[00:00:03]
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
UH, WE ARE COMING UP ON ONE O'CLOCK OR IT IS ONE O'CLOCK.
UH, IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE OUR SPANISH INTERPRETATION SERVICES STATEMENT.
UM, BEFORE WE BEGIN, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH C D C RECOMMENDATIONS AND SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO, YOU MAY WEAR A MASK IN THIS MEETING.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE EXTRA MASKS UP HERE SOMEPLACE AT THE FRONT.
UH, SHOULD YOU WANT ONE? UH, IF YOU ARE FEELING AT ALL, ILL, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WEAR ONE IF, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ALL AS HEALTHY AND STRONG AS POSSIBLE.
MY NAME IS JOHN BUSANTE AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT FIVE ZONING COMMISSIONER.
I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION.
UH, I'D LIKE TO DO ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, MARCO BARROS, UH, DISTRICT NINE.
UH, THIS IS SAREN KMU FROM DISTRICT FOUR.
UH, OZ TIZ WITH DISTRICT EIGHT.
SUMMER GRADE HOUSE DISTRICT ONE.
DISTRICT SEVEN CHARLES FUENTES FOR DISTRICT THREE.
WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
ALRIGHT, UM, BEFORE WE GET INTO THE CASES THAT WE HAVE FOR TODAY, I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF IF YOU WOULD.
SO BEFORE I BEGIN, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO TURN YOUR PHONES ON VIBRATE OR TURN THEM OFF.
THE ZONING COMMISSION IS AN 11 MEMBER BODY APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON ZONING CASES UPON RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION.
YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO FORWARD YOUR CASE TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROCEDURE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CASE MANAGER.
STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE, THE REQUEST.
PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR REZONING AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT.
PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND ANEX INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION IN ANY QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THE REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED REZONING.
YOU'LL BE CALLED AN ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
YOU WILL BE INFORMED THAT THE THREE MINUTES ARE UP.
FOR THOSE THAT WILL LIKE TO GIVE THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER, THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
AND THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A, WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS.
[Zoning Items ]
IF WE COULD NOW BEGIN BY READING THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON OUR WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONED ITEMS. YES SIR.TODAY WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER ONE, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF MALLARD PASS AND CATFISH POND THAT HAS BEEN POSTPONED AND ALSO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN LOCATED AT 1351 AND 1357 SOUTH GENERAL MCMULLEN.
THOSE ITEMS WILL BE BROUGHT FORTH AFTER THE APPLICANT'S REINITIATE.
THE PROCESS NEW PUBLIC NOTIFICATION WILL BE MAILED OUT.
ALRIGHT, SO LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON EITHER ITEM ONE OR SEVEN, UH, THOSE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY.
YOU WILL RECEIVE ANOTHER PUBLIC NOTICE FOR THOSE TWO ITEMS. UH, SO IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THOSE ITEMS, YOU CAN GO OUT AND START TO HYDRATE FOR NYSSA TONIGHT OR DO SOME OTHER USEFUL ACTIVITY.
ALRIGHT, FOR THOSE THAT CAME IN LATE AND NEED TO SIGN IN, THERE'S A SIGN IN SHEET UP HERE? YES.
UH, SO THAT WAY YOU CAN SIGN IN IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM AND YOU HAVE NOT SIGNED IN,
[00:05:01]
THE SIGN IN SHEET IS RIGHT OVER HERE.UH, PLEASE DO SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK
ALRIGHT, LET'S GIVE THEM A COUPLE OF MINUTES AND THEN WE'LL BEGIN TO GO OVER.
CAN YOU ZOOM IN SO WE CAN SEE A LITTLE BETTER? WELL LET'S DO THE FIRST UH, SUMMARY READING OF OUR COMBINED HEARING.
NUMBER ONE, OUR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS PLEASE.
THE ITEMS TODAY THAT ARE COM ON COMBINED HEARING NUMBER ONE FOR CONSENT CONSIDERATION ARE ITEMS NUMBER 4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21 AND 27.
ALRIGHT COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION OR OTHER CONSIDERATION? LOOKING TO MY LEFT, LOOKING TO MY RIGHT, SEEING NONE.
UH, ONCE WE HAVE THIS FINAL SIGN IN, LET'S ENSURE THAT'S NOT AN ITEM ON CONSENT.
SO IT'S 19, ITEM 16 IS REMOVED FROM CONSENT.
UM, ALRIGHT, GIVEN THAT CHANGE, IF WE COULD NOW READ THE REMAINING ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.
ACTUALLY, ITEM NUMBER FOUR ALSO NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.
GIVEN THOSE CHANGES, IF WE COULD PLEASE READ THE REMAINING ITEMS AND THE CONSENT AGENDA INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C THREE TO MF 33 WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 10,000 BLOCK OF STATE HIGHWAY 1 51.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
NUMBER 11 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C THREE TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TRUCK REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 92 49 INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 10 EAST.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RMM FOUR A H O D TO I D Z ONE A H O D WITH USE IS PERMITTED FOR SIX DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT 2 44 PRINCETON AVENUE.
THERE WERE 31 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE RECEIVED AN OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE FROM U UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 13 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R FOUR TO R FOUR HL WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 2 0 7 WYAN OAK DRIVE.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE FROM BELL MEAD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RMM FOUR TO RM FOUR HL WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 1211 SOUTH BEAVER STREET THERE WERE 29 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM DENVER HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
[00:10:01]
REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO R SIX HL.ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 9 27 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO R SIX HL WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 10 25 WEST SATCH AVENUE THERE WERE 28 NOTICES MAILED.
NONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL IN SUPPORT ON THIS ITEM.
ITEM NUMBER 18 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C THREE TO RMM FIVE WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 25 33 WEST SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD.
WE RECEIVED, WE SENT 36 NOTICES RECEIVED NONE IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND WE DON'T HAVE AN OFFICIAL RESPONSE FROM QUINTANA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 21 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM I ONE HS.
THREE HSS, A H O D WITH USES PERMITTED IN C THREE LOCATED AT EIGHT 18 AUSTIN STREET.
THERE WERE 13 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE.
ITEM NUMBER 27 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM I ONE A H O D TO C THREE A H O D LOCATED AT 2,800 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10.
THERE WERE NINE NOTICES MAILED NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION.
AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, MR. CHAIR.
UH, PRIOR TO ENTERTAINING A MOTION, COULD WE PLAY THE VOICEMAILS PLEASE? IT'S FOR ITEM 17.
HELLO, MY NAME IS GREGORY SMITH AND I LIVE AT NINE 18 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE.
BUT I HAVE A HOUSE I OWN A PROPERTY AT 10 44 WEST ATCH.
AND I'M CALLING CONCERNING THE ZONING CHANGE FOR 10 25 WEST ATCH.
LAST THREE DIGITS OF THE ZONING CASE.
I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS, OF THIS HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
YES, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS ZONING CHANGE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AGAIN, MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 6 0 2 0 5 9 7.
I JUST LEFT A PREVIOUS MESSAGE.
I FORGOT TO LEAVE MY PHONE, TELEPHONE NUMBER, BUT I ALSO SENT ALL THIS STUFF TO YOUR EMAILS AS WELL WITH THE PHONE NUMBER AND SIGNATURE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS GREGORY SMITH.
I LIVE AT NINE 18 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE.
I'M CALLING CONCERNING THE ZONING CHANGE FOR 9 27 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE.
UH, THE LAST THREE DIGITS OF THE ZONING CASE THERE IS 0 4 2.
YES, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
I JUST WASN'T SURE IF YOU LEFT HIS PHONE NUMBER ON THE SECOND ONE.
UM, THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION.
MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEMS NUMBER 10 11 12 13 14, 15, 17, 18, 21 AND 27.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ITEMS AS READ, UH, BY COMMISSIONER SIPES.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL DO A SECOND CHAIRMAN.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE TO MY LEFT.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF THE ITEMS AS READ, UH, BY COMMISSIONER SIPES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS.
ALRIGHT, OUR NEXT UH, AGENDA ITEMS ARE RECUSALS AND COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE IS RECUSED ON ITEMS 22 25, 26 AND 28.
SHE IS LEAVING THE HEARING ROOM.
[00:15:02]
UM, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT THE TIME IS ONE 15 AND COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE HAS LEFT THE HEARING ROOM.IF WE COULD READ THE ITEMS ON OUR SECOND AGENDA TODAY, OUR RECUSAL AGENDA.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THOSE ARE ITEMS OFFICIALLY THAT ARE FOR CONSIDERATION OF RECUSAL ON THE CON ON THE SECOND COMBINED.
UH, CONSENT HEARING NUMBER 22, NUMBER 26 AND NUMBER 28.
THERE IS ANOTHER RECUSAL LATER, BUT THAT ONE'S ON INDIVIDUAL HEARINGS.
UM, I BELIEVE WE PULLED 25 OR WAS THERE A SPEAKER ON 25? WE HAD 25 ON ACTUALLY IT.
ALRIGHT, SO 25 WILL BE INCLUDED ON THIS DOCKET AS WELL.
IF WE COULD READ THOSE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER 22 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM MF 18 TO MF 25 LOCATED AT 1 40 50 SOUTHTON ROAD.
NONE IN OPPOSITION, NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 25 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM MF 65 CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT TO C TWO SS A H O D WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A CAR WASH LOCATED AT 83 0 8 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
THERE WERE 86 NOTICES MAILED ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR FOR IN OPPOSITION.
THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 26 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO M X D WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 65 UNITS PER ACRE.
LOCATED AT 11 3 0 6 EBNER ROAD.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM FAT VANCE JACKSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND ITEM NUMBER 28 IS A REQUEST TO SIGNING ZONING TO A PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH LOOP 1604 EAST AND IH 37 SOUTH.
CURRENTLY LOCATED OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS BY APPLYING R FOUR TO LOT ONE BLOCK.
THERE WERE EIGHT NOTICES MAILED NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, MR. CHAIR.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE PUBLIC, ARE THE VOICEMAILS PLAYED FOR THESE ITEMS? YES.
MY ADDRESS, EIGHT FOUR ONE FIVE FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
MY PHONE NUMBER (210) 260-5773.
THE LAST THREE DIGITS OF THE CASE NUMBER IS FIVE FIVE SS AS IN SAM.
AND UH, REGARDING THIS, UH, ZONING PUBLIC HEARING, I DO NOT APPROVE OF A CAR WASH ACROSS FROM WHERE WE LIVE IN THIS COMPLEX WHERE I LIVE.
THERE'S ALREADY ONE DOWN THE STREET.
SO MY SUGGESTION IS A GROCERY STORE, UH, LIKE AN H B OR WALMART, A PLACE THAT SELLS FRUIT CUPS, ET CETERA.
A PLACE WHERE DIFFERENT, UH, TACO TRUCKS COULD BE SET UP.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER VOICEMAILS? NO SIR.
UM, THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO THESE ITEMS. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, ITEMS NUMBER 22 25, 26 AND 28.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 22, 25, 26, AND 28.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND CHAIR.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES FOR ITEMS 22, 25, 26, AND 28.
WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES.
IF WE COULD CALL COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE BACK INTO THE HEARING ROOM.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WERE THE APPLICANT FOR THE ITEMS THAT
[00:20:01]
WERE ON EITHER OF THE TWO CONSENT AGENDAS, YOU MAY GO AND GO GET HYDRATED OR HOWEVER ONE PREPARES FOR OSA.UH, THE TIME IS 1 21 AND COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE HAS RETURNED TO THE HEARING ROOM.
UH, OUR NEXT DOCKET IS OUR CONTINUANCE DOCKET.
IF WE COULD READ THOSE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD.
AND I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT AT 1 21, COMMISSIONER WATSON HAS JOINED OUR HEARING.
THIS IS COMBINED HEARING NUMBER THREE FOR REQUESTED CONTINUANCES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM C TWO E, RZ D TO MF 18 E RZ D LOCATED AT 13,930 FM 1560 NORTH.
THERE WERE 37 NOTICES MAILED ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, 19 IN OPPOSITION.
AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THIS ITEM SEEKS A CONTINUANCE TO APRIL 19TH.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO M F 18.
ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 69 20 69 46 AND 69 50 WEST HAUSMAN ROAD.
FIVE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE RECEIVED AN OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO SEEKING A CONTINUANCE TO APRIL THE 19TH.
AND THERE ARE SIX VOICEMAILS TO PLAY ON THIS ITEM.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS PRESENT TODAY ON THESE TWO ITEMS? NO, SIR.
IF WE COULD PLAY THE VOICEMAILS, ACTUALLY CHAIR ON ONE OF THEM.
I JUST NEED TO MAKE, THEY, THEY HAVE TO MOTION, I THINK IT'S CASE NUMBER LAST 2, 2 0.
THEY NEED TO MENTION TO CONTINUANCE TO MAY 3RD, NOT TO APRIL 19TH.
UM, IN THAT CASE, WE WILL TAKE EACH ITEM INDIVIDUALLY, BUT IF WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PLAY AT THIS TIME.
UH, THE SIX VOICEMAILS ON THE 2 2 0.
THIS IS ANNA MARIE ELLI, 6 8 0 3 WILLOW OAK, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 2 4 9 2 1 0 8 4 5 7 9 8 0.
THE REZONING ON HOUSEMAN ROAD, WHICH WE WANT TO OPPOSE.
HOUSEMAN ROAD IS ALREADY OVERCROWDED WITH VEHICLES THAT HAVE BROUGHT AIR POLLUTION, EXHAUST FUMES EVERY MORNING AND AFTERNOON.
LONG LINES, VIRTUALLY NO POLICE CONTROL PATROLLING THE AREA, AND THOSE OF US WHO PAY EXTREMELY HIGH TAXES IN THIS AREA OPPOSE TO THE REZONING ON HOUSEMAN ROAD.
I LIVE AT 68 11 LINDELL STREET, UH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 4 9 IN DEL OCA ESTATES ON HAUSMAN ROAD.
I AM CALLING AND PROTEST OF THE REZONING REQUEST.
UH, I BELIEVE, UH, IT'S ON THE DOCKET TOMORROW.
WE'VE BEEN TOLD THEY'RE GONNA DO A POSTPONEMENT, BUT WE WANNA MAKE SURE IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THAT UH, YOU GET THIS, UH, UH, OUR DISAGREEMENT WITH REZONING.
THIS FROM RESIDENTIAL TO I THINK, UH, MF 18.
THE REFERENCE NUMBER FOR THAT ON WEST HAUSMAN ROAD IS Z DASH 2 0 21 DASH 1 0 7 2 2 OH.
AGAIN, THAT IS Z DASH 2 21 DASH OH SEVEN TWO OH.
THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT 320 UNITS AND THERE'S GONNA BE WAY TOO MUCH TRAFFIC, AN ADDITIONAL LIGHT, WHICH WILL COMPOUND TRAFFIC, UM, ON HOUSEMAN, WHICH IS ALREADY HORRIBLE.
UM,
AND THEY'RE GONNA CUT THROUGH OUR SUBDIVISION.
UH, THAT'LL INCREASE CRIME AND IT'S ALSO GONNA RUN OUR PROPERTY VALUES DOWN.
SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE VALID REASONS FOR THIS NOT BEING REZONED.
I'M NOT TRYING TO PREVENT PROGRESS, BUT THAT SHOULD BE RESIDENTIAL.
GEORGE CLARK, 68 11 LINDELL STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 2 4 9.
MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 2 1 8 19 40.
I LIVE AT 6 8 2 1 WILLOW OAK DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 4 9.
THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO CASE Z AS IN ZULU, 2 0 2 1 1 0 7 0 0 2 2 0 ON WEST HOUSEMAN ROAD.
UH, WE DO HAVE, UH, MY WIFE AND I OBJECTIONS TO THE ZONING PROPOSAL.
UH, THE DENSITY OUT HERE IS, UH, MUCH GREATER THAN WHAT
[00:25:01]
IT WAS, UH, INTENDED TO BE.EVEN WITH THE EXPANSION OF HOUSEMAN ROAD TO FOUR LANES.
UH, THE TRAFFIC ALREADY IS SUCH THAT, UH, THERE ARE TIMES WHEN YOU CAN'T EVEN GET OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, FOR FOUR OR FIVE MINUTES.
AND, UH, THE, THE DENSITY CONSTRUCTION PROPOSAL, UH, IS JUST WAY TOO MUCH FOR THIS THIS AREA.
I THINK IT WOULD AFFECT, UH, THE HU OUR HOMES VALUE.
IT SITS ON TWO THIRDS OF AN ACRE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING, UH, SIX TO EIGHT HOMES ON AN ACRE IN THIS AREA.
AND THAT'S JUST, UH, RIDICULOUS.
SO, UH, YEAH, PLEASE, UH, UH, APPRECIATE OUR PERSPECTIVE ON THIS.
UH, THE TRAFFIC INCREASE, UH, THE CARS, THE PEOPLE, UH, THE EFFECT ON HOME VALUES IN THE AREA.
UH, IT'S JUST CHANGING THE CHARACTER PLUS THAT AREA.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST IDEAL FOR DEVELOPMENT FOR CITY PARK OR SOMETHING.
UH, THE TRAIL SYSTEM RUNS THROUGH THERE.
UH, HOPE YOU, UH, CONSIDER OUR INPUT.
MY ADDRESS IS 6 8 2 6 WILLOW OAK, ZIP CODE 7 8 2 4 9.
THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO CASE NUMBER Z 20 21 1 0 7 0 0 2 2 0 ON WEST HAUSMAN ROAD.
AND I AM CALLING IN REFERENCE TO MY OPPOSITION, UM, DUE TO INCREASED, UM, TRAFFIC DUE TO INCREASED FOOT TRAFFIC IN OUR, UM, SUBDIVISION, UM, THE INCREASING CRIME, INCREASING SPEED ACTIVITY ON HAUSMAN.
UM, MY FAMILY AND I TO HAVE, UH, VERY GREAT CONCERNS IN REGARDS TO THESE TWO TOPICS.
UM, IT IS AND SHOULD BE REALLY LOOKED INTO, UM, ADDRESS AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.
THE SPEED, UH, LIMITS AND THE, AND THE RACING DOWN HAUSMAN IS OF A HUGE CONCERN IN REGARDS TO MY FAMILY, MY, MY SMALL CHILD.
UM, SO I'M DEFINITELY CALLING IN REGARDS TO OPPOSING THIS REZONING.
MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 8 3 6 6 0 4 0.
I LIVE AT 6,800 WILLOW OAK IN DECA STATES.
I'M CALLING ABOUT CASE Z 2 MILLION 21 1 0 7 0 0 2 20 ON WEST HOUSEMAN.
I AM DENYING THE REQUEST TO REZONE PLEASE.
THEY CAN ALREADY BUILD SEVEN HOUSES.
THEY DON'T NEED TO MAKE IT EIGHT BECAUSE ONCE YOU CHANGE IT TO MF 18, THEY CAN DO BASICALLY ANYTHING THEY WANT.
SO PLEASE DENY THE REQUEST FOR REZONING.
MY ADDRESS IS 7 0 2 2 HAUSMAN ROAD, WEST SAN ANTONIO, SEVEN EIGHT TWO FOUR NINE.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO ONE ZERO FOUR FOUR FIVE FOUR FOUR NINE.
I'M CALLING ABOUT THIS ZONING CHANGE MEETING.
SOMEONE PLEASE CALL ME BACK AND TELL ME WHAT THIS IS AND WHAT THIS IS.
UM, BECAUSE THESE TWO ITEMS ARE SEEKING DIFFERENT CONTINUANCE DATES, WE WILL BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO.
THIS IS A DISTRICT EIGHT CASE.
SO COMMISSIONER ORTIZ TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION.
JUST THIS MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE REQUESTED DATE TO THE APRIL 19TH AND MAY 3RD FOR THE, UH, CASE.
WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE 'EM INDIVIDUALLY.
SO WE'LL GO WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO TO APRIL 19TH.
IS THERE A SECOND? NO OTHER WAY? NO, IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
UH, SO IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO? RIGHT? UM, KEN BROWN, UM, ONE 12 EAST PECAN.
UH, IF YOU REALLY, REALLY WANT IT, I'LL MAKE IT QUICK.
CLEARLY FROM THOSE SIX CALLS, ONE SAID THAT IT WAS GOING FROM RESIDENTIAL TO MF 18 AND IT'S COMMERCIAL.
UH, WE'RE PUTTING 42 HOUSES THERE.
UH, VERY, VERY LOW DENSITY, BUT THEY ARE NOT A REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SO WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO MEET WITH
[00:30:01]
THEM.AND UH, THE NEXT MEETING DATE THAT WE HAD SCHEDULED IS APRIL 19TH, WHICH IS THE NEXT ZONING COMMISSION HEARING.
UH, BUT THE MEETING IS THAT NIGHT, SO WE ARE RE REQUESTING A MEETING, UH, TO BE POSTPONED TILL MAY 3RD.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. BROWN.
WE'RE TALKING CASE THREE 40 RIGHT NOW.
HE SAID ITEM TWO, WHICH IS ITEM TWO.
IT DOES NOT SOUND LIKE THERE NEEDS TO BE ANY AMENDMENT TO THAT MOTION, SO WE WILL PROCEED.
IS THERE A SECOND? SORRY, I'LL SECOND THAT.
COMMISSIONER BARTOS IS THE SECOND ITEM.
NUMBER TWO IS MOVE HAS A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO APRIL 19TH BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS.
ANY DISCUSSIONS? SEEING NONE TO MY LEFT.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, CONTINUANCE TO APRIL 19TH.
MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL OR CONTINUANCE TO APRIL 19TH.
UH, ARE WE GOOD ON ITEM NUMBER TWO? ITEM NUMBER TWO IS SUPPOSED TO BE A CONTINUANCE TO MAY 3RD.
ALRIGHT, UH, GIVEN LIGHT OF THAT, IS THERE A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION? MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
I'M GOING WITH COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL AS THE SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE TO MY LEFT.
ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ITEM NUMBER TWO.
MOTION PASSES FOR RECONSIDERATION.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE AN ALTERNATE MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO? COMMISSIONER ORTIZ, WE'VE KIND OF BLOWN THROUGH THE RULES SO YOU CAN STILL MAKE IT.
THERE IS A MOTION TO CONTINUANCE FOR CONTINUANCE TO MAY 3RD BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, TWO, MAY 3RD.
MOTION PASSES TO CON, UH, FOR CONTINUANCE TO MAY 3RD.
IS THERE AN APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE?
MR. DONDA, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU.
ARE YOU REQUESTING A CONTINU? I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
ARE YOU REQUESTING CONTINUANCE? YES.
UM,
THIS IS A DISTRICT EIGHT CASE, SO COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION? UH, YES.
I'LL MOTION TO CONTINUE TO APRIL 19TH.
THERE'S A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO APRIL 19TH.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER REBATO.
ALRIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE TO MY LEFT.
