[00:00:05]
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
LET'S HAVE OUR SPANISH TRANSLATION SERVICES STATEMENT AT THIS TIME, PLEASE.
AND FOR THOSE, UM, IN THE AUDIENCE WHO, UH, WOULD LIKE A, A MASK WITH THE RISE OF THE FLU AND CVID AGAIN, WE DO HAVE SOME ON THE CORNER OVER THERE.
UM, SO FEEL FREE TO TO WALK OVER THERE AND GET ONE IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
MY NAME IS ROB SIPES AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT SEVEN ZONING COMMISSIONER.
I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULAR NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION.
UH, I'D LIKE TO DO A ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT.
I'M JOHN BUSTAMONTE FOR DISTRICT FIVE.
UH, ALD ORTIZ, DISTRICT EIGHT.
DANIEL KELLUM, DISTRICT ONE, JOHN WHITSETT, DISTRICT 10, TAYLOR WATSON, DISTRICT TWO.
JANELLE CHASE, MAYOR'S OFFICE 80 REYES, DISTRICT FOUR.
KEN HUIT, DISTRICT SIX STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT.
WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.
[Zoning Items ]
TO COMMENCING OUR HEARING, I'D LIKE OUR STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF.BEFORE I BEGIN, PLEASE TURN YOUR PHONES ON VIBRATE OR TURN THEM OFF.
THE ZONING COMMISSION IS AN 11 MEMBER BODY APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON ZONING CASES UPON RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO FORWARD YOUR CASE TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROCEDURE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CASE MANAGER.
STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE 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 THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION, IN ANY 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'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
YOU WILL BE INFORMED THAT YOUR 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 UP TO SPEAK AND MUST YIELD THEIR TIME.
WHEN THAT SPEAKER GOES TO THE PODIUM, THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS.
UH, STAFF IF WE COULD PLEASE UH, GO OVER ANY, UH, THE LIST OF ANY WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONED ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER ONE LOCATED AT 27 0 5 WEST SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AND ITEM NUMBER TWO LOCATED AT 2 2 2 7 AND 2 2 3 5 WEST SOUTH CREST SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD HAS BEEN POSTPONED.
NEITHER OF THESE ITEMS WILL BE HEARD TODAY.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THOSE PROPERTIES ON UH, WEST SOUTH CROSS BOULEVARD, UH, YOU ARE FREE TO LEAVE AS THOSE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD AND YOU'LL BE UH, RE NOTIFIED IF AND WHEN FUTURE ACTION OCCURS.
ALRIGHT, STAFF, IF WE COULD PLEASE JUST GO OVER THE LIST OF ITEMS ON THE COMBINED AGENDA.
ALL RIGHT, ITEMS THAT ARE GONNA STAY ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, NUMBER SEVEN, NUMBER 8, 12 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,
[00:05:13]
AND 33.NUMBER 11, DROPPED OFF YOUR ORIGINAL LIST AND THAT'S ON INDIVIDUAL NOW.
AND WE DO HAVE AN AMENDED SITE PLAN FOR ONE OF THEM.
WE HAVE TWO AMENDED SIDE PLANS.
WE'LL READ THOSE IN AS WE PRESENT THOSE CASES.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OF THESE ITEMS YOU WISH TO PULL TO INDIVIDUAL? LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE, LOOKING RIGHT, SEEING NONE.
IF WE COULD PLEASE READ THE COMBINED HEARING AGENDA NUMBER ONE INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO IDZ ONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 79 DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 1471 AND 1477 WEST VETTE BOULEVARD AND 1487 EAST M BOULEVARD.
14 NOTICES WERE SENT FOR IN FAVOR, ONE.
OPPOSED AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO R FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 2 2 2 CASTORVILLE ROAD 41.
NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE EL CHARRO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM OH TWO TO C TWO AMENDING TO ADD THE NA LOCATED AT 89 30 WAR SACH ROAD.
NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR FOR OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE LAURA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND OUTSIDE 200 FEET.
WERE IN OPPOSITION FOR ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REQUEST FROM A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM VARIOUS ZONING DISTRICTS TO R ONE R TWO.
R THREE R THREE CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO THREE R FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
R FOUR R FOUR CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO, THREE OR FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
R FIVE R SIX R SIX CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO THREE R FOUR DWELLING UNITS RMM FOUR, RMM FIVE, RM SIX I ONE C.
ONE C TWO C TWO NA WITH ALL OVERLAY DISTRICTS REMAINING UNCHANGED.
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY EAST HOUSTON STREET TO THE SOUTH NORTH, NEW BRAUNFELS AVENUE TO THE WEST AND UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS TO THE NORTH AND EAST.
ITEM NUMBER 13 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO IDZ TWO WITH USES PERMITTED FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 1614 NORTH INTERSTATE 35 17 NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE.
OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO NA TO C TWO NA.
CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR OFFICE WAREHOUSE FLEX SPACE WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 40 4600 BLOCK OF NORTH STALL PARK.
10 RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND NINE IN OPPOSITION.
PEPRIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR FOR ITEM NUMBER 15 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM I ONE TO IDZ ONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 10 14 GIBBS STREET, 36 NOTICES WERE SENT.
RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM JEFFERSON HEIGHTS OUTSIDE 200 FEET WE RECEIVED THREE IN FAVOR.
ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A REQUEST FOR CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R SIX TO R FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 4,000 BLOCK OF FORTUNA STREET.
ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM LOS PUENTES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 19 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO IDZ ONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 2 0 1 WOULD BE COURT 39.
OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM THE FIVE POINTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 20 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C ONE TO C ONE CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR LIQUOR STORE WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 39 15 SAN PEDRO AVENUE.
OPPOSED MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE EDISON OR KENWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
[00:10:01]
ITEM NUMBER 21 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM NP 10 TO I ONE WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.LOCATED IN THE 10,000 BLOCK OF QUINTANA ROAD 30 NOTICES WERE SENT.
RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 22 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO RMM FOUR WITH OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 9 23 AND 9 25 POINSETTA STREET.
ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE HARVARD PLACED EAST LAWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 23 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FIVE TWO C3 WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED ON THE, IN THE 5,000 BLOCK OF HAMILTON WOLF.
AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM NUMBER 24 IS A REQUEST AND CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C ONE TO OR C ONE PUD TO R SIX PUD WITH AN AMENDED SITE PLAN LOCATED AT 14 0 2 WALKER'S WAY WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
RECEIVE IN FAVOR? ONE OPPOSED.
AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
OUTSIDE 200 FEET WE RECEIVE 10 IN FAVOR.
ITEM NUMBER 25 IS A REQUEST IN CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R SIX TO R SIX HL UM, WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT NINE 30 AND 9 34 WEST ELLWOOD AVENUE.
ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 26 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM FBZT SIX DASH ONE TO FBZT SIX DASH ONE S WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT WITH AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AS PRESENTED.
LOCATED AT 1000 NORTH ALAMO STREET WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
AND DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
ITEM NUMBER 27 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM OH TWO TO C TWO.
UH, LOCATED AT NINE 9,002 WACH ROAD.
ZERO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE LAUREL HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 53 0 2 LAIMA NINE NOTICES WERE SENT.
AND NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM NUMBER 29 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM MI ONE TO MI ONE S WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
FOR ITEM NUMBER 30 WE RECEIVED IT'S A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO IDZ THREE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 350 DWELLING UNITS.
C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT USES BAR AND OR TAVERN MICROBREWERY EXTENDED STAY HOTEL SLASH MOTEL FITNESS CENTER WITH OUTDOOR USES PERMITTED BOWLING ALLEY.
CONVENIENCE STORE WITH CAR WASH PARTY HOUSE RECEPTION HALL MEETING FACILITY OFFICE WAREHOUSE WITH FLEX SPACE BILLIARD POOL HALL ALCOHOL INCLUDED MONTESSORI SCHOOL, URGENT CARE, EMERGENCY HOSPITAL AND SOCIAL CLUB WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 71 59 SAN PEDRO AVENUE.
ZERO OPPOSED THE SHEARER HILLS, RIDGEWOOD OR RIDGEVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND OUTSIDE 200, 200 FEET WE RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR.
AND OUR LAST ITEM NUMBER 33 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO R FOUR CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 1 36 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT.
MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND WE DO HAVE UH, SOME PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF WE, UH, VOICEMAILS AND SPEAKERS OR JUST VOICEMAILS? YES SIR.
A VOICEMAIL ON ITEM NUMBER 30 AND THEN VOICEMAILS ON ITEM 33 PLUS A IN-PERSON.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD, UH, BEGIN WITH THE VOICEMAILS PLEASE.
[00:15:02]
GUY RUBIO 83 0 4 YORK DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 1 6 REGARDING CASE NUMBER FOUR, NUMBER 0 3 43 IN OPPOSITION.AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME FLOOR TIME IF POSSIBLE THIS AFTERNOON.
2 1 0 2 6 4 3 6 3 9 33 AS WELL PLEASE.
THIS IS MARGO DENKI GRIFFIN AND JAMES GRIFFIN AT 1 1 8 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT AS WELL AS CHRISTINA PARKER AT 1 21 WESTRIDGE COURT REGARDING ZONING REQUEST CHANGE FOR 1 36 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT.
DOES A ZONING REQUEST TO CONVERT A DUPLEX TO A FOURPLEX MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO A NEIGHBORHOOD? HELL YES.
NOT ALL LOCATIONS CAN MANAGE ADDED TRAFFIC SUCH AS THE CASE FOR THE SONY REQUEST FOR THE CORNER.
LOT BORDERED BY STREET ON THREE SIDES.
RIDGEWOOD COURT, HOWARD AND HILDEBRAND.
WHILE RIDGEWOOD COURT IS A NARROW RESIDENTIAL STREET, HOWARD IS A FOUR LANE NORTH SOUTH STREET.
HILDEBRAND IS A TWO TO FOUR LANE STREET IDENTIFIED AS A SECOND ARTERIAL TYPE B FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
TRAFFIC LOAN HILDEBRAND IS RESTRICTED DUE TO ITS INCONSTANT WIDTH, SPECIFICALLY TRAVELING EAST TO WEST IN THE ONE BLOCK FROM MCCULLOUGH TO HOWARD HILDEBRAND NARROWS FROM TWO LANES TO ONE LANE AND BACK TO TWO LANES.
THIS NARROWING CREATES AN INCENTIVE FOR DRIVERS TO BYPASS WEST BROWN.
USING RIDGEWOOD COURT CARS SPEED DOWN RIDGEWOOD COURT.
THUS THIS REQUESTED VARIANCE IS FOR A CORNER LOT THAT BORES NOT ONE BUT TWO DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS.
HOWARD AND HILDEBRAND AND RIDGEWOOD COURT AND HILDEBRAND.
UNLIKE ALL OTHER LOTS IN THIS AREA, THIS PROPERTY HAS NO SIDEWALKS.
SIMPLE APPROVAL OF THIS REZONING REQUEST PUTS BOTH PEDESTRIANS AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC IN PERIL.
5 0 9 BUS PATRONS EXITING AT THE HILDEBRAND HOWARD BUS STOP.
AS WELL AS RIDGEWOOD COURT PEDESTRIANS MUST EITHER CHOOSE TO WALK IN THE STREET OR CROSS HOWARD TO GET TO A SIDEWALK.
CARS ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED TO PARK ON THIS HALF BLOCK OF HOWARD LIMITING THE VIEWS OF BOTH PEDESTRIANS AND VEHICLES NEEDING TO NAVIGATE THIS DANGEROUS INTERSECTION.
REZONING WITHOUT IMPROVING THE VISIBILITY FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC MEANS THE CITY IS DISCARDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CONSTRUCTIVE AND MUCH NEEDED CHANGE.
WE ASK THE ZONING COMMISSION TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF THIS VARIANCE TO REQUEST UNTIL THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PUTS IN PLACE PARKING RESTRICTIONS TO SECURE PEDESTRIAN AND PARTICULAR SAFETY IN OUR AREA.
FOR MORE DETAILS, PLEASE READ MY LETTER.
MY NAME IS SHARON GARCIA AND I AM CALLING REGARDING ZONING CASE 1 0 7 0 0 3 5 6 4 1 3 6 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT.
UH, I RESIDE AT 3 1 2 WEST NORWOOD COURT AND I CURRENTLY SERVE AS THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 422-8894.
LEADERSHIP FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MET WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 1 3 6 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT AND WE EXPRESSED OUR PRIMARY CONCERN FOR ANY REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS PARKING.
THE LACK OF OFF STREET PARKING FOR THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN A PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD HAZARD FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
AS THE PROPERTY SITS AT THE VERY DANGEROUS AND BUSY INTERSECTION OF HOWARD AND HILDEBRAND, THE TENANTS OF 1 3 6 WEST RIDGEWOOD CONSISTENTLY PARK ON HOWARD STREET ARE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE STOP SIGN ON WEST RIDGEWOOD BLOCKING SIGHT LINES FOR MOTORISTS, CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS TRYING TO CROSS HILDEBRAND OR TRYING TO TURN ONTO HOWARD FROM RIDGEWOOD.
OUR ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED REZONING AS IT WILL REQUIRE SIX ACCESSIBLE PARKING SLOTS FOR THE FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
IN ADDITION, THE PROPERTY OWNERS REPRESENTATIVES PLEDGED THAT THE OWNER WOULD SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR AND SUPPORT A NO PARKING SIGN FOR THE EAST SIDE OF HOWARD STREET ON THE BLOCK THAT RUNS FROM WEST BRIDGEWOOD COURT TO HILDEBRAND.
THIS ASK IS IMPERATIVE TO MINIMIZING THE PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS THERE
[00:20:01]
AND WE EXPECT THE PROPERTY OWNER TO COMPLY WITH THIS REQUEST IN GOOD FAITH.THIS STATEMENT IS FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 33 AT 1 36 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT.
MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA AND I RESIDE AT 2 43 EAST SATCH IN THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I CHAIRED THE ZONING COMMITTEE FOR THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION WHO HAS RECEIVED NOTIFICATION FOR THIS ZONING REQUEST.
THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND ALSO SUPPORTS AND CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND WE HAVE MS. MARY JOHNSON FOR ITEM NUMBER 33.
ALRIGHT, MS. JOHNSON, MARY JOHNSON.
