[00:00:03]
OKAY, MR. CHAIR, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
ALL RIGHT, WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
IF WE COULD BEGIN WITH OUR SPANISH TRANSLATIONS SERVICES STATEMENT, PLEASE.
WELL, WINTER IS ENDING, BUT COLDS MAY STILL BE GOING AROUND.
AND I KNOW I SAY THIS EVERY TIME.
WE STILL HAVE MASKS, RIGHT? IF YOU WOULD LIKE A MASK, WE DO HAVE SOME OVER HERE IN THE CORNER.
UM, 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 COMMISSION.
I HEREBY COMMISSIONER, I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION.
I'D LIKE TO DO A ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT.
MARCO BARROS, UH, REPRESENTING DISTRICT NINE, JOHN BUSTAMANTE, DISTRICT FIVE, ALDO ORTIZ, DISTRICT EIGHT.
DANIEL KELLUM, DISTRICT ONE, JOHN WHITSETT, DISTRICT 10, TAYLOR WATSON, DISTRICT TWO.
DISTRICT SIX STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT.
WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL RIGHT.
[Zoning Items ]
YOU.UH, PRIOR TO COMMENCING OUR HEARING, I'D LIKE OUR STAFF TO GO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF.
BEFORE WE 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 REQUEST TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROCEDURE, PLEASE SEE 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 EX INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST.
FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED IN TO SPEAK FOR, 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 WHEN YOUR THREE MINUTES ARE UP.
FOR THOSE WHO 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 INDICATE WHEN THE SPEAKER GOES UP TO THE PODIUM THAT THEY ARE YIELDING THEIR TIME.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH ANY OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS.
UM, STAFF IF WE COULD GO OVER ANY WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONE ITEMS PLEASE.
WE HAVE ONE ITEM THAT'S BEEN POSTPONED.
ITEM NUMBER ONE, LOCATED AT THE, GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 5,900 BLOCK OF HEATH ROAD.
THAT ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY AND WILL BE RE NOTIFIED ONE IF THEY, UM, WHEN THEY DECIDE TO PROCEED.
SO LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THE PROPERTY ON HEATH ROAD, YOU ARE FREE TO LEAVE AS THAT ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY AND YOU WILL AS SAID, WILL BE RE NOTIFIED IF FUTURE ACTION OCCURS.
STAFF, IF WE COULD PLEASE GO OVER THE LIST OF ITEMS ON THE COMBINED AGENDA.
ITEMS ON THE COMBINED AGENDA INCLUDE ITEMS NUMBER 5, 7, 12, 13, AND 17.
[00:05:03]
ALRIGHT, SO 10 HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE CORRECT.10 HAS BEEN MOVED TO INDIVIDUAL.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, ANY ITEMS REMAINING ON THE COMBINED HEARING THAT YOU WOULD WISH TO PULL TO INDIVIDUAL? LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE.
IF WE COULD PLEASE READ THE COMBINED HEARING NUMBER ONE INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A CHA, A REQUEST AND A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR AUTO, PAINT AND BODY WITH ALL LAY'S TO REMAIN THE SAME.
15 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
OUTSIDE 200 FEET WE RECEIVE 10 IN FAVOR.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM I ONE AND I TWO TWO C TWO C TWO NA C3 C3 NA IDZ TWO WITH USES PERMITTED IN MF 33 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT R SIX, R FIVE, R FOUR, AND FOR 68 19 SOUTH.
ZARA, IT HAS BEEN AMENDED TO C3 S WITH A SPECIF SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A CARPENTRY SHOP WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY THE IH 35 TO THE EAST AND SOUTH PALO ALTO ROAD AND SOMERSET ROAD TO THE WEST AND WEST MAYFIELD BOULEVARD TO THE NORTH 977.
TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE TIERRA LINDA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM OH TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR AUTO SHOP TO R FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED.
AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM NUMBER 13 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A TATTOO PARLOR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 25 54 BLOSSOM DRIVE.
13 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ZERO RECEIPT IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED.
AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
AND THEN FOR ITEM NUMBER 17, IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FIVE TO IDZ ONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR 10 DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
LOCATED AT 1 47 WEST QUAIL DRIVE.
ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.
AND THE WOODLAWN HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THESE ITEMS? UH, WE DO HAVE A VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HEAR THAT WE HAVE NO SPEAKER SIGNED UP? THAT IS CORRECT.
IF WE COULD HEAR THE VOICEMAIL PLEASE.
27 11 MISTY SPRAY DRIVE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO TWO FOUR.
TELEPHONE NUMBER (210) 602-3171.
UH, WE'RE IN OPPOSITION FOR THE ZONING AND WANTING TO KNOW WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE ZONING.
UH, THE CASE NUMBER, THE LAST THREE DIGITS ARE 3, 3 5.
AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, I WILL NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE COMBINED HEARING.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS. NUMBER SEVEN.
NUMBER SEVEN, WITH THE AMENDMENT.
ALRIGHT, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS FIVE SEVEN AS AMENDED 12, 13 AND 17.
MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT? SEEING NONE.
IF WE COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR
[00:10:01]
ANY OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, YOU ARE FREE TO ENJOY THE COLD SPRING DAY AND AS THOSE ITEMS WILL NOW BE PROCEEDING ON TO CITY COUNCIL.ALRIGHT, WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR COMBINED HEARING NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS A CONTINUANCE HEARING TO APRIL 2ND.
SO ITEMS THAT ARE REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE FOR TWO WEEKS TO THE APRIL 2ND MEETING.
ITEM NUMBER 3, 6, 9, 14, AND 15.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THOSE ITEMS? WE DO.
WE HAVE A SPEAKER, UM, MS. UH, JANIE VALEZ FOR ITEM NUMBER 14.
DID YOU WANNA TALK? UH, NO, THERE'S OKAY.
IS THERE A MOTION FOR THE, THIS FIRST CONTINUANCE HEARING? MR. CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS TO THE APRIL 2ND HEARING ITEMS NUMBER THREE, SIX.
NUMBER NINE, NUMBER 14 AND NUMBER 15.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION TO CONTINUE ITEMS 3, 6, 9, 14, AND 15 TO THE APRIL 2ND MEETING.
MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARDOS.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT? SEEING NONE.
MOTION IS FOR THE CONTINUANCE.
ALRIGHT, WELL WE WILL SEE Y'ALL IN TWO WEEKS.
UH, THEY JUST WANNA HAND YOU SOMETHING.
ALRIGHT, WELL WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR SECOND CONTINUANCE HEARING, WHICH IS FOR CONTINUANCES TO THE APRIL 16TH MEETING.
ITEM NUMBER 16 IS REQUESTING A FOUR WEEK CONTINUANCE TO APRIL UM, 16TH, 2024.
WE DO HAVE, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT WITH A VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HEAR THE VOICEMAIL, PLEASE.
I LIVE IN THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD.
MY ADDRESS IS 9 0 1 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.
A PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE TWO TEN FOUR FOUR NINE ONE TWO ONE FIVE.
I AM WEIGHING IN ON THE, UH, THE ZONING CASE WITH THE, IN THE BEACON HILL AREA ON, UH, 7 0 8 BURG ROAD.
IT IS, UH, OH, THE NUMBER IS, UM, 20 24 1 0 7 0 0 0 2 7.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS PLANNING ON BEING CONTINUED FOR AT LEAST TWO TO FOUR WEEKS THERE, AND I SAY, WELL, THAT, THAT'S OKAY.
I, I NOTICED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING STAFF, UH, HAD INDICATED MANY, MANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.
THAT THAT PROPOSAL, UH, NUMBER ONE, THE PARKING, UH, HARDLY ANY PARKING, AND CONSEQUENTLY IT WOULD SPILL OVER INTO THE NEARBY CHURCHES, UH, UH, UH, CURB CURBSIDE, UH, PARKING.
UH, BUT BOTH THE ONE, JUST ACROSS, WELL BOTH OF 'EM ARE ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT THERE.
AND SO YES, NUMEROUS PROBLEMS THERE.
ALSO, THE, UH, WELL, UH, THE FACT THAT IT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM CHURCHES THAT, THAT, AND THEY, UH, THEY, THEY MAY HAVE PROBLEMS WITH, WITH THE BAR BEING OPEN WHEN THEY'RE HAVING EITHER SERVICES OR MEETINGS OF THEIR OWN.
UH, TO, AND, AND THERE'S ALREADY A BAR OR TAVERN JUST A COUPLE OF BLOCKS AWAY OVER AT BLANCO AND, UM, AND ASHBY.
SO MY QUESTION IS, DOES THERE REALLY NEED TO BE ANOTHER, UH, UM, BAR TAVERN IN THE AREA? ALSO, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A SCHOOL, RIGHT? THERE'S CONNECTED WITH THE, THE, UH, ST.
ANN'S CATHOLIC CHURCH CENTER AND, AND THAT MIGHT FALL WITHIN THE 300 FEET
[00:15:01]
OF THE, OF THE, UH, PROPOSED, UH, UH, BAR TAVERN THERE.SO ANYWAY, I, IF YOU CAN, UH, IF YOU CAN DENY IT, I, UH, RIGHT OFF HAND, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME.
AND THAT IS IT FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM, MR. CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE.
ITEM NUMBER 16 TO THE APRIL 16TH HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH,
MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM.
AND IF YOU ARE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE FOR THAT ITEM, WE WILL SEE YOU IN A MONTH.
WE WILL NOW BE PROCEEDING ON OUR INDIVIDUAL HEARING AND I BELIEVE THE FIRST ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER TWO.
IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S REPORT PLEASE.
MY NAME IS ALEXA RATANA, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS LOCATED IN THE GENERAL 16,000 BLOCK OF KYLE SALE PARKWAY GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO MF 18, LIMITED DENSITY MULTIFAMILY WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 10 NOTICES SENT OUT.
ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND TWO OPPOSED OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET.
THE EXISTING R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED MF 18 LIMITED DENSITY MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT IS ALSO AN APPROPRIATE ZONING.
THE PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ALIGNS WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE AREA.
WHILE THERE ARE R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT DESIGNATIONS IN PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY, NATURAL BUFFERS PROVIDED BY THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN WOULD CREATE A BARRIER BETWEEN THE LOWER AND HIGHER DENSITIES.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH ENCOURAGES THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATE HOUSING TYPES TO ACCOMMODATE THE CITY'S GROWING POPULATION AT ALL INCOME LEVELS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I BELIEVE THIS IS A EASY RD CASE.
SO IF WE COULD HAVE STAFFS, SORRY, IF WE COULD HAVE SAS REPORT FIRST PLEASE.
MIKE ESCALANTE WITH SAS AQUIFER PROTECTION AND EVALUATION SECTION.
WE REVIEWED THE ZONING APPLICATION LOCATED AT ONE AND A HALF MILES NORTH OF KYLE SEAL PARKWAY AND NORTH LOOP 1604 INTERSECTION, ALLOWING FOR A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON 46.3 ACRE, UH, TRACK THE SOUTHERN AND EASTERN PORTION OF THE SIDE, APPROXIMATELY 27.9 ACRES LIES IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE WITH A REMAINING 18.4 ACRES LOCATED IN THE NORTHERN AND WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE.
UH, WITHIN THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE, THE SITE IS UNDEVELOPED WITH NATIVE TREES AND UNDERSTORY THROUGHOUT THE HILLY TERRAIN.