MOTION IS CONTINUED TO FOUR 19.
OUR MOST EXCITING CONTINUANCE DOCKET EVER.
[00:35:01]
THANK YOU TO THE MICS FROM SASS.WE WILL SEE YOU NEXT TIME OR MAYBE IN A MONTH.
UM, BUT ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ALRIGHT, WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR INDIVIDUAL HEARING ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS DESA KOSS, PLANNER OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
IS LOCATED AT 4 2 4 2 MEDICAL DRIVE GOING FROM P U D C TWO TO C TWO S WITH A SPECIAL SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A HOTEL.
THERE ARE 215 NOTICES MAILED TO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED WITHIN THE 200 FEET.
AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE PROPOSED LEASE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES PRIMARILY BEING C TWO COMMERCIAL MF 33 MULTIFAMILY AND R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH ACTUAL LAND USE CONSISTING OF OFFICE SPACE, MEDIUM INTENSITY, COMMERCIAL OR EMPTY LAND.
THE ADDITION OF A HOTEL THROUGH SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION MATCHES THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? GOOD AFTERNOON.
JAMES MCKNIGHT FROM BRIAN ORTIZ.
UH, I WANNA REQUEST A CONTINUANCE TO MAY 3RD.
I'M KIDDING, I'M NOT GONNA DO THAT.
UM, UH, SO, UH, I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT FOR THE, THE C TWO SS.
AND, UH, THIS IS, OH, YOU HAVE MY, UH, P D F PRESENTATION PLEASE.
I WAS JUST ABOUT TO USE STAFF'S PRESENTATION, BUT I SPENT TIME ON THIS.
SO THE, THE FIRST SLIDE THAT I WANNA SHOW IS JUST AN OVERVIEW, EXCUSE ME, AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING IT'S, IT'S KIND OF AN ODD PROPERTY.
IT'S TWO ACRES THAT'S SORT OF BURIED BACK BEHIND AN OFFICE PARK.
SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE AROUND IT ARE EXISTING THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDINGS.
AS STAFF POINTED OUT, THE ZONING IS A A C TWO P.
THAT WAS FOR THE OFFICE COMPLEX THAT WAS COMPLETED IN THE EIGHTIES.
THERE'S C THREE ZONING ALL ALONG FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
THERE'S A C THREE ACROSS THE STREET ON MEDICAL TO OUR NORTHEAST.
THERE'S, UH, C TWO ZONING FOR A CONDO AND MF 33 AS WELL.
AND TO OUR SOUTH, ALSO C TWO AND C THREE.
SO WE'RE SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL AND MF 3 33 ZONING.
AND OUR REQUEST IS TO GO FROM THIS C TWO TO A C TWO SS.
SO THE, LITERALLY, THE ONLY THING THAT WE ARE ADDING FOR THIS USE IS THAT HOTEL USE AND, UM, SPECIFIC USE, I'M JUST GOING TO BE VERY BRIEF ABOUT THIS.
SPECIFIC USE GENERALLY MEANS THAT IS A, AN APPROPRIATE USE IN THAT BASE DISTRICT PENDING WHAT THE SITE PLAN LOOKS LIKE.
SO THAT'S THE, THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN FOR WHAT WE WANT TO CONSTRUCT.
THAT'S A, A FOUR TO FIVE STORY HOTEL.
AND WHAT WE'RE SHOWING HERE IS I WANTED TO SHOW THE CONTEXT ALL THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE EXISTING IN THE AREA, BUT ALSO HOW, UM, I WANNA SAY UNOBTRUSIVE.
THE HOTEL IS, I MEAN, IT'S ONLY 130 ROOMS. AND AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE, WE, WE PUSHED THE BUILDING, UH, AS FAR BACK FROM THE RESIDENCE ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE, THE CONDO ASSOCIATION, SPY GLASS HILL, UH, THAT'S NEARLY 60 FEET AWAY AND ALSO FROM THE SOUTH END.
AND, UM, THE, THE PORTION THAT'S FACING THE RESIDENCE DOES NOT HAVE ANY BALCONIES OR ANYTHING FACING THAT DIRECTION.
SO THE POR PORTION THAT EVEN HAS WINDOWS IS ANOTHER A HUNDRED FEET BEYOND THAT.
WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAD CONTINUED THIS CASE SO THAT WE COULD MEET WITH, UH, SPY GLASS HILL TWO WEEKS AGO.
AND THERE WERE A LOT OF CONCERNS.
THEY WERE, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, INGRESS AND EGRESS OF THE TRAFFIC THAT YOU CAN SEE IS COMING OFF OF MEDICAL.
THEY, THEY TALKED ABOUT, UH, THE HEIGHT OF THE HOTEL, UH, DRAINAGE ISSUES.
UM, SO THE CAR HEADLIGHTS THAT WERE, WOULD BE DRIVING THROUGH THE PARKING LOT OF THE AREA AND, YOU KNOW, THE VIEW THAT YOU COULD SEE AND THEN THE NOISE FROM THE HOTEL ITSELF.
NOW ALL OF THOSE THAT I JUST POINTED OUT THAT WE WENT THROUGH AND, AND, AND I, THAT'S NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST.
THERE WERE, THERE WERE A FEW THINGS BROUGHT UP, BUT A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WERE, UH, BRINGING UP WERE THINGS THAT ARE, THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY.
MEANING THE C TWO ZONING THAT'S THERE ALREADY SUPPORTS A THREE STORY, FIVE STORY OFFICE BUILDING.
THE HEIGHT THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS HOTEL THAT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY.
AS IT IS THE, THE CARS DRIVING AROUND THE PROPERTY AND POSSIBLY HEADLIGHTS SHINING INTO THERE THAT EXISTS TODAY.
THERE'S AN ALREADY A, AN OFFICE COMPLEX WHERE THERE ARE CARS PARKED WITH THEIR HEADLIGHTS FACING THAT DIRECTION.
THE, UM, THE, THE SEPARATION OF HAVING A FENCE, THAT BECAME ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES.
SO WHAT WE DID IN THE SITE PLAN WAS TRYING TO SAY, OKAY, WE'VE PUSHED
[00:40:01]
THE, THE HOTEL FURTHER AWAY, BUT WE'RE GONNA ADD, WE'RE GONNA TAKE AWAY AS MUCH PARKING AS WE CAN ALONG THAT EDGE AND LEAVE IN THE, THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER.IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, IT'S HARD TO SEE FROM THERE.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT WAS, UM, A CHANGE THAT WE MADE IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE TREES THAT ARE THERE ON THAT NORTHERN BORDER TO STAY.
UH, WE ALSO HAVE AGREED, THEY ASKED FOR AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID FENCE.
THEY WANTED A MORE, UM, THEY WANTED A MASONRY WALL.
WE AGREED TO AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID FENCE AND THAT WOULD DISCOURAGE PEOPLE JUMPING THE FENCE.
THAT WAS SOMETHING WE HEARD ABOUT A LOT FROM OTHER AREAS.
UM, AND THE SOLID OBVIOUSLY WOULD PREVENT THE, THE LIGHTS FROM SHINING THROUGH.
SO WE, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I PUT IN THE SITE PLAN THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY COMMIT TO AS PART OF THIS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP A LOT THAT I I MENTIONED WAS DRAINAGE.
UM, WE, DRAINAGE IS NOT A ZONING ISSUE AND IT'S ON THE PROPERTY AS IT IS ZONE COMMERCIAL.
BUT WE, WE KNOW BECAUSE IT'S AN ISSUE BECAUSE THERE IS FLOODING THAT COMES DOWN ON THAT.
ON THE EASTERN SOUTHEASTERN SIDE, WE, UH, I'VE TALKED TO THE ENGINEER TODAY JUST TO SAY WE DON'T HAVE OUR PLANS READY FOR THAT YET 'CAUSE WE'RE JUST GOING THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS.
BUT AS WE DO THAT, WE WOULD SHARE THEM WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO SAY, HERE'S OUR PLAN FOR, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO MITIGATE ANYTHING THAT'S HAPPENING ON THAT PROPERTY.
THIS IS JUST VIEWS OF THE, THE PLAN FOR THE HOTEL.
IT'S A, IT'S A NEW MODEL SPEC MODEL THAT THEIR, THEIR STAYBRIDGE SUITE IS OFFERING.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S A VIEW OF WHAT WE WOULD BE SEEING.
AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM PHOTO OF THE EDGE THAT'S FACES THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR IS CLOSEST TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT HAVE ANY WINDOWS.
AND YOU CAN KEEP SCROLLING DOWN TO THE PHOTOGRAPH.
THIS IS A VIEW FROM STANDING INSIDES BY GLASS HILL.
I JUST WANTED TO GET AN IDEA BECAUSE OF THE, THE TOPOGRAPHY IT DROPS A LITTLE BIT.
WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE? SO THOSE ARE THE EXISTING TREES THAT ARE ON THAT PROPERTY LINE.
UM, SO YOU CAN IMAGINE WE'RE ADDING AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE TO THAT AND WE'RE ACTUALLY PLANTING MORE TREES ON TOP OF WHAT IS EXISTING.
THIS IS ANOTHER SHOT STANDING ESSENTIALLY THE SAME PLACE, JUST TURNING MORE DIRECTLY TOWARDS WHERE THE HOTEL IS SO THAT YOU CAN SEE WHEN YOU'RE STANDING THERE, IT'S NOT AS OBTRUSIVE AS YOU THINK YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT HOTEL IS ANOTHER 60 FEET BACK BEYOND THAT AND THE WINDOWS ANOTHER A HUNDRED FEET BEYOND.
AND THIS IS, IT'S HARD TO SEE, BUT THESE ARE THE CARS THAT ARE ALREADY PART OF THE PARKING LOT THAT ARE THERE AND PARKED UP AGAINST THE FENCE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS PHOTO AND THE BOARDS THAT ARE THERE ARE EIGHT FOOT BOARDS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE FENCE, UM, BY, I BELIEVE BY SPYGLASS HILLS TO TRY TO BLOCK OUT SOME OF THE, THE LIGHT.
SO WE ARE NOW SAYING, OKAY, WELL WE'LL DO THAT.
WE'LL PUT IN THAT BRAND NEW FENCE AS PART OF THIS ZONING.
UH, LAST SLIDE IS JUST A, JUST SHOWING THE SITE PLAN AGAIN, AND I'LL JUST REITERATE THAT, UH, THE ZONING REQUEST IS FAIRLY SIMPLE.
ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS AS PART OF THIS ARE ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY ALREADY.
SO THE, THE USE IS THE ONLY ITEM THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ADDING AS PART OF THIS.
AND I'LL, UM, I'LL SAVE SOME TIME FOR REBUTTAL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. MCKNIGHT.
UH, IS THERE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR.
WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED IN TO SPEAK.
PAT, ARE YOU PRESENT? AND IF YOU WOULD TELL US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PLEASE.
IT IS, UH, PAT ICAA IN LB 78 80 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MY EMPLOYER.
UM, BACK IN THE NINETIES WHEN THEY BUILT THE BUDGET SUITE OF AMERICA, THEY ALLOWED, UM, HIDE WAS THREE STORIES AND NOW THIS HOTEL IS COMING BACK WITH FIVE STORIES.
WE DON'T OPPOSE THE BUILD OR ANYTHING, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE RULES ARE THE SAME THAT WE HAD TO UPHOLD AT THAT TIME.
UH, WE SENT A LETTER FROM OUR LEGAL COUNSEL STATING THE SAME FACTS, BUT THAT'S OUR OPPOSITION IS THE HEIGHT, NOT THE ACTUAL BUILD.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH SIR.
ALRIGHT, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SIR.
THERE IS NOT A STORY LIMITATION, THERE IS A HEIGHT LIMITATION, BUT AS YOU INCREASE YOUR SETBACKS, YOU CAN INCREASE THE HEIGHT THAT'S ALLOWED AND THAT IS HOW THAT HEIGHT IS ALLOWED ON THIS PROPERTY.
SO 25 C TWO ALLOWS 25 FEET, BUT AS YOU INCREASE YOUR SETBACK YOU CAN GO HIGHER AND THAT'S WHERE IT COMES FROM.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. MCKNIGHT.
THIS IS A DISTRICT EIGHT CASE, SO COMMISSIONER ORTIZ TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
ACTUALLY A QUESTION FOR STAFF WITH THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED AS A C TWO AND WE, WE CAN'T RECOMMEND ANY TYPE OF, UH, RESTRICTIONS OBVIOUSLY ON THIS, BUT IS THERE A WAY FOR THEM, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE GONNA KEEP THE BUILDING AT FOUR STORAGE OR FIVE STORIES, IS THAT WHAT HE'S SAYING? 'CAUSE THEY CURRENTLY ARE ZONED WITH THE C TWO WHERE THEY CAN DO TECHNICALLY BUILDING CAN BE THAT HEIGHT.
THEY'RE GONNA USE A STAIR STEP APPROACH THAT IS ALLOWED IN, UH, SECTION 35, BUT IT, IT, THEY CAN INCREASE THEIR HEIGHT TO THAT SIZE USING THAT APPROACH OF MOVING AWAY FROM THE SETBACK.
[00:45:01]
ON THIS ITEM, YOU CAN HAVE CONDITIONS ON THIS ITEM BECAUSE IT, IT'S A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION.SO IF THERE WERE CERTAIN HOURS OF OPERATION OR BUFFERING OR YOU COULD, YOU COULD DO THAT.
WOULD YOU BE, UH, WILLING TO PUT ANY OF THESE RESTRICTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS INTO YOUR S INTO THE, UH, PLANS IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
WE, WE DO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF FIVE STORIES AND THEN ALSO, I GUESS ONCE YOU DO HAVE THE PLANS TO SHARE THEM WITH SPYGLASS REGARDING THE DRAINAGE ISSUES AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, YOU CAN KIND OF HAVE AMENDS AND ABSOLUTELY JUST GOOD COMMUNICATION BETWEEN BOTH PARTIES.
WE, I'VE, UM, ESTABLISH A PRETTY GOOD RAPPORT, I THINK WITH THE PRESIDENT, I HOPE.
AND UH, YEAH, I'VE TOLD THEM THAT WE WOULD SHARE WITH HIM.
COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER BARTOS? YEAH, JUST A SIMPLE QUESTION IF YOU DON'T MIND.
WHO, WHO IS THE APPLICANT AND WHO IS THE OPERATOR? THE HOTEL? IS IT A FRANCHISE OR A CORPORATE? YEAH, IT'S GONNA BE A STAYBRIDGE SUITES.
THE APPLICANT RIGHT NOW IS A PRIVATE INVESTOR.
IT'S ACTUALLY A DOCTOR WHO'S IS INTERESTED IN, UH, HIS PATIENTS DIDN'T HAVE, OR THE FAMILIES OF HIS PATIENTS DIDN'T HAVE A PLACE TO STAY, LITERALLY DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TO STAY.
THAT LEADS ME TO A COMMENT THAT I, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE WITH THE INCREASE OF THE MEDICAL CENTER, UH, AND MORE FAMILIES COMING FROM SOUTH TEXAS FROM ALL OVER.
UH, I THINK WE'RE GONNA SEE AN INCREASE IN THE NEED FOR LIMITED SERVICE HOTELS WHERE THE FAMILIES CAN STAY NEAR THE MEDICAL CENTER.
SO YOU ANSWER MY, MY QUESTION.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RES.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMERS TO MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT? YES.
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, YOU DID MENTION AN EIGHT FOOT, UH, SOLID FENCE.
IS THAT ON THE SITE PLAN OR IS THAT A CONDITION YOU WOULD AGREE TO HAVE PUT INTO THE RECORD? IT'S ON THE SITE PLAN RIGHT NOW.
I, IT'S, IT'S LISTED AS AN EIGHT FOOT, UH, WOODEN OPAQUE FENCE.
UM, WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AS THEY HAVE ASKED FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF FENCES.
SO WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM BEFORE CITY COUNCIL.
AND WOULD YOU ALSO AGREE TO MAYBE LIGHTING AWAY FROM THAT UH, CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX? YES MA'AM.
THAT, THAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE PLAN AS WELL ON THE FENCE AS WELL.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
UH, FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT.
ALRIGHT, UH, QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF.
YOU KNOW, THERE SEEMS TO BE A QUESTION OF FAIRNESS WITH RESPECT TO THE BUDGET SUITES OF AMERICA.
UM, BUT REFERENCING A PREVIOUS ANSWER, I THINK, UH, THE QUESTION OF HEIGHT IN THIS CASE IS DETERMINED SIMPLY BY THE C TWO ZONING AND RESTRICTIONS WITHIN THAT WITH RESPECT TO HEIGHT THAT ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL USE.
IS THAT FAIR OR WAS THAT JUST REALLY CONVOLUTED? UNNECESSARILY? SO
SO, UM, IT'S LIMITED IN ALL DISTRICTS.
UM, WITHIN THE FIRST 50 FEET TO TWO AND A HALF STORIES, 35 FEET.
C TWO AS A BASE HAS A LIMITATION OF 25 FEET.
BUT YOU CAN GET MORE HEIGHT, UM, WITH THE, WHAT WE CALL THE WEDDING CAKE APPROACH.
UM, WHERE IT'S EVERY, FOR EVERY ONE FOOT BACK YOU GET TWO FEET HIGHER.
BUT THAT LIMITATION, THAT RESTRICTION ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY STILL APPLIES WITHIN THE FIRST 50 FEET.
AND THEN IN THIS CASE, WITH UH, THE SITE PLAN RESTRICTION, HE CAN, YOU CAN CAP THE HEIGHT AND THAT'S WHAT IS IMPLEMENTED DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
SO THOSE TWO THINGS ARE THE REASON WHY, YOU KNOW, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL HERE FOR THIS HIGHER UNIT.
UH, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PREVIOUS CASE.
IS THAT FAIR? THAT'S PRETTY FAIR.
I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU HAVE TO QUALIFY, BUT, UH, VERY WELL.
ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ FOR YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
I'M JUST GONNA ACTUALLY JUST MAKE A COMMENT, UM, JUST BEING IN THE AREA AND LIKE, UH, COMMISSIONER BOS WAS SAYING, I THINK THAT AREA IS LACKING OVERNIGHT STAYS FOR PEOPLE WITH INCREASED, YOU KNOW, DUE TO ILLNESSES AND STUFF HAPPENING IN THE AREA.
SO I'M JUST GONNA GO AHEAD AND JUST UH, MAKE MY MOTION ONCE YOU'RE READY.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE MY MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND I'LL SECOND THAT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RE BOTTLE'S DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT.
UM, I AGAIN JUST WANNA TAKE THE TIME TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR TRYING TO WORK WITH THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMPLEX NEXT DOOR.
I DO APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO WORK OUT THEIR CONCERNS AND UH, HOPE YOU HAVE UH, BEST OF LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT.
SEEING, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT'S WITH UM, A MAXIMUM HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
CAN WE GET THAT CLARIFIED FOR THE RECORD, JAMES? ALRIGHT.
WOULD UH, COMMISSIONER MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? YES.
[00:50:01]
AHEAD, UM, WITH THE APPLICANT JUST AS LONG AS WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE FENCING, LIGHTING, DRAINAGE PLANS AND WORKING WITH SPYGLASS AND OF COURSE THE HEIGHT, WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION.I'LL PUT ON THE SITE PLAN TO MAXIMUM ADVICE STORIES.
BOTTLES WITHOUT QUALIFICATION, I AGREE WITH THAT.
UH, SO, UH, SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR WITH CONDITIONS AS STATED ON THE RECORD, UH, BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTLES ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
UH, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE PLEASE.
MY NAME IS SUMMER MCCANN ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS LOCATED AT 7 1 4 VANCE JACKSON GOING FROM R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR HARDWARE SALES TO NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET AND LOS ANGELES HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED THE EXISTING R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR HARDWARE SALES IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE AREA.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS FRONTING A LOCAL STREET AND A BUDDING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
ALTHOUGH THE PROPERTY IS ALONG A SECONDARY ARTERIAL, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE EAST SIDE V JACKSON VANCE JACKSON, WHICH IS PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL.
ADDITIONALLY, FURTHER ENCROACHMENT OF COMMERCIAL USES IS NOT ENCOURAGED OR SUPPORTED AT THIS LOCATION.
UM, I DIDN'T SEE THE APPLICANT BUT I DON'T SEE THE APPLICANT EITHER.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE? ALRIGHT, THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, HOW KIND WILL YOU BE TODAY?
UM, YES SIR, I DID SIGN UP TO SPEAK BUT THIS IS ALSO IN THE AREA OF THE W
IF I GIVE THREE MINUTES, UH, IF YOU DIDN'T SIGN UP, I'M SORRY BUT OKAY.
I THINK, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR POSITION IS, BUT, UM, COMMISSIONER GRADO, I'LL ACTUALLY GIVE IT TO YOU.
WE'LL SEE HOW KIND YOU WANT TO BE.
UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE SPEAKER, DO YOU WANT A SPEAKER? DO WE WANT THE SPEAKER? UM, YES.
WE'LL GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES, WHY NOT IF YOU ANNOUNCE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND STATE YOUR POSITION OKAY.
WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
MY NAME'S ERNEST SALINAS, I'M THE PRESIDENT FOR THE DELL VIEW AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, I DIDN'T KNOW THIS CASE WAS COMING UP, BUT I'M HERE FOR ANOTHER CASE.
UH, BUT I, UH, SEVEN, UH, 7 1 4 FANS CHECKS AND, UH, I WE WOULD BE OPPOSED, UH, TO THIS, TO THIS UH, UH, ZONE CHANGE SIMPLY BECAUSE IT'S A BUSY STREET.
UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY WOULD USE, UH, WHAT THEY WOULD USE FOR PARKING OTHER THAN THE ALLEY.
SO WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF ACCIDENTS THERE.
UH, AND IT'S JUST, UH, SWITCHING A SINGLE FAMILY INTO A BUSINESS COMMERCIAL.
I THINK WE WANT A SUPPORT SINGLE FAMILY, UH, HOMES AT THIS TIME IN THAT AREA.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH SIR.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
UM, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
UM, WITH RESPECT TO THIS CASE.
UM, WE'VE HEARD THIS, NOT, NOT THIS PARTICULAR CASE, BUT THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF A ZONING CASE IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.
WHAT, BACK ON IN 2019 IT WAS REZONED FOR THE ONE CONDITIONAL USE OF HARDWARES WEAR SALES.
AND WHAT WERE THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE PLACED ON THAT? DO YOU HAVE HAVE THAT WE DON'T HAVE, YEAH, THAT WE DON'T HAVE.
NO, I GUESS I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.
UM, IF WE WERE TO REZONE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, WHAT OTHER CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY COULD OCCUR WITH RESPECT TO SETBACKS HEIGHTS? UM, PHYSICAL CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY.
ALRIGHT, WELL IT BECOMES NOW A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL USE.
