[00:00:02]
LET'S CALL OUR MEETING TO ORDER.
WOULD STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL? MS. CARILLO HAYNES.
MR. GARCIA? I IT'S ON MR. SIPES HERE.
MS. TACKETT? SHE'S RUNNING LATE, BUT SHE'S ON HER WAY.
MR. LEEMAN? PRESENT? TRY MS. GAN GAN HERE.
MR. HANLEY? PRESENT? MR. DOMINGUEZ DOMINGUEZ.
MR. TAPIA? PRESENT? MR. ESTRADA? PRESENT.
MR. RAMIREZ? PRESENT? MR. VASQUEZ? PRESENT.
DO WE HAVE A QUORUM? A QUORUM IS PRESENT.
UM, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, SINCE OUR LAST MEETING OR ANY POINTS TO BRING UP? UH, YEAH.
CAN Y'ALL USE YOUR MICROPHONES? I'M SO SORRY.
WE ARE, BUT THEY DON'T ALWAYS SEEM TO BE PICKING UP.
IS YOU GONNA HOLD THE BUTTON DOWN? NO.
YOU'LL NEED TO SCOOT THE MIC CLOSER TO YOU.
THE, UH, U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS TAKES PLACE EVERY FIVE YEARS, AND THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN DONE IN 2020 TO GET BACK ON THE SAME ORIGINAL SCHEDULE.
ARE WE GONNA HAVE THREE YEARS IN THE NEXT CYCLE OR FIVE YEARS? FIVE YEARS.
MR. UH, CHAIR, THIS IS MELISSA RAMIREZ.
AND IF I CAN, UH, JUST CLARIFY REAL QUICK BEFORE WE GET STARTED.
UH, ONE THING THAT I DON'T WANNA FORGET IS WE NEED TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT IF WE HAVE ANY.
BUT, UM, REMIND THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHEN YOU'RE USING YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE REMEMBER TO TURN IT OFF AFTER YOU FINISH SPEAKING.
UH, WE ARE LIVE STREAMING AND, UH, WE DO OUR, WE ARE HEARING FEEDBACK, UM, WITH THE OPEN MICS.
SO ONCE YOU COMPLETE TALKING, PLEASE, UH, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND TURN OFF YOUR MICS.
ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE GROUP BEFORE WE MOVE ON? ALL RIGHT.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
[Public Comment ]
AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON ANYTHING? UH, DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE OFF UH, AUDIENCE, BUT WE DO HAVE THREE VOICEMAILS TO PLAY.EACH OF THOSE WILL BE LIMITED TO THE TWO MINUTES THAT WAS POSTED ON THE AGENDA.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND PLAY THOSE.
AND, AND IS, IS MY MIC WORKING OR IS IT JUST ME? THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT ISN'T.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE, UH, AV, BUT, UH, I'LL, I'LL KEEP YOU POSTED IF I GET ANYTHING.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LISTEN TO THE VOICEMAILS.
I'M CALLING, UH, FOR THE, UH, PTAC MONDAY PTAC MEETING.
UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE, UH, AMENDMENT REQUEST.
I THINK IT'S AN ILL-ADVISED CONCEPT FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THE CREATING, UM, ZONING DISTRICTS RATHER THAN LAND USE CATEGORIES.
THIS IS A WIDE RANGE OF USES THAT SOUND LIKE A LAND USE CATEGORY, UM, NOT A ZONING DISTRICT.
I THINK TECHNICALLY ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, UM, NEIGHBORHOODS DO NOT NEED C THREE INTENSITY BARS AND TAVERNS REGULARLY MIXED RIGHT IN WITH LOW DENSITY, MULTIFAMILY USES.
UM, RESTAURANTS SERVING ALCOHOL, THAT'S GREAT, THAT MIGHT FIT IN NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT NOT BARS AND TAVERNS.
UM, NOR DO THEY NEED ENTERTAINMENT VENUES WITH LIVE MUSIC RIGHT
[00:05:01]
NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL.UM, ADDITIONALLY, THE WAIVER ON PARKING REQUIREMENT IS NOT NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY.
UM, THE FILLING UP A STREET WITH PARKING, UH, WITH CARS FROM THESE BUSINESSES IS NOT NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY.
UH, AGAIN, OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSAL FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT.
HELLO, MY NAME IS STEVE
UM, THIS, UH, IS STRANGELY SIMILAR TO THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE AND USES, UM, JUST LIKE ONE MORE LEVEL OF INTENSITY.
UH, I MEAN, WE ALL, WE ALREADY SEE URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS STRUGGLING WITH I D Z, UH, USES INSERTED.
UM, I D Z, UH, SEEMS TO BE A VERY, UM, WIDELY USED AND APPROPRIATE FOR FITTING IN THESE MIXED USES ALREADY.
UM, AND IT SEEMS APPROPRIATE THAT THEY SHOULD, UM, BE ABLE, THAT THEY MUST, YOU KNOW, SPECIFY THE USES RATHER THAN GETTING, YOU KNOW, THIS CARTE BLANCHE OF A WIDE RANGE CHANGE OF NEIGHBORHOOD OR OF, OF URBAN USES MIXED IN WITH URBAN RESIDENTIAL.
UM, SO I, I THINK I, I, SO AGAIN, I'M, I'M OPPOSED TO THIS URBAN MIS MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT AMENDMENT PROPOSAL.
HI, UH, MY NAME IS STEVE STEIG, 1 0 5 RENO STREET.
I'M CALLING FOR THE PTAC MONDAY MEETING.
I'M CALLING ON AGENDA ITEM NINE, REGIONAL MIXED USE.
UH, THESE, THESE MIXED USE PROPOSALS, WHICH POTENTIAL, WHICH THEY SAY THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IN LINE WITH SA TOMORROW PLAN WHERE THEY'RE CREATING CORRIDORS.
UM, AND THESE CORRIDORS ARE GONNA GO HUNDREDS OF FEET INTO NEIGHBORHOODS, URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND SO IF I, I SEE AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE HOMEOWNER, YOU KNOW, WHERE LANDOWNERS, HOMEOWNERS WHO WANT TO GET OUT AND MAKE A BUCK ARE GOING TO GET THEIR PROPERTY REZONED, UM, IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE VALUE AND SELL IT.
AND THAT, THAT'S GOING TO, UM, THAT'S GONNA DESTROY THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, IN MY OPINION.
UM, AND YOU MAY, YOU MAY THINK THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN, BUT IT HAPPENED RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME.
UM, THEY FOUGHT AND FOUGHT TO REZONED TO COMMERCIAL SAYING THEY WERE GONNA DEVELOP IT, BUT YET STILL SITTING THERE, THEY'RE STILL TRYING TO SELL IT AFTER, OVER A YEAR, ALL THEY WANTED TO DO WAS REZONE TO MAKE MONEY.
THEY HAD, UH, SIX BUNGALOWS AND A DUPLEX.
THEY'RE GONNA, AS SOON AS THEY SELL IT, THOSE, THEY'LL ALL GET TORN DOWN.
THEY REZONED AWAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND JUST TO MAKE MONEY.
AND PEOPLE, PEOPLE ARE GONNA, PEOPLE ARE GONNA DO THAT.
THEY'RE GONNA REZONE THEIR PROPERTY TO BE ANYTHING GOES DISTRICTS JUST TO SELL IT FOR MORE MONEY.
AND THAT WAS IT FOR PUBLIC TIME.
UH, THAT'S IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
I'M GONNA MOVE JUST STRAIGHT INTO OLD
[Old Business ]
BUSINESS AND WE'LL DO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.SO IF I COULD GET A MOTION, OR IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING, MOTION A MOTION FROM MR. BROWN FOR APPROVAL.
UH, WE'LL JUST DO, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO NEW BUSINESS.
[New Business ]
ITEM NUMBER ONE, DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLE ACTION ON U D C AMENDMENT.ITEM 18 DASH EIGHT, SECTION 35 DASH OH FIVE B NINE.
ALRIGHT, AMENDMENT 18 DASH EIGHT WAS SUBMITTED BY DOUG MELNICK WITH THE OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY.
UM, WE WANT TO GIVE HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE THIS ONE,
[00:10:15]
THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.UM, IT'S A PLEASURE TO GO FIRST.
UH, GOOD LUCK WITH THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
UM, SO BASICALLY WHAT, UH, WE PROPOSED IS, UH, INCLUDING LANGUAGE, UM, UH, IN THE U D C, UH, MEMORIALIZING, THE ESSAY CLIMATE READY PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL, UM, BACK IN 2019.
UH, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS PLAN IS REALLY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING VARIOUS COMPONENTS OF THE CLIMATE CHALLENGE, UH, REDUCING OUR EMISSIONS.
UH, WE DO THAT THROUGH IMPROVED EFFICIENCY, LOOKING AT MOBILITY OPTIONS, ALL SORTS OF GOOD THINGS.
AND THEN THE IDEA OF ADAPTING TO IMPACTS, UH, MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AHEAD TO, UH, INCREASED FLOODING, INCREASED TEMPERATURES, AND MAKING SURE THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WE'RE KEEPING AN EYE ON THAT.
AND SO THE GOAL IS, UM, UM, PLACING THIS LANGUAGE IN HERE, UH, AS A, UM, AS A RECOGNITION THAT, UH, AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND GROW AS A COMMUNITY AND REDEVELOPMENT, WE ARE THINKING ABOUT THE THOSE, UH, EXTERNALITIES.
UM, SO, UH, BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO QUESTIONS.
WE'RE JUST GONNA GO AROUND THE ROOM.
MY QUESTION HAS TO, SORRY, SORRY.
UH, MY QUESTION HAS TO DO IN THE, IN THE ACTUAL APPLICATION, THE ONE HAS THE YELLOW, I THINK YOUR MICROPHONE TURNED OFF, SIR, LIKE A AIR.
UM, I WAS LOOKING FOR, COULD YOU REVIEW, UH, OR SCROLL DOWN TO NUMBER FIVE OF THE, OF THE REQUEST? NO.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE BODY OF THE, OF, OF THE DOCUMENT THAT, THAT IS CALLED THE APPLICATE AREA.
GO, UH, ITEM FIVE, BECAUSE I'M NEW, I'M GONNA ASK A DUMB QUESTION.
IT SAYS THERE, UH, WILL NOT IMPACT ON THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION OR OF DEVELOPMENT.
UH, COULD YOU TELL, CLARIFY THAT FOR ME? YEP.
SO BASICALLY, UH, THIS LANGUAGE, GOSH, I GOT IT.
UM, THIS LANGUAGE, UM, WILL NOT DIRECTLY HAVE ANY IMPACT ON, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
SO IT'S NOT REQUIRING ANY CHANGE, UH, IN HOW, UM, DEVELOPMENT OCCURS.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE, THE, THE RATIONALE FOR CLICKING WILL NOT COST, UM, ANY IMPACT ON CONSTRUCTION.
UH, JUST FOR THE RECORD, JUST WANNA MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT JULIA CREEL HAYNES AND KEN BROWN HAVE BOTH, UH, JOINED THE MEETING.
SO, UM, SO THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN, UH, UH, B I P O C LISTED, UM, IN THE U D C.
AND SO, SO IS THAT KIND OF A NEW DESIGNATION THAT WE'RE GONNA WANT TO CONSIDER? OR IS THERE MORE, THERE'S ONE MORE GENERIC THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SAY LARGER OR, YOU KNOW, SO I WAS JUST WORKING THROUGH IT.
I DIDN'T SEE IT ANYWHERE ELSE.
SO IT'S KIND OF MY FIRST INTRODUCTION TO THAT PARTICULAR LINE.
COULD YOU, UM, SO JUST REPEAT THAT.
SO, SO THE BI BIPO, SO, SO, SO THAT'S THE FIRST TIME IT'S IN THE U D C THAT I COULD SEE.
AND SO, SO IS THAT COULD BE A STANDARD THING THAT WE'RE GONNA LOOK FOR NOW? OR IS THERE, IS THERE ONE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OPEN THAN THAT, I GUESS, REALLY? IS IT NEED TO BE THAT FOCUSED, I GUESS? YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.
I THINK THE REASON WHY WE CHOSE THAT IS WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON ACROSS THE COUNTRY AROUND IMPLEMENTING CLIMATE PLANS, KEY TO THIS IS, IS EQUITY AND BEING AS FOCUSED WITH THE LANGUAGE AS POSSIBLE.
AND SO, UM, TRYING TO SORT OF CALL OUT THOSE SPECIFIC, UM, UH, DEMOGRAPHICS THAT ARE PARTICULARLY VULNERABLE TO CLIMATE, RIGHT? SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE RATIONALE OF, OF TRYING TO USE THAT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE.
SO ARE WE AWARE OF, YOU KNOW, WILL THIS BE, WILL THIS LANGUAGE COME UP FOR ANY OTHER THINGS AS WELL? SO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, AS WE LOOK AT OTHER THINGS OR DO WE CARE? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE WHAT I'M ASKING? YEAH, I DON'T, I THINK RIGHT NOW FOR THIS AMENDMENT PROCESS, I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT THAT INCLUDED THIS, UM, ACRONYM.
AND WE'RE START, WE'RE STARTING TO USE IT IN OTHER AREAS OF, UM, OUR DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY.
YEAH, IT WAS FOCUSED, AND SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S RIGHT OR MAKE IT BROADER, WHATEVER.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO ASK A SECOND QUESTION THEN, BECAUSE OF, UM, UH, OF THE REMARKS CONCERNING THE BIPO, UH, AND THAT WE, UH, I WOULD LIKE, UH, TO SEE IT CONSISTENTLY USED FROM THIS POINT FORWARD.
IT HAS BEEN UTTERED INTO, INTO, INTO THE, THE DOCUMENT.
AND I BELIEVE SINCE WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT ALL OF THE SUB, UM, THE, THE, THE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT
[00:15:01]
BIPO IS, I THINK IT SHOULD BE FROM NOW ON, ON EVERY DOCUMENT THAT IS PRODUCED, BUT SURE.AND, AND WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IT'S A, IT'S A PO IT'S A LARGER POLICY, UM, DISCUSSION.
UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR YOU ALL AND FOR OTHER, OTHER ENTITIES.
AND I THINK, UH, ADDING THIS TO THE SA CLIMATE READY PLAN IS THAT IS A PART OF OUR MASTER PLAN FOR OUR CITY.
SO THAT IS A TOOL THAT WILL BE CONTINUED TO BE REFERENCED.
UM, AND SO I THINK THIS IS THE STARTING POINT IN THE CONVERSATION AS WE REVIEW EACH U D C AMENDMENT, WE CAN DETERMINE IF IT IS APPLICABLE IN THAT SITUATION, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE IN EVERY SINGLE, UH, AMENDMENT THAT COMES ACROSS YOUR DESK.
UH, WHEN, WHEN I FIRST READ THIS THING, THERE WAS, AND IT DOES TALK ABOUT, IT MENTIONS COMMUNITIES MM-HMM.
UM, IN, IN TERMS OF THAT LAST, THAT LAST SENTENCE.
UM, IT'S BASICALLY, UM, WHAT IT IS, UM, TALKING ABOUT IS THE CLIMATE PLAN TRIES TO PRIORITIZE THOSE, UM, DEMOGRAPHICS, UH, IN OUR COMMUNITIES THAT ARE GONNA BE MOST VULNERABLE TO THESE CLIMATE IMPACTS.
AND, UH, BASICALLY THOSE ARE BLACK, INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF COLOR, LOW INCOME, ELDERLY, ELDERLY, AND CHILDREN.
SO IT'S SIMPLY TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT WE REALLY NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING THEIR, THEIR NEEDS, UM, IN THIS PLANNING PROCESS OFF AND ON.
ISN'T THIS A ZONING, UH, AMENDMENT? THIS IS, UM, A FRAMING DOCUMENT FOR THE BROADER INTENT OF DEVELOPMENT.
UM, LAUREN, CAN YOU PULL UP THE U D C REFERENCE FOR THIS SECTION? I WANT THEM TO SEE WHERE THIS APPLIES IN THE ACTUAL U D C.
UM, LOGAN, DID YOU WANNA ADD MORE TO THAT COMMENT? YEAH.
SO GENERALLY WHAT THIS AMENDMENT IS DOING IS IT'S ADDING TO THE LIST OF PLANS THAT DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH.
SO RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE, IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, NUMBER ONE IS THE TRANSPORTATION OR MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN.
WE HAVE WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS, DRAINAGE MASTER PLANS, BECAUSE THIS PARTICULAR PLAN WAS ADOPTED SINCE THE LAST U D C AMENDMENT, IT'S ADDING IT TO THE LIST OF PLANS.
THAT DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
PUT YOUR FINGER OFF YOUR NAIL, BOB.
I'M USED TO, I THINK LAST TIME I USED TO, YOU'D HOLD IT DOWN.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA LOOK INTO THAT.
UM, WE JUST HAD THAT DISCUSSION BEF RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED ANYWAY, UH, WHAT AREA, WHAT AREA OF TOWN WOULDN'T HAVE AT LEAST SOME PEOPLE THAT MEET THAT DESCRIPTION? IT'S A, I MEAN, BASICALLY THE, THE CLIMATE PLAN, UM, IS A CITYWIDE PLAN.
I MEAN, IT'S BASICALLY, AND DEVELOPMENT TOUCHES THE ENTIRE CITY.
SO AGAIN, IT'S SETTING THE FRAMEWORK FOR, UM, MAKING SURE THAT THE CONSIDERATIONS ARE BEING MADE.
WHERE, WHERE WOULD IT NOT APPLY? I MEAN, WHERE ARE YOU GONNA DECIDE THERE'S ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT MEET THAT SPEC THAT THIS THING WOULD APPLY TO THAT AREA? WELL, IT'S NOT THIS, THIS FRAMING LANGUAGE ISN'T NECESSARILY APPLYING TO ANY SPECIFIC ANYTHING.
IT JUST SAYS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, AS, AS, AS WITH THE OTHER PLANS, THERE'S TRENDS.
WE'VE GOT MOBILITY OBJECTIVES, WE'VE GOT, UM, OBJECTIVES AROUND STORM WATER.
UM, IT IS A HIGH LEVEL PLAN THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
I RIGHT NEXT, I CAN'T READ YOUR NAME FROM HERE.
RYAN, NO COMMENTS, NO COMMENT.
NO COMMENT, NO COMMENT, COMMENT.
AND SO A MISSING PART OF THE CONVERSATION FOR ME, I KIND OF THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, THE VERY NEXT AMENDMENT WAS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REFERENCING THE COMP PLANS.
AND THEY GIVE JUST A REALLY A ONE SENTENCE EXPLANATION OF THE THREE PLANS THAT MAKE UP THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, BECAUSE THIS IS JUST GOING INTO A SECTION THAT SAYS, THESE ARE CITY PLANS AND THEY'LL BE AMENDED.
SO I FELT LIKE A LOT OF THIS WAS ABOVE
[00:20:01]
AND BEYOND A DEFINITION IN CODE THAT THAT SHOULD ALL RESIDE IN THE PLAN AND DOES.AND, YOU KNOW, A SIMPLE ONE SENTENCE SIMILAR TO WHAT PLANNING DEPARTMENT DID WAS MORE APPROPRIATE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I HAD SOMETHING LIKE STRAIGHT OUT OF, I THINK YOU'VE GOT A GREAT SENTENCE IN THERE.
