May 12, 2021 Planning Commission

UH, FIRST AND FOREMOST, DO WE HAVE ANY RECUSALS TODAY FROM COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE TO RECUSE FROM ITEM NUMBER 29, BUT UM, I ALSO HAVE TO LEAVE THE MEETING AT 3:00 PM FOR, UM, CHILDCARE ISSUES.

WE ARE LIVE IN THE FUTURE.

AWESOME.

[1:45 p.m. - Work Session ]

SO IF WE GET TO THAT ITEM, THEN I'LL BE RECUSING.

ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER RECUSALS? YEAH, I HAVE TO RE COMMISSIONER PECK, I HAVE TO REUSE FROM ITEM 14 AND I BELIEVE, UH, COMMISSIONER ORIAN, DID YOU, UH, SAY YOU NEEDED TO RECUSE FROM ITEM FOUR? I'M REC, I NEED TO RECUSE ITEM FOUR AND I HAVE A THREE 30 HARD LEAVE FOR CHILDCARE ISSUES MYSELF.

ALRIGHT, SO I HAVE THREE RECUSALS FROM THREE SEPARATE COMMISSIONERS.

ANY OTHERS? OKIE DOKIE.

UM, SO IF WE CAN, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE 22 PLATTS THAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDAS? OKAY.

UH, HEARING NONE, UH, MAY STAFF PROVIDE, UH, IF WE HAD ANY, UH, FEEDBACK ON ITEM ON THE VARIANCE.

ITEM NUMBER 23 ON 23.

DOES THAT, DOES THAT EXCEED MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS? THIS IS MARK BIRD AT THE ARBORIST, UM, COMMISSIONER? YES.

THAT'S WHY THERE IS A VARIANCE FOR GOING BELOW THE MINIMUM ON SIGNIFICANT CANOPY FOR THIS SAUCE PROJECT.

WHAT'S, UM, THIS IS MIKE GARCIA.

I WANTED TO SEE EXACTLY WHERE THIS AREA IS.

SURE.

I JUST GRAPHIC ONE SECOND.

IF STAFF CAN PROVIDE US, UM, THE, THE FEEDBACK ON NOTICES BEFORE WE TAKE QUESTIONS, PLEASE.

MADAM CHAIR, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE PLAN AMENDMENTS OR ARE YOU STILL ON THE VARIANCE ITEM? I'M STILL ON THE VARIANCE.

THE, THE TREE PRESERVATION VARIANCES DON'T HAVE NOTICES THAT ARE SENT OUT.

OH.

SO WE WOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED PUBLIC COMMENT ON THOSE ITEMS. GOTCHA.

MY MISTAKE.

ONE THERE WERE SIX DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, AND THESE THREE WERE THE ONES THAT, UM, HAD FLOODPLAIN ISSUES, WHICH IS WHAT THE VARIANCES FOR IN COVERING.

COMMISSIONER GARCIA, APOLOGIES TO INTERRUPT IF, UM, YOUR QUESTION, OH, I JUST NEEDED A GRAPHIC WHERE THEY ARE, I CAN'T, UH, I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHERE THEY ARE OTHER THAN IT'S JUST A REQUEST.

IS IT THE LOCATIONS OR NORTHWEST OF THE SA MEDIA CREEK TREATMENT PLAN? I DON'T KNOW WHAT, UH, UH, HI, MY NAME IS KY AND I'M A SOURCE PROJECT ENGINEER.

SO APPROXIMATE LOCATION FOR BRAZILIA CREEK WILL BE KIND OF LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT BETWEEN HIGHWAY 87 AND RIGSBY ROAD, YOU KNOW, SO I'LL TRY TO MAYBE PULL IT OUT.

THE PLAN, WE HAVE A POWERPOINT PULLED UP.

IT'S SHOWING THE LOCATIONS.

THIS IS MELISSA'S ASSISTANT DIRECTOR.

OKAY, THANK YOU, MELISSA? YES, MA'AM.

COMMISSIONER, THE, THE LOCATIONS ARE CIRCLED IN RED, UM, THAT THOSE ARE THE AREAS AND THEY'RE LOCATED IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO AND FOUR.

COMMISSIONER, THIS IS MR. STOK TO THE DST ENGINEER.

THESE, UM, THESE PACKAGES WITH THE SEWERS COME IN WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT LOCATIONS BASED ON THE CONTRACT, LET FOR SAWS ON, ON SEPARATE PORTIONS OF THEIR, THEIR SEWER LINE.

SO ON THIS

[00:05:01]

COMMISSIONER GARCIA, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES.

YOU YES, SIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM 23? I JUST HAVE A, A COMMENT IF, IF I MAY, IN THIS SITUATION, SAS IS PAYING MITIGATION, CORRECT? $107,000.

IS THAT RIGHT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

I GUESS JUST MY COMMENT IS, YOU KNOW, SINCE THAT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S REALLY THE PUBLIC'S MONEY, RIGHT? THAT'S SAWS WE'RE PAYING THOSE WATER BILLS.

I JUST ASK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE COGNIZANT OF THE, OF THAT IN THE FUTURE.

I MEAN, IT APPEARS THAT THERE, THERE'S NOT A WAY TO REALLY REALIGN THIS WITHOUT REMOVING THE TREES, YOU KNOW, BUT IF, IF WE CAN REDUCE THE COST TO THE CITIZENS, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT.

SO IT'S JUST REALLY A COMMENT.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MONEY'S BUDGETED AND WHEN YOU DO THE BUDGET SAWS TO PAY FOR THINGS LIKE THAT OR HOW IT'S PAID, IT'S JUST A EXTERNAL COMMENT I HAD IS, IS THERE SOMEONE FROM SAS REPRESENTED THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO CLARIFY? UM, THAT COMES OUT OF, I, I THINK I HAVE, UM, AN IDEA WHERE IT COMES OUT OF A DIFFERENT AREA, BUT I'D LIKE FOR THEM OR A STAFF THAT WERE TO CLARIFY, WELL, YEAH, THIS IS KY AND UH, UH, SOURCE HAS A SEPARATE BUDGET, YOU KNOW, FOR COURSE, UH, UH, PERMITS, YOU KNOW, UH, PROBABLY FINANCE DEPARTMENT CAN PROVIDE MORE DETAILED INFORMATION, BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE NORMALLY DEAL WITH A DIFFERENT BUCKET OF MONEY.

AND, UH, AND OTHER THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION, WE DOING REHAB WORK, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE EXCAVATE, SO WE TRY TO KEEP THE MONEY AT THE LOWER COST BECAUSE WE JUST REHABBING AND WE HOPING A LOT OF TREES WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SAVE BECAUSE WE JUST DOING C I P P, IT JUST WHATEVER POINT OF REPAIRS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHEN WE HAVE TO EXCAVATE.

