THAN A LITTLE, UM, I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, I'D, I'D LIKE TO HEAR, UH, SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS', UM, INPUT ON THIS, BUT I, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY FIRST, YOU KNOW, I HAVE, UM, HAVE SOME CONCERN BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL USES IN C TWO AND BECAUSE WE ARE NEXT TO WHAT IS ZONED MULTIFAMILY.
UM, AND WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, INSTITUTIONAL USES IN, IN A SCHOOL AND, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY HIGH TRAFFIC BECAUSE OF THAT, UM, ON BASSI AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
SO, AND, AND HAVING THE C TWO KIND OF MID-BLOCK THERE TO ME, UM, IS A LITTLE CONCERNING.
UM, HOWEVER, UM, THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT IMMEDIATELY NEXT DOOR TO WHAT IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, YOU KNOW, I, I STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT WITH THAT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE INSTITUTIONAL USES.
SO I KIND OF SEE BOTH SIDES IS THEY COULD GO TOGETHER OR THEY COULD NOT.
BUT I THINK PART OF WHAT I AM STRUGGLING WITH ALSO IS THAT THERE'S NOT REALLY A PLAN HERE, UM, EXCEPT FOR THE CAR WASH AND WHICH IS WHY I WAS KIND OF TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, PULL THAT OUT TO SEE IF WE COULD GO FORWARD WITH JUST THAT.
UM, BUT UM, ANYWAYS, I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM EVERYBODY ELSE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, I'M GONNA START WITH COMMISSIONER S SIPES AND THEN TO YOU COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
UH, YES, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE PRETTY MUCH, UH, SUMMED UP MY CONCERN THAT I HAVE.
UM, I KNOW THAT IN, IN OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, WE HAVE A MIX.
UM, HOWEVER, THIS, THE BASSY IS KIND OF A, A INTERESTING STREET IN THAT A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET WE'LL HAVE, UH, COMMERCIAL A LOT OF TIMES ON, UH, THAT RESIDENTIAL IS KIND OF, UM, I WANNA SAY INTERRUPTED BY OTHER COMMERCIAL USES.
AND IN THIS CASE IT'S A PRETTY CONSISTENT, UM, AND DEFINED, UH, RESIDENTIAL AREA.
[01:20:01]
SO I PERSONALLY, I I I, I HAVE A, AN ISSUE WITH SEEING, UM, THIS, UH, C TWO USE, UH, DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.IF IT WAS ON A CORNER, I I I WOULD BE, UM, OPEN TO IT, BUT, BUT AT THIS LOCATION I, I HAVE SOME, SOME ISSUES WITH IT.
COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, UH, DITTO.
I, UM, MY COLLEAGUES HAVE EXPRESSED THOSE THOUGHTS FOR ME AS WELL, BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT'S JUST MORE THE UNKNOWN OF ESTABLISHING A C TWO BLANKET KIND OF ZONING ON A PROPERTY NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL AND A MULTIFAMILY UNIT AND NOT KNOWING IF THAT MEANS A VERY, IN WHAT I CONSIDER STILL AN INTENSE USE OF A GAS STATION KIND OF COMING IN OR, UH, YOU KNOW, NOTHING AGAINST BARS, BUT IT COULD BE AN ALCOHOLIC USE COMING IN OF SOME KIND, UH, ON THAT PROPERTY.
AND JUST KIND OF WITHOUT KNOWING FURTHER WHAT THAT IS, IT, IT GIVES ME GREAT PAUSE IN JUST, UM, ESTABLISHING THAT.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? I THINK I SAW COMMISSIONER ROMERO.
I DID, UM, WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THE MAP THAT WE GOT, I WAS ASSUMING THOSE HOMES ACROSS THE STREET, UM, FACE THE OTHER WAY, BUT NOW THAT I LOOK ON GOOGLE MAPS, I SEE THAT THAT'S AN ALLEY AND THAT THEY ACTUALLY, THEY WOULD ACTUALLY FACE THIS.
SO THAT'S, UH, REALLY GIVING ME PAUSE AND JUST, JUST SEEING THE AREA AND HOW IT LOOKS.
UM, I, I WOULD HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT IT AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER OAL? COMMISSIONER HUEY? YEAH, I, UH, SHARE, SHARE THE SAME CONCERN AS BETTER COMMISSIONERS.