AND SO WE'VE GOT SETBACKS THAT ARE
[00:55:02]
15, FRONT SETBACK MAXS, UM, SIDE SETBACK OF 10 AND THERE'S A LITTLE NOTE ON THAT, WHICH IS USUALLY MEANS THAT IF IT'S A BUDDING, UH, RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S, IT'S EVEN STRICTER.AND THEN THERE'S A 30 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK AS WELL.
NOW THERE'S ALREADY A STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS A, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, SO THEY'D BE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? SEEING NONE QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT.
UH, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE MOTION.
UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THIS CASE.
UM, I'M DISAPPOINTED THE APPLICANT'S NOT HERE BECAUSE I WOULD'VE LIKED TO HAVE HEARD FROM THEM.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WITH RESPECT TO THIS CASE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL.
UM, 'CAUSE IT NEEDED A PLAN AMENDMENT.
SO AS FAR AS CONSISTENCY GOES, UM, WE WOULD NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE, UM, FUTURE LAND USE.
ALSO THE ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORING LAND, I THINK ARE SIGNIFICANT.
UM, WE HAVE TRAFFIC TURNING ONTO A RESIDENTIAL STREET IN ORDER TO ACCESS, AND AS THE SPEAKER EARLIER MENTIONED, UM, IT, IT, THE PARKING SITUATION COULD BE VERY DIFFICULT.
UM, AND WHILE THE CURRENT USE IS NOT NECESSARILY A RESIDENTIAL USE AND IT IS A COMMERCIAL USE, THERE WERE CONDITIONS PLACED ON THAT, UM, THAT DO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS.
I BELIEVE IT WAS HOURS OF OPERATION.
UM, AND I, I KNOW THERE WERE A FEW OTHERS.
UM, SO I JUST THINK THAT THIS IS A CLASSIC CASE OF COMMERCIAL CREEP AND THAT THE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORS ARE TOO GREAT AND THEREFORE, UM, RECOMMENDING DENIAL.
ALRIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION, UH, FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIPES.
DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT, TO MY RIGHT.
MOTION FOR DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS SUMMER MCCANN ZONING PLAN WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER SIX IS LOCATED AT 16 7 3 5 SOUTH STATE HIGHWAY 16 GOING FROM FR FARM AND RANCH DISTRICT TO R FIVE, UH, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 11 NOTICES MAILED ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE EXISTING FR FARM AND RANCH DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE REQUESTED R FIVE SINGLE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ABUTTING.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PRIMARILY ABUTTING VACANT PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS.
HOWEVER, THE WIDER SURROUNDING AREA IS LARGELY MADE UP OF INDUSTRIAL USES.
THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE WITHIN AN AREA THAT IS HEAVILY INDUSTRIAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, GOOD TO HEAR FROM ME AGAIN.
JAMES MCKNIGHT, BROWNER ORTIZ 1 1 2 EAST PECAN.
SO I, I KNOW HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE.
UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH DISCUSSION WE NEED TO, BUT THERE IS A, A PLAN AMENDMENT PENDING AS WELL.
THE, UH, THE ORDER OF THINGS GOT FLIPPED, SO THAT HAS NOT COME THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION YET, BUT OUR REQUEST IS FROM FARM AND RANCH TO R FIVE.
THIS IS JUST AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROPERTY.
THE WHAT'S OUTLINED IN BLUE IS ACTUALLY A LARGER VERSION OF THE TRACT.
IT'S NOT WHAT WE ARE ASKING TO BE REZONED.
YOU CAN SEE THIS IS ON, UH, HIGHWAY 16, THAT'S WATSON ROAD TO THE NORTH.
THE PRESERVED DEVELOPMENT IS, IS DIRECTLY NORTH OF US.
THE, ALL OF THE PROPERTY THAT YOU SEE EAST OF HIGHWAY 16 IS LEADING TO, UH, THE TOYOTA INDUSTRIAL PLANT, WHICH IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF, UM, APPLEWHITE ROAD.
THIS IS A CLOSER VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.
SO YOU CAN, YOU CAN SEE JUST HOW, UH, SPARSE THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN THE AREA.
THAT RED LINE THAT REPRESENTS THE AREA THAT'S, UH, INSIDE CITY LIMITS.
EVERYTHING NORTH OF THAT LINE IS INSIDE CITY LIMITS.
EVERYTHING SOUTH OF THAT IS OUTSIDE.
[01:00:01]
ACRES IS IN THE E T J, 78 IS IN THE CITY LIMITS, BUT ONLY 65 OF THOSE 78 IS WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY SPEAKING ABOUT TODAY.AND AS I SAID BEFORE, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE NORTH AND WEST OF US IS THE PRESERVED DEVELOPMENT.
THERE'S A VIEW OF THE ZONING MAP.
AS YOU CAN SEE, EVERYTHING IN OUR AREA IS FARM, FARM AND RANCH FOR THIS PROPERTY INTO OUR IMMEDIATE WEST.
BUT TO THE NORTH YOU CAN SEE IS THE PRESERVED DEVELOPMENT.
THAT'S ACTUALLY ZONED R FIVE FOR SINGLE FAMILY.
AND, UM, FURTHER NORTH ALONG HIGHWAY 16, THAT'S ZONED C TWO.
THAT WAS DONE IN, UH, 2017 AS PART OF, UH, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PRESERVED DEVELOPMENT.
SO THAT'S PART OF OUR ARGUMENT IS HOW WE ARE ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY USES AND ZONING, UM, AS PART OF, AS YOU'LL SEE IN A SITE PLAN IN A MINUTE, AS PART OF THAT FARM AND RANCH, THIS IS A, A NATURAL TIER AREA.
31 ACRES OF THAT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE USED AS OPEN SPACE.
WE'D LIKE TO DEDICATE IT TO THE CITY, BUT THAT'S NOT COMPLETELY UP TO US, BUT WE DO WANT IT TO BE OPEN SPACE.
HERE'S A VIEW, I APOLOGIZE THAT IT'S TURNED.
THAT'S, THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT WAS DRAWN, UM, IS A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING.
SO EVERYTHING IN THE HATCHED RED ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THIS DRAWING IS THE SINGLE FAMILY UNITS.
THAT'S OVERALL, THAT'S 445 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
247 OF THEM IS ACTUALLY IN THE CITY LIMITS.
SO THAT DENSITY IS APPROXIMATELY 3.8 UNITS PER ACRE.
THAT INCLUDES SOME OF THAT INCLUDES THAT 31 ACRES OF, UH, OPEN SPACE THAT WE HAVE THAT'S ALONG THE NATURAL MEDINA RIVER AREA.
UM, WE ALSO ARE SHOWING SOME, SOME PARK AT PARKS AND SOME AMENITY CENTER AREAS TO PROVIDE AMENITIES TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
IN THE E T J, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S ANOTHER A HUNDRED EIGHT, A HUNDRED NINETY EIGHT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT'S APPROXIMATELY 3.7 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NOT A DENSITY LIMITATION IN THIS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS.
AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE ACCESS POINTS ALONG HIGHWAY 16 AND ALONG NOAS ROAD.
SO I WANNA TALK ABOUT POLICY BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL FOR THE REQUEST IN THE SA TOMORROW PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2016.
THIS LAID OUT THE FRAMEWORK FOR HOW SAN ANTONIO WAS GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR GROWTH.
AND ONE OF THE MAJOR ISSUES IN THAT PLAN THAT WAS ADDRESSED WAS POPULATION.
SO THIS IS TAKEN STRAIGHT FROM THAT PLAN.
PROJECTED GROWTH FOR BEXAR COUNTY IS EXPECTED TO ADD UP TO 1.1 MILLION NEW RESIDENTS WITH 500,000 NEW JOBS AND 500,000 NEW DWELLING UNITS BY 2040.
SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS.
WHERE ARE ALL THESE PEOPLE GOING TO LIVE? THE NEXT ISSUE THAT'S ALSO ADDRESSED IS DENSITY.
THERE ISN'T ENOUGH LAND TO CAPTURE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IF DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES UNDER THE SAME DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS.
INCREASING THE AVERAGE DENSITY OF SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WILL HELP REDUCE SOME OF THE DEMAND FOR LAND.
SO THAT'S, YOU'RE NOT JUST LOOKING AT ESTATE LOTS AND 10,000, 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.
YOU, WE, WE ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING TO INCREASE DENSITY IN, IN ADDITION TO JUST INCREASING THE POPULATION FROM THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN.
UH, PARTICULARLY AS PART OF THE SA TOMORROW PLAN, THERE IS, UH, THERE ARE SOME OF THE GOALS FOR, UH, LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION.
AND ONE OF THOSE IS A STRATEGY TO WORK WITH PRIVATE EMPLOYERS TO DEVELOP PLANS TO REDUCE TRAVEL DEMAND WITH THE RESULT OF REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY.
SO WE KNOW THAT, THAT SOME OF THE INDUSTRIAL USERS IN THE AREA LIKE TOYOTA HAVE A LOT OF WORKERS AND WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PLAN IS TELLING US THAT WE SHOULD HAVE WORKERS LIVE CLOSER TO WHERE THEY WORK, UH, REDUCING THOSE MILES TRAVELED.
ONE OF THE GOALS IN THERE TALKED ABOUT THE VEHICLE.
MILES TRAVELED PER CAPITA IN 2013 WAS 22.4 AND OUR GOAL BY 2040 IS 16.5.
TO DO THAT, YOU NEED TO REDUCE THE DISTANCE PEOPLE ARE TRAVELING TO GET TO THEIR WORK.
SOME OF THE OTHER GOALS THAT ARE PART OF PLANS THAT ARE STILL ADOPTED, THAT'S THE SECTOR PLAN.
THE HERITAGE SOUTH SECTOR PLAN ENCOURAGE HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING IN STRATEGIC NODES LIKE WATSON ROAD AND 16 LIKE WE HAVE.
ALSO A GOAL IS TO PROMOTE HERITAGE SOUTH AS AN AREA OF CHOICE FOR PROSPECTIVE HOME BUYERS.
AND THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE HAVE REALLY TRIED TO FOCUS ON IS, OR, OR SOME OF OUR CLIENTS HAVE TRIED TO FOCUS ON IS THERE IS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE SOME OF THE HOUSING STOCK IN THIS AREA.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS.
THE CLIMATE ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN.
I DIDN'T PUT ANYTHING SPECIFIC, BUT THAT GENERALLY HAS THE SAME GOALS TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AS THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN.
SO ALL OF THESE ARE THE POLICY GOALS THAT WHICH WE'RE SUPPOSED TO WORK FROM.
AND I BELIEVE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY IN THIS AREA MEETS ALL OF THOSE GOALS WHAT YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE U D C SA TOMORROW, INCLUDING THE, UH, SUSTAINABILITY PLAN, THE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN, THE LAND USE PLANS, THE HERITAGE SOUTH SECTOR PLAN, NONE OF THEM MENTION A PROHIBITION ON SINGLE FAMILY IN THIS AREA.
NONE OF THEM MENTIONED THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A BUFFER AREA, THAT THIS IS, THIS SHOULD ALL BE LEFT INDUSTRIAL THAT'S NOT IN THESE PLANS.
SO IF YOU FOLLOW WHAT'S IN THE PLAN AND LOOK AT THE, THE LAND USE PRINCIPLES THAT WE'RE
[01:05:01]
DEALING WITH, WE FEEL IS, IS HIGHLY APPROPRIATE TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY USE HERE.ONE THING STAFF MENTIONED WAS THAT IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE TO HAVE INDUSTRIAL USES NEAR SINGLE FAMILY.
HOWEVER WE CAN FIND IN EXAMPLES OF THAT ALL OVER THE CITY, AND THIS IS JUST SMALL EXAMPLES THAT I FOUND THAT WERE NEAR THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS A HUNTER'S POND DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ADJACENT TO ALL INDUSTRIAL ZONING.
AND ALSO ON HIGHWAY 90, NEAR LACKLAND, THERE'S A LARGE AREA OF INDUSTRIAL, BUT THE HOUSES HAVE COME UP VERY NEAR OR RIGHT UP TO THAT BUFFER.
AND THEN U D C CONTEMPLATES FOR THAT.
THE U D C HAS A WAY TO HANDLE, IF YOU DO HAVE INDUSTRIAL NEXT TO SINGLE FAMILY, YOU CAN HAVE BUFFERS AND SCREENING AND, AND SETBACKS TO HANDLE THAT.
SO IT'S NOT INAPPROPRIATE TO HAVE INDUSTRIAL AND SINGLE FAMILY NEAR EACH OTHER.
ANOTHER PRECEDENT YOU CAN LOOK AT IS THE PRESERVE THERE.
THERE'S A LARGE, UH, MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY JUST, UH, UH, JUST NORTH OF US AND ACTUALLY DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO OUR ENTIRE PROPERTY LINE ON THE NORTHWEST, IT'S BEING DEVELOPED FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND IT'S BEEN A SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT.
BUT WHAT YOU ACTUALLY, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH YOU DON'T SEE, IS INDUSTRIAL ZONING.
WE'RE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS TO THE SOUTH OF US, ACROSS HIGHWAY 16.
THAT'S ALSO OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, BUT IT'S ALSO FARM AND RANCH ZONING.
THERE IS A NATURAL AREA BECAUSE OF THE MEDINA RIVER NATURAL AREA, AND THAT'S A CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT'S PART OF THE PRESERVE, BUT THERE IS NOT INDUSTRIAL USES AND THERE ARE NOT INDUSTRIAL ZONING IN OUR AREA.
SO THE, I I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT'S NOT THE MOST APPROPRIATE VIEW OF, OF THE SINGLE FAMILY USES THAT WE'RE BRINGING TO THIS AREA.
SO IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THESE POINTS THAT I, THAT I HAVE AS, AS KIND OF THE APPLICATION OF THESE POLICIES AND LAND USE, THESE ZONING ISSUES TO THE, THE SITE YOU'RE ADJACENT TO, EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING, YOU'VE GOT CLEAR ACCESS POINTS WITH MINIMAL TRAFFIC INCREASES.
WE'RE NOT ADJACENT TO INDUSTRIAL ZONING OR USES.
WE'VE GOT MINIMAL DENSITY BOTH IN THE CITY LIMITS AND OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS WHERE THERE ISN'T A LIMIT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 3.8 UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH IS VERY CLOSE TO NP 15 ZONING.
UM, AND WE'VE PROVIDED AND ANTICIPATED THE AMENITIES TO SUPPORT THOSE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS, INCLUDING, UH, TRAIL SYSTEMS THAT CAN GO AND, AND, AND ADD TO THE MEDINA RIVER NATURAL AREA.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO LEAVE OR END IT ON A VIEW OF, AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE.
THAT'S 247 UNITS WITHIN CITY LIMITS AT A DENSITY OF 3.8 UNITS PER ACRE.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE IS A PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
ALRIGHT, MS. HUNSINGER, IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND TELL US YOUR POSITION ON THIS PROPOSED DEVELOP OR PROPOSED REZONING.
MY ADDRESS IS 1 6 3 9 5 STATE HIGHWAY 16 SOUTH.
I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS ZONING, UH, CHANGE AND I'M NOT A GOOD PUBLIC SPEAKER, SO I HAVE TO READ FROM WHAT I WANNA SAY.
UM, MY SIBLINGS, MY FOUR SIBLINGS, AND I INHERITED THIS PROPERTY.
WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THE ZONING RESTRICTIONS INFLICTED ON THIS PROPERTY UNTIL WE TRIED TO SELL IT.
UH, WITH THE CURRENT ZONING, WE ARE UNABLE TO SELL THE PROPERTY AT ITS FAIR MARKET VALUE.
MY FAMILY WAS NEVER MAILED ANY WRITTEN NOTICE FROM THE CITY REGARDING THE ZONING RESTRICTIONS THEY WOULD BE IMPOSING ON OUR PROPERTY, NOR DID THE CITY MAKE ANY OFFER TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY AT FAIR MARKET VALUE BEFORE ENTERING A ZONING AGREEMENT WITH TOYOTA.
THIS ZONING RESTRICTION HAS ADVERSELY AFFECTED OUR PROPERTY, UH, VALUE OUR INHERITANCE, AND, AND OUR FAMILY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OR INPUT IN ANY OF IT.
THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF THE E T J AND ANNEXATION POLICY BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TO PROMOTE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE, IMPROVED BASIC LIVING STANDARDS AND BASIC CITY SERVICES ARE DESPERATELY NEEDED IN THIS AREA OF THE CITY.
IN 2003, THIS PROPERTY WAS USED BY THE CITY TO HELP LURE TOYOTA TO BUILD THE PLANT IN SAN ANTONIO.
THE CITY ENTERED INTO THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT, UH, ZONING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND SAN ANTONIO AND SAN TOYOTA, WHICH ALLOWED THE CITY TO ZONE APPROPRIATE LAND USE GUIDELINES TO SATISFY TOYOTA AND THE THREE MILE BUFFER AROUND THE PLANT.
THIS AGREEMENT PUT ZONING RESTRICTIONS ON SEVERAL RURAL PROPERTIES, INCLUDING OURS, WHICH THE CITY DID NOT OWN.
NO NOTICES WERE MAILED TO ANY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS INVOLVED IN THE THREE MILE BUFFER, AND NO OFFERS WERE MADE TO PURCHASE IT AT PURE FAIR MARKET VALUE.
THIS AGREEMENT ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTIES AND WAS EXTREMELY UNFAIR TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WERE FORCED INTO THIS ZONING AGREEMENT.
[01:10:01]
I'M NOT EVEN SURE THIS ZONING AGREEMENT WOULD BE CONSIDERED LEGAL IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.IN ADDITION, THE OTHER ACRES, UH, IN OUR PROPERTY THAT IS, UH, THAT WASN'T RE REZONED IN THE E T J, UM, IS SOUTH OF MED.
THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS SOUTH OF MEDINA RIVER ON HIGHWAY 16 AND IS SURROUNDED BY UN ZONE PROPERTIES, WHICH ARE NOT WITHIN THE E T J AND WHOSE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE NOT SUB SUBJECT TO THE STARBRIGHT AGREEMENT.
I HOPE YOUR FAVORABLE, EQUITABLE DECISION, DECISION ON THIS REQUEST WILL BE GIVEN.
I ALSO WANTED TO INDICATE OR MENTION THAT IN THE AREA THAT WE LIVE IN, THERE IS NO INTERNET ACCESS OR OTHER THAN ON YOUR PHONE FOR, UM, UH, WHEN YOU LINK TO YOUR PHONE, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO LINES ANYWHERE, NO FIBER OPTICS, NOTHING.
SO IF WE HAD ANY SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN IN IN OUR HOMES, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN SCHOOL DURING THE COVID OUTBREAK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MS. HUNSINGER.
ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, NOTHING ELSE.
UH, COMMISSIONER KAMATH TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
I I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN ON THIS.
THE, UH, THE STARR AGREEMENT, UH, THE SPEAKER JUST MENTIONED.
UM, UM, I, I'M, I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHE WHEN IT WAS SIGNED OR AGREED UPON, HAS, UH, CITY STAFF, ANYTHING WE CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON IT.
I KNOW THAT, UM, COUNSEL APPROVED THE, UH, STARRETT AGREEMENT, UM, PRIOR TO, UH, TOYOTA ACQUIRING THE LAND.
IT WOULD'VE BEEN PRIOR TO 2010 AT LEAST.
UM, SO I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT DATE THOUGH.
TOYOTA CAME INTO SAN ANTONIO WAY BEFORE THAT.
RIGHT? SO I WANNA SAY IT'S, IT'S PROBABLY AROUND 2003, 2004, MAYBE EVEN BEFORE THAT, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE, YOU WENT TO HAVE THE TOYOTA TO AGREE TO COME TO THE SOUTH SIDE.
THEY PROBABLY HAVE ENTERED INTO SOME KIND OF AGREEMENT WITH THE TOYOTA.
SO PRIOR, PRIOR TO THE STAR BRIDE AGREEMENT, UH, THE AREAS, UH, WENT INTO A LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEXATION FROM WHAT I REMEMBER.
UH, SO JUST BRING, GOING BACK INTO HISTORY, WHEN I WAS IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, WE WENT THROUGH A PROCESS, A LAND USE DESIGNATION PROCESS WITH THE CITY SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN.
UM, AND ALSO, UM, INTERIM, UH, ZONING, IF YOU WILL, IN ORDER TO, UH, ESTABLISH LAND USES IN THE APPROPRIATE ZONING.
THEN IT WENT THROUGH, UH, FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION PROCEDURES YEARS AFTER THAT.
UH, BUT THE STARR AGREEMENT, UM, CAME IN, I WANNA SAY RIGHT AROUND 2003.
I'D HAVE TO PULL UP THE ACTUAL DATE, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS, WHAT A WAYS BACK, TWO, 2003.
SO IT WAS PASSED AND APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2003.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UH, MR. MCKNIGHT, THE, YOU MENTIONED THE, SOME OF THE PROPERTY THAT YOU, YOUR CLIENT WANT DEVELOPED IS, UH, IN THE COUNTY AND SOME OF THE PROPERTIES IN CITY.
SO, UM, IF WE, DOES IT DEPEND ON HOW THE OUTCOME OF YOUR APPLICATION IS FOR THE DEVELOPER TO DEVELOP THE PART OF THE PROPERTY IN THE COUNTY AND NOT IN THE CITY? SO IN TERMS OF ACTUALLY DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY THAT IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, TECHNICALLY NO, IT DOES NOT AFFECT IT BECAUSE THEY CAN DEVELOP OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS.
HOWEVER, IN PRACTICAL REALITY IT DOES, BECAUSE IT'S ALL ONE TRACKED.
AND SO HAVING TO TRY TO CUT IT OFF AT THE CITY LIMITS LINE AND TRY TO DEVELOP HALF OF IT, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S SOME, SOME FLOODPLAIN IN THAT AREA, IT PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, ASK THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO, UH, UH, DISCUSS THIS CASE BECAUSE IT, IT NOT ONLY IMPACTS THE DISTRICT FOUR, IT ALSO IMPACTS THE, UH, UM, OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH, UH, ONE OF THE LARGE EMPLOYERS, YOU KNOW.
I THINK WE CAN DO THAT IF, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN HAVE BEFORE WE BEGIN THAT DISCUSSION? UM, THIS APPEARS TO BE PERENNIAL, UH, QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT COMMISSIONERS.
QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT COMMISSIONERS? YES.
[01:15:01]
MCDANIEL.SO QUESTION FOR STAFF WITH REGARD TO THE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY THAT'S GOING IN, I GUESS RIGHT ABOVE THAT, HOW, HOW IS THAT TAKING PLACE GIVEN THAT IT'S IN THE SAME PROXIMITY TO THIS, WHICH FALLS WITHIN THAT, UM, NON-DEVELOPMENT AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL? YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE AREA THAT'S OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS? WELL, THE, THE PRESERVE AND THE PRESERVE, WHAT, I'M SORRY, I FORGET THE NAME OF THE PRESERVE, BUT IT'S, IT'S THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THIS PROJECT.