RIGHT.

NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

IT'S JUST, UM, IT'S DIFFERENT WHEN DEVELOPERS ARE PAYING IN.

I MEAN, OF COURSE THEY'RE GONNA PASS THAT COST ALONG TO, TO THE END USER, BUT WHEN IT'S PUBLIC FUNDS, IT JUST ASKS THAT WE TRY TO REDUCE THOSE COSTS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

YEAH.

I APPRECIATE IT'S VERY GOOD, UH, COMMENT.

I LIKE, THIS IS MELISSA RAMIREZ.

CAN YOU GIVE YOUR TITLE WITH S PLEASE, IF YOU DON'T MIND? UH, YES.

UH, MY NAME IS S KY AND I AM, UH, S S O CONDITION TEAM, UH, PROJECT ENGINEER.

UH, EXCUSE ME IF I'M, UH, MARK BYRD CITY ARBORIST.

AND TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WE DO TAKE A LOT OF CONSIDERATION WITH THESE PROJECTS AS FAR AS THE MITIGATION GOES, AND THERE WAS CREDIT GIVEN FOR VEG REVEGETATION AND, UH, AL ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION METHODS IN THIS CASE FOR THIS, THIS PROJECT TO REDUCE THAT OVERALL AMOUNT OF, UH, THE MITIGATION PAYMENT.

UH, SO SAS, UH, DID A LOT OF, UH, UH, AS MUCH ADJUSTING AS THEY COULD AND MINIMIZED AND FOUND ALTERNATIVE ROUTES TO GET TO, UH, IN AND OUT OF AND WITH THE PIPE BURSTING METHOD THAT THEY'RE USING.

AND THEN AGAIN, AS WELL AS, UH, UH, RECEDING ALL OF THE DISTURBED AREAS, INCLUDING AREAS WHERE THERE ARE NO TREES AND CREDIT WAS GIVEN TO, UH, TO WORK ON, UH, A WAY TO NOT HAVE A FULL MITIGATION PAYMENT WITH, WITH THESE O OTHER OPTIONS.

APPRECIATE THAT, MARK.

THANK YOU, SIR.

BUT NO NOTICES RECEIVED, AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND THERE IS ONE VOICEMAIL THAT WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR.

UH, NOW, MAY STAFF TAKE US THROUGH, UH, ANY NOTICES RECEIVED FOR PLAN AMENDMENTS ITEMS NUMBER 24 THROUGH 28.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THIS IS CHRISTIE FLORES, AND YES, THESE ARE ITEMS 24 THROUGH 28.

I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT ITEM NUMBER 25 IS GOING TO BE PULLED.

THE APPLICANT WILL BE MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM, THE ONE THAT'S BEING PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL.

THERE WERE 30 NOTICES MAILED, NONE WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, THREE WERE RECEIVED OPPOSED, AND THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE IS IN FAVOR.

GOING BACK TO ITEM 24, THERE WERE NO NOTICES RECEIVED.

ITEM 26, THERE WERE 22 NOTICES MAILED,

[00:10:01]

AND SO WE'D LIKE TO DO LIKE WE DID LAST TIME AND PLAY THAT RIGHT BEFORE THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT ITEM.

THAT'S FOR ITEM NUMBER 26.

AND THEN THE FINAL ITEM IS 28.

ITEM 28, WHICH HAD 34 NOTICES MAILED.

TWO WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE ON THIS ONE.

CHRISTIE.

MAY, MAY YOU ALSO, UM, TAKE ON, UH, 29TH THROUGH 31.

I BELIEVE MARCO HINOJOSA IS ON THE LINE TO COVER THOSE.

UM, YEAH, 33 1 ARE MY ITEMS. UM, I THINK 29 MIGHT BE PROXIMATE.

MARKUP.

CAN YOU, UM, PROVIDE US WITH THE NOTICES RECEIVED FOR 30 AND 31? YEAH.

UM, SO 85 NOTICES FROM RELATIVE PROPERTY OWNERS.

WE HAVE THREE RETURN IN FAVOR AND ONE IN OPPOSITION.

AND JUST A REMINDER THAT BOTH THESE ITEMS ARE CONTINUANCE FROM LAST TIME.

AND THE FINAL, UH, AGENDA FOR NOTICES.

ITEM NUMBER 29, PLEASE.

HELLO, THIS IS, UH, ROCKY, UH, ADA, UH, WITH THE PARK, UH, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

UH, FORGIVE ME, BUT WERE WAS A REQUIREMENT TO, UH, PROVIDE NOTICES TO THE, UH, SURROUNDING COMMUNITY REQUIRED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE, UH, AS FAR AS I KNOW, UM, NOTICES WERE NOT.

HOWEVER, THAT DOESN'T MEAN I, I CAN CERTAINLY DOUBLE CHECK WITH, UM, GRAY FORCE UTILITIES TO VERIFY THAT, BUT I WAS NOT A PART OF ANY NOTIFICATION PROCESS.

NOPE, I'M SURE THAT'S CORRECT.

SO IF WE CAN NOW TAKE A STEP BACK AND, UM, REVIEW THE PLAN AMENDMENTS.

DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER 24? OKAY.

AND ITEM 25, UH, WILL BE PULLED FROM THE AGENDA.

UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER 26? COMMISSIONER SIEGEL, I HAVE A QUESTION.

ITEM 26, LOOKING AT THE, UM, PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED, UM, WITH THE, UH, PETITION ONLINE, IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, THAT AREA IS INTENDED TO BE A PARK AND OPEN SPACE TO SERVE AS A BUFFER FROM THE INDUSTRIAL AND RAILROAD YARDS THAT RUN, UH, PARALLEL TO 35 THERE.

AND SO, UH, BUT LOOKING AT THE SATELLITE IMAGERY, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ALREADY ON THAT BLOCK.

UM, AND SO I WONDER, UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF APPROVING THIS LAND USE CHANGE, UH, IS GOING TO GO AGAINST THE INTENTION OF THE PLAN IN, YOU KNOW, A MEANINGFUL WAY, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE RECEIVED ONE VOICEMAIL IN FAVOR.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR THAT.

I GUESS WE'LL HEAR IT DURING THE MEETING, RIGHT? CORRECT.

AND THE USE OF PROPERTIES IN THAT AREA HAS, HAS CHANGED WELL, THAT, THAT LOT ACTUALLY HAS OLD CONCRETE PIERS ON IT AND A AND A CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE PORCH FROM A PREVIOUS HOME STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT ONE.

WELL, IT'S PULLED FROM CONSENT ALREADY.

AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE? IT, IT'S NOT PULLED FROM CONSENT.

IT'S STILL ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT.

AND SO THE, THE ITEM, THE VOICEMAIL WOULD JUST BE PLAYED BEFORE THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UM, AS FAR AS YOUR QUESTION REGARDING GOING FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AS YOU NOTED, THERE ARE, THAT'S NOT EXACTLY HOW IT DEVELOPED OUT.

UM, THEY HAD A PLAN DEVELOPED IN DECEMBER OF 2003, AND SINCE THEN, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE HAVE BEEN, IT WAS PROBABLY EXISTING HOMES IN THAT AREA ALREADY.

SO THE ULTIMATE GOAL WAS LIKE, IF ANYTHING EVER CHANGES HERE, MAYBE A PARK COULD BE DEVELOPED.

BUT SINCE THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN, UM, WHAT IS EXISTING ON THE GROUND TODAY ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

AND SO ACTUALLY MORE APPROPRIATE LAND USE FOR THE ENTIRE BLOCK IS, IS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL OR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR THAT BLOCK? UH, IT, UH, IT SEEMS THAT IT WAS AN INTENTION BACK IN 2003, UH, AS FAR AS WHEN THE COMMUNITY CAME TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT THE PLAN.

BUT HERE WE ARE 18 YEARS LATER AND, AND ACTUALLY THE, THE LAND USES, UH,

[00:15:01]

UM, DO WE KNOW WHEN THAT WAS DEMOLISHED? NO, MA'AM.

I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

AND COMMISSIONER SIEGEL, TO CLARIFY, DID YOU WANT TO PULL THAT OR YOU JUST WANTED TO LISTEN TO THE VOICEMAIL AS, UM, IT'S SET TO BE DONE IN CONSENT? WELL, IF IF THE ONLY RESPONSE THAT WE RECEIVED WAS IN FAVOR, THEN I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED TO PULL IT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

AND MADAM CHAIR, JUST TO ANSWER COMMISSIONER SIEGEL'S QUESTION BY LOOKING AT THE GOOGLE STREET VIEW, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT HOUSE WAS DEMOLISHED SOMETIME BETWEEN 2014 AND 2016.

OKAY, THE AGENDA JUMPS FROM 26 TO 28.

28.

WE DISCUSSED THAT THERE IS A VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED, BUT DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR ITEM 29? JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

AS COMMISSIONER PASSER, YOU SAID THERE'S A, UH, FEE, UM, A COST OF $65,000, I GUESS, COMING FROM GRAY FOREST TO THE CITY FOR THAT EASEMENT.

WHERE DID THAT COST COME FROM? IS THAT BASED ON A LAND VALUE? I MEAN, IT'S NOT A LAND SALE, IT'S JUST AN EASEMENT.

HOW WAS, HOW WAS THAT CALCULATED? UH, HI, COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS, UH, AGAIN, ROCKY DUP THIS THRA WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

UH, THE PARKS AND DEPARTMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH, UH, GRADE FORCE UTILITIES CALCULATED, UH, UH, THE, THE BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISED, UH, VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND, AND SIMILAR SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, UH, OF, OF, OF, OF SIMILAR SIZE.

UH, WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THAT, UH, THE ACTUAL ACREAGE FOR THE REQUESTED EASEMENT, UH, WHICH IS 2.13 ACRES, AND, UH, AND ALSO TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THAT, UH, MUCH OF THE, UM, OF THE EASEMENT IS WITHIN FLOODPLAIN PROPERTY.

UH, BASED ON THOSE FACTORS, UH, WE NE UH, WE NEGOTIATED THE PRICE OF 65,000 WITH GRAY FORCE, WHICH BOTH PARTIES FELT WAS, WAS, WAS FAIR VALUE.

ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM 30 OR 31 AGAIN? UH, WE SAW THIS TWO WEEKS AGO.

THEY ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE TO ALLOW FOR MORE TIME FOR OUTREACH.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TODAY? ANY UPDATE ON THAT OUTREACH? ANY, ANY CHANGES? UH, YEAH, SO THE APPLICANT DID REACH OUT TO SOME CONCERNED, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, BUT ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS DID LEAVE A VOICEMAIL FOR THE PLAN COMMISSION REQUESTING THAT THERE BE ANOTHER TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE.

BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE OR AGREEABLE TO THAT, I THINK THEY WANT TO MOVE THE PROCESS FORWARD.

IS THIS ITEM ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT OR WILL IT BE, UH, DOES IT HAVE TO GO FROM AN INDIVIDUAL? I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE BOTH ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT STAFF CONFIRM, YES, THEY'RE BOTH ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT.

WE CAN PLAY THOSE VOICEMAILS.

UH, BUT JUST BECAUSE A CONTINUANCE ISS REQUEST, IT DOES NOT MEAN THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO GRANT IT.

SO TO CLARIFY, ALL ITEMS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT ON THE AGENDA.

UM, WE DO HAVE ONE BEING PULLED, THREE VOICEMAILS AND, UH, THREE BEING PULLED FOR PURPOSES OF RECUSALS.

IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.

SO WE CAN, WE CAN READ IN THE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS THOSE ITEMS, UH, AND THEN WE CAN TAKE SEPARATE MINI CONSENT MOTIONS, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE THREE UH, ITEMS PULLED FOR RECUSAL.

CHAIR, WHICH ONE IS BEING PULLED FOR CONSIDERATION? NUMBER 25.

OH, OKAY.

SO AGAIN, 29 IS BEING PULLED FOR RECUSAL.

14, RECUSAL FOUR, RECUSAL 25 IS BEING PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL AND 26, 28 AND 31 HAVE A VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED? THAT'S CORRECT.

WELL, WE ARE SET TO MOVE INTO THE MEETING WHEN STAFF GIVES US A GO AHEAD.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE READY WHEN YOU ARE.

MEETING TO ORDER MAY STAFF PLEASE PLAY THE SPANISH INTERPRETER SERVICES STATEMENT.

IT IS, UH, WEDNESDAY, MAY 12TH AT 2 0 6.

I'M CALLING THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION

[00:20:01]

IF STAFF CAN CONDUCT THE WORLD, CALL, PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER JACKSON PRESENT, COMMISSIONER CARILLO HAYNE PRESENT, COMMISSIONER CHRISTOPHER GARCIA PRESENT, COMMISSIONER SIEGEL PRESENT,

[2:00 P.M. - Call to Order ]

COMMISSIONER ZUKI PRESENT, COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GARCIA PRESENT, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE PRESENT, COMMISSIONER ORIAN PRESENT COMMISSIONER PROFIT PRESENT VICE CHAIR PECK PRESENT, AND MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ PRESENT FORUM IS PRESENT.