UH, THAT'S A NICE AND OLD NEIGHBORHOOD ACTUALLY.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE CHURCHES AND YOU HAVE SCHOOLS ALONG THE WAY IN THAT ONE SECTION AND JUST KIND OF OPENING UP THAT ONE, UM, PROPERTY UP TO C TWO AND NOT KNOWING WHAT COULD GO IN THERE IS, UH, IT'S JUST CONCERNING TO ME.
UH, COMMISSIONER JONES? I, UH, YES.
CAN YOU PUT A UH, NA ONTO C TWO SO THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE A, A CONCERN IN THE FUTURE? UH, I'LL SAY RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, I KNOW THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PURSUE, SO, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT ONE TO TRY AND REALLY CHANGE MUCH OTHER THAN JUST PURSUE OUR CAR WASH AND THEN THE LAUNDROMAT IN THOSE TWO BUILDINGS.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO, WE DON'T REALLY, THIS AREN'T OUR TYPICAL TENANTS AT ANYTHING THAT WE DO, EVEN IN OUR LARGE FORMATS CENTERS BECAUSE IT'S JUST NOT ALWAYS A BUSINESS THAT WE CARE TO HOUSE.
SO, THANK YOU, UH, MR. COCHRAN? UH, SURE.
COMMISSIONER JONES, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? NO.
UM, COMMISSIONER MCKEE? YES, I, I, UM, CONCUR WITH, UM, SOME OF THE COMMENTS OF MY OTHER COLLEAGUES, THAT AREA.
IT'S, UM, QUIET RESIDENTIAL, YOU, THE CHURCHES AND THEN THE SCHOOL.
THERE'S, UH, QUITE A BIT OF TRAFFIC AND, UM, ACTIVITIES FROM THE SCHOOL THAT IS JUST NOT EVEN, UH, I THINK IT'S IN THE SAME BLOCK ALMOST.
SO I THINK I WOULD BE KIND OF HESITANT TO PUT A C TWO THAT COULD END UP BEING SO INTENSE, EVEN MAYBE EVEN THE CAR WASH.
ALRIGHT, I AM GOING TO HAVE THE LAST WORD, UH, WITHOUT REPEATING EVERYTHING.
I SHARE ALL THE SAME CONCERNS AS MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS STAFF.
I'M SOMEWHAT CONCERNED REGARDING THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ASSUME THAT THIS WOULD BE A CHURCH USE, UH, FOR THE CHURCH BUILDING ITSELF, EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT IT MAY NOT BE THAT USE.
AND SO THEREFORE THAT C TWO BECOMES AN OPEN ISSUE OUTSIDE OF THE RELIGIOUS USE, UH, OF A CHURCH.
SO, UM, THAT'S THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE AS WELL.
UM, SO, SO GIVEN, UM, GIVEN MY CONCERNS, UM, WITH THE, THE C TWO, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE ISSUES, UH, THE FACT THAT IT'S MID-BLOCK IN A LARGELY RESIDENTIAL AREA, UM, AND THE FACT THAT, UM, UH, WE, WE DON'T HAVE SO MANY UNKNOWNS ABOUT THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY, I'LL BE MAKING A MOTION FOR DENIAL FOR CASE NUMBER SIX.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR DENIAL OF ITEM SIX.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND MCGEE.
[01:25:01]
FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCGEE.ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I ROLL.
[14. 21-2987 ZONING CASE Z-2021-10700044 (Council District 1):]
IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 14 PLEASE.ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R M FOUR TO I D Z OVERLAY REMAINING THE SAME WITH USES PERMITTED FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT 7 0 3 EAST EUCLID AVENUE.
39 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION.
AND THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE PROPOSED I D Z ONE IS APPROPRIATE WITH THE DESIGNATED LAND USE OF URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AS WELL AS SURROUNDING USES AND ZONING.
THE REQUEST WOULD IN, IN EFFECT DOWN ZONE THE PROPERTY FROM ITS CURRENT ALLOWANCE FOR FOUR UNITS TO THREE UNITS AND THE LIMITED PROPOSED AND LIMIT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO A SITE PLAN.
THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIR.
UH, APPLICANT IF YOU WOULD PLEASE TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT AND IF YOU'RE SPEAKING WE CANNOT HEAR YOU, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX.