CLIMATE READY AS ESSAYS, CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN TO MEET THE PRESENT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
YOU KNOW, AND SOMETHING THAT'S, AND IT'S STRAIGHT OUT OF THE PLAN.
IT'S VERY CONCISE, BECAUSE OVER TIME THOSE VERY THINGS RIGHT THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE.
I MEAN, WE MAY CHANGE SOME OF THOSE IS THE CAP EVOLVES, HONESTLY.
AND TO ME AS A, WE'RE JUST REALLY TRYING IN THIS SECTION TO SAY, THIS IS A PLAN WE NEED TO TRACK AND WE NEED TO UPDATE CODE TO MIRROR IT.
AND WE NEED TO GIVE THE ORDINANCE AND THE DATE SIMILAR TO THE OTHERS THAT ARE IN THERE.
AND I LIKED PLANNINGS ONE SENTENCE, AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE SENTENCE, A GREAT SENTENCE OUT OF THE PLAN.
FOR THIS, FOR THE RECORD, I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT KARAT HAS, UH, JOINED THE MEETING.
UM, SO ARE YOU MAKING SOME, SOME TYPE OF MOTION OR RECOMMENDATION TO MODIFY THE PARAGRAPH AS IT'S WRITTEN? UH, YES, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DELETE THE PORTION BEGINNING WITH ON AFTER THE ORDINANCE NUMBER, UM, AND REPLACE IT WITH A SENTENCE OUT OF THE PLAN ITSELF THAT SAYS, ESSAY CLIMATE READY IS SAN ANTONIO'S CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN TO MEET THE PRESENT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE AS NOTED.
ARE WE GONNA TYPE THAT IN THERE BEFORE WE PROCEED, OR ARE YOU JUST GONNA, HOW DO YOU WANNA HANDLE THAT? I, I RECOMMEND WE, WE TYPE IT BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE ON IT.
BIANCA, MY ONLY CONCERN WITH ELIMINATING ALL OF THAT IS TALKING ABOUT YOU REMOVE THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T IMPACT ALL COMMUNITIES THE SAME WAY.
AND I THINK THAT'S A CRITICAL CONVERSATION THAT'S BEING HAD HERE IN SAN ANTONIO ABOUT EQUITY.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT HOW THE CITY IS SPENDING MONEY FOR THE ROADS, IT TALKS ABOUT EQUITY.
AND SO I KNOW WHY YOU WANNA SHORTEN IT, BUT I WOULD WHOLEHEARTEDLY LIKE TO SEE THE EQUITY COMPONENT STAY INSIDE.
IT IS A VERY TARGETED AREA IN THE CLIMATE PLAN THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN PER SE, EVEN, UM, THE SA COMP PLAN AND OTHER ADOPTED PLANS THAT THE CITY HAS.
UM, SINCE WE'VE DEALT WITH THIS IN THE PAST, THIS REALLY IS ABOUT, UM, A PLAN, THE PROCEDURAL PROCESS TO INCLUDE WHAT BIANCA'S ASKING FOR IS IN THE PROCEDURES.
AND THIS WHERE THIS GOES IN THE U D C, IT'S JUST IDENTIFYING THE PLAN.
I'M SURE THOSE ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED IN THE PLAN ITSELF.
SO THEN THIS DEFINITION REFERS TO THE PLAN WHERE THAT IS ALL ADDRESSED.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS WHILE SHE'S TYPING UP WHAT THE MOTION WAS? AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS AND TAKE ACTION.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND YOU, MR. CHAIR? YES.
DEBBIE, UM, BEING A PART OF THAT PROCESS AND HOW CON LOTS OF SOME CONFLICTS IN SOME OF THE TERMINOLOGY AND THE TIME SPENT.
I HESITATE TO DO MUCH CHANGING, ESPECIALLY IN THE FIRST PART OF IT.
BUT I'D LIKE TO BRING THE COMMITTEE'S ATTENTION TO THE DRAINAGE MASTER PLANS, WHICH HAS A WHOLE LOT OF LANGUAGE THAT REALLY TALKS ABOUT THE PLAN AND THE GOALS OF THAT PLAN, WHICH I THINK ARE SOMEWHAT CRITICAL AT THIS EARLY STAGE FOR THIS PLAN.
WHAT DEBBIE'S REFERRING TO, AND CAN WE PUT THE OH 5 35 DASH 1 0 5 UP THERE? SO OVER TIME, YOU KNOW, THESE MASTER PLANS HAVE BEEN ADDED.
SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE TRANSPORTATION MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
IT'S GOT A LITTLE, YOU KNOW, RESOLUTION AND PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF 1978.
SO WE'VE ADDED THESE OVER TIME.
AND THEN PARKS, THEN WATER MASTER PLAN, WHICH IS REALLY A SAW DOCUMENT, WASTEWATER, WHICH IS REALLY A SAW.
THEN YOU GET TO DRAINAGE IS THE FIFTH ONE.
AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S GOT MORE BACKGROUND AND DOESN'T REFERENCE.
THE NEXT THREE ARE VERY, HERE'S THE NAME OF THE PLAN, HERE'S WHEN WE ADOPTED IT, HERE'S THE ORDINANCE NUMBER
[00:25:01]
AND GIVE ABSOLUTELY NO INFORMATION ON IT.SO I REALLY THOUGHT THE NEXT AMENDMENT WE HAVE WHERE PLAN, I MEAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DID JUST THAT, GIVE A SENTENCE SO THAT IT IS SOME CONTEXT AND SOME IMPORTANCE.
UM, BUT MOST OF THESE, I, I FEEL LIKE I AGREE WITH ROBERT.
I DON'T WANT TO, IN A DEFINITION OF WHAT THE PLANS ARE, GET HEMMED IN WHERE, I MEAN, I DON'T EVEN LIKE THE DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN LANGUAGE, BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S, I THINK IT'S LETTING THE PLAN EVOLVE AS WE'RE SAYING IN HERE IT'S GOING TO, AND LET THE PLAN BE THE SUBSTANCE IN THE POLICY.
WHEREAS CODE IS REALLY VERY PRESCRIPTIVE, UM, STRUCTURED.
AND IF, AND IF I CAN JUST ADD, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THE GOAL IS TO HAVE IT RECOGNIZED IN THERE.
AND I DO APPRECIATE THE IDEA THAT THE PLAN IS GONNA CHANGE OVER TIME.
SO I THINK THAT FROM, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AT STAFF, THAT'S AS LONG AS WE'RE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE PLAN'S IN PLACE AND THAT WE'RE REFERENCING, I THINK THAT'S THE BIG OBJECTIVE FOR SURE.
AND THEN I HAPPEN TO, IN MY NOTES HAVE MADE THIS NUMBER 10 IN PLANNING NUMBER NINE.
THEY'RE BOTH NINE SINCE YOU, BOTH TWO DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THIS SAME SECTION.
AND THE ONLY REASON I DID THAT IN MY NOTES WAS THE COMP PLANS WERE ADOPTED BEFORE CAP.
SO IN MY BRAIN, PUT THOSE AS NINE AND CAP IS 10.
SO THAT'S, IS THAT THE LANGUAGE RIGHT THERE, KARA? IS THAT WHAT YOU'VE YES.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? I KNOW, UH, MS. REED HAS SOME COMMENTS, ALTHOUGH I WOULD SAY ESSAYS I WOULD DO SAN ANTONIO'S CLIMATE ACTION, BUT THAT WAS JUST MY SCRIBBLE.
BUT DOUG, 'CAUSE I TOOK THAT FROM THE PLAN, I WANTED TO VERY MUCH CAPTURE THE WORDS IN THE PLAN INSTEAD OF, AND SAN ANTONIO CLIMATE BETWEEN CLIMATE READY IS SAN ANTONIO'S.
THERE IS SAN ANTONIO'S SAN ANTONIO.
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT, UH, MODIFICATION.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
HEARING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, WE WILL, UH, STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL ON THAT ROLL CALL.
ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS DISCUSSION POP.
POSSIBLE ACTION ON U D C ITEM 22 DASH ONE, SECTION 35 DASH 1 0 5 B NINE.
I AM MICAH DIAZ, PLANNING COORDINATOR WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
YOU'RE GONNA GET TO HEAR A LOT FROM ME TODAY.
UM, SO JUST LIKE THE PREVIOUS ITEM, THIS IS SIMPLY AN AMENDMENT TO ADD THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN TO THE LIST OF,
[00:30:01]
UH, PLANS THAT REQUIRE OR THAT WERE ADOPTED AS COMPONENTS OF THE CITY'S MASTER PLAN.UM, AND WE INCLUDED ALL THREE BECAUSE THEY WERE ALL ADOPTED BY THE SAME ORDINANCE AT THE SAME TIME.
UM, WE'LL MOVE AROUND THE ROOM AGAIN AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
MINE, UH, AGAIN, IS, UH, JUST A LITTLE THING, BUT, UH, ON THE EXTREME RIGHT HAND OF THE, OF THE, SORRY, ON THE EXTREME RIGHT HAND COLUMN HERE, IT SPEAKS ABOUT, UH, THE, UH, ITEM THAT, THAT THAT IS, IT SAYS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ADOPTION OF SA TOMORROW, UH, IN, IN MY, I THINK IT'S, UH, IT'S BEEN CORRECTED ALREADY BECAUSE IN THE FIRST ONE THAT WE GOT DISTRIBUTED, IT HAD A TYPO IN THERE, BUT I DON'T SEE THE TYPO ANYMORE IN ITEM TWO.
SO IT HAS BEEN CORRECTED AND ALL, ALL IT WAS WAS TYPO.
I WILL ADD, THERE'S ANOTHER PART TO THIS AMENDMENT.
IT IS UPDATING THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY PERIMETER SECTOR AND SUB AREA PLANS, UH, THAT ARE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO A SECTION THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT MUCH LATER IN THIS PROCESS.
UM, AND THAT THE ESSAY TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED, INCLUDED AN UPDATE TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROGRAM THAT ADDED OUR SUB AREA PLANNING PROGRAM.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHERE THAT LANGUAGE CAME FROM, CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, SO THIS, THE, THE FIRST CHANGE IN THIS AMENDMENT IS DUE TO THAT UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROGRAM THAT WAS ADOPTED WITH THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
A LOT OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT TODAY AND OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, THAT'S THE CASE.
IT'S JUST UPDATING THE REFERENCE TO ALL OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF, OF PLANS.
AND MR. VASQUEZ, THE, UH, AMENDMENT THAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE ONE THAT IS ON THE SCREEN.
THAT DOCUMENT IS A REFERENCE TOOL, IF YOU WILL, FOR, UM, THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
BUT THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT LANGUAGE THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED IS HERE ON THE SCREEN.
AND THIS IS ALSO THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT WE HAD SENT OUT ON THE LINK FOR THE AGENDA AND THE TENTATIVE AGENDA THAT WE DISTRIBUTED IN THE EMAIL, WHICH WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT OVER BEFORE THE END OF THE MEETING.
I'M EXCITED TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE SUB AREAS AND YOU, UH, CLARIFIED SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD, SO I'LL HOLD TILL LATER.
MICAH IN
IS IT CLEAR THAT IT'S ALL THREE PLANS, COMP, MULTIMODAL, AND SUSTAINABILITY? IS THAT VERY, I DIDN'T GO BACK TO REFERENCE 'CAUSE I KNOW WHEN WE WERE IN THE PROCESS, THERE WAS CONSTANT CONFUSION.
IS COMP PLAN THE COMP PLAN OR ALL THREE PLAN? 'CAUSE THE ONLY THING I WAS GONNA SAY IS IF IT'S NOT CLEAR THERE, WE SHOULD SAY SA TOMORROW PLANS INCLUDE 1, 2, 3, YOU KNOW, THOSE ALL THREE PLANS.
THAT SA TOMORROW IS KIND OF THE UMBRELLA AND IT INCLUDES ALL THREE PLANS THEN NO COMMENTS.
THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION ON THIS.
MOTION TO APPROVE BY MS. WRIGHT.
[00:35:01]
HANLEY? YES.UH, DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION ITEM 22 DASH TWO, SECTION 35 DASH 2 0 4 C TWO.
SO AS I ALLUDED TO PREVIOUSLY, MANY OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S, UH, AMENDMENTS ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE ADOPTION OF THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH DID INCLUDE AN UPDATE TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROGRAM, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED IN 2009.
UH, THE U D C SEC, THE RELATED SECTION IS 35,420.
SO YOU WILL BE GETTING TO THAT LANGUAGE EVENTUALLY.
UM, BUT JUST AS A LITTLE BIT OF, UH, SOME BACKGROUND, WE ARE PROPOSING, UM, AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 35 4 20 TO UPDATE THE AND REFLECT THE CURRENT PLANNING PROGRAM, UM, AS WELL AS TO UPDATE THE LIST OF ADOPTED PLANS AND THAT CARRY CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR ZONING CASES.
UM, CHANGE FROM THE PREVIOUS NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL PLANNING PROGRAM TO THE CURRENT SUB AREA PLAN, UH, PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDES REGIONAL CENTER PLANS, COMMUNITY AREA PLANS, AND CORRIDOR PLANS.
UM, THOSE, THE NEW PLANNING PROCESS IS INTENDED TO CREATE A CONSISTENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
UM, AND LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE 28 INDIVIDUAL AMENDMENTS, 12 OF THEM SPECIFICALLY, UM, UPDATE REFERENCE TO SECTION 35, 4 20.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? JUST SHOW OF HANDS IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION.
MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY, UH, BIANCA MALDONADO.
UM, DISCUSSION IN ACTION, UH, AND U D C AMENDMENT ITEM 27 DASH 42, SECTION 35 DASH TWO 10 G.
HOW'S EVERYBODY DOING? GOOD TO SEE YOU.
UH, MY NAME IS NEFI GARZA, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF, UH, PUBLIC WORKS.
IT'S A REAL PLEASURE TO BE HERE.
UH, I WANTED TO TAKE A A A MINUTE BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA SEE A WHOLE BUNCH OF THINGS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, AND I WANT YOU TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
AND THEN I'M GONNA LET SABRINA, WHO IS THE BRAINS OF THE OPERATION HERE,
UM, SHE'S GONNA GO INTO SOME, SHE CAN GO INTO SOME OF THE DETAILS ON IT, BUT LET ME EXPLAIN SOMETHING BEFORE WE REALLY GET IN AND DIVE INTO THESE THINGS.
BUT I WANNA TALK ABOUT LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT.
SOME OF YOU CLEARLY KNOW WHAT LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT IS, SO I DON'T HAVE TO TELL THIS, BUT, SO JUST HOLD ON.
FOR THE REST OF YOU, PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEAN DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS MINIMAL IMPACT.
A LOT OF PEOPLE HEAR THOSE WORDS AND THEY GO, OH, THAT JUST MEANS THAT DEVELOPMENT.
THAT'S NOT GONNA CAUSE ANY ISSUES TO ANYBODY ELSE.
LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT IS A TECHNIQUE BY WHICH YOU TAKE STORM WATER RUNOFF AND YOU TREAT IT A CERTAIN WAY,
[00:40:01]
MANAGING IT A CERTAIN WAY, WITH THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF HAVING BETTER WATER QUALITY.SO THINK OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT, WATER QUALITY.
NOW, IS THERE ANY FLOOD BENEFIT THERE IS, UM, BUT IT'S BETTER EQUATED WITH WATER QUALITY.
NOW, MOST OF THE PEOPLE ACROSS THE COUNTRY, COMMUNITIES THAT ARE EXPERTS IN LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT HAVE A CLEAR REASON WHY THEY'RE DOING IT.
IF YOU'RE UP IN THE GREAT NORTHWEST, THERE MAY BE A FISH POPULATION THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO, UH, HELP.
IF YOU'RE IN THE, IN THE NORTHEAST, THERE MAY BE, UH, ISSUES WITH, UH, SANITARY SEWER, WATER, AND STORM WATER COMBINING IN SAN ANTONIO.
WE ARE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF UNDERSTANDING HOW LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT WORKS WITH OUR CLIMATE, WITH OUR SOILS, UH, WITH OUR INFRASTRUCTURE.
FORTUNATELY, WE'VE HAD SOME EXPERTS COME AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT.
AND INITIALLY WE STARTED OFF WITH A CERTAIN SET OF GUIDELINES, AND THOSE GUIDELINES ARE EXTENDING, EXPANDING PARTLY BECAUSE OUR EXPERTISE IS LEARNING.
WE THE CITY HAVE BUILT MANY LID FEATURES, SOME OF THEM WORK GREAT, OTHERS NOT SO GREAT.
SO THE AMENDMENTS YOU'RE GONNA SEE TODAY AND THAT WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT REALLY ADDRESSES THE ISSUE OF CREATING FLEXIBILITY WHILE STILL HAVING THE SPIRIT AND THE GUIDANCE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
SO I WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU BECAUSE WE ARE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING WHAT WORKS IN SAN ANTONIO.
UH, SO I'M, I'LL LET SABRINA GO IN AND SHE CAN TALK ABOUT ANY, ANY OTHER KIND OF PARTICULAR THINGS AS BEFORE WE GO INTO SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
GOOD AFTERNOON COMM UH, COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
UH, SABRINA SANTIAGO, I AM, UM, THE CAPITAL PROGRAMS MANAGER FOR, UH, STORM WATER, UM, HERE AT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO, UM, REAL QUICK ON, ON THIS TABLE HERE, TABLE, UH, TWO 10, UH, DASH TWO THAT WE ARE AMENDING.
UM, RIGHT NOW, WE ARE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S NOT MUCH CHANGE.
THE ONLY THING THAT WE ARE ADDING AND CODIFYING HERE IS THE STORM WATER UTILITY FEE, UH, REDUCTION.
WE'RE PROVIDING A MECHANISM THAT WE'RE ALREADY PRACTICING TODAY, UM, BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING IT IN THE CODE SO THAT IF ONE IMPLEMENTS LID ON THEIR PROPERTY, UM, THEY WILL GET A MAX 30% REDUCTION ON THEIR, UM, THEIR STORMWATER UTILITY FEE, WHICH IS THE FEE THAT IS ON THEIR SAWS BILL THAT IS, UM, COLLECTED MONTHLY.
AND THAT IS ALL THAT I HAVE FOR THIS.
UH, WE'LL MOVE ON WITH QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE A TIMEFRAME TO REACH A CERTAIN DEGREE OF QUALITY ASSOCIATED WITH, WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING? THAT, THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION ABOUT A TIMELINE.
RIGHT NOW, AS WE'RE, AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AND WE'RE TESTING SYSTEMS AND MECHANISMS, WE STILL HAVE NOT RECEIVED THEM.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH FOLKS LIKE SAUL, THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY, AND SOME OTHER NONPROFIT GROUPS TO HELP, AND EVEN UNIVERSITIES TO HELP US DETERMINE WHAT THE BEST IS.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IS, NO, WE DON'T HAVE A TIMELINE RIGHT NOW, BUT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT, WHAT WORKS HERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, MR. LEMAN.
HEY, SABRINA, WHENEVER YOU COULD DEFINE FOR ME WHAT AN AUTOMATED, AUTOMATED FEATURE IS THAT CAN BE USED FOR A SMALL AREA.
SO, UM, UH, WE'RE DOING THE WHOLE THING.
I THINK THEY'VE ONLY ADDRESSED DO, DO WE WANNA GO ONTO THE OTHER ONES OR SHALL I ADDRESS MR. LEEMAN'S QUESTION AND YES.