IF STAFF CAN NOW READ THE MEETING FORMAT, PLEASE TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF C OVID 19.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE.

THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON THE VARIOUS SUSPENDED PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR IN RESPONSE TO THE C OVID 19 CRISIS AND ARE IN PLACE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH AND LISTEN TO THIS MEETING BY VISITING WWW.SANANTONIO.GOV/DSD OR BY CALLING IN FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3.

TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENT, THERE ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES.

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 MINUTES COMMENTS.

SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS MEETING.

THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

AND JUST A FRIENDLY REMINDER, IF THE COMMISSIONERS CAN PLEASE TURN ON THEIR CAMERAS TO PARTICIPATE IN TODAY'S MEETING, AND THEN IF YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING, PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO MUTE YOURSELF.

WE HAVE, UH, TWO MEETING AGENDAS TODAY.

[Consent Agenda ]

ALL ITEMS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR 14 AND 29, WHICH ARE BEING PULLED FOR PURPOSES OF RECUSALS.

AND ITEM NUMBER 25, UH, BEING PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

MAY STAFF PLEASE, CAN WE GET A MOTION AND A SECOND? OKAY.

CAN I GET A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA PLEASE? MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND MOTION TO APPROVE.

WE ARE GONNA PLAY A COUPLE.

YEAH, WE ARE GONNA PLAY A COUPLE VOICEMAILS BEFORE WE TAKE THE VOTE.

THIS IS RICHARD WEBER.

I LIVE AT 1430 SHERMAN, AND, UH, MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN TWO SEVEN NINE FOUR SIX NINE SIX.

I'M CALLING REFERENCE THE, UH, CASE NUMBER PA DASH 2021 DASH 1 1 6 0 0 0 3 0.

UH, WHICH IS, UM, I GUESS, UM, CHANGING THE DESIGNATION ON 1444 SHERMAN STREET FROM PARKS OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

AND I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I DO APPROVE OF THAT CHANGE.

UM, RIGHT NOW IT'S A VACANT LOT, SO IN MY ESTIMATION, UH, UH, SOME BUILDING ON THAT LOT WOULD, UH, WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.

MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 7 8 7 7 1 3 0.

HELLO, MY NAME IS MARK HEDRICK, 2 6 6 1 NORTH RAYTOWN ROAD, CONVERSE, TEXAS 7 8 1 0 9.

UH, I'M CALLING TO ASK, UH, FOR A TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE.

UH, OUR BUYER HAS MADE SOME SIGNIFICANT, UH, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND GETTING THE LIST PENDINGS

[00:25:01]

OR REMOVED, OR ACTUALLY, IT, IT'S A, THE EASEMENT DISSOLVED, UH, IN ORDER TO MAKE A B CASE, UH, M T P AMENDMENT, UH, WORK, UH, WITHIN ALIGNMENT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY.

UH, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE GONNA NEED A TWO WEEK, UH, CONTINUANCE BECAUSE THAT'S THE, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO MAKE THE HIS, UH, UH, HIS, UH, AMENDMENT WORK.

BUT THIS BUYER CAN, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE TWO WEEK, UH, CONTINUANCE SO HE CAN COMPLETE, UH, THE CONTRACT.

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

BYE-BYE.

YES, MY NAME IS DOUGLAS HEDRICK, PROPERTY OWNER OF TWO SIX SIX ONE NORTH BAYTOWN ROAD.

PHONE NUMBER (210) 478-7970.

AND THE THROUGHPUT BRIEF THERE, UH, REALIGNMENT, UH, WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS ANOTHER TWO WEEKS.

I DIDN'T SEE BECAUSE THE CONTRACTOR WE GOT JUST WANTED TO BUY THE PROPERTY IS OUT A FEASIBILITY PERIOD AND THEY WANT A TWO WEEKS EXTENSION ON IT TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY WANT TO GET ALL THE LEGAL BATTLES OUT THE WAY OR NOT AND BUY.

BUT YET IN THE MEANTIME, THEY WANT US TO QUOTE YES.

SO THAT PUTS US IN A POSITION BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR THAT YOU'RE TAKING THIS TOOTH FAIR FROM THREE PROPERTY OWNERS AND PUTTING IT SOLELY ON MINE STOP OF PEON ROAD.

THAT SEEMS TO BE PRETTY MUCH UNFAIR.

PLUS, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, A, UM, EASEMENT THAT'S RUNNING ALONGSIDE OF IT ONLY A FEW HUNDRED FEET AWAY, WHICH TOTALLY DESTROYS MY PROPERTY.

SO IN ORDER TO MAKE IT FAIR, I FEEL THAT, THAT EITHER ONE, THEY BUY IT, OR TWO, THEY OPT OUT A CONTRACT AND I CAN VOTE NO.

SO I'M ASKING FOR ANOTHER TWO WEEKS AND, UH, HOPEFULLY GRANT .

ALRIGHT, THAT IS ALL FOR THE VOICEMAIL.

WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE IF YOU'D LIKE.

I CAN TAKE THE ROLL CALL NOW.

YES, SIR.

COMMISSIONER JACKSON.

GOOD.

COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE DIANTE.

AYE.

AT THIS TIME I WILL TAKE ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UH, WHICH IS JUST BEING PULLED FOR PURPOSES OF RECUSAL.

AND MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ? YES.

THE MOTION PASSES.

UM, CHAIR, YOU'RE MUTE.

OH, THANK YOU, SIR.

UH,

[4. 21-3481 19-11800291: Request by Lloyd Moody, WPGL, LLC, for approval to subdivide a tract of land to establish West Pointe Gardens Unit 3 Subdivision, generally located northeast of the intersection of West US Highway 90 and Spurs Ranch Road. Staff recommends Approval. (Martha Bernal, Senior Planner, (210) 207-0210, Martha.Bernal@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department) ]

I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER ORIAN HAS MUTED HIMSELF AND HAS TURNED OFF HIS CAMERA.

UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR? COMMISSIONER PECK, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

PROFIT.

SECOND.

COMMISSIONER PECK.

MOTION, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER.

PROFIT.

ROLL CALL PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? YEAH.

COMMISSIONER ZUKI? YES.

COMMISSIONER BUSANTE.

AYE.

AND MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ? YES.

THE MOTION PASSED.

WE'LL TAKE ITEM NUMBER 14, WHICH IS, UH, BEING PULLED FOR PURPOSES OF RECUSAL.

