[00:00:03]
I'M CALLING TO ORDER THE REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2022.
NICE TO SEE SO MANY PEOPLE ENGAGED TODAY.
UH, WE WILL BEGIN WITH INFORMATION ABOUT SPANISH LANGUAGE INTERPRETATION SERVICES, PLEASE.
CAN STAFF PLEASE CONDUCT THE ROLL CALL? MR. ORIAN? PRESENT.
MS. CARRIO HAYNES CHAIR PROFIT HERE.
WE WILL HAVE TWO, UH, TWO SEPARATE, UH, AGENDAS TODAY.
UM, ALL THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CONSENT, THE EXCEPTIONS OF ITEMS 2, 3, 5, AND 25 FOR RECUSAL.
ITEM 15 FOR INDIVIDUAL, ITEM 18, ITEMS 14, 16, 21 IS POSTPONED 22, 23, 24, AND 27.
AND COMMISSIONER BUSANTE, MR. BARING AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
DO YOU WANT TO ALSO INCLUDE THE RECUSALS? COULD YOU ADD, SEPARATE THEM OUT? SORRY.
SO WE'LL TAKE A, UH, THE MOTION IS FOR ALL ITEMS, UH, ON THE CONSENT.
UH, ITEMS 2, 3, 5, AND 25 ARE BEING PULLED FOR CONSENT.
SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF THOSE ITEMS. OKAY.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GARCIA.
IT'S TWO 11 AND COMMISSIONER BUS'S RETURNED.
UH, WE'RE GONNA MOVE AROUND A LITTLE BIT ON THE AGENDA.
WE'LL MOVE AHEAD TO ITEM NUMBER
[Other Items ]
27.DOES STAFF HAVE A PRESENTATION? HELLO EVERYONE.
AGENDA ITEM 27 IS CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOMINATING COMMITTEE MET AND REVIEWED 26 APPLICATIONS THAT WE RECEIVED, UH, FOR A NUMBER OF PRIMARY AND ALTERNATE POSITIONS.
I'D LIKE TO READ THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THE RECORD FOR THE POSITIONS OF COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE.
THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, UH, SELECTED JODY CHERYL AND BRITTANY DALE AS REAPPOINTMENTS, UH, IN PRIMARY POSITIONS AND AS AN ALTERNATE, UH, RICHARD WILSON FOR PLANNING PROFESSIONAL, UH, PRIMARY POSITION.
THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE SELECTED MICHAEL TAYLOR AND FOR AN ALTERNATE KEN BROWN FOR THE REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
UH, THEY SELECTED RYAN GANS FOR REAPPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
AND LAST, THE, UH, FOR DEVELOPMENT REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONAL, UH, PRIMARY POSITION, PAUL BASAL.
I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WE RECEIVE NO APPLICATIONS FOR THE HISTORIC SPECIALIST.
UH, WE HAVE ALREADY READVERTISED THAT POSITION.
UH, IT WILL REMAIN OPEN UNTIL EARLY OCTOBER, AND WE ARE COORDINATING WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION TO TRY TO REACH OUT TO
[00:05:01]
FOLKS IN THAT SPECIALIZATION.UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
UH, DOES, DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE THE NOMINEES.
MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MILAM.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SCHINDLER.
MOTION PASSES AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR, UH, ACCEPTANCE AND, AND YOUR SERVICE ON THE P T A C.
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH Y'ALL.
[Comprehensive Master Plan Amendments ]
ITEM NUMBER 15.ITEM NUMBER 15 IS A REQUEST FOR A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MIDTOWN REGIONAL CENTER PLAN FROM NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE TO URBAN MIXED USE LOCATED AT 2200 MCCULLOUGH AVENUE.
THERE WERE 49 NOTICES MAILED TO RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
TOBIN HILL, MONTE VISTA AND MONTE VISTA.
HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS ARE ALL OPPOSED.
UH, THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ITEM SEEKS A CONTINUANCE TO SEPTEMBER THE 28TH.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD? WE DO HAVE TO PLAY ONE VOICE.
ONE VOICEMAIL RELATED TO THIS? YES.
HELLO, MY NAME IS CURTIS BENNETT.
I LIVE AT, HI, MY NAME IS BRIAN DURAK AND I LIVE AT TWO ZERO SEVEN EAST RUSSELL PLACE.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 432-4182.
I'M CALLING YOU ABOUT THE CASE ENDING AGAIN, 0 7 6 AT 2200 MCCULLOUGH.
I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOU ALL TO CONVINCE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS PLAN.
OUR HOME SITS TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS LOT, SO I FEEL THAT ANY CHANGES HERE MAY GREATLY IMPACT US IN OUR NEIGHBORS.
WHEN WE LEARNED THAT A FOUR STORY CELL STORAGE FACILITY WAS BEING PLANNED HERE, WE BECAME ALARMED WHEN WE PURCHASED OUR HOME, WE DID SO ANO THE LOT WAS ZONED FOR A MAXIMUM OF 25 FEET.
THE NEW PROPOSAL IS TO RAISE OUT TO FOUR STORIES.
OUR HOME AND MANY OF OUR NEIGHBOR'S HOMES ARE BUILT AND PURCHASED WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT OUR VIEWS WOULD NOT BE BLOCKED BY ANYTHING IN THE SPOT.
THIS CHANGE THREATENS THAT MANY OF US HAVE ROOFTOP DECKS WHOSE VIEWS OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS WILL BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY HAVING A LARGE BUILDING TOWERING OVER US AND HAVE OUR PROPERTY VALUES HARMED.
THIS TYPE OF BUILDING AND BUSINESS ALSO DO NOT FIT THE FEEL OF THIS AREA.
IT CONSISTS OF HOMES AND SCHOOLS WITH SOME SMALL SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS.
AN ENORMOUS SELF STORAGE FACILITY WILL BE AN EYESORE, WHICH HAS NOTHING TO ELEVATE OR IMPROVE THE AREA, AND IT ISN'T WANTED BY THE RESIDENTS.
THIS BUSINESS IS ALSO BY ITS NATURE, 24 HOURS.
RESIDENTS HERE CAN EXPECT TO HAVE CARS AND TRUCKS COME IN ALL HOURS OF THE NIGHT CREATING INCREASED NOISE AND ACTIVITY.
THREE SIDES OF THE LOT ARE ALSO SURROUNDED BY HOMES AND EVERYONE HERE WOULD BE GREATLY IMPACTED BY THE ACTIVITY.
SELF STORAGE FACILITIES ALSO INVITE CRIME.
IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH SEARCHING TO FIND NEWS OF BURGLARIES, DRUG ACTIVITY, VANDALISM, AND EVEN HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
I'M NOT ARGUING THESE TYPES OF BUSINESSES SHOULDN'T EXIST.
ONLY THAT THEY SHOULD BE IN APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS WHERE HOMES AND SCHOOLS AREN IMPACTED.
THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE LOCATIONS.
FINALLY, WE BELIEVE TRAFFIC WILL BECOME AN ISSUE.
THE PLAN INGRESS AND EGRESS POINTS ARE DIRECTLY NEXT TO HOMES ON FRENCH AND RUSSELL PLACE.
THIS WOULD INCREASE TRAFFIC IN THOSE AREAS, ESPECIALLY WITH A PLACEMENT OF THESE DRIVEWAYS BORDERING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
RUSSELL PLACE IS ESPECIALLY A PROBLEM.
I I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT, UH, FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT, THE,
[Public Comment]
UH, COMMENTS BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES DUE TO THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND ONE PERSON CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MAXIMUM SIX MINUTES.SO IF ANYBODY YIELDS THEIR TIME ONLY PER A MAXIMUM THAT ANY ONE PERSON CAN SPEAK IS SIX MINUTES.
SO, UH, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT.
UH, SO FOR KATE, THE ITEM NUMBER 15, UH, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CONTINUANCE TO JAN, UH, SEPTEMBER 28TH.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GARCIA.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL.
[00:10:01]
MR. GARCIA? YES.MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE.
ITEM NUMBER 16 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MIDTOWN AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN FROM URBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT EIGHT 15 EAST GRAYSON STREET.
THERE WERE 50 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, FIVE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE FROM GOVERNMENT HILL.
THERE WAS ALSO A NOTICE RECEIVED FROM ONE INDIVIDUAL IN FAVOR OUTSIDE 200 FEET.
THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ITEM SEEKS A CONTINUANCE TO OCTOBER 12TH.
THE REPRESENTATIVE HAVE ANY COMMENTS AT THIS TIME? NO.
UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONTINUANCE TO OUR OCTOBER 12TH.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL.
MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE.
ITEM NUMBER 14 AND BENES, UH, PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE NEAR NORTHWEST COMMUNITY PLAN.
FROM URBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 8 2 7 VDO, THERE ARE 24 TOTAL NOTICES SENT WITH ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR.
ONE IN OPPOSITION AND LOS ANGELES HEIGHT.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED? THE APPLICANT SEATS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE AREA.
WHILE THE PROPERTY IS IN PROXIMITY TO BOTH THE FREDERICKSBURG AND THE WEST AVENUE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, IT IS PART OF AN ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CAN BE FOUND FRONTING ALONG BOTH WEST AVENUE AND FREDERICKSBURG SERVING AS A TRANSITIONAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CORRIDORS.
HOWEVER, TO ALLOW FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD CONSTITUTE COMMERCIAL CREEPAGE AND ENCROACHMENT INTO A PRIMARY PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL BLOCK.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IT ACTUALLY DOES NOT LOOK LIKE SHE'S HERE.
UH, WE'VE ALREADY CONTINUED THIS ONCE.
AND WE'VE REMINDED, UH, WE ALWAYS REMIND THE APPLICANTS OF THE MEETING DATES.
SO IT'S AT YOUR DISCRETION, SIR.
I MOVE TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTED PLAN AMENDMENT SECOND.
MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER UH, SIEGEL FOR DENIAL.
AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BUSMAN.
UH, ITEM 18, WHEN THEY COME UP.
AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS CHRIS MCCULLEN, PLANNING COORDINATOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 18 IS A REQUEST IS PLAN AMENDMENT PA 2 0 2 2 1 1 6 0 0 0 6 2 TO CHANGE THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION MILITARY PROTECTION AREA PLAN, LAND USE PLAN FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO URBAN MIXED USE.
THERE WERE SEVEN NOTICES MAILED OFF.
FOUR OPPOSED OF THOSE FOUR, NONE ARE WITHIN 200 FEET.
THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN
[00:15:01]
200 FEET.UH, THE MILITARY PERSONNEL AT J B S A ARE NOT OPPOSED.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS TO AMEND THE EXTRA TER EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION MILITARY PROTECTION AREA LAND USE PLAN, UH, ESTABLISHED IN 2019.
APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FROM COMMER COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO URBAN MIXED USE BASED ON THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT LAND USE CATEGORY OF COMMERCIAL COMMUNITY, COMMERCIAL AND REGIONAL COMMERCIAL.
THEIR PROPOSED CHANGE TO URBAN MIXED USE LAND IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA.
UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT'S AGENT, UH, IS PRESENT FOR QUESTIONS.
ASHLEY FAIRMONT KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMONT 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE.
UH, THANK YOU ALL FOR HEARING THIS REQUEST TODAY.
AS, AS CHRIS MENTIONED, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR AN E T J PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, TO THE MILITARY PROTECTION OVERLAY.
IT'S A LITTLE OVER FOUR ACRES LOCATED AT LOSS CREEK GAP IN I 10 WITH FRONTAGE ON I 10.
UM, ACCESS FROM LOSS CREEK GAP THOUGH IS WHAT IS PROPOSED AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE AERIAL.
UM, WELL THIS IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE OUT TO DATE.
THERE'S A CALIBER COLLISION, UM, HERE AT THIS LOCATION.
UM, UNIVERSITY HEALTH HAS A FACILITY HERE AND THEN STORAGE TO THE SOUTH.
UH, GIVES YOU, UH, THERE'S A MORE UP TO DATE.
UM, JUST FROM A DIFFERENT VIEW, UH, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR AS, AS CHRIS MENTIONED, IS A CHANGE FROM COMMUNITY S COMMERCIAL TO URBAN MIXED USE.
UH, THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR THE ADDITION OF HOUSING ALSO INSTEAD OF JUST COMMERCIAL.
SO IT ALLOWS FOR THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL USES AS WELL AS, UM, HOUSING.
WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE? I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU FOR TODAY, BUT, BUT SO YOU ALL ARE AWARE OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS A MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT.
UH, AND I DO HAVE A PLAN THAT I'LL SHOW YOU IN, IN A LITTLE BIT.
UH, WE FELT THAT THE URBAN MIXED USE WAS THE BEST CLASSIFICATION LOCATED AT THIS INTERSECTION.
UM, THERE'S THE URBAN MIXED USE ACROSS THE HIGHWAY.
UH, THE OTHER TWO SIDES OF THE INTERSECTION TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE.
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF LAS CREEK GAP IS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, WHICH THE MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL.
SO WE THOUGHT URBAN MIXED USE WAS A GOOD FIT.
UM, BASED ON THOSE FACTORS AND JUST DESCRIPTIONS OF THE TWO DIFFERENT LAND USES, WE CAN GET THROUGH THAT.
BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
UM, AS CHRIS ALSO MENTIONED, THE MILITARY IS NOT OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSAL.
IT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL DOWNWARD LIGHTING STANDARDS.
UM, TREE PRESERVATION IS APPLICABLE IN THE E T J AND TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
AND THEN, UM, THE COMPATIBLE DENSITIES, AGAIN, NOT WHAT YOU'RE BEING CONSIDERED, BUT JUST SO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
IT, IT'S A, A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT ABOUT THIS SHOWS 131 UNITS, BUT IT'S, UH, 123 IS WHAT'S ACTUALLY BEING PROPOSED ABOUT 80%.
ONE BEDROOM, UH, 20% OR SO, TWO BEDROOM, UM, WITH ACCESS OFF OF LOSS CREEK GAP.
AND, UM, AGAIN, REQUEST THAT YOU WOULD APPROVE THIS, UM, REQUEST AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
ARE THERE TWO, UH, INDIVIDUALS TO SPEAK? UM, MS. AN JETT, JUST REMINDER YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
IF YOU COULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE.
SO, UM, DO YOU MIND IF YOU STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS? UM, MY NAME IS ANN JETT AND MY ADDRESS IS 2 5 8 2 7 LOSS CREEK WAY, BURNEY, TEXAS, WHICH IS RIGHT BEHIND.
SO WHEN ASHLEY HAD THE COLORFUL MAP UP BEFORE OLD FREDERICKSBURG ROAD RUNS ALONGSIDE.
UM, SO IF, OKAY, SO SEE WHERE THAT RED IS? THE YELLOW IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
MA'AM, COULD YOU SPEAK INTO THE MIC? SORRY.
UH, THE YELLOW IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT IS BERNIE, TEXAS.
AND THE RED ACROSS IS, UM, FRED OLD FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
THE PROPOSED, UM, UM, CONSTRUCTION IS, UH, FRONTING ONTO I 10.
THAT STRETCH OF PROPERTY THERE, UM, USED TO BE THE COUNTY AND NOW IT'S BOTH COUNTY AND CITY.
IN 2019, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PROPOSED TO ANNEX THIS PROPERTY AND BERNIE, UH, LOSS CREEK WA LOSS CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD WON THAT FIGHT.
AND WE MAINTAIN, WE CONTINUED TO LIVE IN THE COUNTY.
WE DIDN'T FIND OUT UNTIL SUNDAY
[00:20:01]
THAT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAD THAT PROPERTY AND THAT THIS PROPOSAL WAS IN PLACE.SO WE WERE STARTLED TO FIND ALL THIS OUT.
THIS, UM, PROPOSAL IS A LITTLE BIT UPSETTING TO US BECAUSE 130 UNITS IS GOING INTO PLACE OR MAY GO INTO PLACE IF THIS IS APPROVED.
AND IT MEANS THAT A FEW HUNDRED PEOPLE WILL BE USING AN ALREADY, UH, CONGESTED, UM, PROP, UM, TRAFFIC FLOW.
THE TRAFFIC FLOW THAT GOES UP, LOSS CREEK GAP, AND THEN GOES ONTO OLD FREDERICKSBURG ROAD, ENTERS INTO RALPH FAIR ROAD, WHICH IS A VERY CONGESTED, UM, AREA.
THERE ARE WRECKS THERE AT LEAST ONCE A DAY, AND I THINK IF YOU LOOK INTO THAT, YOU'LL FIND IT'S A VERY DANGEROUS PLACE.
SO TO PUT MORE PEOPLE INTO THAT AREA IS VERY DANGEROUS.
IS THAT MY TIME UP? THANK YOU.
CAN I HAVE TWO MORE MINUTES AND GREG DOESN'T GET TO GO IF, IF GREG WANTS TO.
GREG, WILL YOU TAKE MY POINTS? THANK YOU.
HE CAN YIELD HIS TIME TO YOU IF YOU LIKE TOO.
ARE YOU YIELD YOUR TIME, SIR? OKAY.
SO SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES ARE WITH THE LOW LIGHT RESTRICTIONS OF, OF CAMP BULLIS.
THIS, THIS AREA IS JUST THAT AT NIGHT IT'S LOW LIGHT AND SO CRIME HAS BEEN AN ISSUE BECAUSE OF THE LOW LIGHT.
SO WE'RE CONCERNED WITH ADDITIONAL PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY YOUNG ADULTS AND, AND EVEN TEENAGERS THAT MORE TEENAGERS IN THE AREA, CRIME WILL INCREASE.
WE ALREADY HAVE A CRIME ISSUE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT PROPERTY.
UM, VALUES DECREASING BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE THERE IN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
WE'RE CONCERNED ALSO BECAUSE OF SERVICES, OUR FIRE SERVICES OF A VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT.
AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS TROUBLE GETTING THROUGH THE CONGESTED TRAFFIC WAVES AS IT IS.
AND, AND SO IN CON, INCREASED CONGESTION IS A PROBLEM.
WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, THE SCHOOLS, IF THERE ARE THE 20% OF THE PROPERTY THAT WILL HAVE CHILDREN OR COULD HAVE CHILDREN IN THE SCHOOLS.
WE ARE, OUR SCHOOLS ARE OVERLOADED ALREADY.
UM, APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT IS BEING BUILT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF I 10 THAT ARE GOING INTO THE SCHOOLS HERE, THAT IS ALSO OVERLOADED SCHOOLS.
YOU CAN'T EVEN GET INTO THE H E B MOST OF THE TIME BECAUSE THE, THE, YOU CAN'T GET IN THE PARKING LOTS ARE FULL AT EIGHT O'CLOCK, AT NINE OR EIGHT O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
IT'S JUST O WE'RE PACKED IN THIS AREA.
SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE CONCERNING TO US ABOUT BUILDING ADDITIONAL UNITS IN THIS AREA OF TOWN.
IT'S JUST OVERFLOWED WITH, WITH APARTMENT UNITS ALREADY.
SO I'M OPPOSED TO THIS CONSTRUCTION.
UH, ASHLEY, DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS? THANK YOU.
I, I UNDERSTAND, UH, MS. JETT'S CONCERNS AND HAPPY TO, WE MET BEFORE THE MEETING AND HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO DIALOGUE WITH HER AND GREG.
UM, AND THERE ARE OTHER NEIGHBORS IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.
UH, WE DO THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR HOUSING.
EVERYONE KNOWS THERE'S A LOT OF DEMAND AND, AND TO PUT IT ON THE HIGHWAY WE THINK IS THE BEST PLACE FOR IT TO GO.
I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC.