I WILL CHECK THE FOYER JUST IN CASE, BUT OKAY.
UM, WE'LL CHECK REAL QUICK, BUT I DO, WHILE, WHILE SHE'S CHECKING, I DO HAVE CLARIFICATION.
SO WE HAVE ON CASE, CASE OR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS AMENDED TO ADD IN A, I BELIEVE YOU SAID, AND THEN ITEMS 24 AND 26 HAVE AMENDED SITE PLANS? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND I GUESS MS. JOHNSON HAS LEFT, SO, UM, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THIS.
UH, SORRY, SORRY FOR THE COMBINED HEARING.
NUMBER ONE FROM A COMMISSIONER, UH, MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, APPROVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN WITH THE NA AMENDMENT ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, NUMBER 12, NUMBER 13, NUMBER 14, NUMBER 15, NUMBER 17, NUMBER 19, NUMBER 20, NUMBER 21, NUMBER 22, NUMBER 23, NUMBER 24 AS AMENDED NUMBER 25 AS NUMBER 25, NUMBER 26 AS AMENDED.
NUMBER 27, NUMBER 28, NUMBER 29, NUMBER 30, AND NUMBER 33 JUST TO, UH, OKAY, KURT, FIRM SEVEN IS UH, AS IS EIGHT IS THE ONE THAT'S AMENDED FOR THE NA FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL BE HAPPY TO SECOND THAT MR. CHAIRMAN.
ALRIGHT, UH, MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 5, 7 8 AS AMENDED.
UH, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 AS AMENDED.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VADOS.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT, LOOKING RIGHT.
AND FOR THE RECORD IF WE CAN NOTE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER BARDOS JOINED THE MEETING AT ONE 17.
WE'RE UM, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WERE HERE FOR ANY OF THOSE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THOSE WILL NOW BE PROCEEDING ON TO CITY COUNCIL.
SO YOU ARE FREE TO ENJOY THE LOVELY WEATHER OUTSIDE.
UH, WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR COMBINED HEARING NUMBER TWO OR CONTINUANCE HEARING FOR ITEMS REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE TO THE JANUARY 16TH MEETING.
ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED TO JANUARY 16TH ARE ITEMS NUMBER 9 11 16 18 31 AND 32.
ALRIGHT, COULD YOU HOLD ON, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT ONE MORE TIME? SURE.
NINE 11 WAS ADDED, 1618 WAS ALSO ADDED.
31 AND 32 SPEAKERS FOR ITEM NUMBER 32.
[00:25:01]
ALRIGHT.AND WE HAVE VOICEMAILS FOR 18 AND 32.
ALRIGHT, IF WE HEAR THE VOICEMAILS, PLEASE.
I LIVE AT ONE OH SIX UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 872-2433 AND I'M CALLING IN ABOUT THE ZONE CASE Z 20 23 1 0 7 0 0 3 0 3.
UM, I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS CASE TO BE POSTPONED UNTIL A PRESENTATION CAN BE GIVEN TO RESIDENTS OF THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A COMPLETE AND FINAL SITE PLAN.
APPLICANT SHOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH COMMUNITY TO ALTER THE SITE PLAN, MITIGATE ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS THE PROJECT COULD HAVE ON OUR NEAR NEIGHBORS.
I LIVE AT 900 WESTWOOD LAWN AND THIS IS IN REGARDS TO, UM, THE CASE AT 1 37 UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
THE LAST THREE DIGITS OF THE CASE NUMBER IS 3 0 3 BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE ZONING COMMISSION VOTE TO POSTPONE THE ZONING FOR 1 37 UNIVERSITY AVENUE UNTIL THE END OF JANUARY OR FEBRUARY.
BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF INFORMATION AND CONCRETE PLANS PROVIDED FOR THE COMMUNITY, WE ASKED THE APPLICANTS TO TO ARRANGE A MEETING FOR BOTH NEIGHBORHOODS OF BEACON HILL AND UPTOWN WITH A COMPLETE AND FINAL SITE PLAN SO RESIDENTS CAN ASK QUESTIONS AND SHARE COMMENTS.
IT'S IMPORTANT, PARTICULARLY FOR NEAR NEIGHBORS TO GIVE INPUT ON WAYS TO MITIGATE ANY POSSIBLE NEGATIVE EFFECTS.
BEACON HILL WILL NEED TO PUBLISH THE MEETING IN THEIR JANUARY NEWSLETTER AND WILL BLOCK WWI ANNOUNCEMENTS TO UPTOWN RESIDENTS.
A MEETING FOR PRESENTATION TO THE COMMUNITY IS STANDARD PRACTICE IN KEEPING WITH THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLES ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2018 AND SHOULD POSE LITTLE OR NO HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE AT LEAST A YEAR BEFORE THEY APPLY FOR THE T-V-H-C-A TAX CREDITS.
BEACON HILL'S FOCUS IS NOT ON THE PROJECT, BUT THE ZONING THAT WILL EXIST IN PERPETUITY OR UNTIL SOMEONE REQUESTS A CHANGE BECAUSE THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING IDZ TWO.
A SITE PLAN IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IN FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, NO MATTER THE PROJECT OR DEVELOPERS.
SO FAR THIS PROCESS IS LACK TRANSPARENCY AND INCLUSION.
THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ALONG WITH NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS FROM BEACON HILL IN FIVE POINTS MET ON NOVEMBER 9TH TO HEAR A DISCUSSION OF TOWN RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE APPLICANT STATING THEY COULD NOT DO A PRESENTATION REGARDING THE UPCOMING DEVELOPMENT.
AT 1 37 UNIVERSITY REPRESENTATIVES FROM PARTNERS IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LLC AND FROM THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY YOUTH EMPOWERMENT SERVICES WERE IN ATTENDANCE.
UNFORTUNATELY, VERY LITTLE WAS SHARED NEITHER MS. GONZALEZ NOR MR. SHACKELFORD COULD PROVIDE THE EXACT ZONING THEY WERE REQUESTING OTHER THAN A GENERAL IDZ.
AND THE SITE PLAN CONSISTED OF A DIAGRAM ON ONE SHEET OF PAPER THAT WE WERE TOLD WAS GOING TO BE CHANGED LATER UPON REQUEST, MR. SHACKLEFORD EMAILED US THE EXACT ZONING INFORMATION OF IBZ TWO, BUT A DETAILED SITE PLAN AND PRESENTATION TO A LARGER GROUP NEEDS TO OCCUR.
WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THIS CASE BE POSTPONED UNTIL AFTER THIS FULL COMMUNITY MEETING ABOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS WITH THE DEVELOPERS WHO SHOULD PRESENT A FULL AND COMPLETE SITE PLAN.
WE'RE A LITTLE SHOCKED FRANKLY, THAT THIS HAS NOT ALREADY TAKEN PLACE BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A COMMON PRACTICE.
WE REQUEST THAT BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAYS AND TO BE ABLE TO ADVERTISE THE MEETING THE DEVELOPERS SHOULD PRESENT IN MID TO LATE JANUARY OR EARLY FEBRUARY.
RESPECTFULLY, ERIN CAMPBELL, PRESIDENT OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND CYNTHIA SPIELMAN, CHAIR OF THE ZONING AND IRVING DESIGN COMMITTEE.
MY ADDRESS IS 1 1 3 1 WEST ELSMERE PLACE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 1.
AND I'M CALLING ABOUT THE ZONING, UM, CASE NUMBER 2003 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 3 0 3 AT 1 37 UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
AND I WAS JUST WANTING TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT THIS CASE SHOULD BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE DEVELOPER HAS BEEN ABLE TO GIVE A PRESENTATION TO THE RESIDENTS OF UPTOWN AND BEACON HILL AND PROVIDE A COMPLETE AND FINAL SITE PLAN.
APPLICANTS SHOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH OUR COMMUNITY TO ALTER ANY SITE PLANS AND MITIGATE ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS THE PROJECT COULD HAVE ON OUR NEIGHBORS.
[00:30:01]
POSTPONED UNTIL LATE JANUARY OR FEBRUARY SO THAT A MEETING COULD TAKE PLACE THAT IS ADVERTISED IN THE BEACON HILL NEWSLETTER.AND VOLUNTEERS CAN DELIVER FLYERS TO RESIDENTS.
THE POSTPONEMENT SHOULD POSE LITTLE OR NO HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANT AND ALTHOUGH, ALTHOUGH THEY DID ATTEND A MEETING, UH, THERE WAS NO PRESENTATION GIVEN AND NOT ENOUGH DETAILS AS TO THE EXACT ZONING REQUESTED OR FINAL SITE PLANS.
BEACON HILL HAS A HISTORY OF SUPPORTING DEVELOPERS, FOR EXAMPLE, A 34 UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN THE LAST MONTH BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF HOUSING AS PART OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SA TOMORROW TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND CENTRAL TO THIS HAS BEEN A PUBLIC PROCESS THAT INCLUDES NEAR RESIDENTS TO MITIGATE ANY POSSIBLE NEGATIVE EFFECTS AND CREATE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT.
THIS PROCESS HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO TAKE PLACE WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THERE HAS BEEN A LACK OF INCLUSION AND TRANSPARENCY AND THEREFORE WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THERE BE A POSTPONEMENT IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THAT PROCESS.
I LIVE IN ALTA VISTA AT SEVEN 14 WEST RUSSELL AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 288-4883.
AND I AM CALLING ABOUT A ZONING CASE THAT ENDS IN THE LAST THREE NUMBERS, 3 0 3 PERTAINING TO, UH, THE PROPERTY AT 1 37 UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
I'M CALLING TO REQUEST THAT, UH, THE ZONING HEARING FOR THIS CASE BE POSTPONED UNTIL LATE FEBRUARY SO THAT A MORE SUBSTANTIVE, UH, MEETING CAN TAKE PLACE BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DEVELOPERS.
UH, THERE WAS A MEETING BACK IN NOVEMBER, BUT AT THE TIME, UM, THE, UH, THE ZONING REQUEST OR THE TYPE OF ZONING WASN'T KNOWN AND THERE WAS A SITE PLAN, BUT IT WAS VERY MUCH IN DRAFT FORM.
AND AGAIN, I'M CALLING TO ASK FOR A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY BECAUSE A PROJECT OF THIS SIZE AND POTENTIAL IMPACT TO NEIGHBORS DESERVES TO HAVE A MORE ROBUST PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
HELLO, MY NAME IS FATHER RICARDO RAMIREZ.
ANNE CATHOLIC CHURCH LOCATED AT TWO 10 ST.
I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO THE CASE ATTACHED TO ADDRESS FIVE 11 FREDERICKSBURG.
I THINK THE CASE IS PA 20 23 11 60 0 8 0 AND WHEN IT IN REGARDS TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST HERE IN UNION WITH THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST, UH, THAT MORE TIME BE GIVEN, UH, BEFORE THE ZONING CHANGE BE APPROVED BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED, UM, ENOUGH INFORMATION WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT WILL BE DEVELOPED AT THIS POINT ON THAT PROPERTY.
AND SO I THINK IN, IN FAIRNESS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT IS THERE, UM, AND TO OUR, UM, TO OUR COMMUNITY, WE'D LIKE, WE'D LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION BEFORE, YOU KNOW, CONSENT IS GIVEN AND THE CHANGE OF ZONING IS, UH, GIVEN.
THAT IS, UH, UH, THAT IS THE MESSAGE.
GOD BLESS YOU ALL FOR YOUR WORK.
THIS IS HANNAH MENARD, PRESIDENT OF THE UPTOWN ASSOCIATION, CALLING ON BEHALF OF, UH, NUMBER PA TO OH TWO THREE DASH 16 EIGHT.
PLEASE VOTE TO CONTINUE OR POSTPONE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR AN IDV TWO OR, UM, FROM AN R FOUR OR TO DENY UNTIL THEY COME BACK WITH MORE, UH, CONCRETE PLANS.
WE HAD A MEETING ON NOVEMBER 9TH, UM, TO HAVE A PRESENTATION BY MS. GONZALEZ.
UM, SHE CALLED PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND SAID THAT SHE WASN'T GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO A PRESENTATION.
UM, HOWEVER, SHE DID PRESENT A PIECE OF PAPER THAT WAS PASSED AROUND, UM, BUT WASN'T SURE ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO ACTUALLY DO.
IT WENT FROM ONE 30 APARTMENTS TO 90 TO ONE 50 TO FOUR STORIES TO FIVE STORAGE TO THREE STORIES.
BECAUSE THESE PLANS ARE SO PRELIMINARY, UM, WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON.
WE ASK THAT YOU DO NOT APPROVE THIS SPECULATIVE ZONING CASE UNTIL ALL THE FACTS ARE KNOWN BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS.
AND EVEN THEN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THIS, THIS IS VERY UNSTABLE.
THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE THE FUNDING.
[00:35:01]
WILL, WE ASK THAT YOU DO NOT APPROVE THIS ZONING.UM, IF THE PROJECT DOES NOT GO THROUGH, WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE AN INPUT ON THE KIND OF DENSITY WE WANT DENSITY, WE WANT A BUILDING THERE, WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
IT, IT JUST NEEDS TO BE PRESENTED TO THE COMMUNITY.
THIS IS HANNAH MENARD AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF, UH, UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, HELLO, THIS IS HENRY BEEZ.
I LIVE AT 2 0 1 UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
IS THAT SAN ANTONIO? 7 8 2 0 1.
I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER PA 2 0 2 3 DASH HUNDRED 16 0 8 0.
AND I AM IN OPPOSITION AT THE MOMENT TO THIS, UH, REQUEST AND FOR THE REASON THAT BEING THAT, UH, WE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, NEED MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THEIR PLANS ARE, UH, AS FAR AS THE LAYOUT OF THE PROPERTY, UM, YOU KNOW, WE JUST NEED MORE INFORMATION BASICALLY.
UH, WE DID, I DID ATTEND A MEETING WHERE THEY DID GIVE SOME INFORMATION, BUT NOTHING DEFINITE.
SO UNTIL THOSE PLANS ARE DEFINITE, UH, I AM IN OPPOSITION OF THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY AT 1 37 UNIVERSITY.
THIS IS JACK 5 2 5 3 CORNELL IN THE CITY.
UH, THIS HAS TO DO WITH CASE NUMBER 3 0 3 LAST THREE DIGITS.
