* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:04] ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. IF WE COULD BEGIN WITH OUR SPANISH TRANSLATION SERVICES STATEMENT, PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, BEFORE WE BEGIN, IF ANYONE DESIRES, UH, A MASK, I BELIEVE WE STILL HAVE SOME AVAILABLE OVER IN BY THE OTHER DOOR. UM, MY NAME IS ROB SIPES AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT SEVEN ZONING COMMISSIONER. I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICED MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION. THE TIME IS 1 0 5. I'D LIKE TO DO A ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MARCO BARRO, DISTRICT NINE, JOHN BUSANTE, DISTRICT FIVE, JOHN WHITSETT, DISTRICT 10 AL ORTIZ, DISTRICT EIGHT, TAYLOR WATSON, DISTRICT TWO, SUMMER GRID HOUSE DISTRICT ONE. EDDIE REYES, DISTRICT FOUR, CHARLES FUENTES, DISTRICT THREE. IAN HUI, DISTRICT SIX STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COUPLE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS. FIRST, UH, WELCOME TO OUR NEWEST ZONING COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT 10. THANK YOU. AND THEN ALSO, UH, WE HAVE FOUND OUT THAT ELIZABETH IS GOING OFF TO GET HER MASTER'S DEGREE WAVE TO THE CAMERA. WAVE TO THE CAMERA. SO EVERYONE KNOWS YOU ARE IS GOING TO RUTGERS, CORRECT? YES. SO CONGRATULATIONS AND WE WILL MISS YOU. YOU CAN THANK MARCO. ALL RIGHT. UM, BEFORE, AND ONE, AND LASTLY, RIGHT BEFORE, BEFORE WE COMMENCING OUR HEARING, I'D LIKE STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING PROCEDURES AND FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF. THANK YOU CHAIR. BEFORE I BEGIN, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR PHONES. TURN YOUR PHONES TO 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 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 INDICATE THE PROPERTY OWNER'S IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE OPPOSED. FOLLOWING THE PRESENT, THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED REZONING. YOU WILL BE CALLED IN THE 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 WOULD 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. THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK AND MUST INDICATE THAT THEY ARE YIELDING THEIR TIME. WHEN THAT PERSON IS CALLED, THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. [Zoning Items  ] THANK YOU. STAFF, IF WE COULD GO OVER ANY WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONED ITEMS PLEASE. ITEMS THAT WE HAVE FOR, UH, POSTPONEMENT AND WITHDRAWAL. ITEM NUMBER ONE. UH, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE 7,000 BLOCK OF NORTH LOOP 1604 EAST. ITEM NUMBER TWO, LOCATED AT 1 0 1 WEST EUCLID AVENUE AND 1 10 17 NORTH MAIN AVENUE. AND THEN ITEM NUMBER THREE, UM, LOCATED AT THREE [00:05:01] 11 EAST ASHBY PLACE. THOSE THREE HAVE BEEN POSTPONED AND WITH OR WITHDRAWN. THANK YOU. UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THOSE PROPERTIES, YOU'RE FREE TO LEAVE AS THOSE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY AND YOU'LL BE RE NOTIFIED IF AND WHEN FUTURE ACTION OCCURS. UH, STAFF, IF WE COULD NOW GO OVER THE LIST OF ITEMS ON THE COMBINED AGENDA ITEMS I HAVE ON, UM, THE COMBINED AGENDA ARE ITEMS NUMBER 4, 5, 8, 12, 14, 15, 16, AND 17. OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, ANY OF THESE ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD WISH TO POOL TO INDIVIDUAL? LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE, LOOKING RIGHT, SEEING NONE. IF WE COULD PLEASE READ THE ITEMS INTO THE UH, RECORD PLEASE. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM I D Z WITH USES PERMITTED IN C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND MF 50 MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT TO I D Z THREE WITH USES PERMITTED IN C THREE GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND MF 50 MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT TWO 18 EAST JOSEPHINE STREET 16 NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED. TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C THREE TO R FIVE CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 4 1 1 9 WILLARD DRIVE. 10 NOTICES WERE MAILED. ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE UNIVERSITY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND OUTSIDE 200 FEET THEY RECEIVED THREE IN FAVOR. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS A REQUEST AND CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FIVE TO R FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1614 WEST TERRA ALTA DRIVE. 13 NOTICES WERE MAILED. UH, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, SEVEN OPPOSED OAK PARK, NORTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED. AN OUTSIDE 200 FEET 12 RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION. ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C THREE NA AND OH TWO TO MF 33 WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 53 15 BLANCO ROAD. 21 NOTICES WERE SENT. ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE. OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NORTH SHERE HILLS IS NOT OPPOSED. ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO RMM FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 8 2 7 STEVES AVENUE. 34 NOTICES WERE SENT. ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED. AND ROOSEVELT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED. ITEM NUMBER 15 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO R FOUR CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 3 4 2 VIENDO STREET. 39 NOTICES WERE SENT. THREE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE LOS ANGELES HEIGHTS OR KEYSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. ITEM NUMBER 16 IS A REQUESTED A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R SIX CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A DAYCARE CENTER TO R FIVE CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PER FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 5 3 0 EAST COURTLAND PLACE. 26 NOTICES WERE SENT. ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED. AND TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR. AND THEN ITEM NUMBER SI 17 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO AND O TWO TO C TWO SS WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A HOTEL WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 76 15 JONES MALTSBERGER ROAD. 32 NOTICES WERE SENT. ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED. AND SHEER HILLS RIDGEVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED. AND WE DO HAVE VOICEMAIL FOR ONE OF THE ITEMS. ALL RIGHT, THANKS. IF, IF WE COULD PLAY THE VOICEMAIL PLEASE IN REGARDS TO ONE SECOND CALL JEFF HUNT IN REGARDS TO 1 7 4. THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION APPROVES AMPLE PARKING FOR A MIXED FAMILY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN A MIXED FAMILY. SO WE APPROVE. THANK YOU. BYE-BYE. AND DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? WE DO NOT. ALRIGHT. UM, WELL WITH THAT I WILL NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. CHAR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO [00:10:01] APPROVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. NUMBER 4 5 8 12 14, 15, 16 AND 17. I'LL SECOND THAT. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEMS 4 5 8 12 14, 15, 16, AND 17 BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT? LOOKING RIGHT. SEEING NONE. IF WE COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER FUENTES. AYE. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMM COMMISSIONER TSET? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEMS PASS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THOSE ITEMS WILL NOW BE PROCEEDING ON TO CITY COUNCIL. AND SO YOU ARE FREE TO TO LEAVE AND ENJOY THE SUNNY DAY OUTSIDE BEFORE IT GETS TO BE 100. UM, WE WILL NOW BE MOVING ON TO OUR COMBINED AGENDA OR COMBINED HEARING NUMBER TWO FOR CONTINUANCES. IF WE COULD START WITH THE FIRST ONE. I KNOW WE HAVE A COUPLE DIFFERENT ONES. FIRST ITEM, UM, THIS IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANT OR THIS IS MOVED TO BE CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 5TH. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM RMM FOUR TO I D Z TWO WITH USES PERMITTED FOR EIGHT DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 3 14 3 16 MCLEAN STREET. 13 NOTICES WERE MAILED. ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OUTSIDE 200 FEET WE RECEIVED ONE IN OPPOSITION. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT ITEM? UH, WE DO HAVE A VOICEMAIL. ALRIGHT. IF WE COULD HEAR THAT PLEASE. THIS IS KATE RUCKMAN, 1 0 7 KING WILLIAMS STREET, 2 1 0 2 2 4 6 1 6 3. REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 7 3 14 AND THREE 16 MCLEAN STREET. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO OPPOSES THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FOR THREE 14 AND THREE 16 MCLEAN STREET. THIS ZONING CHANGE WOULD ALLOW FOR THE CREATION OF HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT WITH FEWER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AND INTERIOR STREET AND MINIMAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THE CURRENT ZONING DESIGNATION ALREADY ALLOWS FOR MULTIPLE UNITS ON THIS LOT. WHILE THE PROPOSED ZONING MAY REFLECT OTHER DESIGNATIONS IN THE AREA, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LOCATION. MID-BLOCK SANDWICHED BETWEEN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON EITHER SIDE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. AND DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP? WE DO NOT. ALRIGHT. UM, WHAT CASES? DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, DID YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION? SURE. UM, MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN TO THE SEPTEMBER 5TH ZONING COMMISSION HEARING. ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALRIGHT. MOTION IS FOR A CONTINUOUS TO THE SEPTEMBER 5TH MEETING FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT. LOOKING RIGHT. SEEING NONE. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER FUENTES. AYE. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER WEE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER SUP? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CONTINUANCE ITEM. I BELIEVE THAT'S 11 ITEM FOR CONTINUANCE TO SEPTEMBER 19TH IS ITEM NUMBER 11. UH, REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R SIX AND C TWO TO C TWO NA CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TRUCK REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE WITH OVERSIZED VEHICLE STORAGE WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1621 SOUTH CALLAHAN ROAD. 50 56 NOTICES WERE SENT. ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED. AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, DID WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT ITEM? THERE IS, UH, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IT'S A DISTRICT, IT WAS A DISTRICT SIX CASE. SO COMMISSIONER, WE DID YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION ON THAT ITEM? YES, MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO HAVE THIS ITEM CONTINUE TO THE 19TH OF THE SEPTEMBER, 2023. SECOND. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION TO CONTINUE. ITEM 11 TO THE SEPTEMBER 19TH MEETING [00:15:01] BY COMMISSIONER. WE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES, IF WE COULD HAVE, LET'S SEE. DISCUSSION. LOOKING LEFT, LOOKING RIGHT. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER, WEVE AYE. COMMISSIONER FUENTES? AYE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WITT? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO OUR FINAL CONTINUANCE ITEM. ITEM TO BE CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 3RD IS ITEM NUMBER SIX. A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FIVE TO C THREE ON 5.767 ACRES AND BP ON 8.901 ACRES WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 6,500 BLOCK OF OLD PAIR OF SALT ROAD. 37 NOTICES WERE MAILED. FIVE RECEIVED IN FAVOR. TWO RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. OKAY. AND THERE'S NO, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, THIS ONE IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE. COMMISSIONER REYES, DID YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM, MR. CHAIR? I MOVE THAT ITEM NUMBER SIX, BE MOVED TO THE OCTOBER 3RD COMMISSION HEARING. ALRIGHT, SECOND. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TO THE OCTOBER 3RD MEETING FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX BY COMMISSIONER REYES. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES. ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT. LOOKING RIGHT. SEEING NONE. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER REYES. AYE. COMMISSIONER FUENTES? AYE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHATSAPP? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. WE COULD MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST CASE OR ITEM ON THE INDIVIDUAL HEARING. ITEM NUMBER NINE, I BELIEVE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS AFA GONZALEZ, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER NINE IS LOCATED AT 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10 STYRON STREET GOING FROM RMM FOUR TO I D Z TWO. MEDIUM INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR FIVE DUALING UNITS WITH ALL OTHER OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. THERE WERE 37 NOTICES SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR FOR OPPOSED. KING WILLIAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ARE IN SUPPORT AND ONE, UH, OPPOSED OUTSIDE 200 FEET. THE EXISTING RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIX DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED I D Z TWO MEDIUM INTENSITY INFO DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR FIVE DUAL UNITS IS ALSO INAPPROPRIATE ZONING. THE DENSITY PERMITTED IN THE CURRENT RM FOUR BASE ZONING DISTRICT IS A MAXIMUM OF FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER LOT, TOTALING A POTENTIAL OF EIGHT DWELLING UNITS. THE REQUESTED FIVE DWELLING UNITS PROPOSES LESSER DENSITY THAN THE ALREADY PERMITTED DENSITY OF THE RM FOUR DISTRICT. THE PROPOSED REZONING ALSO REQUIRES A SITE PLAN, WHICH WILL PROVIDE DETAILS OF THE LAYOUT AND LIMITED DENSITY TO FIVE UNITS WITH A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT PERIMETER SETBACK AND A MAXIMUM TWO AND A HALF STORY HEIGHT. ANY MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE SITE PLAN AFTER REZONING WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY, THANK YOU. IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD PLEASE AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REQUEST AND IF YOU'D INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. YOUR EXCELLENCE IS MY NAME IS AKA AND I'M THE OWNER OF HIGH HOMES AND RESULTS U SS A UH, BASICALLY I'M HERE FROM THE LAST TWO WEEKS THAT YOU'VE REQUESTED THAT WE SHOULD SPEAK WITH THE DISTRICT. UH, WE'RE COMBINING THE TWO LOTS. NORMALLY WE'RE, WE'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD FOUR HOMES ON EACH LOT, BUT WE'RE COMBINING THE TWO LOTS TO BUILD FIVE TOWN HOMES. SO OUR REQUEST IS FOR REZONING FROM HER FOUR TO IDZ TWO. AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, KIM WILLIAMS, AND THEY'VE, THEY'VE SUPPORTED US AND THEY'VE GIVEN US THE APPROVAL IN WRITING WITH TWO STIPULATIONS, WHICH WE'VE ACCEPTED. ONE IS TO REDUCE THE I FORM UNIT ONE TO FOUR TO TWO AND A HALF. AND THE OTHER ONE WE'VE ALREADY KEPT THE LAST UNIT AS TWO FLOORS. THE SECOND STIPULATION IS FOR US TO SHIFT, UH, THE POSITIONING OF THE BUILDING TO FACE ST. MARY STREET. WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT, BUT ACCORDING TO THE BUILDING CODE, THAT'S THAT, THAT'S AGAINST THE BUILDING CODE. SO WE'LL HAVE TO DEPEND ON [00:20:01] THE CITY TO APPROVE THAT. WE'VE NOTIFIED THEM, THEY'RE AWARE AND THEY'RE JUST WAITING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO BE, TO BE COMPLETED. WE'VE ALSO CONTACTED THE DISTRICT OFFICE. UM, WE HAD A MEETING. THEY'RE VERY HAPPY WITH THAT TOO. AND, UM, WE'RE HERE AGAIN TO SEEK YOUR SUPPORT AND APPROVAL. UM, WE'VE ALREADY MADE A, UH, ADJUSTMENT SO FAR AND WE'LL SUPPORT, UM, WE'LL PRESENT IT LATER, BUT WE'VE MADE A LOT OF COMPROMISE AND, UH, WE JUST WANT THE DEVELOPMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND FOR FIVE FAMILIES TO ENJOY A HAPPY HOME. THANK YOU. RIGHT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO. WE HAVE, UM, WE DO HAVE VOICEMAILS AND THEN WE DO HAVE TWO, UH, SPEAKERS SIGNED IN TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT. IF WE COULD HEAR THE VOICEMAILS FIRST PLEASE. UH, YES. THIS IS JAMES STEWART AT FOUR OH SEVEN CEDAR STREET. PHONE NUMBER (361) 442-4811 REFERENCE 5 0 6 5 10 STYRON PROJECT CASE ENDING IN 1 5 9. THE PROPOSED ZONING DOES NOT FIT IN OUR HISTORIC SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I'M STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE ZONING CHANGE. THIS IS A NOT IS, THIS IS NOT A GOOD APPLICATION OF THE ZONING CHANGE AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS CURRENTLY REMODELING NUMEROUS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND INFIELD LIKE THIS IS NOT NEEDED. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL CAUSE A SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE THE INADEQUATE PARKING FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS STYRENE STREET IS ALREADY DANGEROUS TO WALK AND CROSS THE STREET BECAUSE OF THE OVERFLOW PARKING FROM ST. MARY'S STREET. AGAIN, I AM FIRMLY OPPOSED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE ZONING CHANGED. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. DENNIS QUINN AND JOAN SHEEVER HERE. THIS IS ABOUT CASE NUMBER 1 5 9 AT 5 0 6 5 10 STREET. WE ARE CALLING AN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 5 0 6 STEERING STREET. WE ARE RESIDENTS AND OWNERS OF TWO 17 CEDAR STREET. WE LIVE A BLOCK FROM THE PROPOSED APARTMENTS FIVE THREE STORY APARTMENTS TO BE BUILT IN OUR SINGLE FAMILY HOME NEIGHBORHOOD ON TWO SMALL OF A LOT BEHIND 4 0 2 CEDAR. HOW MANY TIMES HAS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SAID NO TO DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY AS APARTMENTS? THREE TIMES. THREE. NOSS DO NOT MEAN A YES, IT STILL MEANS NO. IT'S BEEN TURNED DOWN THREE TIMES BY THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE THREE TIMES BY PREVIOUS ZONING COMMISSIONERS. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SPACE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING. WE WOULD LIKE TO SAY RESPECTFULLY TO MICKEY CONRAD, CHAIR OF THE KING WILLIAM ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHO SPEAK, WHO SPOKE IN FAVOR OF REZONING. WE NOTE THAT HE LIVES 25 HOUSES AWAY FROM THIS DEBACLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF SOUTH ALAMO. AND HE DOESN'T SPEAK FOR US OR ANYONE IN THE 200, 300 OR 400 BLOCK OF CEDAR. THREE BYS OF THIS APPLE. AND NOW FOURTH, PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THIS TO BE REZONED FOR FIVE THREE STORY APARTMENTS AND CHANGE THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WE'D LIKE TO SAY TO THE UK DEVELOPER WHO HAS ONLY BEEN IN BUSINESS IN TEXAS FOR SEVEN MONTHS AND WHO HAS NOT BUILT ANYTHING IN THE UNITED STATES EVER. THE DWELLINGS IN THE 100 BLOCK OF CEDAR ARE CONDOS, NOT APARTMENTS. AND THAT IS A BIG DIFFERENCE. THE RESIDENTS OF CEDAR STREET ARE ASKING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO DO WHAT YOU HAVE DONE PREVIOUSLY AND WHAT THE H D R C HAS DONE THREE TIMES AND CONTINUE TO VOTE NO AND SEND A MESSAGE. THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE HOLD FIRM AND KEEP KING WILLIAM HISTORIC AND CONTINUE TO VOTE. NO. WE CAN BE REACHED WITH ANY QUESTIONS AT 2 1 0 4 7 1 19 26. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. PLEASE, PLEASE VOTE NOW. THANK YOU. THIS IS KATE RUCKMAN, 1 0 7 KING WILLIAMS STREET, 2 1 0 2 2 4 6 1 6 3 REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 9 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10 STEER STREET. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH ZONING STAFF THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGE WILL RESULT IN LOWER DENSITY AND IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE. HOWEVER, WE ALSO CONCUR THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION DOES NOT CONFORM TO [00:25:01] HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS KRISTEN CASEY. MY ADDRESS IS FOUR 10 MADISON 7 8 2 0 4. I'M CALLING FOR THE ZONING CASE NUMBER THAT ENDS IN 1 5 9. THAT INVOLVES 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10 STERIN. I'M CALLING TO SAY THAT I AM NOT IN, UM, I DON'T APPROVE. WELL, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF, I'M GONNA JUST HANG UP. HI, MY NAME IS LAUREN CHITTENDEN, TEAM CEDAR STREET. MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 4 8 8 4 5 8 4. I AM CALLING IN REGARDS TO THE PROJECT AT 5 0 6 AND YEAH, FIVE 10 STEERING STREET FOR THE REZONING THAT IS BEING REQUESTED. I'M CALLING IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE. UH, WE FEEL THAT FIVE UNITS ON A PROPERTY IS INCREDIBLY EXCESSIVE. THIS LITTLE BLOCK OF STREET ALREADY HAS A GREAT DEAL OF PARKING, UH, PARKING ISSUES DURING THE DAY FROM LOCAL BUSINESSES. AND WE JUST KNOW THAT WITH THAT MANY MORE RESIDENTS IT WOULD JUST SPILL OVER EVEN MORE ONTO THAT TIGHT SECTION OF STREET. UH, WE ALSO JUST FEEL LIKE FIVE UNITS ON A PROPERTY IS UNNECESSARY AND, AND WE JUST WANT TO OPPOSE THIS REZONING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. HI, MY NAME IS MAY GORNEY. I LIVE AT 3 2 7 CEDAR STREET, 7 8 2 1 0. AND I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO THE UM, CASE THAT'S PROPOSED ON 5 0 6 STEERING STREET. UM, THE NUMBER IS 2 0 2 3 3 2 2. AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES THAT, UM, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE LACK OF PARKING. THAT BLOCK IS ALREADY VERY CONGESTED AND UH, IT'S EVEN DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF ALL THE CARS THAT PARK THERE AND THE TRAFFIC TRYING TO CUT THROUGH. ADDING FIVE ADDITIONAL UNITS, UH, WITH LIMITED PARKING WILL ONLY ADD TO THAT PROBLEM. UM, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT AREA IS PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY. IN FACT, A LOT OF THE MULTIFAMILIES HAVE BEEN TRANSITIONED BACK TO SINGLE FAMILY. THEY'RE MOSTLY ONE STORY HOUSES WITH JUST A COUPLE OF SCATTERED TWO STORY AND TO BUILD A STRUCTURE OF THAT SIZE AND SCALE ISN'T IN KEEPING WITH THAT SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ALSO DOESN'T LEAVE MUCH ROOM FOR LANDSCAPING, UM, OR ANY GREEN SPACE. IT'S MOSTLY, UM, IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE WHICH JUST OVERALL ISN'T GOOD FOR WATER DRAINAGE, THE ENVIRONMENT OR, HI, THIS IS MARK HOGENSON AT 4 0 2 CEDAR STREET, 2 1 0 8 5 7 9 3 9 3. I'M CALLING IN REGARD TO CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 2 3 1 0 7 0 0 1 5 9. REGARDING THE ZONING CHANGE, 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10 PROPOSED, UH, CHANGE FROM RMM FOUR TO I D Z TWO. I'M CALLING TO OPPOSE A PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM CURRENT RMM FOUR TO I D Z TWO AND HERE'S WHY THE CURRENT RMM FOUR ZONING HAS TO DATE. MAINTAIN THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD WHILE ALLOWING FOR DIVERSITY AND SCALE AND DESIGN. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO A THOUGHTFUL, WELL-DESIGNED QUALITY DEVELOPMENT. IN KEEPING WITH THE RMM FOUR DESIGNATION. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING FIVE UNITS WITH NINE OFF STREET PARKING SPOTS. THE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT SEEMS TO BE THAT FIVE UNITS WOULD BE BETTER THAN IF EIGHT. THAT WOULD BE FOUR UNITS CITED ON EACH OF THE EXISTING TWO LOTS. UM, I CAN'T IMAGINE ANY DESIGN THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE FOUR UNITS AND THE REQUIRED PARKING ON EACH OF THE LOTS THAT MEASURE 35 BY 1 47. I BELIEVE A SOLUTION WOULD BE FOR THE DEVELOPER TO REPL INTO ONE LOT ALREADY STATED AS THEIR INJECTION AND STAY WITHIN THE RMM FOUR AND BUILD FOUR UNITS INSTEAD OF FIVE. IT WOULD BE A BETTER FIT FOR THE LOT. PROVIDE AMPLE ROOM FOR PARKING, REDUCE THE SCALE, AND BETTER FIT THE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MICHELLE MONSO. I LIVE AT 2 2 6 WICK STREET IN THE KING WILLIAM DISTRICT AND I AM CALLING ABOUT CASE NUMBER Z DASH 20 23 0 7 1 59. I AM CALLING TO COMMENT THAT I WOULD WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT, UH, STAY RESIDENTIAL AND NOT BE INCREASED TO ID THE, THE OTHER ZONING THAT THEY WANTED TO GO TO. SO WANTED TO KEEP IT RESIDENTIAL. WE DO NOT NEED FIVE UNITS ON THAT SMALL, THE SMALL TWO LOTS. THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THAT LOT [00:30:01] TRIED TO GET THE SAME KIND OF DEVELOPMENT ON THERE AND WAS REJECTED ANYWAY. UH, SO KEEP IT RESIDENTIAL. THANK YOU. THIS IS NANCY DEAL. I LIVE AT 4 22 ADAMS STREET AND THE KING WILLIAM DISTRICT. MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN THREE EIGHT OH FIVE SEVEN FOUR FIVE. I'M CALLING AGAIN TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING OF THE TWO LOTS AT 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10. STEER FROM R FOUR TO I D Z TWO. I DON'T THINK THIS IS NECESSARY. THIS IS A FULLY, UH, SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE OCCASIONAL FOURPLEX. I AM ALL FOR RENTAL UNITS AND MORE LOW COST UNITS, BUT THAT'S NOT THESE. AND I THINK THIS REZONING IS A BAD IDEA THAT SETS A BAD PRECEDENT. ALL THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS FOR SEVERAL BLOCKS AROUND ARE OPPOSED TO THIS. THE OPINION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION OF WHICH I'M A LONG TIME MEMBER, DO NOT REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS, IF NOT ALL OF THEM. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. HELLO, THIS IS PAMELA HALL. I LIVE AT 4 0 7 CEDAR STREET. I'M CALLING ABOUT THE 5 0 6 5 10 STEERING PROJECT. I BELIEVE THE ID NUMBER IS 6 3 7 4. UH, CALLING, UH, TO VOICE MY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. WE LIVE BASICALLY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT. UH, IT'S A VERY, UH, DENSE INFILL PROJECT WITH. IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THERE'S ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN HAVE NINE PARKING PLACES THERE. THAT STREET STEERING IS ALREADY VERY CONGESTED, ESPECIALLY ON THE WEEKENDS BECAUSE OF THE CLUBS ON ST. MARY'S. UH, UH, WE ALREADY HAVE CARS PARKED THERE. WE HAVE A NICE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THAT IS RELATIVELY QUIET AND WE ARE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT. WE'RE NOT IN OPPOSITION TO ANY PROJECT, BUT THIS PROJECT IS, UH, EXTREMELY DENSE. THE FACADE DOES NOT LOOK LIKE ANYTHING VICTORIAN AND DOES NOT, UH, BLEND INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AGAIN, THIS IS PAMELA HALL DOOR AT 4 0 7 CEDAR STREET AND WE ARE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING. UM, AND TO THIS PROJECT. THANKS. THIS IS PEGGY RAMSEY. I LIVE AT 1 3 3 EAST RISHI, UH, ZIP CODE SEVEN EIGHT TWO ZERO FOUR. MY PHONE NUMBER'S (210) 315-1473. I'M CALLING ABOUT THE ZONING CASE ENDING IN THE NUMBER 1 5 9 ON 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10. UM, I AM, UH, OPPOSED TO CHANGING THE CODING FROM R FOUR TO THE I D Z COATING. UM, THE NEIGHBORS IN THAT AREA ARE, MOST OF THE HOUSES IN THAT AREA ARE ZONED ARE FOR, UM, WE HAVE ALL KINDS OF INTRUSION COMING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND IT SEEMS THAT WE ARE STILL THE MASKS FOR OUR OPINION BY, UM, THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, THE FOR KINGLEY AND ASSOCIATION AND OTHER ENTITY. UM, THE RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT MAINTAINING THE R FOUR CODING AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO, UH, I'M OPPOSED TO CHANGING THE CODING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS IN REGARDS TO Z 2 0 2 3 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 1 5 9. LOCATION IS 5 0 6 AND FIVE 10 STYRON, S T I E R N IN THE KING WILLIAM DISTRICT. AND THE REASON WHY I'M CALLING IS BECAUSE MY NAME IS ROSEMARY DANA, D AS IN DAVID, A N A AND I LIVE ON 3 23 CEDAR STREET. AND I'M CALLING AND OPPOSING THE PROPERTY THAT WANTS TO BE BUILT ON THAT LOT. UM, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF IT, UM, DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT'S A VERY LARGE BUILDING AND IT WOULD CAUSE A NIGHTMARE WITH THE TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA DUE TO THE BUSINESSES. UM, WE ALREADY HAVE OVERFLOW TRAFFIC IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, DUE TO, UM, ALAMO STREET AND ST. MARY STREET. UM, ALSO THE SCHOOL IS LOCATED THERE, UH, WITHIN THE AREA WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE, THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND ALSO THE HIGH SCHOOL IS IN THAT AREA. WE ALREADY HAVE A MAJOR TRAFFIC PROBLEM. UM, AND I DO NOT AGREE TO PUTTING, YOU KNOW, THREE STORY CONDOS. UM, FIVE UNITS, THREE UNITS. UM, I WOULD RATHER PREFER THAT YOU PUT ONE HOME ON THAT [00:35:01] PROPERTY. UH, ONE STORY, ONE FAMILY, SINGLE HOME FAMILY, UM, MOVE IN THAT AREA. UM, SO, UM, AGAIN, I'M OPPOSING THIS AND, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN GIVE ME A CALL BACK AT (210) 667-8727. HAVE A GREAT DAY. AND THEN FOR UM, SPEAKERS, WE HAVE FIRST MS. MARY GRACE KITNER. YEP. MY NEIGHBOR ROB BEACH, HAS TO LEAVE FOR A MEETING AND I WONDER IF HE COULD GO BEFORE ME. OH, WE DON'T HAVE MR. BEACH SIGNED UP. SO, SO WE CAN'T HAVE, UM, HE CAN'T SPEAK SINCE, LIKE I SAID, HE DID NOT SIGN UP. I SIGNED UP THE LAST TIME. DOES IT NOT CARRY OVER WHEN I IT DOES NOT CARRY OVER. NO SIR. WELL FINE JUST READ THE CHARTER FOR THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION. THAT'S WHY I CAME HERE. AND YOU'RE NOT FOLLOWING THE ASSOCIATION OF KEEPING THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE WAY IT SHOULD BE. THANK YOU ALL. I'M MARY GRACE KETNER. I LIVE AT 1 0 9 FUR. MY LITTLE HOUSE BACKS UP TO THAT PROPERTY. YOU CAN JUST BELOW IT RIGHT IN THE CENTER. MY WHOLE BACK FENCE IS TAKEN UP WITH THE NEW PROPERTY. UM, WHAT I SEE IN THE DRAWING OF THE HOUSE, I DIDN'T SEE IT TODAY. DID IT COME UP AND I MISSED IT? OF THE, I MEAN OF THE APARTMENT. UH, IT'S A LOT OF CONCRETE AND PAVEMENT IN A PART OF TOWN THAT IS ALREADY ONE OF THE HEAT DESERTS THAT WE TALK ABOUT. UM, THAT YOUR DISTRICT FIVE COUNCIL WOMAN IS TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE OUR, OUR ALLEYS MORE, YOU KNOW, MORE RESISTANT TO THIS KIND OF BUILDING. UM, THERE'S UH, THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER PRIVACY FENCE THAT DIDN'T SHOW IN THE DRAWING THAT RUNS RIGHT ALONG THE EDGE OF IT, WHICH MEANS WE'VE GOT A, A LARGE FACILITY WITH ALL CONCRETE AND PAVEMENT AND FENCES ALL THE WAY AROUND. WE'RE NOT KEEPING NEIGHBORS OUT. THOSE FENCES ARE WHAT'S GOING TO MAKE THEM NOT FEEL LIKE A PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WHY COULDN'T THERE BE PRIDE OF BARBADOS OR, OR, UH, QUEEN ENDS LACE OR THE THINGS THAT ARE UBIQUITOUS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD? THOSE LITTLE RED BERRIES SMILES. I THINK LAST WEEK PEOPLE SPOKE OF THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I CAME OUT OF CURIOSITY AND I COME BACK TO OBJECT. BUT HERE'S WHAT THE CHARACTER OF WHAT WE FONDLY CALL BAJA. KING WILLIAM IS ALL ABOUT IT. WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU SEE PORCHES, FRONT PORCHES AND YOU SEE CHAIRS ON THEM. EVEN THIS HOT TIME OF YEAR, YOU MAY NOT SEE PEOPLE BUT YOU SEE CHAIRS ON THEM. 