UM, THERE ARE, THERE'S A COUNTY PROJECT THAT'S PROPOSED FOR OLD FREDERICKSBURG ROAD TO IMPROVE, UM, SOME OF THE SAFETY CONCERNS OF THE SAFETY CONCERNS AND THE TRAFFIC FLOW.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THE TIMING OF THAT, BUT, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE AWARE OF.
UM, AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO TRAFFIC STUDY AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE PLATTING PROCESS.
SO THAT WILL ALL BE ADDRESSED AT THAT TIME.
UM, AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
START WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUKI QUESTION TO THE STAFF.
DOES THE CITY REALLY TO CLARIFY, DOES THE CITY ANNEX THIS AREA OR NOT? UH, SO BACK IN 2019, UH, WE, UH, HELD A VOTE FOR ANNEXATION.
UH, YOU COULD VOTE YES TO ANNEXATION OR NO TO ANNEXATION, BUT YES TO LAND USE CONTROLS.
SINCE THIS IS, UH, IN THE E T J M P A, UH, THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2019, BASICALLY THAT MEANS THE CITY HAS LAND USE REGULATIONS OUT THERE TO ENSURE THAT DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T ADVERSELY IMPACT THE MILITARY.
SO, SO THE ANSWER IS, UH, THERE WAS AN ANNEXATION VOTE.
THEY VOTED NO TO ANNEXATION, BUT THAT MEANT THEY HAD LAND USE REGULATIONS ENACTED ON THE PROPERTIES.
AND WHAT DID THE CITY, UH, PLANS FOR THIS AREA ORIGINALLY? WELL, THE, WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE IS WHAT WAS PROPOSED.
I MEAN, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, UH,
[00:25:01]
WAS PROPOSED OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS REQUEST, UH, WE NOTICED, YOU KNOW, THERE'S REGIONAL COMMERCIAL TO THE NORTH ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF I 10.UM, SO WE FELT LIKE THAT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA BECAUSE IT IS ALONG, UH, THE FRONTAGE ROAD THERE AND HAS EASY ACCESS TO THE HIGHWAY.
THAT'S TYPICALLY WHERE WE SEE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I SEE THAT, UM, THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AT ON LOST THAT SEGMENT OF LOST CREEK GAP COULD BE, UM, REALLY HEAVY.
UM, CONSIDERING THAT THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS SHOWN TO US DID NOT SHOW ANY OUTLETS ONTO THE ACCESS ROAD, UM, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE.
UM, AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT KIND OF LOOKING FARTHER AHEAD, RIGHT? UM, HAVE THERE BEEN CONSIDERATIONS TO USING THAT, UM, CURB CUT THAT'S ALREADY EXISTENT ON THE FRONT, FRONT FRONTAGE ROAD? UH, I THINK THAT THEY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ACCESS ONTO I 10 ONTO THE FRONTAGE ROAD, BUT TXDOT IS VERY PARTICULAR ABOUT WHERE THEY GRANT THOSE DRIVEWAYS.
UM, AND I, I DON'T KNOW THE CURRENT STATUS OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
I THINK IF THEY COULD GET A DRIVEWAY CUT THERE, THEY WOULD, UH, THE PROBLEM IS THE PROXIMITY TO LOSS CREEK GAP IN THE DISTANCE.
SO I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER SCHINDLER? NO QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER GARCIA, DID THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THIS? DID THEY COMMENT? UH, WE DID NOT REACH OUT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND I, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'RE INFORMED OF LAND USE PLANNED AMENDMENTS.
I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, IT'S PEOPLE WITHIN 200 FEET AND THEN THE MILITARY WHO WAIT.
COMMISSIONER LOPEZ? NO QUESTIONS.
UM, I THINK, UH, AGAIN, ONE MORE QUESTION.
CITY OF BERNIE DOESN'T HAVE ANY INPUT IN THIS, THIS, THIS IS WITHIN THE REGULATORY PURVIEW OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
SO THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY OF BERNIE HAS ANY REGULATORY CONTROL OVER.
UH, THE ISSUE I THINK YOU ADDRESSED WITH THE PLATT, WE WILL TAKE, WE WILL TAKE IN CONSIDERATION THE TRAFFIC IMPACT AND WHAT, UH, THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO DO TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE ACCESS.
UM, THIS IS FROM A PLAN USE, UH, THIS IS A HIGH GROWTH AREA.
UM, COMMUNICATE CO WHAT, WHAT TYPES OF DISTRICTS ARE ALLOWED IN, IN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
SO WE DON'T HAVE ZONING OUT THERE, BUT WE, WE DO USE THAT AS KIND OF A, A, A BASE POINT.
SO THAT WOULD BE LIKE C TWO COMMERCIAL, RIGHT? WHICH WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, RESTAURANTS, UH, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
UH, RE A GROCERY STORE, UM, SMALLER SCALE, STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO THE POINT IS THAT THIS IS PRIVATE LAND THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND HOUSING IS OBVIOUSLY NEEDED IN THE CITY.
UM, THIS IS A MARKET RATE PROJECT, I ASSUME IT'S YEP.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I DO SUPPORT IT.
UM, I KNOW WE'RE DOING, A LOT OF PROJECTS ARE COMING FORTH OUT IN THAT AREA, SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS, THE COMMUNITY TO BE ENGAGED WITH THE COUNTY, THE CITY TO ADDRESS THESE, UH, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS WITH TRAFFIC AND, AND IMPROVEMENTS.
BUT, UH, I THINK I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION, BUT I'LL ENTERTAIN, UH, COMMISSIONER MOTIONS.
I SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER ORIEN MAKES, UM, APPROVAL MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
UM, COMMISSIONER MILAN SECOND.
ALRIGHT, NEXT ON THE AGENDA OF THE ITEM NUMBER 22, BUT GOOD AFTERNOON.
ELIZABETH STEWART PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 22 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE HUEBNER LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN.
FROM LOWDEN RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, LOCATED AT 64 85 HOLLY HAWK ROAD, THERE ARE 2020
[00:30:01]
NOTICES MAILED 18 RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, ZERO IN FAVOR.L M O FARMSTEAD BABCOCK ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION 147 NOTICES RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION OUTSIDE 200 FEET.
OAKLAND ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN OPPOSITION FROM OUTSIDE 200 FEET.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO MEDIUM DIS DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO REZONED MF 18 LIMITED DENSITY MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED LAND USE AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS REQUESTED IN ORDER TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO MF 18 LIMITED DENSITY, SORRY, LIMITED DENSITY MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE AREA.
THE PROPERTY IS NOT IN PROXIMITY TO ANY LARGE CORRIDORS.
IT IS PART OF AN ESTABLISHED SHINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEREFORE, INTRODUCING HIGHER INTENSITY LAND USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS NOT ESTABLISHED ALONG THE STREET AND CAN ONLY BE FOUND IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO ECKERT ROAD.
THERE IS NO ADEQUATE TRANSITIONAL BUFFER OF LAND USE IN THIS AREA TO ACCOMMODATE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
AS A SURROUNDING LA AREA ONLY HAS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
OKAY, APPLICANT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION PLEASE? UH, I WELL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START WHILE WE WAIT FOR THE SMALL POWERPOINT PRESENTATION THAT I HAD.
SO I WANNA START OFF BY SAYING MY, MY NAME IS HUGO LANGA.
UM, THIS IS FRANCISCO CERVANTES.
THIS IS A PROPOSAL WE ORIGINALLY PLANNED TO DO MF 33.
WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE IN THIS AREA.
UM, I JUST DEFINITELY WANT YOU ALL TO SEE THE PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE.
UM, IT'S 30, 30 TO 31 UNITS OF, UM, WHAT I CALL SINGLE UNITS.
IT'S NOT A LIKE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX BY ANY MEANS.
UM, MYSELF, I LIVE IN A NEARBY COMMUNITY THAT WAS BUILT BY SMAR HOMES.
IT'S ONE OF THOSE UNIQUE NEW IDEAS THAT, UH, A LOT OF COMPANIES ARE HAVING AND WE WE'RE TRYING TO VENTURE ON DOING SOMETHING SIMILAR.
THE IDEA, THE MAIN PURPOSE OR THE MAIN, UH, REASON WHY WE WENT FOR THIS SPECIFIC LOG, OF COURSE WAS COST.
UM, AND DISTANCE FROM WHERE I LIVE, I LIVE LIKE TWO MINUTES DRIVING DISTANCE FROM MY, MY SUBDIVISION.
AGAIN, I DEFINITELY WANT YOU ALL TO SEE WHAT WE'RE OFFERING OR PROPOSING.
UM, IT IS ORIGINALLY WE HAD APPLIED FOR MF 33, WHICH IS HIGH DENSITY, WHICH DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S WHY WE SWITCHED TO MF 18 EVEN THOUGH WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT MF 18 REFERS TO 18 UNITS PER ACRE.
WE, IT'S NOT THE, THE WHAT WE HAVE IN MIND, THAT'S MORE LIKE WE HAVE IN MIND.
IT'S 30 TO 31 UNITS OF SINGLE PROPERTIES.
IT'S ONE OF THE MAIN ISSUES IN HOLLY HAWK.
SO WE DO PLAN TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF AN ACCESS ROAD, UM, ABLE TO CHANGE IT MYSELF.
OKAY, SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE IN MIND, RIGHT? UH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS AREA SPECIFICALLY ALAMO FARMSTEAD IS UM, THERE'S A LOT OF NATURE, A LOT OF TREES.
WE DEFINITELY ARE OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO HOW TO KEEP THAT.
UH, I DUNNO IF YOU CAN TELL BY THE COMMUNITY PLAN, WE DO KEEP MOST OF THE TREES INTACT.
NOW, THIS NEXT IT'S MORE SO WHAT THE FLOOR PLAN WILL KINDA LOOK LIKE.
UH, THERE, THERE SHOULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 1700 UP TO 1800 PER UNIT, RIGHT? UM, THIS IS A SAMPLE OF WHAT THE PROPERTIES LOOK LIKE.
I MYSELF, AGAIN, LIVE IN THE SPECIFIC COMMUNITY SUBDIVISION BUILT BY CHESMORE HOMES.