UM, SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. LEEMAN'S, UM, THE AUTOMATED SYSTEM, THERE'S, THERE'S A PARTICULAR BMPS, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, OUTLINED IN THE, THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITIES' LID MANUAL, UM, THAT HAVE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS LIKE TRASH RACKS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND SO WE'RE JUST PROVIDING LANGUAGE FROM A MAINTENANCE PERSPECTIVE ON HOW ONE, ONE PARTICULAR B M P SHOULD BE, UM, UH, THE MAINTENANCE SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED ON THOSE.
THERE WASN'T SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE U D C THAT, UM, SPOKE TO THOSE PARTICULAR AUTOMATED SYSTEMS, BUT THE LID MANUAL DID.
AND SO WE'RE JUST INCORPORATING THAT INTO THE, INTO THE CODE CAN.
[00:45:02]
SO LET, LET ME, LET ME ADD A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION.SO TYPICALLY WHEN WE, WHEN WE LOOK AT LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE RAIN GARDENS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS THAT ARE VERY INTEGRATED WITH, WITH NATURE.
THERE ARE SOME SYSTEMS, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'RE DOING A PARTICULAR PROJECT AND YOUR FOOTPRINT IS VERY, VERY SMALL AND YOU DO WANT TO ACCOMPLISH WATER QUALITY, MAYBE A RAIN GARDEN IS NOT THE BEST MECHANISM BECAUSE IT'S TOO SMALL.
SO WHAT THERE IS, THERE'S THESE MECHANICAL FEATURES THAT INCLUDE TRASH RACKS.
UH, ONE OF 'EM THAT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY POPULAR THAT WE USE, IT'S, IT'S CALLED A VORTEX UNIT.
WATER GOES IN, SPINS AROUND, TRASH IS SEPARATED, UH, AND THEN THE WATER DRAINS OFF.
AND IN THAT TRASH, SOME OF THOSE SYSTEMS HAVE HAVE THE ABILITY TO EITHER COMMUNICATE THROUGH, UM, THROUGH, UH, RADIO, RADIO SIGNALS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
AGAIN, THE PURPOSE HERE IS ALLOW FOR OTHER FACILITIES JUST INSTEAD OF JUST ONE PARTICULAR THING THAT, THAT LIMITS YOU.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS BEFORE WE MOVE ON WITH MORE QUESTIONS.
ARE YOU ADDRESSING THE CHART AND THE FOLLOWING TWO PAGES SEPARATELY? OR DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER PRESENTATION ON THAT, OR WHAT'S NO, I WAS GONNA GO ONE BY ONE, BUT I WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, ALLOW QUESTIONS FOR ONE FOR EACH ONE SINCE IT'S OKAY, SINCE IT'S A SECTION THAT WE'RE UPDATING.
I FIGURED I'D ALLOW OPPORTUNITY FOR QUESTIONS.
CONTINUE ON WITH QUESTIONS ON THE CHART.
UM, ON THE TABLE OR THE ORIGINAL TABLE, YOU'RE ELIMINATING THE DEFINITION OF THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME.
IS IT DEFINED SOMEWHERE ELSE, OR IS IT REFERRED BACK TO IN THE LID MANUAL? CORRECT.
IT'S REFERRED BACK TO THE LID MANUAL.
NE LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION BECAUSE THE, THE SARAH MANUEL, IT'S LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT, NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN PROTOCOL, WHICH IS THE PROCEDURES AND THE, THE, UH, DEVICES THAT YOU CAN USE.
BUT MY QUESTION REALLY COMES ON IS THAT IN TRYING TO EVALUATE WHAT WORKS FOR SAN ANTONIO, WHAT IS THE INCENTIVE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED ENOUGH TO GET THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE FENCE TO SAY, I'M DOING LID.
WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THERE'S HISTORICAL DATA THAT CONVENTIONAL LANDSCAPING AND LOW IMPACT DESIGN ARE VERY COMPARABLE NOW.
SO THE QUESTION IS, IF YOU'RE GONNA GIVE AN INCENTIVE FOR A DEVELOPMENT TO USE LOW IMPACT DESIGN, OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE DONE THIS, IS THE INCENTIVE ADEQUATE TO GET THE PERSON OFF THE FENCE, THE YEARS OF MAINTENANCE
UM, JUST A QUESTION ABOUT, SO THE STORMWATER UTILITY FEE REDUCTION, THAT'S ON THE MONTHLY FEE THAT A PROPERTY PAYS.
SO THAT'S AN ONGOING, BUT THE FI O IS A ONE TIME THING.
AND IS THERE ANY WAY TO LOOK AT INCREASING THE PERCENT REDUCTION IN FI O FOR 60%? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
I I WILL SAY THAT, UM, PHILO AND STORMWATER UTILITY ARE A, A A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT AND IN, IN THE SENSE THAT GENERALLY PHILO WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITH FLOOD, FLOOD MITIGATION.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU HAVE PROVEN WITH, YOU HAVE PROVEN THAT YOU'RE NOT HAVING AN ADVERSE IMPACT FROM A FLOOD PERSPECTIVE.
SO THAT'S WHY WE, AND THEN THE UTILITY ONE IS MORE OF MAINTAINING OUR CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE.
UM, WHEN WE STARTED, AND AGAIN, THIS IS EVOLVING, WHEN WE STARTED, WE, WE DETERMINED THAT 30% REDUCTION WOULD BE, WOULD BE HOW WE'RE GONNA, HOW WE THE CITY ARE GONNA TRY AND INCENTIVIZE, UM, THE, THE RIVER
[00:50:01]
AUTHORITY.AS YOU KNOW, THEY HAD A PROGRAM AND I SAY HAD BECAUSE THEY DON'T ANYMORE, BUT THEY HAD A PROGRAM WHERE THEY WOULD ACTUALLY PAY YOU TO DO, TO DO THE LID FEATURE.
WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS THAT, IS THAT THE CORRECT AMOUNT? UH, I WANNA LEAVE IT AT 30 FOR PHILO BECAUSE THE GOAL, A PURPOSE OF PHILO IS REALLY FLOOD MITIGATION, NOT SO MUCH WATER QUALITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS PART? ALL RIGHT.
SO MOVING ON TO, UM, SECTION G TWO D ONE.
HERE WE ARE PROVIDING, UM, LANGUAGE, UM, FOR OUR EXAMPLES, IF YOU WILL, OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
UM, THIS SECTION ONE IS, IS FOR EXAMPLES OF REDEVELOPMENT.
AND THEN ITEM TWO HERE OUTLINES WHAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A REDEVELOPMENT.
IT QUESTIONS, MY ONLY COMMENT IS SPACING.
BUT OTHERWISE, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I THINK THIS WAS ALMOST EXACT, BUT VERY CONSISTENT WITH THE RULE INTERPRETATION DIRECTIVE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTING AND GAVE CLARITY TO HOW TO SIZE AND, UM, WHAT TO DO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, SIR.
UM, DO WE HAVE A GLOSSARY OF TERMS BEING GENERATED FOR SOME OF THESE ACRONYMS AND INDUSTRY TERMS TO REVIEW OR LOOK UP? THE, THE MOST OF THESE ACRONYMS ARE PROVIDED IN THE DEFINITIONS? YES, SIR.
IN THE DEFINITION SECTION, WHICH IS ONE, ARE THEY ALREADY EXISTING? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? SABRINA? SO THE DEFINITIONS OR THE DOCUMENTS THAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU, THE DEFINITIONS ALREADY EXIST IN OUR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THEY'RE IN APPENDIX A.
UM, THE NEXT ITEM, IF WE WILL GO TO, UM, FIVE E GOING TO MR. LEEMAN'S QUESTION ABOUT THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS. UM, AGAIN THERE, THIS IS JUST TO OUTLINE, UM, A CODIFY SOME LANGUAGE FOR, UM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? I'M SORRY.
UH, THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS WAS WHAT MR. LEEMAN'S QUESTION WAS, UM, REGARDING SOME OF THESE, UM, L I D COMPONENTS AND, AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THESE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS SUCH AS TRASH RACKS.
SO I, WE WENT ON THAT ALREADY.
UM, MAINTENANCE HERE WE ARE ADDING SOME LANGUAGE OF SPECIFICALLY, UH, REGARDING ACUTE SOURCES OF POLLUTION.
UM, FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE IN HERE DOG PARKS, UM, WHERE YOU HAVE STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE CAPTURING ANY IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHIN THOSE DOG PARKS, ROUTING IT TO THE, THE RIO.
UM, THE DUMPSTER PADS AND OIL GREASE CONTAINERS ARE ALSO SOME EXAMPLES OF ACUTE SOURCES WHERE WE WOULD WOULD WANNA TREAT AND PROVIDE SPECIFIC, UM, LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT BMPS FOR THOSE, UM, THOSE INFRASTRUCTURES.
ANY QUESTIONS? AND THAT WAS UP THROUGH, WAS THAT UP THROUGH E SABRINA? WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE WAY TO MAKE ALL THE WAY TO MAKE, OKAY.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE REST OF IT? JUST ME.
I KNOW KARA HAS SOME QUESTIONS.
AGAIN, THERE'S SOME SPACING ISSUES IN E E AND THEN IN TWO PLACES IN THE CODE THAT WE DID NOT MARK UP, IT SAYS DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
AND CAN WE UPDATE THAT TO DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS? THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT.
IN E TREATMENT OF OFFSITE WATER, IT SAYS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OR HIS DESIGNEE.
CAN WE DO THEIR DESIGNEE? OOH, THAT'S GOOD.
I MEAN, I KNOW RIGHT NOW IT'S ALL HE'S BUT
I DIDN'T ASK FOR IT TO BE HER.
[00:55:01]
DO YOU, DO YOU SEE THOSE TWO REFERENCES TO T C I THERE, SABRINA? I'M SORRY? DID YOU SEE WHERE THOSE TWO REFERENCES TO TCI? YES, I NOTED 'EM.IS THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? YES, MA'AM.
UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE TREATMENT OF OFFSITE RUNOFF.
IS THAT SET UP TO BE SOMETHING LIKE A PHILO? WHAT IS SO THE OFF TREATMENT FOR OFFSITE WATER, UM, THAT IS SPECIFIC TO SITUATIONS WHERE PARTICULAR SITE, UM, MAY HAVE OFFSITE WATER THAT DRAINS THROUGH THEM, AND IT MIGHT BE, UM, MORE DUE TO SITE CONSTRICT CONSTRAINTS ON THE, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT MIGHT BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO TREAT THAT OFFSITE WATER THAT'S COMING THROUGH THEM RATHER THAN JUST THEIR SMALL FOOTPRINT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO WE'RE PROVIDING SOME ALLOWANCES IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE.
LET, LET, LET ME, LET ME TRY AND EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT, UH, A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, DEBBIE, BECAUSE I SEE SO SOMETIME YEAH, I SEE, I KNOW THAT FOREHEAD, UH, SO IT TURNS OUT SOMETIMES WHEN YOU HAVE A DEVELOPMENT, MAYBE, MAYBE THE TERRAIN OF, OF THE LAND IS SUCH THAT THE RUNOFF OF YOUR PARTICULAR TRAIN RUNS OFF.
IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO CAPTURE SOMEWHERE, SOMEWHERE ELSE WHERE IT MAKES SENSE, YOU KNOW, SAY SAY WE CAN PUT A DETENTION POND ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY INSTEAD OF ON THE SET, INSTEAD OF ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE.
AT THAT SITUATION, WE'RE PROBABLY GONNA REQUIRE THEM TO TREAT TO OVERTREAT, TO TREAT ADDITIONAL AREAS AND THEIR PARTICULAR AREA MAY HAVE TO RUN OFF SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO IT GIVES AN ALLOWANCE TO TREAT OFFSIDE, UM, PROPERTY, UH, AS LONG AS OF COURSE IT'S EQUAL TO WHAT YOU'RE DISCHARGING.
AND THEN THEY WOULD BE STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF IT, SO THAT WOULD BE OKAY.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? NOW WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE PASS BY MR. TAPIA.
STAFF DO ROLL CALL WITH AMENDMENTS.
RIGHT WITH AMENDMENTS AS NOTED.
MS. FAIRMONT, IS THAT, IS THAT YOUR MOTION TO, TO APPROVE OF THE AMENDMENTS AS DISCUSSED? YES.
MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON 22 DASH THREE, SECTION 35 DASH THREE, 10.01 B.
I HAD A QUESTION REGARDING THE ORDERING OF THE AGENDA BECAUSE ITEM FIVE IS SEEKING TO ADD, UH, THE NEW, UH, DISTRICTS AND WE HAVEN'T EVEN DISCUSSED THEM YET.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD BUNDLE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE WITH AGENDA ITEM 19 AND MAYBE HEAR THEM SUBSEQUENTLY AFTER WE HEAR AGENDA ITEM SEVEN THROUGH 11, WHICH ARE THE FIVE NEW, UM, ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.
SO ADDING THEM INTO THE TABLE BEFORE WE DISCUSS 'EM, I DON'T THINK IS PRUDENT IN THE PROCESS.
JUST A POINT OF ORDER FOR THE AGENDA MAKES SENSE TO ME TOO.
YEAH, MY NOTE WAS OKAY IF WE ADD THOSE, SO EXACT SAME COMMENT MAKES SENSE.
SO, UH, WE WILL SKIP ITEM FIVE AND WHICH OTHER ONE IS IT 19TH? I THINK IT WAS NINE 19.
AND WE WILL DO THAT AFTER ITEM SEVEN THROUGH 11.
SO WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH IS DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON ITEM FIVE DASH 35, SECTION 35 DASH THREE, 10.01 C.
[01:00:03]
GET THIS SINGLE.UM, CATHERINE HERNANDEZ, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR IN OUR ZONING SECTION.
UM, THIS, UH, AMENDMENT IS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD, UM, AS A RESULT OF A PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH WHEN WE UPDATED THE RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICTS AND THE MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICTS, UH, A COUPLE YEARS AGO AND THEN ADOPTED SOME AMENDMENTS.
WE HAD FORMED A TASK FORCE THAT HAD LOOKED AT, UM, THESE DISTRICTS AND, UH, THE DESIGN AND THEY WANTED TO ADD MORE REGULATIONS FOR THESE RM DISTRICTS AND MF DISTRICTS WHEN THEY WERE, UH, BUILDING UNITS IN, UH, SMALLER COMPACT NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THAT HAD OLD CO CODE CONVERSION ZONING LIKE MF 33, WHICH WOULD ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES OR, UM, IT WAS A CODE CONVERSION FROM A PREVIOUS 1965 OR 1938 ZONING DISTRICT THAT WERE, THEY'RE NOW RM AND UH, WHAT'S HAPPENING IS NOW SOME OF THEM HAVE DETACHED UNITS ON THE LOT.
SO THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE, UH, ITEMS THAT WAS, UH, ON A PARKING LOT THAT DID NOT GET, UM, GET CONSENSUS FROM THE TASK FORCE.
AND SO, UH, THE PREVIOUS COUNCILMAN FOR DISTRICT ONE HAD ASKED US TO GO AHEAD AND SPONSOR THIS ONE, JUST THIS ONE OUT OF ALL OF THOSE PARKING LOT ITEMS AND BRING IT FORWARD THROUGH THE PROCESS.
UH, SO THIS AMENDMENT IS INTRODUCING A STANDARD FOR RMM AND MF DISTRICTS WHEN, UH, WANTING TO DEVELOP MULTIPLE UNITS WE'RE ALLOWED BASED ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS, BUT PUT THEM ALL IN ONE STRUCTURE.
SORRY, I WAS GETTING READY TO SNEEZE.
UM, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM, GEORGE? LOTS OF DISCUSSIONS.
ONE, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT THE INTENT FOR MF 50 ON 30 ACRES IS STILL TO HAVE ONE BUILDING AS IT'S WRITTEN.
IT WOULD REQUIRE ALL OF THOSE DISTRICTS TO HAVE ALL UNITS IN ONE BUILDING.
SO NOW IT'S UP TO, I THINK, MY OPINION THAT MAKES NO SENSE.
UM, ONE AND THEN TWO, I SERVED ON THAT COMMITTEE ALSO, AND THERE DEFINITELY WAS NOT CONSENSUS AMONGST ANYONE AS TO WHETHER IT'S PREFERRED TO HAVE ONE LARGE BUILDING OR BREAK THAT UP AND TO HAVE TWO SMALLER BUILDINGS, THREE SMALLER BUILDINGS.
SO FOR ME, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS CHANGE MAKES ANY SENSE.
IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE THOUGH.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? MS. MALDONADO DEAL? KAT, WHAT, WHAT'S THE GOAL WITH THIS? IS IT TO, TO AVOID LAND CONDO TYPE SITUATIONS OR OVERDEVELOPMENT THE LOT? I, I GUESS I JUST DON'T SEE WHAT THE CURRENT ISSUE IS WITH THE CURRENT ZONING.
AND YES, WHAT, WHAT YOU JUST ASKED IS EXACTLY WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT IN THE TASK FORCE KATT.
WAS THIS ALSO TO PARTIALLY ADDRESS THE ISOLATION OF INFIELD DEVELOPMENT WHERE THEY'RE TURNED INTO EACH OTHER VERSUS BEING A PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? WAS THIS TO HELP ADDRESS THAT ALSO? WELL, WE FIXED HOW IT WAS ORIENTED TOWARDS THE STREET.
SO THE FIRST STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO FACE THE STREET.
SO IT, IT CREATED THAT, THAT STREET SCAPE IF YOU WILL.
UM, IT AGAIN, LIKE WHAT MR. TEAL SAID, IT WAS JUST ABOUT HAVING OVERDEVELOPMENT OF A LOT MULTIPLE UNITS, LIKE A CONDO SITUATION.
AND IN SOME OF THESE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, A LOT OF THOSE MULTI-UNITS ARE EITHER DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, QUADPLEXES, WHERE THEY'RE NOT, UM, INDIVIDUALLY OWNED.
THIS IS BIANCA, I WAS GONNA SPEAK TO THIS.
THE R PIECE OF IT OF HAVING IT ALL IN THERE IS REALLY ABOUT THE URBAN CORE.
IT'S REALLY ABOUT YOUR OLDER STRUCTURES.
I MEAN, I LIVE OVER IN THE JEFFERSON AREA.
WE HAVE A TON OF THESE BUILDINGS, BUT THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY COULD COME IN IF IT'S NOT PROTECTED TO DEMOLISH IT AND BUILD INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURES IN THE MIDDLE OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BLOCK, BECAUSE MANY OF THESE R FOURS ARE ON THE EDGES OF AN ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY.
SO IT IS SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING THE, UM, THE DENSITY THAT CAN BE BUILT ON A LOT WITHIN THE URBAN CORE.
AND IT'S KIND OF MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WAS A SINGLE HOUSING AT SOME POINT WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED THE RM FOUR DESIGNATION.
AND THAT SOMEHOW OVER TIME IT'S SPLIT UP TO WHERE IT COULD BE MULTIPLE UNITS.
AND SO THIS IS A CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BRING IT BACK.
UM, THAT'S REALLY THE CASE, UH, WITH THIS RMM DESIGNATION.
AND I KNOW THEY TOOK IT UP AT, AT THE TASK FORCE, THEY CAME TO VERY LITTLE CONSENSUS AT THAT TASK FORCE.
THERE WERE A LOT OF HEATED DISCUSSIONS BECAUSE IT WAS ABOUT THE INFILL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING INTO THE URBAN CORE.