SO IT WOULD, IT WOULD DEPEND ON, UH, THE TIMELINE THAT, THAT, UH, DEVELOPMENT WAS IN PLACE.
SO IF IT WAS PART OF A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, THAT HAPPENED BEFORE, UM, ALL, ANY ZONING PROCEDURES TOOK PLACE, AND THAT, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DETERMINED TO SEE HOW THAT TIMELINE IMPACTS AND WHY THAT DEVELOPMENT OCCURS TODAY.
AND THAT'S WHAT LEADS ME TO THE DISCUSSION AND THE CONSIDERATION HERE.
IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND IF THAT MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS IN PLAY BEFORE THAT AGREEMENT WITH TOYOTA OR NOT.
IS THERE A WAY TO TELL US THAT? I CAN, NOT RIGHT NOW.
UNLESS THE APPLICANT KNOWS MORE ABOUT THAT INFORMATION.
WE HAVE THE ATTORNEY HERE THAT WORKED ON THAT.
SO IF YOU WANT, COME ON DANIEL.
SO THE, YEAH, I THINK THE M D P WAS ADOPTED IN 2006.
UM, BUT WE, I MEAN, WE WERE WORKING ON I ITEMS AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT PRIOR TO THAT, BUT IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T CHANGE ULTIMATELY THE, THE LAND USE PRINCIPLES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE IT WAS ACTUALLY ADOPTED AFTER 2003.
I'M, AND, AND IT WAS REZONED IN 2017, RIGHT? NO, I'M, I YOU'RE NOT FOLLOWING ME, BUT THAT'S SO, OKAY.
SO WE HAVE A, AN AGREEMENT THAT WAS SIGNED SOMEWHAT NEAR THE TIME THAT THIS M D P WAS PUT INTO PLACE AS WELL.
SO TO ME, THAT JUST KIND OF OPENS THE DOOR, I THINK, FOR CONSIDERATION OF THIS.
UM, SO WITH REGARD, AND I KNOW YOU JUST ANSWERED PART OF THAT QUESTION, UM, IF THIS, UM, CASE IS NOT APPROVED, WILL YOUR APPLICANT MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE O C L PORTION OF THIS PROJECT? I DON'T KNOW.
I, I KNOW THAT IT WOULD BE A LOT MORE DIFFICULT.
THEY'VE PLANNED IT AS ONE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMERS TO MY WRIGHT? YES.
COMMISSIONER HU UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY YOU BELIEVE OR NOT WHETHER STARBRITE APPLIES TO YOUR APPLICATION OR NOT.
BUT FOR ONE, THE AGREEMENT REFERS TO PUTTING IN BUFFER ZONES BY AN OVERLAY THAT WAS NEVER ADOPTED.
AND THAT'S ONE THING THAT YOU CAN SAY PER AN AGREEMENT IS WHERE IS THAT OVERLAY? YOU'RE NOT A PARTY TO IT.
WELL, THERE'S THAT AS WELL,
SO THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO, AT LEAST IN THIS CASE FOR THAT OVERLAY, THAT BUFFER AREA.
IT'S JUST THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND TOYOTA.
SO HOW DOES IT APPLY TO US IN THAT RESPECT? I MEAN, IT'S AN, IT IS AN AGREEMENT.
SO THAT'S HOW I WOULD SAY IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO US.
UH, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER KAMATH HAS, UM, ASKED FOR SOME DISCUSSION.
UH, COMMISSIONER KAMATH, I DO HAVE THOUGHTS ON THIS, BUT, UH, I WILL GIVE IT TO YOU FIRST FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION, OR IF YOU WANNA HOLD ON THE MOTION, WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION FIRST.
YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD OFF ON THE MOTION UNTIL I HEAR ALL THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
ANY, UM, ANY, ANY THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS WILL BE, UH, WELCOME.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO KICK OFF, I'M GONNA SEEK THAT BENEFIT AT THIS TIME.
UM, WE ARE A RECOMMENDING BODY OF THE CITY WHO LOOKS AT LAND USE.
UM, MY VIEW IS PERSONALLY, AND, AND I THINK WE CAN ALL BE GUIDED BY OUR CONSCIENCE HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WILL GO INTO MUCH GREATER DETAIL, I'M SURE AS TO WHAT EXACTLY THE
[01:20:01]
ELEMENTS OF EACH OF OUR CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD BE ON THESE CASES.UM, THERE IS THIS AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN CHARACTERIZED IN SOME WAYS, YOU KNOW, BY SOME, IN OTHER WAYS, BY OTHERS.
THERE ARE QUESTIONS AS TO ITS LEGALITY.
NONE OF THAT IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, APPLIES TO OUR, OR I'M GONNA NOT SAY OUR, TO MY DELIBERATION TODAY.
UM, THE REASON BEING, UH, IS IT'S ABOVE OUR PAY GRADE.
IF THE CITY WANTS TO DO SOMETHING, THE CITY CAN DO IT.
BUT FOR US, I WOULD PERSONALLY LOOK SIMPLY AT THE LAND USE THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY.
AND SO, SORT OF MY OVERARCHING PHILOSOPHY WILL BE GUIDED AND MY DECISION TODAY WILL BE GUIDED BY THAT.
UM, BUT I'M HAPPY TO HEAR AND HAVE EVERYONE ELSE SHARE THEIR POSITIONS.
UM, OTHERWISE THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE WAY I VIEW IT.
FURTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT.
YOU WANT IT? NO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT.
I TRIED TO BAIT COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE INTO DISCUSSION.
UH, COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT DISCUSSION.
I WAS ON CITY STAFF AT THE TIME THAT THIS WAS ADOPTED.
AND OBVIOUSLY WE WEREN'T THE POLICY MAKERS AT THE TIME, BUT IT WAS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO THIS CITY TO DRAW THE TOYOTA COMPANY HERE FOR THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THAT THE CITY HAS, UH, FELT AND REALIZED GAIN FROM THROUGH JOBS AND REPUTATION AND WHAT HAVE YOU.
UM, AND SO THIS IS A CONUNDRUM, WHICH I FEEL OUR POLICY MAKERS, UM, PROBABLY NEED TO TAKE UP UNDER CONSIDERATION.
AND I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER THAT OUR JOB HERE IS TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE LAND USE AND WE DO THAT EVERY OTHER WEEK.
UM, THIS IS A DIFFICULT ONE FOR ME BECAUSE I DO SEE THAT THERE IS A LAND USE THERE.
I DO SEE THE DOORS OPEN WITH THE MASTER PLAN COM, UM, COMMUNITY RIGHT NEXT TO IT.
UM, BUT I'M ALSO, UM, HAVING BEEN FORMER STAFF, NOT NECESSARILY WANTING TO PUT THE CITY IN A POSITION OF, UM, VIOLATING SOME TERM OF THAT AGREEMENT BY EVEN RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE DONE.
UM, THAT SAID, UM, I DO THINK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE A CASE FOR THIS LAND USE AND I WILL BE SITTING HERE TRYING TO DECIDE WHICH WAY I'M GONNA GO ON THIS.
OBVIOUSLY WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS PREVIOUSLY.
UM, EITHER WAY, UM, THERE IS A, THERE IS A GREAT NEED FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY, WHICH WE HEAR ALMOST EVERY OTHER CASE.
AND SO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS MOVING US FORWARD TOWARD THAT.
ALRIGHT, WE WILL GO BACK TO COMMISSIONER KAMATH.
THE, UH, THANK YOU FOR MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S, UH, FOR THEIR OPINIONS AND, UM, DISCUSSIONS SO FAR.
UM, I HAVE GIVEN A LOT, UH, THOUGHT TO THIS, UH, LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS AND I HAVE ACTUALLY VISITED THE, UH, UM, DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE ON HIGHWAY 16.
SOME OF THESE, THE WHOLE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS HAVE VERY APPROVED OR, UM, EVEN BEFORE THE TOYOTA, UH, CAME INTO SAN ANTONIO.
AND THEY HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED VERY WELL.
AND THEY'RE EXISTING, UH, HARMONIOUSLY WITH THE, UH, INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX THAT IS IN TOYOTA.
AND, UH, IN THIS CASE, UH, THE DEVELOPERS, UH, PLANNING ON RESIDENCES THAT ARE BADLY NEEDED IN OUR TOWN AND THEY'RE ECONOMICALLY AFFORDABLE, UH, COMPARED TO OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY AND DISTRICT FOUR, WE NEED, UH, WE WELCOME MORE HOMES AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT, UM, IT CAN COEXIST WITH THE COEXIST WITH TOYOTA'S BEING THERE.
SO I AM MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM NUMBER SIX, UH, FOR THE REZONING.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER KAMATH FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX.
I'M GONNA GO WITH COMMISSIONER FUENTES FOR THE SECOND.
ALRIGHT, UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.
[01:25:01]
TO MY LEFT DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT.SO WE SAW, UH, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT COME INTO NOT JUST DISTRICT FOUR WITH TOYOTA, BUT YOU KNOW, OVERALL IN SAN ANTONIO WITH THEIR, THEY'RE COMING IN THROUGH JOBS AND, AND WHATNOT, AUXILIARY SERVICES.
UH, BUT NOW I THINK THAT WE NEED TO SEE MORE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, MORE DEVELOPMENT, UH, IN PARTICULAR FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA.
WHEN WE BRING IN THAT DENSITY OF HOUSING, IT, UH, SPURS THE NEED FOR MORE SERVICES IN THAT AREA.
AND I KNOW PERSONALLY THAT THIS AREA LACKS A LOT OF SERVICES.
UM, SO THAT IS THE REASON WHY I'M SECONDING THIS MOTION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FUENTES.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMERS TO MY RIGHT.
SO ON THE FENCE, SORRY, BUT JUST, UH, FOR INFORMATION FOR THIS BOARD, UM, THE AGREEMENT AS IT WAS DEVELOPED WAS INTENDED TO MAKE THIS MORE OF NOT JUST INDUSTRIAL, BUT INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL TYPE AREAS THAT WOULD BENEFIT TOYOTA AND PERHAPS BRING SIMILAR INDUSTRIES TO THAT AREA, WHICH IS THE REASON WHY IT HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN, UM, DEFINED AS NOT, UH, A PREFERRED RESIDENTIAL ZONE, WHICH IS WHY WE DON'T HAVE THAT AND WHY WE FIND OURSELVES HERE TODAY.
UM, AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT WITHOUT JEOPARDIZING TOYOTA, THE POLICYMAKERS ARE THE ONE THAT WOULD NEED TO TAKE THIS FORWARD AND HAVE SOME DISCUSSION WITH TOYOTA TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA AT SOME POINT PUSH THEM OUT OF THE COMMUNITY BY PUSHING A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT THERE.
THAT, UH, GOES AGAINST THE AGREEMENT.
SO I APPRECIATE, UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL'S, UM, UH, COMMENTS ON THAT, BUT I HAVE TO ASK THOUGH, IT'S, SO THE AGREEMENT WAS PUT IN, IN 2003, IT IS NOW 2022.
WHAT DEVELOPMENTS HAVE WE SEEN OR ARE THERE ANY PLAN DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE, UH, IN LINE WITH THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT? SO WE WAITED FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS, AND I THINK IT'S ABOUT TIME THAT WE HAVE THESE RESIDENTIAL SERVICES AND HOME STOCKS IN THAT AREA NOW.
UM, I THINK I'LL TAKE THE LAST WORD.
UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, OF COURSE MAKES GOOD POINTS AS SHE ALWAYS DOES.
UH, THAT BEING SAID, TOYOTA COULD BE HERE, THEY'RE NOT, UH, THAT SHE, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO TALK TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
I ANTICIPATE THAT THEY MAY, UM, MS. HUNSINGER WAS HERE TO DISCUSS SORT OF LOCKING HER FAMILY INTO STASIS, UM, PREVENTING THE DEVELOPMENT THAT MR. MCKNIGHT PRESENTED THAT'S IN LINE WITH OUR GOALS FOR PLANNING, OUR GOALS FOR WHAT WE WANNA SEE FOR SUSTAINABILITY.
AND SO FOR THAT REASON, UM, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE JOBS AND THE INDUSTRY THAT TOYOTA HAS BROUGHT HAVE BEEN BENEFICIAL TO OUR CITY, I IMAGINE THAT THEY WILL REMAIN BENEFICIAL TO OUR CITY, UM, AND LIMITING MYSELF TO THE LAND USE.
AND GIVEN THE PRESENTATIONS WE'VE HAD TODAY, I'M GOING TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION TO MY LEFT, TO MY RIGHT.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER KAMATH ON ITEM NUMBER SIX WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, I BELIEVE YOU'RE STEPPING OUT FOR A SECOND.
ALRIGHT, THE TIME IS APPROXIMATELY 2 29 AND COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE IS LEAVING THE HEARING.
WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON NOW TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MER RAVI, UH, PLAN COORDINATOR FOR ZONING.
I NUMBER EIGHT IS LOCATED AT 1 0 6 OLD VALLEY HIGH DRIVE, GOING FROM R SIX, UH, TO R SIX CD.
ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME FOR CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS.
25 NOTICES WERE MAILED OUT, ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR OF OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE PEOPLE'S ACTIVE AND COMMUNITY EFFORT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR THE VALLEY HIGH NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THEY EXIST IN R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY.
IS THERE APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA? THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE TWO DWELLS IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED TWO DWELLING UNITS IS OUTTA CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING LARGER LOT SINGLE
[01:30:01]
FAMILY DWELLING ESTABLISHED IN THE AREA.STAFF RECOMMENDS IT NOW AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, IF THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, SIR, IF YOU'D COME UP, INTRODUCE YOURSELF, GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REZONING REQUEST.
MY NAME IS RAF FRANK AND MY ADDRESS IS 9 9 3 5 TEMPLE KEY FOREST, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
ZIP CODE SE ZIP CODE 7 8 2 4 5 OH.
UH, CAN I GO AHEAD? YEAH, MY REASON FOR MY REQUEST IS, UH, I WANT TO LIVE THERE WITH MY PARENTS, WHICH WE FACILITY THE LIFE AND, UH, AND TO TAKE CARE OF, WE WOULD TAKE CARE OF THEM.
SO THAT'S THE MAIN REASON HOW IF MY REQUEST CAN BE APPROVED, UH, IF FRUSTRAT, MY PARENTS, AND ALSO ME AS WELL.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? NO SIR.
UM, THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE COMMISSIONER KAMATH TO YOU, UH, QUESTIONS.
YEAH, I WANNA TALK, UH, ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS WITH APPLICANT.
FRANK, WE, UH, TEXTED WITH EACH OTHER, BUT WE NEVER GOT TO MEET AT THE SAME PLACE.
BUT, UH, I DID GO BY THERE, UH, TO THE LOT AS WELL AS, UH, I WALKED THE WHOLE, UH, BLOCK OF OTHER HOMES.
I WANTED TO ASK YOU, HAVE YOU COME ASK YOU, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED, UH, INSTEAD OF PUTTING TWO LARGE TWO STORY BUILDINGS, YOU COULD PUT A ONE RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND THE SECOND ONE AS THE ADJACENT DWELLING UNIT, WHICH YOU WOULD NOT NEED A APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONALLY USED RIGHT NOW? OH, IF, UH, IF I CAN PUT TWO STORY AND, UH, JUST ONE SINGLE, BUT THE, WHICH CAN MEET WITH THE, THE SQUARE FEET, WHICH I NEED THAT, I'M, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
YEAH, I THINK, UH, STAFF HAD TOLD US WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE HE CAN HAVE ON THE A D U.
IS THERE A, UH, MAXIMUM FOR THE MAIN DWELLING? I'M SORRY, SIR, REPEAT YOUR QUESTION.
IS THERE A, UH, NUMBER OF, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE HE NEEDS? HE CAN HAVE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
NO, HE CAN HAVE WHATEVER SIZE HE WOULD LIKE.
UM, IT WILL HAVE TO MEET THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE R SIX DISTRICT.
UM, BUT HE ONLY GETS AN 800 UP TO 800 SQUARE FEET FOR THE ACCESSORY DWELLING AND IT'S ONLY ONE BEDROOM.
UH, HOW, HOW IS THAT, UH, WILL THAT WORK FOR YOU HAVING THE, UH, A D U OR THE ADDITIONAL HOUSE AT 800 SQUARE FEET? OH NO, THAT'S NOT GONNA WORK BECAUSE, UH, UH, I WANT TO LIVE THERE WITH MY PARENTS, MY DAD, MY PARENTS, WHICH NOW THEY HAVE THE THREE KIDS.
MY, MY DAD AND MY MOM, THEY STAY, THEY LEFT WITH THREE KIDS AND SO IT'S NOT GONNA WORK.
DOESN'T THEY NEED EACH
UH, I, I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT I, IF ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONERS I WANT TO DISCUSS OR I, I'M JUST GONNA PASS THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITH OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KAMATH.
ANY QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT? YES, COMMISSIONER, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY REALLY QUICKLY.
WE HAVE, UM, GONE INTO DETAIL ON, ON HIS OPTIONS FOR THIS SITE.
HE HAS INDICATED TO US THAT HE DOES WANT A LARGER STRUCTURE AND THAT'S WHY HE HAS CONTINUED FORWARD WITH THE SAME REQUEST.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, HE DOES WANT THE OTHER UNIT TO HAVE ITS OWN ELECTRICITY, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A SECOND METER, WHICH MEANS HE WOULD NEED A REZONING FOR TWO UNITS.
UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, DO WE, IS, DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA OF HOW LONG THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN UNDEVELOPED? I MEAN, WAS THERE SOMETHING THERE BEFORE
[01:35:02]
OR, AND PERHAPS THE APPLICANT EVEN KNOWS, I DON'T KNOW, BUT, OR, OR HAS THIS BEEN SINCE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT SUBDIVISION? UM, WHEN IT WENT OUT THERE FOR SITE VISITS, I DIDN'T SEE ANY KIND OF FOUNDATION BUILT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANYTHING BUILT THERE.
AND, UM, THE, THE, THE QUESTION THAT I HAD, THE OTHER QUESTION IS LOOKING AT THE, LOOKING AT THE AERIAL AND THEN LOOKING AT THE, THE MAP THAT WE'RE SHOWING UP ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW, I GUESS THE RIGHT OF WAY TAKES IS, IS MUCH LARGER THAN WHAT THE, THE STREET IS RIGHT THERE.
UH, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WOULD THE, WOULD IS, IS THERE ACCESS OFF OF OLD VALLEY HIGH DRIVE OR IS IT ACCESSED OFF OF NEW VALLEY HIGH DRIVE? I BELIEVE IT, IT SHOULD BE OFF OF OLD VALLEY HIGH DRIVE.
UM, TRAFFIC'S GONNA MAKE THAT, UH, DETERMINATION ONCE HE STARTS SUPPLYING FOR BUILDING PERMITS.
AND THAT WERE ALL MY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS.
SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER KAMATH TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UH, HAVING, HAVING VISITED THE, UH, ACTUAL SITE, THE SIZE OF THE, I EVEN CONSIDER THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND ALSO I, UH, WALKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SEE ANY HOMES THAT HAVE, UH, EXCEPT FOR ONE HAD A A D U THAT WAS DONE VERY WELL.
I THINK THE ONE RIGHT BEHIND THIS LOT.
SO BASED ON MY OBSERVATIONS AND MY UH, UH, ACTUALLY VISITING THE LOT, I AM, I AM GOING TO MOVE TO DENY THE REZONING APPLICATION FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ SECOND.
ALRIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? TO MY LEFT, I JUST HAD ONE DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, HIS HOW ZONE R SIX.
IS THERE AN OPTION FOR HIM TO EVEN BUILD A DUPLEX ALONG AS THE PROPERTY'S ATTACHED TO TOGETHER? MAYBE NOT SEPARATE.
EVERYONE WILL JUST SHAKE THEIR HEAD.
UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT COMMISSIONER? TO MY RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, THEN COMMISSIONER SIPES.
I, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, THIS PROPERTY DOES FALL WITHIN LOOP FOUR 10, SO IS I D Z? UM, NOT SOMETHING TO CONSIDER FOR THAT TO ALLOW HIM TO GET THE TWO UNITS, THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION.
UM, IT'S GONNA COME OUT THE SAME, UH, END RESULT, BUT YEAH, THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION SINCE IT'S INSIDE OF FOUR 10.
UM, I MIGHT PROPOSE THAT TO MY COLLEAGUE TO POSSIBLY CONSIDER IF HE WANTS TO FIND A WAY FOR THIS GENTLEMAN TO OBTAIN WHAT HE WOULD LIKE.
THERE IS CURRENTLY A MOTION PENDING, I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL WOULD BE PROPOSING, UH, CONTINUANCE IF THAT WERE TO OCCUR BECAUSE THERE IS A MOTION PENDING AND I D Z TWO IS NOT WITHIN THE RANGE, SO THEREFORE COULD NOT BE AMENDED, UH, WITH THIS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL NOTICE.
CORRECT STEPH? THAT'S CORRECT.
I'M, BUT I'M ALSO TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE R SIX CD FOR TWO UNITS AND THE I DZ ONE FOR TWO UNITS.
IT'S THE SAME END RESULT EXCEPT THAT I D Z IS HAS LESS SETBACKS THAN R SIX I D Z WOULDN'T REQUIRE AN 800 SQUARE FOOT.
SO, BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR IS R SIX CD FOR TWO UNITS.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT YOUR DETERMINATION WAS HE CAN HAVE A ONE HOME, WHATEVER SIZE, THE SECOND HOME, 800 SQUARE FEET, WHICH HE HAS SAID DOES NOT FIT HIS NEEDS.
SO I'M ASKING THOUGH, WOULD I D Z ALLOW HIM TO, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE TO REPL IT OR NOT, BUT TO REPL IT AND TO THEN HAVE TWO HOUSES OF WHATEVER SIZE IT IS THAT HE NEEDS TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR NEEDS.
OH, YOU MEAN SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TWO LOTS? YES.
UM, HE CAN, UH, SUBDIVIDE THIS RIGHT NOW HE HAS THE AREA TO DO IT.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THE REZONING PROCESS IS A LOT MORE, UH, LESS EXPENSIVE, BUT HE CAN RE UH, REPLANT THIS PROPERTY INTO TWO R SIXES RIGHT NOW.
SO HE CAN GET TO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO HERE.
COMMISSIONER SIPES, BEFORE YOU, UH, SPEAK.
I DID WANNA NOTE THAT IT'S TWO 40 AND COMMISSIONER
[01:40:01]
GREATHOUSE HAS RETURNED TO THE HEARING.ACTUALLY THAT WAS, THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GONNA BRING UP IS THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD ALLOW IT TO BE THERE ARE THAT, THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS FOR THIS PROPERTY, UM, INCLUDING THE SUBDIVIDING IT AND THAT WAS IT.
ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH.
UH, THE MOTION IS FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER KAMATH WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
UM, OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE ABSTAIN.
UH, WE WILL MOVE ON NOW TO ITEM NUMBER NINE.
I ANTICIPATE TAKING A BREAK AFTER ITEM NUMBER NINE FOR THE COMMISSION'S BENEFIT.
MY NAME IS SUMMER MCCANN ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS LOCATED AT 15 8 9 5 SOUTH STATE HIGHWAY 16.
GOING FROM C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 82 NOTICES MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE EXISTING C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE REQUESTED R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY IS NOT APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA AS A BASIC PLANNING PRINCIPLE.
RESIDENTIAL USES ARE NOT COMMONLY LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO INDUSTRIAL USES.
ADDITIONALLY, THE C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WAS PURPOSELY ZONED FOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG POTI GEORDAN HIGHWAY TO PROVIDE GOODS AND SERVICES TO EXISTING AND SURROUNDING USES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
AS IF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE OR THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT, PLEASE COME UP, INTRODUCE YOURSELF, GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS AND TELL US ABOUT THIS REZONING REQUEST.
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS, DANIEL ORTIZ HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE APPLICANT.
UM, AS YOU'LL QUICKLY NOTICE IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY DEUCED, I CONSIDER THIS IS GOING TO, UH, HIGHLIGHT A LOT OF THE SAME THEMES OF A CASE THAT YOU JUST HEARD A FEW MINUTES AGO.
BUT IF YOU'LL INDULGE ME, I DO WANNA WALK THROUGH A POWERPOINT, UH, AS QUICKLY AS I POSSIBLY CAN.
I THINK ULTIMATELY I'LL START WHERE THE COMMISSION ENDED ON THAT PREVIOUS CASE, WHICH IS THERE ARE CERTAINLY SOME ISSUES THAT ARE UNIQUE FOR THIS PROPERTY, BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO FOCUS ON ARE THE LAND USE PRINCIPLES.
UM, SO WITH THAT IN MIND, IF WE COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
UM, I'LL JUST HIGHLIGHT A FEW THINGS THAT SUMMER HAS ALREADY MENTIONED, BUT, UM, THE PROPOSED REZONING IS 35 ACRES OFFSET FROM THE MAJOR INTERSECTION THERE OF STATE HIGHWAY 16 AND WATSON ROAD STATE HIGHWAY 16 IS RUNNING NORTH SOUTH, SORT OF ALONG THE RIGHT, UH, OF THE EXHIBIT THERE.
AND THEN WATSON ROAD IS, UH, RUNNING EAST WEST ALONG THE TOP OF THAT EXHIBIT THERE.
PROPERTIES LOCATED IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR.
UM, AND AS YOU CAN SEE HERE FROM THE STREET GRID, IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE PROPERTY, UH, THERE IS ALREADY EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT, UH, ALL THROUGHOUT RUNNING WEST OF THIS PROPERTY.
THE, THE GRID EMPHASIZE OR SHOWS IT THE ACTUAL HOMES AREN'T ON THE GROUND ON THIS AERIAL, BUT THERE'S SIGNIFICANT SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY, UH, ADJACENT AND WEST OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED C TWO.
UM, IT IS PART OF A LARGER SWATH OF 99 ACRES THAT HAS BEEN ENFORCED ON THIS PROPERTY OF C TWO.
BUT TODAY, UH, WE ARE ONLY ASKING TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 35 ACRES, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED WITH THAT BLUE BOUNDARY.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE IT FITS IN, UH, AS PART OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT, WHICH I'LL, UH, TOUCH ON HERE IN A SECOND.
UM, THE R FIVE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ALREADY EXISTING R FIVE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO US TO THE WEST.
AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SUBURBAN TIER DESIGNATION IN THE HERITAGE SOUTH SECTOR PLAN.
WE CONSIDER THIS A CONTINUATION OF A DEVELOPMENT CALLED THE PRESERVE, WHICH AS FAR AS WE KNOW IS THE FIRST MASTERPLAN COMMUNITY IN THIS PART OF TOWN THAT'S ACTUALLY UNFOLDING THE WAY IT WAS SET OUT TO DO SO FROM DAY ONE FOR SOME HISTORY, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, FERIN OV WHO'S HERE WITH US TODAY, BOUGHT THE PROPERTY IN 2003 AND HAS BEEN WORKING VERY HARD TO TRY TO DEVELOP IT EVER SINCE, WHICH WE'RE NOW SEEING SOME OF THAT DEVELOPMENT ON THE SCREEN IS THE OVERALL MASTER PLANNED, UH, DEVELOPMENT AS IT STANDS TODAY.
[01:45:01]
UH, THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, CALLS FOR TODAY COMMERCIAL OF 99 ACRES RUNNING ALONG, UM, STATE HIGHWAY 16.UM, AND BASICALLY A NICE, UM, RECTANGLE THERE THAT REALLY DOESN'T, DOESN'T STEM FROM ANY LAND USE PRINCIPLE, BUT WE'LL GET TO THAT IN A MINUTE.
SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY OF ABOUT 434 ACRES AND OPEN SPACE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS SO IS, UM, CAPITALIZING ON A COUPLE OF LAKES THAT ARE THERE.
AND ALSO THE CITY'S HIKE BIKE TRAIL SYSTEM THAT RUNS THROUGH THAT WILL RUN THROUGH THERE COMING FROM THE WEST.
AND THEN CONNECTING TO A CITY PARK THAT ALREADY EXISTS JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY.
THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF, AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE BOUNDARIES OF IT.
UM, THERE, UH, OVERLAID ONTO THE MASTER PLAN.
WE C WE CONSIDER AN EXTENSION OF WHAT'S ALREADY HAPPENING THERE SUCCESSFULLY.
WE'RE PROPOSING ABOUT 164 LOTS, WHICH IS A DENSITY OF ABOUT 4.7 UNITS AN ACRE.
THE PROPOSED BUILDER WOULD BE DR.
HORTON, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IS BUILDING ALL OVER TOWN EXPERIENCED AND IS ALSO BUILDING IN THE PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALREADY UNDERWAY AND EXISTS IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST.
SIZE OF THE HOMES WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 1,440 SQUARE FEET, UP TO ABOUT 20.
A LITTLE SHY, A LITTLE LESS THAN 2,700 SQUARE FEET.
LOOKING IN, I MENTIONED EARLIER 99 ACRES OF C TWO THAT'S BEEN ENFORCED ON THIS PROPERTY.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN MUCH IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS AND YOU HEAR A LOT OF CONCEPTS, SO I WANNA PUT IT IN CONTEXT.
UM, SHOPS AT LOCK AND TERRA IS ABOUT 117 ACRES.
THE QUARRY MARKET IS ABOUT 85 ACRES.
AND SOUTH PARK MALL, WHICH IS ALSO IN DISTRICT FOUR, IS ABOUT 62 ACRES.
SO WHAT THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN ASKED TO DO IS DEVELOP SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE QUARRY MARKET AND THE SHOPS AT LA AND TERRA, UM, IN A PERFECT RECTANGLE RUNNING ALONG STATE HIGHWAY 16.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, MOVING ON TO THE, TO THE, UM, TO THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, WE DIDN'T GET TO THIS CURRENT SITUATION FROM ANY LAND USE PRINCIPLE.
LET, I THINK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR.
99 ACRES IN A PERFECT RECTANGLE RUNNING IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO STATE HIGHWAY 16.
SO THE PROPOSED R FIVE IN CONTRAST, UM, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE HERITAGE SOUTH SECTOR PLAN.
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE ON THE SCREEN YOU CAN SEE HIGHLIGHTED, UH, STATED GOALS FROM THE SECTOR PLAN, UH, AND STATED GOALS JUST PEPPERED THROUGHOUT IT.
UH, EMPHASIZING SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, AND I WON'T READ 'EM ALL, BUT PROBABLY, UM, THE, THE ONE THAT MAY BE THE MOST POIGNANT THERE AT THE BOTTOM PROMOTE HERITAGE SOUTH IS AN AREA OF CHOICE FOR PROSPECTIVE HOME BUYERS.
WELL, YOU CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, PERIOD.
UM, NEXT SIDE, AS WAS MENTIONED ON THE PREVIOUS CASE, WE ALL KNOW THAT THE SA TOMORROW PLAN IS BEING UNFOLDED FOR THE, OR IT'S BEING DEVELOPED FOR THE OVERALL CITY.
THIS PARTICULAR AREA IS DESIGNATED FOR THE FAR SOUTHWEST C COMMUNITY PLAN PORTION THAT IS, UH, SLATED TO BE, UH, TAKEN UP SOMETIME FROM NOW.
UH, BUT WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING CONTEMPLATED AND DRAFTED IS THE TEXAS A AND M SAN ANTONIO AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN, WHICH FALLS GENERALLY TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY.
MAYBE A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE, BUT ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU SEE THE, THE BOUNDARIES OF THE, THAT COMPONENT, THE REGIONAL CENTER PLAN, WHICH WILL BE PART OF THE ESSAY TOMORROW PLAN AND IN IT.
SO IT'S NOT A STRETCH TO START TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE PRINCIPLES THAT ARE BEING CONSIDERED FOR THAT REGIONAL CENTER AND LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING AREA, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THIS PROPERTY.
UM, AND ONE IS, UH, QUOTE, REGIONAL CENTERS FORECAST FORECASTED TO GROW BETWEEN 1700 6500 NEW HOUSEHOLDS FROM 2010 TO 2040.
MOST OF THE PEOPLE EMPLOYED IN THE TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL CENTER DO NOT LIVE IN THE AREA.
AND THEN FINALLY, AS WAS MEANT TO MENTIONED EARLIER, UM, IN THAT ESSAY TOMORROW, SUSTAINABILITY PLAN, THE STRATEGY IS JUST, I'M PROBABLY OVERSIMPLIFYING IT HERE, BUT HAVING PEOPLE LIVE CLOSER TO WHERE THEY WORK IS A GOOD THING.
AND THIS PROPERTY, UM, CLEARLY DOES THAT IN OUR OPINION.
LOTS OF INFORMATION HERE, BUT, UM, WANT TO EMPHASIZE A FEW THINGS ABOUT THE PROPOSED REZONING AND THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE 35 ACRES ITSELF.
AGAIN, UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT 164 TO TOTAL UNITS IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE, THE DISTRICT OFFICE.
SO WE HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETELY, UM, IMMUNE TO THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT ARE AT PLAY HERE.
ORIGINALLY, WE'RE PROPOSING 212
[01:50:01]
UNITS, SO WE'VE REDUCED THAT TO 164.WE TOOK THE UNUSUAL STEP AS THIS COMMISSION KNOWS, UM, TO UPDATE THE T I A.
SO WE ACTUALLY DID AN UPDATE TO THE T I A AS PART OF THE ZONING PROCESS.
SO AS, AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE WAY THAT THE U D C UNFOLDS NORMALLY.
UM, NOT AN ENGINEER BUT PAP DAWSON WHO DRAFTED THE ORIGINAL T I A FOR THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT.
AND THEN DID THE T I A UPDATE FOR THE 35 ACRES IN QUESTION, UM, IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF WE WANT TO GET INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL.
BUT SUFFICE TO SAY THE CHART THAT'S ON THE EXHIBIT ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU, WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT CHANGING 35 ACRES FROM COMMERCIAL C TWO TO SINGLE FAMILY AT THE DENSITY WE'RE PROPOSING.
SO THE 164 UNITS REDUCES PROJECTED TRAFFIC BY 90%, PERIOD.
UM, SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE CERTAINLY WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT HERE BECAUSE OF THE EFFORT THAT WE WENT THROUGH TO GET TO THIS POINT, UH, AND HAVE THE, THE ZONING COMMISSION TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
UM, ALSO, UM, WORTH MENTIONING AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OR THE AMENITIES THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS UNIT WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THE 160 ACRES, UM, OF OPEN SPACE THAT'S BEEN MASTERPLAN FROM DAY ONE.
THAT OPEN SPACE IS NOW FORMALLY THERE AS PART OF A CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT RUNS IN FAVOR OF THE GREEN SPACE.
GREEN SPACE IS ALLIANCE, SO IT'S FORMALLY DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE AND THE HIKE BIKE TRAIL SYSTEM THAT THE CITY'S BEEN, UM, PUTTING IN THROUGHOUT THE CITY, UM, WILL COME RIGHT THROUGH THE SOUTH OF THAT UH, MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY AROUND THE LAKES AND THEN CONTINUE ON TO THE PARK.
THE CITY'S IN FACT INVESTING, WE'RE PROPOSING TO INVEST AN ADDITIONAL 800,000 INTO THE PARK THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD CONNECT INTO.
SO ACCESS TO AMENITIES I THINK HAS BEEN WELL THOUGHT OUT AND THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE.
UM, THERE IS A SET OF MASTER RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WELL, WHICH I WILL MENTION VERY BRIEFLY 'CAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT IN YOUR PURVIEW, BUT ONLY TO SAY THAT THAT MASTER SET OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, WHICH IS NOTHING TO LAUGH AT, HERE'S, HERE'S WHAT DICTATES THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE EXTENDED TO THIS UNIT AS PART OF US EMPHASIZING THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF SOMETHING THAT'S UNFOLDING SUCCESSFULLY THAT EVERYONE CAN BE PROUD OF, UH, IN THIS AREA.
AND THEN LASTLY, AND MAYBE MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE LAND USE PATTERN THAT EXISTS TODAY WOULD CONTINUE TO EXIST EVEN WITH THIS REZONING TAKING.
IF I COULD JUST HAVE TWO MORE MINUTES OR ONE MORE MINUTE.
ALRIGHT, MR. ORTIZ, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ALRIGHT, BUT YOU'LL HAVE MAYBE SOME TIME FOR REBUTTAL.
BUT WE CAN GIVE YOU SOME QUESTIONS.
UH, AGAIN, THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE, SO COMMISSIONER KAMATH TO YOU BEFORE THAT HAPPENS, HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT AT TWO 50, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE LEFT THE HEARING ROOM.
COMMISSIONER KAMATH? YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE APPLICANT BACK AT THE, UH, PODIUM, PLEASE.
UH, MR. ORTIZ, UH, SO THE PRESERVE IS ALREADY FUNCTIONING, IS THAT RIGHT? THE YES SIR.
IT HAS BEEN AND UNDER DEVELOPMENT FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
SO YOU'RE BASICALLY ASKING TODAY FOR THE 35 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE PRESERVE, UH, FOR 144 SOME, UH, RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
IS THAT, I'M JUST WANT TO CLARIFY MYSELF.
I THINK WE HAVE, UM, THAT'S NOT A QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU MR. ORTIZ, BUT FROM MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS, I THINK THIS IS ALMOST LIKE A SISTER CASE TO THE PREVIOUS ONE THAT WE, UH, HEARD ON THE, UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX, BASICALLY THE DISCUSSION ON THE, UH, INDUSTRIAL AND, UM, OTHER, UH, REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY MIGHT HAVE ENTERED MANY YEARS AGO.
BUT AGAIN HERE, UH, WE ARE, WE ARE ASKED TO REZONE A COMMERCIAL ZONE TO A RESIDENTIAL FOR ONLY FOR 35 ACRES.
UH, I WANT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, UH, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND THOUGHTS ON THIS.
COMMISSIONER KAMATH COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER SIPES, A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
LOOKING AT YOUR SIDE PLAN, I JUST WANNA BE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE 35 ACRES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS DEFINED WITHIN THE SOLID RED, UM, PERIMETER OR IS IT INCLUDING THE DOT? UM, DEFINE THE DIFFERENCES FOR ME SO I UNDERSTAND.
UH, THE, THE 35 ACRES COMMISSIONER THAT WE WERE PROPOSING TO REZONE IS IN THE SOLID RED BOUNDARY.
UM, AND WHAT I WAS GONNA MENTION EARLIER WAS THAT THE LAND USE PATTERN THAT EXISTS TODAY WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST 'CAUSE WE'RE
[01:55:01]
LEAVING COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE THERE TO PROVIDE THE BUFFER THAT I SUPPOSE WAS INTENDED THEN THE SINGLE FAMILY.THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION.
WELL, NEXT TIME I'LL HAVE TO CALL COMMISSIONER S SIPES FIRST.
SO THE COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL DOESN'T KEEP STEALING HIS QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES STILL TO YOU, HE HAS A, A FOLLOW UP TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL.
UM, YOU HAD BROUGHT UP THE, UH, SLIDE ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE QUARRY, THE SIZE OF SOUTH PARK MALL, ET CETERA.
UM, WHAT, I GUESS WHAT DEPTH OR WHAT WOULD IS THE C TWO THAT YOU HAVE LEFT AND, AND WHAT, WHAT KIND OF EXAMPLE, UH, COMMERCIAL ZONING WOULD THAT OR COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS WOULD THAT BE, THAT COULD EXIST? SO, UM, I'LL ANSWER PARTIALLY AND THEN MAYBE WE CAN HAVE PAWSON SPEAK TO IT A LITTLE BIT.
BUT THE GOAL OR THE, THE THINKING BEHIND WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN, THAT COMMERCIAL FRONT IS ABOUT 280 FEET, UM, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR A TRADITIONAL SOPPING CENTER TO EXIST ALONG 16 AND THEN STILL ALLOW FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY BEHIND IT.
AND THEN WE HAVE ROUGHLY STILL 40 ACRES OF THE EXISTING SOUTH OF THIS.
AND IN THAT 40 ACRES, I MEAN, I THINK THE SKY'S THE LIMIT OF WHAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO THERE.
IF YOU'D LIKE SOME MORE EXAMPLES.
I THINK, LIKE I SAID, PAWS SINCE SIERRA, OTHERWISE I THINK THAT PAINTS THE PICTURE.
THAT I JUST WAS UNCLEAR TO THE, THE DEPTH.
SO IT WOULD SEEM SOUTH PARK MALL'S THE LIMIT.
UM, BUT, UH, ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONER KAMATH TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UH, I THINK WE DISCUSSED A LOT IN THE PREVIOUS, UH, UH, THE SISTER CASE OR THE SIMILAR CASE.
UH, BUT HERE WE ALREADY HAVE A, UH, PRESERVED DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS BEEN OCCUPIED AND UH, THIS BASICALLY LOOKED LIKE A CONTINUATION OF THE SAME, UH, UH, TYPE OF HOMES.
SO I, I MOVED THAT I, UH, FOR THE MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, THE ITEM, UH, NUMBER NINE.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER NINE BY COMMISSIONER KAMATH.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT, COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT.
UH, MAY IT BE NOTED THAT AT 2 58 COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE RETURNED TO THE ROOM.
MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER NINE BY COMMISSIONER KAMATH WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
COMMISSIONER GREY HOUSE ABSTAIN.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'VE BEEN GOING ABOUT TWO HOURS.
THIS IS WHERE WE TRADITIONALLY TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
WE WILL STAND IN RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES.
THE TIME IS APPROXIMATELY 2 59.
ALRIGHT, THE TIME IS 3 0 5 AND I AM CALLING THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BACK INTO SESSION.
UM, WE ARE GOING TO PULL UP ITEM NUMBER 24 AT THIS TIME.
I CAN, SORRY TO BE CLEAR, I'M CALLING SOME THINGS OUT OF ORDER A LITTLE BIT HERE.
WE'RE GOING TO ITEM NUMBER 24.
I BELIEVE THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION.
THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON CONSENT.
UM, SO WE ARE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THIS ITEM NOW.
IF WE COULD, I CAN READ IT IF IT'S JUST OH, OKAY.
IF WE COULD READ ITEM 24 INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.
THIS UH, ITEM NUMBER 24 IS A REQUEST FOR TO REZONE FROM I D Z N C D FIVE A H O D WITH USES PERMITTED FOR NC AND METAL WOODWORK SHOP TO IDZ TWO AND CD FIVE A H O D WITH USES PERMITTED FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT ONE 15 CINCINNATI AVENUE.
THERE ARE 33 NOTICES, MA UH, MAILED TWO IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION.
AND BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
[02:00:03]
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME UP, GIVE US YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS, AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REZONING REQUEST PLEASE.AYE, MY NAME'S UH, JOHN MCDOWELL.
UH, I'M AT 1 35 ADAMS STREET AND, UH, I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY SIX YEARS AGO.
UH, I THOUGHT IT WAS OWNED CORRECTLY, FOUND OUT IT WASN'T.
AND UH, SO I'M HERE AT THIS PROCESS NOW.
UH, I GUESS THE GOOD THING IS IT'S GOING FROM KIND OF A HIGHER INDUSTRIAL TYPE USE TO SOMETHING LOWER.
IT'S KIND OF ATTACHED TO A PROPERTY THAT LOOKS SIMILAR.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT HAS APARTMENTS WITH LIKE GARAGES.
UM, AND EVERYTHING SURROUNDING ME IS RESIDENTIAL.
I THINK, EXCEPT FOR, UH, I THINK THE RIGHT, ACTUALLY THE STUFF ON THE LEFT IS ALL RESIDENTIAL.
I THINK ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS COMMERCIAL.
SO JUST, UH, IT'S BEEN A PROJECT OF MINE AND TRYING TO GET IT MOVING FORWARD.
UH, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
HE WAS THE ONLY PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UH, SO COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE TO YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? TO MY LEFT.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION OR NO DISCUSSION? MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE HAS MADE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
ALRIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 24 BY COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
UH, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 24.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. MCDOWELL.
I APOLOGIZE FOR THE MISCOMMUNICATION.
UM, WE WILL NOW GET BACK TO OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED PROGRAM WITH ITEM NUMBER 16 PLEASE.
MY NAME IS SUMMER CAN ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 16 IS LOCATED AT 1 0 6 VAUGHN PLACE.
GOING FROM R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR OF ONE IN OPPOSITION AND THERE IS NO RESPONSE FROM MAVERICK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS IS ALSO APPROPRIATE FOR THE PROPERTY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA BENEFIT FROM THE B TWO R FOUR CONVERSION, WHICH ALLOWS FOR DUPLEX BY RIGHT.
THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY INTEND TO PRESERVE THE CURRENT STRUCTURES BUT WOULD LIKE TO ADD A SECOND METER TO THE REAR DWELLING.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED DENSITY AND CONFIGURATION WOULD MAINTAIN THE ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
IF THE APPLICANT CAN COME FORWARD PLEASE AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REZONING REQUEST.
PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FIRST.
UH, MY NAME'S CASSANDRA DEARTH.
I LIVE AT 1 0 6 BOND STREET OR ON V PLACE.
UM, I PURCHASED THIS HOUSE A FEW MONTHS AGO.
THERE WAS ALREADY, UM, AN A D U IN THE BACK.