THE SOUTHWESTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY LIES IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND NO SENSITIVE GEOLOGIC FEATURES WERE OBSERVED ON SITE.
LET'S SEE, A, A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN, UH, REVIEWED BY SAS PROPOSES FIVE WATER QUALITY BASINS TO TREAT THE STORM WATER RUNOFF FROM THE DEVELOPMENT.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED NOT TO EXCEED 50% PERVIOUS COVER ON THE 27.9 ACRE PORTION OF THE SITE WITHIN THE RECHARGE ZONE AND PROVIDE A FLOODPLAIN BUFFER ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERN BOUNDARY.
THEREFORE, SAS RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH ALL ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE SAS REPORT.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT COME UP PLEASE AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR REQUEST.
GOOD AFTERNOON, JAMES MCKNIGHT WITH ORTIZ MCKNIGHT, 1 1 2 EAST PECAN.
AND I HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR YOU.
FIRST OF ALL, I JUST ALWAYS LIKE TO LOCATE THE PROPERTY WHERE WE ARE IN THE CITY.
[00:20:01]
THIS IS AN AERIAL SHOT SHOWING THE, THE PROPERTY'S 46 ACRES.AS, UH, MIKE ALREADY SAID, IT'S CONTRIBUTING ZONE AND 28 ACRES OF THE ERZD.
AND GENERALLY WE'RE IN THE VICINITY OF OTHER SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AND SOME MULTI-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL.
AND SO OUR REQUEST IS FOR TOWN HOMES.
SO WE'RE DOING ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
THIS IS ACTUALLY FOR OUR OWN KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO A CASE THAT WE, IF YOU MAY REMEMBER SEEING IN DECEMBER.
THAT'S THE PROPERTY TO THE RIGHT UP THERE THAT IT WAS FOR 11 ACRES.
IT WAS A SIMILAR KIND OF PROPERTY AND WE PROPOSED A LARGE AREA OF OPEN SPACE.
WE HAVE THE SAME KIND OF PROPOSAL HERE, SO NOT APARTMENTS.
THIS IS FOR, UH, TOWN HOMES ONLY.
THIS IS THE ZONING AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
YOU CAN SEE THE MF 18 IS UP IN THE TOP CORNER.
THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WAS PROPOSED BACK IN DECEMBER.
UM, MF F 18 ACROSS THE STREET FROM US, C TWO.
AND THERE'S ALSO A GOLF COURSE IN PARKLAND, BUT ALSO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE AROUND US THAT ARE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS.
BUT WE ARE A BUDDING THIS 86 FOOT SECONDARY ART SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR TRAFFIC CONCERNS.
AND IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL SEE THAT ALL THIS AREA IS DESIGNATED SUBURBAN TIER.
SO OUR REQUEST FOR MF 18 IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
THIS IS ALL FOR ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCTS.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT OUR DENSITY, UH, OVERALL IS 8.5, WHICH IS JUST, UM, NORTH OF SEVEN UNITS PER ACRE.
THAT R SIX ALREADY ALLOWS 56, 50 6% OF THE SITE IS PRESERVED FOR OPEN SPACE AS IT IS.
AND WE'VE ALREADY DONE A PROTECTED SPECIES ASSESSMENT AND WE'VE HAD AN ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT ON THIS PROPERTY SAWS IS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AND WE HAVE AN APPROVED USA AS WELL.
SO I'D LIKE TO BRING THIS UP THAT WE ARE IN LINE WITH WHAT SA 2020 AND THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMP IMPLEMENTATION PLAN IS CALLING FOR.
THAT'S SOME INCREASED DENSITY, BUT ALSO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT IT ASKS FOR A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, ENCOURAGE AN ALTERNATE HOUSING TYPE.
AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING FOR HERE.
WE, THE R SIX ZONING IS PRETTY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WOULD WANT FOR OUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH AMENITIES JUST LIKE YOU WOULD TRADITIONALLY, BUT WHEN YOU DO ATTACH PRODUCT NOT ALLOWED IN R SIX.
SO THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE LEFT WITH IS MF 18.
UM, IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF STUCK IN THAT ZONE WHERE WE'RE NOT ALLOWED ANY OTHER KIND OF ZONING, BUT WE HAVE PROPOSED ON THE PREVIOUS ONE AND ON THIS ONE AS YOU'LL SEE, UH, A SET OF COVENANTS, RESTRICTED COVENANTS ON THE PROPERTY SO WE CAN ASSURE THE NEIGHBORS THAT THEY, WE ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE PRODUCT THAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO.
SO THIS IS THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, BOTH OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, SONOMA RANCHES TO THE SOUTH OF US AND DIRECTLY ABUTTING US.
WE HAVE, UH, TALKED TO THEIR LEADERSHIP.
THEY HAVE SAID THAT THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE REZONING, BUT WE DO HAVE ONGOING COMMUNICATION WITH THEM BECAUSE WE PROPOSED A SET OF COVENANTS TO, UH, FOR THEM TO EXECUTE AND ACTUALLY ENTER INTO DIRECTLY.
AND THEY'VE AGREED THAT THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.
SONOMA MESA TO THE NORTH, THEY WERE PART OF THE PROCESS BOTH FOR THE LAST ONE AND FOR THIS ONE WE'VE HAD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WITH THEM AS WELL.
AND THEY AGAIN, HAD NO OBJECTION ON THE LAST ONE.
ONCE THEY SAW THE COVENANTS THAT WE HAD PUT IN PLACE.
UM, THERE WERE VOICEMAILS LEFT AT THE PREVIOUS ZONING COMMISSION AND OUR OFFICE HAS REACHED OUT TO EVERY ONE OF THOSE.
WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO ANY OF 'EM DIRECTLY.
WE DID LEAVE MESSAGES WITH THEM.
PRIMARILY YOU MIGHT HEAR THEIR CONCERNS ARE NO APARTMENTS AND THIS INCREASE IN TRAFFIC.
SO ONE, WE'RE NOT DOING APARTMENTS AND THAT IS, ALTHOUGH WE CAN'T PUT THAT IN THE ZONING, UM, WE ARE PUTTING THOSE IN THE COVENANTS.
WE'RE NOT PROPOSING APARTMENTS.
AND THE INCREASE IN TR FAR LESS THAN WHAT AN MF 18 WOULD BE.
THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE'RE DOING IS DOING IS NOT MUCH MORE THAN IS ALREADY THERE.
BUT AS YOU, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS IS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
THIS ROAD WAS ACTUALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE THIS LEVEL OF TRAFFIC.
THERE WILL BE A TIA DONE, UH, UH, LATER IN THE, IN THE PROCESS.
BUT AS IT IS, THIS WHOLE AREA WAS ALREADY LAID OUT AS PART OF AN MDP AND THAT SECONDARY ARTERIAL IS IN PLACE TO HANDLE EXACTLY THIS KIND OF TRAFFIC.
SO THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS THAT BOTH NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, INDICATED THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WERE A GOOD IDEA.
SO THAT CONTROLS A MAXIMUM DENSITY THAT'S BELOW 18.
THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING WOULD BE PART OF THOSE COVENANTS AS WELL BE LOCKED IN THE HOUSING TYPE SO THAT IT WOULDN'T BE APARTMENTS, EXTRA LANDSCAPING.
THERE WOULD BE AN HOA AND ACTUALLY A COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC ART AS PART OF THE WHAT THE COUNCILMAN'S OFFICES ASKED FOR US.
SO THESE ARE THE PROPOSED TYPE UNIT TYPES THAT THIS COMPANY HAS DONE IN OTHER PLACES.
YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE TWO STORE UNITS.
UM, THEY ARE ATTACHED INSTEAD OF DETACHED, BUT VERY SIMILAR TO A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU'D FIND IN THE AREA.
IT'S ANOTHER SHOT SHOWING SOME OF THE, THE GARDEN AREAS THAT ARE PROPOSED.
THERE'S PLENTY OF OPEN SPACE ON THIS SITE, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A, OTHER THAN THE ATTACHED PART, A TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THIS IS JUST THE SUMMARY SHOWING THAT OUR,
[00:25:01]
OUR DENSITY IS, IS A LOW DENSITY.WE'RE PROPOSING MORE THAN 50% IN OPEN SPACE.
IT'S CONSID CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE CITY'S HOUSING POLICIES, STAFF AND SAWS ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
AND ALTHOUGH WE KNOW IT'S NOT A A ZONING ISSUE, I'LL BRING UP THE RESTRICTED COVENANTS AGAIN TO CONTROL DENSITY, HEIGHT, UM, AND UNIT TYPE.
SO WITH THAT, UH, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO HAVE, UH, TWO VOICEMAILS.
IF WE COULD HEAR THOSE, PLEASE.
IS WHEN I LIVE AT SONOMA RANCH.
UM, MY ADDRESS IS 16 0 0 7 SCOR FALLS.
UM, I WAS CALLING REGARDING, UM, CASE NUMBER ENDING N-E-R-D-D, UM, OFF KYLE SEAL.
UM, I JUST FIRST WANTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I I'M A SENIOR INTERIOR DESIGNER FOR, UM, UM, INTERIOR DESIGN COMPANY AND WE PRIMARILY FOCUS ON MULTIFAMILY SENIOR LIVING AND STUDENT HOUSING.
SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, INDUSTRY AND, UM, SEEING HOW I LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY.
AND SINCE COVID, THERE'S BEEN I THINK THREE APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT SINCE THEN, THEY'RE NOT FULLY OCCUPIED.
UM, AND YET WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF TRAFFIC.
OUR SCHOOLS ARE, UM, ALMOST REACHING MAX CAPACITY AND A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, HAS CAUSED ISSUES TO THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND SO I FEEL LIKE REZONING THIS AREA FOR ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX IS PROBABLY A MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMETHING THAT COULD REALLY BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY BETTER.
UM, YOU KNOW, A PARK OR EVEN IF YOU DID WANNA KEEP IT SINGLE FAMILY, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING GEARED MORE TOWARDS SENIORS.
I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE, UM, FEATURES OR HOMES LIKE GARDEN STYLE HOMES OR SMALL COTTAGES FOR SENIORS, UM, IN THAT AGING POPULATION.
UM, SO I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS IS A CONCERN JUST BECAUSE I'M HERE AND I LIVE HERE.
UM, BUT ALSO I AM A PTA BOARD MEMBER AT MY DAUGHTER'S ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BOB BEARD.
AND I SEE HOW THE CLASSES ARE LIKE, THEY'RE ALREADY FILLED AND TEACHERS ARE OVERWORKED.
AND SO ADDING MORE KIDS TO THE ROSTER I THINK WILL HINDER THAT LEARNING EXPERIENCE.
UM, NOT JUST FOR THAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BUT YOU KNOW, FOR THE SURROUNDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND MIDDLE SCHOOLS AND HIGH SCHOOLS.
UM, AND I FEEL LIKE THEY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S JUST MORE OPPORTUNITY THAT WE COULD SEEK AND FOR THAT AREA, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, PRIMARILY WE NEED TO CONSERVE SOME OF THE NATURAL LANDSCAPE WITHIN SAN ANTONIO.
YOU KNOW, NOT JUST WE SEE A PLOT OF LAND AND, YOU KNOW, THINK WE NEED TO PUT A APARTMENT COMPLEX OR YOU KNOW, A CAR WASH OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE A LOT OF.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A HOUSING SHORTAGE, BUT, YOU KNOW, SPREADING THEM OUT, YOU KNOW, DIVERSIFYING THE TYPE OF HOUSING THAT WE'RE OFFERING ALSO FOR, YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS BIG AND, AND VERY IMPORTANT.