THIS ISN'T NEW CONSTRUCTION OUT IN NEW RAW LAND.
THIS IS INFILL DEVELOPMENT ISSUE RIGHT HERE.
AND SO I WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT MOVING THIS FORWARD.
[01:05:01]
WELL ASHLEY, IF YOU WERE ON THE BOARD, I MEAN THIS IS, I I I UNDERSTAND IT'S THE CORRECTIVE ACTION, BUT IT, IT CREATES ITS MORE PROBLEMS. UH, IS THERE A WAY TO FIX IT OR IS THERE A WAY RE ZONE TO FIX IT HERE? BECAUSE IF NOT, I WOULD JUST JUST DENY IT MOVE ON.IF I COULD CLARIFY, IT'S NOT A CORRECTIVE ACTION.
UM, SO WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THAT OVER TIME, UH, THE, THE MARKET HAS SORT OF EVOLVED INTO THIS TYPE OF NEW TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
BUT THE ABORIGINAL DISTRICTS DID ALLOW MULTI-UNITS ON A LOT, WHICH IS WHY IT WAS CONVERTED TO AN RMM TO ALLOW MULTI-UNITS WITHOUT IT BECOMING NON-CONFORMING.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED OVER A PREVIOUS CODE AMENDMENT HAD TO DO WITH THE ALLOWANCE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SO MANY UNITS BASED ON THE RM.
DISTRICT RM USED TO ALL ALSO ADD OR HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT IT WOULD HAVE MIXED TYPE OF HOUSING.
YOU REMEMBER THOSE WHERE IT HAD, UH, IF YOU WANTED TO REZONE TO AN RM, YOU HAD TO HAVE SO MANY SINGLE FAMILY, YOU HAD TO HAVE SO MANY TWO FAMILY, THREE FAMILY, FOUR FAMILY.
THOSE WERE SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT, UH, WERE PASSED WHERE IT NO LONGER MADE IT A REQUIREMENT.
IT JUST MADE IT AN OPTION THAT YOU CAN WITH AN RMM DO, UH, SOME BLOCKS THAT HAVE TWO UNITS ON EACH LOT OR SOME BLOCKS THAT HAVE FOUR UNITS ON EACH LOT.
BUT IT DIDN'T DICTATE HOW IT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED.
UH, IT LETS THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS GOVERN THAT IF THEY HAD A CERTAIN TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH CORRECTIVE ACTION, IT'S JUST DON'T WANT THE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP AT THE TASK FORCE SOMEWHERE.
SO IF YOU WANNA USE YOUR MIC, SIR.
I REALLY DON'T, BUT CAN I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? I HAVE A QUESTION.
UH, AND WE GET THIS HERE AT THE TAC AND HISTORICAL, WE'VE DONE IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS AMENDMENT IS TARGETED TO ADDRESS A SEGMENT OF THE CITY AND THE U D C IS UNIVERSAL.
AND I'M VERY HESITANT TO, UH, APPROVE AN AMENDMENT THAT TARGETED ONE PARTICULAR PART OF OUR CITY BECAUSE UNLESS YOU WANT TO SAY IT'S EVERYTHING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OR THE WEST SIDE OR THE EAST SIDE, I, I, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S WHAT IT'S TARGETING.
A CERTAIN URBAN CORE, THE CITY, BASED ON WHAT BIANCA SAID, AND, AND I THINK WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THE U D C IS FOR THE WHOLE CITY.
THIS IS BIANCA, I HAVE A COMMENT BECAUSE OF THE AGE OF THAT ZONING, IT IS MORE PREVALENT IN A CERTAIN AREA.
SO WHILE THERE IS NO INTENT TO TARGET AN AREA, IT DOES ADVERSELY IMPACT A CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY MORE SO THAN ANOTHER.
YOU DON'T SEE THIS TYPE OF ZONING UP IN PUDS OR MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITIES UP ON THE NORTH SIDE AND YOU DON'T SEE IT OUT FAR WEST EITHER.
IT'S A VERY UNIQUE ZONING THAT'S HIGHLY PREVALENT IN THE URBAN CORE.
SO WHILE THERE'S NOT AN INTENT TO TARGET, UNFORTUNATELY THAT IS THE STORY OF WHERE THE PREVALENCE OF IT EXISTS OR EVEN WITH R ONE, R TWO, R THREE ZONE LOTS.
SO I, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY I SAY, YOU KNOW, THE AREA THAT I LIVE IN WAS BUILT IN THE THIRTIES.
AND SO SAYING THAT YOU CAN COME TO THAT LOT AND DEMOLISH, YOU KNOW, A SINGLE HOUSED UNIT AND PUT FOUR UNITS ON THAT PROPERTY IS NOT A COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT.
AND HOW THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE LAYOUT OF THAT AREA.
BUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY, THERE'S NO PROTECTIONS FOR THAT.
SO THAT'S WHY I HIGHLY ADVOCATE AND MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR THIS AMENDMENT.
IF, IF I MAY, UM, IT SEEMS THAT A LOT OF THE CONCERN THAT THIS AMENDMENT WAS MEANT TO ADDRESS HAS TO DO WITH THOSE INFILL PARCELS IN EXISTING, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOODS NEAR TO DOWNTOWN.
YOU KNOW, TO ASHLEY'S POINT, YOU KNOW, REQUIRING THAT A 450 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX OUTSIDE LOOP 1604 BE IN ONE BUILDING IS PROBABLY NOT REALISTIC.
IT, IT MAY BE AN OPTION FOR SIX.
IT, IT MAY BE AN OPTION FOR TAC TO CONSIDER PUTTING A SIZE LIMITATION ON THIS SAYING, YOU KNOW, FOR PARCELS LESS THAN A QUARTER ACRE OR FOR PARCELS LESS, I DON'T FIGURE OUT THE NUMBER 10TH OF AN ACRE THAT ADDRESSES THOSE INFILL SCENARIOS WITHOUT AFFECTING LARGE DEVELOPMENT.
YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE NOT ENCOUNTERING THAT ISSUE.
SO COULDN'T YOU JUST KNOCK OFF THE MF 40 AND THE MF 50 TOO? WELL, MOST APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE DEVELOPED AT 33 UNITS PER ACRE.
SO I I WOULD, IF, IF, IF THAT'S THE SOLUTION, I WOULDN'T STOP AT MF 40.
EXCEPT THAT MF 33 IS A LOT IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE OF THE CODE CONVERSION.
THERE'S A LOT OF PARCELS THAT ARE IN, BUT I WILL SAY TO LOGAN'S POINT, WE DID DO THAT WITH THE R M AND MF DISTRICTS.
WE, UM, AND MAYBE MR. SIPES, YOU MIGHT REMEMBER WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT A, A ZONING COMMISSION.
[01:10:01]
WE HAVE THIS IS WE HAD A LIMITATION ON, UM, BASED ON THE SIZE YOU HAD TO DO THIS, IF IT WAS LARGER, YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THIS.SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED.
KATHY, THAT WAS REALLY GONNA BE MY QUESTION.
DIDN'T WE COME IN AND PUT LIKE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGN CRITERIA AND STANDARDS? WE REALLY TRIED TO TACKLE THAT HUGE CONFLICT OF PUTTING A FOUR STORY BUILDING NEXT TO THE HOUSE AND THAT'S REALLY ADDRESSED ELSEWHERE.
BUT WE DID ADOPT A NUMBER OF THOSE TYPE OF AMENDMENTS TO REALLY BRING IT BACK TO SCALE AND CHARACTER MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YES, THAT WAS, THAT WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR AMENDMENTS IN THAT R M M F UM, REDESIGN, IF YOU WILL, ESPECIALLY IF IT WAS ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY.
AND MR. CHAIR, I'M SORRY, REAL QUICK, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
I KNOW WE STILL HAVEN'T FINISHED DISCUSSION, NOR DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SHE MADE A MOTION.
UM, SO I JUST WANNA SEE IF, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
WE NEED TO I GUESS ADDRESS THAT FIRST AND THEN CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION.
WELL WE DO HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ITEM.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE APPROVAL.
OKAY, SO NOW WE HAVE A SECOND.
SO WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL, VOTE ON THAT.
I HAD ADDITIONAL COMMENT THAT MAYBE IF WE COULD AMEND THE MOTION WITH A LAND, UH, SIZE RESTRICTION ON IT.
BUT MY ONLY CONCERN IS IT KICKS OUT THE RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
SO IF WE'RE DONE, NOT DONE TALKING ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT, MAYBE YOU CAN WITHDRAW YOUR AMENDMENT AND, OR I'M SORRY, YOUR MOTION.
THAT WAY THE DISCUSSION CAN CONTINUE AND SO THEN WE CAN HOPEFULLY GET TO A CONSENSUS.
THERE GOES, MOTION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN IN THE SECOND.
ASHLEY, I BELIEVE YOU WERE SPEAKING.
I JUST HAD A QUESTION FOR KATT.
KATT, DIDN'T WE HAVE LIMITATIONS? IT WAS LIKE A THIRD OF AN ACRE.
OR LESS IS WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE, THE THIRD, THIRD OF AN ACRE WAS THE SIZE AMENDMENT.
'CAUSE I THINK THE CONCERN AND WHY THERE WAS SO MUCH SPLIT ON THIS WAS, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE IDEA OF THE SMALL STRUCTURES, BUT THEN THERE WAS ALSO THE CONCERN OF HAVING THE RMM FOUR LOT WITH THE QUADPLEX THAT WAS THIS MASSIVE BUILDING ON THE STREET AS WELL WITH SOME SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T COME TO A ENS ON THAT PARTICULAR PART.
BUT WE DID PUT LIMITATIONS ON ACREAGE, RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, MF 18 MORE SO THE MF 33 IN THESE URBAN AREAS.
BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE MF 33 EVERYWHERE ELSE THROUGHOUT TOWN.
SO PAT, HERE'S YOU'RE SAYING ELSEWHERE IN THE CODE, WE ALREADY HAVE A ONE THIRD ACRE LIMITATION ON WHAT CAN GO ON THESE? YES.
SO THE R M M F DISTRICTS, WHEN WE ADOPTED THOSE STANDARDS A COUPLE YEARS AGO, IT, IT, IT HAS THE REFERENCE TO THE ONE THIRD.
SO I, I, I WOULD SUGGEST THIS BECAUSE I WOULD NOT SUGGEST AMENDING THAT.
'CAUSE ALL YOU, YOU NEED THE RE AND THE R 20 AND THE R SIX, YOU NEED THAT BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH, UM, THAT THE HOME, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY THE USE OF THE HOME IS, IT IS ALL IN ONE STRUCTURE AND THEN OTHER THAN THE ACCESSORY USE.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE, YOU DON'T HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE GARAGES ATTACHED TO A HOME IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT THE CHARACTER.
SO IF WE WERE TO REWRITE THIS, TAKING IN THOSE COMMENTS, I WOULD SAY GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO REWRITE IT AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU.
UM, BECAUSE IT WOULD TAKE A WHILE.
I'M, I MEAN, I'M ALREADY WRITING IT IN MY HEAD, BUT I, IT WOULD TAKE A WHILE AND IT WOULD BE A LONGER CONVERSATION.
AND WHEN I KNOW WE HAVE A NUMBER OF OTHER AMENDMENTS TO GET THROUGH.
I WOULD SAY, UH, THAT SEEMS TO BE THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION.
IS THE GROUP OKAY WITH THAT? BUT GIVE ME ALL OF YOUR, 'CAUSE I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SIZE.
I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT, NOT INCLUDING ALL OF THE DISTRICTS.
MAYBE WE'RE ONLY REFERENCING THE RM AND THE MF UP TO MF 33.
UM, AND, AND THEN WE'RE ALSO, AND, AND AGAIN, I THINK IT'S ALL HAVING THEM ENCLOSED IN ONE STRUCTURE STILL.
I CAN COME UP WITH SOME ONE, WHICH, SO, SO, MR. CHAIR, UH, LET ME JUST CAUTION US, UM, ON PUSHING ITEMS, UH, OFF OF THE AGENDA.
UH, WE HAVE A VERY PACKED NEXT FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS.
AND, UH, OUR PROPOSAL IS TO MEET UNTIL MAY.
HOWEVER, THERE'S MEETING TWO MEETINGS IN JUNE THAT WE MAY GET TO MORE DIFFICULT ITEMS WHERE WE NEED TO PUSH ITEMS TO THOSE AGENDAS.
SO JUST, YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS AMENDMENT WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DISCUSS, I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO TRY AND WORK OUT SOME LANGUAGE HERE VERSUS PUSHING THIS TOWARDS ANOTHER AGENDA.
UH, IT, BECAUSE IT WILL IMPACT OUR TIMELINE.
CAN WE TABLE THIS TO THE LAST ONE? I CAN WRITE SOMETHING UP AND THEN GIVE IT TO HER AND THEN WE CAN DISPLAY IT.
[01:15:01]
SO THIS HAS BEEN A SUBJECT OF A, OF A DIFFERENT SUBCOMMITTEE AND THEY COULDN'T COME TO CONSENSUS ON IT AFTER DEALING WITH FOR HOW LONG? UH, YEAH.SO WE'RE JUST GONNA FIX IT WITH, WITH A EDIT REWRITE AGAIN, SOMETHING TO CONSIDER BASED ON THE CONVERSATION.
I MEAN, WE'RE GONNA BE HERE FOR MOTION.
WELL, I GUESS AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE'LL CONTINUE DISCUSSION.
ENTERTAIN A MOTION OF SOME KIND.
I'M SORRY, I MISSED THE POINT.
I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO GIVE KAT A FEW MINUTES TO COLLECT SOME INFORMATION OR COLLECT, UH, UH, REWRITE AND REPRESENT THAT TO US.
AND SO CAN WE BRING THIS ITEM BACK ON THE AGENDA? SO, SO GIVE HER SOME TIME.
IS THAT WHAT I SAID TOWARDS THE END OF THE MEETING? YEAH, TOWARDS THE END OF THE MEETING.
SO JUST SHIFT IT INTO THE SCHEDULE HERE.
WE CAN TABLE THIS ITEM AND THEN COME BACK AT THE END OF THE AGENDA.
LET'S TABLE IT AND, AND MOVE BACK.
MY BROTHER WITH ALL THE ZONING DISTRICTS.
NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON U D C AMENDMENT.
ITEM 22 DASH FOUR, AFFECTING SECTION 35 DASH THREE, 10.2.
SO ACTUALLY ITEM 7, 8, 9, 10, AND 11 ARE ALL VERY RELATED.
UM, IN MY INTRODUCTION, I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF ADDRESS ALL OF THEM AS A GROUP AND THEN LEAVE IT UP TO YOU HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION.
UM, PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSING FIVE NEW MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT CORRESPOND TO THE MIXED USE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE CATEGORIES THAT WERE ADOPTED IN OCTOBER OF 2018.
UH, THESE CATEGORIES ARE BEING USED IN THE SA TOMORROW SUB AREA PLANS, ALONG WITH OTHER, UM, KINDA MORE SINGLE USE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL, UM, INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURAL.
MOST COMMENTS THAT I HAVE PREPARED RIGHT HERE APPLY TO ALL FIVE OF OUR PROPOSED DISTRICTS.
UM, FOR THESE MIXED USE DISTRICTS WERE DRAFTED TO BE SIMILAR, UM, TO THE CONVENTIONAL BASED ZONING DISTRICTS RATHER THAN THE FORM-BASED ZONING DISTRICTS.
WE DID LOOK AT SOME OF THE EXISTING SPECIAL DISTRICTS TO POLL AND REFERENCE, UM, MAINLY FOR WAYS TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THESE MIXED USE DISTRICTS.
BUT WE DID WANT TO RELY MORE ON THE LANGUAGE FROM THE CONVENTIONAL BASED ZONING DISTRICTS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT MOST PEOPLE ARE USED TO, UM, AND TEND TO BE A LITTLE MORE USER FRIENDLY IN THEIR LANGUAGE.
UM, THESE PROPOSED MIXED USE DISTRICTS DO ACCOMMODATE AND ENCOURAGE A MIX OF USES, BUT THEY DO ALSO ALLOW SINGLE USE DEVELOPMENT.
THE DISTRICTS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN WAYS THAT SUPPORT AND IMPLEMENT THE GOALS OF THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THEY'RE INTENDED TO HELP CREATE AND SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT THAT IS WALKABLE AND TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE.
THAT INCLUDES OPEN SPACE AMENITIES AND GATHERING PLACES FOR RESIDENTS, EMPLOYEES, AND VISITORS.
ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY IS ENCOURAGED THROUGH A VOLUNTARY INCENTIVE PROGRAM THAT IS NOT ON THIS AGENDA, BUT YOU WILL HEAR ABOUT AT A LATER DATE.
UM, AND THAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM WOULD ONLY OCCUR AT THE PLATT OR M D P OR PLAN REVIEW AND PERMITTING STAGE.
AND IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE PART OF THE REZONING CASE.
THESE PROPOSED MIXED USE DISTRICTS ARE ALSO INTENDED TO BE USED AT DIFFERENT SCALES, HENCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, URBAN, REGIONAL, UM, DIFFERENTIATIONS, AS WELL AS DIFFERENT PLACE TYPES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SUCH AS CAMPUS AND ADAPTIVE REUSE SCENARIOS.
THIS IS WHY WE DIDN'T RELY ON THE EXISTING M X D MIXED USE DISTRICT.
THERE IS NO WAY TO REALLY ENSURE THE SCALE FOR M X D CORRESPONDS TO SAY A NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, OR AN URBAN CENTER.
UM, SO WE WANTED TO PROVIDE THOSE KIND OF ALREADY SCALED ZONING, MIXED USE OPTIONS.
WE ALSO DIDN'T WANT TO CHANGE THE EXISTING M X D DISTRICT.
UM, AS YOU'RE AWARE, I D Z AND FIELD DEVELOPMENT ZONE RMM DISTRICTS THAT WERE JUST BEING DISCUSSED.
THE U D C INCLUDES SOME REGULATIONS PRIOR TO A CERTAIN DATE AND THEN DIFFERENT REGULATIONS AFTER A CERTAIN
[01:20:01]
DATE.WE WANTED TO NOT DO THAT WITH M X D.
UM, HOWEVER, LIKE I SAID, M X D M P C D, UM, WE DID PULL FROM THOSE.
AND THOSE DISTRICTS AND OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS ARE STILL AVAILABLE FOR PROJECTS THAT CANNOT OR DO NOT WANT TO USE THE PROPOSED MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICTS.
THOSE SPECIAL DISTRICTS ARE CONSIDERED, UM, CONSISTENT WITH OUR MIXED USE LAND USE CATEGORIES THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE U D C.
THE FIVE PROPOSED DISTRICTS ALL FOLLOW APPROXIMATELY THE SAME FORMAT AND IN INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS.
USE REGULATIONS AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RELATING TO BLOCKS AND STREETS, LOTS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE DESIGNATION AND AMENITIES, DENSITY BUILDING, MASSING, ARTICULATION, ACTIVATION, AND PARKING.
I, I KNOW THESE ARE WRITTEN AS FIVE DIFFERENT SECTIONS.
THEY WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU IN THAT, IN THAT WAY.
I DO, HOWEVER, HAVE A HANDOUT THAT I THINK YOU MIGHT FIND HELPFUL.
IT IS A STANDARDS TABLE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO BETTER VISUALIZE, UM, HOW THE STANDARDS IN ONE DISTRICT RELATE TO THE STANDARDS IN ANOTHER DISTRICT.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THAT, I CAN, I CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU.