COMMISSIONER OREN CAN RETURN TO THE MEETING NOW

[14. 21-3370 20-11800298: Request by Brandy Czar, Dar-Bran Development LLC and Mark Skeans, Potranco Self-Storage, LLC, for approval to subdivide a tract of land to establish Weston Oaks Unit 4 Subdivision, generally located southwest of the intersection of Talley Road and FM 1957. Staff recommends Approval. (Joyce Palmer, Planner, (210) 207-0315, Joyce.Palmer@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department). ]

COMMISSIONER PECK HAS NOW TURNED OFF HIS CAMERA AND MUTED HIMSELF.

DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 14? SO MOVED.

I'M SORRY, WHO MADE THE MOTION? ORIAN AND THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CHRIS GARCIA.

COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GARCIA.

COMMISSIONER

[00:30:01]

SIEGEL? YES.

COMMISSIONER ZUKI? YES.

COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE.

AYE.

MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ? YES.

THE MOTIONS PASSES.

COMMISSIONER CARRIO HAYNES IS NOW MUTING HERSELF AND TURNING OFF HER CAMERA FOR PURPOSES OF RECUSAL FOR ITEM NUMBER 29.

COMMISSIONER PIT CAN RETURN TO THE MEETING.

IT IS TWO 16.

UH,

[29. 21-2950 A request by the Parks and Recreation Department for approval of a resolution recommending the execution of a 2.13 acre gas easement with Grey Forest Utilities granting access to certain property owned and controlled by the City of San Antonio at Leon Creek and the O.P. Schnabel Park expansion area near Prue Road in Council District 7 and 8. Staff recommends Approval. (Rocky Duque de Estrada, (210) 207-2873, roque.duquedeestrada@sanantonio.gov, Parks and Recreation Department) ]

DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR 29? MOTION FOR ACCRUAL OR SECOND? SECOND COMMISSIONER, A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER CHRIS GARCIA.

A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER PROPHET CALL, PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE AYE.

MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ? YES.

THE MOTION PASSES.

UH, FINAL ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER 25.

IT'S TWO 17.

COMMISSIONER HANS CAN RETURN TO THE MEETING.

[25. 21-3508 PLAN AMENDMENT CASE PA-2021-11600025 (Council District 2): A request by Killen, Griffin & Farrimond, PLLC, representative, for Approval of a Resolution to amend the Government Hill Neighborhood Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Master Plan of the City, by changing the future land use classification from "Low Density Residential" to " Low Density Mixed Use" on Lot 11, 23 and 24, Block D, NCB 1160 and Lot 25, Block A, NCB 1155, generally located in the 300 block of Bee Street and Coleman Street. Staff recommends Approval. (Associated Zoning Case Z-2021-10700086) (Azadeh Sagheb, Senior Planner (210) 207-5407, Azadeh.Sagheb@sanantonio.gov; Development Services Department) ]

DOES STAFF HAVE A PRESENTATION? YES MA'AM.

THIS IS CHRISTIE FLORES, PLANNING MANAGER.

ITEM NUMBER 25 IS A REQUEST TO AMEND THE GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW DENSITY MIXED USE GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 300 BLOCK OF B STREET AND COLEMAN STREET.

THERE WERE 30 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, THREE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE IS IN FAVOR.

THE APPLICANT SPEAKS A PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW DENSITY MIXED USE TO REZONE TO IDZ TWO WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 18 DWELLING UNITS.

THE REQUESTED PLAN AMENDMENT IS APPROPRIATE PLACEMENT ALONG WALTERS STREET.

THE WALTERS CORRIDOR IS ALREADY PARTIALLY DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE AND THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL TWO BLOCKS OF LOW DENSITY MIXED USE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA AND THE CORRIDOR.

IT ALSO ACTS AS A BUFFER TO THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING FROM TRAFFIC AND STREET NOISE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE RECEIVED NOTICE FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THEY WILL BE AMENDING THEIR REQUEST TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

MADAM CHAIR, THAT COMPLETES MY PRESENTATION AND I BELIEVE MS. EMILY WEISLER IS ON THE LINE TO MAKE THAT OFFICIAL AMENDMENT.

AND, AND CHRISTIE, BEFORE YOU GO, CAN YOU CLARIFY IF, UM, THE AMENDMENT THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, UM, STAFF IS ALSO IN, UH, WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THAT? YES MA'AM.

IT'S CONSISTENT AS WELL WITH, UH, WITH THE DENSITY THAT THEY DESIRE TO HAVE FOR THE LOCATION.

UH, TO US LOW DENSITY MIXED USE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE APPROPRIATE BECAUSE OF THE COMBINATION OF USES IN THE CORRIDOR.

HOWEVER, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE AS WELL.

FOR A TOTAL OF NINE DUPLEXES OR 18 UNITS.

DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE? UH, YES.

MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS EMILY WEISLER.

CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, WE CAN.

EMILY.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UM, GOOD AFTERNOON.

EMILY WEISLER WITH KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMAN 100 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10, SUITE SIX 50 HERE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER AND APPLICANT.

UH, CHRISTOPHER GILL.

MR. GILL IS ALSO ON THE LINE WITH ME IN CASE THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.

UM, AFTER OUR PRESENTATION.

UM, REAL QUICK, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK KA CHRISTIE AND AZA FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS CASE TODAY.

UM, AS CHRISTIE MENTIONED, WE ARE FORMALLY AMENDING OUR REQUEST TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

I HAVE TALKED WITH THEM A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT TODAY, UM, AND JUST REALLY APPRECIATE THEIR ASSISTANCE AND GUIDANCE TO FINDING THE BEST PATH FORWARD.

SO, UH, THANK YOU GIRLS.

UH, SLIDE TWO PLEASE AND I'LL GO THROUGH THIS RATHER QUICKLY.

AS STAFF MENTIONED, WE ARE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP THESE TWO PARCELS THAT ARE ON EITHER SIDE OF B STREET ALONG NORTH WALTERS.

YOU CAN SEE IN THIS AERIAL THAT WE ARE NORTH OF CARSON STREET, SUCH JUST SOUTH OF THE WALTERS GATE TO FORT SAM HOUSTON.

UH, SLIDE THREE

[00:35:01]

PLEASE.

JUST TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT OF LOCATION.

THIS IS AT THE SOUTHERN END OF OUR PART OF WALTERS.

AT THE INTERSECTION OF 35 WALTERS HAS BEEN FULLY IMPROVED TO A FIVE LANE THOROUGHFARE, WHICH SERVES AS A GATEWAY, UH, BOTH LITERALLY AND VISUALLY FROM THE FREEWAY TO THE MILITARY BASE.

UM, IT'S BEAUTIFUL.

SLIDE FOUR PLEASE.