I SIMPLY AM ASKING FOR THE REZONING SO THAT I CAN PUT A SEPARATE ELECTRIC METER ONTO THE BACK AND A SEPARATE MAILBOX.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR.
SUE, DID YOU SIGN UP? SUSAN, WHERE'S YOUR NAME? OH, OH, SHE WAS LAST.
YOU'RE ON THE SECOND PAGE? YEAH.
ALRIGHT, MS. HOFFER, IF YOU WOULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF, GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS AND TELL US YOUR POSITION ON THIS REZONING REQUEST.
I LIVE, LIVE AT ONE 18 VAUGHN PLACE AND I'M RE REPRESENTING TODAY A COUPLE OF MY NEIGHBORS.
IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT I HAVE TO SAY, AT A VERY MINIMUM, I WOULD ASK THE COMMISSION TO FOR CONTINUANCE BECAUSE WE'VE REALLY HAD INSUFFICIENT TIME TO PREPARE ONE OF THESE FANCY PREPARATIONS WITH PHOTOS AND ALL.
UM, I DIDN'T RECEIVE A NOTICE.
TWO OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORS I SPOKE TO DIDN'T RECEIVE A NOTICE IN THE MAIL.
THERE HAS BEEN A CAR PARKED DIRECTLY SMACK IN FRONT OF THAT SIGN.
I JUST HAPPENED TO SEE THAT YELLOW SIGN ABOUT 10 DAYS AGO.
I'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER ENOUGH INFORMATION BECAUSE THERE'S NO PERMIT LISTED FOR THIS SECONDARY HOUSE.
IT'S NOT LISTED WITH THE CITY.
SO I'VE LEARNED A LOT OF NEW LANGUAGE, I LEARNED A LOT OF NEW THINGS.
AND MY MAJOR ISSUE WITH THIS, UM, USED THE TERM COMMERCIAL CREEP A LITTLE EARLIER.
I THINK IT WAS MS. GREATHOUSE WHO MENTIONED THAT.
AND THIS SEEMS TO ME LIKE A CASE OF HOUSE CREEP.
[02:05:01]
ON MY STREET NOR ON MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS TWO FULL OUT HOUSES ON ONE LOT.IT SEEMS THAT IN 1980 OR SO, THE COUNTY HAS THIS LISTED AS A DETACHED CARPORT, DETACHED GARAGE.
AT SOME POINT LATER, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THESE THINGS WERE CLOSED IN, THERE'S NO RECORD ON THE CITY.
BUT WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT RIGHT NOW THIS IS NOT AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
THIS IS A FULL ON HOUSE WITH TWO BEDROOMS, BRICK CODE.
I'M PRETTY SURE IT HAS, UM, SETBACK, ENORMOUS SETBACK PROBLEMS. IT'S SET BACK THREE FEET FROM THE SIDE, NINE INCHES FROM WHAT I'VE MEASURED, NINE INCHES FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S NOT EVEN COUNTING THE OVERHANG, THE EVE, IT'S GOT PROBLEMS WITH TRAFFIC.
THE, THE NICE PICTURE THAT'S SHOWN HERE OF THE BEAUTIFUL STREET IS USED TO BE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHEN I MOVED IN, I CAN POINT OUT THAT THE FULL FRONT OF THE HOUSE HAS BEEN COVERED WITH CARS.
LAST WEEKEND WE HAD A HOUSE PARKED ON THE GRASS IN FRONT OF THE WINDOW OF THAT HOUSE.
THERE WAS A TRUCK FOR THE FIRST TIME.
THEY'RE USING THE, SOME OF THE PARKING BEHIND.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF A HOME THIS IS PURPORTED TO BE, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT IN THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
MAKES IT VERY UNSAFE FOR ME TO WALK MY DOGS OR MY GRANDCHILD ON THAT STREET BECAUSE I'M WALKING AROUND CARS.
THERE'S JUST REAL PROBLEMS WITH IT.
SO AGAIN, THE COUNTY REPORTS THIS TO BE THIS DETACHED GARAGE DETACHED CARPORT.
THE OWNER IN THE APPLICATION CALLS IT A CASITA.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, BUT THERE'S CLEAR CODE VIOLATIONS IN THAT IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN ONE BEDROOM.
THERE ARE CODE VIOLATIONS IN THAT BY ONE MEASURE.
I CONSIDER THAT IT'S MORE THAN 40% OF THE SIZE OF THE MAIN HOUSE.
I TOOK THAT FROM SOME REAL ESTATE RECORDS, JUST SUBTRACTING WHAT I THOUGHT THEY HAD.
BEXAR COUNTY HAS IT LISTED AS OVER 900 SQUARE FEET.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? NO SIR.
THIS IS A DISTRICT SEVEN CASE.
UM, SO THE PROPERTY IS, AS IT WAS AS I PURCHASED IT A FEW MONTHS AGO ON THE COUNTY APPRAISAL DEPARTMENT.
IT IS, UM, LISTED AS AN DETACHED LIVING AREA THAT WAS BUILT IN 1987.
TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THAT'S, THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE SINCE 1987.
I AM AWARE OF THE SETBACK ISSUES ON THE SIDE.
I WAS TOLD THAT THE BACK DID NOT MATTER BECAUSE THERE'S A BACK ALLEY.
I DID SPEAK WITH SOMEBODY FROM THE, I GUESS IT'S CODE, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT COMMITTEE OR SOMEBODY LIKE THAT.
UM, SO THE BACK IS NOT AN ISSUE BECAUSE THERE'S AN ALLEY THERE ON THE SIDE.
HE SAID THAT TECHNICALLY IT IS AN ISSUE IN TODAY'S STANDARDS, BUT HE SAID SINCE IT WAS BUILT IN 1987 THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
UM, WHICH I'M STILL WORKING ON.
I WAS JUST OUT OF THE COUNTRY FOR THE LAST WEEK AND A HALF.
UM, I JUST GOT BACK LAST NIGHT, SO I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO ADDRESS THESE THINGS.
IN REGARDS TO THE CARS, UM, WHILE I WAS GONE, I WAS DOING SOME IMPROVEMENTS ON THE HOME.
I HAD THE FLOORING, REDONE, PAINTING, ALL THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
SO THEY WERE CONTRACTORS AND, UM, THEIR STAFF, WHICH, WHERE WAS, THERE WAS AN ABUNDANCE OF CARS WHEN, AS SOON AS I WAS MADE AWARE ABOUT THE CAR PARKED ON THIS, ON THE GRASS, I, I MEAN, I WAS IN A SEVEN HOUR TIME DIFFERENCE.
LIKE I DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL THE NEXT DAY.
UM, I'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT WITH THE CITY, WITH THE CODE VIOLATION.
UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. ALRIGHT.
THIS IS A DISTRICT SEVEN CASE.
UM, SO IT WILL BE TO YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES QUESTIONS, UM, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT FIRST, AND THAT IS, UM, UH, MS. HOFFER WAS ASKING ABOUT PERHAPS A CONTINUANCE FOR TWO WEEKS.
WOULD, WOULD YOU ENTERTAIN A CONTINUANCE TO PERHAPS TALK WITH, WITH HER OR SOME OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORS? UM, YOU CAN INCLUDE ME AS WELL AND THEN MAYBE, UH, UM, GO OVER SOME WHAT COULD BE MISCONCEPTIONS.
ANOTHER ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS I ALREADY DISCUSSED WITH HIM.
AND WE'VE IRONED EVERYTHING OUT.
I EXPLAINED THE, THE ISSUES AND I, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THAT INDIVIDUAL NO LONGER HAS ANY ISSUES WITH THE, THE ZONING CHANGE.
MY ONLY ISSUE WOULD BE I NORMALLY WORK, YOU KNOW, DURING THE DAY.
AND SO THIS WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER MEETING, ESPECIALLY SINCE I JUST TOOK A LEAVE FOR TWO WEEKS.
UM, SO I'M NOT, I'M HAPPY TO COMMUNICATE, I JUST DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD BE ABLE TO BE HERE AND BE PRESENT FOR THE MEETING.
[02:10:01]
UM, SO THIS, THE B TWO, OUR CONVERSION, UM, ALLOWS DUPLEXES BY, RIGHT.WOULD, UM, WOULD THE PROPOSED ZONING TAKE AWAY THAT DUPLEX? RIGHT, SINCE THE SITE PLAN IS INCLUDED, WOULD IT BE THAT OKAY, YOU HAVE TWO UNITS, YOU CAN NO LONGER DO A DUPLEX IN THE FRONT AND A UNIT IN THE BACK? I BELIEVE SO, YEAH.
SO THE B TWO R FOUR CONVERSION ONLY RESULTS BECAUSE IT WAS CONVERTED WHEN THE CODE WAS ADOPTED.
ONCE IT'S REZONED, IT LOSES THAT CONVERSION CAPABILITY.
UH, SO IF, SO, EVEN IF IT WAS APPROVED FOR THE TWO UNITS, THIS WAY IF SOMEBODY DEMOLISHED BOTH, THEY COULD NOT BUILD A DUPLEX, THEY COULD ONLY BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR WHATEVER THIS CONDITIONAL USE IS APPROVED FOR.
AND AS, BUT AS, AS LISTED RIGHT NOW, IF, IF NO REZONING OCCURRED, THEY COULD PUT A DUPLEX.
AND, UM, SINCE A SITE PLAN IS INCLUDED, UM, THE PARKING THAT IS SHOWN ON THAT SITE PLAN WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE PARKING.
IN OTHER WORDS, THERE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PAVED SURFACE.
SHE COULD NOT COME BACK AND PUT PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD AND MAKE A BIG PARKING LOT IN THE FRONT.
IF SHE BUILDS IT AS THE 1800 SQUARE FOOT HOME AND THE 500 SQUARE FOOT, UM, SECOND UNIT, THEN HER PARKING IS RESTRICTED TO HOW SHE PUT IT ON THE SITE PLAN.
I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THIS TIME.
UM, I'LL OPEN UP TO OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? YES.
UM, CATHERINE, UM, THOSE SIGNS THAT GO UP, I MEAN, I SEE 'EM ALL THE TIME.
THEY GO UP NORMALLY ABOUT 30 DAYS BEFORE, OR THREE WEEKS BEFORE THREE WEEKS, TWO AND A HALF WEEKS TO THREE WEEKS? CORRECT.
AND I THINK THE PERSON MADE AN OBSERVATION HERE, THE COMMENT THAT SHE SAW IT 10 DAYS AGO.
SO, I MEAN, TO ME THAT'S ON ONE DAY AND THEN ON ONLY ON TWO DAYS HAVE I SEEN IT UP.
IT'S BEEN COVERED THE REST OF THE TIME.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE TIMING, UM, 'CAUSE I SEE 'EM WHEN I'M DRIVING, I SEE THE SONY CASES AND I WASN'T SURE.
I SOMETIMES I'VE SEEN IT MORE THAN THREE, THREE WEEKS IN ADVANCE, SO SOME OF JUST BE FASTER THAN SOMEONE ELSE.
WE WON'T START POINTING FINGERS AT STAFF YET.
UM, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT.
UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UM, THIS IS, WELL, I'M NOT GONNA SAY THAT THIS, THIS, THIS IS, THIS IS A, UH, A CASE THAT IS LITERALLY A CROSS BABCOCK ROAD FROM, FROM MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I'M, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA.
UM, AND ORIGINALLY IF THERE WAS NOT A B TWO, UM, CONVERSION, UH, BONUS YOU MIGHT SAY, I WOULD PROBABLY, UH, BE AGAINST, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE HOUSE GROUP AS MS. HOFFER, YOU KNOW, MENTIONED.
UM, HOWEVER, BECAUSE THIS, THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE LOCKED IN WITH THE SITE PLAN, UM, IT, IT'S, AND I I RECOGNIZE THAT ON, ON, ON ON THIS STREET, THERE MAY NOT BE A LOT OF THE, UH, DETACHED GARAGES, BUT, BUT ON OTHER STREET OR DETACHED GARAGES THAT HAVE BEEN CONVERTED INTO, UM, UH, LIVING SPACES.
BUT, BUT THAT IS KIND OF A COMMON IN OUR AREA THAT'S, IT'S, IT'S VERY COMMON FOR, FOR THAT TO HAPPEN FOR, UM, THOSE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS TO, TO, TO OCCUR.
SO IN THIS CASE, UM, I WILL BE MAKING THE MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
COMMISSIONER SIPES HAS MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 16, UH, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS.
COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT, COMMISSIONER TO MY RIGHT.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 16 BY COMMISSIONER S SIPES WITH
[02:15:01]
A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.ALRIGHT, UM, MS. DUR, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS AS IT HEADS TO CITY COUNCIL.
ALRIGHT, WE ARE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 19.
MY NAME IS SUMMER MCCANN ZONING PLANNER OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 19 IS LOCATED AT 1401 LEE HALL.
GOING FROM R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 30 NOTICES MAILED TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, FIVE RECEIVED AN OPPOSITION, FIVE RECEIVED AN OPPOSITION OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IS ALSO AN APPROPRIATE ZONING.
THE ZONING REQUEST MAINTAINS THE BASE ZONING AND THE CONDITIONAL USE ALLOWS FOR CONSIDERATION OF A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, WHICH IS COMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO IH 10.
THE PROPOSED USE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LOCATION.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD MAINTAIN THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHILE ALLOWING AN ADDITIONAL SERVICE FOR THE AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
ALRIGHT, IF THE APPLICANT CAN PLEASE COME UP, GIVE YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS, AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REZONING REQUEST, PLEASE.
NAME'S, UH, JAVIER RA UH, ADDRESS IS 79 19 PINE BROOK.
UM, ASKING A REZONING ON 1401 LEE HALL, UH, FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, UH, TO PUT A, UH, ACCOUNTING OFFICE.
ANY, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YES, WE HAVE MR. ERNEST SALINAS.
MR. SALINAS, HE LEFT ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, SIR.
AND MR. SALINAS WAS TO SPEAK OPPOSED? VERY GOOD.
UM, MR. BORA, UH, THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE, SO IT GOES TO, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE FOR QUESTIONS PLEASE.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ON THIS.
DID, DID WE RECEIVE ANY, ANY, UM, OPPOSITION, UM, FOR THIS CASE? NOTICES OF OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS? UM, YES, THERE WERE FIVE, UH, NOTICES RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND FIVE OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET.
WERE THERE ANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT WERE NO.
UM, I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UM, THIS CASE FOR ME IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT, UM, BECAUSE WHILE I THINK THAT THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME FACTS THAT SUPPORT THE REZONING, UM, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE SURROUNDING THIS AREA ARE IN OPPOSITION.
THERE'S BEEN A LARGE AMOUNT OF OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORS, UM, RIGHT IN THAT AREA.
UM, AND, AND ALSO I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE THIS IS, WHILE IT IS ON A CORNER, IT IS A CORNER OF, UM, A LOCAL STREET.
IT IS, UM, IN A LARGE SWATH OF, UM, R FOUR, UM, RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
UM, SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT INTRODUCING A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE INTO WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE MIDDLE OF, OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO FOR THAT REASON, I'LL BE MOTIONING FOR DENIAL.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE HAS MOVED FOR DENIAL.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.
UM, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT.
ALRIGHT, UH, BRIEFLY, I WILL DISCUSS SOME THINGS, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER GREAT HOUSE'S POSITION, I THINK THIS USE FOR AN ACCOUNTING OFFICE, UH, WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE LISTED IN THE STAFF'S ANALYSIS.
AND SO I WILL BE OPPOSING THE MOTION.
[02:20:01]
ALRIGHT, THAT BEING SAID, THE MOTION IS FOR DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER 19 BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL.MR. BO CAN I GOT A GOOD LUCK TOO.
UH, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 20 PLEASE.
MY NAME IS SUMMER MCCANN ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 20 IS LOCATED AT 6 1 8 VERN STREET.
GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR RESIDENTIAL UNITS IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPOSED DENSITY WOULD BE OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE AREA.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPERTY IS AN INTERIOR LOT ABUTTING OTHER SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, MAKING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
ALRIGHT, IF THE APPLICANT CAN COME FORWARD, PLEASE TELL US ABOUT YOUR REZONING REQUEST.
GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FIRST, IF YOU WOULD, BEFORE I GET STARTED, THERE WERE SOME VOICEMAILS.
ARE THOSE GONNA BE ALLOWED TO BE PLAYED? THEY WILL BE PLAYED AFTER YOU PRESENT.
MY NAME IS MELODY ADAMS. MY ADDRESS IS 5 1 0 7 CHARLOTTE STREET.
I AM THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND THE APPLICANT FOR THIS REZONING APPLICATION.
UM, I WANTED TO COME IN AND JUST DRIVE HOME A COUPLE KEY POINTS.
UM, THIS 112 SQUARE FEET, UH, UH, CONDITIONAL USE, MEANING WE WILL NOT BE ADDING ANY SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE PROPERTY WILL STAY AS 4,112 SQUARE FEET.
UM, THE DEMAND FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY IS THERE.
UH, AS PART OF THE ADOPTED DOCUMENT FOR THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE FORECASTED AMOUNT OF GROWTH REPRESENTS SIGNIFICANT OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND THE CITY WILL HAVE A RANGE OF DEMAND FOR HOUSING TYPES FROM A GROWING DIVERSITY OF RESIDENTS.
UM, AS FAR AS DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INITIAL STUDIES FOUND THAT THERE ARE A LARGE NUMBER OF VACANT AND UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS WITHIN THE INNER CORE OF THE CITY.
ALLOWING FOR THESE AREAS TO REDEVELOP WITH A WIDER MIX OF USES AND INTRODUCING HOUSING CAN HELP REVITALIZE THESE AREAS AND IMPROVE THE SURROUNDING EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS.
AGAIN, CITING THE ESSAY TOMORROW.
UM, A CYCLE OF DISINVESTMENT HAS PERPETUATED THE PROBLEMS WITNESSED IN OUR COMMUNITIES DECLINING NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO WE HAVE A ACTIVE INVESTIGATION AGAINST THESE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS BECAUSE THEY HAVE ILLEGALLY BLOCKED THE ALLEYWAY DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROPERTY.
UM, THE CHIEF CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER, BELINDA PONCE, IS ON OUR SIDE WITH THIS INVESTIGATION.
AS FAR AS THE, UM, THE CHIEF FIRE INSPECTOR, HE SAYS THAT THAT IS ALSO A MAJOR HAZARD BECAUSE FIRETRUCKS CANNOT GET THROUGH THERE.
SO AS FAR AS COMMISSIONERS AND YOUR DELEGATION ON LAND USE, THAT WHOLE ALLEYWAY IS BEING BLOCKED WITH BROKEN DOWN VEHICLES, ENCROACHED BACKYARDS.
UM, AND THESE ARE, AND IT'S THE WHOLE BLOCK BEHIND IT.
SO OUR INTENTION WITH THIS IS TO OPEN THAT BLO THAT BLOCKED ALLEYWAY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS FROM BEHIND.
SO PARKING WILL BE BEHIND THE PROPERTY, NOTHING WILL BE IN THE FRONT.
UM, THE INTENDED FOUR UNITS COULD BE UP TO TWO TO THREE BEDROOMS WITH ONE TO TWO BATHS.
EACH POSING, UM, YOU KNOW, A GREAT NEED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE MULTIFAMILY.
UM, IT'S NOT ONLY RECOMMENDED, BUT ENCOURAGED ALSO BY THE SOUTH CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY PLAN,
[02:25:01]
WHICH STATES THE LAND USE PLAN IDENTIFIES THE PREFERRED LAND DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY.THE RECOMMENDED LOCATION OF DIFFERENT LAND USES IS BASED ON EXISTING USES, COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS, AND THE MAY, 2001 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SOME OF THE PRINCIPLES ARE TO DISTRIBUTE LAND USES TO MEET PHYSICAL, SOCIAL, CULTURAL, AND ECONOMIC AND ENERGY NEEDS, ENCOURAGE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT THAT PROVIDE THE FULL RANGE OF HOUSING CHOICES AND PROMOTE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY URBAN VITALITY AND EFFICIENT PROVISION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND IN ENCOURAGE A BALANCE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE TARGET AREAS.
AGAIN, CITING THE SOUTH CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY PLAN, CONSERVATION AND REVITALIZATION OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH COMPREHENSIVE REZONING AND OTHER CITY PROGRAMS. SO TO ME WHAT I'M READING IS THAT THE SOUTH CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY PLAN, THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS RECOMMENDING REZONING SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES SPECIFICALLY LISTED ALONG THESE CORRIDORS OF SOUTHWEST MILITARY DRIVE, PLEASANTON ROAD, ROOSEVELT AVENUE FOR MIXED USES THAT ARE DESIRED ALONG THESE CORRIDORS.
UM, CITING THE FINAL REPORT FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF INITIAL STUDIES.
THE FORECAST FOR NEW HOUSEHOLDS ARE ESTIMATED TO GENERATE DEMAND FOR 565,621 NEW HOUSING UNITS BY 2040.
SO BY TURNING THIS OVER 4,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY HOME INTO POTENTIALLY FOUR DIFFERENT THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT UNITS, THAT'S HOUSING FOR FOUR FAMILIES.
THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE ANY ADDITION OF SQUARE FOOTAGE OR ANY NEW DWELLING ON ANY OTHER PROPERTY.
UM, IN THE SITE PLAN, IT SHOWS WHERE WE PLAN ON PUTTING THE PARKING LOT IN THE BACK, WHICH CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW IS BEING BLOCKED BY THOSE NEIGHBORS.
LIKE I SAID, THE CURRENT INVESTIGATION IS GOING.
THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE CITATIONS ALREADY TO GET THAT CLEARED OUT.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, THE CHIEF CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER, THE CHIEF INSPECTOR WITH THE CITY, THE FIRE MARSHAL, I HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH ALL OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS.
THEY ALL ARE IN FAVOR OF GETTING THIS CLEARED OUT.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU MS. ADAMS. WE'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AFTER WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND POTENTIAL REBUTTAL.
UM, I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME VOICEMAILS.
IS THERE ANY PERSON HERE IN PERSON? YES.
MR. PORTILLO, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS.
DO WE HAVE LAST NAME? I MEAN OKAY, WE CAN PROJECT IT.
OH, HELLO, ZONING COMMISSIONERS.
I RESIDE AT 12 12 1, UH, MERRIT VILLA SAN ANTONIO.
UH, SO OUT TOWARDS ALAMO RANCH.
UM, SO I PREPARE, I PREPARED A, A BRIEF STATEMENT ALONG WITH SOME, WITH SOME TALKING POINTS THAT I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE CONVEYED HERE.
SO I'LL START OFF WITH, UH, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO ALLOW US TO ADVOCATE FOR THE CHANGE IN ZONING OF 6 1 18 VERN, UH, FROM AN R SIX TO AN R SIX CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR UNITS.
UM, I WON'T, I WON'T TAKE YOUR TIME.