UM, BUT YEAH, I JUST FEEL LIKE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU, UM, FOR LISTENING TO THE VOICEMAIL AND I HOPE YOU KNOW WE DO THE RIGHT.
HI, I'M CALLING ABOUT CASE ZONE NUMBER Z 2 0 2 3 1 0 7 0 0 1 8 4 E AS IN EDWARD, R AS IN RED, Z AS ZEBRA, D AS IN DAVID.
UM, PROPOSAL TO BUILD ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX ON KYLE SEAL PARKWAY.
UM, I AM VERY, VERY CONCERNED.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT IN THE AREA FOR EIGHT YEARS.
I HAVE SEEN FOUR APARTMENT COMPLEXES GO UP WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS.
THE ROAD CONDITIONS ARE HORRIBLE.
IT'S VERY DANGEROUS TRYING TO JUST GET OUT OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD NOW WITH THE INCREASED TRAFFIC, WHICH THESE APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE NOT EVEN AT HALF CAPACITY YET AND IT'S ALREADY GOTTEN THAT MUCH WORSE.
I'M EXTREMELY WORRIED ABOUT THE WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS.
THE EFFECT IT'LL HAVE ON THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE IS RIGHT ABOVE IT.
AND JUST THE ENVIRONMENTAL, I MEAN, WE'VE ALREADY, WE HAVE TOO MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES ALREADY HERE.
MY ADDRESS IS 8 1 1 9 CEDAR KNOLL DRIVE AND THAT'S SEVEN EIGHT TWO FIVE FIVE.
AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 262-2069.
I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THEY NEED TO BUILD APARTMENTS, BUT WE HAVE WAY TOO MANY APARTMENTS ALREADY ON COSTA PARKWAY.
IT'S, IT'S GETTING OUTTA HAND AND IT'S
[00:30:01]
DANGEROUS.SOMETHING BAD'S GONNA HAPPEN 'CAUSE THERE'S EVERY DAY THERE'S A NEAR MISS JUST TRYING TO GET OUTTA MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT'S JUST GETTING WORSE AND WORSE.
I CAN'T EVEN FATHOM THE THOUGHT OF ANOTHER APARTMENT MULTIUNIT COMPLEX GOING ON IN THAT SAME AREA.
IT'S ALREADY SURROUNDED THE WHOLE COW, UH, CEDAR PARK, CEDAR CREEK GOLF COURSE, WHICH IS REALLY TAKEN AWAY FROM ITS BEAUTY.
THIS IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL, THIS IS A HAZARD, A SAFETY CONCERN.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MUST NOT GO THROUGH.
THEY NEED TO FIND ANOTHER PLACE.
IT'S, IT'S GONNA COST AN ENVIRONMENT AND IT'S GONNA COST LIVES AND ENDANGER PEOPLE.
THERE'S NOT EVEN ENOUGH ROOM IN THE SCHOOLS AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE BEING OVERRUN WITH WITH RENTAL PROPERTIES AROUND HERE.
AND IT'S JUST THE ROAD'S JUST IN SUCH BAD SHAPE.
PLEASE, PLEASE FIND AN ALTERNATIVE PLACE FOR THIS.
UM, AND I JUST, THIS JUST NEEDS TO STOP.
I HOPE YOU LISTEN TO THIS AND I HOPE SOMEBODY GETS THIS MESSAGE.
'CAUSE I'M JUST BESIDE MYSELF RIGHT NOW TO THINK THAT IT'S GONNA BE ANOTHER, EVEN A PROPOSAL TO BUILD ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX IN THIS, ON THIS STREET.
AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ALRIGHT, MR. MCKNIGHT, WOULD YOU LIKE A CHANCE TO RESPOND? UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D SAY THAT WE, WE DID TRY TO REACH OUT TO THEM TO TALK TO THEM DIRECTLY.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. AMI WAS ONE OF THE ONES THAT WE HAD CALLED PREVIOUSLY.
I THINK THAT THE TRAFFIC ISSUE, WE STOOD UP HERE AND SAID THIS MANY TIMES IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A ZONING ISSUE, BUT I KNOW IT COMES UP, THAT ROAD IS PLANNED TO HANDLE THIS KIND OF TRAFFIC.
IF IT'S IN BAD SHAPE, THE CITY REALLY SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THAT AND WE CAN TALK TO THE COUNCIL OFFICE ABOUT THOSE THINGS.
BUT, UM, THIS AREA HAD BEEN PLANNED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES FAR BEFORE EVEN THOSE RESIDENCES SHOWED UP.
THIS, UH, WAS PART OF AN MDP FROM 2005 THAT SHOWED ALMOST 200 UNITS ON IT.
SO THE SINGLE FAMILY, UM, DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA HAS BEEN LAID OUT FOR A LONG TIME.
THIS, AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ADDING APARTMENTS, OF COURSE, WE ARE JUST TRYING TO DO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, BUT THE CONCERNS THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE THEY'RE DISCUSSING ARE DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS THAT WE DO NEED TO ADDRESS, BUT ARE NOT ABOUT THE ZONING BECAUSE AS FAR AS THE USE GOES, THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE AND HAS BEEN PLANNED FOR A LONG TIME.
UH, THIS IS A DISTRICT EIGHT CASE, SO COMMISSIONER ORTIZ TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR, UH, MR. MCKNIGHT.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, MR. MCKNIGHT.
UM, REGARDING JUST, I GUESS THE TRAFFIC AND THEN THE, LET ME SEE, I HAVE IT HERE.
I GUESS THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH, THE, WITH SONOMA RANCH OF SONOMA MEA, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY, MAYBE, I GUESS SOME, I GUESS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE BY CITY COUNCIL TO SHOW THAT THERE'S, THEY'LL BE SUPPORT WITH THE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, EVEN THOUGH I CAN'T TALK ABOUT COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS, BUT JUST BASED ON THE SUPPORT THAT YOU HAVE FROM BOTH HOAS.
I MEAN, WE, WE DID FOR SONOMA MESA THE FIRST TIME AROUND, SO I'M, I'M FAIRLY CONFIDENT WE'LL HAVE THAT.
AS FAR AS SONOMA RANCH GOES, THEY ALREADY SAID THEY WEREN'T OBJECTING AND SAID THAT COVENANTS WERE A GOOD IDEA.
SO THEY KNOW, THEY KNEW THE TIMELINE AND, UH, THE COUNCIL OFFICE HAS GIVEN INSTRUCTION TO HAVE THAT IN PLACE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL.
SO WE'VE ALREADY, WE'VE SET THE TABLE, WE JUST, WE HAVE THE COVENANTS, WE JUST REALLY NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WITH THEM.
UH, BUT FOR NOW THEY HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'RE AT A, WE'RE ON A GOOD PATH.
THE KYLE SEAL PARKWAY, IS THAT CONSIDERED A MAJOR CORRIDOR? LIKE WAS IT BUILT FOR FOR HIGH STEADY TRAFFIC? IN OTHER WORDS, KYLE SEAL PARKWAY, IT SAYS THE EXISTING CHARACTER'S A LOCAL LOCAL, A LOCAL STREET.
NO, IT'S ON, IT'S ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN AS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
THE, THE, THE LISTING, IT COULD BE THAT PORTIONS OF IT OR LOCAL PORTIONS OF IT ARE IN THE, THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I HAND IT OVER TO MY FELLOW COMMISSION CASE.
FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR FOR MR. MCKNIGHT.
MR. MCKNIGHT, AT THE FAR NORTH END OF YOUR LAYOUT, THERE'S A LITTLE STUB OUT THAT MIGHT CONNECT TO A CUL-DE-SAC.
IS THAT A POSSIBILITY THERE? NO, THAT'S A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY NORTH OF US, SO WE WOULDN'T, AND IT'S NOT OWNED BY US EITHER, SO WE WOULDN'T CONNECT THAT DIRECTION.
YOU'RE TALKING THE, THE TRUE NORTH, RIGHT?
[00:35:01]
YEAH, THAT'S A, IT'S WHERE THE, IT'S WHERE THE, THE PROPOSED, UH, CAMP BOLUS ROAD WILL CONNECT.SO THAT, THAT'S A THERE'S NO OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT STUBBING OUT TOWARDS THE ROAD.
I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT STUBBING TO THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED THAT.
UH, IT HAS, OF COURSE YOU'RE THE FIRST ONE TO BRING IT UP.
NO, WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT THAT.
UM, BUT I MEAN, IF THAT'S, IF THAT ALLEVIATES, UM, SORT OF EXIT CONCERNS, THEN YEAH, I THINK WE CAN DO THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT AND I HAVE, I HAVE THAT CLARIFICATION.
THE FUNCTION IS LOCAL, BUT IT IS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
UM, C SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
BACK TO YOU, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
JUST GONNA MAKE, UH, I GUESS A COMMENT.
I'M GO AHEAD AND MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS.
JUST AGAIN, THANK YOU SO FOR COMING IN AND MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT.
UM, JUST I'D CONSIDER MR. MCKNIGHT JUST CONSIDER, UH, THE, I GUESS THE COMMUN COMMUNICATION THAT YOU'RE DOING WITH SONAMA RANCH UNTIL YOU GET TO CITY COUNCIL.
AND THEN OTHER THAN THAT, I'LL BE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL ALSO, JUST FOR THE MAIN REASON THAT YOU'RE PRESERVING 26% OF THE LAND.
I THINK THAT'S A BIG, UH, SUPPORT REASON, UM, THAT I AM BE SUPPORTING THIS RECOMMENDATION.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
AND THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER OB BARDOS.
DISCUSSION COMMISSION ON MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT? NONE.
UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS.
UH, WE WILL BE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION PLEASE.
ANN BETA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS LOCATED AT 9 9 9 RED ROBIN ROAD AND 7 5 3 5 WEST LOOP 1604.
AND IS A REQUEST TO GO FROM R SIX CDS AND OH ONE S TO C TWO WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
10 NOTICE ASCENT WITH ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR, ZERO RETURN ON OPPOSITION AND HILLS IN DALE'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS.
IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE CURRENT R SIX CDS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT AND A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OVER THE EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE AND OH ONE S OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OVER THE EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED CDU C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS ALSO AN APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICT.
THE PROPERTY FRONTS LOOP 1604 WEST AND IS SITUATED IN A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
WHILE THERE IS A LARGE LOT LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT AREA, THE PROPERTY IS PLACED IDENTICALLY TO OTHER ABIDING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES WITH THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ZONING FRONTING LS LOOP 1604 WEST TO MINIMIZE COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT INTO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION AND HAS INDICATED THAT THEY WILL, WILL AMEND THEIR REQUESTED BASED ZONING DISTRICT TO C TWO NA COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT.
SAS SAS IS ALSO PRESENT TO MAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATION.
IF WE COULD HEAR SAUL'S REPORT ON THIS ITEM.
MIKE ESCALANTE WITH SAS AQUIFER PROTECTION AND EVALUATION SECTION.
WE REVIEWED THE ZONING APPLICATION LOCATED AT 75 35 NORTH LOOP, 60 0 4 WEST AND RED ROBIN ROAD, UH, ALLOWING FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 1.09 ACRE LOT.