UH, WE WOULD, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UH, THE REZONING ISSUE THERE POSTPONED AS NONE OF US, UH, HAVE SEEN ANY TYPE OF SITE PLAN OR ANYTHING.
AND THERE WILL BE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE.
MY PHONE NUMBER'S (210) 735-7100.
GOOD MORNING ZONING COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS MAX WOODWARD, 8 2 3 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD, AND I'M THE FOUNDER OF THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ALTHOUGH I NO LONGER PARTICIPATE DUE TO BULLYING BY LEADERSHIP, I SUPPORT THE PROPOSED REZONING CASE NUMBER Z 20 23 107 0 3 0 3 BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LARGE, LONG VACANT PROPERTY ALONG LOWER FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
FOR YEARS, THIS CORRIDOR HAS SUFFERED STAGNATED GROWTH DUE TO INTERFERENCE BY ALLEGED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ATTEMPTING TO MICROMANAGE DEVELOPMENT.
THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED CHANGE CLAIM.
PROPOSED POSTPONEMENT WILL POSE LITTLE OR NO HARDSHIP TO THE APPLICANTS, BUT THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.
DELAYS IN CONSTRUCTION REPRESENT A MASSIVE COST TO DEVELOPERS AND DISCOURAGE INVESTMENT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THE VOICE OF AN ORGANIZED AND PRIVILEGED FEW OUTWEIGH THE NEED FOR GROWTH AND INVESTMENT IN HISTORIC UP DOWN COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
MAX, DID YOU PLAY ALSO FOR 32? OH YES.
THIS IS A PROPERTY TAXPAYER AT 2 7 0 TAYLOR PORT NAME IS ERICA HEISEL, 2 1 0 5 4 9 85 9 4.
THE DUES PAYING NUMBER OF THE HOT WELL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BEEN ACTIVE.
I GO WHEN I CAN AND I'M ASKING THE ZONING COMMISSION TO POSTPONE THIS ACTION UNTIL THE DEVELOPER, UM, HAS THE COURTESY TO TALK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE CASE NUMBER IS ENDING IN 3 4 7.
CASE NUMBER Z DASH 20 23 1 0 7 0 0 3 4 7.
THAT'S THE NOTES THAT I RECEIVED.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE DO HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO SHOULD BE ON SITE FOR THE ZONING HEARING.
HIS NAME IS BRADY, AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY OTHER FURTHER FOLLOW UP, 2 1 0 5 4 9 85 94.
AND AGAIN, THE PROPERTY ADDRESS FOR THE NOTICE WAS 2 7 0 TAYLOR COURT 7 8 2 2 3.
AND AGAIN, I'M ASKING THE ZONING COMMISSION TO VOTE NO FOR APPROVAL TODAY
[00:40:01]
AND TO POSTPONE IT UNTIL THE DEVELOPER HAS THE COURTESY TO TALK TO THEIR NEIGHBORS.I'M PRESIDENT OF THE MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
MY ADDRESS IS 5 22 EAST DIXON AVENUE.
UH, I'M CALLING TO, UM, EXPRESS AN OPINION ABOUT THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST AT THE 6,000 BLOCK OF SOUTH PRESA.
THIS IS, UM, UH, CASE NUMBER Z 20 23 1 0 7 0 0 3 4 7.
AND, UH, THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE IS FROM R FOUR MC TWO, A HOD, SINGLE, UH, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, UH, TO IDZ THREE MC TWO A HOD, HIGH INTENSITY INFIELD DEVELOPMENT ZONE.
UM, WE HAVE NOT, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS NOT HAD A PRESENTATION OF THE PLANS OR THE COMMENTS THAT THE STATE TRAILS OR THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
UM, HOWEVER, OUR BOARD MEMBERS HAVE DISCUSSED THIS AND WE ALL AGREE WITH THE WISHES OF THE HOT WELLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS THAT THEY WOULD DENY THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST AND THEY, UH, DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS, UM, COMMENTS AT TRAILS ADDED TO THEIR COMMUNITY.
UM, THEY PREFER TO KEEP THE R FOUR ZONING, UH, FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, WHICH ARE MUCH NEEDED IN THIS AREA.
UM, WE ALREADY HAVE PLENTY MORE THAN ENOUGH LOW INCOME HOUSING, UH, PROJECTS AND THERE HAS NOT BEEN A SINGLE, UH, NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THIS AREA, UH, AT LEAST IN THE MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, BOUNDARIES SINCE 1954, THE RAVEN HILL, UH, UH, RAVEN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, OF A, THE ONE SQUARE MILE HOMES BUILT IN 1954.
UM, SINCE THEN, IT'S ALL BEEN APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
WE NEED MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING STOCK.
WE, UH, DO NOT, UM, UM, AGREE WITH THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST AND, UM, WE SUPPORT THE WISHES OF THE HOT WELLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN DENYING IT.
SO THAT IS IT FOR VOICEMAILS AND NOW WE'LL MOVE TO INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS.
FIRST FOR ITEM NUMBER 18, MR. JACK FINGER AND AFTER MR. FINGER WOULD BE FOLLOWED BY MS. ERICA DUKE.
WELL, GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE ZONING COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS JACK AM FINGER AND I RESIDE AT, UH, 9 0 1, UM, UH, MULBERRY AVENUE IN THE BEACON HILL AREA REGARDING, UH, THE CASE OF, UH, ON UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
UH, IF YOU CANNOT ABSOLUTELY DENY IT RIGHT NOW, AT THE VERY LEAST, POSTPONE IT.
WHY? BECAUSE THIS THING IS REPLETE WITH A NUMBER OF RED FLAGS.
YOUR VERY OWN ZONING STAFF THOUGHT IT WAS A BAD IDEA.
YEAH, THEY SAID IT JUST, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE PATTERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE.
UM, I NOTICED ALSO THAT THE, UH, ONE OF THE BIG THINGS I NOTICED OFF TOP, THE TOP WAS THE FACT THAT IT WAS AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE AROUND THE AREA WHEN SIX FEET IS THE MAXIMUM FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
UH, BUT I GUESS THE THING THAT REALLY, THAT REALLY BUGS ME THE MOST, YOU KNOW, IS THE FACT THAT YOUTH EMPOWERMENT, IT MADE A CURSORY PRESENTATION EARLIER, BUT IT, UH, WAS LACKING IN QUITE A FEW NEEDED DETAILS ABOUT THIS ISSUE.
AND, UH, WHEN BEACON HILL REPRESENTATIVES ASKED THEM TO PRESENT TO BEACON HILL, UH, THEY, THEY DECIDED THEY, NO, THEY'RE, WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT.
NOW, I MEAN, LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT.
THE REQUESTED ZONING HAS THE WORDS BEACON HILL IN IT, AND YOUTH EMPOWERMENT DOES NOT WANT TO MEET WITH THE BEACON HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
NOW, WHAT IS YOUTH EMPOWERMENT TRYING TO HIDE HERE?
[00:45:01]
SOMETHING KIND OF SMELLS, YOU KNOW, UH, NOW AND IN CASE YOU THINK WE'RE JUST BLOWING SMOKE, JUST KNOW THAT BLE BEACON HILL IS A PRETTY DECENT NEIGHBORHOOD.PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE INTO BEACON HILL.
WE HAVE MANY MORE PEOPLE MOVING IN THAN MOVING OUT.
IT'S A CHOICE AREA OF THE CITY.
AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS ONE OF THE FINEST AROUND, WE DELIVER OUR OWN NEWSLETTERS, THOUSANDS OF THEM EVERY MONTH.
I KNOW BECAUSE I'M ONE OF THOSE DELIVERERS.
SO BEACON HILL, QUITE FRANKLY, IS THE PLACE WHERE YOU WOULD WANNA LIVE IF YOU HAD A CHOICE.
AND TO HAVE A, AN APPLICANT KIND OF TURN UP ITS NOSE AT THIS PROCEDURES THAT WE HAVE.
I'M SORRY, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO BE POLITE ABOUT IT, BUT YOUTH EMPOWERMENT ISN'T.
PLEASE, UM, AT THE VERY LEAST, CONTINUE THIS THING IF YOU JUST CAN OUTRIGHT SAY NO TO THEM.
NEXT, MS. ERICA DUKE, THEN TO BE FOLLOWED BY MR. RAY SALINAS.
UM, MY NAME IS ERICA DUKE AND I RESIDE AT 2 0 8 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, UM, WITHIN THE 200 FEET OF, UH, THIS PROPOSED ZONING REZONING, UM, I SAME, I'M ECHOING THE SAME CONCERNS AS MY NEIGHBORS AND VOICEMAILS IN HERE, UH, WITH US TODAY.
UM, THERE HAS BEEN A LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AS FAR AS PLANNING, UH, SPECIFICALLY, UM, HIGHLIGHTING NOT ONLY DESIGN, BUT ALSO SOME HEALTH CONCERNS.
THERE HAVE BEEN A HEAVY PUDDLING IN AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THAT, UM, PROPERTY FOR QUITE SOME LONG, A LONG TIME.
UM, SO HEALTH IS DEFINITELY A CONCERN.
I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN HOW THAT'S GONNA BE IMPROVED ONCE 130 DWELLING UNITS ARE, ARE THEN PRESENT.
UM, SAFETY, UH, WE'RE GOING FROM A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD INTO A HIGH DENSITY, UM, NOISE IS ALSO A CONCERN.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY TYPE OF TRANSPARENCY TO WHEN CONSTRUCTION WILL START STARTER.
AND, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WITH ALL THESE POINTS TAKEN, UM, THAT WE'RE BEING CONSCIOUS OF OUR NEIGHBORS TO THIS SPACE.
UM, AND IF I CAN ALSO VOUCH THAT WE DELAY, UH, THE APPROVAL OF THIS, OF THIS PETITION UNTIL WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION, UM, THAT'S WHERE I STAND.
NEXT WE HAVE MR. RAY SALINAS AND HE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY MR. BRADY ALEXANDER.
I RESIDE AT 2 0 6 UNIVERSITY AVENUE IN THE BEACON HILLS UPTOWN, WHICH USED TO BE FIVE POINTS.
UH, I'M STATING I'M AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL AT THIS TIME.
UH, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION.
THE ORGANIZATION, YOUTH EMPOWERMENT'S, BEEN THERE FOR OVER 12, 13 YEARS AND SINCE THEIR SCHOOL'S SHUT DOWN, THEY'VE BEEN HAVING LACK OF INFORMATION, WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO WITH THAT PROPERTY FOR A LOT OF US THAT'S LIVED OVER THERE IN THAT AREA FOR A DECADE OR TWO.
UM, SO WE JUST NEED MORE INFORMATION.
UM, AT THIS TIME, UH, EVEN ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES WHO'S HERE TODAY, HASN'T BEEN BACK TO TALK TO US, HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO GIVE US INFORMATION IN DETAIL.
UM, JUST TRYING TO CRAM A BUNCH OF UNITS INTO THIS AREA IS, IS NOT THE BEST THING TO DO.
DEFINITELY NEED HOUSING, BETTER HOUSING IN SAN ANTONIO, BUT THEY NEED TO BE UPHELD TO THE REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING, NOT ACCOUNTING, FOR STREET PARKING, FIRE HYDRANTS, RELOTTING, REZONING, UH, MAKING SURE LIGHTS ARE UP TO CODE DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE BEING ADDED BY THAT POOLING AREA OF WATER THAT'S BEEN SITTING THERE, THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKING 3 1 1 TO ADDRESS FOR THE 14, 15 YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED THERE AND NOTHING'S BEEN DONE.
SO WE WANT THE COMMUNITY TO GROW AND BE BETTER.
UH, MOST OF OUR NEIGHBORS, WE WAVE AT EACH OTHER, WE ACKNOWLEDGE EACH OTHER.
UH, SO WE'RE BEING BRINGING IN 200 TO 300 INDIVIDUALS SUPPOSEDLY, UH, FOR WHAT THIS ADVENTURE WANTS TO DO.
AND JUST, THEY HAVEN'T EVEN COME OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO LET US KNOW, TO TALK TO US, TO JUST GIVE US WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO DO.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO HOLD ANYONE BACK, BUT THEY DO NEED TO LET THE COMMUNITY KNOW WHAT'S COMING, WHAT'S GONNA BE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, TWO DOORS DOWN.
IT'S TWO DOORS DOWN FROM WHERE I LIVE.
IT'S GONNA CHANGE TRAFFIC, NOISE, CRIME, POSSIBLY TAXES.
WHO KNOWS? BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW.
AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS STILL WON'T COME AROUND AND TALK TO US.
SO IT'S KIND OF JUST, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW TO DENY IT, UH, POSTPONE IT, UH, AND JUST MAKE SURE THEY'RE BEING UPHELD TO ALL THE REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE OF BEAR COUNTY AND SAN ANTONIO TO CONTINUE TO MAKE BEACON HILL BEAUTIFUL AND BETTER.
NEXT WE HAVE MR. BRADY ALEXANDER, AND THEN TO BE FOLLOWED BY MR. TERRY
[00:50:01]
IBANEZ.I RESIDE AT 1 8 3 9 EAST PYRON 7 8 2 2 3.
I'M PRESIDENT OF THE HOT WELLS MISSION REACH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY OUR POSITION.
WE RECEIVED NOTHING, UH, FROM THE APPLICANT, UH, PETITIONERS, ET CETERA REGARDING THIS PROJECT.
EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE RECEIVED IS THIRD PARTY CONJECTURE, UM, ET CETERA.
IN ORDER FOR US TO, UM, DETERMINE OUR POSITION, WE REQUIRE, UM, THE INFORMATION TO MAKE AN OBJECTIVE INFORMED DECISION.
SO AT THE PRESENT, WE HAVE NOT TAKEN A STANCE ON THIS.
UH, THERE HAS BEEN, UH, MUCH MISREPRESENTATION OF OTHER ASSOCIATIONS AND, UM, ORGANIZATIONS REGARDING THIS, UM, AS DOCUMENTED IN, UM, VARIOUS MEDIA ARTICLES.
UM, I WON'T GET INTO THAT FOR TIME CONSTRAINTS, BUT, UH, ONCE AGAIN, WE, UM, WE LOOK FORWARD TO, TO HEARING ABOUT THIS.
WE HAVE REQUESTED THAT IT BE A CONTINUANCE UNTIL OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING IN JANUARY.