THE TEAM, THE TEAM CAN PASS THAT OUT FOR YOU.
I ALSO HAVE, UM, A USE MATRIX THAT INCLUDES THESE FIVE DISTRICTS.
UM, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING ADDING THEM TO THE, THE USE MATRIX THAT'S IN THE U D C, BUT I CREATED IT MAINLY FOR MY OWN REFERENCE.
I DID NOT PRINT ENOUGH COPIES OF IT FOR EVERYONE, BUT I DO HAVE MULTIPLE COPIES THAT CAN BE SENT AROUND FOR REVIEW.
THE ONE IN GREEN IS THE, THE STANDARDS.
THE ONE THAT HAS A LITTLE BIT OF ORANGE IN IT AND IS MUCH THICKER IS THE USE MATRIX.
THERE SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR EVERYONE OF THAT ONE.
I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, THAT USE MATRIX WOULD'VE BEEN VERY BENEFICIAL TO HAVE BEFORE THE MEETING, AND I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF CAN EMAIL IT OUT TO US AND MAKE ADDITIONAL COPIES SO WE CAN ALL HAVE ONE.
'CAUSE THAT'S A, IT'S A BIG DISCUSSION POINT AS WE GO THROUGH EACH DISTRICT.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION, MR. CHAIR? YES, MA'AM.
MICHAEL, WAS THERE A COMMITTEE? I MEAN, A LOT OF THESE WE SEE, WE'LL SEE LATER SECTIONS THAT WE'RE ADDING SUBSTANTIAL CODE OR CHANGES, BUT I KNOW A LOT OF THOSE HAD COMMITTEES THAT WORKED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
WAS THERE A LARGE COMMITTEE WORKING ON ALL OF THIS? THIS SEEMED, THIS IS A LOT FOR NEW STUFF, HONESTLY.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ALREADY BEEN REALLY A BROAD SPECTRUM OF STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAVE VETTED IT GONE THROUGH, OR IS THIS REALLY KIND OF CONSULTANT STAFF DRIVEN? SO THIS, OUR AMENDMENT PROCESS HAS BEEN, UM, GOING ON FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.
IT WAS, UM, INTERRUPTED JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE BY COVID.
UM, PRIOR TO COVID, I, WE HAD QUITE A BIT OF STAKEHOLDER, UM, MEETINGS, INPUT NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, TALKING ABOUT THE GENERAL IDEAS AND CONCERNS THAT, THAT PEOPLE WANTED ADDRESSED IN MIXED USE DISTRICTS, UM, DI DIFFERENT DENSITY RANGES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
TRYING TO FIND THAT APPROPRIATE SCALE.
UM, ONCE COVID HIT, THIS PROJECT IN PARTICULAR WAS IMPACTED BY, UM, BUDGET CONCERNS FROM THE CITY.
UM, SO IT WAS PUT ON HOLD BECAUSE WE WEREN'T, WE DIDN'T KNOW IF, UM, THE FUNDS THAT WE HAD DEDICATED WE WERE GONNA GET TO KEEP OR IF THEY WOULD BE TAKEN AWAY FROM US.
UM, SO THERE IS A CONSULTANT TEAM.
THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY A DIFFERENT PROJECT MANAGER.
I ACTUALLY JUST INHERITED THIS A FEW MONTHS AGO.
UM, SO THE PREVIOUS PRO PROJECT MANAGER AND THE CONSULTANT DID WORK WITH A BROAD GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS.
UM, THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN WAS NOT DEVELOPED WITH, WITH THAT LARGER AUDIENCE.
SO YOU'RE COMING THROUGH OUR TECHNICAL PROCESS TO GIVE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FOR YOUR NEW PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
I KNOW THAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS REACHED OUT TO PEOPLE DURING C O V I D EVEN EARLIER THIS YEAR BEFORE SUBMITTING THEIRS BECAUSE THIS IMPACTS EVERYONE IN THE CITY.
AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT TAKING AWAY PEOPLE'S PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SOME OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS, THESE HAVE GOT CONFLICT ISSUES WHEN YOU HAVE OVERLAY FOR NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
'CAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MASSING AND FORM, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SETBACKS.
[01:25:02]
I DON'T SEE THAT WE SHOULD LISTEN TO ANY OF THESE AMENDMENTS.WE CAN'T CONSIDER 'EM, THEY'RE TOO TECHNICAL.
AND YOU HAVEN'T GONE OUT FOR PUBLIC INPUT.
I KNOW CONCEPTUALLY PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THINGS THAT THEY WANNA SEE IN THEIR COMMUNITIES AND THAT THINGS THEY WANNA SEE IN THEIR PLANS.
BUT WHEN IT GETS DOWN TO THE NITTY GRITTY AND THE TECHNICALITIES THAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN THIS, THESE DISTRICTS, I'M SORRY, THIS, I THINK THIS IS NOT DOING US JUSTICE AND IT'S NOT FAIR TO US BECAUSE I RECEIVED A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT, HEY, WHEN DID THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAVE THEIR PUBLIC MEETINGS ABOUT THEIR U D C AMENDMENT PROPOSALS? AND I SAID, I'M NOT AWARE THAT THESE, ANY OF THESE HAVE SEEN DAYLIGHT AND THAT THEY ARE, IN MY OPINION, CONSULTANT STAFF DRIVEN BASED ON FEEDBACK.
BUT PART OF THE FEEDBACK PROCESS IS TAKING THE FEEDBACK, GOING BACK TO THE PUBLIC AND SAYING, DID WE HEAR YOU CORRECTLY? IS THIS WHAT YOU INTENDED? BECAUSE IF YOU SCROLL AND YOU GO START LOOKING AT THE AS OF RIGHT ZONING, LET ME TELL YOU, THAT LIT UP A LOT OF PEOPLE ABOUT AS OF RIGHT ZONING.
AND YOU THINK OF THE BIGGEST CONFLICTS THAT PEOPLE HEAR AT ZONING ARE ALL ABOUT THOSE ALCOHOL CASES.
WE HAVE A NOISE ORDINANCE TASK FORCE RIGHT NOW LOOKING AT SINGLE FAMILY ISSUES FOR NOISE ADJACENT TO ESTABLISHMENT.
SO IF YOU SCROLL UP, YOU'LL START SEEING AS OF RIGHT OF THE Y'ALL THE ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENT.
I MEAN, THIS IS HUGE WHAT YOU'RE OFFERING.
A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE STILL WAITING TO HAVE THEIR PLANS IMPLEMENTED THAT WERE ADOPTED YEARS AGO, AND NOW THEY'RE GONNA BE RE-PLANNED IN THE ESSAY TOMORROW.
SO COMING IN AND ADDING SOME OF THE BIG ONES, THERE'S SOME BIG ONES HERE THAT ARE BIG RED TRIGGERS.
I DON'T FEEL IT'S DUE PROCESS FOR US TO HEAR ANY OF THE FIVE.
AND THAT'S AGENDA ITEM SEVEN THROUGH 11.
UM, I ASSUME YOU AND I APPRECIATE THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PERSPECTIVE, THAT THAT'S OUR, THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE TOO, FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE THAT WE USE THIS COAT EVERY DAY.
AND I DIDN'T SEE THIS AS AN AMENDMENT.
I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GOOD OR BAD, BUT, AND I'VE LOOKED AT IT.
I, ONE OF THE FEW THINGS I DID, 'CAUSE I DO MOSTLY ZONING WORK,
I THINK THIS IS OUT OF THE SCOPE OF OUR, OF, OF WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR, UH, IN, IN MY MIND.
BUT WHAT, CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY FOR EVERYBODY, WHEN YOU ALL INTEND TO USE THESE, WOULD THEY BE CITY INITIATED REZONINGS, UM, OR IS IT APPLICANT BASED REZONINGS? SO AS WE DEVELOP AND ADOPT SUB AREA PLANS TO COVER THE ENTIRE CITY, SO FAR WE'VE ADOPTED SIX.
UM, WE HAVE ANOTHER SIX THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PROCESS.
UM, PART OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THOSE PLANS IS A COMPREHENSIVE REZONING.
HOWEVER, WE ARE GOING PLAN AREA BY PLAN AREA, PRIORITIZING CERTAIN REZONING CASES, UM, REACHING OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS, DISCUSSING IT WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, NEIGHBORS, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
UM, SO THERE IS A COMPREHENSIVE REZONING ELEMENT TO THE SUB AREA PLANS.
UM, AND THOSE SUB AREA PLANS ARE THE ONLY WAY THAT THE LAND USE CATEGORIES, THE RELATED LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE PUT INTO PLACE.
UM, SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE ADOPTED BY COUNCIL ALONG WITH THE SUBAR PLAN ITSELF.
UM, HOWEVER THESE DISTRICTS MIGHT BE USED IN THAT COMPREHENSIVE REZONING PROGRAM, BUT IT WOULD ONLY BE AFTER COMMUNICATION AND, AND BASICALLY, UM, PERMISSION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.
WE ARE NOT TRYING TO IMPOSE THESE DISTRICTS ANYWHERE.
WE WANT THEM TO BE AVAILABLE, UM, FOR PEOPLE TO SEEK.
AND IF WE CAN INCORPORATE SOME OF THAT REZONING AS PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AT THE PROPERTY OWNER'S AGREEMENT, WE ARE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE AT ALL LOOKING TO IMPOSE ANYWHERE.
WE REALLY WANT THESE MIXED USE DISTRICTS TO OR, AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO BE MARKET DRIVEN.
UM, WE REALIZE THAT THEY'RE NOT SUITED FOR EVERYONE AND EVERY PROJECT.
SO, UM, I DO ALSO UNDERSTAND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LACK OF LATER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
UM, WE WERE TRYING TO GET THIS IN AS PART OF THE, UM, FIVE YEAR U D C AMENDMENT CYCLE.
UM, IF YOU ALL THINK IT SHOULD BE GIVEN MORE TIME AND TAKEN BACK OUT, TAKEN OUT OF CYCLE,
[01:30:01]
THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.COULD I MAKE A MOTION? IS THAT POSSIBLE? YEAH.
BIANCA, MOTION FOR DENIAL OF ITEM SEVEN THROUGH 11 IN ADDITION TO ITEM FIVE AND NUMBER 19.
OKAY, WE NOW ON THE TABLE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL OF ITEM 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 5, AND 19.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? GEORGE, CLARIFY WHAT A DENIAL MEANS.
SO I GUESS THE DENIAL IS THESE ARE OFF THE TABLE FOR NOW, BUT THEY CAN COME BACK LATER.
THEY CAN COME BACK OUT OF CYCLE, BUT NOT THROUGH THE, NOT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
WE'RE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK, THEY WOULD GO THROUGH AN OUT OF CYCLE SITUATION THROUGH COUNCIL AND I WOULD HOPE THAT IT HAD A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT COMPONENT, UM, BECAUSE OF THE JUST SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE FIVE, UH, ZONING BASED DISTRICTS.
WHICH MAY MEAN IT'S GONNA TAKE THE FULL CYCLE TO GET 'EM BACK.
UM, I WOULD ALSO ADD, WE HAVE ANOTHER, OR WE HAVE A, A NUMBER OF OTHER RELATED AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD BE ON LATER AGENDAS.
SO I ASSUME WE WOULD PULL THOSE.
IF THESE GET DENIED, WE'LL WE'LL COORDINATE WITH YOUR OFFICE TO ENSURE THAT IF THE WE'RE NEEDING TO PULL OTHERS OFF OF THE AGENDA.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR DENIALS HISTORICALLY, THEIR RECOMMENDATION.
SO, UM, THERE WILL BE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE WILL HAVE INTERNALLY WITH THE, UH, DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR TO SEE IF THERE IS A WANT OR A NEED TO MOVE FORWARD REGARDING THIS POLICY.
UM, THERE IS AN OPTION FOR STAFF TO STILL CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL.
WE WILL BRING THAT UPDATE BACK TO YOU SO YOU'RE AWARE OF WHAT THE, UM, STEPS ARE MOVING FORWARD.
UM, CAN I ASK A QUESTION THEN? WHAT IF THE MOTION WERE TO HAVE IT WITHDRAWN FOR CON FROM CONSIDERATION, THESE ARE STILL, STILL CITY INITIATED AMENDMENTS.
SO STAFF DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UM, DISCUSS INTERNALLY WHETHER OR NOT WE WANNA BRING THAT FORWARD.
IT'S A POLICY DISCUSSION THAT WE WILL HAVE TO HAPPEN WITH.
UM, AND I SEE RUDY COMING UP TO THE PODIUM, SO THANK YOU.
RUDY, YOU HAVE TO DO THIS ONE.
WE, WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED.
AND SO IF THE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, CONTINUING TO WORK WITH STAKEHOLDERS ON THE, ON THE, THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT AND WE WOULD REMOVE THEM FROM THE PROCESS THEN AT THAT POINT.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I SEE IN THIS CHART HERE AS I LOOK AT IT IS, GENTLEMEN, I'VE LOOKED AT IT, IT, IT KIND OF GOES FROM, UH, WE'LL SAY MORE INTRUSIVE OR, OR, OR, OR HEAVIER IMPACTS TO OR FROM LESS TO MORE.
AND SO WHEN IT GETS TO THIS SECTION HERE, I SEE IT KIND OF BOUNCE AROUND WHERE YOU, YOU, YOU HAVE DIFFERENT PERMISSIONS IN DIFFERENT DISTRICTS AND I'M USED TO SEEING IT GET, YOU KNOW, I'M USED TO SEEING A SLIDING CHART WHERE THE VERY LAST ONE IS BASICALLY MOST INTENSIVE, BUT I, I DON'T SEE READ THAT HERE IN THIS CHART AS I KIND OF LOOK AT IT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BY DESIGN OR JUST BECAUSE OF THE DISTRICTS THEMSELVES.
SO MAYBE SOME OF THE, YOU KNOW, SOME THAT I LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S RIGHT SIZE FOR MY COMMUNITY AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT GETS A LITTLE MORE CONFUSING I THINK IN THAT DIALOGUE.
FIRST THREE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE, URBAN MIXED USE AND REGIONAL MIXED USE ARE DEFINITELY ALONG THAT SLIDING SCALE FROM LESS INTENSE TO MORE INTENSE.
THE, UM, THE LAST TWO EMPLOYMENT FLEX AND BUSINESS INNOVATION, UM, ARE REALLY MEANT TO ADDRESS A VERY DIFFERENT, UM, TYPE OF SITUATION.
THEY ARE MEANT, UM, TO SERVE AS, UM, POSSIBLE ADAPTIVE REUSE OF LARGE INDUSTRIAL SITES, UM, OFFICE PARK TYPE AREAS.
UM, SOME OF THE, THE LARGER EMPLOYMENT CAMPUSES, UM, ON THE CITY'S WEST AND NORTHWEST SIDE.
UM, SO THEY, THEY DON'T FALL IN THAT, THAT NICE CLEAN RANGE.
UM, OF THOSE TWO THOUGH, THE EMPLOYMENT FLEX IS, UM, SLIGHTLY LESS INTENSE, BUT ALLOWS MORE RESIDENTIAL.
UM, AND THE BUSINESS INNOVATION ALLOWS MORE INTENSE USES AND SLIGHTLY LESS RESIDENTIAL.
UM, THEY'RE KIND OF MIRRORS OF EACH OTHER.
THEY, THESE AREAS REALLY ARE INTENDED TO FOCUS ON EMPLOYMENT AND WORKFORCE TO, TO KEEP THOSE USES, YOU KNOW, IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
SO MY SUGGESTION MAY BE TO SEPARATE THOSE TWO A LITTLE BIT SO THAT WE DO SEE A SLIDING SCALE.
SO YOU KIND OF, I CAN CALL THAT OUT AND THEN SAY OKAY, THESE ARE SPECIAL USES OKAY.
[01:35:01]
SO MELISSA, YOU GUYS WILL PULL THE RELATED AMENDMENTS OFF OF OUR FUTURE AGENDAS AT THIS STAGE.WE'LL GO THROUGH THE REST OF THE AGENDAS AND MAKE SURE WE'RE PULLING THOSE ITEMS OFF.
AND, UM, WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHICH ONES WE PULLED OFF.
'CAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO IDENTIFY THAT ON LINE AS WELL.
DID WE VOTE? UH, WE WILL VOTE NOW.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL AS STATED.
WE HAVE A SECOND BY MR. BROWN.
UH, STAFF, PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL, VOTE AND WE'RE REAL CLEAR WHICH ONES WE'RE DOING.
'CAUSE THERE'S ONE SEVEN OF THEM.
ITEMS 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, AND 19 FOR DENIAL.
YES, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING FOR.
ALL RIGHT, SO NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12.
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ITEM NINE DASH THREE AFFECTING SECTION 35 DASH THREE 11 B2.
IT'S EASIER FOR ME TO HOLD IT AT THIS POINT WITH MY BIG OLD BINDER.
THIS IS JUST, UM, A, UH, CLARIFICATION.
ACTUALLY, ONE OF OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS, UH, SAW I LOVES TO READ CODE AND SAW THIS AND HE NOTICED THAT IT'S A, UH, DIFFERENCE IN HOW OUR PROFESSIONAL OFFICES ARE ACTUALLY CLASSIFIED IN THE CODE.
UH, THEY'RE NOT CALLED GENERAL OFFICES.
SO IT'S JUST A CHANGE FROM GENERAL TO PROFESSIONAL MOTION.
WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AT ALL? MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR APPROVAL FROM MR. BROWN? WAS IT SECOND FROM BIANCA? UH, ROLL CALL.
ITEM 13, UH, ACTION AND OR DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON FIVE DASH 55, UH, SECTION 35 DASH THREE 11 DASH TWO.
SO THIS AMENDMENT IS ACTUALLY THE RESULT OF A, UH, RULE INTERPRETATION DECISION ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IN 2020.
UH, IN RESPONSE TO THE CITY'S INITIATIVE TO PLACE, I BELIEVE THEY WERE CALLED, UH, PORTLAND LUBE, THERE ARE EFFECTIVELY PUBLIC RESTROOMS. UH, THERE WERE, UH, ONE OR TWO OF THEM PLACED DOWNTOWN.
AND EFFECTIVELY IT'S HOW DO WE AS A CITY GO ABOUT DEFINING WHAT THOSE ARE.
AND THEN IN TABLE THREE 11 DASH TWO, THE NON-RESIDENTIAL USE MATRIX, UH, DETERMINING WHICH ZONING DISTRICTS THOSE ARE AUTHORIZED IN.
UH, SO THE TEXT HERE IS, UH, TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THAT RULE INTERPRETATION DECISION.
UH, SO THIS HAS BEEN IN EFFECT AND ENFORCED SINCE 2020.
UH, BUT, UH, AS I KNOW WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE IT EARLIER, ALL RIDS BETWEEN AMENDMENT CYCLES ARE AUTOMATICALLY GROUPED AND PRESENTED TO THE T FOR CONSIDERATION.
AND THE, LOU WAS JUST ONE OF THE FIRST ONES THAT WAS SORT OF A, UM, STANDALONE, BUT, UM, MOBILE, IF YOU WILL, RESTROOM.
AND WE ALREADY KNOW WE HAVE A,
[01:40:01]
UH, BUILDING DOWNTOWN.I'M NOT GONNA SAY THE STREETS JUST CATTYCORNER FROM THE MCDONALD'S DOWNTOWN.
THAT'S ITS OWN PRIVATE BATHROOM.