'CAUSE WE SIT OUT AND WE WAVE TO OUR NEIGHBORS WHO ARE WALKING THEIR DOGS AND THAT KIND OF THING. UM, WE SEE CARS COMING BY WITH CARS PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. SO THEY HAVE TO SIGNAL TO ONE ANOTHER. COME ON THROUGH, I'LL LET YOU THROUGH. I'LL WAIT. THAT'S THE KIND OF OUR STREETS WERE BUILT FOR MODEL A'S THESE CENTURIES OLD HOUSES ARE SMALL BY TODAY'S STANDARDS. THEY'RE SMALL BY WHAT WE GENERALLY THINK OF AS WHAT KING WILLIAM LOOKS LIKE, BUT THEY HAVE SOMETHING CALLED GRACE. AND WE ASK FOR GRACE IN NEW CONSTRUCTION AS WELL. NOT HARDSCAPE WITH FENCES AND CONCRETE AND AT LEAST TWO AND A HALF STORIES THAT'S STILL GONNA CAST A SHADOW UNTIL ABOUT MID-MORNING OVER MARK HOGANS SON'S HOUSE. HE'S AN ARTIST. HE NEEDS A LOT OF LIGHT IF YOU VOTE AGAINST THIS. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO BUILD A PLAYGROUND THERE SO THAT THE KIDS AND THE GRANDKIDS WHO LIVE AND VISIT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WON'T HAVE TO CROSS A MAJOR STREET IN ORDER TO GET TO SOME PLAYGROUNDS WHERE THEY CAN PLAY TOGETHER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. AND THEN FOLLOWED BY, UM, MS. KIMBERLY BUON. VERY CLOSE. HELLO. UM, FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA THANK THE COMMISSIONERS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAND UP HERE AND OPPOSE THE 5 0 6 5 10 STEERING STREET REZONING FROM RMM FOUR TO IDZ TWO AND TO ECHO A LOT OF MY NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS AND PHONE CALLS, UM, THAT WERE DIALED IN. UM, I ALSO OPPOSED [00:40:01] THIS PROJECT AND HERE'S WHY. UM, KING WILLIAM WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1967, THE YEAR I WAS BORN, AND IN 1972, DEFINED ITS BOUNDARIES AND WAS RECOGNIZED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTRY. KING WILLIAM IS A SPECIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A VAST RESIDENTIAL HISTORY, EVEN HAS A LITTLE BIT OF INDUSTRIAL HISTORY PRIOR TO THE 1972 DESIGNATIONS. UM, AS I SAW IN A MAP EARLIER, UM, JOSIES, UM, USED TO OCCUPY THE SPACE AND LATER, UM, THE ST. ANTHONY'S HOTEL, I LEARNED HOW TO GREENHOUSE AND, UM, GREW VEGETABLES FOR THE HOTEL DOWNTOWN. I, ALONG WITH SEVERAL OF MY SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE CHARM OF KING WILLIAM. IT'S NO SECRET THAT KING WILLIAM IS NOT A CHEAP NEIGHBORHOOD TO LIVE IN, AND THAT'S DUE TO NEIGHBORS UPKEEPING AND BEAUTIFYING THEIR EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURES. I WOULD LIKE IT TO REMAIN RMM FOUR AND KEEP IT RESIDENTIAL. WHILE IT'S POSSIBLE WITH RMM FOUR TO PUT EIGHT UNITS ON THE TWO COMBINED LOTS AND QUESTIONS, IT WOULD BE A MIRACLE TO MAKE IT ALL FIT WITHIN THE GUIDELINES. WE UNDERSTAND THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THE PROJECTS AND THEY PROVIDED FOR GUIDANCE AND SUGGESTIONS THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN FULLY ADDRESSED IN THE RECENT SITE PLANS. LASTLY, WE KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND WE EXPECT THAT TO HAPPEN AND WE DO WANT TO SUPPORT IT, BUT NOT IF IT DOESN'T TAKE THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS AND THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD INTO CONSIDERATIONS. TO DATE, I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY, UM, REACH OUT FROM THE DEVELOPERS AND I LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO THE PROJECT. WE WILL SHARE A FENCE TOGETHER AND I HOPE THAT, UM, THE DEVELOPERS AND MS. NAKOTA AND HER FAMILY, I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME THEM TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AT THE LAST MEETING SHE MENTIONED THAT SHE WAS GOING TO KEEP A UNIT FOR HER FAMILY. SO WE REALLY WILL BE NEIGHBOR SHARING OFFENSE AND, UM, IF THAT IS TRUE, I WOULD LOVE FOR HER TO MEET WITH OUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, JUST ABOUT ALL OF US OPPOSE IT. AND WE'D LOVE TO SIT DOWN AND WORK TOGETHER, UM, WITH THE THINGS THAT THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION HAS SENT FORTH AND I'M SURE THE, UM, HISTORIC, UM, REDESIGN COMMITTEE WILL AS WELL. UM, AGAIN, I DO OPPOSE THIS AND I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. UH, MS. ULKA, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A SHORT REBUTTAL IF YOU WOULD LIKE, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT CAME AND VOICED THEIR OPINION, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND BY CATEGORIZING THE OPINION INTO ABOUT FOUR DIFFERENT, UH, TITLES THOUGH. NUMBER ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE CURRENT ZONE. IT'S HIRING FOUR, NOT OUR FOUR. AND WITH RM FOUR, UM, I'M SURE YOU ALL KNOW BETTER. UH, WE'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD UP TO FOUR UNITS ON IT WITH ONE SINGLE ROOF. SO IF WE DO KEEP THIS RM FOUR, WE'RE NOT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, WE'RE JUST REDUCING IT FROM EIGHT TO FIVE. SO I HOPE EVERYBODY CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE. WE'VE ALREADY MADE A COMPROMISE FROM THE BEGINNING. WITHOUT SPEAKING TO ANYONE, WE, WE ARE NOT COMING IN TO DESTROY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE'RE COMING IN TO BE TO MAKE SURE THE, THE DEVELOPMENT ALIGNS WITH WHAT WE HAVE, WHAT THEY HAVE ALREADY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THE CURRENT ZONES ARE IN FAULT, NOT OUR FAULT. AND WE'RE ONLY BUILDING FIVE. THE OTHER ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE FENCE. THAT'S PART OF, UM, REQUIREMENT FROM THE KING WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION THAT WE SHOULD MAKE THE FENCE VERTICAL LIKE A PICKER FENCE. AND THAT'S, WE'VE ALREADY ACCEPTED THAT AND WE'RE DOING THAT. UM, IN TERMS OF THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND US, THAT'S ALSO ONE OF THE COMPROMISE WE MADE. WE LOWERED THE DEVELOPMENT TO TWO FLOORS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T OVERSHADOW THE NEIGHBOR AT THE BACK. AND IN KEEPING WITH, UM, KIM WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION STIPULATION, WE'RE LOWERING THE WHOLE THREE FLOOR TO TWO AND A HALF. UM, SO I'M SURE THAT WOULD, UM, SATISFY WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN REQUESTING FOR. THEY WANTED LOWERED, WE'RE LOWERING IT. AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY ACCEPTED IN TERMS OF PACKING. UM, I CANNOT TAKE THE FALL FOR WHATEVER IS HAPPENING OUTSIDE OF THE TWO LOTS FROM ST. MARY'S OR FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT WE'VE PROVIDED ENOUGH PACKING IN LINE WITH THE BUILDING REQUIREMENT CODE AND EXTRA PACKING AS WELL. AND IN TERMS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, WE'VE ALREADY SWITCHED, UH, SOME OF OUR DESIGNS AND REDUCED IMPERVIOUS COVER BY BRINGING IN MORE EXPENSIVE MATERIAL TO MAKE IT PERVIOUS. WE'RE BRINGING IN, UM, PAVERS SO THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, UM, WE WANNA SATISFY EVERYBODY BUT WE CAN'T SATISFY EVERYBODY A HUNDRED PERCENT. AND I THINK I WOULD PLEASE APPRECIATE IF EVERYBODY CAN SEE THE BENEFIT THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS BRINGING IN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE OTHER DEVELOPERS, THE PAST DEVELOPERS. I'M NOT THE PAST DEVELOPER. WHAT I'M COMING IN AND WE'RE DEVELOPING AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE ASSOCIATION. WE'VE SPOKEN WITH H D L C COMMITTEE, [00:45:01] THEY'VE GIVEN US THEIR RECOMMENDATION. ALL THESE POINTS THAT WE'VE ACCEPTED ALSO ALIGNS WITH WHAT THEY'VE REQUESTED FOR. AND WE'VE SPOKEN WITH THE DISTRICT IN TERMS OF SPEAKING WITH, UH, THE NEIGHBOR. THE NEIGHBOR ARE OPPOSITE US ACTUALLY. HE ACTUALLY HELPED US WITH THE GRASS TO CUT THE GRASS. WE'VE HAD CONVERSATION WITH THEM. THE NEIGHBOR, UH, JUST BESIDE US IS A COMMERCIAL. SO I'M SORRY I CAN'T, THERE'S NOTHING I CAN DO ABOUT THAT. AND THAT COMMERCIAL BUILDING IS TWO FLOORS AND WE'RE LOWERING OUR DEVELOPMENT IN LINE WITH THAT TWO AND A HALF. IN TERMS OF THE OTHER NEIGHBOR, I WILL BE HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH HER AFTER THIS MEETING SO THAT SHE CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING AND THE AMENDMENTS WE'RE MAKING. SO I HOPE EVERYBODY WILL BE HAPPY WITH THAT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. YEAH. I'LL HAVE UM, A FEW QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND ALSO FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, TO STAFF. UM, SO THE CURRENT ZONING IS RMM FOUR. CAN YOU REMIND US WHAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWABLE IN THE RMM FOUR DISTRICT IS? IT'S 30. UH, NO, IT'S 30, IT'S 35 FEET. I'M PRETTY, PRETTY SURE, BUT WE'RE GONNA DOUBLE CHECK RIGHT NOW. OKAY. AND SO THREE STORIES. THREE STORIES, THREE STORIES IN THE RM FOUR WITHOUT A, WITHOUT ANY FEET REQUIREMENT, THAT'S ACTUALLY SET FORTH, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO 30, SO THREE FULL STORIES ARE ALLOWED IN RMM FOUR. AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, HOW TALL WOULD THAT BE? THREE STORIES OVER 35 FEET? IT COULD BE, IT'S GENERALLY ABOUT 35 FEET. IT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. OKAY. UM, AND HOW MANY UNITS WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING? FOUR. FOUR PER LOT. AND WE HAVE TWO LOTS, CORRECT. SO A TOTAL OF EIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. UM, CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT MAJOR VERSUS MINOR AMENDMENTS? SO IF THIS IS, IS APPROVED, WERE TO BE APPROVED, WHAT WOULD THIS HAVE TO COME BACK FOR? SO WOULD A CHANGE IN HEIGHT HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH A REZONING PROCESS? YES, IT WOULD, IT WOULD ALSO, IF THEY EXPAND THE FOOTPRINT OR IF THEY TRIED TO ADD UNITS. UM, NOT THE LAYOUT PER SE, LIKE IF THEY NEED TO GO A LITTLE FURTHER NORTH OR A LITTLE FURTHER SOUTH ON THE PROPERTY. BUT IF THEY'RE EXPANDING THE FOOTPRINT, IF THEY'RE, UH, GOING HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS PROPOSED. YEAH, THAT'S ABOUT IT. YEAH. WHAT ABOUT CHANGING THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES? UM, NO, THEY HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM, THE MINIMUM RE UH, SPACES REQUIRED. AND THEY'D ALSO HAVE TO KEEP THIS ALL AS FIVE DWELLING UNITS. THEY COULD NOT CHANGE ANY OF THE USES OR ADD ANY COMMERCIAL OR OTHER TYPES OF USES. AND HOW MANY PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED? 7.5 UP TO