UH, THIS CONTINUANCE DOES NOT MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.
UM, SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THEM, UH, MEETING WITH US PRIOR TO THIS BEING CONSIDERED AT THE BOARD.
AND THEN LASTLY, MR. TERRY YEZ OR MS. TERRY, I APOLOGIZE.
I RECITE AT 1438 NAPIER AVENUE.
UM, I'VE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO SEE THE PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT, UM, BUT MY NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NOT, MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THEY HAVE NOT SEEN HIDE OR HAIR OF THIS PROJECT.
I WANT THEM TO, UH, LEARN ABOUT IT.
I SHARED, UH, THE HOMELESS ISSUES COMMITTEE, UH, FOR THE TIER ONE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS.
AND OUR CO OUR COMMITTEE WAS SEARCHING OUT SOLUTIONS, POSITIVE SOLUTIONS FOR RESIDENTS AND THE UNSHELTERED.
AND THE TWO THINGS THAT WE SAW WHEN WE WERE RESEARCHING AND LEARNING ABOUT THE PROBLEM AND SOLUTIONS WERE TO SOLVE HOMELESSNESS.
YOU MUST HAVE HOUSING, PERMANENT HOUSING, BUT IT MUST ALSO COME WITH SERVICES, MENTAL HEALTH AND, UH, SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND JOB TRAINING.
AND UM, I THINK THAT IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, INCLUDING HOT WELLS WERE TO SEE THE PROJECT AND SEE THAT IT'S NOT A HAVENS FOR HOPE AND IT IS A BEGINNING FOR A HEALTHY LIFESTYLE FOR UNSHELTERED PEOPLE, BUT ALSO A POSITIVE THING FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH DISTRICT THREE, AS ALL THE DISTRICTS IN THE CITY SUFFER FROM A LOT OF ENCAMPMENTS THAT ARE CONTINUALLY MOVING AROUND AND BEING CLEANED UP.
UM, AND A LOT OF CITY MONEY GOES INTO TO THOSE CLEANUPS.
UM, I FEEL THAT IT MIGHT BE A SOLUTION, BUT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TO FIRST SEE WHAT IS BEING OFFERED AND THEN THEY CAN DECIDE WHETHER TO SUPPORT IT OR NOT SUPPORT IT.
I HOPE YOU DO THE CONTINUANCE.
AND THAT IS IT FOR SPEAKERS ON THOSE TWO ITEMS. 18 OR YEAH, 18 AND 32.
SO THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC SPEAKING FOR CONTINUANCE ITEMS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION FROM A COMMISSIONER ON THESE ITEMS FOR CONTINUANCE? MR. CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEMS NUMBER 9 11 16, 18 31 AND 32 TO THE JANUARY 16 HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL BE HAPPY TO SECOND.
THERE IS A MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEMS 9 11 16, 18 31 AND 32 TO THE JANUARY 16TH MEETING.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VATOS.
IF WE COULD A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE.
ALRIGHT, WELL WE WILL SEE Y'ALL NEXT YEAR, MR. CHAIR.
UM, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO ITEM 30 ON THE CONSENT.
[00:55:01]
ON INDIVIDUAL, BUT THERE'S A SPEAKER WHO HA WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR THAT ITEM.IF WE COULD JUST BRING THEM UP FOR THE PUBLIC SPEAKING PORTION.
YES, FOR ITEM NUMBER 30, MS. UH, MS. GUY RUBIO.
UM, AND I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE PROJECT COMING IN.
UH, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING OF IT, BUT YOU KNOW, IT BACKS UP TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND WE HAVE KIDS, UH, THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE RUNNING AROUND ALL THE TIME BACK THERE AS IT IS.
WE HAVE ALREADY SO MUCH TRAFFIC.
UH, AND UH, IF THE PROPOSED IDEA IS TO DEVELOP 350 APARTMENTS, THAT'S A HUGE CONCERN TO ME, UH, SINCE AGAIN, IT BACKS UP TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE'S OTHER, UH, CONCERNS REGARDING THE, UH, ACCESSIBILITY, TRAFFIC, NOISE, UH, ET CETERA.
THERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE THINGS THAT ARE A CONCERN TO ME, SO I I, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE PROJECT.
UH, AT THIS POINT, UH, I I'M NOT IN IN AGREEMENT OF IT, UH, AS I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING OF IT.
SO I WOULD APPRECIATE, UH, WHOEVER'S RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT PROJECT TO, UH, COMMUNICATE TO ME.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS, BUT, UH, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD THING TO DO.
I UNDERSTAND THE HOUSING NEED AND ALL OF THAT.
UH, BY FAR WE NEED IT, BUT UH, I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND OUR SAFETY.
DO WE, WHO IS THE CASE MANAGER ON? I'LL GET WITH HIM.
SO HE, HE WILL GET WITH YOU AFTER.
UM, I BELIEVE WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND I BELIEVE ITEM NUMBER THREE IS FIRST CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
ITEM NUMBER THREE, GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS JOSEPH FLAS, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS LOCATED AT 4 2 0 LAMAR STREET, GOING FROM R SIX TO R SIX CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 31 NOTICES SENT OUT.
ZERO IN FAVOR TO OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE DIGGITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THERE ARE THREE OPPOSED OUTSIDE 200 FEET.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORING LAND.
IN RELATION TO THE ZONING EXCHANGE REQUEST, THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE EXISTING R SIX IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR UNITS IS, IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS LARGELY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
THE REQUEST FOR FOUR UNITS IS A HIGHER DENSITY AND WOULD BE OUT CHARACTER WITH THE EXISTING OR FROM THE EXISTING UM, COMMUNITY.
THUS STAFF RECOMMENDS AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS TO BETTER COMPLEMENT THEIR SURROUNDING AREA.
PROVIDING ADDITIONAL HOUSING IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH ENCOURAGES DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS FOR ALL INCOME LEVELS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF R SIX CDA RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS.
STAFF IS IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS JOSE RODRIGUEZ.
I'M THE OWNER ON FOUR 20 LAMAR.
UM, INITIALLY I REQUESTED AN R SIX TO CD CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR UNITS AND BACK IN OCTOBER THE STAFF RECOMMENDED AN R SIX TO CD CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO UNITS.
WHAT I'M DOING TODAY IS I'M AMENDING MY REQUEST OR MY INITIAL REQUEST FROM AN R SIX TO CD CONDITIONAL USE FROM FOUR UNITS TO WHICH I REQUESTED BACK IN OCTOBER, WHICH IS AN R SIX CD CONDITIONER USE FOR TWO UNITS.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? I SEE IT, UH, NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ONE.
ALRIGHT, THIS IS THE DISTRICT TWO CASE.
SO COMMISSIONER WATSON TO YOU FOR
[01:00:01]
QUESTIONS.UM, FOR STAFF, HAS THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A NEW SITE PLAN THAT REFLECTS THE REQUESTED AMENDMENT? OKAY, WE JUST DIDN'T RECEIVE IT AHEAD OF TIME.
UM, THANK YOU, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, CAN YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD? UH, CAN YOU PLEASE SHARE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT UM, WHAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH ATTEMPTS YOU'VE MADE, UH, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT YOU'VE AMENDED YOUR REQUEST FROM YOUR ORIGINAL? I, UM, SPOKE TO SEVERAL NEIGHBORS AND THEY WERE OPPOSED TO THE FOUR UNITS AND THEY IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF JUST TWO UNITS.
LIKE MANY OF THE PROPERTIES IN THE IN THE STREET HAVE THREE AND FOUR UNITS FROM DEVELOPERS AND THEY KIND OF WANTED TO PUT A STOP TO THAT.
Y'ALL RECOMMENDED IT, I AGREED WITH IT AND THEY'RE HAPPY WITH THAT AS WELL.
UM, HAVE YOU SHOWN THOSE NEIGHBORS THE UPDATED SITE PLAN? I HAVE NOT SHOWN THEM THE SITE PLAN.
I SPOKE TO THEM AND I LET THEM KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I WAS DOING WITH ONLY ONE ADDITIONAL UNIT, WHAT THEY REQUESTED.
SO NO THEY DIDN'T, BUT THEY'RE WELL INFORMED AND I AGREED WITH WHAT THEY WANTED ME TO DO.
THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION.
UM, I AM READY TO MAKE A MOTION, UH, BUT I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR OTHER QUESTIONS.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT.
BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON.
UM, I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TO JANUARY 16TH.
UM, I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THAT YOU HAVE AMENDED THE REQUEST, UH, TO TWO UNITS REFLECTING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THAT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT TYPICALLY I WOULD SUPPORT AS WELL.
UM, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT IN OUR DISTRICT, ESPECIALLY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE KNOW THERE'S CURRENTLY A VACUUM OF LEADERSHIP WITH THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE COUNCILMAN'S PREFERENCE TO SEE DOCUMENTED SUPPORT, UH, FROM PARTICULARLY NEIGHBORS IN 200 FEET.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT ADDITIONAL TIME WILL GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THE SITE PLAN AND GET IN WRITING PREFERABLY, UM, STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT OR MAKE SURE UM, THE STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT ARE SUBMITTED TO THE CASE MANAGER.
UM, AND I THINK THAT WILL BE ESSENTIAL FOR ENSURING, UH, YOUR SUCCESS AND UH, TYPICALLY I WOULD ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL.
UM, CONSIDERING YOU AMENDED YOUR REQUEST BUT DUE TO THE HOLIDAYS, I THINK THAT CONTINUANCE, UM, IS, IS WISE, UH, TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THAT COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND YOU CAN BE SUCCESSFUL AT COUNCIL.
MR. CHAIR, I'M SORRY IF I MIGHT, COULD I GO BACK AND ASK A QUESTION IN LIGHT OF THE MOTION? ALRIGHT, THAT'S FINE.
WHEN IS COUNCIL GOING TO HEAR THIS? IF IT WERE DETERMINED TODAY? JANUARY 25TH.
ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS FOR A CONTINUANCE.
IS THERE A SECOND? ALRIGHT, MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
ALRIGHT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM.
ALRIGHT, UM, ANY DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT, SEEING, JUST GONNA MAKE QUICK COMMENT.
I JUST, UM, I'M NOT SUPPORTING THE CONTINUANCE.
I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE ENOUGH TIME BY CITY COUNCIL TO GO AHEAD AND MEET WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
UH, MAYBE IF THE APPLICANT COULD STATE THAT OR SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD BE MEETING WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS BEFORE THE JUNE, JANUARY 25TH MEETING, THEN THAT WAY YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO CONTINUE THIS AND GO AHEAD.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING CITY STAFF CAN GUIDE ME ON OR THANK YOU.
UH, HE CAN CERTAINLY STATE IT FOR THE RECORD BUT A MOTION'S BEEN MADE AND SO RIGHT.
UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT? YOU WANT ME TO DO YOU LAST? YEAH, I THINK LAST.
COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT DISCUSSION.
UM, I DID RECEIVE COMMUNICATION FROM SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, UH, APPROXIMATELY AN HOUR BEFORE THIS MEETING THAT THEY HADN'T RECEIVED INFORMATION ABOUT THE SITE PLAN.
AND IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CONSISTENT CONTACT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RIGHT NOW, WE'LL HAVE TO PUT IN THAT WORK ON OUR END.
UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT GIVING THAT EVEN THOUGH THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY IS THE 25TH, I DO BELIEVE THAT ADDITIONAL TIME IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE, UM, IN THE BEST INTEREST OF BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE COMMUNITY, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT IT WOULD LIKELY BE CONTINUED AT COUNCIL ON THE 25TH BASED ON THE PATTERN OF COMMUNICATION THAT WE'VE SEEN THUS FAR.
ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION IS FOR A CONTINUANCE TO THE JANUARY 16TH MEETING BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM.
[01:05:01]
COMMISSIONER TSET? YES.THE MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE HAS FAILED.
IS THERE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE AND I'LL SECOND THAT.
FIRST WE NEED TO DO RECONSIDER IT FIRST.
RIGHT? THERE NEEDS TO BE A RECONSIDERATION FIRST.
SO YOUR MOTION WOULD BE MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM NUMBER THREE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
MOTION TO RECONSIDER BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ SECOND BY COM.
THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION.
THE OPTIONS FOR ALTERNATIVE MOTION WOULD BE WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED AND THEN THERE WAS AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF, IS THAT CORRECT? THE, ACTUALLY THE APPLICANT AMENDED THEIR REQUEST.
SO IT WOULD BE, UH, CONSIDERATION OF ITEM NUMBER THREE AS AMENDED.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
SO IS THERE A MOTION? THANK YES.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE AS UM, I AS AMENDED.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE AS AMENDED, UH, BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
SECOND BY SECOND YOU COMMISSIONER RE BARROS.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS DISCUSSION.
UH, MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED.
UM, WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR IF WE CAN HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION PLEASE.
AND BENAVIDES ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS LOCATED AT 3 7 6 HAWTHORNE STREET AND IS A REQUEST TO GO FROM R SIX TO C ONE CD WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 21 NOTICES SENT WITH FIVE RETURN IN FAVOR, ZERO RETURN ON OPPOSITION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM ST.
LEO'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
STAFF DOES FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE CURRENT R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C ONE CD LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE BLOCK IS COMPRISED OF A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL ZONING.
HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IS A MORE INTENSE C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL USE THAT IS BEING REQUESTED TO BE CONDITIONED INTO A LIGHT COMMERCIAL BASE ZONE.
THE PLACEMENT AND PROXIMITY TO A MAJOR HIGHWAY MAKES AN INAPPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR LIGHT COMMERCIAL INFILL.
BUT THERE IS A CONCERN THAT THE SITE PLAN AND USE WOULD NOT ALLOW APPROPRIATE BUFFERS ALONG THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO SCREEN THE PROPOSED MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USE FROM THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF C ONE LIKE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITHOUT THE CONDITIONAL USE AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
MY NAME IS YA RAMIREZ WITH YA V INVESTMENTS FOR
[01:10:01]
3 76 HAWTHORNE STREET DISTRICT FIVE.WE PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY WITH A SOLE INTENT OF CONVERT, CONVERTING IT INTO A SMALL FAMILY OWNED USE CAR LOT.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS GIVEN BY THE STAFF FROM THE ZONING COMMISSION AND WE INTEND TO FOLLOW THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH HAVING THE DOWNWARD LIGHTING FACING DOWNWARD, UH, FACING LIGHT.