UM, THAT'S MORE OF AN ANOTHER WAY OF SEEING THE PROPERTIES.
UH, THE REASON, AGAIN, WE CHOSE TO GO WITH THIS ONE.
WE SAW A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, NOT SPECIFICALLY IN HOLLYHOCK.
WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BABCOCK AND ECKERD, THERE'S A LOT OF NEWER CONSTRUCTIONS BEING BUILT.
THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER SUBDIVISIONS ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED THERE FOR A COUPLE YEARS THAT ARE KIND OF SIMILAR, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE CLASSIFIED
[00:35:01]
AS R RIGHT? THIS IS MF AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT THAT KIND OF GIVES A DIFFERENT IMPRESSION OF BEING MULTIFAMILY.BUT BY NO MEANS THESE ARE NOT APARTMENT COMPLEXES, THEY'RE JUST SINGLE PROPERTIES UNITS.
I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ANY CONCERNS.
Y YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS.
I KNOW WE HAVE VOICEMAIL OR JUST ONE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS CURTIS BENNETT.
I LIVE AT 5 7 0 3 LOCKHILL ROAD AND I'M OPPOSED TO THE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST.
UH, CASE NUMBER PA 2 MILLION 22 116 0 8 7.
I'M IN OPPOSITION TO THIS SUBJECT PLAN AMENDMENT CASE THAT WOULD AMEND THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 4 6 4 8 5 HOLLYHOCK ROAD WITHIN THE AVNER LEON CREASE COMMUNITY PLAN.
UM, I'M OPPOSED TO ANY CHANGES THAT YOU WOULD MAKE TO THAT PROPERTY, UH, TO THE UM, AMENDMENT SUCH AS ANY CHANGE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND I'M OPPOSED TO ANY VARIANCE TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SAME PROPERTY.
I LIVE AT 1 0 1 2 2 SANDY GLEN IN THE LOCKWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.
I AM OPPOSED TO THE UM, PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR CASE NUMBER PA DASH ZERO, UH, 2 0 2 2 1 1 6 0 0 8 7.
UM, THIS IS AN, UH, A AMENDMENT TO A PLAN THAT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO REQUESTED BE SET UP THE HENER, UH, UH, EVENING ROAD, UH, UH, LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN.
AND, UM, WE SET THAT UP MANY YEARS AGO AND I AM IN OPPOSITION TO ANY CHANGES REQUESTED FOR THE PLAN.
I LIVE AT 70 30 PEMBROKE ROAD 7 8 2 4 OH.
CONCERNING THE CASE NUMBER 0 8 7, I AM OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY FROM RE TO MF 33.
THIS ZONING IS NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE LEON VALLEY COMMUNITY PLAN AND IT IS CERTAINLY NOT FAIR TO THOSE HOMES AND PROPERTY THAT SURROUNDS 64 85 HOLLYHOCK ROAD.
I LIVE AT 6 6 0 6 COUNTRY VIEW LANE IN ALAMO FARMSTEAD.
I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO, UH, PUBLIC HEARING CASE PA 2 0 2 2 1 1 6 0 0 0 0 8 7 AND I GOT ONE TOO MANY ZEROS.
I AM AGAINST THE CHANGING TO FROM LOW DENSITY TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR THIS, UH, APARTMENT COMPLEX.
AGAIN, IT'S RON HOLIDAY 6 6 0 6 COUNTRY VIEW AND I AM AGAINST THE REZONING OR THE CHANGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, FROM HIGH DENSITY TO LOW DENSITY.
MY NAME IS SUE SNYDER AND I'M PRESIDENT OF THE OAKLAND ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I RESIDE AT 5 6 5 5 LOCKHILL ROAD.
I WISH TO ANNOUNCE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD'S, UH, OPPOSITION TO PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE EDER CREEK LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN.
PLAN NUMBER 0 8 7 AND IT IS REGARDS TO THE ZONE CASE 6 4 8 5 HOLLY HAWK.
HELLO, MY NAME IS SYLVIA GLADMAN.
I RESIDE AT 65 95 STONY KIRK, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 4.
I'M CALLING ABOUT CA UH, CASE NUMBER P A 2 0 2 2.
I AM AGAINST WHAT THIS PLAN AMENDMENT WOULD ENTAIL.
[00:40:01]
YOU.OKAY, SO YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF CITIZENS TO BE HEARD.
UH, THE FIRST IS PHILLIP MANA YIELD TO ALMA.
ALRIGHT, SO THERE'S A POWERPOINT ON THERE.
ONE
SO WE'LL LET YOU KNOW OKAY? WHEN THEY'RE DUPLICATES.
SO IF YOU CAN STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU'LL HAVE SIX TOTAL MINUTES.
UH, THAT WAS SIX MINUTES WAS IT? YES.
I LIVE AT 8 3 5 7 ROCHELLE ROAD.
I'M REPRESENTING THE ALAMO FARMSTEADS BABCOCK ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I SERVE ON THE BOARD AS VICE PRESIDENT AND HAVE LIVED IN ALAMO FARMSTEADS FOR FIVE YEARS.
OUR BOARD PRESIDENT PHILIP MANOR, HAS LIVED THERE FOR 25 YEARS.
OUR BOARD SECRETARY, STEVE CLAY, HAS LIVED THERE FOR 60 YEARS.
THIS IS A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF THE MIXTURE WE SEE ACROSS OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, NEWCOMERS, MEDIUM TERMERS, AND OLD TIMERS.
ALAMO FARMSTEADS BABCOCK ROAD AREA IS JUST EAST OF OVAL PARK AND THAT'S SECTION OF LEON CREEK GREENWAY.
IT'S BOUNDED BY PRU ROAD TO THE NORTH BABCOCK AND THEN EBNER TO THE WEST WITH ETT ROAD AND MARSHALL MEADOWS MARKING THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.
THE LMO FARMSTEADS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, LIVES SITS WITHIN THAT AREA.
IT WAS CREATED 96 YEARS AGO AND ANNEX BY THE CITY 50 YEARS AGO.
SO THERE ARE NO H O A COVENANTS GOVERNING THESE PROPERTIES.
WE RELY ON THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONS AND CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS AND ENSURE OUR RIGHT TO THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF OUR PROPERTIES.
YOU CAN SEE ON THIS MAP OF THE HINO LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN AREA THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS MARKED.
THERE'S A ADDRESS AND AN ARROW POINTING TO IT.
IT SITS IN THE SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA IN THE HEART OF L M O FARMSTEADS AS DOCUMENTED IN THE LAND USE PLAN OR THE COMMUNITY PLAN BY UNANIMOUS BOARD DECISION, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES THIS CASE.
THIS IS NOT A SUITABLE LOCATION WITHIN THE PLAN AREA FOR THE REQUESTED USE.
AS CITY STAFF HAVE ALREADY OUTLINED, THE REQUESTED LAND USE FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CURRENT AND FUTURE LAND USE OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
IT IS ALSO INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE BETTS PRACTICE DESIGN PRINCIPLES USED IN CONSTRUCTING COMMUNITY PLANS.
FUTURE LAND USE LAYOUTS, SPECIFICALLY THE PRINCIPLE OF POSITIONING HIGHER INTENSITY USES TOWARDS THE OUTER PERIMETERS OF THE COMMUNITY AREA AND THE PRINCIPLE OF GRADUALLY REDUCING INTENSITY AS YOU MOVE FROM THE OUTER PERIMETERS TOWARDS THE INTERIOR OF THE COMMUNITY AREA.
THE EBNA LEON CREEK'S COMMUNITY PLAN WAS DEVELOPED USING THESE BEST PRACTICE DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREAS ALREADY CONFORMED TO THOSE BEST PRACTICES.
THE PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEX OF 30 SOME TOWN HOMES BRINGS WITH IT CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC, NOISE, DRAINAGE, DETENTION PONDS AND LA LOSS OF VEGETATION AND TREE CANOPY.
BUT THE IMPACTS TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS CANNOT BE ASSUMED TO BE LIMITED TO THE DESIGN PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT.
SINCE THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OR GUARANTEE THAT THE CURRENT APPLICANT ACTUALLY RETAINS OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY TILL AFTER DEVELOPMENT IS COMPLETE, THE APPLICANT COULD SIMPLY SELL THE PROPERTY AFTER THIS AMENDMENT AND ZONING REQUEST ARE GRANTED.
AND FUTURE OWNERS WOULD HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO LIMIT THEMSELVES TO THE SUBMITTED ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND COULD DEVELOP THE PROPERTY TO THE FULL DENSITY OF THE NEW LAND USE AND ZONING.
APPROVING THIS AMENDMENT WOULD NOT ONLY IMPACT THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, IT WOULD ALSO HAVE SIGNIFICANT LONG-TERM IMPACT TO THE WHOLE OF ELMO FARMSTEADS SINCE IT WOULD DIRECTLY COMPROMISE A MAJOR GOAL OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN.
THAT STATED GOAL IS TO PROTECT THE EXISTING LARGE LOTS, THE LARGE ESTATE LOTS, THE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE LOTS ALSO HAVE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS.
THERE IS A SECTION OF U D C CODE THAT PROTECTS THE NEIGHBORING RE LOTS ABUTTING ANY NEW SUBDIVISION IT THAT IT REQUIRES THAT THEY BUILD IN LARGE BUFFER LOTS ON THAT SUBDIVISION.
AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT WOULD PRESENT MAJOR PROBLEMS FOR THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THE LOT IS NOT LARGE ENOUGH.
I MADE THE APPLICANT AND CASE MANAGER AWARE OF THIS REQUIREMENT WE DID.
UH, IN THE PAST THE ELMO FARMSTEAD COMMUNITY HAS SUPPORTED HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT WAS ALIGNED WITH THE PROPERTY'S FUTURE LAND USE AS DOCUMENTED IN THE COMMUNITY PLAN, WE DID SUGGEST THAT THE APPLICANT SEARCH FOR A PROPERTY THAT ALREADY HAD AN APPROPRIATE LAND USE AT SOME OTHER LOCATION WITHIN THE PLAN AREA.