SLIDE FOUR SHOWS, UH, THERE ARE TWO YELLOW STARS ON THE VACANT PARCEL THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP, WHICH FRONT WALTERS AND OUR DEVELOPMENT WILL FRONT WALTERS ACCORDINGLY.

UH, THESE WERE PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY UNION PACIFIC AND WERE UNDEVELOPED RIGHT OF WAY.

YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS HERE INCLUDE LARGE SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF WALTERS, UM, AND THAT THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ARE ALREADY BUFFERED AND SEPARATED FROM THESE LOTS.

AND WALTERS SLIDE FIVE PLEASE.

THIS IS THE NORTHERN B STREET LOT IN ITS CURRENT STATE.

YOU CAN SEE THAT WE ABUT THE DRIVEWAY AND THE FENCE OF THE ADJACENT RESIDENCE HERE.

UM, AND THIS IS ALSO THE SAME CONFIGURATION OF OUR LARGER PARCEL JUST ACROSS B STREET.

UH, THE TERRACOTTA ROOFS THAT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IN THE BACKGROUND ARE THE BASE.

SO WE ARE VERY, VERY CLOSE.

UH, TO THAT, THAT GATE AT WALTERS.

SLIDE SIX PLEASE.

THIS IS JUST A WIDE ANGLE VIEW OF BOTH OF THOSE LOTS, UM, IN THE EXISTING CONDITIONS.

UH, OF THOSE YOU CAN SEE KIND OF THE SEPARATION FROM WHERE THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STARTS BETWEEN, UM, WITH US IN THE MIDDLE, BETWEEN THEM AND WALTERS, UH, SERVING AS A GOOD BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO USES.

SLIDE SEVEN PLEASE.

THIS IS JUST THAT SOUTHERN B STREET LOT, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IS DEFINITIVELY SEPARATED FROM THE EXISTING ADJACENT RESIDENCE.

AND WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT ONLY ABUTTING THEIR FENCE BUT THEIR DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS THE SAME AS THE LOT ACROSS THE STREET THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO REDEVELOP AS WELL.

SLIDE EIGHT PLEASE.

AND THIS IS JUST THE SOUTHERN END OF THAT LARGE LOT WITH A BUS.

UH, COLEMAN STREET.

COLEMAN STREET DOES NOT CONNECT TO WALTERS.

UM, AND WE CONFIGURED THE PROJECT IN MIND, UM, TRAFFIC WISE AS WELL.

UM, BUT YOU CAN JUST SEE HOW WE KIND OF ARE TAKING, UH, THIS PIECE UP FRONT WALTERS AND, AND STOPS AT COLEMAN.

SLIDE NINE, PLEASE, UH, FOR CONTACT.

OUR ZONING REQUEST IS FROM R FIVE AND R SIX, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY LEFTOVER RIGHT OF WAY THAT TOOK ON THE, THE ZONING OF THE ADJACENT PARCEL TO I D Z TWO TO ALLOW FOR 18 TOTAL UNITS.

UH, THOSE WILL BE NINE DUPLEXES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AS STAFF MENTIONED, GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE AND THIS MOUNTING COMMUNITY IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED REZONING AND THE PROJECT PLAN.

SLIDE 10 PLEASE.

SO THE, THE PLAN AMENDMENT, WHILE, UH, WE ARE ON THE AGENDA TODAY FOR LOW DENSITY MIXED USE, WE HAVE SPENT A TON OF TIME DISCUSSING THIS PLAN DESIGNATION SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

THE RESOUNDING AND SINGULAR CONCERN FOR OUR PROPOSAL IN ITS ENTIRETY IS THE PLAN DESIGNATION.

THESE NEIGHBORS ARE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF LOW DENSITY MIXED USE AS IT COULD ULTIMATELY ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL USES TO BE FOUND CONSISTENT AND THEORETICALLY PERMITTED ON SITE IF THIS PROPERTY WAS REZONED REDEVELOPED AT A LATER DATE.

SO WHILE WE'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY COMMERCIAL USES WITH THE PROPOSED REZONING AND HAVE LIMITED OUR REQUEST TO ONLY 18 RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR THE SITE, WE DEFINITELY HEAR AND UNDERSTAND THOSE COMMUNITY MEMBERS' CONCERNS ABOUT THE CURRENT REQUEST DESIGNATION AS IT RELATES TO THE POTENTIAL FOR COMMERCIAL USES AND CONSISTENCY.

AS SUCH, WE ARE FORMALLY AMENDING OUR REQUEST, UH, TO AMEND THE GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN DESIGNATION FOR THIS PROPERTY FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL INSTEAD OF THAT LOW DENSITY MIXED USE.

UH, WE HAVE DISCUSSED WITH STAFF TO ENSURE THAT THE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WAS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH OUR REQUEST AS WELL AS THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.

AS CHRISTIE MENTIONED, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT AS WELL, THE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO SERVE AS A REALLY GOOD BUFFER BETWEEN THE EXISTING RESIDENTS AND THAT TRAFFIC AND NOISE OF A FIVE LANE WALTERS ROAD, WHICH WE ARE RIGHT AT THAT GATE, UH, TO J B S A FORT SAM.

AND, AND THERE'S A TON OF TRAFFIC THAT COMES IN AND OUT.

SO IT'S A GOOD BUFFER FOR THOSE EXISTING RESIDENCES.

IT ALSO PROVIDES A REALLY QUALITY RESIDENTIAL OPTION FOR THIS VACANT, UNDERUTILIZED LAND, UM, AND IS DEFINITIVELY SUPPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY.

SO, UM, ALL IN ALL THIS IS REALLY BECAUSE OF AND AT THE REQUEST OF THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

UM, AND, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM TO ENSURE THAT THERE ARE NO COMMERCIAL USES KIND OF ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARCEL AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

UH, SLIDE 11 REALLY QUICK IS JUST OUR I D D TWO SITE PLAN SHOWING THE TWO DUPLEXES ON THE NORTHERN EAST STREET LOT AND THE SEVEN DUPLEXES ON THE SOUTHERN END

[00:40:01]

AGAIN, THE COMMUNITY AND STAFF ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, THE ASSOCIATED REZONING, AND KIND OF OUR PROJECT AS A WHOLE.

SLIDE 12, PLEASE.

UH, THIS SLIDE JUST SHOWS A BETTER VISUALIZATION OF THAT LAND PLAN FOR THIS SITE.

KINDA GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF HOW THOSE ARE ORIENTED, UM, FROM AN AERIAL VIEW, UM, AND A PROPOSED PRELIMINARY RENDERING OF THE BUILDINGS, ALL OF WHICH WILL FRONT AND FACE WALTERS.

UH, LAST SLIDE IS SLIDE 13, UM, WHICH IS JUST A RECAP OF THE SLIDE YOU SAW EARLIER.