SO THAT THERE ARE NO ISSUES WITH AIR TRAFFIC, ALTHOUGH IT DOES NOT RESTRICT PERMITTED USE, BUT WILL FOLLOW IN AN EFFORT TO MINIMIZE NIGHTTIME LIGHT POLLUTION, AS WELL AS KEEPING ALL SIGNS AND BANNERS INSIDE PROPERTY AND BUILDING A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE IN AN L SHAPE SO THAT OUR BACK DOOR AND SITE NEIGHBORS CAN HAVE PRIVACY ENTER THEIR PROPERTY.
OUR HOURS OF OPERATION WOULD BE MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, 9:00 AM TO 6:30 PM WITH SUNDAYS CLOSED WHEN MAINLY EVERYONE IS STILL AT WORK OR JUST COMING OUT AND ENJOYING THEIR WEEKEND.
UH, WE HAVE ALSO GOTTEN IN CONTACT WITH THE TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT AND THEY STATED THAT OUR MAIN ENTRANCE, WHICH WAS IN QUESTION, WOULD POTENTIALLY BE, UH, EXCLUSIVELY OFF OF HAWTHORNE STREET, BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED ONCE THE SONY IS COMPLETE AND IN THE BUILDING STAGE.
WE ALSO REACHED OUT TO TDOT, UH, FOR POTENTIAL AND ADDITIONAL ENTRANCE OFF OF HIGHWAY 35.
BUT, UH, WE'RE STILL AWAITING RESPONSE FROM THEM.
WE ARE, WE WERE VERY PLEASED TO HAVE GOTTEN NEIGHBORS FULL SUPPORT, INCLUDING BUSINESSES AROUND THE PROPERTY WHERE WE REACHED OUT, WHEN WE REACHED OUT TO THE COMMUNITY SO THAT, SO THAT WE CAN CONVERT THIS PROPERTY INTO A SMALL USE CAR LOT WITH SOME EVEN OFFERING OUR SERVICES, THEIR SERVICES, SPECIFICALLY GETTING APPROVAL FROM OUR NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR IN FULL SUPPORT.
WHO WOULD BE THE ONE MAINLY IMPACTED WITH ANY SUCH CHANGE? IT IS UNDER OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WITH THIS, WITHIN THE SAME SQUARE BLOCK SOUTH OF US, THERE ARE TWO PROPERTIES THAT OBTAIN PERMISSION IN 2017 TO CONVERT INTO A USED CAR LOTS, ALTHOUGH THEY SIT EMPTY, WHICH IS 1 79 SIMS AND FIVE 19 BU UH, THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST WE SUBMITTED IS CONSISTENT WITH A CURRENT DESIGNATED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND CONSISTENT WITH A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE ACCESS ROAD OF HIGHWAY 35 WITH A SOON TO BE NEW RESTAURANT RIGHT IN FRONT OF US AND WITH A, WITH USED CAR LOTS, UH, TWO BLOCKS NORTH AND ANOTHER USED CAR LOT TWO, UH, TWO BLOCKS SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE ARE JUST, THOSE ARE JUST THE CLOSEST TO TO US WITH OVER 20 CAR LOTS SURROUNDING THE THREE MILE STRETCH FACING, UH, HIGHWAY 35.
AS WE WOULD BE, WE CONSIDER THIS CHANGE WOULD POSITIVELY IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SINCE WE WOULD BE CONVERTING THE UNINHABITABLE RESIDENCE WITH A VALUE OF ABOUT 140,000 TO A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITH POTENTIAL VALUE OF OVER 300,000 ONCE COMPLETED, HELPING THE PROPERTY VALUES AROUND US.
WE HAVE EXPERIENCE, UH, NOT ONLY IN THE CAR DEALERSHIP INDUSTRY WITH OVER 15 YEARS AS WE CURRENTLY OWN ONE, BUT IN THE CONVERSION OF AN UNINHABITABLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO A BEAUTIFUL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
AS THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAD SUBMITTED WHEN WE FILED SHOW THE PROPERTY I JUST MENTIONED, UH, WE PURCHASED THAT, UM, ABOUT, FOR ABOUT THE SAME PRICE BUT IN WORST CONDITION AS THE PROPERTY THAT WE, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW.
AND WE WERE ABLE TO FULLY RENOVATE IT WITH A NEW MARKET VALUE OF OVER 400,000.
SO, UH, I ASK THAT OUR REQUEST FOR THE ZONE CHANGE FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR A SMALL USE CAR LOT BE APPROVED SO THAT OUR FAMILY OWNED CAR LOT CAN CONTINUE, UM, HELPING THE, THE COMMUNITY THAT SURROUNDS US.
WE HAVE THE BUDGET AND READY FOR THE REMODEL AND WE HAVE AN ESTIMATED TURNOVER ABOUT FOUR MONTHS, UH, ONCE WE START THE REMODEL.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? UH, NO.
THIS IS THE DISTRICT FIVE CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE FOR QUESTIONS.
IF THE APPLICANT CAN COME BACK UP PLEASE.
AND WALSH IS COMING UP STAFF, UH, GIVEN A C ONE CD, IS THERE ANY BUFFER REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN THAT AND A RESIDENTIAL USAGE? YES, THERE IS A REQUIRED BUFFER FOR THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF C ONE AND UH, ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE.
WHAT IS THAT BUFFER? I BELIEVE IT IS 15 FEET, BUT LET ME CONFIRM.
SO YES, UM, THERE IS A DA 15 FOOT, UM, BUFFER, LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
WOULD THAT BE ABLE TO INCLUDE A DRIVEWAY FOR A LANDSCAPE BUFFER? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM THE LANDSCAPING TEAM TO CONFIRM, BUT I DO NOT, IT WOULD NEED TO BE A CONSISTENT 15
[01:15:01]
FEET STRIP OF LANDSCAPING.THAT'S ANY UM, REQUIREMENT FOR FENCING BETWEEN THE C ONE? YES.
A SOLID SCREEN, SIX FEET SOLID SCREEN.
SO TO THE APPLICANT, UM, YOU KNOW A LOT OF THIS IS GONNA DEPEND THEN ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN GET TDOT TO AGREE OKAY.
TO AN ENTRANCE TO 35 TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL ENTRANCE.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A 15 FOOT BUFFER LANDSCAPE BUFFER BETWEEN, UM, THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL AND YOUR COMMERCIAL USE.
THE OTHER OPTION IS TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND SEEK A VARIANCE FOR THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFER, CORRECT STAFF? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, LET ME ASK YOU THIS, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED, UM, HOURS OF OPERATION? UH, YES SIR.
I MEAN OUR MAIN HOURS OF OPERATION ARE NINE, UH, 9:00 AM TO 6:30 PM MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY OR MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY AND THEN CLOSING ON SUNDAY.
BUT I MEAN, WE'RE WILLING TO ADJUST IF THAT'S AN ISSUE.
IT'S MAINLY WHEN EVERYONE'S AT WORK.
AND HOW ABOUT NO OUTDOOR AMPLIFICATION, WOULD YOU AGREE TO THAT? OF COURSE.
WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING OUTDOORS.
WE'RE KEEPING THE STRUCTURE AS IS.
WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING ADDITIONAL OTHER THAN UH, JUST ADDING THE CONCRETE FOR THE PARKING OF THE VEHICLES.
AND IT'S A SMALL CAR LOT, SO IT'S ABOUT, IT FITS ABOUT EIGHT TO 10 AT MOST.
SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A DEALERSHIP WHERE IT'S A SMALL FAMILY OWNED CAR LOT.
RIGHT NOW YOU SEEM TO INDICATE EIGHT CARS FOR VEHICLE DISPLAY ON YOUR SITE PLAN? YES SIR.
AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WILL BE BOUND TO THIS SITE PLAN GIVEN A CONDITIONAL USE? YES, OF COURSE.
ALRIGHT, UH, I'M GONNA TURN THIS OVER TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT.
DO YOU HAVE ACCESS OFF OF HAWTHORNE CURRENTLY? I'M SORRY YOU HAVE ACCESS OFF OF? YES.
AND UH, AS I STATED, UH, TRAFFIC SET THAT IT MIGHT BE ABLE TO EXCLUSIVELY USE, BUT UNTIL WE'RE IN THE BUILDING, THE PORTION OF IT, SO ONCE ZONING IS COMPLETE.
UM, ARE YOU PLANNING TO DO ANY, UH, VEHICLE MAINTENANCE ON YOUR PROPERTY? NO, SIR.
WE DON'T DO VEHICLE MAINTENANCE.
IT'S AS WE, UH, PURCHASE THEM FROM, FROM AUCTION CLEAN AND THAT'S IT.
WE, UH, SELL UH, BLUE TITLE VEHICLES.
WE DON'T SELL ANY, ANY, UH, REPAIR VEHICLES FOR THAT.
WE TAKE THEM TO, UH, MECHANICS 'CAUSE WE, WE DON'T HAVE MECHANICS IN HOUSE.
BUT YOU'RE STILL GONNA DO SOME CLEANING ON THE LOT, RIGHT? UH, JUST THE, THE MAIN VACUUMING AND THINGS LIKE THAT? YES.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT ALL? I HAVE SOME, A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR, FOR STAFF AND, UM, SO THE QUESTION WAS ASKED ABOUT BUFFERS BETWEEN C ONE, UM, AND USUALLY A CAR LOT IS A LITTLE MORE INTENSE.
ARE THERE INCREASED BUFFERS IF IT WAS, NO, SIR.
THERE IT'S NOT MORE, UH, INTENSE.
HOWEVER, WE KNOW THAT SHE HAS APPROXIMATELY A 30 FOOT, 38 FOOT, UM, PROPERTY WIDTH ON HAWTHORN.
AND SO IF YOU TAKE 15 FROM THAT, THAT ONLY LEAVES HER A WIDTH OF 23 FEET.
SO BASED ON WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS AND THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPING, SHE IS GOING TO A HUNDRED PERCENT NEED A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT APPROVE THIS IN, UH, PERMITTING WITHOUT THE REQUIREMENTS BEING MET.
AND THAT, THAT WAS, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS BECAUSE IT APPEARS THAT THE, THAT, UH, THE BUFFER REQUIREMENT INTERFERES WITH WHERE THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY IS AT AT THIS POINT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL OF MY QUESTIONS.
SO COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE TO YOU FOR A MOTION.
UH, ACTUALLY, MR. CHAIR, BEFORE I MAKE MY MOTION, IF I COULD ASK THE APPLICANT ONE MORE QUESTION? YES, SIR.
SO, UNDERSTANDING THAT EVEN IF ZONING WERE TO RECOMMEND
[01:20:01]
APPROVAL TODAY MM-HMM,YOU WANT TO GO FORWARD? YES, SIR.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, NOW I'M PREPARED.
UM, SO THESE ARE ALWAYS HARD CASES BECAUSE AS WE'VE DISCUSSED REPEATEDLY THE HISTORY OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE HISTORY OF OUR INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM INTERSECT HERE IN A UNPLEASANT WAY.
WE HAVE THE POSSIBLY BUSIEST HIGHWAY IN AMERICA, ONE OF THE PRIMARY ARTERIES FOR TRADE BETWEEN MEXICO, THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA, RUNNING RIGHT THROUGH WHAT WAS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SO WHILE I APPRECIATE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THEIR CONCERNS IN THIS CASE, UH, IN LIGHT OF 35, IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THERE IS NEIGHBOR SUPPORT HERE, UM, I'M GOING TO, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, UH, HOURS OF OPERATION MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, NINE TO SIX 30, NO OUTDOOR AMPLIFICATION OF SOUND.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS DIFFICULT, BUT IN LIGHT OF THE EXISTING HIGHWAY, THE FACT THAT THAT HIGHWAY AT THIS POINT'S NOT GOING ANYWHERE, UH, THAT IS MY MOTION, MR. CHAIR.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
COMMISSIONER WITT, THAT WAS YOU? YES.
UH, SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND.
UH, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT? SEEING NONE LOOKING RIGHT.
IS THE APPLICANT OKAY WITH THOSE CONDITIONS? YES.
BUT YES, THAT'S, YES, I I BELIEVE SHE HAD MENTIONED THOSE HOURS OF OPERATION DURING OUR PRESENTATION.
UM, I, I AGREE WITH, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE.
THIS IS A DIFFICULT CASE WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU LOOK AT OLD AERIAL PHOTOS OF HOW NEIGHBORHOODS WERE WERE IMPACTED.
UM, UM, AND IT'S TOO EARLY FOR STORY TIME, SO I AM JUST GOING TO SAY THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS, UM, ALONG 35, SOME OF THOSE SMALLER LOTS BE CONVERTED INTO TO AUTO, AUTO DEALERSHIPS.
AND UNFORTUNATELY IT APPEARS THAT, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT STAFF WOULD PROBABLY WANT ANOTHER, UM, COMMERCIAL USE, BUT THESE LOTS ARE SO SMALL THAT THERE'S REALLY, UM, NOT AN ALTERNATIVE THAT I CAN, I CAN, I CAN SEE.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS BY COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITSETT.
ITEM PASSES, UM, WITH CONDITIONS? YES.
ALRIGHT, WE WILL, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, I BELIEVE.
AND BEN NAVITA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER SIX IS LOCATED AT 1 5 1 CORTEZ AVENUE AND IS A REQUEST TO GO FROM R SIX TO C TWO WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 49 NOTICES SENT WITH SEVEN RETURNED IN FAVOR, ZERO RETURN IN OPPOSITION.
LAS PALM'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED AND OUTSIDE THE 200 FOOT BOUNDARY.
STAFF DOES FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE CURRENT R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING
[01:25:01]
AREA.THE PROPOSED C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS NOT APPROPRIATE AND WOULD PERMIT COMMERCIAL USES INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, WHICH IS LARGELY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FOR C ONE LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
THIS WILL ENABLE THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO CONTINUE USING THE PROPERTY AT HI AS IT HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY UTILIZED, WHICH IS AS A CONVENIENCE STORE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION WILL LIMIT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY TO LIGHT COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND WILL ALSO LIMIT THE BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET WITH AN AGGREGATE OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET.