DISCUSSING HOW MY WIFE AND I, UH, WE'RE BOTH FROM THE SOUTH SIDE, UM, FROM OUR RESPECTIVE CITIES, OR HOW OUR PARENTS COMPETED WITH OTHER TENANTS OR BUYERS, UH, IN THEIR ATTEMPT TO PUT A ROOF OVER OUR HEADS.
I ALSO WON'T SPEND ANY TIME, UH, DISCUSSING HOW, UH, MY PARENTS TOOK PRIDE IN THEIR, IN THEIR HOUSES AND IN THEIR DWELLING UNITS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, HOWEVER, TAKE A MOMENT TO DISCUSS OUR REASONING FOR THE ZONING CHANGE REQUESTS AND HOW, UH, OUR ACTIONS ARE IN SERVICE TO THE GROWTH OF OUR COMMUNITY, THE BEAUTIFICATION EFFORTS OF OUR LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THE FORWARD PROGRESS OF THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH SAN ANTONIO.
UM, I'D LIKE TO, UH, TAKE, UH, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO, UH, PAGE ONE HERE, UM, THAT YOU'LL SEE, UH, I HAVE PROVIDED WITH, UH, SOME, SOME KEY TAKEAWAYS.
SO ON PAGE ONE, YOU'LL, YOU'LL SEE A SAMPLE SIZE OF LISTINGS CONSIDERED MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS WITHIN HALF A MILE RADIUS OF SIX 18 VERN AND MARK DESIGNATIONS.
UM, WHETHER THEY'RE LOCATED ON A CORNER OR NOT.
SO OF THE NINE ADDRESSES, ONLY TWO OR 22% ARE LOCATED
[02:30:01]
ON CORNER LOTS.THIS IS INTENDED TO SHOW NOT ONLY THAT, NO, NOT ONLY DO MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS EXIST WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, BUT ALSO THAT THE MAJORITY OR 78% EXIST IN AREAS THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AS STATED IN WITHIN THE STAFF'S REPORT.
THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT WHETHER THEY WERE GRANDFATHERED IN, BUT RATHER DO THEY HELP ADDRESS THE GROWING HOME DISPARITY WITHIN THAT SIDE OF TOWN? I THINK SO.
AND THIS IS ONE ISSUE OR ZONING CHANGE REQUEST IS LOOKING TO ADDRESS.
UH, ON PAGE TWO, UH, YOU'LL FIND A COPY OF THE 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION RADIUS AS ISSUED BY, UH, OUR INITIAL ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
YOU'LL SEE THAT OF 30 PROPERTIES THAT, UM, WE NOTICED WOULD RE WOULD RECEIVE NOTICES THROUGH YOUR COMMER THREE ARE COMMERCIAL AND EIGHT WOULD BE CONSIDERED INVESTMENT PROPERTIES.
THESE INVESTMENT PROPERTIES IS MARKED BY THE EX OR SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTI-DWELLING UNITS AIMED AT ADDRESSING THE HOME DISPARITY GAP.
YES, SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DO NOT MAXIMIZE THE LOT SIZE TO ADDRESS MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, BUT DO PROVIDE A LIVING QUARTERS TO OFTEN UNDERREPRESENTED GROUP OF PEOPLE WITH HOME PRICES SKYROCKETING.
PEOPLE WHO RENT, UH, PEOPLE WHO RENT ARE FORCED TO CONTINUE TO RENT AND OFTEN DO SO, UM, OFTEN DO SO, UH, MUCH, MUCH FURTHER AWAY THAN WHERE THEY, THEY CURRENTLY, UH, WORK.
THE INTENT HERE, UH, IS TO SHOW THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO LEVERAGE.
IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU, WE'LL CALL YOU BACK.
MY NAME IS MELODY ADAMS. PHONE NUMBER TWO ONE ZERO FIVE EIGHT FOUR.
CAN, UM, DUPLEX, SHE SAYS SHE'S IN FAVOR OF DUPLEXES ON THAT STREET.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE NEEDED AN OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION, BUT I THINK MOST OF US GOT IT.
UM, MY NAME IS FRANKIE SANCHEZ.
I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO, UH, CASE NUMBER 0 4 9 CD.
UM, I DO KNOW THAT THIS HOUSE IS, UM, BEING EVALUATED FOR REZONING AND I WOULD, UH, HONESTLY BE INTERESTED IN HAVING THIS HOME, UH, RENTED OUT.
UH, I DO HAVE A LARGE FAMILY AND I WOULD BE LOOKING FORWARD TO POSSIBLY RENTING OUT A HOME THAT'S LARGE ENOUGH, UM, WITH MULTIPLE UNITS, UM, LOCATED THERE ON THE SOUTH SIDE AT SIX 18, VERN.
UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR CONCERNS, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND GIVE ME A CALL BACK AT (210) 895-7488.
UM, AGAIN, THIS IS FRANKIE SANCHEZ AND I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER 0 4 9 CD.
UH, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HAVING THIS HOME, UH, BEING AVAILABLE FOR MULTIPLE UNITS SO THAT I COULD, UH, BE ABLE TO HOUSE MY FAMILY THERE.
UH, MS. ADAMS A BRIEF REBUTTAL I SUPPOSE, ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY WERE ALL IN FAVOR.
SO THERE'S NOT MUCH TO REBUT, RIGHT?
WHETHER THERE'S ON THAT WAY OR NOT, UM, IN THE AREA SPECIFICALLY WITHIN 500 FEET, THERE WERE TWO, THEY ARE ON CORNER LOTS AND THEY WERE, UM, ADOPTED THAT WAY BEFORE THE ZONING CHANGE IN 1988.
UM, THERE'S ALSO TWO MORE THAT ARE
[02:35:01]
WITHIN 600 FEET AND THEN THE LIST THAT MR. PORTILLO ALSO BROUGHT UP AS WELL.SO IN, IN OUR OPINION, IT IS APPROPRIATE AND BASED ON THAT MESSAGE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S CLIENTS THAT ARE VERY INTERESTED AS WELL.
SO THANK YOU MS. ADAMS. YES, SIR.
UM, THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE CASE, SO COMMISSIONER FUENTES TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
THE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, MA'AM, YOU SAID THAT ALL THE PARKING FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE IN THE REAR.
SO, UH, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE THREE SPACES LISTED ON THE SITE PLAN? UH, THAT ARE ON THE EXISTING, UH, ON VERNE? OH, AND LET'S SEE HERE IN THE FRONT.
SO THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE EXISTING PARKING RIGHT NOW.
SO IS THAT GOING TO REMAIN IT'S GRAVEL RIGHT NOW, SO IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY GOING TO CONVERT IT INTO PARKING.
THE ACTUAL PARKING LOT WOULD BE A CONCRETE PAVED PARKING LOT IN THE BACK AND ACTUALLY IT'S, IT'S GONNA HAVE UP TO SIX SPACES.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FUENTES, UH, COMMERS TO MY RIGHT QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER HU I HAVE A CLARIFICATION, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO SHE PREPARED A SITE PLAN AND THEN SHE SAID THAT THE PARKING WAS NOT GONNA BE IN THE FRONT, BUT WERE IN THE BACK AND IT'S GONNA BE CONCRETE.
SO DOES SHE NEED TO MAKE THAT CHANGE ON THE SITE PLAN? SHE CERTAINLY COULD IF SHE WANTED TO AMEND THE SITE PLAN.
BUT I MEAN, IF IT'S LEFT ON THERE, IT GIVES HER FLEXIBILITY FOR IF IT NEEDS TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT AND IT CAN'T BE LOCATED IN THE BACK.
UM, JUST IN CASE SOME SORT OF A TECHNICAL ISSUE COMES UP WHEN, WHEN THEY'RE REVIEWING IT IN TRAFFIC.
SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND, IF SINCE THE, UH, CONDITIONAL USE AND UH, THE SITE PLAN DOES NOT MATCH WHAT SHE'S DESCRIBING, THEN WHAT IS THE CONDITION THAT WILL, THAT WILL BE, UH, DETERMINING? SO THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR PARKING LOT IN THE FRONT IS THERE'S NO FRONT YARD.
IT IS GRAVEL FROM THE FRONT DOOR TO THE SIDEWALK.
NOW IS THAT THE CURRENT STATE OR THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? THAT'S THE CURRENT STATE.
THAT'S THE FRONT AND THAT'S WHERE THE CURRENT PARKING LOT WAS.
UM, IS OUR INTENTION IS TO HAVE THE PARKING IN THE BACK.
AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WITH THE FLEXIBILITY, IF IT'S NECESSARY TO HAVE TO DO IT IN THE FRONT BECAUSE OF THAT ONGOING INVESTIGATION WITH THE BLOCKED ALLEYWAY, DEPENDING ON THE RESULT OF THAT, UM, IF IT'S DETERMINED FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT THAT BLOCKED ALLEYWAY GETS TO STAY BLOCKED, THEN IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WE MAY HAVE TO, UM, PUT SOME PARKING IN THE FRONT.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT CODE DOESN'T ALLOW FOR PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD.
SO AGAIN, THIS ONGOING INVESTIGATION, THERE'S, UM, MR. ANDREW LAKE, WHICH IS PART OF THE, THE PUBLIC REAL ESTATE, UH, DEPARTMENT.
I'VE GOT HIM INVOLVED TO SEE IF THOSE NEIGHBORS ACTUALLY OWN THAT PROPERTY.
SO IT'S, IT'S KIND OF ONGOING AND THERE'S, THERE'S A LENGTHY PROCESS INVOLVED.
UM, NONETHELESS, UM, I MEAN I EXPECT THAT THAT BLOCKED ALLEYWAY TO GET CLEARED.
WE HAVE ALL THE NECESSARY OFFICIALS THAT ARE SAYING IT'S ILLEGAL, THIS CAN'T HAPPEN.
THE FIRE MARSHAL IS CONCERNED.
UM, SO I EXPECT THAT BLOCKED ALLEYWAY TO BE CLEARED OUT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS INTO THAT PARKING LOT THAT WE INTEND ON PUTTING IN THE BACK.
SO IN THAT CASE, YOU SHOULD MODIFY YOUR SITE PLAN BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNSEL.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ON THE LEFT, WE'LL GET TO YOU.
OH, RIGHT NOW, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE QUESTIONS, UM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
SO IF, IF IN FACT THE, SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO ACCESS THROUGH THE BACK BECAUSE THE ALLEY IS BLOCKED, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO IF THE ALLEY DOES NOT BECOME UNBLOCKED, IS THERE ANY WAY TO ACCESS
[02:40:01]
THE BACK OF THE HOUSE OR ALL OF YOU WOULD, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM WITH YOUR SETBACKS, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.UM, MS. ADAMS, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
AS INDICATED THAT THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, UM, IT LOOKS A LITTLE FRANKENSTEINY TO ME.
HAS THIS ALWAYS BEEN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME? DO WE KNOW STAFF? I, I, WE, WE TYPICALLY DON'T GO INSIDE THE STRUCTURE WHEN WE'RE DOING OUR FIELD ANALYSIS.
I MEAN, ALL WE WOULD HAVE IS WHATEVER BECA SHOWS IN THEIR DATA.
WHICH SHOW THE, THE NEW OWNER WOULD HAVE MORE INFORMATION THAN WE WOULD ABOUT WHAT IT IS INSIDE.
MS. ADAMS, YOU SAID IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
DO YOU KNOW IF IT HAS EVER BEEN MULTIPLE UNITS? NO, IT HAS NOT.
UM, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FUENTES TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
SO I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.
SO WOULD WE BE ABLE TO APPROVE THIS AS IT IS WITH SITE PLAN STILL SHOWING PARKING IN THE FRONT? IF SHE PUTS IT ON THE RECORD THAT SHE'S GONNA REMOVE THE PARKING IN THE FRONT, THEN WE WOULD JUST COLLECT THE AMENDED SITE PLAN AS IT MOVES FORWARD TO COUNSEL, BECAUSE THEN YOU'LL KNOW SHE STATED FOR THE RECORD THERE, THERE'S NO PARKING IN THE FRONT.
UM, I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE, UH, WITH THE AMENDMENTS TO THE SITE PLAN.
MS. ADAMS, DO YOU AGREE TO THAT AMENDMENT? I DO.
UH, THERE IS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES TO APPROVE WITH THE AMENDMENTS TO THE SITE PLAN.
DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? TO MY LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER, OR JUST TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM THE APPLICANT.
SO YOUR PROPOSAL IS JUST TO HAVE FOUR PARKING DEPOSITS IN THE BACK AND THEN USE ACCESS FROM THE ALLEYWAY FOR THE INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THESE, FOR YOUR RESIDENCE OR THE GUESTS THAT ARE GONNA BE STAYING THERE? A HUNDRED PERCENT.
THEY'RE NOT, IT'S THE ONLY WAY THEY'RE GONNA GET INTO THIS PROPERTY.
WHICH IS PROBABLY A RURAL ROAD.
THERE'S NO PAVEMENT, I'M ASSUMING.
IS THAT CORRECT? IN THE ALLEYWAY? YES.
SO CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW IT'S, SO WHERE IT SAYS VERN STREET MM-HMM.
RIGHT NOW THAT PUBLIC ALLEYWAY IS COMPLETELY BLOCKED FROM BOTH ENDS BY ALL THE NEIGHBORS ON GROSVENER BOULEVARD.
SO IDEALLY THAT WHOLE BLOCKED ALLEYWAY IS GONNA GET CLEARED TO HAVE ENTRANCES ON BOTH SIDES TO COME IN TO ACCESS THAT PARKING LOT IN THE BACK.
DOES THE CITY USE THAT FOR, UH, PICKING UP LIKE TRASH CANS? ANYTHING THERE THAT'S IN THE FRONT OF THE STREET? THEY, NO, NOT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S BLOCKED, IT'S COMPLETELY BLOCKED.
THERE IS, THERE'S ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT HAS A ILLEGALLY PUT UP A GATE ON ONE SIDE AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE THEY HAVE ILLEGALLY, THEY HAVE, UH, BROKEN DOWN VEHICLES IN THEIR BACKYARD.
AND SO YEAH, WE'RE TRYING TO GET THAT CLEARED OUT AND THAT'S WHERE, THAT'S WHERE THE FIRE MARSHAL COMES IN AND SAYS, THIS IS COMPLETELY UNSAFE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO GET BACK THERE WITH OUR FIRE TRUCKS IF IT'S NECESSARY.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMERS TO MY LEFT.
COMMERS TO MY RIGHT COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL AND, SORRY, ACTUALLY IT'S NOT A QUESTION, IT'S JUST, SORRY, JUST BROUGHT SOMETHING.
BUT FOR STAFF ACTUALLY, SO THIS IS KIND OF ALL UP IN THE AIR PARKING, DEPENDS ON WHETHER THE ALLEYWAY CAN BE CLEARED IN ORDER FOR A PARKING LOT TO BE REACHED.
IF THIS MULTI-FAMILY KIND OF ZONING OR, OR USE FOR FOUR UNITS IS ALLOWED, BUT THE PARKING CAN'T COME TO FRUITION FOR WHATEVER LEGAL REASONS, IS THE CITY GOING TO ALLOW PARKING THEN JUST TO FALL TO THE STREETS? SO THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS.
SO BEING THAT IT IS, UM, AN UNPAVED ALLEY, UH, WE SEE THIS IN, UH, THE INNER CITY.
WHAT HAP WHAT HAPPENS IS SOMEBODY WANTS TO UTILIZE THAT ALLEY IN ORDER TO PUT PARKING IN THE REAR OF THEIR STRUCTURE.
UH, THEY WILL HAVE TO IMPROVE IT UP TO THE POINT OF THEIR LOT.
SO THEY'LL HAVE TO PAVE IT UP TO THE POINT OF THEIR LOT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THAT.
YES, PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN OWNERSHIP, IF YOU WILL, AND PUT THAT LOOSELY IN QUOTES OF UNPAVED ALLEYS BY EITHER, UH, PUTTING THEIR FENCE THERE, UM, OR, UM, STORING THINGS THERE, BUT THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO.
AND SO, UM, WHEN THESE ALLEYS GET IMPROVED BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT, THOSE OWNERS THAT HAVE PUT STUFF THERE NEED TO MOVE IT.
UM, SO THAT, THAT'S ONE ISSUE RELATED TO ACCESSING IT.
HER, HER PROPOSED USE IS FOUR UNITS, WHICH TRIGGERS A 1.5 PARKING REQUIREMENT, WHICH TRIGGERS SIX SPACES.
[02:45:01]
FIT PER CODE, ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE SPACES, THEN SHE'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A NEXT STEP, WHICH IS A, A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, PROCESS, UH, IN ORDER TO WAIVE THE REST OF THE PARKING, UH, THAT'S REQUIRED.BUT NO, THE CITY, THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE AN OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT PERIOD.
IF YOU CAN'T MEET IT, THEN YOU HAVE TO EITHER DO A COOPERATIVE PARKING AGREEMENT OR YOU CAN GO THROUGH A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WAIVER PROCESS.
MAY I COMMENT AS WELL? NO, THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT, UH, I HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.
I HAVE SOME DISCUSSION BRIEFLY.
UM, I SEE THIS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD QUITE A BIT WHERE WE HAVE HOUSES THAT ARE OVERSIZED FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU WOULD.
AND IN THOSE CASES, UM, FREQUENTLY THEY STARTED OUT AS MULTIFAMILY UNITS, UH, RMM FOUR, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
AND SO EVEN THOUGH THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN A SINGLE FAMILY, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION BECAUSE I THINK THAT KIND OF VARIETY IN, UH, SOME OF OUR, ESPECIALLY, UH, THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE CLOSER TO THE CITY CORE IS A APPROPRIATE USE, IS AN APPROPRIATE USE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, UH, MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 20 BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
WE WILL MOVE ON NOW TO ITEM NUMBER 23, THE SWEET KOS PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 23 IS LOCATED AT 5 3 6 EAST CORTLAND PLACE GOING FROM R SIX CD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR DAYCARE CENTER TO R SIX CD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT.
THERE WERE 27 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED WITHIN THE 200 FEET.
TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT UNDER AGREED UPON CONDITIONS.
THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE PRIMARILY C ONE, C TWO, AND C THREE ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
AND OTHER SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE R SIX AND MF 33.
THE REQUEST WOULD MAINTAIN THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHILE ADDING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT.
THE ADDITION OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE IS APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE SIZES LOCATION ON ST.
MARY'S STREET AND ITS PROXIMITY TO OTHER SIMILAR USES ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
FURTHERMORE, SUCH A DESIGNATION WILL ACT AS A TRANSITIONAL USE BETWEEN THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMERCIAL USES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, MR. CHRISTENSEN? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 10 SOUTH ST.
UM, THE PROPERTY TODAY IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED, UH, AS A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT FOR A DAYCARE.
IT WAS A, A DAYCARE FOR, FOR YEARS AND YEARS.
UM, THE COVID SHUTDOWNS PRETTY MUCH KILLED THE, THE DAYCARE BUSINESS.
THE OWNERS HAVE BEEN ACTIVELY MARKETING IT FOR ANOTHER DAYCARE OPERATION FOR ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF NOW.
AND THERE'S, THERE'VE BEEN NO TAKERS.
THEY WERE APPROACHED BY SEAN WYNN AND ANDREW HO WHO DO, UH, THEIR RESTAURANT TOURS.
THEY'RE CHEFS, THEY'VE DONE PINCH BOIL AND THEY HAVE A CURRY RESTAURANT, OR CURRY BOYS, I'M SORRY, RESTAURANT RIGHT HERE ACROSS THE STREET.
UM, THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO A RESTAURANT HERE CALLED BEST BEHAVIOR.
AND THEY HAVE ANOTHER LOCATION FURTHER NORTH ON ST.
MARY'S THAT'S GONNA BE WORST BEHAVIOR SPELLED W U R SS T A GERMAN ASIAN TYPE OF RESTAURANT.
THIS LOCATION THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, FOR SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT CLOSER IN STYLE TO OUTLAW KITCHEN, A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD RESTAURANT.
IT'LL BE OPEN AT 9:00 AM AND SERVE COFFEE, UH, ROLLS, BREAKFAST ROLLS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THEN THE AFTERNOON, IT'LL SWITCH TO LUNCH AND THEN TO DINNER LATER ON.
UM, AND WORKING WITH TOBIN HILL WHO ARE IN SUPPORT, UH, THEY WERE INSISTED ON SOME CONDITIONS AND THOSE CONDITIONS WERE BASICALLY HOURS OF OPERATION.
THE BIG CONCERN WAS THAT THIS MIGHT SOMEDAY BE TURNED INTO A BAR.
SO WE'VE AGREED TO CLOSE THE RESTAURANT WHEN BARS REALLY GET HOPPING, SO THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE THIS COULD EVER BE A BAR.
AND ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPERTY OWNERS OWN THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE WHERE THERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
THEY'RE GOING TO FIX THAT UP AND TURN IT INTO BACK INTO A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
SO IT'S KIND OF A NICE LITTLE BUFFER, AT LEAST WITH THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY NEXT DOOR.
UM, THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS THAT WE AGREED TO WITH TOBIN HILL WERE ARE SUNDAY TO WEDNESDAY, 9:00 AM TO 10:00 PM AND THEN THURSDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, 9:00 AM TO 11:00 PM AND I'VE CONFIRMED WITH CITY STAFF HOW THOSE HOURS OF OPERATIONS WORK FOR A RESTAURANT.
IF SOMEBODY'S INSIDE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO FINISH THEIR MEAL, BUT THEN THEY HAVE TO CLOSE THE DOOR, NOBODY ELSE
[02:50:01]
CAN COME IN.UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.
I BELIEVE THERE'S SOMEONE HERE TO SPEAK AND I'LL DO A LITTLE REBUTTAL AFTER THAT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. CHRISTENSEN.
IS THERE A PUBLIC COMMENT? BYRON BURKI.
ALRIGHT, MR. BURKIS, YOU'VE BEEN HERE QUITE SOME TIME, SO YOU KNOW THE DRILL.
NAME, ADDRESS, SIR, AND TELL US YOUR OPINION.
UH, MY ADDRESS IS 5 3 5 EAST DEWEY PLACE.
UH, MY TELEPHONE NUMBER, YOU WANT ME (210) 649-9137.
UM, I THINK JUST TO START OFF, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND JUST HEARING ME OUT AND, AND JUST KIND OF HEARING MY CONCERNS JUST TO KIND OF, UH, ESTABLISH MYSELF REAL QUICKLY.
I'VE BEEN IN THE AREA FOR ALMOST 10 YEARS NOW.
I HAVE TWO WONDERFUL KIDS, FIVE AND 11.
I HAVE A DOG WHO, AND WE'RE CONSTANTLY WALKING THE AREA.