THE SITE IS PARTIALLY DEVELOPED WITH AN EXISTING PARKING LOT NEAR THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE SITE WITH NATIVE TREES AND UNDERSTORY ALONG THE REMAINING NORTHERN AND WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THE SITE.
NO SENSITIVE GEOLOGIC FEATURES WERE OBSERVED ON SITE, NOR IS THE SITE LOCATED IN A FLOODPLAIN.
THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL CONSIST OF A MEDICAL CLINIC, OFFICE AND, UH, RETAIL SPACE.
[00:40:01]
APPROVAL WITH ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE REPORT TO INCLUDE 65% PERVIOUS COVER AND PROPER CONTAINMENT AND DISPOSAL OF MEDICAL BIO WASTE MATERIAL FROM A LICENSED, UH, WASTE HAULER.UM, DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE FOR YES.
IF YOU COULD TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR PROJECT? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 15 ECOMMERCE.
BASICALLY WHAT'S GOING ON IS IT WAS REZONED BEFORE, EVEN IF YOU HEARD IT WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT ZONING, SAY ZONING DESIGNATIONS.
IT WAS AN R SIX CDS AND AN O ONE S THAT WAS FOR BASICALLY TO CONSTRUCT PARKING LOTS AND DETENTION BASINS.
UH, A DOCTOR THAT'S ALMOST NEXT DOOR IS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND SHE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD ADDITIONAL CLINIC SPACE AND WE'VE ASKED FOR THE C TWO, SO MAYBE WE COULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF RETAIL SPACE IF THEY DON'T NEED ALL OF THE SPACE FOR THE DOCTOR'S OFFICES.
WE, WE ACCEPT THE SAWS OF 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER RECOMMENDATION.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH HILLS AND DALES AND WE'VE DRAFTED SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT INCLUDE THINGS LIKE A TREE SAVE, AREA BUFFERS, NO SOBS, EIGHT FOOT FENCE, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.
I JUST WOULD REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT.
AND PATRICK, CAN YOU CONFIRM YOUR AMENDING? OH YES.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO.
WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN, MR. JAMES HARNISH SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
ALL RIGHT, MR. HARNISH, AND IF, WHEN YOU COME UP TO THE MIC, IF YOU COULD GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
JAMES HARNISH 7 7 5 1 WILD EAGLE ROAD IN THE HILLS AND DALES NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND COMMISSIONER ORTIZ AND YOUR COLLEAGUES.
UH, I AM THE, AGAIN, THE PRESIDENT OF THE VOLUNTARY, UH, HILLS AND DALES HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION.
UM, I HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE APPLICANTS, THE TWO DOCTORS AND MR. CHRISTENSEN.
AND WE'VE WORKED OUT SOME RESTRICTIONS.
UH, AND UH, UH, WE LOOK AT THIS AS A EXPANSION OF A MEDICAL CLINIC, WHICH WOULD BE A GREAT USE FOR THIS LAND, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY VACANT.
UM, IT WOULD PREVENT, UH, UH, A RESTAURANT OR A BAR COMING IN THERE.
UM, AND, UH, WE SUPPORT THIS ZONE CHANGE WITH THAT CONDITION THAT IT BE AN A ADDED.
SO THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION, BUT I'D LIKE TO GIVE MR. ORTIZ MY CARD, WHICH I HAVEN'T, WHOM I HAVEN'T MET YET.
AND THAT'S IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
MR. CHRISTENSEN, DID YOU, I, I SAW YOU SAT WAY BACK IN THE BACK, SO I WAS ASSUMING YOU WEREN'T GONNA SAY ANYTHING ELSE BUT
UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ, THE DISTRICT EIGHT CASE.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I'M GONNA HAND IT OVER TO MY COMMISSIONERS.
UH, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
BACK TO YOU, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ FOR A MOTION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
UM, JUST LIKE TO THANK AGAIN, SAS AND UM, APPLICANT AS WELL AS MR. HARNESSER COMING IN AND TODAY AND MAKING HIS, UH, SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT.
I DO FEEL THAT THIS, UH, ADDITION OF THE CLINIC TO THIS AREA BE, UH, GREAT USE FOR THE AREA AND THEN ALSO ADDING THE NA TO THE C TWO IS A GREAT GREAT ADDITION.
AND I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS CHANGE.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO SECOND THE MOTION.
WAS THAT THE MOTION AS AMENDED? OH, SORRY.
AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION AS AMENDED TO ADDING THE NA TO THE C TWO.
AND THE, UH, AND COMMISSIONER BARDOS IS OKAY WITH THAT.
SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED TO NA BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARDOS, UH, DISCUSSION.
WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
[00:45:01]
WITH UH, PLANNING COORDINATOR WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS LOCATED AT 1422 SOUTH ST.
MARY STREET GOING FROM C3 NA TO C TWO NA IDZ, UM, COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH AN IDZ OVERLAY AND ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
THERE WERE 30 NOTICES SENT OUT.
LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED TO THE IDZ OVERLAY ALIGNING WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE KING WILLIAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE EXISTING C3 NA UH, GENERAL COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE, UH, ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C TWO NA IDZ COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES INFILLED DEVELOPMENT ZONE OVERLAY DISTRICT CONSTITUTES A DOWN ZONING FROM THE PROPERTY.
BUT THE IDZ USED AS AN OVERLAY TO WAIVE SITE PARKING IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE UH, ITEM.
THE ST MARY'S CORRIDOR CURRENTLY STRUGGLES WITH LIMITED PARKING OPTIONS FOR ITS NUMEROUS BUSINESSES AND WITHOUT ANY REQUIRED PARKING, PATRONS WOULD LIKELY OPT TO PARK ON LOCAL SIDE STREETS, WHICH ARE MEANT TO SERVE THE SURROUNDING HOMES.
THUS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FOR C TWO NA COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES, UH, BUT WITHOUT THE IDZ OVERLAY, WHICH WOULD ELIMINATE PARKING ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THE UH, REPRESENTATIVE IS IN ATTENDANCE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 15 EAST COMMERCE.
I HAVE A SUPER SHORT PRESENTATION FOR YOU.
UM, YOU MIGHT RECALL THIS CASE WAS POSTPONED A FEW MONTHS AGO.
WE ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR C TWO I WITH AN IDZ OVERLAY FOR THIS PROPERTY.
UH, WE HAD A BARBECUE RESTAURANT THAT WANTED TO LOCATE THERE, BUT WE HAD OPPOSITION FROM LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AGAIN BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PARKING.
AND THEY TOLD US, WE'LL SEE IF YOU CAN FIND SOME PARKING IN THE AREA.
SO WE SAID, OKAY, LET'S POSTPONE THE CASE.
UM, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO FIND ANY PARKING IN THE AREA.
THERE'S A VACANT LOT RIGHT HERE, JUST SOUTH OF US AND THERE'S A COFFEE SHOP RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THAT.
THE PROBLEM THERE IS THE PARKING LOT IS JUST GRAVEL.
SO IF WE WANT TO USE THAT AS A PARKING, AS PART OF A COOPERATIVE PARKING PLAN, WE HAVE TO BASICALLY BUILD A PARKING LOT.
WE HAVE TO PLOT IT, WE HAVE TO DO STORM WATER SURVEYS, DRAINAGE SURVEYS.
AND MY CLIENT JUST, HE CAN'T FINANCE IT CONSTRUCTING A PARKING LOT ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S JUST THAT THAT WON'T WORK.
SO WE BASICALLY JUST KIND OF HELD OFF AND LET'S JUST SEE IF THE BAR, THE BARBECUE GUYS WENT SOMEWHERE ELSE.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN FIND, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER USER.
SO THIS IS THE, THE FROM THE SOUTH, LOOKING NORTH ON THE PROPERTY.
A PREVIOUS OWNER HAD ASKED TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING BECAUSE AGAIN, DOESN'T HAVE ANY PARKING AND HISTORIC CAME IN AND SAID, NO, WE THINK THIS CENTRAL PART OF THE STRUCTURE IS HISTORIC SO WE WON'T ALLOW YOU TO DEMOLISH THAT.
AND THE PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY WAS, IT WAS C3 AND A, IT WAS AN AUTO PAINT AND BODY SHOP FOR DECADES.
AND SOMEHOW THEY GOT AWAY WITH GETTING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WITHOUT HAVING ANY PARKING PROBABLY BACK IN THE SEVENTIES.
WELL THAT USE HAS BEEN BEEN OUTTA BUSINESS FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.
SO WE HAVE NO GRANDFATHERING RIGHTS ON ANY KIND OF PARKING.
SO WE HAVE PROBABLY THREE, MAYBE FOUR SPACES UP FRONT.
THIS IS A, A FIRE HYDRANT, A TELEPHONE POLE THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, UH, PULL IN PARKING.
THE BARBECUE RESTAURANT WAS EXPLORING MAYBE DEMOLISHING THIS BACK TIN SHED PART OF THE STRUCTURE TO SEE IF THEY COULD GET SOME PARKING BACK THERE.
BUT THERE'S A FIRE STATION BUILDING RIGHT HERE.
THERE'S REALLY ANY WAY YOU CAN FIGURE THIS FOR PARKING.
YOU'RE ONLY GONNA GET A FEW SPACES 'CAUSE AND AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THE CITY WOULD ALLOW US TO DO THAT BECAUSE CARS ARE GONNA HAVE TO BACK OUT ONTO THE STREET TO GET OUT OF THERE.
SO THAT, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE WERE.
SO A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, UH, A CHURCH APPROACHED US AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO LOCATE THERE AND YOU KNOW, THE CHURCH PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE ONE PARKING SPACE PER EIGHT SEATS AND EIGHT SEATS IS YOUR NORMAL CHURCH PEW, WHERE THERE'S A LITTLE DIVIDER IN THE MIDDLE AND FOUR PEOPLE CAN SIT ON ONE SIDE OF THE DIVIDER AND FOUR ON THE OTHER.
THEY HAVEN'T COME UP WITH THEIR, UM, FINISH OUT ON THE PROPERTY YET.
'CAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GET OUR REZONING, BUT I THOUGHT WELL, OKAY, A CHURCH IS A PRETTY GOOD USE.
I CHECKED WITH THEM THEIR UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
THEIR SERVICES ARE HELD ON SUNDAY MORNINGS, NOT A WHOLE LOT OF TRAFFIC OR PARKING PROBLEMS ON SUNDAY MORNINGS.
UM, SO WE ASKED FOR, ORIGINALLY I ASKED FOR C3 NA WITH AN IDZ OVERLAY 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE PROPERTY WAS.
C3 A STAFF INFORMED ME THAT THE C3 WAS INAPPROPRIATE WITH THE, UM, COMMUNITY PLANS.
SO I CHANGED THAT TO C TWO A, KEEPING THE NA SO THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO A BAR OR RESTAURANT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS THE C TWO NA.
WITH THE IDZ OVERLAY, WE HAVE NO PARKING.
SO WHEN STAFF SAYS WE RECOMMEND C TWO, HOW AM I GONNA GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THE PROPERTY? YOU KNOW, WITHOUT GETTING SOME KIND OF COOPERATIVE PARKING PLAN, IF THERE'S NO PARKING IN THE AREA, I CAN'T DO THAT.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHY STAFF'S RECOMMENDING C TWO.
[00:50:01]
HAVE THIS IDZ OVERLAY FOR JUST THIS KIND OF SITUATION, AN OLDER HISTORIC BUILDING THAT WE CAN'T DEMOLISH THAT HAS NO PARKING.SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AND RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT.
DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO NOT.
I'M, I'M SHOWING THAT WE HAD ONE VOICEMAIL.
YES, WE HAVE, UM, A VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED.
IF WE COULD HEAR THAT VOICEMAIL PLEASE WELCOME NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CALLING, UH, WITH REGARDS TO CASE, UM, ITEM AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, UH, CASE 2 6 0 FOR 1422 SOUTH ST.
UM, MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 3 6 7 2 9 0 4 AND I'M AT 2 2 4 CAROLINA STREET.
UH, I'M REPRESENTING THE BOARD OF THE LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
WE REVIEWED THIS CASE TO REZONE FROM C3 NA, UH, TO C TWO NA IDZ.
THE LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AGREES WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL AND SUPPORTS THE ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION FOR C TWO NA.
WITHOUT THE IDD OVERLAY SPECIFICALLY, WE OPPOSE THE IDD OVERLAY IN THIS CASE BECAUSE OF THE SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION OF REQUIRE OFF STREET PARKING ON STREET PARKING IS LIMITED IN THIS AREA, WHICH IS LOCATED ON AN EMERGENCY SERVICE SERVICES ROUTE ADJACENT TO FIRE STATION SEVEN.
THE CLOSEST STREET PARKING IS JUST A FEW SPACES ON A ONE-WAY STREET OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, WHICH IS FLORIDA STREET OFF STREET PARKING LOTS IN THE AREA ARE PRIVATELY HELD AND CANNOT BE RELIED UPON AS A PERMANENT SOLUTION REGARDLESS OF THE TENANT.
AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU MR. CHRISTENSEN.
UM, JUST TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WE DID SPEAK WITH AND MEET WITH LAVACCA ON THE SITE.
I MEAN, THEY'RE JUST SORT OF HAVE A BLANKET POLICY.
NO, IDZ OVERLAYS, BUT LIKE I TOLD YOU, WE'RE STUCK.
WE HAVE A BUILDING WITH NO PARKING AND WE CAN'T GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WITHOUT PARKING.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE, THAT'S WHY THE CITY CREATED THE IDZ OVERLAY.
I'M NOT SURE WHY STAFF HAS DECIDED THEY'RE NOT GONNA SUPPORT THAT.
UH, MAYBE PRESSURE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY OWNER BASICALLY HAS A BUILDING.
I THOUGHT A CHURCH WOULD BE A PRETTY GOOD USE.
I MEAN, SUNDAY MORNINGS ARE BUSY.
MAYBE SOME BIBLE STUDY ON AFTER WORK AND THE WEEKDAYS, BUT THAT'S IT.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE ANY KIND OF CRAZY PARKING REQUIREMENTS, BUT THANK YOU.
THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER KELLUM FOR QUESTIONS AND JUST ONE QUICK CLARIFICATION.
UH, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THE C TWO, THE C TWO WAS REQUESTED AND WE'RE GOOD WITH THE C TWO AND A, UH, IT'S JUST THE OVERLAY THAT WE, UM, ARE HAVING AN ISSUE WITH.
AND UM, AS YOU KNOW, THIS AREA OF ST.
MARY'S CONTINUALLY HAS ISSUES WITH PARKING.
SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PRESSURE FROM NEIGHBORHOODS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT JUST BASIC PLANNING PRINCIPLES THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW PARKING AFFECTS THIS PARTICULAR AREA MORE CLOSELY BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE EXISTING ISSUES.
UH, COMMISSIONER LUM, DO YOU FOR QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE PARTICULAR QUESTIONS.
I, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHERE THE STAFF IS GOING WITH THE TRAFFIC ISSUE, THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE BUILDING.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT REALLY MY EXPERTISE, BUT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THAT, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT ABLE TO TAKE THAT DOWN.
I WOULD, I WOULD SAY GENERALLY I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO, TO THE APPROVAL OF A BUSINESS IF IT WASN'T FOR THE CHURCH.
I THINK THAT THE CHURCH ALLOWS THIS, THIS PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO BE UTILIZED IN A FUNCTIONAL WAY.
I THINK IT ALLOWS IT TO MITIGATE TRAFFIC, UM, IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK I WILL MAKE A MOTION FOR, UM, APPROVING THIS.
ALRIGHT, WELL LET'S SEE IF THERE'S SOME OTHER QUESTIONS FIRST.
UH, COMMISSIONER'S ON MY LEFT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? JUST A QUESTION ABOUT THE, WE'RE NOT THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, BUT JUST LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY, UH, IS THE WHOLE THING HISTORIC OR IS IT THE MIDDLE PART OF THE BUILDING? I MEAN THE FRONT LOOKS LIKE AN ADDITION.
I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UH, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, PATRICK, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT.
IT WAS REALLY JUST THE, UM, IF YOU CAN GO, WHICH ONE OF THE VIEWS OF THE BUILDING? WELL, I DUNNO.
SO IF YOU REMEMBER THAT SLIDE I SHOWED YOU WITH YEAH, THERE WE GO.
UH, CAN YOU GO TO THE, THE VIEW OF THE GARAGE? TELL WHAT THE, THAT THE, THE VIEW THAT'S RIGHT THERE.
UM, WHAT HISTORIC STAFF SAID WAS THAT WAS HISTORIC, NOT NECESSARILY THE 10 SHEDS ON EITHER SIDE, BUT THAT BUILDING ITSELF IS PROBABLY
[00:55:01]
LESS THAN A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET.SO KIND OF THE ISSUE IS, YEAH, WE CAN DEMOLISH EVERYTHING AND WE HAVE THAT, BUT WHAT DO WE DO WITH THAT? I MEAN, IT'S VERY SMALL.
SO THERE, THERE IS THE FLEXIBILITY TO DEMOLISH THE OTHER POSSIBILITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSION BY LEFT COMMISSIONER BARDOS YOU WOULD LIKE? I JUST HAVE A COMMENT, UM, IF I ALLOWED TO MAKE THE COMMENT NOW, BUT I I, I THINK THIS IS A REALLY GOOD USE OF, TO HAVE A CHURCH THERE.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE THAT I HAVE VISITED MANY CHURCHES AROUND THE CITY THAT HAVE VERY LIMITED PARKING.
UH, MANY OF YOU PROBABLY, THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER CHURCHES ON ST.
MARY'S, UH, NEAR THE, UH, YMCA THAT HAS PROBABLY 20 PARKING SPACES AND MOST OF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH ANOTHER CHURCH, UH, ST.
JOSEPH, BETTER KNOWN AS A JOKE AT ST.
JOSEPH'S, UH, THAT HAS 12 PARKING SPACES.
AND, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ACTUALLY WALK THREE, FOUR BLOCKS TO GET TO IT.
SO, UH, THIS IS NOT A NEW ISSUE FOR ME.
I, I THINK I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS, UH, BECAUSE IT'S THE BEST USAGE FOR THIS AND IT MAY OPEN THIS AS A COMMUNITY CENTER FOR OTHER USES.
SO I'M, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS TO BRING THAT COMMUNITY TOGETHER.
UM, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, PLEASE.
SO AS I'M LOOKING AT, UH, GOOGLE MAPS OF THE, UM, UH, FLO, UH, FLORIDA STREET, THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME PARKING SPACES THAT THE CITY HAS CALLED OUT ALONG THAT THE STREET.
HOW MANY SPACES ARE THERE? I THINK THERE'S ABOUT FIVE OR SIX.
YOU KNOW, THEY BASICALLY WHAT THE CITY DID WAS THEY BUILT, UH, CURB CUTOUTS THERE BETWEEN ST.
AND UM, YOU KNOW, ALSO, I MEAN, JUST TO SAY I, ON SUNDAYS, PEOPLE ARE PROBABLY GONNA PARK ACROSS THE STREET ON THE GRAVEL FIELD, UM, OR LOT.
UH, THE, THE COFFEE SHOP'S NOT OPEN YET ON SUNDAY MORNINGS AND IT'S JUST, WE CAN'T USE THAT AS AN OFFICIAL CITY, CITY APPROVED AND ACCEPTED PARKING LOT BECAUSE IT'S JUST GRAVEL.
I MEAN, THERE, THERE IS PARKING AROUND THERE.
I MEAN, RIGHT DOWN THE STREET IS BRACKENRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL, WHICH HAS LOTS OF PARKING AND I KNOW THERE'S NOTHING GOING ON THERE ON A SUNDAY MORNING.
SO IF PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO WALK A COUPLE BLOCKS, THEY'LL HELP, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO FIND SOMEPLACE TO PARK.
I THOUGHT I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY THAT THEIR STREET PARKING WAS BEING USED BY, UH, RESIDENTS.
UM, WHERE WOULD THOSE RESIDENTS BE? THAT I, I'M NOT SEEING THEM ON THE MAP HERE.
THERE, THERE ARE SOME HOUSES TO THE, WELL, IF WE CAN GET AN AERIAL, THERE ARE SOME HOUSES BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND, AND, UH, PRESA.
SEE WE GOT A, WE HAVE A GOOD AERIAL.
I MEAN, THERE ARE SOME HOUSES BACK HERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND THEY CAN PARK IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSES.
THERE'S ALSO SOME CUTOUT SPACES UP HERE.
YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY THIS IS A FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THEY GOT LOTS OF PARKING, BUT WE CAN'T PARK THERE
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMERS ON MY RIGHT, MR. CHAIR? YES.
AS I WAS SITTING HERE THINKING VERY SLOWLY, I CAME UP WITH A QUESTION, UH, MR. CHRISTENSEN, UH, SO THE WHOLE POINT OF THE IDZ OVERLAY IS JUST TO GET RID OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENT, CORRECT? NO OTHER, NO OTHER PURPOSE THERE? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
I MEAN, IT REALLY DOESN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE.
ALL IT DOES IS ALLEVIATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FROM A, I MEAN, IF YOU RECALL IN THE OLD I-D-Z-I-D-Z GOT RID OF ALL THE PARKING, BUT THEN WHEN THE CITY CAME UP WITH THE IDZ ONE, TWO AND THREE, THE STAFF CAME, KEPT THE IDZ JUST IN CASE YOU HAVE A PROPERTY THAT YOU KNOW, NEEDED TO BE WAIVED FROM THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.
IT JUST WAIVES THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.
UM, I KNOW THE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN ON, YOU KNOW, THE OPERATION OF A CHURCH AT THIS FACILITY, BUT THE ZONING WOULD BE FOR C TWO, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THAT'S ALL C TWO USES ANYTHING PERMITTED BY RIGHT.
AND WITH AN NA, WITH AN NA, UM, CHURCHES CAN OPERATE IN RESIDENTIAL ZONED AREAS AS WELL.
THEY CAN OPERATE IN ALL ZONES.
SO WOULD, WOULD THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY, AND I GUESS THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR COMM, UH, I ALMOST CALLED YOU COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN.
UM,
[01:00:02]
WAS THERE EVER AN EXPLORATION OF PERHAPS EVEN LOWERING TO C ONE OR TO SOMETHING EVEN LOWER? WELL, I MEAN, YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.UM, I, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF, IF C ONE IS FATAL, BUT I'LL TELL YOU, THERE WAS A CASE A WHILE BACK, PROBABLY BEFORE YOUR TIME, THERE WAS A COMMERCIAL AUTO REPAIR BUILDING THAT WAS R SIX.