IN RESPONSE, THE APPLICANT INDICATED THAT THE HOLLY HO PROPERTY WAS SELECTED BECAUSE IT WAS CONSIDERABLY LESS EXPENSIVE THAN LOCATIONS IN THE HIGHER DENSITY DESIGNATED AREAS.
HOLLYHOCK WAS AFFORDABLE, CLOSE TO AN ARTERIAL, WAS NOT AFFORDABLE.
I WOULD NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT SAYS HE LIVES A COUPLE OF, UH, MINUTES AWAY IN HIS SUBDIVISION.
THE APPLICANT LIVES ON BABCOCK ROAD,
[00:45:01]
A MAJOR ARTERIAL.THE BABCOCK IS GIVING, UH, APPLICANT'S, GIVING YOU EXAMPLES OF DEVELOPMENTS ON BABCOCK ROAD AND ECKERT.
THIS LO THIS PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED ANYWHERE NEAR A MAJOR ARTERIAL.
IT'S ABOUT A MILE AWAY AT LEAST.
IT HARDLY SEEMS SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION.
THE AFFORDABILITY OF THIS LOT TO AMEND A WELL-DESIGNED, WELL-ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY PLAN, A COMMUNITY PLAN THAT WAS A MULTI-YEAR COLLABORATION BETWEEN RESIDENTS, BUSINESSES, DEVELOPERS, REALTORS, CITY PLANNERS, AND FOUR SUCCESSIVE DISTRICT SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBERS.
PROPERTY OWNERS IN THIS AREA, UM, MADE PURCHASING DECISIONS AND LIFE PLANS EXPECTING THE EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE RESTRICTIONS OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO BE UPHELD AND ENFORCED OVER LONG-TERM TIMEFRAMES.
PEOPLE PURCHASE IN THIS AREA SPECIFICALLY FOR THE RURAL FIELD.
THIS AMENDMENT, IF GRANTED, WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY AND PERMANENTLY ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
CANVASSING OF THE RESIDENTS WITHIN THE 200 FOOT PERIMETER AND NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS FOUND SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUESTED AMENDMENT.
MORE DETAILS ON THAT TOPIC WILL BE PRESENTED SHORTLY BY MY COLLEAGUE.
OUR SISTER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR OAKLAND ESTATES HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED THEIR OPPOSITION, WHICH YOU HEARD EARLIER.
PLEASE SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 FEET, ALONG WITH THE ALAMO FARMSTEADS, PROVIDENCE LOST OAKS, WHISPER CREEK OAKLAND ESTATES, AND OTHER NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS BY VOTING TO DENY THIS APPLICATION.
IN CONCLUSION, I WOULD ASK THAT AUDIENCE MEMBERS WHO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION, COULD YOU PLEASE STAND NOW? THANK YOU.
UH, JIM ERS MY TIME TO CHERYL LAURIE.
MS. LAURIE, YOU HAVE, UH, FOUR MINUTES UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO, TO YIELD THEIR TIME.
SO YOU HAVE SIX TOTAL MINUTES MS. LORI, I'M SORRY.
YOU HAVE SIX, SIX TOTAL MINUTES.
GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE HEBNER LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6 4 8 5 HOLLYHOCK ROAD.
MY NAME IS CHERYL LORI AND I RESIDE WITH MY HUSBAND TODD AT 6,800 PEMBROKE ROAD WHERE WE HAVE LIVED FOR THE PAST 18 YEARS.
AND OUR HOUSE HAS BEEN IN MY FAMILY FOR OVER 60 YEARS.
I'M A MEMBER BOARD MEMBER OF THE ALAMO FARMSTEADS BABCOCK ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SERVING AS SECRETARY FOR OVER A YEAR.
FIRST, LET ME STATE MY OPPOSITION TO THIS APPLICATION.
LIKE MANY OTHERS, WE WANTED TO LIVE IN ALAMO FARMSTEADS BECAUSE OF THE LARGE, LOTS QUIET ROADS IN THE SEMI-RURAL SETTING.
I AM NOW A RETIRED CIVIL SERVANT AFTER WORKING 38 YEARS FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
OFTEN WHEN I'M OUTSIDE OF MY YARD ENJOYING MY RETIREMENT, I RELISH THE FACT THAT I LIVE ON A PROPERTY WHICH RESEMBLES THE COUNTRY, BUT IS IN THE HEART OF A LARGE CITY.
I BECAME ACTIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO PROTECT THE HE HEBNER LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN.
BECAUSE IT WAS CREATED TO PRESERVE THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LAND USES WE ALL DESIRED WHEN PURCHASING OUR HOMES.
ON AUGUST 4TH, 2022, THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE HOLLY HOK PROPERTIES LAND USE FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THEN SOMETIME LATER, THE APPLICANT CHANGED THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUEST TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
ON AUGUST 26, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS MADE AWARE OF THE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE OAKLAND ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WHO READ THE POSTING IN THE NEWSPAPER.
AND WHO BY THE WAY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS ALSO IN OPPOSITION.
ON THAT SAME DAY, ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS SAW THE YELLOW ZONING SIGN POSTED ON THE PROPERTY.
THAT WEEKEND, SOME OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS DILIGENTLY CANVASSED THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS NEIGHBORS WITHIN THE 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY BY GOING DOOR TO DOOR TO ACCESS THEIR POSITIONS ON THE REQUEST TO CHANGE A PROPERTY LAND USE CATEGORY FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO CANVAS THE NEARBY NEIGHBORS NEIGHBORHOODS OF PROVIDENCE, LOST OAKS, WHISPER CREEK, AND SOME NEARBY IN ALAMO FARMSTEADS.
THE REACTIONS OF THE MAJORITY OF THOSE CONTACTED PERSONS WERE THE SAME ONE OF SHOCK WORRY.
AND TO BE HONEST, MANY WERE UPSET AT THE VERY IDEA IT DIDN'T TAKE LONG FOR THE NEWS TO SPREAD ACROSS THE ALAMO FARMS DEATHS BABCOCK ROAD COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORS CAME TOGETHER UNITED IN OPPOSITION.
IF WE HAD MORE TIME, WE WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO COVER MORE OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
[00:50:01]
I NOW WILL SUMMARIZE OUR DATA COLLECTION USING THE FOLLOWING SLIDES.THIS FIRST SLIDE SHOWS THE WITHIN 200 FEET, UH, RESIDENTS OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE ARE 20 PROPERTIES FALLING WITHIN A 200 FOOT RADIUS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE CITY SIDED, UM, I BELIEVE 18 PROPERTIES REPRESENTING 89% OF TOTAL ACREAGE WITHIN 200 FEET IN OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTED CHANGE IN LAND USE.
HOWEVER, WE ACTUALLY OBTAINED SIGNATURES FROM ALL 20 OR A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ACREAGE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET STATING THEIR OPPOSITION.
LET IT BE NOTED, THREE OF THE OPPOSING PROPERTIES ARE COVERED BY THE YORKSHIRE H O A, CURRENTLY THE PROVIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH INCLUDE A PUBLIC STREET DRAINAGE AREA AND A PLOT OF LAND.
THE SECOND SLIDE, YEAH, SORRY.
THE SECOND SLIDE SHOWS RESIDENTS WITHIN THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, WHICH INCLUDE PROVIDENCE LOST OAKS AND WHISPER CREEK.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS THOSE RESIDENTS WHO ANSWERED THEIR DOORS DURING THE CANVASSING OF WHOM 86 OPPOSED IN WRITING THE PLAN AMENDMENT CHANGE.
THE GREEN SQUARES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ON HOLLY HAWK.
LIGHTER RED SHAPES, UM, REPRESENT THE 200 FOOT RESIDENCE, WHICH AGAIN, ARE ALL IN OPPOSITION TO THE PLAN AMENDMENT CHANGE.
CLEARLY A LARGE AMOUNT OF NEIGHBORS IN THESE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS ARE OPPOSED.
THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE OVERALL HEVNER CREEK PLAN AREA.
THE LA THIS LAST MAP SHOWS THE OVER 147 RESIDENTS WITH EBNER LEON CREEK COMMUNITY AREA, WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION TO CHANGING THE PLAN IN LAND USE CATEGORY FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
THERE WERE ONLY ONE OR TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO VERBALLY EXPRESSED IN FAVOR BUT DID NOT PUT THEIR POSITION IN WRITING.
AS OF THE 4:00 PM CUTOFF YESTERDAY, THERE WAS NO IN FAVOR POSITION SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OR TO US.
NOTE THE DENSE CLUSTER OF OPPOSITION AROUND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SEVERAL OR MORE SCATTERED AND DISTANT FROM HOLLY HAWK.
THIS MAP SHOWS VERY CLEARLY THE OVERWHELMING OPPOSITION OF OUR EBNER LEON CRETS COMMUNITY TO CHANGING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND FROM ITS CURRENT LAND USE CATEGORY OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE AND THE HENER LAND CRE COMMUNITY PLAN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION.
PAULINE GLICKMAN, I TO MAY BALLARD MR. ALSO YIELDING HIS TIME.
I'M SORRY, YOUR NAME SIR? LAUREN
UH, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES, MS. BALLARD.
MY NAME IS MAYE BALLARD AND I LIVE AT 98 11 STRATHAVEN.
MY FAMILY AND I HAVE LIVED IN THE SAME HOME FOR OVER 30 YEARS AND I SERVE AS A BOARD MEMBER FOR THE ALAMO FARMSTEAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I STAND IN OPPOSITION TO THE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR 64 85 HOLLY HAWK.
THE DAY AFTER THE YELLOW ZONING SIGN WAS POSTED, ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER AND I, STEVE CUSHMAN WENT DOOR TO DOOR TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, MAKING THEM AWARE OF THE CASE AND GETTING THEIR FEEDBACK.