WE'RE VERY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
WE'RE VERY COMMITTED TO THE COMMUNITY IN THE AREA, AND WE, AND WE'D LOVE TO STAY THERE FOR A VERY, VERY, VERY LONG TIME.
UM, WE LEARNED A FEW YEARS AGO WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN, UM, WHEN A NEW OPERATOR MOVES IN AND KIND OF, UM, TAKES OVER.
I KNOW WE, WE, WE KNOW WHERE WE LIVE.
WE WE'RE, WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT IT JUST TAKES ONE BAD OPERATOR TO REALLY, UH, CHANGE THE WAY OF LIFE, FRANKLY, IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
I'M NOT SURE IF THE COMMITTEE'S AWARE OF SOME OF THE RECENT CURRENT EVENTS IN THE AREA THERE.
UM, YET AGAIN, THERE WAS ANOTHER SHOOTING LAST WEEKEND.
THANKFULLY NO ONE WAS KILLED THIS TIME THAT I'M AWARE OF.
UM, THERE'S A NOISE TASK FORCE THAT IS CURRENTLY IN, UM, CURRENTLY ACTIVE, I THINK FOR THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR.
UM, AND, UH, I JUST, UH, I I'M AFRAID OF THAT.
WE'RE JUST THROWING GAS ON A, I MEAN THROWING FI YOU KNOW, GAS ON A, ON A ALREADY KIND OF FLAMING FIRE.
I LIVE IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THIS FACILITY.
UM, AND MY, MY NEIGHBOR WHO'S NO LONGER HERE, SHE COULDN'T STAY.
UM, I THINK SHE MAY HAVE LEFT A VOICEMAIL.
SHE'S LOCKING STEP WITH MY COMMENTS HERE, BY THE WAY.
UM, I, I THINK, UM, THERE'S SOME CONCERNS WE HAVE ABOUT HOW THIS IMMEDIATELY IMPACTS WHAT THE STAFF SAID, ADVERSE IMPACTS THE NEIGHBORING LANDS AND HEALTH SAFETY AND OUR WELFARE.
UM, THOSE CONCERNS ARE, UM, JUST ANOTHER PLACE WITH ALCOHOL, YOU KNOW, AND WHAT THAT MIGHT BRING TO THE AREA WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH, UH, WITH, UH, THE LAYOUT IN THE AREA AND WHAT, WHERE IT ALREADY EXISTS.
BUT JUST ANOTHER ONE, UH, JUST, JUST CONCERNS THERE.
PARKING AND SAFETY, THIS IS A BIG ONE FOR ME.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAYOUT, I HAVE A DETACHED GARAGE IN THE ALLEY THERE.
THE OTHER, MY NEIGHBOR ALSO HAS A PARKING IN THE BACK THERE.
I'VE BEEN THERE OVER 10 PLUS YEARS.
THAT IS THE ONLY WAY I HAVE ACCESS, PAVED ACCESS, IF YOU WILL, TO MY DETACHED GARAGE WHERE WE, MY WIFE PARKS HER CAR, MY KIDS GET OUTTA THE CAR SEAT, WE GET OUT AND MY CARPORT BACK THERE.
IF WE ARE FORCED TO BY ANY REASON MOVE TO PARK ON THE MAIN STREET, WE ARE NOW GONNA BE ON EAST DEWEY PLACE, WHICH IS A HIGHLY TRAFFICKED AREA.
AND TAKING A KID OUT OF A CAR SEAT OR EVEN TRY AND HAVE MY PARENTS COME AND JUST COME OVER TO VISIT IS VERY SCARY AND UNNERVING AT TIME.
SO THE PARKING THERE, OUR UNIQUE ACCESS TO THE ALLEY, UM, OUR, THE DUTCH GARAGE SPACE, UM, ARE JUST THINGS I'D LIKE THE COMMITTEE TO THINK ABOUT THE TRASH, WHERE THEY HAVE THE TRASH PACKED OR THE TRASH CAN.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S JUST CONCERNS WITH ADDITIONAL FOOD AND ANIMALS AND, AND STUFF THAT MIGHT BE CREEPING UP THERE.
NOT TO MENTION, WHEN THE WEATHER KICKS IN THE, AND THE TRASH IS OUT THERE, IT JUST FINDS A WAY TO JUST GET THAT STUFF UP IN THE ALLEY AND, AND SPREAD THE TRASH ALL OVER THE PLACE.
UM, AND THEN LASTLY, THE NOISE.
I COULD ASSURE YOU THE TASK FORCE DOES NOT EXIST TODAY BECAUSE OF THE NOISE OF ALL THOSE PLAYING CHILDREN.
IT'S THERE FOR OTHER REASONS AND UM, JUST THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME OUT, YOUR CONSIDERATIONS.
ALRIGHT, STAFF, ANY OTHER PERSONS PRESENT? NOT PERSONS PRESENT, BUT WE DO HAVE SOME VOICEMAILS.
IF WE COULD PLAY THE VOICEMAILS PLEASE.
SO SMITH, I LIVE AT 2213 NORTH ST.
MY PHONE NUMBER CALLING IN REFERENCE TO CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 0 2 2 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 0 5 3 CD, WHICH IS 5 36 EAST CORTLAND PLACE.
THIS CALL IS IN SUPPORT OF ALLOWING THE CONDITIONAL ZONING CHANGE FOR A FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT.
THE OPERATOR, IN MY EXPERIENCE MAINTAINS A RESPONSIBLE OPERATION OF NORTH ST.
MARY'S AND SEVERAL OTHER LOCATIONS AROUND TOWN TO BE A TRULY WALKABLE, VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE NEED MORE RESTAURANTS AND SERVICES THAT CATER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE DECIDEDLY DO NOT NEED MORE BARS, WHICH IS NOT WHAT THIS CHANGE WOULD ALLOW AS IN ANY COMMERCIAL VENTURE.
IN A MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE ARE CHALLENGES WITH NOISE, COMPATIBILITY AND PARKING, BUT THEY CAN BE MITIGATED WITH CONSTRUCTIVE DIALOGUE WITH RESPONSIBLE PARTIES.
I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THIS VENTURE IS RUN BY RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS ARE TRYING TO MAKE OUR COMMUNITY BETTER.
AGAIN, I AM SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
[02:55:04]
HELLO, MY NAME IS, UH, BYRON BURKI.UM, UH, MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS, HELLO, MY NAME IS PAULY TORO.
I LIVE AT 6 0 2 EAST DEWEY PLACE AND I'M A 22 YEAR RESIDENT OF TOBIN HILL.
I LIVE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY AT 5 3 6 EAST COURTLAND.
IN FACT, I CAN SEE IT FROM MY FRONT YARD THAT IS REQUESTING REZONING WITH CASE NUMBER Z 20 22 7 5 3 CD.
I OPPOSE THE REZONING REQUEST.
THERE IS ALREADY A NO IF IT'S THIS INTERVIEW AS WELL, THERE'S JUST NOTHING IN THERE.
BUT HE'S PLAYING FOR ANOTHER MINUTE AND A HALF.
ALRIGHT, WELL IS THERE ANY SUBSTANCE TO THE MINUTE AND A HALF? NO.
ALRIGHT, WELL WE WILL NOTE THAT AS AN OPPOSITION AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE.
HI, THIS MESSAGE IS FOR CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 2 2 1 0 7 0 0 0 5 3 CD.
I AM THE OWNER OF 6 0 5 KENDALL STREET.
UM, AND I AM, UM, NOT IN FAVOR OF REZONING THAT AS A RESTAURANT.
THE DAYCARE CENTER, WE HAVE, UM, STRUGGLED WITH PEOPLE PARKING IN OUR PARKING.
UM, SPOTS ARE ON OUR PROPERTY.
THERE IS NO PARKING AROUND THERE FOR AN ESTABLISHMENT, SO IT WOULD BE STREET PARKING.
AND, UM, I, I AM OPPOSING THAT TO BE TURNED INTO A RESTAURANT.
UM, MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 667-5066.
MY ADDRESS EIGHT FOUR ONE FIVE FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
MY PHONE NUMBER (210) 260-5773.
THE LAST THREE DIGITS OF THE CASE NUMBER IS FIVE FIVE SS AS IN SAM.
AND, UH, SHE JUST WENT TO THE NEXT ONE ON, ON ACCIDENT.
ALL RIGHT, MR. CHRISTENSEN BRIEF REBUTTAL, PLEASE.
UM, LOOK, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS.
THERE'S BEEN SOME CRAZY THINGS GOING ON, EXCUSE ME, ON ST.
I MEAN THOSE, BUT THOSE ARE INVOLVING BARS AND MOST OF THOSE ACCIDENTS ARE VERY LATE AT NIGHT WITH OUR AGREED HOURS OF OPERATION.
THIS PLACE WILL BE CLOSED BY ANYTIME, ANY OF THAT, ANY OF THAT HAPPENS.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS.
I MEAN, SO THIS IS THE LOCATION RIGHT HERE.
YOU HAVE LITTLE DEATH, A WINE BAR, YOU'VE GOT MIDNIGHT SWIM A LATE STAY UP WHEN IT'S LATE BAR.
WE'VE GOT BURGER BOYS RIGHT HERE.
I MEAN, IT'S A VERY COMMERCIAL KIND OF AN AREA.
THIS PROPERTY TURNING BACK INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THE CHANCES OF THAT ARE PROBABLY SLIM TO NONE.
UM, AND, AND ADDED, CAN YOU GO TO MY SITE PLAN? I HEARD THE, THE QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING.
UM, WE ARE GOING TO LOCATE 12 PARKING SPACES ON THE PROPERTY HERE.
UM, IT'S A LITTLE OUTDOOR AREA AND PLEASE REMEMBER THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE TOBIN HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO ANY OUTSIDE REMODELING REDESIGNS, WE'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE HISTORIC DESIGN AND REVIEW COMMISSION PROCESS.
THAT'S ANOTHER LITTLE ADDED PROTECTION.
SO I THINK THAT WITH THE HOURS OF OPERATION WILL CERTAINLY STOP THIS FROM BEING SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD, WOULD FIND, UH, SOMETHING THAT THEY DON'T LIKE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. CHRISTENSEN.
UM, THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE, SO COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY PLAN? OH, OKAY.
THE DUMPSTER LOCATION IS ACTUALLY ON HERE.
IS IS THERE, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THAT LOCATION COULD BE CHANGED TO BE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE, UM, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES BEHIND THIS? UH, WELL, I MEAN, I GUESS WE COULD TRY.
THERE'S THE, THE BURGER BOYS IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, SO WE WERE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THAT'S WHERE SUDDEN DEATHS IS TOO.
THE, THE KENDALL STREET RIGHT HERE.
I MEAN, WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF THERE'S SOME PLACE WE CAN RELOCATE IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANNA PUT IT IN THIS PROPERTY'S, YOU KNOW, VERY LIMITED
WE DON'T WANNA PUT IT IN FRONT.
WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, WE GOT THE OUTDOOR SEATING RIGHT HERE, BUT WE CAN TRY TO, I CAN WORK WITH THE RESTAURATEURS TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE WE CAN DO AND TO MODIFY THAT SITE PLAN BEFORE WE GO TO UH, COUNCIL.
UM, ARE YOU PLANNING FOR THERE TO BE ANY OUTDOOR SPEAKERS ON THIS? NO, NO OUTDOOR SPEAKERS, NO LIVE MUSIC, NO DJS, NOTHING LIKE THAT.
[03:00:01]
I'M JUST KIDDING.UM, OR WOULD, WOULD THE APPLICANT BE WILLING TO PUT A RESTRICTION ON AN NR ON THIS? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
AND THEN, UM, SO THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR YOU.
UM, WITH RESPECT TO, WE NEED TO LOOK UP THE NR PLACEMENT, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL BASED DISTRICT.
SO ARE YOU SAYING MAYBE WE DON'T EVEN NEED TO DO THAT? LIKE WOULD, WOULD OUTDOOR SPEAKERS BE ALLOWED? YES, OUTDOOR SPEAKERS WOULD BE ALLOWED.
I JUST DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN PLACE AN NR ON IT AND NR MAY ONLY BE ELIGIBLE ON C TWO AND C THREE, THEN WE JUST PUT A CONDITION THAT THERE BE NO OUTSIDE SPEAKERS.
SITE PLAN CAN SHOW NO OUTSIDE SPEAKERS.
REGARDLESS SOMETHING ON THE SITE PLAN OR CONDITION THAT SAYS NO OUTDOOR AMPLIFICATION OF SOUND.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE FOR STAFF WAS THERE'S NO PARKING ALLOWED IN THE ALLEY.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO AGAIN, OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT ON THE ALLEY.
I'M JUST SAYING, SO IF, IF SOMEONE WAS TO BE PARKED IN THE ALLEY, THEN THAT WOULD BE A TICKETABLE OFFENSE OR CODE ENFORCEMENT COULD BE CALLED OR IT DEPENDS.
SO, UM, IT DEPENDS ON THE WIDTH OF AN ALLEY.
IT DEPENDS ON, UM, IF AREAS ARE PASSABLE, BUT THE ALLEY IS NOT CONSIDERED PART OF THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SO THERE'S ALLEYS IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO THAT ARE WIDE ENOUGH WHERE PEOPLE PARK ON THE ALLEY, BUT IT'S STILL PASSABLE ON THE SIDE.
BUT THAT IS NOT THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACE.
THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACE IS ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT ON THE ALLEY.
SO IT, IT, IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE WIDTH OF THE ALLEY AND WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S BEEN USED FOR PARKING BUT YOU CAN'T BLOCK THE ALLEY.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, UM, COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT QUESTIONS? YES, I HAD FOR THE, UH, MS. KRISTEN THE ALLEYWAY, IS THERE SOME TYPE OF BUFFER FOR THAT ALLEYWAY THAT LOOKS KIND OF NARROW FOR THE RESIDENCE? THERE'S LIVING ON THE OTHER SIDE.
I NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
I, 'CAUSE I, I WAS LOOKING AT, I'M LOOKING AT AN AREA VIEW RIGHT NOW OF IT.
THERE'S JUST LIKE A CHAIN LINK FENCE, BUT IS THERE ANY TYPE OF PLAN TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF WOODEN FENCE OR SOMETHING TO SEPARATE ITSELF FROM THAT? YES, COMMISSIONER AND I CAN ADD THAT TO THE SIDELINE TOO.
WE'RE GONNA PUT A, A SOLID SCREEN WOOD FENCE HERE AND THEN OF COURSE FOR THIS, BETWEEN THE, THE PARKING AND THIS AND THE RENTAL PROPERTY WILL BE A WOOD, WOOD, A WOOD FENCE ALL ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE.
SO YES, THERE WILL BE A FENCE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT.
AND IF I COULD, UM, SO SINCE YOU'RE GOING, YOU MIGHT BE MAKING A MOTION THAT ALTERS, UH, THE CONDITIONS RELATED TO THE HOURS OF OPERATION.
YOU CAN JUST ADD A CONDITION OF NO OUTDOOR SPEAKERS.
COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UM, I'LL BE MAKING A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR THIS CASE, UM, WITH THE CONDITIONS, UM, FOR HOURS OF OPERATION SUNDAY THROUGH WEDNESDAY FROM 9:00 AM TO 10:00 PM AND THURSDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, 9:00 AM TO 11:00 PM ALSO CONDITION OF NO OUTDOOR AMPLIFICATION AND WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICANT'S GOING TO ADD THE WOODEN FENCE, WOODEN SCREENING FENCE AS WELL AS WORKING TO POTENTIALLY RELOCATE THE DUMPSTER.
AND SO THIS CASE IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S DIFFICULT IN A LOT OF WAYS.
UM, AS ARE I FEEL LIKE ALL OF MY CASES, UM, BECAUSE IF THEY'RE EASY THEY STAY ON CONSENT.
UM, BUT ON THIS CASE, I MEAN I'M EXTREMELY COGNIZANT OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN ST.
MARY'S AND, AND FELLOW COMMISSIONERS UP HERE KNOW THAT I TALK ABOUT IT A LOT BECAUSE I CAN HEAR ST.
MARY'S FROM MY HOUSE AND I DON'T LIVE BEHIND MIDNIGHT SWIM OR PAPER TIGER.
I LIVE FAR ENOUGH AWAY THAT I PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HEAR THE STRIP.
HOWEVER, I DO FEEL LIKE THIS CASE IS DIFFERENT AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AGREEING TO CONDITIONS THAT ALLOW US TO HAVE, UM, DEVELOPMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY AND TO INCREASE THE AMENITIES IN THIS WALKABLE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, ADDITIONALLY THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN.
IT IS URBAN, UM, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH ACTUALLY ALSO, UM, SAYS THAT IT SHOULD ACCOMMODATE SMALL SCALE RETAIL AND SERVICE USES THAT ARE INTENDED TO SUPPORT THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES.
SO I BELIEVE THIS IS FULLY CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN.
I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADVERSE IMPACTS
[03:05:01]
ARE BEING MITIGATED HERE.UM, A AS AS REFLECTED BY THE, UM, THE CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT'S PUTTING ON.
UM, I ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THIS, UM, IS GOING TO KEEP THE SAME RESIDENTIAL FEEL WITH KEEPING THE, THE, UM, NEIGHBOR KEEPING THE THE SITE PLAN.
YOU KNOW, WITH A, A UM, HOUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE A HOUSE, UM, FROM THE FRONT, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY REDEVELOPMENT FROM, FROM THAT SIDE.
AND ALSO THAT WE DO HAVE OTHER OPERATORS, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE OUTLAW KITCHEN THAT IS A RESPECTFUL, GOOD OPERATOR IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO, UM, RESIDENTIAL USES.
SO MY HOPE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH THESE PROTECTIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO PUT IN PLACE, THAT THAT WILL INCREASE PLACES FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO GO.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
CAN I GET JUST ONE CLARIFICATION? OF COURSE.
UM, SO ON RESIDENTIAL BASED DISTRICTS, THERE ARE THREE, UM, CONDITIONS THAT ARE AUTOMATIC, UH, ON THIS.
AND I JUST WANNA CONFIRM WHICH ONES ARE, WE'RE CHANGING, WHICH ONES ARE NOT GOING TO APPLY.
SO THE FIRST ONE HAS TO DO WITH SIGNAGE NOT TO EXCEED THREE SQUARE FEET.
IS IS THAT, IS, ARE WE ADHERING TO THAT WITH THIS CASE OR DO YOU NEED BIGGER SIGNAGE? I DON'T BELIEVE, I DON'T BELIEVE WE NEED BIGGER SIGNAGE.
IT'S JUST GONNA BE A SIGN OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WOULD STILL APPLY ACTUALLY, KATT, MAY I AND THAT THREE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS AFFIXED TO THE STRUCTURE? THAT'S CORRECT.
JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE THERE.
AND THEN NO CONSTRUCTION FEATURES SHALL BE PERMITTED, WHICH REPLACES STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE'RE KEEPING THE EXISTING HOUSE AND WE'LL GO THROUGH THE H D R C PROCESS ON IT.
BUT I DO SEE OUTDOOR DINING OUTSIDE IN THE FRONT.
IS THAT A PROBLEM? I MEAN, WELL UNLESS YOU'RE GONNA CONSTRUCT SOME SORT OF UM, PATIO COVER TO COVER THE CHAIRS AND TABLES, THAT'S USUALLY NOT WHAT YOU SEE IN, IN FRONT OF A HOUSE.
SO IT SAYS NO CONSTRUCTION FEATURES SHALL BE PERMITTED, WHICH WOULD PLACE THE STRUCTURE OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO HOMES TYPICALLY DO NOT HAVE A DETACHED PATIO COVERING THEIR FRONT YARD.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU INTEND ON HAVING A PATIO COVER OVER THAT DINING SPACE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE PLANNING ON HAVING ANY LIKE STRUCTURAL COVER.
THEY MIGHT PUT SOME OF THOSE SHADE.
I THINK IT WOULD BE SAFE NOT TO INCLUDE THAT CONDITION.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE REVISED HOURS OF OPERATION AND THEN NO OUTDOOR SPEAKERS.
SO THEN JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE WOULD NOT BE INCLUDING THAT CONDITION BUT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH H D R C.
THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH H D R C FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION.
AND KAT ALSO THE SCREENING FENCE ALONG THE ALLEY.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA BE A CONDITION, BUT IT WAS BE, I'LL ADD IT TO THE SITE PLAN INCLUDED THE SITE PLAN AND WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE IT MEETS ALL CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENTS.
DOES THAT CLARIFY YOUR MOTION? YES.
THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OR CONDITIONS AS READ ON THE RECORD AND CLARIFY.
AND THEN SECOND BY COMMISSIONER REBUT.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, UH, WITH THE CONDITIONS AS READ ON THE RECORD AND CLARIFIED BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS.
COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT, I JUST WANT COMMENT.
UM, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE.
I, I'D RATHER SEE RESTAURANTS AND LESS BARS IN THAT AREA.
I KNOW THAT AREA IS GOING THROUGH A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE NEXT 120 DAYS.
THERE'S A LOT GOING ON WITH CITY COUNCIL MEMBER MARIO BRAVO AND THE SAP P D.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD CHANGES GONNA HAPPEN AND IT'S GONNA TAKE CARE OF ITSELF.
BUT THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS, UH, I PREFER RESTAURANTS AND I THINK THIS WILL TAKE CARE OF IT.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS AS READ ON THE RECORD AND CLARIFIED, UH, BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTLES ROLL CALL.
MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
MR. BURKAS, THANK YOU FOR COMING.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT IS OUR LAST, UH, REZONING REQUEST ON OUR AGENDA.
[03:10:01]
IS ITEM[Approval of Minutes ]
NUMBER 29, CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 15TH, 2022 ZONING COMMISSION MEETINGS.UH, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS, AMEND RECOMMENDATIONS, TYPOS, THINGS THAT NEED TO BE FIXED? ALRIGHT, SEEING AND HEARING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE.
THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR MARCH 15TH, 2022 BY COMMISSIONER SIPES.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES.
UH, WE CAN DO THIS BY ACCLAMATION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MARCH 15TH, 2022 ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES.
[Other Items ]
DIRECTOR'S REPORT UPDATE ON 2022 CODE AMENDMENTS.UM, WE ARE, UM, WE HAVE OUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH, UH, WILL BE UH, QUITE A FEW AMENDMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED.
IT'S MANY OF THE EXTERNAL ONES THAT, UM, WERE UH, APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THE PROCESS.
THEY'RE ARE NOW MEETING EVERY OTHER WEEK.
AND THAT NEXT MEETING IS APRIL 11TH? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND JUST FOR INQUIRING MINES WHO WANNA KNOW, UH, YOU CANNOT PUT NR NOISE RESTRICTION ON RESIDENTIAL BASED DISTRICTS, ONLY COMMERCIAL BASED DISTRICTS.
WILL YOU JUST REMIND ME OF THAT? 'CAUSE I'M GONNA CONTINUE DOING THAT.
THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS ADJOURNED.