THEY ASKED FOR R SIX CD TO DO AN ART GALLERY SO THAT THEY COULD LIVE THERE AND HAVE AN ART GALLERY.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS DEAD SET AGAINST IT.
SO AFTER THAT, I TELL CLIENTS, DON'T EVER GET RID OF COMMERCIAL IF YOU'RE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING BECAUSE YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO GET THAT BACK.
AND YOU HAVE A RESIDENTIAL ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS CLEARLY NOT A HOUSE, NEVER BEEN A HOUSE.
SO, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING FOR A CHURCH, BUT YOU KNOW, THE CHURCH IS NOT BUYING IT.
THEY'RE LEASING IT SOMEDAY IN THE FUTURE, THEY MAY CHANGE THEIR MIND.
UM, BUT I DON'T, I, I DON'T KNOW IF C ONE IS NECESSARILY FATAL.
IT'S JUST, LIKE I SAID, I STARTED WITH C3 STAFF SAID, NO, YOU HAVE TO DO C TWO.
SO THAT'S WHERE I GOT GOT HERE.
THIS OTHER PROJECT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THAT WOULDN'T BE ALONG FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
WERE YOU HERE AT THE TIME? I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WERE.
NO, BUT I LIVE OFF OF FREDERICKSBURG.
AND JUST TO CONFIRM, YES, HE DID SUBMIT ORIGINALLY FOR C3, BUT TO STAY WITH THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION, UH, THE C TWO WAS, UM, ALIGNED WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE CLASSIFICATION.
WELL, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAD.
WE, I JUST NEED A CLARIFICATION FROM THE STAFF.
SO STAFF, UM, THE APPLICANT IS SUGGESTING THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE AN IDZ OVERLAY AND UM, THE USE IS GONNA BE FOR CHURCH AND IT'S GOING TO BE LEASED.
SO AFTER THE LEASE IS OVER, DOES THE IDZ OVERLAY REMAIN OR DOES IT EXPIRE WITH THE LEASE? IT REMAINS.
ALRIGHT, BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER LUM FOR, UH, A MOTION.
I MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR A C TWO NA WITH THE IDZ OVERLAY.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND, UM, DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT.
ALRIGHT, WELL I UNDERSTAND, UM, SITUATION BUT IS HERE AND THAT MR. CHRISTENSEN IS, IS TRYING TO DEAL WITH.
I DO HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING THE LACK OF PARKING IN PERPETUITY.
UM, AS WE KNOW IN THIS STRIP BETWEEN PRESA AND ST.
MARY'S, WE HAVE HAD, UH, A LOT OF MORE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY THAN WE HAVE HAD IN THE LAST 20 YEARS, INCLUDING, UH, A BAR THAT HAS CAUSED ISSUES WITH PARKING JUST TO THE NORTH OF THIS LOCATION.
UM, AND SO I DON'T THINK I CAN SUPPORT THIS MOTION BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PARKING IN PERPETUITY AND, AND BECAUSE SOMETIMES I GET STUCK ON FLORIDA TRYING TO TAKE A LEFT ONTO ST.
MARY'S, UH, AS I COME OFF 37 TO GET TO MY HOUSE.
UM, AND SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PARKING.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT.
UM, LIKE, UM, COMMISSIONER, UM, TI SAID THIS IS IN PERPETUITY AND THE LAND USE HAS BEEN PROPOSED IS TEMPORARILY BECAUSE AGAIN, IT IS GOING TO BE A LEASED PROPERTY, SO, UM, THE PARKING ISSUE'S GOING TO REMAIN IN PERPETUITY, SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION EITHER.
UH, FINAL DISCUSSION? ANYONE? I HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU.
YEAH, IT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, CAN YOU JUST REMIND ME ON THE LEASE OPTION? I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT, IT, THE OVERLAY WILL STAY, BUT I MEAN THEY COULD LEASE IT TO A BARBECUE PLACE, CORRECT? YES, THEY COULD LEASE IT TO A, A REST A FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT.
THERE'S NO RESTRICTIONS, JUST THE NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES ON SITE.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER WATSON? THIS PROBABLY WAS A SURPRISE SECOND FOR ME.
UM, BUT I AM SUPPORTING THE MOTION BECAUSE THIS IS ON A CORRIDOR THAT HAS EXISTING COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.
UH, AND BECAUSE THEIR STRUCTURE HAS A HISTORIC COMPONENT, UM, WITHOUT SOME INNOVATIVE APPROACHES, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO REVITALIZE PROPERTIES LIKE THAT AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE USED
[01:05:01]
FUNCTIONALLY AND FIT IN WITH SOME OF OUR LONG-TERM PLANNING GOALS THAT WE LIKE, RELIED ON STAFF, RELIED ON PLANNING PRINCIPLES RELATED TO PARKING FOR THIS.SOME OF THE OTHER DESIRE FOR THE AREA LONG TERM CAN'T BE ACHIEVED WITHOUT DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHICH IS WHY I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
UH, LAST CHANCE FOR DISCUSSION.
I JUST HAVE, UM, I'M ALSO SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE THIS AREA HAS BEEN, UM, IT HAS AN INCREASE OF MULTI, MULTI-PURPOSE, UM, TRANSPORTATION, WHICH THE CITY'S BEEN ENCOURAGING AND IT'S RIGHT OFF THE BIKE TRAIL.
UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE GOING TO CHURCH ARE GOING TO USE THE BIKE TRAIL, BUT THE OPTIONS ARE THERE AND I'D LIKE TO SUPPORT THAT THERE'S BUS LINES, UM, AND I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE PAST ONLY LOOKING FOR PARKING.
UM, I WILL FINISH DISCUSSION UNLESS ANYONE ELSE JUMPS IN
I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY OF THE CURRENT CONDITION.
I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE POSSIBILITIES THAT IN PERPETUITY CAUSE CAUSE UM, AND I AM STILL WORKING IT THROUGH MY MIND.
UM, THERE ARE EXAMPLES IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE HAVE A, UM, COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT, OR ACTUALLY WE HAVE LOTS OF COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS THAT HAVE NO ONSITE PARKING.
IT'S ALL ON THE, ON ON STREET AND, UM, SOMETIMES THOSE SPILL OVER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND AT THIS TIME I'M REALLY, I I I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY I, I'M GONNA BE, BE SWAYED IN MY MIND BY THE TIME WE TAKE THE VOTE.
UM, SO I'M GONNA JUST STOP TALKING AND I WILL SAY THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL, UM, AS AMENDED TO, WELL, NO, IT WAS NOT, IT WAS AMENDED TO NA, CORRECT? OR WAS THAT THE PREVIOUS CASE? NO, THIS ONE WAS ALWAYS C TWO AND A, CORRECT.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL, UM, BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
ALL RIGHT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 10.
I BELIEVE YOU HAVE STAFF'S REPORT, PLEASE.
VINCENT
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS LOCATED AT 1226 NORTHWEST 36TH STREET GOING FROM R SIX TO R SIX WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAY REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 27 NOTICES SENT OUT.
AND THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE WEST SOUTHWEST SECTOR PLAN ADOPTED IN 20 20 11 AND IS CURRENTLY DE DESIGNATED AS GENERAL URBAN TIER IN THE FUTURE LAND USE COMPONENT OF THE PLAN.
THE REQUESTED R SIX BAY ZONING DISTRICT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY.
THE EXISTING R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND IS AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS IS ALSO APPROPRIATE.
THE DENSITY IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA AND THE REQUIRED SITE PLAN WILL HOLD THE APPLICANT TO THE PROPOSED LAYOUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND ANY MAJOR CHANGES TO THIS SITE PLAN WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL REZONING CONSIDERATION, STAFF REPRIMANDS APPROVAL AND APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MY MOTHER BEHIND HERE.
SHE CO-OWNS THE PROPERTY WITH ESMO CASTILE, MY FATHER, AND, UM, THEY RESIDE
[01:10:01]
AT 1226 NORTHWEST.THEY RESIDE AT 1 0 3 COYLE PLACE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 3.
THIS IS THEIR, UH, SORT OF INVESTMENT PROPERTY, THEIR RETIREMENT PROPERTY, I WOULD SAY FURTHERMORE, AND, UH, I'M HERE TO HELP ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND TRY TO GET THIS APPROVED.
I WILL SAY ONE THING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AS YOU GO TO VOTE, UM, NO, WE DID SPEAK TO THE NEIGHBORING ASSOCIATION AND, UH, THE WOMAN THERE DID EXPRESS ONE CONCERN THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ADDRESSED IN THE PAST, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY'VE HAD TENANTS THAT, UM, DON'T NECESSARILY MEET THE STANDARDS AND NORMS THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY AS FOLKS AGE OUT OF THE COMMUNITY AND THEN GIVE THE FOLKS AWAY, UH, GIVE THE, GIVE REATH THE PROPERTIES TO THEIR CHILDREN AND THEY BRING IN TENANTS THAT, YOU KNOW, OVERCROWD THE PLACE OR ARE MINDFUL OF THE AESTHETICS OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY IN WHICH THEY NOW RESIDE.
UM, MY PARENTS HAVE GONE AHEAD AND CONTRACTED A PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, WHICH REQUIRES THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECKS.
UH, WE'VE GONE AHEAD AND ALSO ENSURED THAT, UH, THERE'S REGULAR CHECKUPS ON THE PROPERTY PER THE CONTRACT THAT WAS STIPULATED, UH, THAT THEY SIGNED.
AND SO WE FEEL THAT, UH, THEY'RE DOING THEIR PART TO HELP SORT OF ADDRESS THE ISSUES OF THE NEIGHBORING ASSOCIATION.
UH, NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT WAS A GOOD THING, BUT BECAUSE WE ALSO THOUGHT IT WAS THE ASSOCIATION, BUT NEVERTHELESS WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS THAT.
AND, UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MYSELF, WE WILL FIND OUT.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO.
WE HAVE, UM, MS. TERESA KILMER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS.
MY NAME IS THERESA KILMER, PRESIDENT OF THE LOMA PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
IT HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS SINCE THE 1990 NINETIES.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT DISAPPEARED TO ANYWAY, UH, THE THING IS THAT, UH, WHEN WE MOVED IN THERE, THE, THE CITY WAS, LOMA PARK WAS ESTABLISHED IN 19, WHAT, 54? I MOVED IN THERE IN 1955 AND I'VE BEEN FIGHTING WITH EVERYBODY SINCE THEN.
UH, WE HAD A PLACE TO WHERE YOU COULD GO IN THERE AND HAVE A MOTEL SIX ONE DAY AND A SUB FACTORY THE NEXT DAY BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ZONING, YOU KNOW, TO THAT WE COULD COUNT ON.
HOWEVER, AFTER MUCH TO DO, AND WE WENT AND WE HAD IT CHANGED IN OUR SIX.
NOW IN R SIX, UH, TIMES HAVE CHANGED.
AND SO CONSEQUENTLY NOW WE'RE BECOMING A, A PARKING LOT FOR THE CITY, UH, A HAVEN FOR THE HOMELESS AND UH, UH, A MOTEL.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE PEOPLE THAT THE ORIGINAL OWNERS PASS AND THEN EVERYBODY RENTS AND THEY RENT ROOMS AND HUS AND CHICKEN COOPS AND SO FORTH.
I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SAY, I DON'T MIND IF THESE PEOPLE ADD A, UH, ELECTRIC METER TO THEIR GARAGE OR WHATEVER, BUT I DO MIND AND I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO AN R SIX.