PERMITTED STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF C ONE LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
I'M HERE, UH, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, UH, REQUESTING THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE, UH, ZONED TO C TWO TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF THE CURRENT BUSINESS.
CURRENTLY, IT'S A CONVENIENCE STORE IN WHICH A PORTION OF THE BUILDING THERE THAT HOPED TO POSSIBLY, UH, CONVERT IT INTO A, UH, PACKAGE STORE, BASICALLY A LIQUOR STORE.
AND IN DOING SO, UH, OF COURSE THE REQUEST FOR A C TWO ZONE WAS SU SUBMITTED.
UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT, OF COURSE IT'S A, UH, OLD NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, BUT UNFORTUNATELY UNDER A, UH, AND OF COURSE I KNOW THAT THE CONSIDERATION OF A C ONE ZONE, WHICH OF COURSE WOULD PERMIT A CONVENIENCE STORE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY WOULD NOT, UM, UH, ALLOW A PACKAGE STORE.
AND SO, UM, I'M WONDERING IF, UH, THERE'S A REQUEST FOR, UH, UH, CONDITIONAL USE WITH THAT C ONE TO ALLOW A PACKAGE STORE, UH, AGAIN, WITH KNOWING FOR, WELL, OF COURSE, THE, UH, REQUIREMENTS OF A PACKAGE STORE, IT'S HOURS OF OPERATION, UH, IT'S CLOSING DAYS AND OF COURSE IT'S CLOSING DAYS ON HOLIDAYS, UH, TO ALLOW THE, UH, CURRENT OWNERS TO EXPAND THEIR, UH, OPERATIONS.
IT'S NOT ONLY A CONVENIENCE STORE, BUT ALSO, UH, ALLOW THEM TO OPERATE A, A NEIGHBORHOOD PACKAGE STORE.
AND SO YOUR CONSIDERATION WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED IF, UH, IF GIVEN THAT.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ONE.
COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE, ANOTHER ONE FOR YOU MR. CHAIR.
I, LET ME ASK STAFF, THIS IS A LIQUOR STORE ALLOWED IN C TWO? IT IS.
ALRIGHT, CAN YOU REMIND ME OF THE COUNT ON THIS CASE PLEASE? GIMME ONE SECOND.
ZERO OPPOSED? LAS PALMAS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED.
AND OUTSIDE 200 FEET, WE RECEIVED 24 IN FAVOR.
ALL RIGHT, MR. GONZALEZ? YES, HONOR, FORGIVE ME, I, UM, WAS EXPECTING SOMETHING ELSE.
SO RIGHT NOW, IS THE BUSINESS IN OPERATION AS A CONVENIENCE STORE? YES IT IS.
UM, BUT NO ALCOHOL OR NO LIQUOR SALES ARE TAKING PLACE AT THIS TIME? NO, SIR.
UH, WHAT THEY ARE HOPING TO DO, THE APPLICANT IS CONTINUE WITH THE CONVENIENCE STORE, BUT A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY PROPERTY.
UM, IF, IF YOU COULD MAYBE, UH, PUT A PICTURE OF YOU GET HIM A PROPERTY.
UM, AND GET HIM A POINTER IF YOU WILL SEE RIGHT THERE.
UM, I GUESS THERE'S A POINTER RIGHT THERE.
HOW DOES THIS WORK? JUST PRESS THIS BUTTON.
UH, THIS AREA HERE, OF COURSE, THIS IS THE MAIN ENTRANCE RIGHT HERE AND IT OPERATES AS A CONVENIENCE STORE CURRENTLY AND WHICH WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE.
THERE'S AN AREA IN THE BACK, WHICH IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
UH, AND THERE'S A DOOR THAT FACES THE, UH, UH, WHAT ROAD IS THAT? UH, IS THAT THE, UH, CORTES SIDE OF THE ROAD? I THINK MAYBE, UH, IT SITS RIGHT, YOU KNOW, JUST OFF OF THAT AREA WALL.
[01:30:01]
WE GO.AND SO WHAT THEY ARE PLANNING TO DO OR HOPE TO DO IS THAT CONTINUE WITH THE CONVENIENCE STORE, BUT AS A, UH, UM, WITH, TO HELP WITH THEIR, I GUESS, UH, THEIR BUSINESS TO UP, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, BRING IN MORE REVENUE IS THEY HOPE TO OPEN A LIQUOR STORE, PACKAGE STORE AT THE BACK PORTION OF THE BUILDING, WHICH THE MAIN ENTRANCE WOULD BE ON THE WALL STREET ADDRESS, UH, SIDE OF THE STREET.
AND ALLOW THEM TO NOT ONLY CONTINUE WITH THE CONVENIENCE STORE, BUT TO OPERATE A SEPARATE BUILDING BECAUSE THERE'S A WALL THAT SEPARATES THE, THE, UH, THE CONVENIENCE STORE WITH THAT, UM, VACANT SPACE TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
UH, AND WITH TABC REQUIREMENTS, UH, THEY'RE ABLE TO DO SO, UH, AS LONG AS THE BUILDING THAT'S IN, UH, IN THE REAR COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS HAVING A FRONT DOOR FOR YOUR CUSTOMERS TO ENTER THE ESTABLISHMENT, A BACK OR SIDE DOOR, WHICH ON THE OTHER END OF THE BUILDING THERE IS A REAR DOOR ENTRANCE AND A, UH, RESTROOM FACILITY THAT, UH, MEETS THE A DA REQUIREMENT.
AND WHICH OF COURSE THE APPLICANT SAYS HE WILL, UH, WILL, WILL, UM, DO, UH, IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, TO DO NOT ONLY RUN THE COMMUNITY STORE, BUT TO OPEN A NEIGHBORHOOD LIQUOR STORE, UM, FOR THE, UH, SURROUNDING AREA.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. GONZALEZ.
STAFF, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION HERE.
THIS IS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED R FOUR, CORRECT.
WHY? SO, UM, WITH THE PROPERTY HISTORY IT WAS ZONED TWO R FOUR, UH, BACK IN 2001, BUT BECAUSE THERE WAS AN EXISTING, UM, RETAIL GROCERIES WITH BEER TO GO, IT'S CONSIDERED AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE RIGHT NOW.
SO IF WE WERE, AT THIS POINT, THE REQUEST IS FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, THAT ENTIRE PARCEL TO BE C TWO? CORRECT.
THAT'S IN CASE IF MAYBE THEY WANNA EXPAND OR NEED TO, UM, SAY IF THEY NEED TO RENOVATE, THAT'S GONNA COST MORE THAN 50% OF THE APPRAISED VALUE.
THE NON-CONFORMING USE WOULD NO LONGER, IT WOULD GO VOID, SO.
UM, AT THIS POINT I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
ON MY LEFT, I HAVE ONE COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, IT APPEARS THAT THE, UH, PORTION OVER TO SAN BERNARDO IS VACANT.
DID, ARE THEY GONNA THE SAN BERNARDO OR WALL STREET? UH, IT FRONTS SAN BERNARDO ALSO.
ARE THEY GONNA PAVE THAT AND MAKE THAT ACCESS FOR THE LIQUOR STORE OR IS THAT JUST GONNA REMAIN VACANT? UH, WHICH PORT ARE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? WHICH PORTION AGAIN? THE BACKYARD, I GUESS.
OH, THE BACKYARD WHERE THE, THAT'S PART OF THEIR, THAT'S PART OF THEIR PREMISES.
IT'S GONNA REMAIN, UH, VACANT.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA PAY, UH, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND AT THIS TIME, THEY'RE NOT PLANNING TO, TO, UH, PAVE THE AREA.
SO THAT'LL BE ZONED, THAT'S THE RE ZONING REQUEST IS FOR THAT PORTION TOO? YES, SIR.
ALL OF THAT PROPERTY RIGHT THERE, UH, OF COURSE, UH, THAT TYPE OF BUSINESS IS NOT, UH, HIGH VOLUME, UH, OTHER THAN OF COURSE, HOLIDAY SEASONS, BUT, UH, MOST OF THE TRAFFIC THAT THEY PROBABLY MAY RECEIVE AS THEY CURRENTLY DO IS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, 'CAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A VERY LARGE PARKING AREA.
UH, BUT IT'LL BE, UM, UM, ONSITE PARKING AND OFF STREET PARKING, SIDE PARKING.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S THE REQUEST.
AND, UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS?
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT QUESTIONS.
MR. CHAIR, QUESTION FOR STAFF.
IF THIS IS APPROVED, WILL ANY ADDITIONAL PARKING BE REQUIRED OR DOES THE EXISTING LOT, UM, SUPPORT IN THE PARKING? WELL, AS WE MENTIONED BEFORE, IT'S EXISTING NON-CONFORMING.
SO IF IT'S REZONED TO, WHETHER IT BE C TWO, C ONE, WHATEVER IT IS, IF THEY EXPAND OR THEY PULL PERMITS TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN YES, THEY'LL HAVE TO MEET ALL THE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
BUT IF THEY LEAVE IT AS IS, IT'LL JUST STAY THAT WAY.
ANY OTHER, UH, QUICK COMMISSIONER? QE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UH, JUST SOUTH OF THERE
[01:35:01]
ON CASSVILLE ROAD, THAT CORRIDOR BETWEEN, UM, JUST WEST OF, UH, GERMAN MCMILLAN, ALL THOSE BUSINESSES HAVE THE DESIGNATION OF NA.WAS IT, UH, BECAUSE OF A, UM, CITY PLAN THAT ALL THOSE BUSINESSES ARE? NA, IT, WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THE ZONING HISTORY ON THOSE TO FIND OUT, BUT SEEING THAT THEY'RE CLUSTERED THAT WAY, IT, IT IS OFTEN THE RESULT OF EITHER A LARGE AREA OR SOME SORT OF, UH, ACTION THAT WAS DONE.
THEY LOOKED LIKE SC THREE RS AND IF WE'RE LOOKING IN THE RIGHT AREA AND C TWO NAS.
SO IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IT WAS PART OF SOME, SOME PLANNING ACTION OR ZONING ACTION, BUT WE CAN'T CONFIRM FOR SURE AT THIS MOMENT.
UM, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
UH, YOU HAD MENTIONED, OH, THIS, SORRY, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT SINCE IT'S NON-CONFORMING AND, AND UNLESS THEY DID SOME MAJOR RENOVATION, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO, IT WOULD NOT INCUR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING.
WOULD ZONING CHANGE BE ONE OF THOSE, RIGHT? NO, THE ZONING CHANGE, YOU, YOU CAN CHANGE ZONING, BUT WHATEVER'S THERE NOW CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE THE WAY IT'S OPERATING.
BUT WOULD BY ADDING A LIQUOR STORE THOUGH, THAT WOULD BE A CHANGE, WOULDN'T IT? IF, IF RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST A CONVENIENCE STORE, OR I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE HISTORY.
UM, IN THE PAST, ALCOHOL HAS BEEN SOLD AT THIS LOCATION, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
TO GO ALCOHOL SALES TO GO ALCOHOL SALE.
AND IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH TO-GO ALCOHOL SALES AND A STRAIGHT LIQUOR STORE? YES, THERE WOULD BE.
I SHOULD, YEAH, I SHOULD, I SHOULD ADDRESS THIS QUESTION TO COMMISSIONER BOTTLES.
HE'S THE KNOWLEDGEABLE ONE ON TABC REQUIREMENTS ON THE, ON THE COMM, BUT, OKAY, SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT, OKAY, ALRIGHT.
IN FACT, UH, A I BELIEVE THE LIQUORICE STORE HAS TO BE A C ONE CD TO BE ALLOWED.
BUT FOR A CONVENIENCE STORE, THAT'S A DIFFERENT USE.
AND SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE PRIMARY USE IS SELLING OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES AND SO THE ALCOHOL BECOMES AN ACCESSORY TO THAT.
IT'S NOT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE USE.
PUT IT IN ARCHITECTURAL TERMS. ACCESSORY USES.
YEAH, THEY, THE TABC WILL REQUIRE A DIFFERENT APPLICATION AND A DIFFERENT INSURANCE AND ALL THAT GOES WITH IT, BUT IT'S, IT'S THE MIX DRINKS.
UH, ALCOHOL IS A LITTLE COMPLICATED.
IT'S NOT JUST THE, UH, RETAIL, BEER AND WINE.
AND SO IT'S A LITTLE LONGER PROCESS.
AND THE NICE THING ABOUT IT IS THAT AN INSPECTOR FROM TABC ACTUALLY SHOWS UP AT YOUR PLACE AND TAKES A VIDEO AND MAKES SURE THAT YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE.
ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU FOR THAT.
ALRIGHT, THOSE ARE ALL OF MY QUESTIONS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE FOR A MOTION.
I, I DID WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF THAT.
IT, IT'S RELATED TO YOUR LINE OF QUESTIONING, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE STUCK IN A SITUATION WHERE WE ARE SEEKING A COMMERCIAL USE ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL USE.
SO THE BUFFERS THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE PREVIOUS CASE WOULD APPLY HERE AS WELL.
SHOULD, UH, THE USE EXPAND BEYOND THE GRANDFATHERED USE? CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
OR IF HE HAD TO REBUILD THE EXISTING, THAT'S CONSIDERED NEW CONSTRUCTION AND IT WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CODE.
WELL, AND WHAT I'M HEARING IS, IS THAT THERE WILL BE SOME REHABBING OF THE VACANT PORTION TO INCLUDE A RESTROOM AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
NOW, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT PENCILING THAT ON THE BACK OF A NAPKIN TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S 50% PLUS ONE.
UM, BUT, UM, AT, AT THIS POINT, UH, I THINK I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS THAN I, UH, CARE TO, UH, I'D RATHER NOT WASTE ANY MORE TIME ON THE DIOCESE, BUT I'D ALSO DON'T WANT TO REJECT THIS CASE OUTRIGHT.
UH, I APPRECIATE, UM, THEM ACCEPTING THE PREVIOUS CONTINUANCE.
BUT I'M GONNA MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE TO THE NEXT MEETING.
[01:40:01]
AND I SO MOVE.THERE IS A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TO THE JANUARY 16TH MEETING.
I'M GONNA GIVE IT TO COMMISSIONER WATSON.
UH, MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE TO THE JANUARY 16TH MEETING BY COMMISSIONER BUSTA MONTE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
MOTION PASSES FOR A CONTINUANCE TO JANUARY 16TH.