I WILL NOW READ A LETTER SIGNED BY SOME OF THE 200 FOOT RESIDENTS DATED 11 SEPTEMBER, 2022.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE BOARD, WE, THE UNDERSIGNED INDIVIDUALS ARE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE WITHIN 200 FEET OF 64 85 HOLLY HAWK ROAD.
OUR HOMES EITHER BORDER THE PROPERTY OR IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.
WE INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY OPPOSE THE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR CASE NUMBER PA 20 22 1 6 8 7, AND THE REZONING APPLICATION FOR CASE NUMBER Z 20 22 7 2 2 6.
ALL OF US HAVE LIVED IN OUR HOMES FOR YEARS.
MANY OF US HAVE LIVED IN THEM FOR SEVERAL DECADES.
WE ALL PURPOSEFULLY AND INTENTIONALLY CHOSE OUR HOMESTEADS BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF ALAMO FARMSTEAD.
ITS CHARACTER COMES FROM HAVING TREES AND LARGE PARCELS.
THE THREE ACRE PARCEL IN QUESTION IS ONE OF THE FEW REMAINING LARGE ACRE TRACKS WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS THESE TRACKS THAT WE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFICALLY WANNA PROTECT.
FOR THIS REASON, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PARTICIPATED IN AND CREATED A COMMUNITY PLAN PROTECTING LARGE ACRE LOTS BY DESI, BY DESIGNATING THEM RE LOW DENSITY.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THESE LARGE ACRE TRACTS ARE IMMEASURABLE, AND WITHOUT THEM, ALAMO FARMSTEADS WOULD FOREVER LOSE ITS IDENTITY.
AS RESIDENTS OF ALAMO FARMSTEAD AND CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF SAN
[00:55:01]
ANTONIO, IT IS NOT UNREASONABLE FOR US TO EXPECT DEVELOPERS TO FOLLOW OUR COMMUNITY PLAN AND FOR US TO EXPECT OUR CITY'S LEADERSHIP TO PROTECT US AGAINST THOSE WHO WISH TO UNDERMINE IT.OUR COMMUNITY PLAN WAS DEVELOPED AFTER YEARS OF PAINSTAKING CONSIDERATION WITH PARTICIPATION FROM STAKEHOLDERS SUCH AS RESIDENTS, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, BUSINESSES, SCHOOL DISTRICTS, AND MAJOR EMPLOYEES TO NAME A FEW.
AND IT ALSO INCORPORATES LAND USE AND ANTICIPATES FUTURE USE.
THE APPLICANT'S STATES IN HIS APPLICATION, HE WANTS TO BRING MORE MOVEMENT IN COMMERCIAL BUSINESS.
THIS IS BLATANTLY CONTRARY TO OUR COMMUNITY PLAN.
ACCORDING TO OUR PLAN, THIS PARCEL IS DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
HOLLY HAWK IS A RESIDENTIAL STREET AND NOT ONE THAT SHOULD BE COMMERCIALIZED.
THE MOST THIS PARCEL SHOULD HAVE IS ONE HOUSE PER ONE ACRE, NOT 10 TIMES THE NUMBER APPLICANT PROPOSES.
OTHER DEVELOPERS HAVE CREATED NEW COMMUNITIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR PLAN.
WHY SHOULD THIS APPLICANT BE ANY DIFFERENT? THE APPLICANT'S GOALS AND INTENTIONS DOES NOT FOLLOW THE HEBNER LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH IS INCORPORATED INTO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THUS, THE APPLICANT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO REDETERMINE AS AN ORIGINAL MATTER.
THE CITY'S MASTER PLAN POLICIES AMENDING OUR COMMUNITY PLAN SHOULD NOT BE AD HOC, AND DEVELOPERS HAVE RUN OUT OF OPTIONS, SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DEVIATE FROM AN ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED PLAN.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK ALL MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD TO DENY APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND CONTINUE TO ENFORCE OUR COMMUNITY PLAN AND KEEP THE DESIGNATION OF 6 4 8 5 HOLLY HAWK AS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE RESPECTFULLY SIGNED BY WILBUR SPENCER, LOCATED LIVING AT 64 51 HOLLYHOCK ROAD, WHO HAS A 19.09% VOTING INTEREST.
LAWRENCE OGE LIVING AT 64 56 HOLLYHOCK ROAD AND HAVING A 15.328% VOTING INTEREST AND ALSO OWNING 64 93 OXFORD TRACE WITH A 4.752% VOTING INTEREST.
AND CATHERINE FOY LIVING AT 93 60 ABE LINCOLN WITH AN 11.46% VOTING INTEREST.
I LIVE AT 6 6 8 2 PEMBROKE ROAD IN ALAMO FARMSTEAD.
AND I WANNA THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU.
I'M, UH, THE OTHER PERSON WHO WENT WITH ME TO KNOCK ON DOORS AND SEE HOW PEOPLE FELT ABOUT THIS.
AND I'M RELATIVELY NEW TO THE AREA.
I'VE ONLY BEEN HERE TWO YEARS.
I'M ALREADY ON THE BOARD OF THE, UH, HOME OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BECAUSE THIS IS THE THIRD TIME IN TWO YEARS SOMEBODY'S TRIED TO COME COMMAND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND CHANGE IT.
SO I DECIDED THE ONLY WAY TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT IS TO GET PERSONALLY INVOLVED.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS I LEARNED FROM BEING AT A ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING HERE JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO IS THAT YOU GUYS FOLLOW THE RULES FOR THE MOST PART.
YOU DO WHAT YOU SAY YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
SO I'M HOPING THAT CONTINUES WITH THIS ISSUE AT HAND.
AND I, I REITERATED THAT TO MANY OF THE PEOPLE THAT I TALKED TO IN THE COMMUNITY WHEN I WAS KNOCKING ON DOORS.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE DEVELOPERS ARE TRYING TO SHORTCUT THE PROPER ROUTE JUST TO MAKE MORE MONEY, WHICH OF COURSE IS WHAT DEVELOPERS TRY TO DO, MAKE MORE MONEY.
AND THEN IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THEY'RE WILLING TO DO ALMOST ANYTHING THAT WILL FURTHER THEIR CAUSE TO MAKE MORE MONEY AS LONG AS THEY CAN GET YOU GUYS TO GO ALONG WITH IT.
WHICH AGAIN, SHOWS ME THAT THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY.
THEY ONLY CARE ABOUT THEMSELVES, WHICH TO ME IS A COMPLETE LACK OF DISRESPECT OR SHOW OF DISRESPECT TO THOSE OF US WHO'VE ALREADY BEEN THERE FOR YEARS AND SPEND A LOT OF MONEY AND TIME TO DEVELOP A COMMUNITY THAT'S SUCH A JEWEL.
AND THAT'S THE WORD MANY PEOPLE USE WHEN THEY COME TO MY PROPERTY FOR THE FIRST TIME.
IT'S A REALLY UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOOD.
PLEASE DON'T MESS IT UP BY ALLOWING THESE PEOPLE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT.
MY NAME IS RANDOLPH GLICKMAN, MY WIFE PAULINE, AND I OWN THE PROPERTY AT 84 25 ROCHELLE IN THE ALAMO FARMSTEADS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M ALSO A BOARD MEMBER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE BOTH STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS.
FIRST OF ALL, THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE LONGSTANDING EBNER LEON CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH FROM HERE ON I WILL REFER TO AS THE PLAN, AS YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM, UH, MY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS.
AND FROM, FROM A PERSONAL POINT OF VIEW, AS A LONGTIME RESIDENT, I FEAR THAT THIS
[01:00:01]
PROPOSED CHANGE, IF APPROVED, WILL DISRUPT THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD WITH INCREASED NOISE AND TRAFFIC, ESSENTIALLY CHANGING THE QUIET AND PEACEFUL CHARACTER THAT WE NOW ENJOY.WHEN WE PURCHASED OUR HOME HERE IN 1997, WE SPECIFICALLY CHOSE THIS LOCATION BECAUSE OF ITS QUIET ENVIRONMENT, MANY LARGE TREES, GREEN SPACES, AND LOW TRAFFIC FLOW.
WE ALSO PARTICIPATED IN DEVELOPING THE PLAN EXPRESSLY TO PRESERVE THESE QUALITIES FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
FURTHERMORE, IF THE LAND RESTRICTIONS ARE CHANGED AT THIS, UH, ON THIS SINGLE LOT, A PRECEDENT WILL BE SET THAT WILL LIKELY RESULT IN APPROVAL OF MOST FUTURE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUESTS BECAUSE NILE WOULD CONCEIVABLY BE CONSIDERED DISCRIMINATORY OR DUE TO FAVORITISM.
THE INEVITABLE OUTCOME OF THIS WILL BE THE STEADY INCREASE IN THE DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, DESTROYING ITS CHARM AND ESSENTIAL CHARACTER, AS WELL AS NEGATING THE INTENT OF THE PLAN.
FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY URGE ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS HERE TO DENY THE PROPOSED PLAN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
I LIVE AT 93 60 A LINCOLN AND MY HOUSE IS ON A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE PROPERTY AND SHARES A PROPERTY LINE WITH 64 85 HOLLYHOCK.
BEFORE I PURCHASED MY HOME, I DID MY RESEARCH TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE PROPERTIES SURROUNDING MY HOUSE WERE ZONED LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY.
THE APPROVED HEBNER LEON CREEK'S COMMUNITY PLAN SHOWS THE AREAS IN GREENISH YELLOW AND LIGHT YELLOW CAN ONLY BE LOW DENSITY.
AND THESE ARE THE AREAS AROUND ME.
I WOULD NOT HAVE PURCHASED MY HOME IF THERE WAS AN MF 18 HOUSING NEXT TO ME BECAUSE AT THIS TIME IN MY LIFE, I CHOSE TO LIVE IN A LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT TO NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE SIMILAR PROPERTIES.