I HEARD SOMETHING I HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? I'M NOT, I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
UM, MY NAME IS NA NATASHA ULRICH.
I AM WITH UP ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING.
WE'RE CIVIL ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF OUR CLIENT, UM, RAFAEL PAZ PAAZ, UM, WHO OWNS AND ACTUALLY LIVES AT 7 0 3 EAST EUCLID STREET.
UM, IN THE CURRENT STRUCTURE THERE IS A, AN EXISTING TWO STORY HOME, UM, AT THE CORNER OF, UH, ATLANTA AND EAST EUCLID.
UM, THIS PROPERTY WAS PLATTED BACK IN 1910, UM, AND IS APPROXIMATELY 7,000, UM, 7,800 SQUARE FEET.
UM, OUR, THE REASON FOR OUR REZONING, UH, REQUEST IS OUR CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A DUPLEX UNIT LOCATED AT THE BACK OF HIS PROPERTY.
UM, THE DUPLEX UNITS WILL BE THREE STORIES EACH AND APPROXIMATELY 2000 SQUARE FEET, UM, WITH A ONE CAR GARAGE, POSSIBLY TWO CARS.
UM, BUT FOR SURE A ONE CAR GARAGE.
UM, THE, UM, IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED R RMM FOUR AND UM, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR FOUR UNITS.
UM, AND WE ARE ASKING FOR THREE.
UM, AND THE REASON IS WE WOULD LIKE TO REPL THE PROPERTY, PLACING EACH UNIT THE EXISTING HOME AND THEN, YOU KNOW, EACH OF THE DUPLEX UNITS ON THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL LOT.
UM, THE PROPERTY BEHIND TO THE NORTH AND TO THE NORTHWEST ARE BOTH ZONED RMM FOUR WITH AN ALLEY THAT IMMEDIATELY ABUTS US TO THE NORTHWEST.
THE PROPERTY ACROSS, UM, KIND OF TO THE SOUTHWEST, UM, ACROSS ATLANTA IS ZONED, UM, I D Z WITH AN MF 25 OVERLAY, UM, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO ATLANTA.
AND THEN THERE'S AN I D Z TWO, UM, ZONES JUST TO THE WEST OF THAT.
UM, I THINK THAT ABOUT COVERS IT FROM MY END.
THANK YOU MS. ULRICH, UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO SIR.
UM, IN THAT CASE WE'RE BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
[01:30:01]
OKAY.UM, I'LL MAKE THIS PRETTY BRIEF.
UM, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
SO ON THE, CAN WE GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN, UM, FOR THIS? I, SO I'LL, I'LL JUST KEEP GOING, JUST KEEP THINGS MOVING.
UM, ON THE SITE PLAN IT SAYS PROPOSED DUPLEX 2.5 STORIES AND THEN WHEN, UM, WHEN YOU WERE PRESENTING, YOU MENTIONED, UM, THREE STORIES.
SO COULD WE JUST GET A LITTLE CLARIFICATION ON THAT? UM, YEAH, SO WE ARE ACTUALLY AT, UM, HE'S STILL IN, IN DESIGN OF WHAT THAT STRUCTURE'S GONNA LOOK LIKE.
SO WE ARE GONNA HOLD IT TO THE 35 FEET OR LESS, UM, HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
SO WHETHER THAT TOP FLOOR BECOMES HALF LEVEL OR NOT.
UM, I CURRENTLY, THE, THE CURRENT PLANS THAT I'VE SEEN, UM, THAT TOP LEVEL IS UH, DOES CONTAIN TWO BEDROOMS. UM, SO I WOULD SAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IT AT THREE STORIES WITH A GARAGE BEING AT THE BOTTOM.
IS THIS, IS THIS JUST A DIFFERENCE IN SEMANTICS OR WE'RE NOT FUNCTIONALLY GETTING TO ANYTHING DIFFERENT? I, I'M, I ALWAYS HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING THE HALF STORY.
AND, AND HOW THAT AFFECTS REALLY THE, THE PROPERTY AND ALSO ON HERE, ON THE SITE PLAN, THE HALF STORY VERSUS THE 35 FEET.