MR. GONZALEZ, WOULD YOU GIVE ME A CALL? SURE.
AT YOUR CONVENIENCE? UH, YOU CAN GET MY NUMBER FROM DEREK.
SO, UM, MARY JOHNSON IS HERE AND SHE WAS HERE TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM IN THE BEGINNING.
I THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA BE THE LAST ARGUMENT.
WE DON'T EVEN WORK AND CAME BACK.
SO IF SHE COULD HAVE A FEW MOMENTS OF YOUR TIME FOR ITEM NUMBER 33, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
AND THAT'S THE ONE WE HAD, WE HAD, UH, IN 33, THAT WAS ONE THAT WE APPROVED AS A FOR A CONTINUANCE, CORRECT? NO BIG CALL FOR YOU, MARY? OH, A COUPLE TIMES.
I'M SO, OH MY GOSH, I'M GETTING ALL CONFUSED.
SHE JUST HAS A STATEMENT SHE'D LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD.
I JUST WANTED IT TO BE ON THE RECORD.
I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I LIVE AT 1 25 WEST RIDGEWOOD COURT AND I JUST WANTED TO READ THIS STATEMENT.
UM, THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS LOCATED IN BETWEEN TWO DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS, HOWARD AND HILDEBRAND AND HOWARD AND RIDGEWOOD.
WE HAVE HAD REPEATED WRECKS AT THE HOWARD AND HILDEBRAND INTERSECTION IN ONE FATALITY THERE AFTER THE FATALITY HAPPENED.
THERE IS NOW A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES IN THE WORKS AS WELL AS A CROSSWALK PLANNED.
WITH ALL THE INCREASED HOUSING THAT'S BEEN BUILT SOUTH OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE HOWARD AND RIDGEWOOD INTERSECTION HAS BEEN BECOME INCREASINGLY DANGEROUS WITH THE INCREASED TRAFFIC.
THE FACT THAT THIS PROPERTY'S ON THE CORNER OF THESE TWO DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS, THE STREET PARKING OF TENANTS AND THE FOUR UNITS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD.
CARS HEADED NORTH ON HOWARD OFF OF HILDEBRAND CROSSING SOUTH TO NORTH ON HOWARD ARE ACCELERATING UP A SMALL HILL.
THE VEHICLES PARKED ON THE STREET ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOWARD AND IN MANY INSTANCES, VEHICLES ARE PARKED RIGHT UP TO THE STOP SIGN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RIDGEWOOD AND IT MAKES VISIBILITY FOR THE PEDESTRIANS, THE CYCLISTS AND OTHER MOTORISTS REALLY PERILOUS THE OFF STREET PARKING.
AT THIS MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTY IS NOT ONLY NEEDED AS A CONVENIENCE IN THIS CASE, IT'S A NECESSITY TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
WE MET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER'S ATTORNEYS AND WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONING.
WE STRESS TO THEM HOW IMPORTANT THE OFF STREET PARKING BE CONVENIENT TO ACCESS AND USE FOR THE TENANTS.
THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS ALSO AGREED TO HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN SOLICITING THE CITY, INSTALLING NO PARKING SIGNS ALONG THE SMALL EAST SECTION OF HOWARD NEXT TO THE PROPERTY.
THIS WILL ENCOURAGE THE TENANTS TO USE THE NEW PARKING.
THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT THE OFF STREET PARKING WILL HAPPEN GIVEN THAT WE HAVE ASKED THE CITY BEFORE AND THEY SEEM TO THINK THAT, THAT THE HOWARD IS WIDE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE PARKED CARS, WHICH TO ME SEEMS A LITTLE NEGLIGENT ON THE CITY'S PART.
IT SEEMS THERE WAS NO THOUGHT GIVEN TO THE LOCATION AND HOW PROBLEMATIC IT IS CONCERNING VISIBILITY FOR MOTORISTS BEING SO NEXT TO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD JUSTIN AS, AS AN EXAMPLE THAT IN ONE INSTANCE A VEHICLE PARKED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOWARD AT THE 1 36 PROPERTY WAS HIT BY ANOTHER CAR TURNING NORTH ON HOWARD OFF OF HILDEBRAND AND IT WAS KNOCKED COMPLETELY INTO THE SIDE YARD OF THE, OF THAT PROPERTY.
SO WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WITH THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER SUPPORT AND THE COOPERATION OF THE CITY, WE CAN GET THE SIGNS INSTALLED AND MAKE THAT INTERSECTION MUCH SAFER FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME READ THAT.
ALRIGHT, CASE NUMBER OR ITEM NUMBER 10 I BELIEVE.
[01:45:01]
GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.UH, NAME IS KELLY SANDERS, PLANNING COORDINATOR.
ITEM NUMBER 10, LOCATED AT 8 34 LEAL STREET IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R SIX TO R SIX CD FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
UM, 35 NOTICES WERE SENT TO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED.
AND GARDENDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE WEST END HOPE AND ACTION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OUTSIDE 200 FEET, WE DID RECEIVE THREE IN FAVOR.
AND PROSPECT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
THE EXISTING R SIX IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPOSED R SIX CD FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
STAFF DOESN'T FIND APPROPRIATE.
UM, THERE ARE ZONING DISTRICTS ON THE BLOCK FACE THAT PERMIT TWO OR THREE DWELLING UNITS.
THUS STAFF RECOMMENDS AN ALTERNATE FOR, UH, THREE DWELLING UNITS TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL UNITS BUT STAY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S ESTABLISHED IN THE AREA.
THE REQUEST WOULD ALLOW ADEN ADDITIONAL DENSITY, WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
UM, AGAIN, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF R SIX CD FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS.
AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
MATTHEW GILBERT WITH, OR THAT WAS QUICK.
UH, MATTHEW GILBERT WITH ORTIZ MCKNIGHT, 1 1 2 EAST PECAN, UH, HERE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR 8 3 4 AL STREET.
UH, THIS PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 1.87 ACRES IN SIZE.
UM, AS STAFF MENTIONED, IT IS IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF THREE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UH, PROSPECT HILL, GARDENDALE, AND WEST END HOPE IN ACTION.
THIS IS A OVERVIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES LOCATION IN RELATION TO THOSE THREE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UH, AS PART OF OUR APPLICATION, WE DID REACH OUT TO, UH, THESE THREE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, GARDENDALE IS IN OPPOSITION.
UH, PROSPECT HILL IS IN SUPPORT AND WEST END OPEN HOPE IN ACTION, UH, IS IN OPPOSITION AS WELL.
THIS REQUEST IS FOR REZONING FROM R SIX TO R SIX CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
PREVIOUSLY THIS PROPERTY WAS OWNED MF 33, UH, BEFORE THE GARDENDALE LARGE AREA REZONING, WHICH, UH, WAS UNDERTAKEN EARLIER THIS YEAR.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY, UH, OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AT VARYING, UM, RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES.
THE IMAGE ON THE SCREEN HAS, UH, CHECK BOXES FOR, UH, OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG THE BLOCK THAT ALSO HAVE, UH, THESE CONDITIONAL, UH, USE PERMITS, UH, FOR, UH, ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS.
UM, AS STAFF MENTIONED, UH, THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH, UH, THE CITY'S STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, UH, BY PROVIDING ADDITIONAL HOUSING.
UM, HERE IS A TIMELINE SHOWING EXACTLY KIND OF HOW WE GOT HERE.
UM, THE, UH, PROPERTY, AS I SAID, WAS SUBJECT TO THE, UH, GARDENDALE LARGE AREA REZONING, WHICH, UH, COMMENCED IN, UH, 2022, UH, PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE ACTUALLY SENT TO THE ESTATE OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER.
UM, THE CURRENT PROPERTY PROPERTY OWNER, UH, PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR, IMMEDIATELY ENGAGED IN ARCHITECT, UM, ALL BEFORE THE EFFECT OF DATE OF THE GARDENDALE LARGE AREA REZONING.
A CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION WAS OBTAINED IN JUNE, UH, FOR MULTIFAMILY USAGE.
UH, AND IT WASN'T UNTIL AUGUST UH, THAT PLAN REVIEW ACTUALLY, UH, CAUGHT THE DISCREPANCY, UH, WHICH WAS FOLLOWED IMMEDIATELY BY THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER ENGAGING OUR FIRM TO, UH, SUBMIT THIS REQUEST.
UM, OUR INITIAL OUTREACH WAS TO PROSPECT HILL AND TO GARDENDALE.
UM, WE FOLLOWED THAT UP WITH OUTREACH TO WEST END HOPE IN ACTION.
EVENTUALLY SUBMITTED THE, UH, REZONING APPLICATION.
UH, WE HOSTED A COMMUNITY MEETING WITH GARDENDALE AND WEST END HOPE IN
[01:50:01]
ACTION ON DECEMBER 1ST, AND, UH, CONDUCTED BLOCK WALKING LAST THURSDAY TO GATHER COMMUNITY SUPPORT.HERE IS A, UH, FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY JUST FOR REFERENCE.
THE EXISTING HOUSE IS SHOWN AS, AS THE, UH, DARKER, UH, HUED.
ALL OF THE, UH, PROPOSED CONDITIONAL, UH, USED DWELLING UNITS ARE IN WHITE LOCATED ACTUALLY BEHIND, UH, THE EXISTING RESIDENCE.
UM, FOUR UNITS IS REQUESTED, ALTHOUGH STAFF IS RECOMMENDING UH, THREE UNITS.
THE PRIMARY REASON FOR THE FOUR UNITS IS TO PRESERVE THAT EXISTING RESIDENTIAL SPACE AT, UH, 8 34 LEAL STREET.
UM, THREE UNITS WOULD BE FEASIBLE, BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UH, REVISITING OF THESE DESIGNS IN ORDER TO ASSESS WHETHER PRESERVATION OF THAT EXISTING RESIDENCE WOULD STILL BE FEASIBLE.
UM, IF NOT, IT WOULD LIKELY RESULT IN THAT PROPERTY BEING RAISED.
AND THEN, UH, CONSTRUCTION OF THE, UH, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDED THREE UNITS HERE IS A, UH, SHOT OF THE, UH, REAR OF THE HOUSE.
IT DOES A BUT UH, AN IMPROVED ALLEYWAY.
UM, THE ALLEYWAYS USED BY RESIDENTS AND BY THE CITY FOR ACCESS AND FOR UTILITIES.
UM, PARKING WOULD BE LOCATED BOTH IN THE REAR AND IN THE FRONT.
IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY GO BACK, UH, FIVE SPACES WOULD BE LOCATED ALONG THE ALLEYWAY, UH, TO THE SOUTH, ALONG WITH TWO TO THREE SPACES, UH, UP NORTH.
UM, WHICH SATISFIES THE, UH, UD C'S PARKING STANDARDS.
UH, THERE WOULD BE SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL, UH, PARKING ALONG, UH, LEO STREET, BUT OF COURSE WE WOULD TRY TO KEEP ALL OF THAT PARKING INTERNAL ON THE PROPERTY.
I DON'T THINK STAFF HAD THIS UPDATED COUNT, BUT WE DID, LIKE I SAID, CONDUCT BLOCK WALKING.
UH, LATE LAST WEEK WE DID TRY TO GO DOOR TO DOOR, UH, AVOIDING SOME OF THE, THE DOGS, UH, IN THE AREA.
UH, WE WERE ABLE TO GAIN, UH, GATHER UH, THREE SIGNATURES OF SUPPORT FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN, UH, 200 FEET.
UM, AGAIN, UH, DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A LOT, BUT JUST ACCESS TO SOME OF THE, THE PROPERTIES WAS, UH, UNOBTAINABLE.
AND JUST TO QUICKLY WRAP UP, THE OVERALL REQUEST IS UH, FOR REZONING TO R SIX CD WITH UH, CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
UH, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA ALONG WITH, UH, STAFF'S UH, STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
UM, I WENT THROUGH THAT MISTAKEN TIMING JUST TO GIVE KIND OF BACKGROUND TO THE PROPERTY AND WHAT KIND OF BROUGHT US HERE TODAY.
UM, BUT THE INCREASED DENSITY AND SENSITIVITY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH THAT PRESERVATION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTS, WE THINK IS UH, DEFINITELY WARRANTED HERE.
AND, UM, I WILL REMAIN AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO.
I HAD SAID THAT PROSPECT HILL WAS OUTSIDE 200 FEET, BUT THAT IS INCORRECT.
THEY ARE WITHIN 200 FEET, SO THEIR APPROVAL IS ACCEPTED WITHIN 200 FEET.
AND THEN AS TO JUST CLARIFY WITH WHAT MS UH, WITH WHAT MATTHEW HAD JUST SAID ABOUT THE THREE, WE DID RECEIVE, UM, SIGNATURES, BUT THEY WERE NOT THE SAME NAMES AS THE OWNERS.
SO I WAS TO BELIEVE THOSE ARE TENANTS.
AND SO THAT WAS WHY THEY WERE PUT IN THE OUTSIDE 200 FEET NOTIFICATION SINCE THEY WERE NOT THE OWNERS WHO SIGNED IT, THEY STILL LIVE THERE.
THEY WEREN'T MATCHING THE OWNER'S NAMES.
SO ONLY OWNERS HAVE RIGHTS OR WHAT IT IS FOR ACCORDING TO YES, ACCORDING TO STATE LAW, IT IS THE OWNERS WHO HAVE THE, UM, WHO ARE RECOMMENDED WITHIN 200 FEET.
WE DO, WE HAVE MR. UH, RUSSELL LON WITH PROSPECT HILL.
HOW Y'ALL DOING? RUSSELL LON, PRESIDENT OF PROSPECT HILL ON THE WEST SIDE IN, UH, 2014 WEST COMMERCE.
AND WHEN I GOT THE ZONING A COUPLE OF MONTHS, I WENT BY THE PROPERTY TO GO LOOK AT IT AND,
[01:55:01]
UH, CALLED FELIX THE ARCHITECT AND, AND WENT OVER A COUPLE OF THINGS WITH HIM.I WAS IMPRESSED WITH THE DESIGN THAT WENT UP.