MY NEIGHBORHOOD ISN'T GATED, BUT IT'S STILL A NEIGHBORHOOD UN GATED DOESN'T MEAN OUR PROPERTIES ARE FAIR GAMES TO DEVELOP WHO DEVELOP DEVELOPERS WHO FIND IT MORE COST EFFECTIVE TO TARGET LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FOR REZONING THAN TO PURCHASE A PROPERTY IN AN AREA ALREADY PROPERLY ZONED.
AS OUTLINED IN OUR COMMUNITY'S MASTER PLAN, ANYTHING BUILT ON THE THREE ACRES IN QUESTION SHOULD FOLLOW THE APPROVED ZONING TO BE UNIFORM WITH NEIGHBORING HOUSES.
31 HOUSES ADJACENT TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE IS NOT BALANCED.
A NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AS PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO NAME A FEW.
A GROUPING OF TWO STORY MINIMAL LOT HOUSE, MINIMAL LOT LINE HOUSES DOES NOT FIT WITH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
LIGHT POLLUTION WILL ILLUMINATE THE AREA OF THE 16 HOMES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS PROPERTY, AND AT LEAST SIX OTHER HOMES JUST BARELY BEYOND THE 200 FOOT LINE AND FLOODING AND TRAFFIC BURDEN WILL STRESS THE ALREADY STRESSED HOLLYHOCK ROAD.
THE DEVELOPER'S IDEA TO REZONE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE PROPERTY IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE MASTER PLAN APPROVED BY THE CITY IS TAKING UP COMMUNITY MEMBERS' TIME, TIME AWAY FROM OUR WORK USING THE VALUABLE TIME OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND USING TAXPAYER DOLLARS FOR THESE REASONS AND MORE.
I ASK THAT THE REQUESTS FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY AT 64 85 HOLLY HALL ROAD BE DENIED.
SOMEBODY NEXT ON THE LIST IS RON.
IS IT HOLIDAY THAT ALSO, UH, MAY I INTERJECT HERE? UM, SO RON HOLIDAY HAD A VOICEMAIL PLAYED.
UM, SO IF, IF HE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THOSE TWO MINUTES.
THE ONLY PERSON LEFT IS, UH, CURTIS BENNETT.
THAT WAS THE SAME WITH CURTIS BENNETT.
SO RENEE, YOU'RE THE LAST TO SPEAK IF YOU WANT, WANT TO.
I LIVE AT MY, MY WIFE AND I LIVE AT 66 0 7 COUNTRY VIEW LANE.
UH, WE'RE HERE TO OPPOSE BECAUSE WE DON'T CONSIDER, UH, EVEN IF THE PROPERTY GOING TO A MIDDEN IS STILL TOO MUCH ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IS GONNA CAUSE AROUND HOLLY HOK.
IT'S ALREADY CONGESTED AND THERE'S A LOT OF FLOODING IN THAT AREA AND PLUS THE INCREASE IN KIDS AND, AND FAMILIES, IT'S GONNA BRING INTO THE SCHOOL, SCHOOL BOARD AND SO FORTH.
SO I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ALL PREPARED FOR THIS AND I JUST WANNA BE OPPOSED TO IT.
UH, DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE, UH, ANY RESPONSE OR REBUTTAL?
[01:05:01]
ALRIGHT.UM, THERE'S A LOT OF OPPOSITION OF COURSE.
SO, UM, THOUGH I DON'T AGREE WITH SOME OF THESE STATEMENTS THAT TODAY I COMPLETELY RESPECT AND UNDERSTAND, UH, THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS AND WORRIES.
UM, I DO WANNA KIND OF CLARIFY THAT THE REASON WHY WE ALSO FOCUS IN THIS AREA IS BECAUSE I'M FAMILIARIZED WITH THE AREA.
WE KNOW THAT THE MEDICAL CENTER, U T S A U S A IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER.
UH, THERE'S A HIGH DEMAND FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE STATING AS FAR AS KEEPING THE NATURE AND THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE AREA, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE THAT.
I MEAN, IN THE MAP IT'S, IT'S CLEAR THERE'S A LOT OF MOVEMENT, UH, WHEN WE WOULDN'T BE THE ONLY ONES.
UH, BUT AGAIN, I HAD THE PLEASURE OF JOINING THEIR MEETING LAST WEEK.
THEY, THEY WERE NICE ENOUGH TO INVITE ME OVER.
I HAD THE PLEASURE OF TALKING TO THEM.
AND LIKE I STATED BEFORE, WE ARE OPEN TO WORKING WITH THEM.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO TO IMPROVE THE AREA AS FAR AS MINIMIZING THE, THE AMOUNT OF UNITS, KEEPING THE MOST AMOUNT OF TREES IN NATURE UPFRONT, UM, WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM.
SO, UM, AGAIN, I DID NOT MEANT TO STEP ON ANYONE'S TOES.
WE'RE HERE RESPECTFULLY TO TRY TO SEE HOW THIS WORKS.
IT'S OUR FIRST TIME WORKING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND, UH, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, I'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER LOPEZ.
COMMISSIONER BUSTANI? UH, YEAH, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.
UM, SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S, AND THIS IS FOR STAFF, THAT THERE ARE SOME ISSUES AS TO OUR VARIOUS LAND USE CATEGORIES.
UH, THAT IN FACT THERE ARE SOME MORE LOCALIZED PLANS THAT HAVE DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS THAN THE SA TOMORROW PLAN.
UH, WHAT LAND USE CATEGORY APPLY HERE? THE ONLY CATEGORIES THAT APPLY HERE ARE AS IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED, WHICH IS RURAL ESTATE AND RP, WHICH IS RESOURCE PROTECTION.
THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO CATEGORIES.
SO AS OPPOSED TO THE SAN ANTONIO TOMORROW PLAN, WHICH WOULD HAVE USES ALL THE WAY DOWN TO R 20, IS THAT RIGHT? WELL, RURAL ESTATE'S GONNA REQUIRE ONE ACRE LOT DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I WOULD HAVE TO REVIEW THIS, THE SAN ANTONIO TOMORROW PLAN CATEGORIES TO ENSURE THAT I HAVE IT UP.
IS THAT, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT SOUNDS RIGHT.
UM, LOOKING AT THIS BLOCK OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE, WHICH SHOULD CONSIST OF ONLY, UH, THE R 20, I'M SORRY, RE AND R P DESIGNATIONS FROM THIS COMMUNITY PLAN, UM, I NOTICED THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF USE OUR ZONING DESIGNATIONS, UH, THAT ARE R FIVE AND MF 33 IN THE SAME BLOCK OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
CAN WE EXPLAIN WHY THOSE MIGHT EXIST HERE? UH, LIKELY THEY WERE THERE PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE EBNER LEON CREEK LAND USE PLAN, WHICH WAS DONE IN 2003.
AND HAS THAT LAND USE PLAN BEEN UPDATED? NO SIR.
BUT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS SLOWLY WORKING ON DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY.
UM, EVENTUALLY IT WILL GET TO THIS PART OF THE CITY, BUT, UH, FOR NOW THE, THE ACTIVE PLAN FOR THIS AREA IS HE OR LEON CREEK.
UM, IF I CAN MAKE A COMMENT, MR. CHAIR, UM, SO I UNDERSTAND, UH, THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS CONCERNS REGARDING, UM, THIS CHANGE IN LAND USE AT THIS TIME.
UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE MEDIUM DENSITY IS TOO INTENSE FOR WHAT IS THERE, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT EVERYONE'S GONNA HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SAN ANTONIO TOMORROW PLANS LANDS USE CATEGORY FOR LOW DENSITY RES RESIDENTIAL OR BUY THE PROPERTY AND KEEP IT RE OR RP.
UM, BECAUSE WE ARE HAVING A HOUSING CRISIS IN THIS CITY WITH 60,000 UNITS THAT WE ARE MISSING.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT Y'ALL WANT TO KEEP THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
[01:10:01]
IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOODS THE SAME, BUT I THINK AT SOME POINT THESE COMPETING INTERESTS, YOUR INTERESTS TO KEEP YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD STATIC IS GOING TO COME INTO CONFLICT WITH THE NEED OF THE CITY AT LARGE TO DEVELOP PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPERTIES THAT YOU BUILT, WHICH WOULD BE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, R FIVE, R SIX.UM, AND SO EVEN THOUGH I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS PLAN AMENDMENT TODAY, UM, I HOPE THAT SHOULD SOMEONE COME WITH A MORE APPROPRIATE RE REQUEST WITH A MORE APPROPRIATE ZONING REQUEST, AND I THINK IN THIS CASE THAT WOULD BE R FIVE OR R SIX, WHICH WOULD BE SA TOMORROW PLAN, UH, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UH, THAT Y'ALL WILL CONSIDER THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE SAME OPPORTUNITY YOU HAD TO BUY R FIVE OR R SIX SHOULD BE GIVEN TO OTHERS.
COMMISSIONER RORY? YEAH, I WANTED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF GREW UP OFF BABCOCK ROAD, UH, OVER IN THIS AREA.
I REMEMBER DRIVING THROUGH IT AS A KID AND I JUST, I KNEW IT WAS A VERY RURAL TYPE OF AREA.
I KNEW THERE WAS, IT WAS PRONE TO SOME FLOODING AND, AND OVER THE LAST, THIS IS BACK IN THE EIGHTIES, SO OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS, YOU KNOW, YOU START TO SEE THINGS TURN INTO OTHER THINGS.
AND, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL PLATT, ALL THIS AREA BOUNDED BY ECKERT AND, AND BABCOCK, AND IT WAS ALL LARGE, SUPER LARGE LOT.
AND I THINK THAT THE, THEY WERE EVEN TWICE THE SIZE OF WHAT THEY HAVE NOW, WHAT THEY SEE LARGE LOT HERE.
AND I JUST, I THINK THERE'S ALREADY BEEN SOME CONSIDERATION IN, AND A REDUCTION IN SOME OF THE, UH, HISTORIC, UH, LOT SIZES.
AND THERE'S APPARENTLY HALF OF THIS PLATT HAS BEEN TURNED INTO OTHER THINGS, EITHER A HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL OR MULTIFAMILY.