UH, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, OWN PERMANENT BATHROOM, UH, FACILITY.
SO WE, WE REALIZED WE NEEDED TO CLASSIFY THESE IN THE CODE.
ANY QUESTIONS? JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
WOULD THIS EVER, UM, SUPPLEMENT OR BE USED FOR BATHROOM REQUIREMENTS IN A COMMERCIAL OPERATION? NO.
WHAT, WHAT THE R SAYS IS THIS IS REALLY INTENDED ONLY IF THE PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC RESTROOM.
IF YOU ARE ANY SORT OF BUSINESS WITH PUBLIC RESTROOM FACILITIES THAT IS UNRELATED TO THE AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
SO IN THE CHART, UH, TABLE THREE 11 DASH TWO, IT HAS AN ASTERISK BY O TWO AND THEN AN ASTERISK BELOW THAT SAYS, THIS ENTRY IS FOR PRIMARY USE FOR THE PROPERTY ONLY.
SO WHAT YOU JUST SAID, IS THAT ONLY APPLICABLE FOR O TWO OR WHAT? NO, NO.
THE O TWO COLUMN HAS TO DO WITH, UM, THE, WHEN YOU GO TO THE O TWO DISTRICT, IT'S, IT'S HOW THE USES ARE ALLOWED.
UM, SO MAYBE WE JUST REMOVE THE ASTERISK TO AVOID THAT CONFUSION ON THIS ENTRIES FOR PRIMARY USE FOR THE PROPERTY ONLY.
BECAUSE YEAH, I THINK THE ASTERISK SAYS THAT USES PERMITTED IN NO TWO ARE, ARE ONLY AS ACCESSORY USES YES.
TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE OF A HIGH, HIGH-RISE OFFICE BUILDING.
SO THE DELETION OF THE ASTERISK WOULD PROBABLY CLARIFY THAT.
AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER COUPLE OF, UH, MINOR COMMENTS IN THE UNDER NO AMENDMENT LANGUAGE.
UNDER I, IT'S ON THIS, OH, HANG ON.
THIS, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, IT'S WEIRD SAID IT'S SAYING AS THIS ONE.
CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? YEAH.
UM, IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE INDOOR OR CAN IT BE OUTDOOR FACILITY MORE? I MEAN, WE SAY PERMANENT AS IN BEING LONG, LONGER THAN 30 DAYS.
SO I MEAN, IT DOESN'T MATTER ON HOW THE BATHROOMS ARE.
I MEAN OBVI, IF THE DOORS FACE OUT OR IF THE DOOR FACE IN INSIDE, INSIDE ANOTHER STRUCTURE, IT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS, UH, SUPPOSED TO, UH, GOVERN.
WHAT IT'S JUST TALKING ABOUT IS WHEN THE USE OF A BATHROOM IS THE ONLY USE ON THE PROPERTY, WHETHER IT IS A, UM, TEMPORARY OR NOT, THESE ARE THE ZONING DISTRICTS IT'S ALLOWED IN AND IF, AND THEN THE A HUNDRED FOOT SEPARATION IF IT'S, UH, ADJACENT TO ANY SINGLE FAMILY USES.
SO YOU GOT THE ASTERISK REMOVED CHAIR.
JUST ONE MORE QUESTION ABOUT THE, UH, DISTANCE A HUNDRED FOOT FROM RESIDENTIAL MM-HMM.
IF YOU HAVE A PUBLIC RESTROOM BY YOUR, UM, WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET, IT'S NOT MUCH DISTANCE.
JUST SO IS YOUR QUESTION, WHY NOT MORE THAN A HUNDRED FEET? YEAH, MAYBE.
AND THIS IS, IT MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS.
SO IT, AND THE ONLY CONCERN REALLY WOULD BE D RIGHT? WELL D OR EVEN I ONE.
UH, BUT I MEAN, I MEAN, AGAIN, A HUNDRED FOOT IS, IT'S A PRETTY DEEP RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE.
SO IT'S ALMOST A LOT DI DEEP MM-HMM.
I I I WILL ALSO SAY THAT IT'S A 100 FOOT SEPARATION FROM ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
SO I MEAN THE D DOWNTOWN DISTRICT C THREE AT MAJOR HIGHWAY INTERSECTIONS, NOT, AND WE, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY ISSUES WITH IT SINCE 2020 WHEN WE CAUGHT WHEN WE MADE THE RID.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT
UM, I DID HAVE A COUPLE OTHER MINOR COMMENTS.
SO IN THAT LAST SENTENCE THERE, UNDER THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, IT SAYS, THESE FACILITIES ARE USUALLY TEMPORARILY ATTACHED TO UTILITY SERVICES AND ARE DESIGNED TO BE EASILY DETACHED FROM UTILITY SERVICES.
IT SHOULD, THERE SHOULD JUST BE A PERIOD AND THE WORDS ARE RELOCATED, SHOULD BE REMOVED.
IT'S PROBABLY SUPPOSED TO SAY AND RELOCATED.
I KNOW WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO YEAH.
WHEN RELOCATED MAYBE THAT'S WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DESIGNED TO BE EASILY
[01:45:01]
DETACHED FROM UTILITY SERVICES WHEN RELOCATING.MAYBE THAT WOULD THAT AT LEAST IT WOULD BE.
AT LEAST IT WOULD BE A SENTENCE.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN UTILITY SERVICES ARE RELOCATED, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS.
YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE INTENT WAS.
NO, THE FROM BETWEEN DETACHED AND UTILITIES, I THINK THAT'S A WIN.
WHEN UTILITY SERVICES ARE UTILITY SERVICES ARE RELOCATED LOCATED.
LAUREN, CAN WE MAKE THAT CHANGE? SHE NEEDS TO LEARN TO DO A RED LINE DOCUMENT AND I'LL MARK IT AS IT GOES.
AND THEN PUT BACK THE R IN THE FUTURE.
SO IS WAS, WAS THAT THE INTENT?
OH, NO WONDER IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
SHE GOES WHAT'S IS, OKAY, THESE ARE LIVESTREAMED AND I'M SURE HE'S WATCHING.
HE'S GONNA, HE'S GONNA TEXT YOU RIGHT NOW.
I'M GONNA GET A TEXT RIGHT NOW.
CAN YOU MAKE, YEAH, THERE YOU GO.
SO WAS THAT THE INTENT? DOES ANYBODY KNOW OR WAS IT 'CAUSE THE OTHER WAY JUST SAYS, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY OUR DESIGN, THE FACILITIES ARE USUALLY TEMPORARILY ATTACHED TO UTILITY SERVICES AND ARE DESIGNED TO BE EASILY ATTACHED FROM UTILITY SERVICES.
IN OTHER WORDS, THEY'RE MOBILE, RIGHT? THEY'RE MOBILE.
SO THIS KIND OF SAYS THAT EASILY DETACHED FROM YOUR, IN OUR DESIGN, THESE FACILITIES ARE USUALLY TEMPORARILY ATTACHED TO UTILITY SERVICES AND ARE DESIGNED TO BE EASILY DETACHED WHEN UTILITY SERVICES ARE RELOCATED.
SO WHAT UTILITY SERVICES ARE BEING RELOCATED? SO I, THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT THE WHEN WAS BEFORE THE RELOCATED, IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN THE, WHEN THE, WHEN THE FACILITY WAS BEING RELOCATED, IN OTHER OTHER WORDS IT COULD BE'S.
SO I THINK WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE INTERPRETING DIFFERENT WAYS AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE INTENT WAS BE.
WHAT, WHAT IF WE JUST LET IT SAY THESE FACILITIES ARE USUALLY TEMPORARILY ATTACHED TO UTILITY SERVICES AND ARE DESIGNED TO BE EASILY DETACHED FROM UTILITY SERVICES OR JUST YES.
CAN YOU MAKE THAT, CAN YOU RED LINE IT INSTEAD OF JUST CHANGING IT SO THAT WE HAVE A TRACK OF WHAT WE CHANGED? SO WHEN YOU'RE TYPING, JUST LEAVE THE ORIGINAL BUT CROSS IT OUT AND TYPE THE NEW GOT A REVIEW, I THINK SAY IT'S REMEMBERING THAT LAST PART RIGHT, LOGAN? YEP.
DELETING OUR RELOCATE, UH, SERVICES ARE RELOCATED EVERYTHING AFTER DETACHED.
DO WE WANNA MENTION THE TIMEFRAME? WE MENTIONED THERE'S A MINIMUM 30 DAYS? NO, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.
'CAUSE YOU'VE GOT TWO ON THE PERMANENT, I THINK SAY LESS THAN 30 DAYS.
TEMPORARY IS LESS THAN 30 DAYS, WHICH IS WHY THE PERMANENT SAYS GREATER THAN LIKE TWO DIFFERENT THOUGHT.
SO HERE'S ONE THOUGHT ATTACHED.
NO, IT'S SO WHAT DOES IT LOOK? YEAH.
SO AFTER DETACHED OR AFTER UTILITY SERVICES, OR THE THOUGHT IS THESE ARE TEMPORARY PERIOD.
SO WHY DO WE CARE WHETHER IT'S ATTACHED OR DETACHED? IN OTHER WORDS, THE LAST SENTENCE IS REDUNDANT.
YOU COULD LEAVE IT, YOU COULD JUST MAKE IT SAY THESE FACILITIES ARE USUALLY TEMPORARILY ATTACHED TO UTILITY SERVICES, PERIOD.
WE, WE CAN DO WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN OR WE CAN ALSO GET RID OF THAT.
BECAUSE THAT SATISFIES THE DEFINITION TO DEFINING IT AS TEMPORARY.
SO THAT, THAT PERIOD, THAT'S IT.
RIGHT? THIS IS THE MOST DIFFICULT ONE OF THE DAY
MAKE A DOES ANYBODY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? AND TO THE RELOAD? YES.
LET'S DO THAT STRAIGHT TO EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT.
NOW ON THE NEXT PARAGRAPH DOWN, UM, NO, THE DIRECT, THIS IS EASY.
I THINK THERE SHOULD THE, THE WORD STRUCTURES IN THE LAST SECOND TO LAST SENTENCE SHOULD BE PLURAL.
SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AS MEASURED FROM STRUCTURE TO STRUCTURE.
AND YOU HAD AMENDMENT TOO, DIDN'T YOU, KARA DIDN'T YOU HAVE SEPARATION OR SOMETHING? SO SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AS MEASURED FROM STRUCTURE TO STRUCTURE.
[01:50:01]
I THINK WE SOMEWHERE ELSE TALK ABOUT THAT.
IS THE SEPARATION DISTANCE SHOULD VERSUS JUST 100 FOOT DISTANCE.
SO SHOULD IT SAY HAVE A 100 FOOT SEPARATION DISTANCE REQUIREMENT? YEAH.
I HAD THE WORD SEPARATION, RIGHT? YEP.
HMM? I HAVE ONE MINOR EDIT TO THAT ALSO TO THAT LAST, OKAY.
IT'S A, IT'S A COMMA ON THE SCREEN.
WHERE WAS THAT? THAT WAS CORRECT.
I THINK AT THE END, LAUREN, ON THE, UM, P D F THAT WAS SENT OUT.
AND SO IT NEEDS TO BE A PERIOD.
FORMAT AND MISSING PERIODS IN.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT EDITED VERSION? NOT ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM, UH, MS. MALDONADO TO, UH, A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED.
AND A SECOND BY, WHO WAS THAT? MR. ESTRADA? UM, ROLL CALL.
DISCUSSION IN ACTION ON U D C ITEM 10 DASH ONE, AFFECTING SECTION 35 DASH THREE, 11 DASH ONE.
SO THIS AMENDMENT WILL, UH, AGAIN, THIS WAS BROUGHT UP BY ONE OF OUR, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS.
UH, SO OUR, OUR USE MATRIX HAS ALWAYS HAD SINCE 1965, THE L B C S FUNCTIONS AND THE L B C SS STRUCTURES, UM, AS, UH, AS A REFERENCE POINT.
SO THE, UH, NATIONAL AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION HAS, UH, THESE SYSTEMS, UH, IN WHICH THEY ARE CLASSIFY USES BASED ON CATEGORIES, IF YOU WILL, WHETHER IT'S FORM, WHETHER IT'S USES.
AND THIS HELPS US, UM, WHEN WE HAVE TO CLASSIFY A USE THAT DOESN'T EXIST IN OUR CODE.
AND WE WANNA FIND, UM, USES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO IT.
THIS, THIS, THIS FUNCTION THAT WAS IN OUR CODE HELPED US TO LOOK AT, OKAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS CONTRACTOR FACILITY IS NUMBER 1, 2, 3, 4.
LET'S SEE WHAT OTHER, UH, USES ARE SIMILAR TO THAT.
SO I CAN SEE IF THIS NEW USE IS CLASSIFIED AS THE SAME WAY, SO THAT WAY WE CAN DETERMINE WHAT DISTRICTS IT, IT SHOULD BE, UM, CLASSIFIED IN.
HOWEVER, OVER THE YEARS, THE L B C S CODE GETS UPDATED, UM, BY A P A AND SO, UH, AND IS EASILY, UH, I, I GUESS EASILY RESEARCHED, UH, ONLINE.
SO OUR, THE AMENDMENT JUST PROPOSES REMOVING THEM FROM, UH, FROM THE USE MATRIX BECAUSE THEY ALREADY EXIST IN, IN A DOCUMENT.
AND THEN WE ACTUALLY HAVE A REFERENCE TO THE USE OF THE L B C S CODE IN ARTICLE THREE AS WELL.
WHENEVER WE NEED TO MAKE, UM, MATERIAL MATERIALLY SIMILAR, UM, USE INTERPRETATIONS.
MS. TACKETT, SORRY FOR ROLL CALL.
THAT'S HOW YOU GET ALL THAT? YES.
[01:55:01]
MANNA? YES.UH, ITEM 15, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON ITEM FIVE DASH 30, SECTION 35 DASH THREE 11 DASH ONE.
SO WE ALL KNOW PUBLIC LIBRARIES AREN'T A NEW THING.
UH, HOWEVER, THEY AREN'T CO ACTUALLY CODIFIED IN OUR CODE.
UM, IN 2015, WE ACTUALLY FINALLY CODIFIED FIRE STATIONS AND POLICE STATIONS AND POLICE STATIONS AS PUBLIC, AS PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES.
UH, SO IT JUST LIBRARY PUBLIC LIBRARIES WERE ACCIDENTALLY LEFT OFF.
AND SO THIS WILL JUST CLEAN THAT UP.
UM, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE CITY FACILITIES.
HOWEVER, I WILL NOTE THANKS TO, UH, BIANCA GIVING A CALL THAT REALLY THE INTENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE ALL OF THE CITY OWNED PUBLIC, UH, FACILITIES, AND THEY SHOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT.
ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTION? MOTION FOR APPROVAL? WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY AS, BUT WITH THE AMENDED TO BE ALLOWED IN ALL.
SO CATEGOR BE CHANGED HERE THEN, RIGHT? WE'D HAVE TO ADD THE PSS ALL.
ADD THE PS TO THE OTHER COLUMNS, INCLUDING E R Z D, INCLUDING E R Z D.
WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO THE NEXT GROUP? YES.
AND THEN THE E R Z D FOR THE LAST RIGHT THERE.
SHE'LL FINESS THAT LATER, BUT YES, THAT'S WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
SO, UH, JULIA, IS YOUR MOTION TO, UH, FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED? AS AMENDED? YES.
WE HAVE A MOTION FROM JULIA FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED.
ALRIGHT, ITEM 16, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ITEM 10 DASH THREE AFFECTING 35 DASH 3 11 2.
SO THIS ONE WAS ACTUALLY SPONSORED BY THE ZONING COMMISSION.
UM, AND, UH, IF YOU WANT MR. SIPS, YOU CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT I'LL SUMMARIZE IT.
UH, SO WHAT THIS DOES, DOES IS THIS AMENDS, UM, THE, AND REQUIRES AN SS SO A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION, WHICH IS A REZONING FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
UH, WHENEVER, UH, A GAS STATION IS PROPOSED TO BE WITHIN A C TWO DISTRICT, UM, SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING IS ON SEVERAL CASES WHERE WE'VE HAD GAS STATIONS ON C TWO PROPERTIES, C TWO CAN BE, UH, LOCATED ADJACENT TO NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND SO THERE WERE CONCERNS WITH GAS STATIONS DIRECTLY ABUTTING, UH, HOUSES OR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND SO, UM, THEY WANTED TO ADD THAT AN S SHOULD BE REQUIRED.
SO THAT WAY THERE CAN BE, UH, PUBLIC INPUT AND DIALOGUE AND, UM, A DIALOGUE ESPECIALLY, UH, RELATED TO A SITE PLAN BECAUSE AN SS REQUIRES A SITE PLAN.
SO, MRS. SIPES, DID YOU WANNA ADD ANYTHING ELSE? SHALL I GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE HISTORY? OKAY.
UM, ONE OF THE, THE, THE CASES, ALTHOUGH WE'VE HAD A COUPLE, ONE OF THE CASES THAT REALLY INSPIRED THIS, UH, AMENDMENT WAS IN GOVERNMENT HILL WHERE WE HAD A PROPOSAL FOR A GAS STATION.
[02:00:01]
UM, THERE WAS A, A TREMENDOUS OUTPOURING OF, OF NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION TO IT.UM, BECAUSE IN, IN SOME OF THE OLDER AREAS OF THE CITY, YOU WILL HAVE, WHERE YOU HAVE A GRID LIKE, UH, STREET SCAPE OR STREET LAYOUT, UM, YOU'LL, YOU'LL HAVE RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL AND THEN C TWO C TWO USUALLY BEING FOR A SMALLER TYPE OF COMMERCIAL.
HOWEVER, IN, IN SOME CASES IT WAS A LARGER, THE, IN THIS CASE THERE WAS, UM, A COUPLE PARCELS THAT HAD BEEN PUT TOGETHER AND REZONED AS, AS C TWO.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE, THE SIZE OF THE GAS STATION THAT WAS BEING PROPOSED WAS VERY LARGE, A LOT OF, A LOT OF PUMPS.
AND SO THE IDEA WAS TO KIND OF AT LEAST ALLOW MORE PUBLIC INPUT, UM, BEFORE APPROVAL OF A, A GAS STATION THAT'S ADJACENT TO OR ACROSS, IN THIS CASE, ACROSS A RESIDENTIAL STREET FROM, UM, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
ANY QUESTIONS NOW? UM, I DO, THAT WAS A VERY UNIQUE CASE, UM, AND I HATE CHANGING THE CODE OVER SOMETHING VERY UNUSUAL LIKE THAT.
UM, A QUESTION, UM, A CONVENIENCE STORE ALONE IS ALLOWED IN A C TWO, CORRECT? CORRECT.
UH, AND, AND I GET THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, BECAUSE THAT WAS A QUICK TRIP, I THINK, AND IT WAS GONNA HAVE LIKE 12 OR 14 PUMPS, BUT WE HAVE SO MANY CONVENIENT STORES IN THIS TOWN THAT HAVE TWO PUMPS, AND THEY'RE ALL GONNA BECOME NON-CONFORMING AFTER THIS.
AND THAT MEANS YOU CHANGE OWNERSHIPS, YOU KNOW, NINE MONTHS GO BY BEFORE YOU GET A NEW T A B C OR WHATEVER IT IS.
AND, AND YOU'VE LOST YOUR RIGHT.
AND YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS.