UH, STILL KEEPING THE ORIGINAL DESIGN IN THE FRONT AND THEN PARKING IN THE REAR ALWAYS BELIEVED PARKING IN THE REAR WAS ALWAYS A GOOD THING AND A LOT OF CONTRACTORS DON'T LIKE DOING IT 'CAUSE THEN THEY HAVE TO TRY AND ASPHALT THE ALLEY WHEN A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE NOT ASPHALTED, UH, IN THIS CASE, PARKING IN THE REAR.
I WAS REALLY APPRECIATIVE THAT WE GOT IN ENOUGH PARKING.
SO I, WE ALL SUPPORT THIS WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
AND WAS THAT THE EXTENT OF PUBLIC COMMENT? THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
STAFF, THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE WHETHER, UH, ACCEPTED AS SUBMITTED OR WITH THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
ALRIGHT, SO THAT MEANS THAT THE APPLICANT WILL BE BOUND TO THE SITE PLAN, CORRECT? ONE WAY OR THE OTHER? YES.
SO IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO DETERMINE THAT THEY WERE NOT HAPPY WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF THREE UNITS AND DETERMINE TO, UH, DEMOLISH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, THEY WOULD'VE TO COME BACK HERE.
IS THAT RIGHT? IF THEY WANTED TO BUILD THREE, FOUR UNITS ON THAT PROPERTY OR THREE UNITS ON THAT PROPERTY? CORRECT.
IF THEY DECIDE THAT THEY WANT TO, THEY NEED TO DEMOLISH THE FIRST BUILDING, THEY COULD EITHER REBUILD TO MATCH THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND DIMENSIONS OR THEY WOULD NEED TO REVISE THEIR SITE PLAN, WHICH IF IT'S A, AN EXPANSION FROM WHAT WAS APPROVED, THEN IT WOULD BE A MAJOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT.
BUT IF IT'S SMALLER THAN WHAT WAS APPROVED, IT WOULD BE A MINOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, WHICH CAN BE DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY.
BUT REGARDLESS, IT'S HOWEVER MANY UNITS ARE SPECIFIED TODAY.
I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR RIGHT NOW.
COM OTHER COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON FOR THE APPLICANT.
I MAY HAVE MISSED THIS DETAIL IN THE MIDST OF YOUR PRESENTATION, SO I APOLOGIZE IF I DID, BUT CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY, UM, THE FOUR UNITS ARE GOING TO BE RENTED OR SOLD TO PROPERTY OWNERS? THEY'RE PROPOSED FOR RENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, UH, YOU INDICATE THAT MANLOVE'S ON THE BACK IS AN ALLEY, BUT IT'S GOT A NAME AND THEN THERE'S DOWN THE STREET, THERE'S TWO LOTS THAT LOOK LIKE THEY'RE PLATTED ON.
UH, MANLOVE, COULD YOU REPL THIS INTO MORE THAN THE SINGLE LOT THAT I AM NOT SURE? UH, I'M HERE WITH THE ARCHITECT, UH, THE PROP PROJECT ARCHITECT WHO COULD PROBABLY EXPAND ON THAT.
UM, I'M FELIX ZIGA, THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT.
UM, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THE, WITH THE NEW ZONING R SIX, I DON'T THINK A REPL INTO TWO LOTS WOULD BE FEASIBLE BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T HAVE ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
A QUESTION FOR STAFF PROPOSED PARKING, CAN THAT GO ON EXISTING UTILITY? UTILITY, EXCUSE ME, UTILITY EASEMENTS, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE ALLEY, AS LONG AS THEY'RE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, I, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'RE ALLOWED TO PARK IN THE ALLEY.
YOU HAVE, THEY'D HAVE TO PARK ON, THEY CAN'T CREATE AN OBSTACLE WHERE TRAFFIC HAS TO GO THROUGH OR TRASH OR WHATEVER KIND OF MECHANISM HAS TO GO THROUGH THERE.
SO IT WOULD NEED TO BE ON SITE, CORRECT? MM-HMM.
AND I DO WANNA CLARIFY BASED ON THE ACREAGE, IF THIS IS ACCURATE, UM, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PLOT THE LOT INTO TWO LOTS, BUT, UH, THAT DOES, DOES NOT AFFECT THE ZONING REQUEST BECAUSE IT'S THE OVERALL SITE PLAN AND WHATEVER DENSITY IS AGREED UPON TODAY.
HOW BIG IS THE LOT? OH, UH, I JUST DID THE MATH.
IT'S 1873 OF AN ACRE, SO IT'S, OH, DID I DO THE MATH WRONG? IT'S APPROXIMATELY OVER 8,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT 81, 60.
IT CAME OUT TO 12,000 BEFORE, SO, YEAH, SO GOOD QUESTION.
BUT MANLOVE IS A STREET, IS IT NOT? NOT AN ALLEY.
I MEAN, I'VE NEVER SEEN AN ALLEY NAMED IT.
IT COULD BE A THAT IT'S, IT'S AN ALLEY, BUT IT HAS A STREET NAME.
UH, BUT IT'S NOT AN OFFICIAL LIKE LOCAL STREET,
[02:00:01]
BUT I CAN FIND OUT FOR YOU.YEAH, JUST I WAS CURIOUS 'CAUSE THEY, SOMEBODY WAS ABLE TO PLOT TWO LOTS DOWN THE WAY ON MANLOVE WHEN YOU, Y'ALL SHOWED THE MAP.
CAN I, CAN I ADDRESS THAT QUESTION? I, I, I DO KNOW THE ANSWER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
UM, SO MANLOVE ALLEY IS, IS AN ALLEY.
UM, BUT IT IS, UH, IT IS, IT DOES SERVICE, UM, PUBLIC UTILITIES AND ALSO PUBLIC SERVICES LIKE TRASH PICKUP AND SUCH.
AND YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE ARE SOME PROPERTIES THAT FACE MLO VALLEY.
SO IT, IT'S A STREET FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES IN TERMS THAT IT CAN BE USED AS A RIGHT OF WAY, BUT IT, IT IS A CATEGORY OF AN ALLEY DUE TO ITS, UH, DIMENSIONS, UM, TRAFFIC.
UM, JUST TO, UH, POINT OF CLARIFICATION, UM, TRAFFIC AND ALL, ALL PLAN REVIEW HAS BEEN COMPLETED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ZONING.
SO IF, IF ZONING WERE TO APPROVE THIS, WE'D BE ABLE TO GET A PERMIT, YOU KNOW, WITHIN 24 HOURS.
IT'S, IT IS CLASSIFIED AN ALLEY, NOT AS, IT'S NOT IN THE STREET LISTING.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? JUST ONE QUESTION FOR MATTHEW.
ARE THEY GONNA BE USING, UH, MANLOVE AS AN ENTRYWAY TO THE PROPERTY OR NO, JUST STRICTLY THROUGH LEO? UH, THEY WOULD ACCESS THE PARKING ON YES.
SO THEY WILL BE ENTERING THROUGH MANLOVE? CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? LOOKING LEFT, LOOKING RIGHT.
BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE FOR A MOTION.
ALRIGHT, UM, SO THIS IS A DIFFICULT CASE, UM, MADE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT BY THE FACT THAT THERE ARE TWO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, ONE AGAINST ONE IN FAVOR.
I THINK, UM, THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A DENSITY THERE THAT THAT CAN RAISE ISSUES AND I CAN SEE HOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SPLIT.
UM, WHAT IS MOST DISTURBING ABOUT THIS AND IS SORT OF HOW THIS ENDED UP BEFORE US IN THE FIRST PLACE.
UH, AS MENTIONED IN THE TIMELINE, THIS WAS A CASE WHERE THE LARGE AREA REZONING WAS OCCURRING DURING THE SALE OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, BECAUSE OF THAT FAILURE IN A HANDOFF OF INFORMATION BETWEEN THE CURRENT LISTED NOTICED OWNER AND THE PROSPECTIVE OWNER, THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WERE PLANNED AND THAT THEY HAD IN GOOD FAITH, I BELIEVE BEGUN WORKING ON, UM, WOULD HAVE FALLEN AS OF RIGHT OR WOULD'VE BEEN ALLOWED AS OF RIGHT PRIOR TO THE LARGE AREA REZONING.
THAT HOWEVER, CUTS BOTH WAYS ON THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PART, THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER'S PART.
IT INDICATES SORT OF AN EQUITY INTEREST, AN EQUITABLE INTEREST IN ALLOWING THEM TO MOVE, MOVE FORWARD.
HOWEVER, THAT IS BALANCED WITH THE SURROUNDING USES AND THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, PARTICULARLY IN THIS CASE, THE ONE THAT WAS AGAINST, UH, THIS REZONING BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THEY HAD SETTLED THIS ISSUE WITH THE LARGE AREA REZONING TO PROTECT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, I AM STUCK CHOOSING BETWEEN THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT'S SUBMITTED.
I, I THINK WHAT'S SUBMITTED IS WELL DESIGNED, WHICH IS NOT OUR PURVIEW, BUT CAN BE APPROPRIATE HERE.
UM, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE
[02:05:01]
AND DE DEMOLISHING OF IT.HOWEVER, I DO NOT WANT TO BE HELD HOSTAGE BY IT EITHER.
UM, AND SO AT THIS POINT I'M GOING TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL IN LINE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF, UH, R SIX CONDITIONAL USE FOR THREE UNITS.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF, UH, THREE UNITS.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
THAT WAS COMMISSIONER BARTOS, I BELIEVE.
ALRIGHT, UM, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS LOOKING LEFT.
IN A STRANGE TURN OF EVENTS FOR ME, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, UH, BECAUSE UNLIKE ONE OF THE EARLIER, UM, PRESENTATIONS WE SAW, THIS SITE PLAN INDICATES EXACTLY HOW THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE USED AND IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND.
UM, AND IT MAKES SENSE TO ME IN TERMS OF THE EQUITABLE INTEREST CONCERN THAT COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE, UM, THOROUGHLY EXPLAINED, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THEY WERE WILLING TO INCORPORATE PRESERVATION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE.
UM, AND BECAUSE THE DESIGN AND THE USE OF THESE UNITS IS PROVIDING ATTAINABLE HOUSING STOCK, UM, WHILE RESPECTING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND SO FOR ME, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS, UM, A GOOD PROPOSAL.
UM, AND I THINK IT DOES FIT AND CONSIDERING PROSPECT HILL IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET, UM, I BELIEVE SUPPORTING, UH, THEIR, UM, POSITION ON THIS IS, IS DOES REFLECT THE INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY, UM, OVERALL AND UH, ALSO CONSIDERING THE EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT DONE IN THIS CASE.
UH, I THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD FAIR EXPECTATION ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON HERE.
UM, AND, UH, AMPLE OPPORTUNITY AND ADJUSTMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO REFLECT THAT.
UH, OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT COMMENTS, UH, RATHER THAN GOING INTO MUCH, I'M GONNA SAY DITTO TO WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON HAS SAID.
UH, I EXPERIENCED SOMETHING LIKE THIS MYSELF A LONG TIME AGO WHERE SOMETHING GOT CHANGED WITHOUT OUR KNOWING IT.
AND SO I UNDERSTAND AND I, I DO BELIEVE THIS IS A WELL DESIGNED PROJECT.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMM UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? ONE QUESTION ACTUALLY FOR A SEC.
SO JUST MAYBE YOU CAN EDUCATE ME HERE.
SO THIS ZONING THAT HAPPENED, WAS THIS PART OF THE UNIFICATION THAT REZONED IT OR THIS IS THE OLD ZONING.
IT WAS PART OF A LARGE AREA REZONING.
SO A RESOLUTION WAS DONE BY COUNCIL TO INITIATE, UM, ANALYSIS AND RE UM, REZONING OF THE AREA BASED ON WHAT WAS ON THE GROUND AT THE TIME.
SO WHAT WAS THE INITIAL, WHAT WAS IT PREVIOUSLY? IT WAS MF 33.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT DISCUSSION.
OH MAN, THEY ALL, THEY HAD A BUNCH OF PEOPLE
UM, YEAH, NO, THEY ALWAYS PUT ME RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS ALWAYS, THIS IS MY SEAT.
UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY A, A DIFFICULT ONE FOR ME ON DECIDING AS WELL.
UM, AND, AND, AND WHAT'S WEIRD IS I KNOW WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GET INTO DESIGN.
UM, MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THE SITE PLAN IS, IS UH, THERE'S NOT A LOT THAT IT'S ALMOST A HUNDRED PERCENT IMPERVIOUS COVER.
UM, BUT I DO RECOGNIZE THAT THE TRADE-OFF TO THAT IS THAT THEY ARE SMALLER UNITS AND THEY AREN'T LARGE.
TWO AND A HALF STORY THINGS TOWERING OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THE, UH, UH, ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY ONE STORY BUILDINGS.
UM, SO I AM STILL FORMULATING HOW I AM GOING TO TO VOTE, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF THREE UNITS.
MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE.
COMMISSIONER BARDOS, I BELIEVE YOU MADE THE SECOND CORRECT.
UH, IS THERE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER? MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
[02:10:01]
RECONSIDER BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION? MR. CHAIR? I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REZONING AS PRESENTED.
WAS THAT YOU? COMMISSIONER KELLUM.
MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM.
UM, DO WE NEED DISCUSSION? ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT.
[Approval of Minutes ]
HAVE MINUTES.SO IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OR CORRECT MINUTES? MR. CHAIR? I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER REYES WITH A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
[Director’s Report ]
APPROVED.DO WE HAVE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT? NO, OTHER THAN WE DIDN'T GET STORY TIME WITH SIPES TODAY.
I KNOW I WAS GONNA OH, I KNOW.
SO WE JUST WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
UH, AND WISH YOU THE HAPPIEST OF HOLIDAYS AND A GREAT NEW YEAR, AND WE WILL SEE YOU IN A FEW SHORT WEEKS.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS.
THIS HAS BEEN A, A REALLY GOOD YEAR.
AND, UH, I ALSO WANNA PUT A, A THANK YOU TO, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, FUENTES, WHO, WHO, UM, SERVED WITH US THIS YEAR AS WELL.
UM, AND WITH THAT WE HAVE TWO MORE DAYS UNTIL THE WINTER SOLSTICE, SO THE SADNESS ENDS AND WE, AND THE DAYS GET LONGER, WHICH IS AWESOME.
SO WITH THAT, THE ZONING COMMISSION IS ADJOURNED AT THREE 17.