EIGHT PARKING SPOTS? OH YES, BUT I D Z IT WAVES I D Z HALF. IS IT I D Z TWO? YES. SO THAT WAVES HALF. SO AT MINIMUM FOUR UNITS WOULD BE MANDATORY FOR U D C CODE PARK FOR PARKING SPACES. OKAY. BUT IF, IF THE DEVELOPER SHOWS NINE PARKING SPACES, WHICH I BELIEVE I'LL HAVE HER CONFIRM IN A SECOND, THAT'S SHE'S PROPOSING TO PUT NINE PARKING SPACES IF THAT IS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, IF THAT WERE TO CHANGE, WOULD THAT COME BACK TO ZONING COMMISSION? NO, BECAUSE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IS FOUR. OKAY. SO THAT, THAT CHANGE IS NOT UNDER THE U D C IS NOT REQUIRED TO COME BACK? CORRECT. AS LONG AS THEY CAN MEET WHAT'S IN THE U D C, WHICH IS ONLY HALF OF THE REQUIREMENT, THEN THEY CAN PROCEED WITH THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A MINOR AMENDMENT AND STAFF COULD REVIEW THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY. OKAY. AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, WHICH I THINK I PROBABLY KNOW THE ANSWER TO NOW, BUT IF THE, IF THEY ARE TO SHOW IMPERVIOUS COVER VERSUS PERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE PLAN, WOULD THAT COME BACK? IF THAT WAS TO CHANGE, IF THEY WERE TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, THEN YES, IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR PUBLIC PROCESS. BUT IF THEY'RE TO REDUCE AND CAUSE MORE PERVIOUS, THEN IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A MINOR AND NOT HAVE TO COME BACK TO PUBLIC PROCESS. OKAY. UM, THEN I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. JUST TO CONFIRM, HOW MANY PARKING SPACES ARE YOU PLANNING [00:50:01] ON PROVIDING? UH, FIVE ONE CAR GARAGE PLUS FOUR EXTRA PARKING PA SPACES TO MAKE NINE. OKAY. AND DO YOU HAVE AN UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT YOU DO HAVE AN UPDATED PLAN THAT SHOWS THAT? OKAY. UM, AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT IS, UM, CAN YOU, SO YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU'RE INCREASING THE, UM, PERVIOUS COVER COVERAGE, RIGHT? YES. SO CAN WE, UH, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO UPDATE THAT ON YOUR SITE PLAN, UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU WOULD BE BOUND TO HAVING TO PROVIDING THAT AS PERVIOUS COVER AND NOT CHANGING THAT TO HARDSCAPE? OH, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE, UH, THIS IS TO STAFF. STAFF. ONE THING THAT'S BEEN MENTIONED IS THE H D R C. THIS IS A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO H D R C REVIEW AT THIS POINT. HAS THERE BEEN ANY H D R C ACTION ON THIS ITEM? NO, THEY DID REVIEW IT THOUGH AS PART OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL AND THEY JUST INDICATED THAT THE, IF THERE IS, UM, THAT THEY ARE GONNA HAVE TO FOLLOW, UM, HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. THAT'S MY QUESTION. ALRIGHT, ANY, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? UH, IT'S PROBABLY FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT, AND MAYBE STAFF BOTH. UM, AS FAR AS, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S AN ALLEY ON THE BACKSIDE OF THIS, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. THERE, IT, THERE DOES APPEAR TO BE AN ALLEY OR AT LEAST, UH, WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A, AN OLD PAPER STREET. OKAY. IS IS THE ALLEY PAVED OR ARE Y'ALL GONNA ACCESS THE ALLEY? I CAN'T TELL FROM THE DESIGN NECESSARILY. UM, NO. UM, I CAN'T ACTUALLY PROVIDE, UM, AN ACCURATE ANSWER TO THAT BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE ACTUAL LOTS, NOT THE HARLEY BEHIND US. I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT SECONDARY ACCESS, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD USE, WHETHER IT'D BE ANY BENEFIT OR IF IT'S NOT PAID. WE REALLY, WE REALLY DIDN'T FOCUS ON THAT. WE JUST FOCUSED ON THE TWO LOTS, THE DIMENSION, AND WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO FENCE THEM AROUND ANYWAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BOTTLES? YEAH. FOR THE APPLICANT. HAVE, HAVE YOU ALL MET IN PERSON WITH THE KING WILLIAM STAFF ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION? HAVE Y'ALL MET IN PERSON AT THEIR OFFICES WITH NO, UH, WELL, ALL THE MEETINGS THEY'VE HAD BEEN ONLINE. THAT'S WHAT THEY REQUESTED FOR. AND WE'VE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WE'VE HAD, UH, TO START OFF THIS PROJECT, WE ACTUALLY HAD A P P R AND WE INVITED SEVERAL AGENCIES FROM O H P, UM, TRAFFIC. EVERYBODY, THEY GAVE US THEIR GUIDELINES, THEY GAVE US THE HISTORY, THEY GAVE US INFORMATION THAT WE SHOULD USE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE STARTED WITH. AND WE'VE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS. WE, KING WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION HAD MEETINGS WITH H D L C AND OF A MEETING WITH THE DISTRICT AS WELL. IS THAT THE, NOW I'M GONNA WAIT FOR SUMMER COMMISSIONER SUMMER TO, I, I HAVE S SEVERAL CONCERNS. UM, I THINK THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THAT WE HEAR THIS CASE. IF NOT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. THIS, THIS IS THE SECOND TALKING ABOUT THIS CASE IN SPECIFICALLY. YES. SO THIS IS THE SECOND. IT WAS CONTINUED LAST TIME. SO THIS IS THE SECOND TIME. NOW W WAS HIS APPROVED BY THE STAFF OR NOT? WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT I WAIT FOR COMMISSIONER. OKAY. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ANTE. SO NOW I HAVE A QUESTION. HAS THIS ADDRESS BEEN PART OF A ZONING REQUEST IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS? I DON'T RECALL IT BEING PART OF A ZONING REQUEST. SHE'S GONNA HAVE TO DO A LITTLE HISTORY ON THAT. I MEAN, FROM, FROM THE COMMENTS, IT SOUNDED LIKE MOST OF THE REJECTIONS WERE H D R C REJECTIONS, WHICH WOULD BE DESIGN ELEMENTS, MASSING SCALE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WHICH WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE MET EVEN IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE ZONING. IN THIS CASE. I'M NOT SEEING, UM, ANY PAST, UH, ZONING [00:55:01] CASES WITHIN THE LAST FEW YEARS IN OUR SYSTEM. JUST THIS ONE. I MEAN, I DO SEE POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL, BUT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN BY A PRIOR OWNER. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? LOOKING LEFT? I, I'M JUST CURIOUS TO SEE IF COMMISSIONER SUMMER HAS MET WITH DISTRICT ONE OFFICE OR NOT ON THIS CASE? UH, MY, MY CONCERN, UH, I CAN TELL YOU THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF OPPOSITION BY THE NEIGHBORS. I'VE HEARD A LOT OF, UH, NEGATIVITY FROM. SO, UH, I DON'T THINK I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS MYSELF, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT CAN ALWAYS TAKE IT TO, UH, CITY COUNCIL DIRECT. SO, UH, I I I'VE HEARD SO MANY, UH, PHONE CALLS, VOICEMAILS AND TEXTS FROM NEIGHBORS. SO I, I'M NOT GONNA BE, I I'M VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS. ALRIGHT. BUT, UH, BUT YOU'RE DONE WITH QUES, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUES OKAY. ALRIGHT. LAST CHANCE FOR QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT? NONE. UM, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BACK TO YOU, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE FOR A MOTION. OKAY. UM, THIS, AS ARE ALL OF OUR DISTRICT ONE CASES WAS, IS A DIFFICULT CASE. MM-HMM. , UM, THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, FACTORS TO CONSIDER AND A LOT OF INTEREST TO CONSIDER. UM, I I WILL BE MAKING A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE. AND THE REASON WHY IS, UM, I'VE SEVERAL REASONS WHY, UM, IN LOOKING AT, AT THE LAND USE, WHICH I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE FIRST COMMENT THAT, UM, UH, A LOT OF THE, THE PHONE CALLS AND OPPOSITION WAS AROUND THE DESIGN AND THE ARCHITECTURE AND THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THAT IS UNFORTUNATELY NOT OUR PURVIEW HERE. THAT IS THE PURVIEW OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN AND REVIEW COMMISSION. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE ISSUES WITH THAT TO ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS AND HAVE THEIR, THEIR OPPOSITION AND THEIR CONCERNS HEARD AT THOSE MEETINGS. UM, SO THAT, THAT IS, IS KIND OF THE, HOW I'D LIKE TO PREFACE MY, THE REST OF MY COMMENTS. UM, WITH RESPECT TO LAND USE SPECIFICALLY, UM, ONE OF THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS WAS THAT THIS IS GOING TO INCREASE DENSITY AND INCREASE TRAFFIC, UM, BY, RIGHT, THIS OWNER CAN DO EIGHT UNITS, THAT'S EIGHT FAMILIES HERE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIVE UNITS, FIVE FAMILIES. SO IT'S ACTUALLY A REDUCTION. THIS IS ACTUALLY A DOWN ZONING AS TO WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD DO BY RIGHT. UM, UH, IN ADDITION, UM, THE CONCERNS ABOUT PERVIOUS COVER VERSUS IMPERVIOUS COVER, UM, THERE'S NOTHING THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE THAT I OWN HAD THE ENTIRE BACKYARD WHEN I BOUGHT IT WAS ENTIRELY IMPERVIOUS COVER, RIGHT? IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. SO THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOPS SINGLE FAMILY HOMEOWNERS FROM DOING THOSE SAME TYPES OF THINGS. AND THIS ACTUALLY PROVIDES GREATER, UM, PROTECTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO SHOW THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND SHE'LL BE TIED TO THAT ON HER, UM, ON HER SITE PLAN AND WILL NOT BE ABLE TO REDUCE THAT. UM, SO I, I FEEL LIKE THAT IS A, AN ACTUALLY AN A WIN FOR, FOR THE NEIGHBORS WITH RESPECT TO PERVIOUS COVER. UM, ALSO PARKING, SHE'S PROVIDING MORE PARKING, UM, THAN REQUIRED. THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN WHAT COULD BE DONE BY WRIGHT. WE HEARD THE STAFF SAID THREE STORIES IS WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY WRIGHT. THIS IS GOING TO BE TWO AND A HALF. UM, SO AGAIN, WE'RE DOWN ZONING. IT'S A REDUCTION IN THE INTENSITY AND IN THE SCALE AND THE MASSING OF THIS PROJECT. UM, AND UM, TWO, TWO FINAL COMMENTS. UM, WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC POLICY, EVERYONE APPEARS TIRED OF HEARING ME TALK ABOUT THIS. MAYBE NOT THE NEW COMMISSIONERS, BUT Y'ALL WILL GET TIRED OF HEARING ME TALK ABOUT THIS. MAYBE, UM, IS, IS HOUSING A NEED IN THE COMMUNITY? WE DO HAVE A GREAT HOUSING NEED IN TEXAS AND IN SAN ANTONIO SPECIFICALLY. AND SO WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS RESPONSIBLE AND THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I KNOW THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD FEELS LIKE THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THIS IS MY FINAL POINT IS THAT IF YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING INCREASED DENSITY IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, MAYBE THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE DOING A LARGE AREA REZONING. THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE DONE THAT. UM, WITHIN DISTRICTS ONE AND DISTRICT FIVE IN PARTICULAR. UM, BECAUSE THE ZONING THROUGHOUT ALL OF THAT AREA IS RMM FOUR. SO EACH ONE OF YOU COULD DO FOUR UNITS ON YOUR PROPERTY, RIGHT? SO WHILE IT IS, HAS BEEN DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT YOU FROM CUTTING YOUR HOUSE UP INTO FOUR UNITS AND PUTTING FOUR FAMILIES IN THERE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IS, IS BY RIGHT, EACH ONE OF THESE LOTS COULD HAVE FOUR UNITS ON IT. SO [01:00:01] I WILL STOP TALKING NOW. ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND. WHO DID I HEAR FOR? ALRIGHT, I'LL JUST, YOU ALRIGHT, I'LL TALK. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER REYES WITH THE SECOND, UM, ANY DISCUSSION? WHICH WAY DO I GO? I'M GONNA GO LEFT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER WATSON, DO YOU WANNA GO BEFORE COMMISSIONER MONT? OKAY, I GOT EYEBROWS ARE GOING FIRST. UM, , I AM GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, UM, BECAUSE AS MUCH AS I AGREE WITH WHAT I'VE HEARD ABOUT, THIS WOULD MAKE A GREAT PLAYGROUND WITH AMAZING NATIVE PLANTS. IT IS PRIVATELY OWNED, THE ASSOCIATION DOESN'T, UM, AND TO ACHIEVE SOMETHING IN LINE WITH YOUR, UM, GOALS TO MAINTAIN, UH, THE LONGEVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE WAY IT IS NOW, BECAUSE THIS IS RM FOUR AND TWO LOTS BY RIGHT? YOU WOULD HAVE THE OWNER COULD DEVELOP SOMETHING THAT IS HIGHER WITH MORE UNITS. UM, I THINK THEY'VE SHOWN GOOD FAITH IN TRYING TO MEET WITH YOU AND MAKE, UM, ADJUSTMENTS AND SO YOU'RE GETTING MORE PROTECTION WITH WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED BY. RIGHT? UM, I WANNA UNDERSCORE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THINGS FROM RM FOUR, WHICH MOST OF YOUR LOTS ARE, PLEASE WORK WITH THE COUNCIL OFFICE TO GET A C C R AND FOR A LARGE AREA REZONING. BUT YOU ARE GOING TO BE MORE PROTECTED WITH THIS THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY PERMITTED BY RIGHT? AS IT IS A DOWN ZONING. UM, AND YOU ALSO WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT REFLECTS WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS LIKE DURING THE H D R C PROCESS. SO, UM, IF IT FAILS AT HT R C, YOU STILL HAVE A LOWER DENSITY ZONING. UM, THAT REFLECTS THE COMMENTS WE'VE HEARD AND CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, UM, WITH THIS SITE PLAN IN I D Z. UM, AND YOU WILL HAVE MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO COMMENT ON DESIGN, WHICH WE DON'T GET TO HAVE, UM, PURVIEW OVER HERE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S SOMETHING FOR CONTEXT PURPOSES, WE DO TRY TO CONSIDER WHEN WE CAN. UM, SO FOR THAT REASON YOU'RE GETTING MORE PROTECTION WITH THIS THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED BY WRIGHT. AND THAT IS WHY I AM SECONDING. WELL I TRIED TO SECOND, BUT I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. UM, I TOO WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AND YOU KNOW, AS I THINK THE ONLY MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION THAT HAS SERVED ON BOTH ZONING AND, UH, THE HISTORIC DESIGN AND REVIEW COMMISSION, UH, I FEEL VERY STRONGLY AND I UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS REGARDING DESIGN AND THOSE WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DEALT WITH AT H D R C AND THERE VERY WELL MAY BE SOME INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE H D R C AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT MAY BE REQUIRED OF THIS SITE PLAN. SO, YOU KNOW, I COULD SEE A VERY GOOD CHANCE, DEPENDING ON WHAT H D R C SAYS THAT WE COME BACK WITH SOME KIND OF MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THIS SITE PLAN. UH, BUT AT THE VERY LEAST FOR NOW, AS UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE AND COMMISSIONER WATSON HAVE POINTED OUT, THIS IS IN FACT A DOWN ZONING. UM, AND I THINK MANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS GET TO, AGAIN, MASSING SCALE AND DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT I THINK CAN BE DEALT WITH APPROPRIATELY AT THE H D R C. AND SO I WOULD, YOU KNOW, START THINKING ABOUT THOSE MEETINGS AS THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD. BUT FOR ZONING PURPOSES, FOR LAND USE PURPOSES, UH, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR APPROVAL. ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, I'M GONNA SAY THEY'VE JUST SAVED ME SAYING ANYTHING BECAUSE I'M IN SUPPORT OF WHAT THEY'VE SAID AND THE REASONS WHY. THANK YOU. UM, UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. UM, I'D ACTUALLY JUST LIKE TO, UH, THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORS ALSO BEING HERE TODAY TO COME AND VOICE THEIR OPPOSITION OR EVEN IN SUPPORT. UM, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE EVERY, UH, PIGGYBACK WHAT MY OTHER FELLOW COMMISSIONER SAID, THIS IS A DOWN ZONING AND I DO FEEL IN THE FUTURE THIS WOULD BE HELPING THE COMMUNITY A LOT FURTHER. SO THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? LOOKING LEFT. LOOKING RIGHT? ANY COMMENTS? ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. UH, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AND I HAVEN'T SERVED ON H D R C, BUT AS AN ARCHITECT IT'S REALLY HARD SOMETIMES TO LET GO OF DESIGN, BUT, BUT THAT IS NOT OUR PURVIEW. UM, AND, UH, AS WAS MENTIONED, UM, A LOT OF THE COMMENTS WERE DESIGN RELATED, UM, HEAT DESERT, THE FENCING, FRONT PORCHES. YES, I AGREE. I AGREE. UM, AND I HAVE LEARNED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS TO, UH, LET H D R C HANDLE THOSE, THOSE SUBJECTS. UM, AND JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING MAY NOT APPEAR TO BE COMPATIBLE HERE AT ZONING, UM, IT'S ABOUT THE USE OF THE LAND AND H D R C WILL, WILL [01:05:01] HAVE THEIR INPUT TO MAKE IT COMPATIBLE. UM, WE'VE SEEN IT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE AN ITEM WAS PASSED, THERE WAS NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION BECAUSE OF THE DESIGN, BUT BECAUSE WE'RE HISTORIC DISTRICT, IT GOES ON TO THE NEXT LEVEL FOR THEM TO MODIFY THE DESIGN TO MAKE IT COMPATIBLE. UM, AND SO WITH THAT, I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT. MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. SECOND BY, IS IT REYES OR FUENTES? WHO? REYES. COMMISSIONER REYES. THANK YOU. UM, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER FUENTES. AYE. COMMISSIONER WEE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? NO. COMMISSIONER WITT? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO, AND I BELIEVE JUST, I, I BELIEVE H D R C IS HEARING THIS CASE THIS WEEK. YES. I, I THOUGHT I SAW IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS WEEK. UM, SO I ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO, TO LOOK AT THAT. UM, IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10, PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ADOLFO GONZALEZ, ZONING PLANNER WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 10 IS LOCATED AT 14,520 PLEASANTON ROAD, GOING FROM FR TO M H C MANUFACTURED HOME CONVENTIONAL DISTRICT WITH ALL OTHER OVERLAYS WHO REMAINED THE SAME. THERE WERE 12 NOTICES SENT OUT. FOUR IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ONE IN FAVOR OUTSIDE 200 FEET. THE EXISTING FR FARM, FARM AND RANCH DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE REQUESTED M H C MANUFACTURED HOUSING CONVENTIONAL DISTRICT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING. THE SURROUNDING AREA IS PREDOMINANTLY ZONED FR. FARM AND RANCH DISTRICT AND M I ONE MIXED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. UNDER THE HERITAGE SOUTH SECTOR PLAN, THE AREA IS INTENDED FOR AGRICULTURAL, COMMERCIAL, LIGHT, AND INDUSTRIAL USES. THE PROPOSED M H C BASED ZONING DISTRICT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING ZONING OR LAND USES. STAFF FINDS EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY ARE TYPICALLY TWO TO 10 ACRE LOTS THAT ARE DE DESIGNED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES. STAFF RECOMMENDS N AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. IF WE COULD HAVE THAT APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REQUEST. UM, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S JACOB COLLIER. UM, MY REQUEST IS TO PUT A HOUSE ON 10 ACRES THAT WE LIVED ON SINCE THE EIGHTIES. UM, I KNOW IT SAYS FIVE ACRES, BUT WE HAVE SITE PLANS. WE AMENDED IT DOWN TO ONE ACRE. UM, THOSE GOT PUT IN, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE, THE DEAL OR WHATEVER. UM, BUT LIKE I SAID, WE, WE'VE LIVED HERE SINCE 1982. WE'RE THE ONLY FAMILY THAT THAT DOES ANYTHING. AGRICULTURE IN OUR FARM, RANCH AREA THERE, WE GROW HAY. UM, THIS HAS BEEN A, AN ONGOING PROCESS HERE. I'VE BEEN APPROVED FOR A HOUSE ALREADY. THEN I GOT DENIED, UH, FOR MY C O D. SO THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TODAY. I'VE DONE ALL THE STEPS, ALL THE, EVERYTHING. I'VE, UM, JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH OR HOW I'M GETTING DENIED BECAUSE ALL WE'RE DOING IS ONE ACRES. IT'S NOT LIKE I'M TRYING TO MOVE IN A, I KNOW IT SAYS FIVE ACRES, BUT ALL I'M DOING IS ONE, I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE A MOBILE HOME, UH, MOBILE HOME PARK. UM, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL I GOT. . ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE IS NO, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE K. SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER FUENTES FOR QUESTIONS, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF. SO IS THE REASON FOR THIS THE, THE REQUEST OF ZONING BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY EXISTING MOBILE HOMES ON THE LOT? OR WHAT, WHAT TRIGGERED THAT? THE, THE REQUEST THERE. SO THERE IS EXISTING, BUT THOSE ARE, UM, GRANDFATHERED IN BECAUSE THEY WERE PUT IN BEFORE THE PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED. UM, THE NEW, UH, MOBILE MANUFACTURED HOME. SINCE HE WANTS TO ADD THE NEW ONE, THAT'S WHY THE REZONING IS BEING, UH, INITIATED. RIGHT. SO THE CODE REQUIREMENT IS THAT YOU CAN ONLY DO ONE MANUFACTURED HOME PER LOT. GOT IT. UM, NO OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER REYES QUESTION FOR STAFF. WHAT IS THE [01:10:01] LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORING LANDS THAT YOU WRITE ABOUT? THIS IS, UH, AN AGRICULTURAL AREA AND AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. IT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED AS SUCH. AND SO THOSE ACTIVITIES FOR FARMING AND AGRICULTURE AND INDUSTRY HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE AREA. AND SO THE POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT COULD BE TO RESIDENTIAL, UH, UNITS THAT ARE PUT INTO THE AREA. SO MOBILE HOME WOULD BE ADVERSELY IMPACTING THE SURROUNDING AREA? THE NO, THE, THE SAFETY, THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE WOULD, COULD POTENTIALLY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE INSTALLATION OF A HOME ON THE PROPERTY, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S SOME THERE ALREADY THAT WERE ESTABLISHED WELL BEFORE, UM, THIS REQUEST. BUT, UM, BECAUSE OF THE INDUSTRY AND THE AGRICULTURE IN THE AREA, UM, STAFF DOESN'T FEEL THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO HAVE A, A THE MANUFACTURED HOME. SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE ADVERSE EFFECTS? UH, LAR LARGE TRUCKS, UM, POTENTIAL NOISE AND, UH, SMOKE POLLUTION, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. THANKS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, QUESTIONS OTHERS ON THE RIGHT NOW? COMMISSIONER, HERE'S ON MY LEFT. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, I HAVE A QUESTION. I GUESS IT'S BOTH AGAINST STAFF AND THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER. SO IF HE RE PLATTED INTO ONE ACRE, CARVED OFF AN ACRE, HE COULD PUT A MOBILE, COULD PUT A MOBILE HOME THERE WITH NO ISSUES. IF IT'S REZONED, HE'S GOTTA GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS. EVEN ON REZONING, IF HE'S JUST, HE GOES DOWN TO ONE ACRE RELAS AND OUT OF THE ACREAGE, CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THE ONLY USES THERE ARE, YOU CAN'T HAVE A HOUSE, IS THAT I'M SAYING? NO, THE, IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED FOR FARM AND RANCH. IT'S NOT ZONED FOR, FOR HOMES. WELL, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE FARM AND RANCH, UM, YOU COULD HAVE A HOME AND AS CHRISTIE HAD MENTIONED, YOU COULD HAVE ONE MANUFACTURED HOME, BUT THERE IS A MEDIA OR A, A MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH IS 10 ACRES. AND SO HE, OR IT'S MUCH MORE, ACTUALLY I THINK IT'S 25 ACRES. AND SO HE WOULD, HE DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH ACREAGE TO REPL INTO VARIOUS, LIKE A SEPARATE LOT TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL UNIT IF THAT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING? YEAH. UNDER THE CURRENT FR ZONING. CORRECT. HENCE WHY HE'S REQUESTING THE M H C, WHICH HAS A, UM, MUCH LESS MINIMAL, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE MINIMUM. YOU SAID YOU'VE LIVED THERE SINCE 1982? UM, 26 NOW MY GRANDPARENTS BOUGHT IT IN 1982. UM, WE, WE'VE OWNED PROPERTY DOWN MARMON ROAD. THAT'S 25 ACRES OVER THERE, 10 ACRES OVER HERE, PROPERTY AND SEIN. UM, THIS PROPERTY, AFTER MY GRANDPA PASSED AWAY, THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT I GUESS WE HAVE LEFT, THE 10 ACRES. UM, SO THE, THE GRAND SCHEME WAS THE ENTIRE FAMILY'S GONNA LIVE ON THE 10 ACRES. WELL, WHEN WE GOT ANNEXED IN NOBODY TO THE SIDE OF THE THING, HEY, UM, BY THE WAY, WE'RE GONNA MAKE THIS ALL FARMER RANCH. IS THAT ALL RIGHT? NOBODY ASKED, NOBODY SAID ANYTHING. SO I'M HERE. I SPENT MY MONEY. I GOTTA SPEND 20,000 MORE TO GET MY, MY PLAQUE DONE. I MEAN, I'M IN IT FOUR GRAND ALREADY. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW. THERE'S NO BIG TRUCKS, THERE'S NO, NO SMOKE, NO, NO, NOTHING LIKE THAT. UM, I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT A HOUSE. I'M NOT MAKING A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. IT'S, IT'S JUST A HOUSE. ALL IT IS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT? NONE. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION AND THAT IS FOR STAFF. UM, IF THIS IS REZONED TO M H C, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING? HOW, HOW MANY? ONLY ONE. ONLY ONE. ONE PER LOT. OKAY. AND IN THIS CASE, ONLY ONE BECAUSE OF THE REST OF IT BEING FR. OKAY. OKAY. GOTCHA. ALL RIGHT. UM, COMMISSIONER FUENTES, BACK TO YOU FOR A MOTION. UH, FOR ME IT'S REALLY SIMPLE. UM, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL HAVE BEEN THERE. SEE IT ONLY RIGHT TO, TO MOVE TO APPROVE THIS AS IT IS, UM, WITH SO MANY STIPULATIONS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE RESTRICTED TO. I MEAN, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU NEED. UM, IT'S A SHAME THAT IT HAD TO GO THIS WAY, BUT I'M GLAD YOU'RE ABLE TO MAKE THE PROPER STEPS TO GET WHAT YOU NEED. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, A UH, MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 10. ALL RIGHT. THERE IS A MOTION FOR [01:15:01] APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? AND I WAS LOOKING THE WRONG WAY AGAIN. . ALRIGHT. YOU KNOW, MOTION . COMMISSIONER REYES WANTED TO DO IT. UM, ALRIGHT, UH, MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. DISCUSSION, LOOKING LEFT. COMMISSIONER WATSON. UM, I AM SUPPORTING THE MOTION BECAUSE I THINK IT MAKES SENSE, UM, IN A LOT OF WAYS. AND, UH, AS SOMEBODY WHO IN MY DISTRICT OCCASIONALLY DISAGREES WITH, UH, STAFF, BOTH APPROVALS AND DENIALS, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S, UM, NOT ADEQUATE CONTEXT AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE PEOPLE IN PLACE AND HOW THEY'RE IMPACTED BY SOME OF THE, UH, RULES AND HOW THEY ENGAGE WITH THEM IN THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS. I THINK IT'S CLEAR THAT, UM, THIS IS ADDRESSING POLICY OBJECTIVES IN TERMS OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL HOUSING AND MAKING SURE PEOPLE AREN'T DISPLACED, UM, THAT ARE REFLECTED IN SHIP. AND, UM, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME TO APPROVE THIS BECAUSE I THINK UN UNLIKE WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED, IT DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY ADVERSE IMPACT. IT ACTUALLY IS HELPING THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO'S TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND, UH, MAKE SURE THERE'S HOUSING FOR HIS FAMILY. AND IT, IT DOESN'T IN ANY WAY, NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE COMMUNITY AROUND. IN FACT, IT'S A CREATIVE SOLUTION, UM, THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES TO, TO GET DONE AND MEET. SO, UM, THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING THE MOTION. UM, I'M GLAD THAT YOU TOOK THE STEPS TO LOOK THROUGH THIS AND THAT WE COULD PUT SOME OF THAT COMMENTARY INTO THE RECORD. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT WITH COMMENTS? NONE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER ON MY, UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER WATSON HAD, UM, SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS AND, UM, I AGREE WITH THOSE AND I'M REALLY GLAD THAT, UM, CHAIR SYS THAT YOU ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT HOW MANY HOMES, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE QUESTION THAT I HAD. I THINK THAT THE, IF, IF THERE WERE TO BE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS, THEY WOULD BE EXTREMELY MINIMAL. UM, AND PROBABLY MORE MINIMAL THAN OTHER TYPES OF ZONINGS THAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN, IN THIS AREA. SO, UM, INCLUDING THE, UM, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT, THAT'S IN THE AREA AS WELL. UM, BUT I ALSO JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I'M JEALOUS OF COMMISSIONER FUENTES BECAUSE HE HAD AN EASY CASE, BUT I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER FUENTES AYE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? YES. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. MOTION PASSES. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, OUR LAST CASE, I BELIEVE ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER 13. GOOD AFTERNOON. ANN BEN'S ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 13 IS LOCATED AT 2 3 2 8 SOUTH BRAZO STREET AND IS A REQUEST TO GO FROM R FOUR TO I D Z ONE WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. THERE WERE 41 NOTICES SENT WITH TWO RETURN IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITIONS AND COLLINS GARDEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS. IN RELATION TO THIS CHANGE OF ZONING REQUEST. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE CURRENT R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING, AS IS THE IDZ ONE LIMITED INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE DISTRICT WITH USES PERMITTED FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS. THE PROPERTY IS PLACED ON THE CORNER OF TWO LOCAL STREET AND IS SIZED AT TO ADEQUATELY ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE HELD TO A PRESCRIBED SITE PLAN THAT WILL REGULATE THE UNIT SIZE AND HEIGHT AND ANY DEVIATION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DOCUMENT COULD POTENTIALLY WARRANT A NEW REZONING CASE. THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH ENCOURAGES THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING STOCK TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROWING CITY POPULATION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. IF WE COULD HAVE THAT APPLICANT PLEASE. HELLO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M JUST HERE TO PRESENT A MAKE SENSE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY. UM, THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY A, WOULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME? I'M SORRY. MY NAME IS MARCUS MILLER. I'M A PARTNER WITH LJ AND FAMILY IN THIS DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY. UM, OKAY. UH, SO, OH, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS, UH, THREE STRUCTURE UNIT THAT WAS BURNED DOWN AND SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THREE, THREE BRAND NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FACING THE SAME DIRECTION. THAT'S IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. , UH, THIS, UH, OH, DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? [01:20:01] THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. ISN'T THERE A VOICEMAIL? THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT. YES. VOICEMAIL . HELLO. UH, MY NAME IS ARTHUR EAST NINE LIVE AT TWO FIFTY TWO RAY AVENUE. MY PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE (210) 912-0086. AND I'M CALLING REGARDING THE, UH, REZONING, UH, AREA, UH, LETTER THAT I RECEIVED. I AM OPPOSED TO THIS AND I GUESS THIS IS WHAT I HAVE TO DO. I DON'T KNOW, JUST CALL AND, AND LET Y'ALL KNOW WHAT I'M POST FOR THE LEFT THREE DIGIT NUMBERS, UH, ON MY CASE NUMBER IS 1 7 2 2. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE A SHORT REBUTTAL OR, OR WE CAN ASK, GO TO QUESTIONS. YEAH, I DO HAVE TO MAKE, I'M INTERESTED IN MAKING A COMMENT. UM, SO I WENT TO A, UH, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION MEETING, UH, I GUESS IT WAS TWO MONTHS AGO. AND I FOUND OUT THAT THAT ZIP CODE AND A, AND A ADJACENT ZIP CODE WAS THE PER CAPITA ONE OF THE POOREST IN THE COUNTRY. AND SO I ACTUALLY GREW UP IN THIS ZIP CODE AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF, THERE'S A LOT OF PUSHBACK FROM PUSHING THINGS FORWARD. UM, THERE'S A HOUSE COMPARABLE TO THIS ONE THAT SOLD FOR 460,000 AND I'M GONNA MAKE IT AFFORDABLE FOR MY ZIP CODE AND I'M GONNA SELL 'EM AT THREE 30. THAT'S THE EXPECTATION. SO IF IT'S THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR DOWN PAYMENT AS ASSISTANCE. I'M A LICENSED MORTGAGE LOAN OFFICER SO I CAN WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO REVITALIZE THAT AREA OF TOWN. SO. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. MR. MILLER STAY CASE AT THE PODIUM IF YOU WOULD. YES, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, I PULLED THIS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION BECAUSE CONTRARY TO WHAT THE CHAIR SAID IN THE LAST CASE OR TWO CASES AGO, EXCUSE ME, I'M GOING TO START ASKING ABOUT TREES. OKAY. AND HERE'S WHY. UM, THERE ARE TWO BIG TREES THERE ARE ON THIS PROPERTY. MM-HMM. ONE LOOKS LIKE IT'S DEAD. YEAH, IT'S DEAD. OKAY. BUT THE OTHER ONE IS A LITTLE CLOSER TO BRAZOS. CORRECT. UM, DO WE HAVE A PICTURE OF, OF THE SITE? SO THERE, THERE YOU CAN SEE CLOSER TO THE OTHER PROPERTY, RIGHT? YES. THE OTHER PROPERTY MM-HMM. , IS THAT TREE GOING TO BE TAKEN DOWN? NO, IT ACTUALLY FITS WITHIN THE, THE EASEMENT BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE FROM THE, THE HOME ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT AND THAT PROPERTY LINE FOR THAT NEIGHBOR. OKAY. PERFECT. MM-HMM. , THAT'S GREAT. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR, UM, DOING THE WORK, TALKING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND DOING ALL THAT. MY CONCERN IS AS WE GET INTO THESE HOTTER AND HOTTER DAYS WITH CLIMATE CHANGE AND OTHER ISSUES, AS WE ARE SEEING THE HEAT ISLAND EFFECT AND WHERE WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, WHAT LOOKED TO BE HERITAGE TREES, I AM GOING TO LOOK AT THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS AND START EXAMINING WHETHER OR NOT THE HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE ASPECTS OF OUR REMIT ARE, ARE IMPLICATED WHEN WE APPROVE I D Z IN PARTICULAR, WHEN WE CAN USE THE SITE PLAN AND ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. I'M GLAD YOU'RE KEEPING THAT TREE. I'M GLAD YOU GOT THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION. AND IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MY COMMISSIONERS, I'M WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION. WELL, LET'S FIND OUT. UH, COMMISSIONER'S ON MY LEFT. ANY QUESTIONS? NONE COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER REHOUSE. UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, ON OUR I D Z SITE PLANS, IF A TREE IS SHOWN ON A SITE PLAN, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT TREE? THE, THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, UH, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO MEET THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, SO LIKELY HE'S GONNA BE ABLE TO KEEP THAT TREE. BUT IF HE WASN'T ABLE TO KEEP THE TREE, HE WOULD LIKELY BE ABLE TO REMOVE IT, BUT HE WOULD HAVE TO MITIGATE BY PROVIDING OTHER TREES TO DO THAT. OKAY. BUT JUST, SO, JUST BECAUSE, 'CAUSE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE TRYING TO KEEP I D Z UNDER CONTROL. UM, IF, IF SOMETHING IS SHOWN ON THIS, 'CAUSE I KNOW THAT'S TYPICALLY LIKE WHAT WE'VE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, HAVE BEEN TOLD IN THE PAST IS LIKE IT'S TIED TO THE SITE PLAN, IT'S TIED TO THE SITE PLAN. IF A TREE IS SHOWN ON A SITE PLAN, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO THAT TREE BEING ON THAT SITE PLAN GOING FORWARD JUST BECAUSE IT'S SHOWN THERE. THAT IS CORRECT. BUT THEY DO HAVE TO MEET, YOU KNOW, THE PERIMETER BUFFERS. THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO MEET ANY LAND ESCAPING REQUIREMENTS, UM, THINGS OF THAT NATURE AND THEY CAN'T, YOU KNOW, THE IMPERVIOUS COVERS STILL APPLIES AS WELL. SO THEY CAN'T EXPAND THAT. SO IF THAT TREE IS, [01:25:01] IS ON THERE AS YOU KNOW, UH, PART OF THE LANDSCAPE AND THEN THEY TRY, THEY REMOVE IT AND TRY TO PAVE IT, THEN THAT IS AN ISSUE, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE INCREASING THE PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS COVER. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD. THANKS. UH, COMMISSIONER REYES, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU WANT TO ASK A QUESTION. ONE QUESTION CHAIR. THERE'S THREE ACCESS POINTS. YES. OFF OF BRASS. WERE THERE THREE ACCESS POINTS BEFORE? UM, THREE AXI? YOU MEAN DRIVEWAYS? YES. UH, WELL THERE WAS TWO. THERE WERE TWO. IF YOU LOOK AT GOOGLE MAPS, THERE WERE TWO. THERE WAS ONE ON THE, ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT. THIS OWNER, HE MADE, HE WAS DOING LIKE, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO EXPLAIN IT. IT WAS, IT LOOKS LIKE HE WAS JUST THROWING WHATEVER BUILDING UP THERE. YEAH. SO IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE WHAT HE HAD BEFORE, BUT, OKAY. SO YOU'RE A, YOU'RE ADDING ONE ACCESS POINT. YES. YES. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT? NONE. I DON'T HAVE ANY. SO BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER. SO BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE FOR THE FORMAL MOTION. AND, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, UM, THIS WAS MORE OF MY WARNING SHOT RIGHT NOW. UM, THAT THIS IS GONNA BE SOMETHING I AM LOOKING FOR. WHEN WE DO HAVE, AGAIN, THESE GOOD CANOPY TREES AVAILABLE, I THINK, YOU KNOW, REMOVING THEM DOES FALL UNDER OUR AUSPICES BECAUSE OF THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELLNESS ISSUES. UM, SO IN ANY EVENT, AGAIN, I'M HAPPY TO DO THIS. I'M SORRY THAT YOU HAD TO STAY HERE JUST SO I COULD MAKE THAT LITTLE POINT. THAT'S FINE. UM, THAT'S FINE. , BUT I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 13. SECOND. I WAS THAT YOU COMMISSIONER FUENTES. OKAY. I THINK NEXT TIME BEFORE I ASK IF THERE'S A SECOND I'M GONNA BITE. I'M GONNA LIKE LOOK AND SEE WHO'S GONNA JUMP FIRST. ALRIGHT. THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 13 BY COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FUENTES. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE AYE. COMMISSIONER FUENTES. AYE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER TSET? YES. COMMISSIONER GREENHOUSE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES. ALRIGHT. AND I APOLOGIZE I DIDN'T ASK IF ANYONE WANTED A DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM, BUT [Approval of Minutes  ] WE WILL MOVE ON. UM, LAST ITEM IS MINUTES. SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR CORRECTIONS FOR APPROVAL. OH MY GOSH. PEOPLE MOTION TO APPROVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SECOND. OKAY. I ONLY HESITATED 'CAUSE YOU HAD THEM UP, SO I WAS LIKE, IS THERE? AND IF YOU WEREN'T HERE, YOU IT, IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO ABSTAIN IF YOU DON'T WANT TO VOTE, VOTE I ABSTAIN. ALRIGHT. THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. UH, SHOULD WE DO A ROLL CALL VOTE SINCE THERE'LL BE SOME ABSTENTIONS. WE'LL DO THAT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GREENHOUSE? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON. YES. COMMISSIONER FUENTES. EPSTEIN. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WIT ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ALRIGHT. [Director’s Report  ] DO WE HAVE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT? YES. THERE'S GONNA BE ONE LITTLE FORMAT CHANGE, UH, WENT OVER IT WITH AUDREY LAST MEETING AND THAT'S GONNA BE ON YOUR CONTINUANCES FROM NOW ON. UH, WE'RE ONLY GONNA STATE THE, THE NUMBER AND THE CONTINUANCE STATE. IT'S NOT GONNA HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION IN THE COUNTS AND ALL OF THAT. IT'S GONNA BE MORE OF THE FORMAT THAT COUNCIL FOLLOWS. SO WE WANNA TRY TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY WITH ALL OF THE DIFFERENT, UM, MEETINGS THAT WE HAVE. AND SO KELLY WILL JUST STATE ITEM NUMBER 11 IS CONTINUED TO, IS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO SUCH AND SUCH DATE. AND WE WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU. I DIDN'T TECHNICALLY, WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE DONE IT TODAY, BUT I DIDN'T WANNA SURPRISE YOU WITHOUT GIVING YOU THAT INFORMATION FIRST. BUT JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THERE'S A LITTLE FORMAT CHANGE COMING QUESTION ON THAT. HOW WILL THAT IMPACT VOICEMAILS THAT WE'LL STILL PLAY? WE, WE WILL STILL PLAY VOICEMAILS. MR. CHAIR, UH, ONE COMMENT IF I'M ALLOWED. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO OUR NEW, UH, COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT 10 FOR BEING HERE. AND I ALSO WANT TO, UM, SHOW MY APPRECIATION. I REALLY ENJOY YOUR COMMENTS, YOUR QUESTIONS. IT MAKES MY LIFE A LOT EASIER JUST HEARING ALL YOUR INFORMATION AND YOUR EXPERIENCES. SO IT'S A GREAT TEAM AND I WILL TELL YOU I SERVE ON A COUPLE OTHER COMMISSIONS AND, AND I REALLY ENJOY [01:30:01] LISTENING TO YOUR QUESTIONS AND FEEDBACK AND INPUT. UH, IT'S VERY, VERY, UH, WORTH IT FOR, FOR ME PERSONALLY. ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. I THOUGHT YOU WERE GONNA SAY THAT WE'RE GETTING DONE A LITTLE EARLY TODAY BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T MAKE A, YOU DIDN'T MAKE A, UH, WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T HAVE STORY PREDICTION ON TIME. WE DIDN'T HAVE STORY TIME. STORY TIME WITH, WITH COMMISSIONER, WITH CHAIR SIPES. UH, I DON'T WANNA DO STORY TIME. I NEED TO THINK OF MORE STORIES. I, I'VE GOT SOME. ALRIGHT, SO WITH THAT, WE WILL BE ADJOURNED AT 2 35. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.