I I, I'M NOT REALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS UNLESS WE PUT SOME SORT OF SIZE ON IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I'D GET A FIVE ACRE SITE THAT'S, THAT'S MORE THAN A, A CONVENIENCE STORE AND, AND SOME PUMPS.
UH, IF YOU HAVE WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THEN YOU'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT A GAS STATE.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, A A A PUMP STATION SORT OF THING.
AND, AND REALLY THE, YOU KNOW, BUYING THE BEER IS SECONDARY.
UM, SO I, I REALLY, I, I MEAN, EVERYONE HERE PROBABLY KNOWS OF A NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE STORE WITH TWO PUMPS, AND EVERY ONE OF 'EM IS GONNA BECOME NON-CONFORMING USE.
SO I, I WOULD, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD PUT SOME SORT OF ACREAGE ON IT.
I, I GET THERE, THERE'S A CON CONCERN.
UH, BUT YEAH, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THAT WAS, THAT WAS ACTUALLY DISCUSSED.
AND, UM, KAT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I SAID.
AND I THINK
AND IF, IF, IF I'M WRONG, WE COULDN'T, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS, UM, AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS AT, UH, WHAT SIZE OR WHAT, I MEAN, IS IT AN ACRE LESS HALF? I MEAN, WE HAD IT, IT BECAME THIS, HOW MANY C TWO PROPERTIES OUT THERE? WHAT ARE THEIR TYPICAL SIZES THAT ARE NEXT TO, UM, A PROPERTY? BUT WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS, IS PUT IN THE AMENDMENT AND THEN LET THE DISCUSSION HAPPEN.
WE DID TALK ABOUT, WELL, IS IT TWO PUMPED? DOES THAT MEAN IT'S JUST ONE LITTLE THING WITH TWO PUMPS, OR IS IT FOUR PUMPS? BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE TWO STANDS.
SO YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT WAS PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD.
BUT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT ACREAGE, WE NEED TO SEE WHAT, WHAT IS THAT RIGHT ACREAGE? WHY DON'T WE SAY ONE ACRE? YES.
SO, SO CAN WE MAKE THAT A LITTLE BIT SMALLER? 'CAUSE AND SO THE REASON WHY I WAS ASKING THAT, 'CAUSE, SO ON THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT WILL COME THROUGH THAT, UM, WILL, UM, HAVE DIALOGUE ON HOW TO MAXIMIZE THE SPACE.
AND SO, SO, SO ONE ACRE IS A PRETTY LARGE PIECE THAT THEY CAN PUT A LOT OF STUFF ON AND 'CAUSE THEY'LL ASK FOR, YOU KNOW, UH, START WORKING WITH THE, UH, THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND THAT, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT'S GONE.
AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S, IT'S AGAIN A GIANT, UH, PIECE OF PROPERTY.
SO, SO COULD IT BE SMALLER THAN THAT? WELL, AREN'T YOU PROPOSING SMALLER THAN AN ACRE WOULD REQUIRE THAN AN S SO I'M SAYING ONE ACRE OVER AN ACRE WOULD REQUIRE THE SPECIFIC PERMIT RIGHT.
[02:05:01]
OH, STILL THAT'S RIGHT.BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MOM AND POP ONES, RIGHT? YES.
I'M TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY THAT'S IN YOUR NEIGHBOR.
YEAH, BECAUSE I WAS THINKING, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE R 20 SIZE OR, YOU KNOW, SO, SO HALF AN ACRE SIZE IS WHERE I WAS THINKING BECAUSE 'CAUSE WE'VE SEEN THEM UP TO A HUNDRED, THE HALF ACRE, AND THEY COME THROUGH AND THEY'RE GETTING SOME BIG SYSTEMS ON THOSE HALF ACRE LOTS.
AND THAT'S WHERE, SO I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST A HALF ACRE AND THEN UP.
SO, BUT LITTLE BIT OF SEA PROPERTY ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL HAS ALREADY GOT BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS.
THAT EATS INTO THAT ONE ACRE, WHICH IS WHERE I WOULDN'T GO SMALLER THAN AN ACRE.
OR YOU CAN'T FIT, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THAT IN THERE.
I MEAN, ONE ACRE IS REALLY PUSHING IT FOR SOME, FOR A, YEAH.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS, I THOUGHT THE ONE ACRE WAS PRETTY TIGHT GIVEN ALL THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS AND STANDARDS.
UH, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS WITH A ONE ACRE, UH, IS IT MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM? SOMEONE HELP ME? YEAH.
TO ONE ACRE MINIMUM UP TO ONE ACRE IN HIS EYES.
CAN WE MAKE THAT CHANGE UP THERE SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE CHANGING? IT'S GONNA HAVE GO, GO BACK TO THE AMENDMENT.
NO, I THINK IT'S WHAT, WHAT I THINK IT'S THE REVERSE.
I'M LOOKING FOR HELP FROM ANYWHERE.
UH, LOGAN, LOGAN, I, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION WHY THEY'RE WORKING ON THE LANGUAGE AND I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF, OF THE MOTION.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CONVENIENCE STORES IN C TWO THAT ALL BECOME NON-CONFORMING IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE THEIR PUMPS, GET NEW TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE, THEN WHAT? SO I, I BELIEVE WHAT THE CODE SAYS IS THAT IF YOUR INVESTMENT INTO REHABBING THAT PROPERTY EXCEEDS 50% OF ITS REPLACEMENT COST, UH, THEN YOU WOULD IN THIS SITUATION BE REQUIRED TO REZONE THE PROPERTY WITH AN SS IF YOU WERE OVER ONE ACRE.
YEAH, I THINK, I MEAN, I THINK WE WANNA ENCOURAGE BETTER TECHNOLOGY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT WITH GAS PUMPS.
SO I'D HATE TO SEE THAT, THAT PEOPLE ARE DISCOURAGED FROM MAKING UPGRADES.
THE, THE NON-CONFORMING CHAPTER EFFECTIVELY ALLOWS YOU TO CONTINUE OPERATING, UH, IT ALLOWS YOU TO MAKE REPAIRS AS NECESSARY.
BUT IF YOU EVER PLAN TO OVERHAUL, UH, THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY, IF THE PROJECT COST EXCEEDS 50% OF ITS REPLACEMENT VALUE, THEN YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE MOST CURRENT STANDARDS THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS.
SO IF YOU HAD TO UPGRADE ALL OF YOUR TANKS AND PUMPS AND PIPING BECAUSE OF STATE REQUIREMENT AND CHANGES ON, YOU KNOW, GOING, YOU KNOW, LINERS, SENSORS, EVERYTHING, IS THAT A, THAT COST COUNTS? 'CAUSE THAT COULD IN SOME CASES EASILY BE A 50% COST OF THE FACILITY ON AN OLD BUILDING.
SO I'M, I'M GONNA ASK THE CITY ATTORNEYS IF THERE'S ANY PROVISION ON NON-CONFORMING.
IF THE MECHANISM TRIGGERING THE REPLACEMENT, IF IT'S A MANDATE FROM THE STATE, ARE THEY EXEMPT FROM THAT PROVISION? NON-CONFORMING IS NON-CONFORMING, BUT BY USING THAT TERM, IT IMPLIES THAT IS A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING, BUT IT'S STILL NON-CONFORMING.
SO, SO, SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF, LET'S SAY I OWNED A GAS STATION, I WAS 1.25 ACRES.
THERE WERE LAWS CHANGED UP IN AUSTIN THAT MANDATED, I REPLACED TANKS AND PUMPS, WHATEVER ELSE IT IS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REASONS.
AND MY HALF A MILLION DOLLARS PROPERTY REQUIRED $300,000 IN UPGRADES, WOULD I BE FORCED INTO THE REZONING PROCESS? 'CAUSE THE, THE CODE CURRENTLY SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE NON-CONFORMING, YOU CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE, BUT YOU CAN'T EXPAND.
AND YOU, IF YOU'RE GONNA, IF YOU'RE GONNA CONDUCT IMPROVEMENTS THAT EXCEED 50% OF THE REPLACEMENT VALUE, THEN YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE CURRENT CODES.
I I JUST THINK THAT WHEN'S THE LAST TIME THE STATE MANDATED FOR THE UPGRADE OF ALL THE TANKS? IT'S BEEN ABOUT 10 YEARS.
SO WE'RE DUE, AND, AND THEN YOU LOOK AT THE FEDERAL SIDE, WHICH IS THE, THE NOZZLE, WHICH IS 'CAUSE WE'RE IN THE NON-CONFORMING.
SO MANNA, SO, SO WOULD A, UH, REPRIEVE
[02:10:01]
FOR ANYBODY WHO'S CAUGHT INTO THE SPACE ALSO HAD THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO SEEK A VARIANCE, UM, FROM THAT, FROM THAT MANDATORY 50%? YEAH.SO, SO THAT IS AN OUT FOR THEM, I THINK, RIGHT? WELL, I I DON'T THINK YOU COULD NOT PETITION THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO OVERRIDE THE ZONING REQUIREMENT.
THAT'S A USE VARIANCE, RIGHT? THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE A VARIANCE NONCONFORMING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT THE NON-CONFORMING PIECE.
SO BASICALLY IF THEY, BUT IT'S ABOUT A USE, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE STANDARD.
THE REASON WHY IT'S NON-CONFORMING IS BECAUSE THE USE OKAY.
IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT.
CAN TABLE HERE EXEMPT EXISTING USES AND IT ONLY APPLY TO NEW APPLICATIONS OR REZONINGS? IS THAT POSSIBLE? UH, I MEAN, I, THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION.
I MEAN, IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT IT'S A LEGAL QUESTION.
CAN THE USE EXEMPT EXISTING FACILITIES? NO, WE'VE NEVER ALLOWED THAT.
NO, THEY'RE STILL, THEY WOULD BE NON-CONFORMING THAT, THAT GOES BACK TO ROBERTS.
I YOU CAN'T, THE U D C
UM, DO YOU HAVE TO GET A PERMIT FROM THE CITY TO CHANGE OUT PUMPS AND THINGS? YES.
JUST, JUST A, UM, FOR AN EXAMPLE THOUGH, AS FAR AS ACREAGE SIZE, THE, THE EXXON ON I 10 AND HILDEBRAND, THAT'S RIGHT THERE AT THAT INTERSECTION.
THAT'S LESS THAN AN ACRE SIZE.
OH, THAT'S WHY YOU WERE SAYING HALF ACRE.
BUT, BUT I'M SAYING THAT WITH YOUR PROPOSAL THAT YOU HAD, THAT WOULD STILL BE COMPLETELY, THAT WOULD NOT BE A NON-CONFORMING USE THAT WOULD, WHICH IS I THINK WHAT YOU, YOU WERE KIND OF CONCERNED ABOUT, OR I HEARD CONCERNS OVER IT'S, IT'S 0.89 ACRES ACCORDING TO BEAR COUNTY.
THAT'S, OH, I WAS WORKING AGAINST MYSELF.
HOW ABOUT THE VALERO ON MULBERRY RIGHT THERE NEXT TO THE DRIVING RANGE.
WELL, IT'S BASICALLY SAYING WE'RE SAYING OLDER FACILITIES NOW WE'RE PENALIZING THEM BY PUTTING YEAH, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE SAME, UM, DESIGN CONSTRAINTS AND RESTRICTIONS AND COMPATIBILITY ISSUES.
BUT THEN THAT TAKES US BACK TO, IS ADDING AN SS FROM C TO APPROPRIATE NOW? YES.
IF NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS ARE, ARE CITY ORDINANCE RATHER THAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, THEN IT'S WITHIN THIS COMMITTEE'S POWER TO SUGGEST SOME OTHER, UH, METHOD OF DETERMINING NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS IN THIS SITUATION.
NO, YOU, YOU CANNOT CHANGE WHAT NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS ARE.
YOU CAN MAYBE I'M, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT.
I'M SUGGESTING THAT IF IT'S NOT, IF IT'S NOT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AS PRESCRIBED BY STATE STATUTE, THEN IT CAN BE CHANGED HERE.
OR AT LEAST PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL AS CHANGED.
I THINK WHAT MICHAEL IS SAYING, THE WAY YOU ESTABLISH NONCONFORMING RIGHTS IS UNIFORM.
KEN, IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON? I'M SORRY.
THE WAY THEY'RE TERMINATED OR IS DETERMINED IS DETERMINED BY EACH AND EVERY MUNICIPALITY.
SOME, SOME, SOME MUNICIPALITIES HAVE NINE MONTHS.
IF YOU, IF YOU DON'T USE IT FOR NINE MONTHS, YOU CAN LOSE YOUR NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS.
SOME DON'T HAVE THIS 50% RULE.
UH, I MEAN, THE WAY YOU ESTABLISH THEM IS DICTATED BY LAW.
THE WAY OUR CITY DETERMINES HOW YOU LOSE THEM IS SOMETHING THAT WE, WE LOCALLY CAN ADDRESS MANNA.
SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, UM, SO, SO IF WE'RE ASKING FOR A SPECIAL, UH, EXCEPTION HERE, UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SO WAS DONE IN OUR COMMUNITY IS THAT THEY CHANGED SOME, SOME ZONING IN OUR COMMUNITY, RIGHT? SIZED IT WE'LL SAY.
UH, AND SO CAN WE DO SOME KIND OF POLL ACROSS THE CITY AND LOOK AT THOSE CURRENTLY NON-CONFORMING AND GIVEN THE, GIVEN THE S AS A CITY AS A CITY PROCESS, AND THEN ANYTHING NEW COMING IN WOULD NOW, UH, HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PUBLIC COMMENT.
BUT TO GIVE THEM THE S WOULDN'T THEY THEN HAVE TO SUBMIT THE SITE PLAN AND COMPLY WITH BUFFER AND ALL OF THAT? WELL, SO I, SO WE HAD THE CITY COUNCIL VOTE ON TO MOVE ALL OF OUR PROPERTIES TO ANOTHER THING.
AND IT WAS, THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, IT REALLY WASN'T ALL THAT DISCUSSION.
SO IT WAS KIND OF COMMITTEE SAID, HERE'S WHAT WE WANNA DO, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DID.
AND SO, SO IT SEEMED LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL HAD THAT, HAD THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF ALL THAT DISCUSSION WAS REQUIRED.
[02:15:01]
TALKING ABOUT LIKE A LARGE AREA REZONING THAT WENT TO LIKE RES BUT THAT DIDN'T HAVE A SITE PLAN COMPONENT.THE ESC HAS THE SITE PLAN COMPONENT, AND THEN YOU HAVE ALL OF THE, AGAIN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE EXISTING PRIOR TO LIKE THE 65 BUFFER REQUIREMENTS OR EVEN PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SO, UM, THEY, THEY'LL, THEY'LL HAVE THOSE NON-CONFORMING ISSUES AS WELL.
UH, THAT, UH, THEN WILL BE HIGHLIGHTED DURING ANOTHER LARGE, YOU KNOW, CITY INITIATED REZONING PROCESS TO RIGHTSIZE THEM.
I, AND YOU, I WANNA AMEND MY MOTION.
UM, SO, UH, I, THE P IS FINE, UH, BUT THE, UH, THERE HAS TO BE A CUTOFF AND I'LL SAY THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE.
AND THEN THAT THE PROVISION ABOUT 50%, UM, IN, IN, UH, APPROVING IMPROVING YOUR PROPERTY DOES NOT APPLY IN THIS SITUATION.
SO TO DO THAT, WOULDN'T WE HAVE TO AMEND THE CODE SECTION ON NONCONFORM OF WHAT? YEAH.
I IS THE INTENT TO SPECIFY THAT AN ACT OF TERM, AN ACT THAT WOULD TERMINATE NON-CONFORMING USE BE SPECIFIC TO GAS STATIONS GREATER THAN THREE QUARTERS OF, OF AN ACRE? YES.
BECAUSE WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS.
AND THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH ON A CONVENIENCE STORE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO STICK WITH THAT 50% RULE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD IT FOR 50 YEARS.
I MEAN, WE'RE ALL, I THINK WE'RE ALL SAYING WE'RE GOOD WITH GETTING A THRESHOLD THAT PUTS THE SPECIAL USE IN NEW SITUATIONS IS IMPORTANT.
WE JUST DON'T WANNA PENALIZE EXISTING FACILITIES THAT WANT TO UPGRADE, BUT NOW LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO DO IT WITHOUT A ZONING CASE, WHICH IN MANY CASES THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE SS DEPENDING ON THE SITE NO MATTER WHAT.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS DO ANYWAY.
LAUREN, CAN YOU PULL UP ON UNICODE, UH, U D C SECTION 35 7 0 6? UH, GO TO ART ARTICLE SEVEN, NOT DIVISION SEVEN.
SO AT THE VERY BOTTOM, WE WOULD HAVE TO ADD IN A SUBSECTION G THAT SAYS APPLICABILITY TO CONVENIENCE STORES WITH GAS STATIONS EXCEEDING THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE PLACE TO PUT IT.
I THINK THAT THE ATTORNEYS NEED, WE NEED TIME TO REVIEW THAT BECAUSE THAT NON-CONFORMING IS, IS A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE.
AND NOW WE'RE CREATING THESE SPECIAL PRIVILEGES FOR, UM, USES BECAUSE NOW WE'RE REQUIRING THEM TO HAVE TO REZONE.
IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IT MOVES FORWARD THROUGH THE PROCESS.
OKAY, I'VE GOT A NEW ONE, THEN, UM, DROP MY MOTION.
UH, MOTION TO DENY BECAUSE IT JUST WASN'T THOUGHT THROUGH.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I, I WE'RE REACTING TO A SITUATION AND IT WAS A ONESIE.
YOU WANNA SHARE THE MIC?
SO OUTSIDE OF THAT, JUST SAYING, YOU KNOW, OKAY, NON, NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS ARE DERIVED FROM STATE LAW.
SO I THINK THAT WHAT THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS PROBABLY SAYING IS, I THINK WE NEED SOME TIME TO INVESTIGATE IF WE EVEN CAN CARVE OUT EXCEPTIONS.
UH, AND THEN BEYOND THAT DISCUSSION ON NON-CONFORMING USES WAS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
SO I WOULD NOT ENCOURAGE THAT WE PROCEED IN THAT ROUTE TODAY.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THE DOWNSIDE IS THAT YOU LOSE YOUR BUSINESS DOWN.
CONFORMING RIGHTS REALLY IS DIFFICULT FOR BUSINESSES.
SO SHE SHOULD NEVER TAKE IT LIGHTLY.
UM, THEY HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING LOANS.
UM, IT, IT HAS, IT'S REALLY PROHIBITIVE FOR THEM.
THEY CAN STILL OPERATE, BUT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE, CAN BE VERY DETRIMENTAL TO THEM.
UM, AND THERE ARE QUITE A BIT IN THE INNER CITY AREA.
I MEAN, THAT'S HOW THE NEIGHBORHOODS WERE
[02:20:01]
CREATED.I MEAN, THERE WERE CONVENIENT BECAUSE IT'S CONVENIENT ON YOUR WAY TO WORK, OR YOU'RE CONVENIENT ON THE WAY HOME OR EVEN DURING A GAS SHORTAGE.
IT'S JUST RIGHT THERE DOWN THE STREET.
UM, BUT, UH, YEAH, IT WOULD CREATE, I CAN JUST IMAGINE THERE WOULD BE QUITE A FEW THAT WOULD NOW BECOME NON-CONFORMING BECAUSE OF THEM.