R SIX IS ONE FAMILY, ONE HOME.
SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? IF THEY WANT TO PUT AN ELECTRIC METER FINE, BUT DON'T CHANGE MY R SIX.
AN R SIX IS ONE FAMILY, ONE HOME.
WAS THAT THE END OF, AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WOULD YOU LIKE A CHANCE TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT SURE.
PUBLIC COMMENT? YEAH, I DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO MS. KILMER A COUPLE OF TIMES AND I WHOLEHEARTEDLY, WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE TENANTS THAT DO COME INTO THE COMMUNITY.
I GREW UP IN THE COMMUNITY, WENT TO, UH, LOMA PARK ELEMENTARY, TRUMAN MIDDLE SCHOOL.
SO I, I DO MY, SEE, I SEE MYSELF VESTED IN, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMITTEE HERE TODAY, I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT MY PARENTS ARE PERSONALLY SACRIFICING OR INVESTING 12% OF THE INCOME THAT WOULD OTHERWISE GENERATE FOR THEIR RETIREMENT, FOR THEIR, UH, DAY-TO-DAY LIVING.
UM, FATHER'S 80 PLUS MY MOM'S 70 PLUS, EVEN THOUGH SHE DOESN'T WANT ME TO TELL YOU THAT.
UM, TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE GETTING QUALITY TENANTS THAT ARE PAYING THE RENT ON TIME, THAT ADHERE THE NORMS AND STANDARDS THAT WE ALL CONSIDER TO BE, UH, UP TO THE, THE KIND OF QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE WANNA SEE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I HOPE THAT SHE SEES THAT WE'RE SINCERE IN, UH, IN OUR APPROACH BY DOING SO.
UH, THIS IS A DISTRICT FIVE CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER MONT FOR QUESTIONS.
MR. CASTILLO, UH, QUESTION TO YOU.
ALRIGHT, SO WHEN I LOOK AT SOME OF THE MAPS OF THIS PROPERTY, THE ONE STORY STRUCTURE IN THE BACK RIGHT HAND CORNER APPEARS TO BE NEW.
WHEN WAS THAT BUILT? THAT WAS BUILT IN THE, UH, EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.
AND IT'S A LIVING STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW FOR, UH, A YOUNG WOMAN WHO'S A NURSE WITH HER, WITH HER SON.
[01:15:01]
AND, AND IS YOUR INTENTION TO, TO LEASE THAT AS A SINGLE STRUCTURE? YES.THEY, THEY WOULD BE THE TENANTS IN THE BACK AND THE TENANTS IN THE FRONT WOULD BE THE FRONT STRUCTURE.
AND HOW MANY ROOMS ARE IN THE FRONT? OH, THE FRONT STRUCTURE HAS AT LEAST FOUR, FOUR ROOMS IN ONE OFFICE.
AND THREE BATHROOMS. ARE BOTH PROPERTIES CURRENTLY LEASED? YES.
UM, SO DID YOU RECEIVE A, RECEIVE A CITATION OR HOW DID THIS CASE COME ABOUT? WELL, THE, THE, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S, UM, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
I SHOULD HAVE ANSWERED THAT IN THE UPFRONT.
SO THERE'S ALWAYS A LITTLE BIT OF HEALTHY DEBATE ABOUT HOW MUCH ELECTRICITY THAT DIFFERENT TENANTS USED, AND WE FIGURED THAT IF THEY HAD THEIR OWN METER IN THE BACK, THAT DEBATE WOULD, UH, BECOME NULL AND VOID BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD PAY THEIR ELECTRICITY, THE FRONT END WOULD PAY THEIR ELECTRICITY AND IT WOULD, UH, YOU KNOW, AVOID, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT POINT OF CONTENTION.
UM, ONE THING I'VE NOTICED SORT OF GOING THROUGH, UH, THE GOOGLE MAPS HISTORICALLY ON THIS IS IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE A DECENT AMOUNT OF PARKING.
GIVEN WHAT'S INDICATED ON THIS SITE PLAN, HOW MANY UNITS OR SPACES OF PARKING DO YOU THINK THIS REPRESENTS HERE? I WOULD SAY, UM, A MODEST NUMBER WOULD BE FOUR.
AND, AND DO YOU THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT GIVEN YOUR EXPERIENCE OF THE PROPERTY? MORE THAN SUFFICIENT, I WOULD SAY.
BECAUSE I, AND I WAS, AND SORRY TO INTERRUPT AND WE WOULDN'T, WE, WHEN WE TALK TO THE TENANTS, WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE TENANTS THAT HAVE LIKE FOUR OR FIVE VEHICLES.
WE'VE SEEN THAT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE FEEL THAT IT'S A, IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WANT TO, WE WANT TO HAVE IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE WHEN I GO BACK THROUGH SORT OF GOOGLE MAPS STREET VIEW, I DO SEE INDICATIONS WHERE ODDLY ENOUGH THERE APPEARS TO BE PLENTY OF AVAILABLE PARKING, BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE STILL PEOPLE PARKING IN THE YARD,
UM, AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT GOES TO MS. KILMER'S POINT.
UM, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S GONNA BE A BIG CONCERN HERE.
MS. KILMER, IS THERE SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO SAY, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME UP? THE RESIDENCE AT THAT PARTICULAR ADDRESS HAS THE DRIVEWAY.
THEY CAN PARK IN THE DRIVEWAY OR IN THE FRONT.
HOWEVER, THERE IS SOME PROPERTY, THERE'S A, A PIECE OF LAND THAT IS OWNED BY RIGHT NOW, I CANNOT TELL YOU WHO IT'S OWNED BY, BUT IT'S OWNED BY SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND THAT, THAT IS BEING USED AS A PARKING SPACE.
I MEAN, THE ADDRESS THAT WE HAVE HERE DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR MORE THAN TWO OR THREE CARS TO HAVE ADDITIONAL, UH, PROPERTY OR PARKING IN THE PE UH, OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY.
I DON'T THINK THAT IS CORRECT.
I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
QUESTIONS OTHER COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, THIS IS PROBABLY FOR THE STAFF, THE NEW A DU RULES.
DOES THAT ALLOW THEM TO GET A SEPARATE METER? IF THAT'S THE ISSUE, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO, BUT THE RE THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO BE LIVING ON THE PROPERTY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSION ON MY LEFT COMMISSION ON MY RIGHT? NONE.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, SO A SITE PLAN IS BEING SHOWN, IS THAT AN OFFICIAL PART THEN, SINCE IT'S A CD OF THE, UH, OF THE CASE? YES, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT WOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE ORDINANCE.
IF THIS IS TO BE APPROVED, SO IT'S SHOWING TWO PAVED PARKING SPACES.
WELL, YOU CAN ASSUME TWO PAVED PARKING SPACES THERE IN THE FRONT.
UM, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, NOT TO, NOT TO INTERRUPT, YOU DO SEE FOUR PARKING SPACES ALONG THE LEFT SIDE WHERE IT SAYS LIKE MAIN RESIDENCE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE SECOND RESIDENCE, SQUARE FOOTAGE, EXISTING SHED, AND THEN THE FOUR PARKING SPACES.
UM, AND THEN, UH, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, UH, THE CITY'S DEFINITION OF A PARKING SPACE IS THAT IT HAS TO BE A FIRM STABLE, KIND OF ALMOST CONCRETE SURFACE.
NOT NECESSARILY CONCRETE, BUT, BUT UH, PARKING IN THE YARD IS NOT CONSIDERED A PARKING SPACE.
SO, UH, THIS, THE SITE PLAN, A LONG WAY OF SAYING IT KIND OF LOCKS IT INTO IT JUST BEING THOSE TWO SPACES, THEY COULDN'T COME BACK AND REPAVE THE WHOLE FRONT YARD TO PUT IN PARKING? CORRECT? UM, YES.
THEY COULD NOT EXPAND ANY IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT IS CALLED OUT ON THE, UM, THE SITE PLAN.
AND THEN PLUS THERE'S REGULATIONS FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL ALONG, ESPECIALLY WITH, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE FRONT YARD.
[01:20:01]
QUESTIONS I HAVE.FOR STAFF, IT SHOWS MINIMUM 1.5 PER UNIT.
DOES THAT EQUAL THREE? THE UM, EQUAL THREE, YOU MEAN 1.5 SPACES PER UNIT PER CORRECT.
SO IF THERE'S TWO UNITS THERE, IT WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF THREE SPACES WOULD BE REC, UM, RECOMMENDED.
AND THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS FOUR.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING YOU? NONE.
BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE FOR A MOTION.
UM, THANK YOU TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FOR ALL OF THE QUESTIONS.
I THINK, UM, Y'ALL ADDRESSED A LOT OF STUFF THAT WAS IN MY MIND BUT HADN'T BEEN PUT EXPLICITLY.
AND THANK YOU MS. KILMER FOR COMING HERE.
UM, I HOPE THAT Y'ALL LISTEN TO MS. KILMER, UH, ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, RECOGNIZE HER LEGITIMATE CONCERNS HERE.
UM, BECAUSE THERE ARE ISSUES WHEN WE SEE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, CAN HAVE MULTIPLE UNITS PLACED ON THEM AND THEN THOSE MULTIPLE UNITS ARE IN FACT SUBDIVIDED AND END UP REALLY CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, IN THIS CASE, HOWEVER, AND I UNDERSTAND MS. KILMER, THAT THAT YOU WANT R SIX TO BE SINGLE FAMILY, SINGLE STRUCTURE AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS, BUT AS WE CONFRONT, UH, PRETTY SIGNIFICANT HOUSING CONCERNS, AS WE LOOK AT THE STRATEGIC HOUSING INITIATIVE PLANS, ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOK AT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
UH, THIS DOESN'T QUITE QUALIFY AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THE OWNER IS NOT RESIDENT ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, BUT IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE IT'S AN R SIX CD AND BECAUSE IT IS AS FAR AS THE USE IS CONCERNED, VERY MUCH LIKE ANY OTHER R SIX IN THAT IT HAS TWO UNITS AND MAINTAINS THE SINGLE FAMILY NATURE OF THE PROPERTY, I AM GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION HERE.
UM, I THINK THE IMPORTANCE OF, UH, INCREASING OUR HOUSING STOCK, INCREASING THE ABILITY OF THESE SORT OF ENTRY LEVEL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES IS TOO IMPORTANT TO NOT DO IT IN THIS CASE.
ALSO, THE PROPERTY IS CLOSE TO A COMMERCIAL ZONE AND COMMERCIAL AREA, SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR THAT.
AND SO AT THIS TIME, I AM MOVING FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10 AS SUBMITTED SECOND.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON.
UH, WE WILL NOW BE MOVING ON TO ITEM 11, I BELIEVE.
IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION PLEASE.
MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BENAVIDEZ, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 11 IS LOCATED AT 6 3 5 7 RIMAN ROAD GOING FROM I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TWO I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WAS ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 14 NOTICES SENT OUT.
TWO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED? NO.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS LOCATED WITHIN 200 FOOT RADIUS AND NO RESPONSE FROM OUTSIDE.
THE 200 FOOT RADIUS STAFF FINDS EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE EFFECTS, ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE SURROUNDING AREA IS C3, GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL.