UM, PLEASE JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT WE ARE LIMITING THE UNIT COUNT TO 18 TOTAL ACROSS BOTH PARCELS.

THAT MAKES OUR CUMULATIVE DENSITY, UM, RIGHT AROUND 25 UNITS AN ACRE.

SO IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY HIGH IN DENSITY.

UM, BUT THE DENSITIES PRESCRIBED WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT HILL PLAN ARE A BIT DATED AND EVEN ALLOW FOR OUR CURRENT ZONING.

SO ULTIMATELY THIS REQUEST ALLOWS FOR A RANGE OF RESIDENTIAL USES AND DENSITIES, BUT DOES NOT ASSERT CONSISTENCY WITH ANY COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH IS WHAT THE NEIGHBORS WANT TO ENSURE.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM, UM, AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AMENDMENT TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES.

UH, WE ARE THOROUGHLY CONSISTENT WITH THE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION, UM, IN THE PLAN, AND THE AMENDED REQUEST IS DEFINITELY APPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE ALONG NORTH WALTERS.

ABOVE ALL ELSE, THIS DESIGNATION, UM, IS WHAT THOSE SURROUNDING RESIDENCES ARE COMFORTABLE WITH AND WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE HAPPEN FOR THIS SITE.

UH, MR. WROTE IN, UM, OPPOSITION TO THE PLAN DESIGNATION, OUR ORIGINAL LOAD DENSITY MIXED USE.

UM, HE OWNS THREE PARCELS WITHIN 200 FEET OF OUR SITE.

UM, AND WE HAVE CONFIRMED WITH HIM THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ELIMINATE THOSE CONCERNS.

UH, AS I MENTIONED, THE COMMUNITY IS THOROUGHLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT, OF THE REZONING AND, AND REALLY OF THIS AMENDED PLAN REQUEST.

SO AS SUCH, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT AS AMENDED TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR THIS PROPERTY.

UM, AGAIN, MYSELF AND MR. GI ARE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU EMILY.

UH, STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM? YEAH, WE HAVE TWO VOICEMAILS.

WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PLAY THOSE NOW.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

GIVE US JUST ONE SECOND.

IT'S BUFFERING.

WE SHOULD HAVE A PLANE.

JUST A MOMENT.

I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO AGENDA ITEM 25, CASE 25.

MY NAME IS DIA COLE, MY HUSBAND AND I OWN 3 1 5 COLEMAN, WHICH IS A RENTAL HOME AND THREE 14 AND THREE 16 COLEMAN, WHICH ARE VACANT LOTS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPOSED PROJECT.

WE LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT 1 0 5 RENO STREET, JUST TWO SHORT BLOCKS AWAY FROM THESE PROPERTIES.

I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF RESIDENTIAL INFILL IN OUR GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.

I'VE REVIEWED THESE PROPOSED PLANS AND WOULD LIKE FOR THIS NINE DUPLEX PROJECT TO COME TO FRUITION.

IT'LL BE GREAT TO HAVE THESE NEW HOMES AND NEIGHBORS JUST NEXT DOOR AND ACROSS THE STREET.

AND OF COURSE, I WANT AS MANY NEIGHBOR CONCERNS AS POSSIBLE ADDRESSED.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, I WANT ALL PROPERTY WEST OF WALTER STREET IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO STAY RESIDENTIAL.

THAT INCLUDES THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION HERE.

I DO NOT APPROVE OF THE DESIGNATION OF MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF COMMERCIAL USES ON THIS PROPERTY.

PLEASE RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR OF RESIDENTIAL AND ONLY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION.

I WE HAVE ONE MORE.

GIVE

[00:45:01]

US A SECOND.

HI, MY NAME IS STEVE .

I LIVE AT 1 0 5 RENO STREET.

I'M CALLING ABOUT, UH, CASE NUMBER 25, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 25.

UM, THE PROPERTY AT THE GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG WALTERS AT THE END OF BEING IN COLEMAN STREET.

UM, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE RESIDENTIAL INFILL.

UM, I I BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN, UH, A MISINTERPRETATION THAT THE, THE LOWEST INTENSITY FOR I D Z IN THE GOVERNMENT HILL PLAN IS, UM, IS THE, UH, LOAD, UH, LOAD DENSITY MIXED USE.

UM, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S WHAT IT EXPLICITLY STATES THERE, THERE WAS A RID AFTER THE I D Z WAS BROKEN INTO 1, 2 3.

SO I D Z 1 23, UH, FROM THE 2019 R SAY THAT THEY CAN BE, UM, APPLIED TO ANY, UH, FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE USE AND THE DENSITY, WHICH, UM, MEDIUM OR HIGH, UH, DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WOULD APPLY TO THE PROPOSED, UH, IDZ TWO PLANS THAT THE APPLICANT IS SUBMITTING.

SO PLEASE, UH, KEEP THIS PROPERTY, FUTURE LAND USE AT ONLY RESIDENTIAL AND APPROVE THE APPRO THE APPROPRIATE MEDIUM OR HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE FOR THESE PROPERTIES.

THOSE WERE THE TWO VOICEMAILS WE HAD.

UH, WE'LL GO AND ORDER, UH, COMMISSIONER CHRISTOPHER GARCIA, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF, UM, THE APPLICANT, THEY STATED THAT THERE WAS ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO, UH, OWNS SOME PROPERTY NEARBY AND THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY USES, BUT, UH, ONCE THEY HEARD THE REVISION TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THEY WERE OKAY WITH IT.

IF THEY JUST CAN JUST GET SOME TYPE OF DOCUMENTATION INTO THE RECORD, THAT'D BE GOOD.

AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

I SAW ON THE PLAN, UH, MIXED USE FOR THE LAND USAGE, UH, LITTLE AGENCY USE, UH, AROUND THE AREA.

SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHY DOES HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MAKE SENSE FOR THIS AREA? IF YOU CAN JUST CLARIFY THAT FOR ME.

SURE.

WELL, IT ALLOWS, UM, BASICALLY THE SAME DESI RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS AS LOW DENSITY MIXED USE, EXCEPT IT ELIMINATES THE COMMERCIAL USES ENTIRELY, WHICH AS THE APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE NOTED MADE THE COMMUNITY MORE COMFORTABLE.

BUT, UH, ALL OF THE, THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS ALLOWED UNDER HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UM, CAN ALSO BE FOUND IN LOW DENSITY MIXED USE EXCEPT WITHOUT THE, WITHOUT THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT.

COMMISSIONER ZUKI.

UH, JUST REQUEST TO CHANGE THE MINUTES TO REFLECT THE AMENDMENT FROM THE WAY IT APPEARS RIGHT NOW TO LOW TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

THROUGH THAT MF 50 RANGE.