WE DID TALK ABOUT THAT AT ZONING COMMISSION.
SO BEFORE, BEFORE YOU FINISH THE MOTION IS SO, SO IF WE GO TO A MUCH LARGER SIZE, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WE GO BACK TO THE FIVE ACRE DIALOGUE OR WHATEVER IT IS.
SO SOME, SOMETHING THAT'S MUCH LARGER.
SO BASICALLY LEAVES OUT A LOT OF THE SMALL, SMALLER SITUATIONS OUT OF THE QUESTION OR IN CONFORMANCE, BUT, BUT, BUT TRY TO DO AWAY WITH THE LARGE DEVELOPMENT KIND OF THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS.
SO WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE GATHERING LOTS AND KIND OF DOING A WHOLE STRIP ACROSS THE CITY.
SO IS THERE, IS THERE A SIZER THAT IS WORKABLE? I GUESS SO, RATHER THAN STRIKE THE WHOLE THING.
'CAUSE I THINK IT IS, I THINK THERE'S VALUE TO IT.
SO I GUESS IS WHERE I WAS GOING.
UM, I, I AGREE WITH WHAT KEN WAS TRYING TO ADDRESS.
UH, THIS APPEARS, AND MR. SYSES, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I, I DON'T THINK THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS COMMITTEE IS TO MAKE RULES AND REGULATIONS AND MODIFY AMENDMENTS BASED ON ONESIES.
AND IF THIS IS A ONESIE, I AGREE WITH KEN BROWN.
WE SHOULD PROBABLY JUST, UH, DECLINE IT.
IS THAT A SECOND? PARDON? IS THAT A SECOND TO THE MOTION? YES, SIR.
BIANCA, I JUST HAD ONE LAST COMMENT.
I MEAN, I APPRECIATE ALL THE DIALOGUE AND I UNDERSTAND THE STRESSES THAT, UH, NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS CAN BRING.
BUT I JUST WANNA SAY WHY YOU THINK THERE MAY BE ONE CASE.
THERE WERE SEVERAL CASES THAT WERE NEVER FILED AND THERE WERE A LOT OF DIALOGUE OUT IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS, THIS PARTIC PARTICULAR SITUATION TO THE POINT THAT NEIGHBORS, UH, PURCHASED SIGNS AND PUT 'EM IN THEIR YARD SAYING THEY DIDN'T WANT THIS TYPE OF USE ADJACENT TO THEIR, UM, THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO, WHILE I THINK THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA COME TO CONSENSUS TODAY, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I MADE THAT POINT BECAUSE WHAT YOU HEAR AS NOTICED ITEMS IN THE ZONING AGENDA IS NOT NECESSARILY THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S TRYING TO HAPPEN.
THERE'S MORE SOMETIMES AND THEY JUST DON'T FILE.
UM, BECAUSE THEY, THEY SEE THAT SO MUCH OPPOSITION ABOUT IT IN A COMMUNITY.
SO, AND THEY ARE FOR THE SMALL ACRE SITES TOO.
SO JUST, WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT THE SYSTEM WORKS RIGHT NOW ALSO THAT IS THE PROCESS OF ZONING.
THERE'S NOTIFICATION, THERE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, THE COMMISSION CAN MAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATION AND COUNCIL MAKES THEIR DECISION.
AND MAYBE IT'S GOING TO BE APPROVED AND MAYBE IT'S NOT.
THAT'S WHY EVERYTHING IS NOT BY, RIGHT.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY KEN BROWN AND A SECOND BY ROBERT HANLEY FOR, AND WHAT WE'RE, AND WHAT WE'RE VOTING FOR IS THE THREE QUARTER OR SO, NO, NO ACREAGE LOCATION.
SO BASICALLY AS OPEN, STRAIGHT UP DENIAL.
BUT IF IT, SO, OKAY, NEVERMIND.
THANK YOU FOR THE SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE ACTION ON THE MOTION.
DOES MOTION PASS? MOTION PASSES.
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON U D C AMENDMENT.
ITEM FIVE DASH 31 SECTION, UH, 35 DASH THREE 11 DASH TWO.
[02:25:01]
EVOLVE OVER TIME.AND SO, UM, AS HOOKAH LOUNGES AND SMOKING ROOMS, UH, STARTED HAPPENING, WE DID THE WHOLE MATERIALLY SIMILAR INTERPRETATION, USE AND CLOUD THEM TOBACCO STORES.
AND SO THIS JUST CODIFIES WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR A WHILE NOW.
ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTION? MOTION FOR APPROVAL? WE HAVE A MO WE HAVE A MOTION BY BIANCA.
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ITEM FIVE DASH 39, WHICH AFFECTS SECTION 35 DASH THREE 11 DASH TWO.
UH, THIS AMENDMENT IS, UH, THE RESULT OF ANOTHER RULE INTERPRETATION DECISION ISSUED IN 2018, UH, SIMILAR TO THE ITEM YOU JUST DISCUSSED.
IT IS, UH, CLARIFYING THAT, UH, DAIRY PRODUCTS, WHOLESALE, GROCERY WHOLESALE BE AUTHORIZED BY A SPECIAL USE EXCEPTION, UM, UH, IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THAT'S L UH, AND THEN PERMITTED, UH, IN THE I TWO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT FOR THE DAIRY PRODUCTS AND FRUIT AND PRODUCE WHOLESALE.
AGAIN, THIS WAS EFFECTIVELY A, UH, CLASSIFICATION ISSUE.
WE FOUND THAT IT WAS MATERIALLY SIMILAR TO A NUMBER OF OTHER, UH, WHOLESALE OPERATIONS.
UH, SO WE HAVE UPDATED THE USE MATRIX TO PERMIT THOSE IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTION ON THIS ITEM? MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY BIANCA.
WHO IS THE SECOND? RYAN PAGANS.
ITEM NUMBER 20, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON U D C AMENDMENT 22 DASH 10 AFFECTING SECTION 35 DASH 3 35 C.
ALRIGHT, THIS FINAL ITEM, UM, SIMILAR TO THE EARLIER ONES, UM, STARTED OUT AS AN UPDATE TO THE PLAN TYPE REFERENCES RELATED TO THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROGRAM, SECTION 35 4 20.
UM, WHILE READING THROUGH IT AND SORT OF DOUBLE CHECKING SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT WAS INCLUDED, I FOUND A NUMBER OF MISTAKES IN THE ADOPTION DATES OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS IN AN EFFORT TO FIX THOSE.
I FIGURED IT MIGHT JUST BE EASIER OR AS EASY TO ALSO INCLUDE THE ORDINANCE NUMBERS THAT ADOPTED THOSE DISTRICTS TO MAKE THE REGULATIONS EASIER TO FIND.
SO THIS BEGAN AS, UM, AN UPDATE TO THE, THE PLAN TYPES AND KIND OF GREW INTO A, A CORRECTION.
UM, IT ALSO INCLUDES UPDATING, UM, THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT, UM, FOR NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS FROM THE
[02:30:01]
PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BECAUSE THEY HANDLE THAT NOW.WE WILL MOVE ON TO ANY QUESTIONS.
SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BEING CAPITALIZED.
UM, I WAS TRYING TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY, UM, OTHER DEPARTMENTS ARE, ARE NAMED THROUGHOUT THE U D C.
MOST OF THE TIME THEY'RE NOT FULLY CAPITALIZED.
SOMETIMES THEY ARE, SOMETIMES THEY AREN'T, BUT FOR THE MOST PART THEY'RE NOT.
AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THE, THE ONES THAT ARE STRUCK, THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOT CAPITALIZED.
THE D IS CAPITALIZED IN C BECAUSE IT'S THE BEGINNING OF A SENTENCE.
ACTUALLY, IT'S NOT REALLY, BUT IT'S THE BEGINNING OF A, A BULLET.
BIANCA, THANK YOU FOR CARRYING THE LOAD.
KEN, WE APPRECIATE, THANK YOU FOR CARRYING THE LOAD.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY KEN BROWN.
ALRIGHT, NOW WE GOTTA GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER SIX.
UH, JUST AS A NOTATION, UH, DOMINIC DOMINGUEZ ALSO YES.
AND THEN, UH, MANAM, YOU AND JULIA.
SO ON THE PREVIOUS POINT, UM, SO IT DOES TALK ABOUT SUB AREAS, AND THOSE ARE NOT DEFINED ANYWHERE YET.
AND SO I ASSUME WE'RE, IT, IT'S, IT'S SOMEWHERE IN THE EXIST OR IN AN UPCOMING DIALOGUE THAT SUB AREAS WILL BE DEFINED, RIGHT? SO, AND, UH, WHEN YOU GET TO SESSION, RIGHT, SO WE'RE APPROVING SUB AREAS RIGHT NOW, ASSUMING THAT SUB AREAS WILL BE APPROVED OR THAT DIALOGUE WILL BE APPROVED LATER, SO, OKAY.
OKAY, BACK TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH WAS DISCUSSION ON ITEM 5 35, SECTION 35 DASH THREE, 10.01 C.
SO WHAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN IS THE CURRENT.
AND SO SHE'S PULLING UP, UM, THE, WHAT I SENT HER.
SO THIS IS WHAT I'M TOSSING OUT.
SO THE FIRST ONE, AGAIN, REMOVING THE WORD THAT WE ADDED FROM SINGLE AND LEAVING THAT, UH, DESCRIPTION ALONE.
THIS IS SPECIFIC TO THE RMM DISTRICTS ONLY.
WHERE, UH, NOW WE TALK ABOUT MULTI-UNIT CONSTRUCTION ON LOTS.
ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE IN SIZE OR SMALLER SHALL BE WITHIN A SINGLE STRUCTURE.
SO SIMILAR TO HOW WE DID THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS, UH, FOR THE R UH, RMM AND MF DISTRICTS.
AND THE ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE WAS THAT SIZE MOTION TO APPROVE.
OH, BUT THIS WILL CARRY OVER TO YOU.
YOU CLICK ON THE TRIGGER THERE, KEN.
SO I ELECTED NOT TO TOUCH MF 18 OR MF 25 'CAUSE THOSE ARE NOT, UH, CODE CONVERSION ISSUES.
AGAIN, SIMILAR TO HOW WE DID THE MF 33, UH, PROVISIONS.
ADDING A SECTION UNDER THAT DEF THAT PURP STATEMENT OF PURPOSE FOR A LOT AND BUILDING SPECIFICATIONS AT MULTI-UNIT CONSTRUCTION ON LOTS, ONE THIRD OF AN ACRE IN SIZE OR SMALLER.
AND ZONED MF 33 SHALL BE WITHIN A SINGLE STRUCTURE.
KEN, YOU WANNA MAKE THE MOTION? I KNOW.
IS THERE ANY MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED? SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE BY BIANCA TO APPROVE SECOND BY DEBBIE REED TO APPROVE AS AMENDED BY STAFF AND CURRENTLY REFLECTED ON THE AGENDA.
[02:35:03]
MR. SIPES? YES.MS. TACKETT? SEE MR. ESDA? MR. TAPIA? YES.
ALRIGHT, THAT IS EVERYTHING ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
IS THERE ANY POINTS OF DISCUSSION OR DOES STAFF HAVE ANY UPDATES? WE DID WANNA GO BACK TO, UM, OUR PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION OF THE, UM, AGENDA.
WE JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU SOME UPDATES ON WHAT CHANGES WE'VE MADE AND THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAD WITH THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FROM OUR LAST MEETING.
AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO LOGAN.
UH, SO, UH, THREE QUICK ITEMS. I KNOW THERE WAS DISCUSSION LAST T MEETING ON THE DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TO BE SUBMITTED.
UH, SO WE WILL ADJUST THAT, UH, TO 8:00 AM THE MORNING OF THE AGENDA.
THAT WAY IF IT IS MONDAY OR A TUESDAY, UH, THE DEADLINE MOVES WITH, YOU KNOW, THE DAY THAT THE MEETING ITSELF WILL BE HELD.
SO, AND JUST AS A SIDEBAR THAT THE AGENDA TODAY ALREADY REFLECTS THAT.
SO JUST WANNA MAKE SURE Y'ALL KNEW THAT.
UH, ADDITIONALLY, WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH, UH, CHAIR PACK AND VICE CHAIR CARRILLO HANES ON HOW WE WANT TO REVIEW THE AMENDMENTS.
UH, WE AGREED THAT JUST FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE CODE ITSELF, IF YOU LOOKED ON THE SPREADSHEET TODAY, IT STARTED WITH 35 DASH ONE ONTO DASH TWO, ONTO DASH THREE, UM, WITH ONE NOTABLE EXCEPTION THAT HAS TO WAIT UNTIL THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE ABILITY TO CONSIDER EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS, BECAUSE THERE WERE SEVERAL STORMWATER RELATED EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS THAT WE FEEL IT IS NECESSARY TO CONSIDER SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE INTERNAL STORMWATER RELATED ONES.
UH, SO ONCE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS DETERMINED WHICH EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS THEY WANT TO SPONSOR, WE'LL COME BACK TO TAC UH, PROBABLY IN THE FIRST MARCH MEETING, UH, WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THOSE STORMWATER AMENDMENTS.
UH, THOSE ARE EXTREMELY TECHNICAL AND THERE'S MANY OF THEM.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO ALL OF THOSE.
SO WE'LL TAKE APPENDIX H A LITTLE BIT OUTTA ORDER AND THEN GET BACK INTO FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE CODE.
UH, THE LAST THING THAT I HAVE TO SHARE, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCREEN, OUR HOMEPAGE HERE AT D S D OVER ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND SIDE WHERE THE CURSOR IS, WE HAVE ADDED THE TENTATIVE AGENDAS.
UH, WE HAVE POSTED TENTATIVE AGENDAS FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ZONING COMMISSION, PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A WHILE.
WE'RE DOING THAT NOW WITH TAC.
SO IF YOU WERE TO CLICK ON TODAY'S MEETING THE 14TH, THAT IS TENTATIVELY WHAT WE PLAN ON CONSIDERING AT EACH OF THOSE AMENDMENTS.
YOU KNOW, WE GOT THROUGH ALL 20 AMENDMENTS ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
IF FIVE OR SIX OF THOSE HAD TO BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE WE RAN OUT OF TIME, WE'LL HAVE TO KIND OF, THIS IS A LIVE DOCUMENT THAT WE'LL HAVE TO KEEP UPDATING.
UH, BUT THIS GIVES THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THE AMENDMENT I'M LOOKING AT, IT MAY NOT BE UP FOR TENTATIVE CONSIDERATION UNTIL MAY 31ST.
UH, THAT WAY THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO A LITTLE EXTRA PLANNING AS WELL.
SO, JUST WANTED TO SHARE THOSE THREE UPDATES.
DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? UH, THE ONLY THING I'LL ADD TO THAT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO INVITE ALL OF THE APPLICANTS TO ATTEND THE MEETING.
THERE MAY BE FOUR OR FIVE APPLICANTS, UM, WHO MAY HAVE SUBMITTED INDIVIDUAL ITEMS THAT WILL BE SITTING THROUGHOUT THE MEETING AND MAY NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE THEIR ITEM HEARD UNTIL THE FOLLOWING MEETING.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T WANNA PUT 15 ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND WE'RE DONE AND WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE COULD HAVE USED THAT TIME WISELY.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE MAKING SURE WE'RE DOING THE BEST THAT WE CAN TO BALANCE EVERYTHING.
UH, TODAY WAS, UM, A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE WAS SEVEN AMENDMENTS I THINK THAT Y'ALL DENIED AND JUST PUSHED OFF OF THE AGENDA, WHICH IS FINE.
THAT'S JUST WHAT, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I ANTICIPATE IF WE WOULD'VE BEEN CONSIDERING ALL OF THOSE ITEMS, WE'D STILL HEAR BE HERE TALKING ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UH, BUT, UM, WE HAVE, WE HAVE, UM, MADE THE CHANGES WE HEARD FROM THE LAST, UM, TAC MEETING.
SO I THINK WE'RE ADDRESSING ALL THE CONCERNS.
UM, AND WE'LL DO THE BEST TO KEEP YOU UPDATED, UH, GET THOSE AGENDAS OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO MAKE SURE YOU
[02:40:01]
HAVE THE INFORMATION IN ADVANCE.SO THIS, UH, YOU SAID THIS IS AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE? I'M SORRY.
CAN YOU GO BACK, LAUREN? I JUST, REAL QUICK, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHERE IT'S AT, JULIA.
IT'S ON OUR MAIN PAGE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WEBSITE.
THAT'S WHERE, UH, AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER, WE HAVE ALL OF OUR TENTATIVE AGENDAS THERE.
IF YOU CAN ZOOM IN, LAUREN, UM, IT'LL HAVE, UM, THIS IS WHERE EVERYONE CAN FIND IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT ON OUR FRONT PAGE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WEBSITE, OUR PTECH TENTATIVE AGENDAS.
I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION OVER HERE.
BIANCA, I JUST HAD A COMMENT AND A QUESTION.
I JUST WANNA THANK STAFF FOR THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE IMPLEMENTED.
I THINK THEY'RE, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, UM, SEEK TO ENGAGE MORE PEOPLE AND BE MORE, UH, PREDICTABLE ABOUT WHAT'S COMING UP IN OUR AGENDAS TOO.
I ALSO WANTED TO ASK, IF YOU SAW OUR AGENDA TODAY WHEN WE WERE DOING, UM, THE ITEMS FOR PLANNING, I KIND OF FELT BAD THAT ONCE WE VOTED ALL THE AMENDMENTS DOWN, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT STILL HAD AN AMENDMENT AND THEY WAITED TILL THE SECOND TO THE LAST AMENDMENT FOR THEIR, YOU KNOW, IF WE COULD BULK 'EM TOGETHER, I GUESS, AND THEN ALSO MAYBE ORDER THEM SO WE HAVE THEM.
THAT WAS WHAT LOGAN WAS TALKING ABOUT, IS WE HAVE THEM BY SECTION.
WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE SOME SORT OF FORM FORMAL PROCESS IN CONSIDERING THESE, NOW WE'RE GONNA PUT THEM ON THE AGENDA THAT WAY IT IS ENTIRELY UP TO THE COMMITTEE HERE IF THEY WANNA MOVE ITEMS AROUND, UM, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANTS.
BUT, UM, WE DIDN'T WANNA TAKE ANYTHING OUT OF ITS PROCESS OBJECTION.
AND THEN I, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE US TO CONSIDER AS PEOPLE ARE COMING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS THAT COME IN, THAT SOME PEOPLE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO COME AT A CERTAIN TIME.
MAYBE WE LOOK AT DOING SOME THAT ARE LIKE TIME CERTAIN FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO WORK.
I JUST THINK THOSE ARE BARRIERS FOR PEOPLE WHO COME, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TAKING OFF ALL THIS TIME AND IF SOMEBODY'S GONNA SPONSOR AN AMENDMENT EXTERNALLY, THAT WE'D BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
SO THAT TO THAT WHOLE POINT THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CITY DEPARTMENT SITTING HERE FOR ONE LAST AMENDMENT, BUT FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WHO TAKES TIME OFF OF WORK.
SO JUST, UH, SOME PERSONAL CONSIDERATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON THE AGENDA.
SO THANK, AND I THINK THAT'S WHY WE PUT THE TENTATIVE AGENDAS OUT THERE SO THERE IS WELL ENOUGH ADVANCED TIME AND NOTICE WHEN THESE ARE GOING TO BE HEARD.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE, IT IS THREE 18 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.