I MEAN, IS THAT SAYING THAT 35 FEET IT, IF THEY SAY TWO AND A HALF STORIES, THEY COULDN'T HAVE A 35 FOOT, UM, STRUCTURE THAT CONTAINED THREE STORIES WITH LIKE A FLAT ROOF, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LIKE THE, WITH THE DORMER WINDOW.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, CORRECT.
SO IT, IT IS LIMITED TO TWO AND A HALF STORIES, 35 FEET.
IT CANNOT APPEAR TO BE THREE FEET, UH, UH, THREE STORIES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO IF THERE IS SOMETHING BEYOND THAT THAT THEY NEED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A VARIANCE.
BUT THE LIMIT IS TWO AND A HALF STORIES, 35 FEET.
AND THEN BECAUSE WE'RE AN I D Z, UM, WE HAVE THE MAJOR VERSUS MINOR AMENDMENT ISSUE.
SO, SO IN THAT INSTANCE, IF IT SAYS ON THE SITE PLAN TWO AND A HALF STORIES, IF THEY WERE TO CHANGE IT TO AN ACTUAL THREE STORIES, WOULD WE BE COMING BACK TO ZONING COMMISSION BECAUSE THERE'D BE A CHANGE IN HEIGHT.
WOULD THAT BE A MAJOR AMENDMENT? WOULD THAT BE A MINOR AMENDMENT? WOULD FOLKS KNOW ABOUT IT? WOULD WE HAVE NOTICE IN A PUBLIC HEARING OR THEY WOULD JUST GO, UM, TO THE, TO STAFF FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT? OR ARE WE GOING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? ARE WE DOING ALL THREE? WHAT WHAT'S THE PROCESS? IT IT IS NOT AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS JUST BY STAFF.
UM, AND SO IT WOULD REQUIRE GOING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A VARIANCE AND THAT DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT IT WILL NOT BE COMING BACK THROUGH ZONING.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
I ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES, THIS IS A QUESTION I GUESS FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'M HEARING A DUPLEX, BUT IT'S, BUT THERE'S TWO LOTS.
SO DOES THAT MEAN A DUPLEX ON EACH LOT OR A OR IT'S JUST, THERE'S ONE UNIT ON ONE LOT AND ONE UNIT ON THE SECOND LOT.
ONE UNIT ON EACH OF THE LOTS, BUT THEY ARE CONNECTED.
SO THE WHOLE BUILDING ITSELF IS A DUPLEX.
ONE DUPLEX, BUT EACH UNIT IS ON A LOT.
AND THAT, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES.
UH, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
'CAUSE I JUST NOW WANTED A CLARIFICATION ON THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT QUESTION.
SO WHAT WE ARE CONSIDERING TODAY IS A LIMIT OF TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
UH, BUT WE'VE HEARD THE ENGINEERING REP STATE THAT THEY BELIEVE IT MAY BE A FULL THREE STORIES AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEY'D HAVE TO GO TO A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
BUT IS THAT A REQUIREMENT DURING THE BUILDING PROCESS OR THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND BUILD IT AND THEN GO AND ASK FOR THAT? UM, PERMISSION? NO, MA'AM.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FIRST.
IT, IT HAS DURING THE, THE REVIEW OF THE BUILDING PLANS, IF THEY'RE SHOWING THREE STORIES, THEN THAT IS AUTOMATICALLY HAS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR THE TODAY AND YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
IT'S TWO AND A HALF STORIES, 35
[01:35:01]
FEET, NO MORE.SO SINCE WE ARE DISCUSSING IT TODAY AS TWO AND A HALF STORIES AND ANY CONSENT OR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM US TO COUNSEL WOULD BE TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
UM, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WOULD GIVE CONSIDERATION OF THAT, THAT THIS IS WHAT THE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE AT TWO AND A HALF STORIES OR I GUESS NOT UNDERSTANDING THE, THE WEIGHT OF THIS BECAUSE IF THEY'RE WANTING THREE STORIES, I I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT ZONING, UM, REQUEST.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE THIS ONE OUT BECAUSE NOW I'M CONFUSED.
SO WE'VE HAD CASES LIKE THIS THAT HAVE COME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BEFORE.
SO WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU IS ABOUT THE USE, HOW MANY UNITS, UM, AND HOW IT'S DESIGNED.
UM, SO IT, IT'S, IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN SOMEBODY COMING TO YOU TO REQUEST R SIX.
THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN R SIX STATE THAT IF THESE ARE THE SETBACKS, THIS IS THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION, SETBACKS, YOU KNOW, 10 FEET FRONT, 20 FEET REAR FIVE FOOT ON EACH SIDE, 35 FEET, TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
ONCE THEY GET THE ZONING FOR THAT, THEN THEY GO THROUGH A BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS.
IF DURING THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS THEY EITHER WANT TO ENCROACH INTO THAT STEP BACK OR, UM, GO HIGHER IN HEIGHT, THEN THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROCESS.
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DOES TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ANY RECENT REZONINGS THAT THEY'VE GONE THROUGH WHERE IT HAD ITS SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED AS PART OF THAT PROCESS.
ALTHOUGH CITY COUNCIL, IF THEY APPROVE THE CASE AND THEY APPROVE IT WITH THE SITE PLAN, THEY'RE APPROVING THE, THE UNIT, THE NUMBER OF THE DENSITY AND THE INTENSITY OF THAT SITE.
BUT THEY ARE NOT WAIVING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CAN ONLY BE WAIVED THROUGH A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE PROCESS.
BUT AGAIN, THEY DO TAKE THAT CONSIDERATION OF THE SITE PLAN APPROVED AS PART OF THAT COUNCIL APPROVED PROCESS INTO CONSIDERATION.
I I, IT JUST KIND OF QUESTIONS THE, MAKES ME QUESTION THE WHOLE PROCESS THEN OF, OF THAT HAPPENING, BUT THAT'S FINE.
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I THINK I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UH, GIVEN THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD REGARDING THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ISSUES, UM, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU GET APPROVAL TODAY, IT'S 2.5 STORIES, NOT THREE WITH THE 35 FOOT LIMIT STILL CORRECT.
MS. ULRICH, WE ARE GOOD WITH THAT, YES.
UH, UH, BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
UM, AND, AND I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS BEFORE I MAKE MY MOTION.
UM, THE, THE REASON THAT I, THAT I'VE DELVED INTO THE, UM, THE HEIGHT LIMITATION WAS BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SENT A LETTER OF SUPPORT BUT EXPRESSED THE CONCERN WITH RESPECT TO THE TWO AND A HALF STORIES THAT, THAT, THAT BE THE LIMITATION.
SO I WANTED TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF, UM, GIVEN THE FACT THIS IS I D Z AND THERE ARE CHANGES, UM, POTENTIAL CHANGES TO I D Z SITE PLANS THAT I'M NOT SURE THAT I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND AT ALL TIMES.
WANTED TO MAKE PERFECTLY CLEAR AND, AND MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD, UM, WHAT, WHAT THE, THE GAME PLAN IS HERE AND, AND HOW THAT WOULD, WOULD PROCEED.
SO, UM, WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER 14.
THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER 14 BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND JONES.
UH, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 14 BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JONES.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
[21. 21-2990 Consideration and approval of the April 6, 2021 Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes.]
I BELIEVE WE'RE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 21, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.UH, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES,
[01:40:01]
EDITS, AMENDMENTS, CORRECTIONS, HUMOROUS ANECDOTES? ANYTHING TO ADD TO THE MINUTES? SEEING NONE, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.I GUESS THAT'S THE HUMOROUS ANECDOTE.
NOBODY WANTED TO, MAKES A MOTION.
UH, THE MINUTES FROM THE, OH MY GOODNESS.
WHAT'S THE DATE? UM, APRIL 6TH.
SEE, I'M REALLY MAKING IT HUMOROUS.
I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE, UH, MINUTES FROM APRIL 6TH.
UH, THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
I SUBMITTED, UH, FOR APRIL 6TH BY COMMISSIONER MCGEE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
VICE CHAIR SITE ABSTAIN AS I WAS RECOVERING FROM MY VACCINE.
AND COMMISSIONER SIPES NOW FULLY VACCINATED.
UM, ALRIGHT, UH, STAFF, IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER? NOTHING FURTHER OTHER THAN HAVE A GREAT REST OF THE WEEK.
AND SAME TO ALL OF YOU COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME, PATIENCE.
UM, I THINK WE DID VERY WELL TODAY, SO THANK YOU AGAIN AND WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 2 35.