SO I, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN SOME REMNANTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT PEOPLE BOUGHT INTO, UH, OVER THE DECADES.
UH, AND I THINK THAT THESE LITTLE POCKETS OF LARGER LOTS, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THEM.
I THINK IT ADDS TO THE FLAVOR OF THE AREA.
SO I'M NOT GONNA BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
COMMISSIONER SCHINDLER? NO QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER MILAN? NO QUESTIONS.
UM, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND I WONDER IF YOU COULD DESCRIBE HOW THAT RELATES TO YOUR PLAN.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M MAYBE SAID THAT CORRECTLY.
WHAT I MEANT IS MORE SOMETHING THAT THE YOUNGER CROWD, LIKE MY MYSELF, COULD RELATE TO SOMETHING IN THE THREE FIFTIES TO MAYBE 3 75.
NOWADAYS, I'M A REALTOR MYSELF.
I'M, I'VE BEEN SHOWING HOUSES TO A LOT OF MY FRIENDS AND JUST WITH SALARIES AND EVERYTHING, NOT GOING UP WITH INFLATION, UNFORTUNATELY.
IT'S JUST, IT'S OUT OF OUR, IT'S OUT OF OUR, UH, REACH TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD ANYTHING THAT GOES EVEN OVER THREE 50 TO 400 SOMETIMES, ESPECIALLY IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA.
SOME OF THEM ARE, UH, NURSES, DOCTORS, SOME OF THEM DO HAVE PLANS TO MAKE MORE MONEY EVENTUALLY.
AND I, OF COURSE WE ALWAYS WISH THEM THE BEST.
BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW WITH, UH, STUDENT LOANS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE ARE LOOKING INTO FIND THAT NICHE, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY TO BRING, UM, OPPORTUNITY TO EVERYONE.
TO BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THAT AREA WITHOUT HAVING TO SPEND AN OVER $400 OR 400,000 I MEANT.
SO YOU SHOULD AVOID USING THE TERM AFFORDABLE HOUSING IF YOU'RE NOT PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO, UM, UM, PLEASE READ THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN THAT WAS PUBLISHED LAST YEAR.
UM, THE CITY IS ACTUALLY IN NEED OF 96,000 UNITS OF HOUSING THAT CAN BE AFFORDED BY PEOPLE WHO EARN UP TO 120% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME AND 350,000 IS NOT YET.
I, I APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS.
UM, I AGREE THAT THE HOU THERE NEEDS TO BE HOUSING AND WHAT CAPACITY THAT IS.
I MEAN, CLEARLY THERE'S A NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT'S JUST, I THINK IT'S THE WRONG PLACE AND I HOPE ENCOURAGE YOU GUYS TO, YOU KNOW, FIND THE RIGHT LOCATION AND PROVIDE THAT KIND OF HOUSING FOR FOLKS.
UM, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT, UH, I'M VERY IMPRESSED, UH, THAT YOU GUYS WALKED, UH, 200 HOMES.
UH, THESE ARE WHAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE FOR.
UH, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU DISCUSSED THE PROJECT, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, TRIED TO MAKE IT WORK AND THAT'S WHAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT THIS PROCESS IS ABOUT.
SO BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS TO KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS, BUT YOU GOTTA, JUST, LIKE MR. BUSTANI SAID, THINGS CHANGE.
SO WHEN THE ESSAY TOMORROW COMES IN THAT AREA, YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR VOICES CONTINUE TO BE HEARD.
SO AT THIS TIME, I WILL SUPPORT, UH, SORRY.
[01:15:01]
I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION.MOVE TO DENY SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ORIAN FOR DENIAL.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL.
THIS ACTUALLY WAS ELIGIBLE FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO, UH, SINCE THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM 24.
ITEM 24 BY COMMISSIONER BUSTANI.
I HAD AN HOUR LONG PRESENTATION PREPARED, BUT, UH, APPRECIATE Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD THANK YOU FOR KEEP KEEPING YOU WAITING IT LONGER,
ELIZABETH STEWART PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 23 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE PORT SAN ANTONIO AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN FROM NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE TO EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE LOCATED AT 2 3 1 4 2 3 1 8 2 3 2 2 L JARDINE AND 2 3 2 0 SOUTHWEST 36TH STREET.
THERE WERE 17 NOTICES MAILED FIVE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET.
AND NO RESPONSE FROM THOMPSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT FLEX USE TO REZONE TO C TWO CD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR CONSTRUCTION TRADE CONTRACTOR.
THE PROPOSED LAND LAND USE AMENDMENT FROM EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE TO IS, UH, TO BUSINESS INNOVATION.
MIXED USE IS REQUESTED IN ORDER TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO C TWO CD WITH A COMMERCIAL, USE COMMERCIAL WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR CONSTRUCTION TRADE CONTRACTORS TO EXPAND THEIR CURRENT BUSINESS.
UH, THIS IS NOT CURRENTLY CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USE OF EMPLOYMENT, FLEX, MIXED USE AND NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE.
THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY'LL BE REMOVING 2320 SOUTHWEST 36TH STREET FROM THE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST BECAUSE THEY'RE AMENDING THE REZONING TO C TWO CD COMMERCIAL WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR CONSTRUCTION TRADE CONTRACTORS, WHICH IS PERMITTED IN THE EXISTING EMPLOYMENT.
FLEX MIXED USE LAND USE CATEGORY ON 30 23, 22.
SOUTHWEST 36TH STREET WITH THE REQUESTED REZONING.
THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO INDICATED THAT THEY WILL BE AMENDING THE REQUEST FROM BUSINESS INNOVATION, MIXED USE TO EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE FOR THE REMAINING PROPERTIES.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND WILL BE COMING UP TO AMEND THEIR REQUEST.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE UP HERE.
I'M THE OWNER OF CENTRAL ELECTRIC.
UH, GOT MY UNCLE BACK HERE, URA.
PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS, SIR.
MY ADDRESS, UH, HOMER WORK BUSINESS BUSINESS IS 2320 SOUTHWEST, 36TH STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
SO, UM, FIRST THAT LAST CASE WAS, WAS PRETTY TOUGH.
IT'S, UH, ADMIRABLE THAT YOU GUYS ARE ALL UP HERE.
YOU GET BIG SALARIES AND BIG PAYCHECKS, UH, DONATING YOUR TIME.
I, I WAS, UH, FORTUNATE TO BE ON THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR ALMOST 15 YEARS AND SO IT'S EXCITING TO, TO WEIRD TO BE ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE.
WANT TO LIKE SAY WHAT DO I DO WITH MY HANDS,
BUT, UH, UM, ALL KIDDING DECIDES.
MY, OUR PARENTS, MY PARENTS STARTED CENTRAL ELECTRIC IN 1975.
MARY'S UNIVERSITY IN 2000, JOINED THE COMPANY, ENDED UP BUYING OUT MY PARENTS WITH MY BROTHER A LITTLE MORE THAN 10 YEARS AGO.
UM, WE'RE VERY, VERY BLESSED THAT IN 15 PLUS YEARS WE'VE ADDED MEMBERS TO OUR TEAM EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
UM, AND WITH THAT COMES GROWING PAINS.
AND THOSE GROWING PAINS ARE, UH,
[01:20:01]
NEEDING TO EXPAND.AND THAT'S THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
UM, WE PUT GADGETS TOGETHER THAT WE PUT INTO BUILDINGS THAT WE BUILD FOR IN ELECTRICAL WORK.
AND WE'VE, UH, BEEN VERY BLESSED.
WE'VE GOT PARTNERSHIPS WITH VARIOUS SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND C T E PROGRAMS WHERE, UM, SOME HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WILL INTERN WITH US DURING THE DAY, DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR.
THEY'LL GO TO SCHOOL PART-TIME AND COME INTERN WITH US.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO EXPAND THAT DEPARTMENT.
WE'RE TRYING TO, UM, BUILD, UH, SOME MORE AREA OFFICES.
AND SO WE, THAT'S WHY WE'RE, WE WANT TO GO ACROSS THE STREET.
UH, IT'S NEVER BEEN BUILT ON, IT'S NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED OTHER THAN UNFORTUNATELY BY, BY SOME FOLKS THAT HAVE CHOSEN TO LIVE BACK IN THE BRUSH.
SO WE CLEANED IT ALL UP AND, AND WE'RE, WE WANNA IMPROVE IT.
UM, WE WANNA PUT SOME BETTER LIGHTING ON IT.
UH, AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE STAND.
I'D LIKE TO AMEND THE QUIET, THE REQUEST TO EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE.
AND THE REMOVAL OF THE OTHER PROPERTY, RIGHT? CORRECT.
WELL, UH, THANK YOU, UH, FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THE ZONING AND UH, FOR YOUR FAMILY BUSINESS.
UM, SO THE, UH, PROPOSAL AHEAD OF, IN FRONT OF US IS RECOMMENDATION OF THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF, UH, BUSINESS EMPLOYMENT.
I'M SORRY, EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE.
AND REMOVING ONE OF THE PROPERTIES.
SO THE MOTION IS FOR MOTION IS TO APPROVE AS AMENDED AND I MAKE IT MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER BUSTANI, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LOPEZ.
MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED.
AND THANKS JOHN FOR KEEPING ME STRAIGHT AGAIN.
I JUST WANTED TO ALSO POINT OUT THAT COMMISSIONER ORIAN AND I ARE TRUE VOLUNTEERS.
WE DON'T EVEN GET THE 20 BUCKS.
YOU DON'T, YOU GET, YOU GET RESERVED PARKING THOUGH.
UH, NEXT ITEM IS, UH, 20 OUTTA ORDER HERE.
THE, HMM, 28 WAS APPROVED ON CONSENT TO MOVE, TO MOVE THE UH, OKAY.
SO WE'RE JUST LEFT FOR THE MINUTES I GUESS.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION OR CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? HEARING NONE.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABS EXTENSIONS? WE GOOD? MOTION PASSES.
ALRIGHT, WELL IT IS 3 31 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.