WE'LL, WE'LL MAKE THE CHANGE WHEN I, I THINK WE TAKE A MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER CARDILLO HAYNES.

SORRY I COULDN'T FIND MY MUTE BUTTON.

UM, UH, NO QUESTIONS.

I WANTED TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS AND REVISING THEIR, UM, ASK FOR THIS PROJECT TO, UM, TO FIT IN NOT ONLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN, BUT THE DESIRES OF, OF THE RESIDENTS.

I THINK THAT WAS, UH, GREAT.

UM, MY, UM, RESUME MY QUESTIONS HERE.

UM, CAN STAFF JUST ANSWER FOR ME, SO IS THIS HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IS THAT THEIR ONLY OPTION? IS THERE A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL THEY COULD HAVE DONE? UM, IF NOT, THAT'S, THAT'S FINE.

I'M JUST, I'M JUST CURIOUS FOR THE DIFFERENT, UH, THE PARAMETERS OF THE TWO DESIGNATIONS.

SURE.

SO ON THE HIGH DENSITY, THEY, THEY DO NEED THE HIGH DENSITY BECAUSE OF THE DENSITY THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING FOR THE PROJECT.

AND SO AS A RESULT, IN ORDER TO MEET THOSE NUMBERS, UM, THEY HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST 30 UNITS PER ACRE.

AND SO TO FALL INTO THAT RANGE, IS THAT MF 25

[00:50:01]

THANK, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

UM, AND NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

OKAY, COMMISSIONER JACKSON? THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, ECHO, UH, COMMISSIONER HAYES, UM, REPRESENTATIVE FOR, UM, PLAN, USE CHANGE AND YOUR DEVELOPMENT PLANS.

I THINK THIS WILL PROVIDE, UH, A BENEFIT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, AND, AND THE INCREASED HOUSING OPPORTUNITY.

I'M SURE.

SO I THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIEGEL.

I HAVE NO QUESTIONS OR STATEMENTS.

COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GARCIA.

UH, AGAIN, JUST ECHOING FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, IT'S GOOD TO SEE THE, UH, DEVELOPERS AND THE COMMUNITY WORKING TOGETHER TO FIND A HAPPY MEDIUM.

UM, I THINK THIS IS GREAT, UH, LOCATION FOR HOUSING AND HOPEFULLY IT'S IN A, YOU KNOW, AFFORDABLE FASHION AND ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, MORE WORKFORCE HOUSING.

UH, SO, UH, THANK YOU EMILY AND, AND MR. GILL, UH, FOR LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY AND, UH, COMING TO, UH, AN AGREEMENT THAT I THINK WILL MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY.

SO THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER PECK, UH, NO QUESTIONS.

JUST, YOU KNOW, SAME COMMENT AS EVERYBODY ELSE.

UH, APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT AND, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WORKING TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF, UH, HOW IT WORKS.

SO, UH, APPRECIATE IT.

COMMISSIONER CARILLO HAYNES SECOND.

GREAT.

THANK YOU FOR THE END TIME.

I ALSO ECHO THE COMMENTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.

UM, THIS IS A, A GOOD EXAMPLE OF COLLABORATION.

I THINK THIS IS A GREAT CORRIDOR, AGAIN FOR THE, UM, RESIDENTIAL.

UM, IT'LL BE EXCITING TO SEE THIS GET DEVELOPED, ESPECIALLY WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE, THE DIFFERENT, UM, VISITORS, UM, GOING TO FORT SAM AND WHATNOT.

I THINK THIS IS A, AN IMPORTANT AREA THAT WE NEED TO DEVELOP, UM, PROPERLY.

SO AGAIN, THANK Y'ALL TO THE VARIOUS, UM, TEAM, UH, FOR COLLABORATING WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND GETTING THIS THROUGH.

SO AT THIS TIME, I WILL TAKE A MOTION, I BELIEVE WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED AND IF YOU ALL CAN INCLUDE IT IN YOUR MOTION, IF THAT'S THE CASE.

UM, TO CLARIFY THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

YEAH, WE, WE CAN TAKE A MOTION AS AMENDED.

MOTION AS AMENDED.

A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER CARILLO HAYNES.

A SECOND FIRM COMMISSIONER.

PROFIT ROLL CALL PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER GUS AYE.

MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ? YES.

THE MOTION PASSES.

ITEM ON THE AGENDA, THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES.

FINAL

[32. 21-2414 Consideration and Action on the Minutes from April 28, 2021. ]

I JUST HAVE ONE CLARIFICATION.

UH, COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE WAS NOT INCLUDED.

IS THAT NORMAL FOR THE FORMAT? YES.

I WAS ABSENT AT THE LAST MEETING.

RIGHT, BUT YOU JUST, YOU WEREN'T NOTED AT ALL.

YEAH.

YOU, YOU, YOU SH WE WE CAN CORRECT THOSE.

HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTED EVEN IF HE WAS NOT IN, UH, IN ATTENDANCE.

JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE INCLUDED.

COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE.

COMMISSIONER PECK COMMISSIONER PROFIT MOTION.

UM, THANK YOU.

SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER REVISIONS, UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? UH, MOTION TO APPROVE IS AMENDED.

SECOND.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PECK.

ROLL CALL PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER CHAN? YES.

COMMISSIONER BUSANTE ABSTAINED.

COMMISSIONER

[00:55:01]

ORIAN? YES.

AND MADAM CHAIR GONZALEZ? YES.

MOTION.

AND DO, UH, DOES THE STAFF HAVE ANY PRESENTATIONS? AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, DO YOU HAVE AN UPDATE ON, UH, WHEN AND IF WE PLAN TO GO BACK IN PERSON AT, AT THIS POINT IN TIME? UH, VERY SIMILAR UPDATE.

SO WHAT WE SHARED LAST TIME, WE ARE LOOKING AT MOVING TO A HYBRID MEETING FORMAT.

UH, I'LL LET YOU HAVING SOME COMMISSIONERS IN THE BUILDING AS WELL AS SOME MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

UH, WE ARE, UH, TRYING TO RETROFIT THE, UH, THE BOARDROOM TO ENABLE THAT, UH, TARGETING AUGUST, UH, FOR A START DATE.

SO PROBABLY GONNA HAVE A COUPLE MORE, UH, ALL WEBEX MEETINGS UNDER OUR BELT BEFORE WE GET TO THAT.

BUT WE WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE UPDATES.

THANK YOU SIR.

UM, NOW IT IS 2 42 AND I WILL ADJOURN THE MEETING.

THANK Y'ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.