THE EXISTING I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL AND C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ARE APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICTS FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
WHILE THE PROPOSAL FOR I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
[01:25:01]
DISTRICT WOULD PROVIDE UNIFORM ZONING ACROSS THE PROPERTY, IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE ABUTTING PROPERTIES AND USES THE LARGE AREA REZONING FROM 1986, ESTABLISHED A C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUFFER ALONG GRIMAN ROAD AND FM 78, WHICH IS PRIMARILY OCCUPIED BY SMALL SCALE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.EVEN THOUGH MOST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS EXISTING I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL, THERE IS A PIECE THAT ENCROACHES THE C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL BUFFER AND HAS POTENTIAL TO INTRODUCE, UH, INCOMPATIBLE AND INDUSTRIAL USES NEAR AN ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL, PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE, I'M SORRY, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
HELLO EVERYONE, MY NAME'S KEVIN LOVE AND I AM MAINLY HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
BUT THIS, DO YOU HAVE THE SITE PLAN THAT WE SUBMITTED, WHICH SHOWS WHAT SHOWS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO BE BUILT? GIMME ONE SECOND.
BASICALLY WE'RE, WHAT, WHAT'S HAPPENED IS THE FRONT ALONG RUMAN ROAD, UH, PRIMARILY THAT ZONE C3, UH, INDUSTRIAL BEHIND IT, UH, WE HAD TO CHANGE THE LAND USE BECAUSE THAT WHOLE TRIANGLE WAS, UM, I THINK IT WAS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL.
AND SO WE HAD TO CHANGE IT TO INDUSTRIAL, UH, TO BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE ZONING.
BUT THE COMMERCIAL WAS DEVELOPED NOT TOO LONG AGO, UM, I GUESS IN, WITHIN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.
AND SO THE, THE SMALL KIND OF TRIANGULAR PIECE THAT WE'RE ASKING TO CHANGE ZONING FOR IS WHAT'S LEFT OVER WHEN THE COMMERCIAL CAME IN AND DEVELOPED.
UH, WALGREENS WOULD NOT PURCHASE THAT EXTRA PIECE OF PROPERTY.
UH, WE'RE COMING IN AND CLEANING THAT UP MAINLY, YOU KNOW, I I GUESS CALL IT SELFISH REASONS, BUT WE NEED FINANCING AND, UH, EQUITY PARTNERS AND BANKS LIKE TO SEE INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS, UH, YOU KNOW, ZONE CONSISTENTLY THE C UH, THE C3, THE, THE, THE TRIANGULAR PIECE OF CC THREE, IT FALLS WITHIN OUR LOT.
I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE OUR LOT CONTIGUOUS WITH REGARDS TO ZONING.
UM, I CAN EMAIL Y'ALL A SITE PLAN, BUT BASICALLY IF WE COULD, SO ON THE AERIAL RIGHT HERE, I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT, WHAT WE'RE REZONING IS THIS PIECE THAT KIND OF GOES OFF, IT'S THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE.
AND SO THERE'S A INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT THROUGH HERE, WHICH PROVIDES REAR CONNECTIVITY FOR ALL OF THESE LOTS.
SO, I MEAN, WE CAN'T DEVELOP IT.
I MEAN WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOTTA RESPECT THAT INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT.
SO THERE'S NOT MUCH, I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE WE COULD PUT A BUILDING IN THERE.
AGAIN, WE'RE HERE TO, TO TRY TO MAKE OUR, OUR ZONING CONTIGUOUS THROUGHOUT THE PLATTED LOT, BUT THIS IS HOW WE'RE HERE BECAUSE THIS IS HOW THE COMMERCIAL ENDED UP BEING DEVELOPED.
SO THIS ONE, THAT'S THE PLAT, BUT YEAH, YOU CAN, YOU CAN SEE THE ENTIRETY OF THE LOT.
AND THEN BASICALLY THAT LINE DOWN THERE IS, UH, THE LOAN LINE OF ZONING CHANGE AND THEN THE DRIVE PROVIDING REAR CONNECTIVITY THAT YOU SAW RUNS THROUGH THE BACK OF THE LOT THROUGH HERE.
AND THE TOTAL ACREAGE SIZE OF, THAT'S ABOUT 0.4 ACRES.
UM, JUST TO POINT OUT, THAT'S AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION.
UH, OUR BUILDING, SINCE WE CAN'T FIND THE SITE PLAN IS LOCATED HERE, UH, WITH REAR DOCKS ALONG HERE.
UH, AND THIS IS PARK AND FIELD.
WELL, THERE'S A PICTURE OF THE PLAID AS WELL.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
ALRIGHT, WELL THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON FOR QUESTIONS.
I HAVE NO QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL OPEN IT UP TO MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONERS ON MY, MY RIGHT.
[01:30:01]
CAN YOU ELABORATE ON YOUR ACCESS? UM, SO IT SHOWS THAT YOU'RE LANDLOCKED AND YOU DO HAVE AN EASEMENT THROUGH, THROUGH THE BACK OF THOSE EXISTING COMMERCIAL, UH, PROPERTIES.UM, CAN YOU, MAN, THAT LOOKS VERY STRANGE.
CAN YOU, WELL, CAN YOU SHOW 'EM OUR PLAT? GO BACK TO OUR PLAT.
SO, SO OUR PROPERTY, YEAH, IF YOU CAN ZOOM OUT WHERE YOU CAN SEE RMAN CROSSING.
SO OUR PROPERTY HAS, WE DO FLAG OUT TO RMAN, UH, THEY LEFT THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR WHATEVER REASON THIS REAR LOT, OUR ACCESS WILL BE FROM WOODLAKE CENTER.
UH, THERE IS AN INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT HERE, BUT YOU KNOW, IN THE BACK OF INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES, THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE GATED, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, CONTROLLED ACCESS, BUT THE PROJECTS, YEAH, IT'S NOT LANDLOCKED.
WE'VE GOT FRONTAGE ALONG WOODLAKE CENTER AND, UM, NOT CROSSING, BUT CENTER.
AND THEN ALSO THERE'S FRONTAGE HERE AS WELL, WHICH MEETS THE UDC REQUIREMENTS FOR FRONTAGE.
AND WE DO HAVE ONE LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE AUTO ZONE PERSON.
THOUGHT ABOUT REACHING OUT OUT THE JACK FINGER, BUT DIDN'T THINK OF THAT UNTIL LATER.
UH, NO OTHER, OH, COMMISSIONER HUEY.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR, CAN YOU AGAIN POINT TO ME WHAT, WHAT SECTIONS YOU'RE TRYING TO REZONE? SO IT'S THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE, WE'RE GONNA PULL UP THE MAP FOR YOU.
AND SO IF YOU'LL PULL UP TO MAKE IT CLEAR.
WELL, IF YOU CAN SHOW 'EM, GO BACK TO THE AERIAL.
IT'S WHICH AERIAL? WELL, JUST ANY AERIAL.
THAT, THAT ONE'S FINE RIGHT THERE.
EVEN THAT YOU HAVE THE ACTUAL ONLINE ZONING MAP WILL SHOW YOU THE C3 PORTION.
SO, SO THE PORTION THAT WE'RE REZONING IS HERE.
SO SORRY FOR THE, APPARENTLY, UH, WE, WE COULDN'T SIGN INTO THE COMPUTER TODAY, SO WE'RE HAVING SOME LITTLE GLITCHES, WHICH IS WHY IT'S A SLOW PROCESS TODAY.
AND I GUESS I JUST SAID, JUST SAY, JUST FOR THE RECORD, UH, WE SUBMITTED AN EXHIBIT WITH FIELD NOTES FOR THAT, FOR THAT EXACT AREA THAT SHOULD BE WITH STAFF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS LOOKING LEFT.
COMMISSIONER WATSON, DO YOU FOR A MOTION? I AM GONNA MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM.
UH, IN PART BECAUSE PLANNING COMMISSION DID PASS IT.
UM, THIS, THERE'S A LOT OF STRANGE PLANNING PATTERNS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF DISTRICT TWO.
UM, IT CONTINUES TO BE A CHALLENGE FOR RESIDENTS AS WELL AS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP, TO ACTUALLY MAKE THINGS WORK.
IN THIS CASE, AS YOU'VE BEEN MAPS AND BY SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS, IT'S VERY CONFUSING WHY THIS ISN'T ALREADY I ONE.
AND HOW THIS FITS INTO THE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAND USE MAP THAT'S LARGER, THIS IS SECTION RIGHT HERE IS LISTED AS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS WHY IT HAD TO GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, EVEN THOUGH IT IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO INDUSTRIAL AND THE PRIMARY MASSING AND FRONTAGE AND ACCESS POINTS WILL BE ON WOODLAKE.
UM, IF THIS HAD BEEN A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL, UM, SINCE THERE IS A COMMERCIAL CORNER CORRIDOR ON RIDIN THAT RESIDENTS FREQUENTLY USE, UM, WE ARE GENERALLY OPPOSED TO CONTINUING TO PUT INDUSTRIAL ON OUR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO REVITALIZE IN THE DISTRICT.
BUT IN THIS CASE, UM, THAT IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING.
MOST OF THE BUILDING WILL BE ON WOODLAKE, UM, AND THAT IS AN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL
[01:35:01]
CENTER.UM, SO WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF IT AT THE OFFICE.
UM, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY OPPOSITION FROM THE COMMUNITY.
UM, IT'S UNFAIR TO THE APPLICANT TO PUT THIS BURDEN AND CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS UNDEVELOPABLE PIECE OF LAND BECAUSE THERE'S NON-CONFORMING AND CONSISTENT ZONING.
UM, SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE OVERALL, YOU KNOW, THIS, THE APPLICANT'S WORKED REALLY HARD TO MAKE THIS MAKE SENSE, UM, HAS WORKED WITH US CLOSELY, NO ISSUES WITH THIS REQUEST AND UM, I'LL BE MAKING A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
A MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITSETT DISCUSSION.
I BELIEVE THOSE ARE ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL CASES FOR TODAY.
DO WE HAVE, UH, WE HAVE MINUTES
[Approval of Minutes ]
LEFT AS THE FINAL ITEM ARE THERE? SORRY.ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES? IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED.
OR MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SECOND.
AND IS THAT YOU? COMMISSIONER ORTIZ.
COMMISSIONER ORTIZ WITH A SECOND.
VERY QUIET COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES.
ANY OPPOSED? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE.
DO WE HAVE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT FOR TODAY? NO SIR.
UM, I I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.
UM, NOT THAT I'M COMPLAINING, UH, ARE, IS THERE LIKE A BACKLOG OF, OF ZONING CASES COMING UP? IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE
WHAT DOES THE, THE, THE APRIL SCHEDULE LOOK LIKE, KELLY? WELL, THE APRIL SCHEDULE WE LOOK TO HAVE ABOUT 15 CASES FOR THE NEXT MEETING AND THEN POSSIBLY ANOTHER 12 TO 15 FOR THE NEXT ONE.
BUT I WILL SAY SINCE WE HAVE, UM, MA MADE IT MANDATORY THAT APPLICANTS CONTACT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN 200 FEET, WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ON HOLD BECAUSE THEY'RE FAILING TO DO SO.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY CAUSING A LITTLE, LITTLE OF THE BACKLOG.
I AM, WE ARE NOT TO SCHEDULE THESE MEETINGS UNTIL THEY MAKE, THEY REACH OUT TO THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
ALRIGHT, WELL UH, GOOD TO KNOW.
THE TIME IS 2 45 AND THE ZONING COMMISSION OF SAN ANTONIO IS ADJOURNED.