* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:04] ALL RIGHT, SO WE WILL BEGIN WHILE WE WORK OUT THE, THE TECHNICAL ISSUES WITH ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS. UM, GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. IF WE COULD BEGIN WITH OUR SPANISH TRANSLATION SERVICES STATEMENT START. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. MY NAME IS ROB S 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 REGULARLY NOTICED MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION. THE TIME IS 1 0 5. I'D LIKE TO DO A ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MARCO BARROS, UH, REPRESENTING DISTRICT NINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. JOHN BUSANTE, DISTRICT FIVE. DANIEL KELLUM, DISTRICT ONE, JOHN WITT, DISTRICT 10. TAYLOR WATSON, DISTRICT TWO GEORGE OSA, DISTRICT THREE. EDDIE REYES, DISTRICT FOUR. KEN HUITT, DISTRICT SIX STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRIOR TO COMMENCING OUR HEARING? UH, I WOULD LIKE OUR STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF. BEFORE I BEGIN, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR PHONES ON, OR I'M SORRY, TURN YOUR PHONES ON. VIBRATE OR TURN THEM OFF. THE ZONING COMMISSION IS AN 11 BO 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 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 HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSED REZONING, YOU'LL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER THAT YOU HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION. YOU WILL BE INFORMED THAT THE TWO 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 SIX MINUTES. THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK AND MUST ANNOUNCE THAT THEIR SPEAKER IS GOING UP TO THE AND MUST ANNOUNCE WHEN THAT SPEAKER IS GOING UP TO THE PODIUM THAT THEY ARE YIELDING THEIR TIME. THE APPLICANT WILL BE THEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS. THANK YOU CHAIR. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN WITH THE, UH, FORMAL AGENDA, I'D JUST LIKE TO NOTE FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEMS 26 AND 27, THOSE ARE THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT. THOSE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD UNTIL 6:00 PM OR AFTER 6:00 PM UM, SO WE WILL NOT HEAR DEPENDING, UH, EVEN IF WE GO THROUGH OUR AGENDA IN RECORD TIME AND FINISH IN AN HOUR, WE STILL WILL NOT HEAR THOSE ITEMS UNTIL 6:00 PM SO YOU ARE FREE TO ENJOY THE DAY DOWNTOWN AND COME BACK AND SEE US AT SIX O'CLOCK IF YOU WOULD LIKE. ALL RIGHT. AND MR. CHAIR, DO YOU MIND IF WE TEST THE MICROPHONE WITH THE COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES, THAT'D BE GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CHASE, CAN YOU HEAR US? I CAN HEAR YOU. THANK YOU. ALEXIS, CAN WE PUT HER BACK ON THE SCREEN? THANK YOU ANDREW. WE'RE READY TO PROCEED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, STAFF, [Zoning Items  ] IF WE COULD GO OVER OUR WITHDRAWN OR POSTPONED ITEMS AT THIS TIME. ITEMS THAT ARE GOING TO BE POSTPONED ARE WITHDRAWN. ARE ITEMS ONE LOCATED AT 7 0 8 NORTH COLORADO STREET. ITEM NUMBER TWO LOCATED AT 10 19 PEREZ STREET. ITEM NUMBER THREE AT LOCATED AT 42 0 2 WILLARD DRIVE, ITEM NUMBER FOUR LOCATED [00:05:01] AT 1411 SPRINGVALE DRIVE AND ITEM NUMBER FIVE, LOCATED AT 6 35 WEST POPLAR STREET. THESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN POSTPONED OR WITHDRAWN AND THEY WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. AND IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THEM, YOU WILL BE RECEIVING REIFICATION, UM, IF AND WHEN THEY ARE RESCHEDULED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. SO LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THOSE PROPERTIES ON NORTH COLORADO PEREZ, WILLARD SPRINGVALE, OR WEST POPLAR, AS KELLY STATED, THOSE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY AND YOU ARE ALSO FREE TO ENJOY DOWNTOWN FOR THE NEXT COUPLE HOURS IF YOU WOULD LIKE. ALL RIGHT, STAFF, IF WE COULD PLEASE GO OVER THE LIST OF ITEMS ON THE COMBINED AGENDA. ITEMS ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA ARE ITEMS NUMBER 7 13 15 16, 18, 19 21 AND 23. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OF THESE ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD WISH TO PULL TO INDIVIDUAL? LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE, LOOKING RIGHT, SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER CHASE ONLINE. ANY ITEMS? I THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. NO. SO IF WE COULD PLEASE READ THE COMBINED HEARING, THE, THE CONSENT AGENDA INTO THE RECORD PLEASE. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FIVE TO C TWO WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER, UM, WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME, LOCATED AT 41 31 CBRA ROAD. UM, UM, WE DO HAVE AN AMENDED SITE PLAN, WHICH IS PROPOSED. SO THERE IS A CHANGE, UM, WHERE WE'VE GOT THE UH, C TWO CD ON LOTS. UM, PULL UP THE SITE PLAN PLEASE. ALEXA, I APOLOGIZE. I APOLOGIZE. YES, THEN I APOLOGIZE. I GOT THAT MIXED UP. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. UM, APOLOGIES, WE'RE HAVING A A BIT OF DIFFICULTIES HERE. HOLD ON ONE SECOND PLEASE. I APOLOGIZE, WE HAD SOME MISCOMMUNICATIONS. THE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN THAT IS ON HERE IS THE INCORRECT, UM, ITEM SEVEN. THAT ITEM IS ACTUALLY ITEM NUMBER SEVEN THAT IS LOCATED AT, UM, 4 1 3 1 COLLAB ROAD IS ON INDIVIDUAL, SO I APOLOGIZE. UM, FOR THE COMBINED ASCEND AGENDA, THIS ITEM THAT IS SHOWING ON THE SUMMARY THAT ENDS IN 0 0 1 S IS ACTUALLY FOR A ANOTHER CASE. SO WE ARE NOT GOING TO HEAR THAT. SO I AM SKIPPING STRAIGHT TO ITEM NUMBER 13. SO ITEM NUMBER 13 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FIVE TO R FIVE CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED IN THE 200 BLOCK OF CRESWELL DRIVE, 22 NOTICES WERE SENT, UM, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. [00:10:03] ITEM NUMBER 15 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM R FOUR TO RM FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 25 43 AMITY ROAD 30 NOTICES WERE MAILED 19 IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED. AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. ITEM NUMBER 16 IS A REQUEST AND CHANGE IN ZONING FROM OH TWO TO C TWO NA WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A VETERINARY HOSPITAL SMALL ANIMAL WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 11,000 9 0 2 RUSTIC LANE, 127 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED, AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. ITEM NUMBER 18 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM MPCD TO MPCD WITH A MAJOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. 11 NOTICES WERE MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND THE NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE GAVE NO RESPONSE. ITEM NUMBER 19 IS A REQUEST AND CHANGE IN ZONING FROM I ONE TO R 20 LO WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 10 41 CLYDE ROAD. 20 NOTICES WERE MAILED. EIGHT RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. FOR ITEM NUMBER 21. A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM RM FOUR AND C TWO TO C TWO NA WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 38 0 2 SOUTHWEST MILITARY DRIVE. 53 NOTICES MAILED ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED QUINTANA COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR. AND ITEM NUMBER 23 IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C TWO TO MHC WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1 2 5 9 0 FISHER ROAD. 12 NOTICES WERE SENT. ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED. AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET. SO THAT IS IT FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. AGAIN, THAT IS ONLY ITEMS 13 15 16, 18, 19 21 AND 23. AND WE DO HAVE, UH, FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS. MR. CHAIR, BEFORE WE GET TO PUBLIC COMMENT, I'D LIKE TO REMOVE AN ITEM FROM INDIVIDUAL AND MOVE IT BACK TO CONSENT IF POSSIBLE. ALRIGHT. AND THAT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, CASE ENDING IN OH EIGHT SIX. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ ARRIVED AT 1:12 PM . THANK YOU . ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD, IF WE COULD HEAR ITEM NINE, IF WE COULD ALSO READ THAT INTO THE RECORD AS WELL. ITEM NUMBER NINE IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM C3 NA TO MF 18 WITH ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME, LOCATED AT 10 17 AND 10 19 SOUTH SAN EDUARDO AVENUE. 42 NOTICES WERE MAILED FOR RECEIVED IN FAVOR, UH, ONE OPPOSED AND NO RESPONSE FROM THE LAS PALMAS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ALRIGHT. AND, AND, AND YOU SAID WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT ON THESE, UH, CONSENT ITEMS? THAT IS CORRECT. DO WE HAVE VOICEMAILS OR JUST SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? WE JUST HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD BEGIN WITH THOSE THEN. SO FOR ITEM NUMBER 13, I HAVE RAYMOND PEREZ. YES. MR. PEREZ, IF YOU CAN COME TO THE PODIUM AND YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK. IF YOU CAN JUST PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. SO BEFORE I STEP UP HERE, I'D LIKE TO ASK, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS CAN YOU PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM TO ASK THE QUESTION? I'M SORRY SIR, CAN YOU TURN ON THE MICROPHONE AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? MY NAME'S RAYMOND PEREZ. I'M SORRY, WHAT ELSE DID YOU NEED? UH, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE? IT'S 1 3 3 CRESWELL DRIVE. MY QUESTION TO THE PANEL IS, SO YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED WITH THE INFORMATION AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU GUYS ARE ALREADY IN FAVOR OF VOTING FOR AND I'M ONLY ALLOWED TWO MINUTES. PLEASE PICK IT TO THE MIC, SIR. DID, DID YOU ALL HEAR MY, UH, MY QUESTION? IS THAT CORRECT? THIS IS YOUR TIME TO MAKE A STATEMENT, SIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. [00:15:02] THIS IS YOUR TIME TO MAKE A STATEMENT, SIR. I AM GONNA READ OUT A REZONING HEARING NUMBER 2019 FROM 2019. IT IS Z 20 19 1 0 7 0 0 0 68 CD JUST IN CASE YOU GUYS WANNA DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. THAT PROPERTY WAS REZONED FROM RESIDENTIAL TO, UH, COMMERCIAL. SO NOW I HAVE AN 18 WHEELER TRUCK REPAIR SHOP THAT IS OPERATING 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. THAT PRO THAT THOSE TRUCKS ARE PASSING ON A RESIDENTIAL STREET 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, HAVE A, THEY HAVE A COMPRESSOR RUNNING 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK TO HAVE LIGHTS GOING ON 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. MY NEIGHBOR HAS HAD TO PUT UP FOIL PAPER ON HIS WINDOWS SO THAT HE CAN SLEEP AT NIGHT. SO NOW, LIKE I SAID, I HAVE 18 WHEELERS GOING UP AND DOWN MY STREET 24 HOURS A DAY. THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT BEHIND THAT 18 WHEELER. ON THE ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS THE 18 WHEELER, UH, REPAIR SHOP ON THIS SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL. SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER, I DON'T SEE HOW YOU GUYS WHO HAVE ALREADY REVIEWED THE OPPOSING SIDE'S REQUEST TO HAVE IT REZONED. YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY SEEN ALL THEIR PAPERWORK AND YOU'RE GONNA GIVE ME TWO MINUTES TO PRESENT. I'M OPPOSED. PRETTY PATHETIC IS WHAT I THINK. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. DID WE HAVE, AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, ACTUALLY, I APOLOGIZE. WE MOVED ITEM NUMBER NINE, WE HAVE A MR. JOSE GALLEGOS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE. I'LL DEFER FROM SPEAKING SINCE IT'S BEEN MOVED TO THE CONSENT ITEM. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE, THEY ARE REQUESTING, WHICH CAN BE APPROVED THROUGH ZONING COMMISSION, UM, AND CITY COUNCIL AMENDING TO ALLOW UP TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE AROUND THE PERIMETER FOR THIS PROPERTY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT? I'M SORRY, QUICKLY, I APOLOGIZE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ITEM NUMBER NINE ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT. SO ITEM NUMBER NINE I THINK CAN REMAIN ON CONSENT AS IS NO AMENDMENT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE, I, SO AGAIN, THEY ARE ASKING FOR A FENCE HEIGHT THAT IS ABOVE UDC STANDARDS, HENCE WHY WE ARE AMENDING AT THE PODIUM TO GRANT THEM. YES. SO THEY, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT THAT THE FENCE COULD BE ALLOWED IS EIGHT FEET, HOWEVER, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY SAYING IT WILL BE EIGHT FEET. UM, AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO HELP ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS. GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS PATRICIA VI. I'M REPRESENTING MR. JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ, PROPERTY OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY. UM, THE FENCE IS ACTUALLY A, GO AHEAD SIR. I'M SORRY. IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE. YES, MY ADDRESS IS 14, UM, 3 42 FLORENCIA AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 2 8. AND MR. CHAIR, IF I MIGHT JUST QUICKLY SURE. I APOLOGIZE. GO AHEAD MR. MR. MONTE. AND SO GIVEN WHAT THE STAFF HAS REPRESENTED, ARE YOU SEEKING TO AMEND YOUR APPLICATION TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO BUILD UP TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? NO. OKAY. WHY DON'T, BUT YOU'RE NEEDING IT BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY PERMITTED UP TO FIVE OR UP TO THREE SOLID FENCE IN THE FRONT. OKAY. AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR MORE? NO, LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED. WHEN WE CAME IN TO GET THE PROPERTY PERMIT, I MEAN THE PERMIT FOR THE FENCING, WE WERE INSTRUCTED BY THE GENTLEMAN AT WINDOW NUMBER [00:20:01] TWO THAT WE COULD HAVE A THREE FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT, PLUS IF WE WANTED TO GO TO FIVE FEET, WE NEEDED TO LEAVE AN OPENING OF ONE FOOT AND THEN ONE MORE FOOT ON TOP, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT A FIVE FOOT FENCE, WHICH IS WHAT WAS MADE AND THAT'S WHY WE WERE TRYING TO GET IT CORRECTED. BUT IT'S A FIVE FOOT FENCE, NOT A, NOT A SIX OR EIGHT MS. MS. VIAL. YES. IF I MIGHT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION SURE. I I WOULD ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER, UH, ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUILD UP TO EIGHT FEET. CORRECT. AND THE STAFF CAN WORK WITH YOU AS YOU GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND DO IT. SO I'M GONNA ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN. ARE YOU AMENDING YOUR APPLICATION TO BUILD UP TO AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE? YES. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. NOW WE CAN GO. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. AS YOU CAN TELL, HE USED TO BE OUR CHAIR FOR MANY YEARS. . ALRIGHT, IF, IF, UH, IS, IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT, SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. UM, JUST TO QUICK, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE SOME GUIDANCE TO UM, THE GENTLEMAN THAT CAME UP SINCE NUMBER 13 AS A CASE IN DISTRICT TWO, UM, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR, UM, A CD, UH, RATHER AN R SIX CD RATHER THAN A COMMERCIAL. UM, IT IS NOT A PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN REZONED BEFORE, BUT IF YOU ARE HAVING ISSUES WITH THE 18 WHEELER, SIR, UM, I WOULD SUGGEST YOU REACH OUT TO THE DISTRICT TWO OFFICE SO WE CAN HELP MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER THAT BUSINESS IS DOING THAT'S CREATING CHALLENGES, UM, WE CAN ADDRESS THROUGH CODE OR WHATEVER OTHER NEEDS. UM, IT'S NOT PERTINENT TO THIS ZONING CASE, BUT WE WILL, UH, BE WILLING TO WORK WITH YOU ON THAT ISSUE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON. UH, OTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? ONAL. MY LEFT. SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT DISCUSSION. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER CHASE? UH, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER NINE AS AMENDED. ITEM NUMBER 13, ITEM NUMBER 15, 16 18, 19 21. I'LL SECOND THAT MR. CHAIR. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A, A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS. I BELIEVE WE'RE MISSING 23. I THOUGHT YOU SAID 23. I DIDN'T HEAR. I, SORRY. OKAY. I AM INCLUDING 23 OF THE MOTION. THANK YOU. AND COMMISSIONER BARDOS, YOU'RE ACCEPTING OF THAT ADDITION? YES, SIR. OF 23? YES. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE ITEM NINE AS AMENDED 13 15 16 18, 19 21 AND 23. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SEC. A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. UM, I BELIEVE THERE'S, THERE'S NO DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT. NO DISCUSSION. LOOKING RIGHT. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEMS PASS. NINE AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THOSE ITEMS WILL NOW BE PROCEEDING ON CITY COUNCIL AND YOU ARE FREE TO ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR DAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WE ARE NOW GOING TO MOVE ONTO OUR COMBINED HEARING FOR CONTINUANCE ITEMS FOR THE CONTINUANCE TO AUGUST 6TH. WE HAVE THREE ITEMS. ITEMS NUMBER 22, 24 AND 25 ARE REQUESTING A TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE TO THE AUGUST 6TH MEETING. AND WE DO, UM, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THOSE ITEMS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. OH, I APOLOGIZE. WE DO HAVE A VOICEMAIL FOR 24. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD PLAY THE VOICEMAIL PLEASE. HI, MY NAME IS LAURA DOMINGUEZ. MY ADDRESS IS 1706 EAST CROCKETT STREET. UM, THE CASE I'M CALLING ABOUT ENDS IN, UH, 0 1 4 2. UM, WE'RE JUST CALLING AS A BOARD MEMBER OF THE JACKSON HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO NOTE THAT WE, WE DON'T SUPPORT THIS, UH, CHANGE WITH THE BUILT. UM, WE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROXIMITY TO THE HOUSES, UH, CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARKING SPACES ARE AVAILABLE, AND THEN ALSO JUST IN GENERAL, THE FACILITY'S GONNA BE A LAUNDRY SPACE. UM, OUR AREA, WE'RE REALLY IN NEED OF ALTERNATE OPTIONS FOR, YOU KNOW, FOOD, WHAT KIND OF FOOD DESERT IN THIS SIDE OF TOWN. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE PRODUCTIVE THAN A LAUNDROMAT. ALSO, THERE'S, [00:25:01] UH, LAUNDRY FACILITIES NOT TOO FAR AWAY ALREADY. UM, SO YES, UM, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, UH, JUST LET US KNOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BYE-BYE. AND THAT'S IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IS THERE A MOTION FOR THESE ITEMS? MR. CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS TO THE AUGUST 6TH HEARING. ITEM NUMBER 22. NUMBER 24 AND 25. ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. MR. CHAIR. ALRIGHT. UH, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WATSON TO CONTINUE ITEMS 22, 24 AND 25 TO THE AUGUST 6TH HEARING. UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS. ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT. SEEING NONE. LOOKING RIGHT. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER CHASE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER TSET? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEMS PASS FOR CONTINUANCE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU TO THE SECOND CONTINUANCE HEARING THAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER 12 IS REQUESTING A FOUR WEEK CONTINUANCE TO AUGUST 20TH. UM, AND THEY ARE A VOICEMAIL AND WE HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP ON THIS. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD BEGIN WITH THE VOICEMAIL PLEASE. THIS AT SIX 12 SOUTH PARK BOULEVARD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 4. CASE NUMBER Z DASH 2024 DASH ONE OH SEVEN ZERO ZERO ZERO EIGHT THREE. PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN FIVE OH ONE NINETY EIGHT ZERO SEVEN. I AM IN OPPOSITION OF THE REZONING. AT THE ADDRESS IS 6 0 8 SOUTH PARK BOULEVARD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 4. THE REASON IS THERE HAS BEEN OVERDOSES INSIDE THE BUILDING AND DEATH IS A RESULT OF IT. ONE TENANT PASSED AWAY INSIDE CHILDREN ARE NEXT DOOR PLAYING AND IN THE PARK ACROSS THE STREET IS ALSO A LOT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY GATHERINGS FOR PICNIC PICNICS AND PLAY CLIMB. SO I APPRECIATE YOU TAKE ALL THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AND, UM, I AM OPPOSED TO IT. THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC IN AND OUT. THANK YOU. AND THEN MR. FALLON, ARE, YOU'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. DID YOU WANNA SPEAK OR DID YOU WANNA WAIT IF THEY HAD ANY QUESTIONS? I TRY WAIVE IT. LET'S JUST DO CONTINUOUS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION? MR. CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE FOLLOWING ITEM TO THE AUGUST 20TH HEARING ITEM NUMBER 12. HAPPY TO SECOND THAT MOTION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BOT BOTTO. ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS TO CONTINUE ITEM NUMBER 12 TO THE AUGUST 20TH HEARING BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS, UM, DISCUSSION. LOOKING LEFT. SEEING NONE. LOOKING RIGHT, SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER CHASE ONLINE. NO THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER OSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER WHIT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. WE WILL SEE YOU IN A MONTH. ALRIGHT, UM, WE ARE MOVING NOW TO OUR INDIVIDUAL HEARING. UM, WE HAD A REQUEST, A COMMISSIONER REQUEST TO MOVE ITEM NUMBER 10 TO THE, TO THE START. SO WE'LL HEAR ITEM NUMBER TEN FIRST, PLEASE IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION. [00:30:35] GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS BRO FRERE ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 10 IS GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 10,000 BLOCK OF SOUTH SARZA MORRIS STREET GOING FROM FBZ FORM-BASED ZONING TO MF 40 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT. WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME, THERE ARE 15 NOTICES SENT OUT. THREE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED. AND THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITH 10, 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE EXISTING FORM-BASED ZONING DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED MF 40 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT IS NOT THE SURROUNDING AREA IS A MIX OF LARGE LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BUT WITH THE HIGHEST DENSITY AT 33 UNITS PER ACRE. STAFF CONSIDERED THE PROPOSED 40 UNITS PER ACRE OUT OF CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND IS BETTER SUITED FOR A CENTRALLY LOCATED AREA NEAR SUPPORTING TRANSPORTATION AND COMMERCIAL FACILITIES. THE LOCATION DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO PUBLIC BUS TRANSPORTATION, WHICH CAN CREATE SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION ISSUES FROM THE GROWING AREA AND VERY LITTLE COMMERCIAL USES OR SPACE TO APPROPRIATELY SERVICE THE PROPOSED POPULATION. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE. YES, THANK YOU. HI, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. ASHLEY FAIRMONT, KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMONT 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE. UH, WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION TODAY. I'M HERE WITH SIMA KYRA FROM SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST. UH, AND SHE'S GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT OF DETAILS ABOUT THE PROJECT. AND THEN I'M JUST GONNA GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE ZONING AND PLANNING. UM, SO AGAIN, HERE'S THE SITE. IT'S A LITTLE LESS THAN 20 ACRES. IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM VERANO, WHICH IS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, GROWING AND DEVELOPING MORE HOUSING PRODUCT IN THE AREA. SINGLE FAMILY AS WAS DISCUSSED. THERE'S ALSO APARTMENTS ACROSS THE STREET, UH, YOU CAN SEE ON THE, THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE SOUTH. UH, YEAH, THERE YOU GO. UH, TEXAS A AND M. AND THEN ALSO, UM, JUST NORTH OF A AND MA LITTLE BIT TO THE LEFT ON THAT PLAN WILL BE THE NEW UNIVERSITY HEALTH HOSPITAL. UH, AND THERE'S ALSO COMMERCIAL PLANNED FOR THIS MASTER PLANNED AREA, UH, AND A LOT OF GROWTH COMING HERE. UH, THE OTHER THING I DO WANNA HIGHLIGHT IS, SO THE GREEN IS THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE REZONING AND CONSIDERING TODAY, IF FRONTS ON ZAR ZAMORA, IT IS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL ON THE CITY'S MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN. IT'S 120 FEET TO 140 FOOT RIGHT OF AWAY. UM, SO IT IS A LARGE STREET THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS. OH, I DON'T, SORRY, I'M NOT IN CONTROL. UM, SO AGAIN, THE CURRENT ZONING IS FORM BASE. UM, THERE'S A REASON WHY YOU DON'T SEE HARDLY ANY FORM BASE HERE ANYMORE. IT, IT'S NOT A ZONING DISTRICT THAT REALLY WORKS FOR DEVELOPMENT. ALL OF VERANO HAS BEEN ZONED OUT OF FORM BASE. THERE'S ONLY A FEW PIECES THAT REMAIN. UM, AND THEN SO THE ZONING AROUND THE AREA IN PCD IS THAT TURQUOISE COLOR THAT YOU SEE ACROSS THE STREET. SO THAT'S THE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY DISTRICT. WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY IN A VARIETY OF, OF ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE AREA. UM, JUST ON ON STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS DENSITY AT THIS LOCATION IS APPROPRIATE. THE PROJECT ACTUALLY COMES IN AT ABOUT 30 UNITS PER ACRE. UH, IT'S 600 UNITS TOTAL. IT'S, IT'S REALLY A COMMUNITY THAT SEMA IS GONNA TALK ABOUT, BUT IT'S THREE DIFFERENT HOUSING PRODUCTS IN ONE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT. AND SO THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT PLATTING AND THEN HOW THAT DENSITY WORKS OUT. SO WE HAVE TO ASK FOR THE MF 40 TO ALLOW FOR SOME HIGHER DENSITY ON SOME LOTS AND LOWER DENSITY ON OTHERS. SO AGAIN, IT COMES OUT TO ABOUT 30 UNITS AN ACRE. UM, AND JUST ON ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, WE DID GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT A MONTH AGO AND RECEIVED A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. UM, SO WE DO HAVE THAT AND WE DO BELIEVE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH, WITH THE CURRENT PLAN. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE AMENDED, UM, ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS. UM, WE DON'T THINK THERE'D BE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS. WE ACTUALLY THINK ADDING WORKFORCE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE AREA AND A POSITIVE FOR THE CITY, UH, AND CONSISTENT WITH THE SHIP. UM, AND THEN JUST KIND OF JUMPING ALONG, I DON'T WANNA SPEND TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME, UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, HOUSING GOALS THAT ARE MENTIONED IN THE REPORT ARE ABOUT ARRAY OF HOUSING CHOICES. WE THINK THIS PROVIDES THAT. SO WE DO THINK IT'S CONSISTENT. AND THEN ALSO, UM, SUSTAINABILITY FOR [00:35:01] SUSTAINABLE DESIGN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, UH, TO CREATE AFFORDABILITY AND QUALITY AND ALSO CHOICE OF HOUSING PRODUCT TYPE. UM, REGARDING PUBLIC TRANSIT, UH, THIS IS ON A VIA LINE. AND THEN WHEN THE PROJECT COMES, THEY WILL WORK TO HAVE A VIA STOP IN FRONT OF THE PROJECT. SO THERE IS PUBLIC TRANSIT HERE. UH, AND THEN THE A AND M REGIONAL CENTER PLAN, I WON'T GO INTO THIS TOO MUCH, THE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS CONSIDERED BY PLANNING COMMISSION. UM, BUT ONE OF THE GOALS OF THAT PLAN, AND WE'RE JUST OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES, IS TO INCREASE, UH, HOUSING PRODUCTS, HOUSING PRODUCT CHOICE AND AVAILABILITY FOR RESIDENTS AT ALL INCOME LEVELS. SO WE THINK IT DOES THAT TOO. UH, WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO CIMA TO TALK ABOUT THE HOUSING TRUST. THANK YOU. HI. THANK YOU, UM, FOR, UH, CONSIDERING OUR CASE TODAY. I'M CIMA KYRA, UM, AT 8 3 1 EAST MAGNOLIA AVENUE. UH, BUT HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE HOUSING TRUST. THE HOUSING TRUST IS AN ORGANIZATION, A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT WAS CHARTERED BY THE CITY AND WORKS VERY CLOSELY WITH THE CITY TO, UM, DEVELOP, UH, UM, NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, PRODUCTS. WE MAINLY WORK WITH DEVELOPERS, UM, IN SORT OF THE FINANCING, UM, AND UM, UH, BOND , UH, PROCESSES. BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY OUR FIRST, UH, FULLY SELF-DEVELOPED PROJECT. SO WE'RE REALLY EXCITED, UM, TO BE ABLE TO BUILD, BUILD A PROJECT THAT'S GONNA BE, UM, OWNED BY THE HOUSING TRUST PERMANENTLY. IT'LL BE, UM, IN PUBLIC OWNERSHIP FOR PER PERPETUITY, WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO, UM, KEEP THE, THE PROPERTY PERMANENTLY AFFORDABLE. AND HOPEFULLY OVER TIME, UM, WE'LL BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY DEEPEN THE AFFORDABILITY AND WORK, UM, WITH THE COMMUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S WELL MAINTAINED. UM, THESE ARE KIND OF THE GOALS FOR THE PROJECT OVERALL. WE REALLY ARE EXCITED ABOUT MAKING A WALKABLE COMMUNITY, UM, WITH VARIED BUILDING TYPES. UM, REALLY CREATING A NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND A COMMUNITY THAT WILL SUPPORT KIND OF MULTI-GENERATIONAL LIVING. UM, WE RECENTLY PASSED, UM, A UNIVERSAL DESIGN STANDARD, SO REALLY THINKING ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY, UM, THAT WE'RE APPLYING TO ALL PROJECTS THAT WE WORK ON, BUT WE'RE REALLY WANNA HIGHLIGHT AND FEATURE, UM, IN OUR PROJECT. SO, UM, REALLY GONNA MAKE THIS PROJECT DISABILITY FORWARD. UM, AND WE'RE ALSO GONNA BE, UH, LOOKING TO MEET THE GREEN COMMUNITY STANDARD, WHICH IS, UM, A THIRD PARTY, UH, SUSTAINABILITY STANDARD FOR, FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO, UM, WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO, TO BRINGING THIS PROJECT TO SAN ANTONIO. UM, SO THIS IS A, A VERY EARLY CONCEPT DESIGN. UM, YOU'LL SEE IT'S ABOUT 600 UNITS. UM, YOU HAVE KIND OF TWO LARGER MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS, UH, OR ON THE, THE LEFT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN, UH, A SENIOR FOCUSED BUILDING AND THEN A RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN, A UM, A KIND OF GENERAL POPULATION MULTIFAMILY BUILDING. UM, AND THEN IN THE CENTER OF THE SITE WE HAVE A MUCH LOWER DENSITY, UM, DEVELOPMENT OF KIND OF SMALLER SCALE, MISSING MIDDLE TYPOLOGY, UM, THAT IS REALLY CENTERED AROUND, UM, A LOT OF GREEN SPACE, UH, AND KIND OF OF PEDESTRIANIZED, UM, STREET. UH, SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING TO KIND OF AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, YOU PUT YOUR CARS AWAY WHEN YOU GET TO THE SITE AND THAT YOU CAN, UH, MOVE AROUND THIS, RIGHT, THIS SITE BY, UM, BY FOOT OR BY BIKE. UM, AND HOPEFULLY REALLY ENGAGE ONE ANOTHER IN YOUR NEIGHBORS. UM, SO, UH, YOU'LL SEE AS IN THREE 3D WE'RE KIND OF THINKING IT'S A MIX OF TWO TO FOUR STORY BUILDINGS. UM, AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO OBVIOUSLY CONTINUE TO ADVANCE THE DESIGN TO, TO PUT IN MORE KIND OF DETAIL AND CHARACTER. UM, BUT THIS IS KIND OF THE OVERALL KIND OF, UH, DIVISION OF, UM, DENSITY. UH, AND YOU'LL SEE HERE. SO WE KIND OF DEVELOPED THIS DESIGN AND THEN DID AN ANALYSIS. AND YOU CAN SEE THE, THE TWO END PARCELS OF THE SITE ARE ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT OVER, UM, 40 ACRES A UNIT, BUT THE CENTER IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS. SO OVERALL 600 UNITS OVER THE 19.6 ACRES IS ABOUT 30.5 UNITS PER ACRE. UM, BUT THERE IS THIS KIND OF DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN WE NEED SOME HIGHER DENSITY, UM, ON THE ENDS AND WE'LL HAVE THE LOWER DENSITY IN THE MIDDLE. WE ARE GONNA NEED TO PLOT THESE PROPERTIES, UH, THREE SEPARATE PARCELS 'CAUSE THEY'RE GONNA USE THREE DIFFERENT, UM, FUNDING STRUCTURES. SO WE WANT THAT TO BE CLEAN. SO IF WE GET THE MF 40, WE WILL OBVIOUSLY BRING THOSE TWO END PARCEL PARCELS INTO MF 40, UM, BY KIND OF, UH, MASSAGING SOME OF THE UNIT COUNTS AND, AND UM, LOT DIVISIONS. UM, BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE MF 40, UH, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ONLY REALLY GONNA GET TO, UM, THE 30.5. AND YEAH, I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, LET LET US KNOW. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO. WE HAVE UM, WE HAVE JUST A SPEAKER HERE. UM, MR. FERIN OL, [00:40:38] SORRY, WE'RE GETTING OUR IT FOLKS TO HELP US. QUESTION? MM-HMM. APOLOGIES ABOUT THIS. IS THE POWER PRINT COMING UP ON Y STREET? NO, THEY'RE TRYING. WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CHASE ON, IS IT ON? THERE YOU GO. JUST THE OTHER WAY AROUND. JUST NO, THE OTHER WAY. JUST, YEAH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS FERMIN RAJA 1901 MILITARY DRIVE. I'M HERE TO BE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. I THINK THE SOUTH SIDE NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOMES. THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT. THIS COMMISSION APPROVED LAST MEETING, A PROJECT THAT I HAVE VERY SIMILAR, WHICH IS THE SAME DISTANCE AS YOU CAN SEE OVER THERE GOING ON ON WATSON ROAD. AND WHAT WE NEED IS DEFINITELY THIS TYPE OF PROJECTS. UH, WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY STAFF RECOMMENDS ALWAYS DENIAL ON PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN THREE MILES INSIDE THIS, UH, PERIMETER OF TOYOTA. IT MIGHT BE THE STAR BY AGREEMENT, IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING AROUND THERE. BUT I WILL ENCOURAGE THE ZONING COMMISSION ALWAYS TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS TYPE. AFFORDABLE HOMES, MORE NEEDED IN THE SOUTH SIDE. SO PLEASE, I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND DID WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT OR VOICEMAILS? NO, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. ALRIGHT. UM, MS. ARMANDA, MS. KYRA, DID YOU WANT TO HAVE ANY REBUTTAL AT ALL? NO. ALRIGHT. THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE OF COMMISSIONER REYES TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIR. I'VE STUDIED THE MERITS OF THIS PROJECT, SO I WILL LET THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, QUESTIONS. UH, COMMISSIONER HUEY. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT PLEASE. [00:45:02] ON THE, UH, MAP THAT WE'RE SEEING, UH, FOR YOUR DEVELOPMENT, YOU'RE BUDDING UP AGAINST A, UH, UTILITY, UH, ROW AND THEN YOU'RE UP AGAINST, UH, 1 0 7 5 5 SOUTH ZAMORA. ISN'T THAT A, UH, CEMETERY? YES. AND WILL, WILL YOUR DEVELOPMENT BE DISRUPTING THE CEMETERY? NO, THE CEMETERY WOULD REMAIN. UM, IT IS A CEMETERY AND, UM, YEAH, OUR, OUR DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT BE DISRUPTING THE CEMETERY AND UM, AND WE CAN CONSIDER THAT IN AS WE EVOLVE THE DESIGN AS WELL. UM, SO THERE'LL BE A PARKING AREA MOST LIKELY, UM, KIND OF IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT. SO HAVE YOU, UH, TALKED TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO THOSE? UH, UH, CEMETERY PLOTS? UH, WE WOULDN'T BE AFFECTING ANY OF THOSE PLOTS, BUT WE, UM, WE, WE CAN IN, WE CAN LEARN MORE AND IN, IN ALL OF OUR DUE DILIGENCE, UM, NO ISSUE HAS, UM, BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD ABOUT, UM, THE PROXIMITY TO THE CEMETERY YET, SO, BUT WE CAN LOOK INTO IT. YES. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA, QUICK QUESTION 'CAUSE I SAW IT. IS THERE A PARKING STRUCTURE OR WAS THAT, SO IT'S GONNA BE A MULTI-LEVEL GARAGE? YES. OKAY. HOW MANY LEVELS? UM, I THINK IT KIND OF DEPENDING, IT KIND OF DEPENDS. YEAH, THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT QUESTIONS. SEEING NONE. OH, COMMISSIONER WHITSETT. UM, I, SORRY, UH, I GUESS JUST FOR Y'ALL AND THEN PROBABLY FOR STAFF, BUT I JUST WANNA SAY I SPOKE AT ACTUALLY PLANNING COMMISSION IN FAVOR OF THIS. UH, I WAS ON THE HOUSING TRUST BOARD FOR FOUR YEARS AND I'M, I'M GLAD TO SEE Y'ALL DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT. UM, AND IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD SUPPORT. I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE REASONING WHY THERE'S BEEN A, A DENIAL FOR IT. UH, I DO HAVE A QUESTION. UM, SOME INFORMATION THAT WAS SENT TO ME AND THERE WAS SOME KIND OF PRESS CONFERENCE OUTSIDE AND I HAVE A DOCUMENT HERE THAT CAME FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S, UH, OFFICIAL RECORDS. UH, AND IT WAS A 2008 COUNCIL CONSIDERATION REQUEST AND, UH, SPECIFICALLY WAS PHILIP CORTEZ AND FOUR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO SIGNED IT. AND THEN THERE'S A GOVERNANCE DEAL. AND IN THIS IT SAID THAT, AND I I'M ASKING Y'ALL IF YOU'VE DEALT WITH THIS, UH, IT SAID TO DIRECT STAFF TO INFORM CITY COUNCIL DURING THE PROCESS OF ZONING WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF THE STAR BRIDE AGREEMENT. THIS NOTIFICATION WOULD TAKE PLACE AT TIME OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL. AND THEN ON THE BACKGROUND IS THAT THERE WAS A ZONING CASE IN 2008 THAT IT SAID IT VIOLATED THE TERMS OF THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT AND THIS WOULD NOTIFICATION WOULD PREVENT FUTURE COUNCILS FROM REZONING AFFECTED PROPERTY AND PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR INTERESTED PARTIES. NOW THEN FURTHER ON THE, UH, APRIL UH, GOVERNANCE APPROVAL, THIS, THE CONSIDERATION AND THE STAFF RESPONSE WAS PRESENTED BY ROD SANCHEZ. HE SAID DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS AN ESTABLISHED POLICY TO ENSURE STAFF REPORTS TO CITY COUNCIL INDICATE IF THE SUBJECT SITE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF TOYOTA. THE SUMMARY PORTION OF THE ZONING REPORT WILL INCLUDE THE STATEMENT. THIS ZONING CODE CASE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT. AND HE, MR. SANCHEZ REITERATED AGAIN THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAD ESTABLISHED THIS POLICY TO ENSURE STAFF REPORTS TO COUNCIL. IF THAT SITE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF TOYOTA, HAVE THEY ADDRESSED THAT WITH Y'ALL? THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE SUBJECT TO, UH, THE STAR BRIGHT AGREEMENT AND TOYOTA'S AND COUNCIL'S APPROVAL? UH, NO COMMISSIONER. SO I GUESS MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR STAFF. UH, HAVE Y'ALL DID, WHY DIDN'T Y'ALL TELL THEM THAT THEY'RE SUBJECT TO THAT AND THAT YOU'RE GONNA TAKE THIS TO COUNSEL WITH THIS TYPE OF STATEMENT? UH, MR. WOODS OR COMMISSIONER WOODS SAID, I'M NOT AWARE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT YOU'RE MAKING IN THE CASE THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, SO WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT. BUT OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I'M SORRY, THESE ARE RECORDED OFFICIALS, CITY DOCUMENTS UNDERSTOOD. BUT I'M NOT AWARE OF WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. I WOULD NEED TO LOOK INTO IT, BUT OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS AS IS, WELL RIGHT HERE IT SAYS THAT STAFF, THERE'S A POLICY THAT STAFF IS TO PUT ON ANY ZONING CASE GOING FORWARD TO COUNSEL THAT IT'S IN THE THREE MILE ZONE OF TOYOTA. THIS IS IN THE [00:50:01] THREE MILE ZONE OF TOYOTA. SO I'M CONCERNED FOR THEIR APPROVAL THAT THEY WILL GET BEFORE COUNSEL AND IT WILL GET TURNED DOWN. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THAT I AM NOT AWARE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT YOU'RE MAKING. I WOULD NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT, BUT THE, I WAS READING EXACT WORDS. OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT, SIR. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS AS IS ON, AS IT IS POSTED ON THE AGENDA. ALRIGHT, WELL I'M IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL AND AGAINST, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. SEEING NONE, UM, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. UM, BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER REYES FOR A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 10. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALRIGHT, I'LL, I'LL GIVE IT TO COMMISSIONER WATSON SINCE I HEARD HER LOUDER THAN YOU COMMISSIONER , BUT THAT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE SHE'S SITTING RIGHT NEXT TO ME THIS TIME. UM, ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10 BY COMMISSIONER REYES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT? NONE. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UM, I ALSO, WHILE I APPRECIATE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM, UM, THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER PROJECTS INCLUDING THOSE OF MR. OV LAST TIME THAT I HAVE NOT SUPPORTED IN THIS AREA. UH, THIS PROJECT IS DISTINCT FROM THOSE BECAUSE THERE IS NOT BORDERING INDUSTRIAL USES AROUND THERE. AND SO AS A RESULT, I THINK GIVEN ITS LOCATION, GIVEN THE PLANNED USES, THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I SEEING NONE. UM, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE. COMMISSIONER CHASE. I CAN SEE THAT SHE'S VOICING. YES. CAN YOU DO A THUMBS UP OR A THUMBS DOWN? COMMISSIONER? THUMBS UP. ALRIGHT. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, ITEM NUMBER SIX I BELIEVE IS NEXT ON THE AGENDA. WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S REPORT PLEASE. WE GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ALEXA RATANA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS LOCATED AT 5 5 1 8 IVANHOE STREET. GOING FROM R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO R FIVE CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME. THERE ARE 44 NOTICES SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET COLLAB PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THUNDERBIRD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE AND THERE'S NO RESPONSE FROM OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET. THE EXISTING R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS IN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED R FIVE CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS IS NOT THE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS INTRODUCES A HIGHER DENSITY THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING AREA. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE SINGLE UNIT HOMES AND THE PROPOSED THREE UNITS ARE UNCHARACTERISTIC. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE. HI, MY NAME IS EMILY DELGADO. I'M HERE WITH MY MOM, GABRIELA MARTINEZ. SHE IS A HOMEOWNER OF 55 18 IVANHOE. UM, WE ARE CURRENTLY REQUESTING A CHANGE OF STONE. WE HAVE BEEN, UM, COMMUNICATING WITH BOTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THEY'RE BEING VERY PERSISTENT FOR US TO REQUEST AN A DU, UM, PERMIT. UM, HOWEVER, WE DON'T MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS, SO WE'RE HERE TO SEE. WE CAN EITHER BE APPROVED OR DENIED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. WELL THIS IS A DISTRICT SEVEN CASE, SO IT GOES TO ME FOR QUESTIONS. SO, UH, THANK YOU MS. DELGADO FOR, FOR BEING HERE TODAY. UM, SO RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE AN, THERE'S, THERE'S AN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAN THAT'S ON THE SCREEN. MM-HMM. , THERE'S AN [00:55:01] EXISTING TWO STORY BUILDING AND YOU'RE LOOKING TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING IN THE BACK. THE STRUCTURE IS ALREADY THERE. THE STRUCTURE, IT'S BEEN BUILT ALREADY. OKAY. UM, ABOUT HOW LONG AGO WAS THAT BUILDING? UH, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. ABOUT TWO YEARS? YES. OKAY. AND, UH, AND SO RIGHT NOW, AND, AND, AND I MEAN I, I'M AWARE OF THE COMMUNICATIONS, UH, REGARDING THE A DU MM-HMM . UM, I GUESS ONE QUESTION FOR YOU BEFORE I ASK STAFF IS, DO YOU KNOW WHY THAT THERE AN A DU IS, IS IS NOT A POSSIBLE OPTION FOR THIS PROPERTY? FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, I THINK IT'S BECAUSE, UM, IT'S CONSIDERED A TWO UNIT AND NOT A JUST ONE UNIT. ALL RIGHT. AND SO I GUESS THE SAME QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, COULD THIS UNIT IN THE BACK, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO BE CONSIDERED AN A DU? THEY WOULD HAVE TO LIVE ON THE PROPERTY. WELL THEY LIVE ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S JUST PRETTY MUCH, IT'S TWO SEPARATE UNITS. THERE'S NO CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO UNITS. SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE, THERE'S TWO SEPARATE LIVING AREAS AND EVERYTHING. SO TO MAKE IT AN A DU, YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE IT ONE UNIT AND THEN PLUS, UM, POSSIBLE SIZE. THE POSSIBLE SIZE, YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, ALL RIGHT. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS CURRENTLY THAT I HAVE. I'LL OPEN IT UP TO FELLOW COMMISSIONER AND SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT QUESTIONS? NONE, COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT. QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER OSA? YES. HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF. CAN YOU REMIND ME WHAT IS AN A DU? AN A DU IS AN, UM, AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. AND SO NORMALLY IT'S PERMITTED FOR LIKE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WHERE THEY CAN HAVE OPEN FOR SAY, A SECOND FAMILY TO LIVE ON SITE. USUALLY IT'S LIKE A MOTHER-IN-LAW SUITE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT, UM, IT IS CONSIDERED A SEPARATE UNIT ON THE PROPERTY. THERE ARE SOME GUIDELINES THAT IT MUST BE WITHIN A CERTAIN, UM, SIZE STANDARD IN REGARDS TO THE MAIN DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY. USUALLY YOU CAN GO UP TO ABOUT 800 SQUARE FEET, UM, OR MORE IF IT'S HALF OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE. AND THEN ALSO ANOTHER ITEM IS THAT THE RESIDENT OR THE OWNER HAS TO LIVE ON THE PROPERTY FOR AN A DU TO AN EXIST. I I DO WANT TO CHIME IN WITH A LITTLE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS WELL. SO IN AS PART OF THE 2021 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, THE CITY EFFECTIVELY REWROTE THE ENTIRE A DU SECTION, UM, SPECIFICALLY TO MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE, UH, TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND TO ALLOW FOR INCREASED FLEXIBILITY IN THE DESIGN OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. THEY ARE NOW ALLOWED TO BE AT LEAST 800 SQUARE FEET FOR EVERY SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY THAT USED TO BE THE MAX. WE ACTUALLY ALLOW THEM TO BE 50% THE SIZE OF THE MAIN HOME UP TO 1,600 SQUARE FEET WITH NO LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROVIDED YOU MEET THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE. UH, AS PART OF THOSE AMENDMENTS AS WELL, WE ALSO REDUCED SETBACKS. THERE WERE A LOT OF PROPERTY OWNERS THAT DIDN'T HAVE THE ROOM IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THOSE CAN BE REDUCED TO AS LITTLE AS THREE FEET. IF THERE ARE NO EVE OVERHANGS ON THE STRUCTURE, UM, IF THERE ARE EAVES, THEN THEY ONLY HAVE TO MEET A FIVE FOOT SIDE AND REAR SETBACK. SO THOSE WOULD BE OPPORTUNITIES, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT TO PURSUE IN LIEU OF A EXCHANGE OF ZONING AS WELL. IS THAT GOOD? ONE OTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, DO Y'ALL LIVE THERE CURRENTLY OR? YES. OKAY. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. JUST THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, I, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HUEY? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE REMIND ME AGAIN WHY THIS UH, NEW TO NEW TWO STORY BUILDING DOES NOT QUALIFY AS AN A DU? SO ACCORDING TO THE UH, FLOOR PLANS, ONE FLOOR IS ONE UNIT, THE SECOND FLOOR IS A SEPARATE UNIT. THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED IN ANY WAY. USUALLY WHEN YOU HAVE A SINGLE STRUCTURE, YOU COULD HAVE MULTIPLE BEDROOMS OR MULTIPLE LIVING SPACES, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE CONNECTED SOME WAY. EITHER IT BE IN A DOOR OR A FOYER OR SOME KIND OF HALLWAY, SOME WAY TO CONNECT IN IT. INTERNALLY, THERE IS NO INTERNAL CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO. THEY ARE SEPARATED AS TWO UNITS AS PER OUR BUILDING CODE. IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S A DUPLEX. THANK YOU. [01:00:03] ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT? NONE. ALRIGHT. UM, THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. OH, SORRY. COMMISSIONER CHASE, I FORGOT ABOUT YOU. I KNOW IT'S OKAY. UM, FOR, IT'S MY QUESTION'S FOR THE APPLICANT. UM, AND MAYBE I JUST DIDN'T HEAR IT, BUT CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY WHY YOU HAVE TWO SEPARATE DWELLING UNITS FOR IN THE A DU ITSELF? UM, WHY IT'S NOT A COMBINED SPACE OR MAYBE WHY THE DESIGN CAN'T HAVE A, UM, STAIRWELL THAT CONNECTED TO, IN SOME WAYS THAT IS AN A DU. YES. SO THE MAIN PURPOSE WHY IT WAS BUILT WAS BECAUSE AS MY BROTHER'S GETTING OLDER, HE WANTED HIS OWN SPACE AND A BIGGER ROOM I GUESS. AND THEN ALSO WE ALWAYS HAVE LIKE EITHER FAMILY OR GUEST OUT OF TOWN. SO THAT'S WHY WE BUILT LIKE TWO DIFFERENT UNITS. AND IS THERE ANY WAY TO CONNECT THEM SO THAT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO REZONE, MAYBE YOU COULD JUST ADD THE DOOR OR SOME WAY THAT SINCE IT'S JUST FAMILY LIVING THERE? MM-HMM. , UM, YOU KNOW, JUST THE DOOR WITH A LOCK TO KEEP IT SEPARATE, BUT IT JUST ALLOWED IT TO BE AN A DU. UM, I GUESS WE COULD, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE THE, THE PLAN CONNECTOR. UM, MY MOTHER IS SAYING YES, WE COULD UM, I GUESS CONNECT THE TWO UNITS. IT, DID WE SEE A PLAN OR DO WE HAVE A, THE FLOOR PLAN FOR THE EXISTING OR BUILDING? SORRY, COMMISSIONER CHASE, YOU WERE KIND OF BREAKING UP. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION? SURE. DO WE HAVE A, UH, FLOOR PLAN OR PHOTOS OF THE EXISTING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT? THAT IS ACTUALLY TWO SEPARATE DWELLING UNITS. THERE ARE, UH, TWO APPLICATIONS IN OUR PERMITTING SOFTWARE RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE, BUT ONE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AND ONE HAS EXPIRED. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO, IF, IF THEY WERE TO WITHDRAW THE ZONING CASE AND COMMIT TO MODIFYING THE STRUCTURE, IT WOULD BE A NEW SET OF PLANS THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME INTO THE DEPARTMENT FOR REVIEW. BUT THE ZONING CASE DOES HAVE A SITE PLAN WITH IT. SO AT THE MOMENT WE DON'T HAVE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS TO SHOW RIGHT NOW, IF THAT'S THE QUESTION. YES, BUT I, I THOUGHT THE BUILDING WAS ALREADY BUILT. IT IS ALREADY BUILT, YES. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND I GUESS A QUESTION, UM, FROM ME IS WW I'M ASSUMING THAT IT WAS BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. IN THE UM, STAFF REPORT YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS A CODE VIOLATION OF BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT ON THERE. UM, AND THEN JUST ALSO CALLING OUT, THEY WILL, IF THIS WAS TO PROCEED, UM, JUST IF FOR THE THREE UNITS, BE AWARE THAT THE PARKING FOR THREE UNITS IS 1.5 SPACES PER UNIT. AND SO THAT WOULD BE UP TO ABOUT FIVE PARKING SPACES. SO IF THEY, IT'S NOT CALLED OUT ON THE SITE PLAN, REALLY THERE'S, I DON'T SEE SPACE TO PUT FIVE VEHICLES, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO FOR A VARIANCE AS WELL. IF THIS IS TO, UM, MOVE ALONG, I JUST WANTED Y'ALL AWARE. NO, I I I SAW THAT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UM, COMMISSIONER CHASE, WAS THAT THE EXTENT OF YOUR QUESTIONS? YES. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. I'M SORRY. YES. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. I'M SORRY TO JUMP OUT OF ORDER HERE. UH, BUT I DID HEAR SOMETHING I WANTED TO INQUIRE OF THE APPLICANT ABOUT, UH, MS. DELGADO. YOU MENTIONED YOUR BROTHER IS CURRENTLY LIVING THERE ON THE TOP FLOOR, AND HOW OLD IS HE? BOTTOM FLOOR? UM, HE IS ABOUT TO BE 18. OKAY. OKAY. DOES HE HAVE ANY SPECIAL NEEDS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? NO. THANK YOU . ALL RIGHT. WELL I GUESS IT COMES BACK TO ME FOR A MOTION. UM, AND, UM, UNFORTUNATELY IN THIS CASE, UM, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION FOR, UH, DENIAL. UM, BUT I DO THINK THAT Y'ALL CAN MODIFY THE INTERIOR SO THAT YOU CAN, YOU CAN, I I I BELIEVE THAT THIS ITEM COULD BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH, AS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. IT COULD BE THAT YOU HAVE STORAGE ON THE, ON THE FIRST FLOOR OR, OR, UM, PORTION OF THE FIRST FLOOR. UM, AND [01:05:01] THEN THE, UH, AN INTERNAL STAIRWAY COULD, COULD BE BUILT. UM, UH, LIVING IN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD, I'VE SEEN, I'VE SEEN HOMES GO FROM A SINGLE FAMILY TO A DUPLEX BACK TO A SINGLE FAMILY, TO A TRIPLEX AND BACK TO A SINGLE FAMILY. SO I'VE SEEN NUMEROUS, UM, UM, THINGS HAPPEN THAT, THAT, UM, IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, CHANGING NEEDS. BUT, UM, THE MAIN REASON I'M MOTIONING FOR A DENIAL IS OF THE THREE UNITS. UM, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THREE IN THE MIDDLE OF A BLOCK IS, IS, IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA. SO, UM, MOTION FOR DENIAL. SECOND. ALRIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION FOR DENIAL BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BUSTA MONTE DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT. COMMISSIONER BUSTA MONTE. YEAH. UM, YOU KNOW, IT IS WITH HESITATION AND RELUCTANCE THAT I SECOND THE CHAIR'S MOTION. UM, HOWEVER, AGAIN, I THINK THERE ARE POSSIBILITIES TO CORRECT THIS. UM, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY THIS IS A SITUATION THAT ARISES WHEN, WHEN A BUILDING IS PERFORMED WITHOUT A PERMIT, THE PERMIT WOULD'VE HELPED TO UNCOVER THIS ISSUE. COULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, SAVED SOME DIFFICULTIES HERE. UM, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT REALLY PUSHES ME TO JOIN THE CHAIR'S MOTION IS THAT ZONING RUNS WITH THE LAND. AND SO IF WE WERE TO GIVE YOU THREE UNITS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK, IT WOULD GO FOREVER EFFECTIVELY UNTIL SOMEONE DECIDED TO CHANGE IT. AND, AND FOR THAT REASON, UH, IS THE PRIMARY REASON I'M JOINING. SO I APOLOGIZE. I, I WISH YOU THE BEST, BUT I AM GOING TO SECOND THE MOTION AND SUPPORT IT. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT JUST TO COMMENT, I, UM, IT'S A DIFFICULT SITUATION BECAUSE, UM, WITH GOOD ADVICE FROM STAFF, FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND UH, AND I ALWAYS GO AND GET ADVICE FROM JEREMY CAMIO AND OTHER STAFF AND INSPECTORS. UH, I THINK THEY COULD AVOID A LOT OF, UH, LONG HOURS AND A LOT OF WASTED TIME. UH, BUT I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU ALL MEET WITH A STAFF MEMBER AND THEY CAN GIVE YOU THE NAMES, BUT, UH, THEY'RE EXTREMELY HELPFUL. ALL THE INSPECTORS. I JUST HAD A MEETING WITH ABOUT EIGHT OF THEM LAST WEEK AND ON ANOTHER CASE AND THEY ALL CAME WITH THREE DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS, SO I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BARTOS. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT. NO DISCUSSION. UH, COMMISSIONER CHASE, I WON'T FORGET YOU THIS TIME. ANY DISCUSSION? NO, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IF WE OH IT WAS ME. SORRY. I SAID THANK YOU. OH, SORRY. NO . NO, SORRY. . ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR SIPES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER HUEY. AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WIT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. MOTION PASSES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN PLEASE. IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OR STAFF'S REPORT. ALEXA RATANA PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS LOCATED AT 41 31 CABO ROAD GOING FROM R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C TWO CDU COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME. THERE WERE 30 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET COLLAB PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR OF C TWO NACD COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER ON THE FRONT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND R FIVE CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT ON THE BACK HALF OF THE PROPERTY. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET. THE CURRENT R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS INAPPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED C TWO CD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY. WHILE HALF OF THE PROPERTY FRONTS A PRIMARY ARTERIAL AND IS PLACED IN SIZE TO ADEQUATELY ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED HOME IMPROVEMENT STORE, THE BACK HALF OF THE PROPERTY DOES NOT AS IT IS WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. STAFF FINDS OUT THE MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USE CAN BE ACHIEVED BY LIMITING IT TO THE FRONT HALF OF THE PROPERTY THAT FRONTS COLLAB ROAD WHILE MAINTAINING THE RESIDENTIAL BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF THE BACK PORTION. THUS STAFF RECOMMENDS AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF C TWO CD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR [01:10:01] HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER ON LOT NINE AND THE WEST 31.3 FEET OF LOT 10 AND R FIVE CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT ON LOT EIGHT AND THE WEST 31.3 FEET OF LOT SEVEN. THIS CASE WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 18TH FOR REVIEW OF THE AMENDED SITE PLAN AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD DO THE APPLICANT PLEASE. UM, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS FRA AGUILA AND I'M WITH BEAR ENGINEERS AND ASSOCIATES LOCATED AT 47 0 3 AU OAK SUITE 100. SO AS UM, AS ALEXIS STATED, WE CAME LAST MONTH TO PRESENT THIS CASE AND I DID GET ALL THE APPROVALS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE NEED THE UPDATED SITE PLAN. UM, SO THE OWNER, SHE'S JUST PROPOSING TO DO A HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER AND IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME AND JUST GO AHEAD AND LET ME KNOW. ALRIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO NOT. ALRIGHT, WELL THIS IS ANOTHER DISTRICT SEVEN CASE AND SO IT'S BACK TO ME FOR QUESTIONS. SO I GUESS, UH, MY FIRST QUESTION TO YOU IS, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION? YES. SO WE DID MAKE ALL THE NECESSARY CHANGES AND WE MET WITH THE COLLIBRA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND MADE ALL THE CHANGES AS WELL. AND I ALSO WANTED TO NOTE THAT LAST WEEK WE DID MEET WITH, UM, FRANK RAMIREZ. YES, RAMIR DISTRICT AND UNFORTUNATELY HE WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND, BUT WE MET WITH HIS TEAM AND THEY DID GIVE US APPROVAL BECAUSE THEY EMPHASIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A NEIGHBORHOOD IN AGREEMENT WITH IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. MM-HMM, , UH, QUESTIONS? OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT? ANY SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. SEEING NONE. ALRIGHT, BACK TO ME. UM, WELL I HAVE NO, I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS AND UM, THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND I WILL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALRIGHT, MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE ALTERNATE RE OF STAFF'S ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE. LOOKING RIGHT, SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER CHASE ANY DISCUSSION AND I I FAILED TO ASK IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS, EITHER, UH, QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. CHAIR SIPES. YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. MOTION PASSES. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. AND THE MOTION WAS FOR THE ALTERNATE, CORRECT? YES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER, WAIT EIGHT. WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON AT OTHER GOMEZ ZONING. SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AT NUMBER EIGHT IS LOCATED 1606 EAST CARSON STREET. GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO R SIX CD, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE CONDITION OF USE FOR FOUR UNITS. THERE WERE 34 NOTICES SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR, 20 OPPOSED. GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR. GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION IS NEUTRAL. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS. IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUESTS. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE EXISTING R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS INAPPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PURPORTS R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH CONDITIONAL USE OF FOUR DWELLING UNITS. IT'S ALSO AN APPROPRIATE USE. THE PROPOSAL WE TRAIN A SINGLE FAMILY BASED ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH WHILE ALLOWING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF FOUR DETACHED UNITS, A DESIGN CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DETACHED UNIT CHARACTERISTIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PRESCRIBED SITE PLAN WOULD PREVENT EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND WOULD ENSURE ADEQUATE PARKING IS AVAILABLE FOR THE FOUR DWELLING UNITS. THE EVASION FROM THE APPROVED DOCUMENT WOULD POTENTIALLY WARRANT ADDITIONAL COUNSEL CONSIDERATION. FURTHERMORE, THE REQUEST ALIGN WITH THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH SUPPORTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADDITIONAL AND ALTERNATIVE HOUSING TYPES AND ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE CITY CITY'S GROWING POPULATION AT ALL INCOME LEVELS. THIS CASE HAS CONTINUED FROM THE SIX 18 MEETING. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED AN AMENDED SITE PLAN FOR HOW TO SEE TODAY. I BELIEVE IT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU EARLIER AND THEY ARE HERE FOR QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IF WE COULD HAVE THAT APPLICANT PLEASE. [01:15:04] ELDER FUQUA 2 0 3 TOLEDO STREET. I'M THE APPLICANT FOR THE PROJECT AT 1606 EAST CARSON. UM, PREVIOUSLY, UM, IN THE LAST MEETING, UM, I HAD PROPOSED A FOUR UNIT, UH, PROJECT WITH THE UNITS FACING LAWRENCE STREET. UM, AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION AND SPEAKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS, UM, AT THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 FEET, UM, AS WELL AS BOTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, I DECIDED TO CHANGE THE PLAN FROM FOUR UNITS FACING LAUREN'S TO THREE UNITS ESSENTIALLY. UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE, THE NEW CONFIGURATION FITS WITH THE CHARACTER IN THE STREET AS WELL AS THE REST OF CARSON WITH THE TWO UNITS FACING CARSON. AND THEN I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE UNIT IN THE BACK FITS THE PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH TWO UNITS FACING, I GUESS THE MAIN ARTERIAL STREET AND THEN ANOTHER UNIT, UM, OFF IN THE BACK. UM, WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 FEET, THEIR CONCERNS, UH, TO WHICH THEY SPOKE ABOUT, UH, WERE, UM, UH, THE DRIVEWAYS AND THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN HAD FOUR DRIVEWAYS ON LAWRENCE, WHICH WOULD'VE KIND OF BEEN IN THE WAY AS IT PERTAINS TO THE, UH, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. UM, TO WHICH, UH, THE STAFF THERE I BELIEVE USES SOME OF THAT SIDE STREET FOR PARKING. UM, THE SITE ALREADY HAD ONE DRIVEWAY. I'M ALREADY THERE, SO, UM, ESSENTIALLY I ADMITTED TWO DRIVEWAYS. I I HAVE THE OTHER ONE, UM, OBVIOUSLY FOR THE DRIVEWAY, FOR THE UNIT AT THE CORNER. UM, UH, BUT I, I THINK I KIND OF ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE IN A WAY BY, BY REMOVING TWO DRIVEWAYS FROM OUR, UM, FROM OFF THAT SIDE STREET. UM, NEXT OBVIOUSLY WAS THE UNIT COUNT. UM, I WENT DOWN FROM FOUR, UH, TO THREE. UM, AND ALSO THE CONFIGURATION, THE ORIENTATION BY THEM FACING CARSON, TWO OF THEM, THE, THE MAJORITY OF CARSON HAS, YOU KNOW, HOUSES FACING THAT WAY. UM, AND THE LOT SIZE, EXCUSE ME, THE LOT SIZE. UM, IT'S 50 FEET WIDE, SO THAT'S YOUR STANDARD LOT SIZE ON THE EAST SIDE IN DISTRICT TWO AT 50 BY MAJORITY OF TIMES IT'S 125 OR 115 DEPTH AND WE HAVE A HUNDRED HERE. UM, SO, UM, SPOKE WITH THEM, UM, ACTUALLY MET WITH THEM LAST NIGHT AT THE 11TH HOUR AS WELL. UH, GOVERNMENT HILL OF TOMORROW, UM, AT 7:00 PM AND PRESENTED IT TO UM, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS MR. ANTE WHO WAS, I GUESS IF YOU WANNA CALL THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE 200 FEET. AND UM, I BELIEVE I GOT THEIR BLESSING WITH THE, THE SITE PLAN CHANGE AND THE AMENDMENT AND I HOPE YOU GUYS, I GUESS AGREE, UM, AS WELL. AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO. WE HAVE A FEW SPEAKERS AND THEN WE HAVE VOICEMAILS. BUT FIRST WE ASK, UM, MS. DOMINGUEZ, DID YOU WANT YOUR VOICEMAIL PLATE OR DID YOU WANNA SPEAK? I WANT, OKAY, SO AGAIN, WE HAVE SPEAKERS AND VOICEMAILS. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FIRST? VOICEMAILS FIRST PLEASE. ALRIGHT, AND PLEASE DON'T PLAY MS. DOMINGUEZ, UM, VOICEMAIL SINCE SHE WILL BE SPEAKING. THANK YOU. THIS IS ALICE TRUJILLO OF FIVE 60 SANMAR SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 8. I AM OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OF 60 0 6 EAST CARSON. THE CASE NUMBER IS Z 2 0 2 4 107 52. UH, I HAVE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER 60 YEARS AND ALL THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS FOR FAMILY ONLY, SO WE DON'T WANT ANY APARTMENT HOUSES LIKE THEY'RE PLANNING TO, TO DO NO TOWNHOUSES OR NOTHING. IT'S FOR FOREVER HOMES, SO WE OPPOSED TO IT. THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS MESSAGE IS FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. MY NAME IS BENJAMIN PENA. I LIVE AT 1610 EAST CARSON AND I AM OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OF THE LOT LOCATED AT 1606 EAST CARSON. FIRST, I HAVE PRIVACY CONCERNS FOR ME AND MY FAMILY WITH THE PROPOSED FOUR, TWO STORY HOMES THAT WILL OVERLOOK MY PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY MY BACKYARD, WHERE MY KIDS PLAY. I'M ALSO CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY HAZARDS THAT THIS WILL BRING WITH TRYING TO FIT THESE TWO STORY HOMES IN THAT CORNER. THE CORNER OF CARSON AND LAUREN'S IS LOCATED IN THE SCHOOL ZONE AND A, UH, PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK FEEDS RIGHT INTO THAT LOT. THERE IS ONLY ONE SIDEWALK THAT RUNS DOWN LAUREN'S AND IS USED BY FAMILIES TO WALK THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL, AS WELL AS A SMALL PARK THAT IS LOCATED NEXT TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND THAT SIDEWALK IS LOCATED ON THE SIDE WHERE THESE HOUSES WOULD BE BUILT. [01:20:02] UH, THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AND I HOPE Y'ALL HAVE A GREAT DAY. I AM CALLING IN REFERENCE TO 1606 EAST CARSON AGENDA ITEM EIGHT. MY NAME IS DIEGO COLE AND I LIVE AT 1 0 5 RENO STREET IN GOVERNMENT HILL. I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW THOUGH. TODAY I'M JUST CALLING AS A NEIGHBOR AND HOMEOWNER. MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE JUST TWO BLOCKS FROM THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM PERSHING ELEMENTARY. BETWEEN US, THIS LARGE CORNER LOT IS CALLED THE FIREFLY LOT BECAUSE ON OUR NIGHTLY WALKS IN LATE MAY AND INTO JUNE BEFORE IT GETS TOO HOT, WE PAUSE AND LOOK FOR THEIR LITTLE LIGHTS. THERE ARE SOME OLD TREES AND OVER BURN SHRUBS AND WE'VE ALWAYS FIGURED IT WAS THE PERFECT SPOT FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY TURN UP HERE EVERY YEAR IN THE PRESENTATION UPDATE MEETING WITH MR. FUQUA THIS EVENING. IT WAS GREAT TO SEE ALL OF THE REVISIONS TO THE SITE PLAN AND THE REDUCTION OF FOUR NARROW HOMES ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO THREE MORE APPROPRIATELY APPOINTED DWELLINGS FOR THIS PROPERTY. THESE CHANGES MAKE THIS PROJECT BETTER, SUIT THE LONGTIME NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS AND REQUEST AND REALLY CREATE THREE HOMES THAT FIT THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THOUGH THERE MAY NOT BE FIREFLIES LIVING THERE, WE LOOK FORWARD TO NEW NEIGHBORS THAT WILL COME TO LOVE OUR LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD. AS MUCH AS WE ALL DO, PLEASE APPROVE THIS ZONING REQUEST FOR THREE HOMES AT THIS PROPERTY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. HELLO, MY NAME IS DORA TIS. I'M AT THREE 12 VAN MEYERS. I'M DOWN THE STREET FROM THE 16 16 0 6 EAST CARSON PROPERTY. I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONING. THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS IS ELIZABETH, A PENA ADDRESS IS 6 0 1 SANDMEYER 7 8 2 0 8. UM, I CALLING TO OPPOSE THE REZONING OF 16 SIX EAST CARSON IN THE CASE OF THE 20 24 1 0 7 0 0 0 5 2 CD. UM, IT IS, I THINK THE AGENDA HAS A PLAN, UH, FOR FOUR. THIS IS, UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO SUPPORT. UH, WE JUST MOVED BACK TO THIS HOME. THIS IS THE THIRD AND FOURTH GENERATION TO LIVE IN THIS HOUSE. UM, AND I JUST MOVED BACK HERE AT THE START OF THE YEAR, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE LOT SIZE AND IT NOT BEING TOO OVERCROWDED OR TOO CROWDED. THE STREET SIDE STREET IS EXTREMELY SMALL. I CAN'T EVEN PICTURE THERE BEING FOUR, UM, MULTIPLE HOMES BEHIND US. UH, WE DO OPPOSE THIS. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 883-7793. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS GUADALUPE MARQUEZ. MY ADDRESS IS 6 1 5 SAINT MAYER STREET AND I'M CALLING BECAUSE I OPPOSE THE REASONING OF THE LOT 1 6 0 6 EAST CARSON FOR MULTIPLE HOMES. THE CASE NUMBER IS C 20 24 10 70 0 0 50. HI, MY NAME IS MARIA CERVANTES. I LIVE AT SIX OH THREE SAM MEYER, AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 224-7105. AND THE LAST FOUR OF THE CASE NUMBER IS FIVE TWO CD. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I'M AGAINST THE ZONING, UM, REZONING OF 1606 EAST CARSON. UM, I'VE LIVED HERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE, UH, IN EARLY 1960S AND IN GOVERNMENT HILL SINCE THE FORTIES. UM, MY HUSBAND AND I WERE A PART OF THE FIRST GOVERNMENT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN COMMITTEE IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS, AND OUR NEIGHBORS MADE THEIR VOICES CLEAR THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS FAMILY ORIENTED AND WE WANNA CONTINUE TO, TO ENCOURAGE GENERATIONAL RESIDENTS TO COME BACK OR STAY HERE. MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE LOST SIZES IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE EVERYONE AROUND HERE USES THEIR YARDS FOR BARBECUES AND FAMILY GET TOGETHERS. THE CITY HAS DONE A GREAT JOB IN GROWING HOUSING IN OUR AREA BY PROVIDING AREAS WITHIN GOVERNMENT HILL WHERE THERE'S MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE GOING UP ON CARSON AND GRAYSON. THOSE UNITS WILL PROVIDE HUNDREDS AND DOZENS OF TOWN HOMES, APARTMENTS DOWN HOMES LIKE DEVELOPER WANTS TO PUT BEHIND MY HOUSE. THOSE AREAS ARE CLOSER TO THE PEARL AND RESTAURANTS OFF OF GRAYSON, [01:25:01] WHICH IS PERFECT FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN STARTER HOMES OR WHO WANTED MORE URBAN LIFESTYLE. THOSE MULTI UNIT DEVELOPMENTS ARE ONLY ABOUT A HALF A MILE TO OVER A MILE FROM OUR BLOCK OF GOVERNMENT HILL. AND I WOULD RESPECT, RESPECTFULLY ASK THE ZONING COMMISSION TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. AS WE ARE HAPPY WITH THE NEW NEIGHBORS, WE ARE PLANTING ROOTS IN OUR CORNER OF THE HILL. I AM EXCITED BY NEW, MY NEW NEWER NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE MOVED ONTO OUR BLOCK BECAUSE THEY VALUE WHAT THOSE OF US WHO HAVE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME VALUE. HI, MY NAME IS MELANIE ANTES. I LIVE AT 6 0 3 . UM, YOU CAN REACH ME AT 2 1 0 8 8 4 2 0 0 9. I'M CALLING REGARDING, UH, CASE OR ACTUALLY ITEM NUMBER EIGHT AND I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF, UM, AND THE 18 PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, WHO REPRESENT NINTH OF THE 28 HOMES IN THE 200 FOOT FILM, WHICH OPPOSED TO REZONING OF 1606 EAST CARSON. UM, UNFORTUNATELY I WON'T BE ABLE TO ATTEND BECAUSE I HAVE THE LONGSTANDING APPOINTMENT FOR THE TIME OF THE HEARING THIS MONTH. UM, BUT I RESUBMITTED OUR PETITION WITH A NEW SIGNATURE, WHICH SHOULD INCREASE THE REPRESENTATIVE PERCENTAGE BASED ON THE CITY'S FORMULA. AND WHILE WE ARE AGAINST DEVELOPING THE FOUR UNITS THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT AGENDA ON THE PARCEL AS PRESENTED, UM, THE SIGNERS OF THE PETITION WOULD SUPPORT, UM, ONE SINGLE LOSS OF 1606 WAS SUBDIVIDED BACK TO THE ORIGINAL STATE. AND THE HOUSES, OF COURSE, WERE DESIGNED WITHIN THE AESTHETICS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OUTLINED WITH THE CITY'S MASTER PLAN AT THE EAST SITE COMMUNITY AREA PLAN. UM, I ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONER HINO JOSE'S CONCERN REGARDING SUPPORTING OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, WHICH HAS BEEN A HUGE POLICY ISSUE. I'VE WORKED ON DOTY, UM, OVER MY 25 YEAR CAREER AS A POLICY MAKER. UM, THE CITY HAS DONE AN ADMIRABLE JOB IN ENSURING THAT THERE ARE PLENTY OF NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE WESTERN PORTION OF GOVERNMENT HILL THAT REFLECT OUR COMMUNITY'S EVOLUTION AND ALLOW FOR MORE URBAN LIVING ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT NEGATIVELY IMPACTING THE MOST SPACIOUS LOTS WHERE WE'RE LOCATED, UM, WITH THE MULTITUDE OF APARTMENTS THAT HAVE AND ARE OPENING UP ON THE CORRIDOR TO HALF A MILE FROM WHERE OUR BLOCK IS, HUNDREDS OF UNITS AT VARIOUS PRICE POINTS WILL BE OFFERED TO THOSE WHO WANT TO MAKE GOVERNMENT HILLS AT HOME. THAT ALONG WITH THE MULTI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS AND TOWN HOMES, SIMILAR TO WHAT THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING FOR THE PARCEL, WHICH, UM, HAVE BEEN BUILT AND ARE BEING BUILT, ARE LOCATED ABOUT OVER A MILE TO THE WEST OF US AND THOSE WHO ENSURE THE COMMUNITY GROW SUSTAINABLY. UM, ESPECIALLY IF OUR SCHOOL ENROLLMENT DRIVES LIKE THE ONE GOVERNMENT AND ALLIANCE IS WORKING HARD SUCCESSFUL SO WE CAN KEEP THOSE LEGACY LEGACY SCHOOLS LIKE PERSHING OPEN. UM, I'M SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THAT. UM, KEEPING US, I, MY NAME IS REBECCA NATAL AND I LIVE AT 6 1 1 SAN MEYER STREET, SAN ANTONIO, SEVEN EIGHT TWO ZERO EIGHT. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (469) 733-4328. I'M CALLING TO OPPOSE THE REZONING OF 1 6 0 6 EAST CARSON, UH, IN THE CASE OF Z AS IN ZULU, 20 24 1 0 7 0 0 0 5 2 DD AS IN AS IN CHARLIE DELTA. UM, MY CONCERN IS OVER THE PLACEMENT OF THREE TO FOUR MULTI-UNIT, UH, DWELLINGS ON WHAT IS REALLY TRADITIONALLY MEANT TO BE TWO LOTS INTENDED FOR ONE HOUSE EACH. UM, BASICALLY I'M NEW TO THE AREA. I MOVED HERE IN 2021 AND I CHOSE THIS AREA BECAUSE OF THE LOOK AND FEEL. THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT HAD BIG YARDS, OLDER HOMES, SINGLE LEVEL HOMES, UM, AND IT'S VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO THE HOUSE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD I GREW UP IN DALLAS. UM, TOO OFTEN NOWADAYS AND EVEN IN DALLAS, YOU SEE THESE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS BEING TAKEN OVER BY THESE. SO LIST BOXLIKE, FAST BUILD HOUSES THAT REALLY RUIN THE AESTHETIC. UM, IT REALLY SEEMS LIKE THE BUILDERS ARE TRYING TO SQUEEZE AS MANY UNITS AS POSSIBLE INTO A SMALL SPACE, BASICALLY ALL IN THE NAME OF PROFIT. AGAIN, I CHOSE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT, IT HAD THE FEEL OF, TO ME OF A REAL, OF A REAL NEIGHBORHOOD, A REAL PLACE, A REAL HOME IF YOU WILL. UM, IT'S SOMEWHERE YOU CAN BE COMFORTABLE IN REGARDS TO THE SPACE BETWEEN EACH OF THE HOUSES. IT'S ALSO SOMEWHERE WHERE YOU DON'T FEEL CONFINED OR CROWDED BY OTHER PEOPLE OR BUILDINGS. UM, AGAIN, I OPPOSED THE BUILDING OF THIS MULTI-UNIT, UH, TWO STORY, UH, OR THIS MULTI-UNIT TWO STORY PROPOSAL. AND I REALLY PREFER IF THE BUILDER KEEP TO THE, UH, I GUESS THE DESIGN AND FUNCTION AND EVEN LOT SIZE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BASICALLY ONE HOUSE EACH ON EACH OF THOSE LOTS. IF YOU KNOW, JUST TO KEEP THE N HELLO, I'M CALLING ABOUT AGENDA ITEM 8 16 0 6 EAST CARSON. MY NAME IS STEVE VERTE, 1 0 5 GREENHAM STREET. I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW. THE APPLICANT ALBERT FUQUA ATTENDED OUR MOST RECENT GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION MEETING. ALL PRESENT. AGREED, THE NEW SITE PLAN WITH THREE DWELLING UNITS WAS [01:30:01] MUCH BETTER, ALTHOUGH SOME CONCERNS REMAINED. THIS NEW SITE PLAN SEEMS TO LESSEN MERELY ALL OF THEM. OUR ORGANIZATION REMAINS NEUTRAL. WE CANNOT SPEAK FOR 200 FOOT PROPERTY OWNERS AND CANNOT CONFIRM THEIR OPPOSITION HAS CHANGED. IT IS CLEAR THOUGH THE COMPROMISE OF THREE DWELLINGS DOES FIT THE PATTERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ONE FACING THE SIDE STREET. WE APPRECIATE MR. QUAS ABILITY TO LISTEN AND RESPOND TO NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS. WITH THIS SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE SITE PLAN, THIS APPEARS TO MANY OF US TO BE MORE LIKE THE DEVELOPMENT WE CAN WELCOME TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, AND THAT IS IT FOR VOICEMAIL, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO SPEAKERS. FIRST WE HAVE MS. ROSE HILL TO BE FOLLOWED BY MS. PHYLLIS NEWMAN, AND YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES MS. HILL. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, GOOD. UH, AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME'S ROSE HILL, PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT ALLIANCE LABOR ASSOCIATION, 2107 NORTH INTERSTATE 35. UH, THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT. UM, THERE AT THE, DUE TO THE LAST ZONING MEETING, WE ASKED THE APPLICANT AND THE RESIDENTS TO COME TO OUR JUNE 26TH MEETING. WE FEEL THAT ALL VOICES NEED TO BE HEARD AND IN THAT, UH, MEETING THE APPLICANT DID STATE THAT THEY WERE GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE SOME CHANGES, UH, FROM FOUR DOWN TO THREE, UH, ADDRESSING THE, UH, ISSUES OF THE HOA AND THE UNITS AND THE PARKING. UM, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE THOSE CHANGES AND I, I BELIEVE THAT, UH, THAT HE HAS MADE ALL THE ATTEMPTS TO, TO MAKE ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT WERE SERIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE, ABOUT THE PROJECT. I WANNA REMIND YOU, COMMISSIONERS, THAT THE PERSHING ELEMENTARY WAS ON THE LIST TO CLOSE. THE, THE ALLIANCE FOUGHT TO SAVE THE SCHOOL. WE NEED MORE ENROLLMENT OF CHILDREN TO KEEP IT OPEN. SO BY BUILDING THESE THREE SINGLE FAMILIES WHO WILL HOPEFULLY BRING FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN AGAIN, THIS IS A VACANT DORMANT LOT NEGLECTED FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, THE LOT HAS HAD HOMELESS PEOPLE PASSING THROUGH DRUG DRUG USERS LEAVING NEEDLES ON THE LOT AND ON THE SIDEWALKS TRASH AND AN EYESORE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT CAN WE OVERLOOK THAT? LET'S REMEMBER THAT CHILDREN FROM PERSHING ELEMENTARY ARE IN DANGER EVERY DAY. THEY PASS THAT VACANT LOT. THERE ARE NO SECURITY GUARDS PROTECTING THAT LOT WHO WILL PROTECT THE CHILDREN. THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE IS ALL, IS ALL FOR PROTECTING THE CHARACTER IN THE HISTORICAL HOMES IN THAT IN OUR COMMUNITY. BUT THIS IS NOT A HOME BEING TORN DOWN. THIS IS NOT A PROJECT THAT'S, THAT'S IN, UH, DEVELOPING THREE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX BEING PROPOSED. THERE ARE, THESE ARE THREE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BEING PROPOSED TO BE, TO BUILD. THIS PLAN ALSO FITS INTO THE GOVERNMENT HILL MASTER PLAN. I ALSO ENLISTING TO THE, UM, VOICEMAILS. I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A MEETING LAST NIGHT, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE MISINFORMED THAT THEY WERE GOING FROM FOUR DOWN TO THREE. AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE TWO NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATIONS. THERE'S A LACK OF COMMUNICATION AND WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE, I THINK BETWEEN GOVERNMENT, COMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENT ALLIANCE, IT GAVE EVERYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THE TABLE. EVERYBODY HAS BEEN HEARD, BUT LISTENING TO THOSE VOICEMAILS, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT NOT EVERYBODY GOT BACK THE INFORMATION DOWN FROM FOUR TO THREE. SO WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, NEXT WE HAVE, I'M SORRY, MS. UH, PHYLLIS NEWMAN. AND THEN AFTER MS. NEW MRS. NEWMAN, IT'LL BE MS. DOMINGUEZ. HELLO, MY NAME IS PHYLLIS NEWMAN. I'M A PROPERTY OWNER IN GOVERNMENT HILL FOR 32 YEARS. AT THE LAST NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, MEETING I OVERHEARD, UM, MS. MELANIE AND, UM, ALBERT DISCUSSING THE PROJECT. AND AT THAT TIME, THE ONLY OBJECTION WAS AN INCREASE IN TAXES. AS I ASKED HER, I SAID, WELL, DID YOUR TAXES INCREASE LAST YEAR? AND THAT'S WHEN SHE SAID, WELL, YES IT DID. I SAID, WELL, THERE WAS NO DEVELOPMENT IN YOUR AREA AT THAT TIME. SHE GOES, WELL, I'M LOOKING INTO IT. SO, UM, WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT I THINK THAT AS NEIGHBORS, WE SHOULD SUPPORT EACH OTHER IN THE PROPERTY VENTURES BECAUSE WHEN, WHEN SOMEONE PURCHASED A PROPERTY AND THEY LOOK AT THAT AS THEIR NEXT NEST EGG, WHEN THEY'RE OLDER AND WHEN THEY'RE GONNA RETIRE OR SOMETHING, WE SHOULD BE RE SUPPORTING THOSE PEOPLE AND NOT JUST, UH, AUTOMATICALLY TURNING AGAINST THEM AND SAYING, WELL, I DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE OTHER NEIGHBOR IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SHE FACES WALTERS. AND SHE WAS, WE WERE GONNA HAVE A QQ TIP, UH, GAS STATION THERE, AND THE NEIGHBORS WENT AGAINST IT. AND NOW THIS LADY IS, YOU KNOW, SHE'S NOT DOING WELL AND SHE'S NOT ABLE TO CASH IN ON HER NEST EGG VACANT LOTS HAVE A TENDENCY TO HAVE, UH, HIGH WEEDS AND RODENTS AND CRIME AND DUMPING. AND I JUST THINK THIS IS A, A CHANCE FOR US TO SUPPORT OUR NEIGHBORS. AND ALL ISSUES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. IF YOU ADDRESS THE ISSUE, I MEAN, I COULD COME [01:35:01] BEFORE YOU AND SAY, IS IT TAXES? AND YOU SAY YES. THEN TOMORROW YOU SAY, WELL, IT'S TRAFFIC. AND THEN, AND THEN I SAY, WELL, OKAY, LET'S ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC. THEN THE NEXT DAY I COME BEFORE YOU. AND THEN YOU SAY, WELL, IT'S CRIME. YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU WANT TO ADJUST, ADDRESS THE ISSUE. I THINK IT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. I'M IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU, MS. NEWMAN. AND NEXT WE HAVE, UH, MS. BERTHA DOMINGUEZ. YOU READY? HI. HI, I AM BERTHA DOMINGUEZ. I'M THE OWNER OF 7 1 5 WEST LAWRENCE. THIS IS THE ONLY HOUSE THAT IS RIGHT THERE ON THE STREET OF LAWRENCE. I CONCUR WITH ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WERE AGAINST IT. AND THEN IF I CAN JUST SUMMARIZE SOMETHING OF WHAT THESE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID AS FAR AS HIGH TRAFFIC, AS FAR AS HIGH TAXES, AS FAR AS THE, THE, THE TWO STORY HOUSES, THE TWO STORY HOUSES THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PROPOSE. AND I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR EVERY SINGLE MEETING WHEN THEY WERE FOUR AND THEY WERE FIRST FACING CARSON, BUT IT WAS TOO MUCH TRAFFIC, THEN THEY TURN 'EM AROUND. IT WAS FOUR FACING LAWRENCE. NOW THEY HAVE CHANGED IT TO NOW THREE. HOWEVER, THE ISSUE IS STILL THE SAME. THE ISSUE IS THE TRAFFIC, THE TRAFFIC THAT IS RIGHT THERE BY PERSIAN ELEMENTARY. I AM A FORMER, FORMER, FORMER SCHOOL TEACHER AND A FORMER PRINCIPAL OF AN ELEMENTARY CAMPUS HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. I KNOW THAT THE TRAFFIC AND THE CHILDREN MEANS A LOT TO ME. THEY'RE ALWAYS EITHER RUNNING BACK AND FORTH, GOING TO THE PARENTS' HOUSES, I MEAN TO THE PARENTS', UH, CARS TO BE PICKED UP. I KNOW PARENTS PICK UP THE CHILDREN EVERY SINGLE DAY AND THEY, THEY DROP THEM OFF EVERY SINGLE MORNING. THIS IS NOT JUST EVERY DAY. THIS IS 300, ALMOST 300 DAYS A YEAR OUT OF THE WHOLE YEAR. THIS IS DAY IN, DAY OUT, DAY IN, DAY OUT. THE CHILDREN COME IN, THE CHILDREN GO OUT, THE CHILDREN GO THIS, THE CHILDREN GO THERE AND TO PUT THESE APARTMENT HOMES RIGHT THERE. IT IS A VERY, VERY RISKY SITUATION AND A VERY DANGEROUS FOR THE CHILDREN. AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE TWO, THEY'RE A SINGLE FAMILY, TWO STORY. IF THERE'S TWO CARS, THAT'S OKAY. HUSBAND AND WIFE. THOSE FAMILIES CAN HAVE CHILDREN ALSO OF THEIR OWN WHEREBY THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE THEIR OWN CAR, THEIR OWN CARS. BECAUSE WE CANNOT SAY THAT THIS IS ONLY FOR THE CHILDREN. THIS IS ONLY, THIS IS WHOEVER WANTS TO RENT THEM OUT OR BUY THEM, THEY WILL HAVE GROWN CHILDREN. THERE WOULD BE MORE CARS IN THAT AREA, NOT JUST THOSE TWO VEHICLES OR THOSE TWO PARK SPACES. THEY WOULD NEED A LOT MORE SPACE IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE THE HIGH RISE APARTMENTS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, WHICH IS NOW THREE, WHICH IS, OKAY. MS. DOMINGUEZ, THAT'S YOUR TIME. THAT'S IT. YOU'VE HAD YOUR TWO MINUTES. THANK. YES MA'AM. THANK YOU. AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. UH, MR. FUQUA, WOULD YOU LIKE A OPPORTUNITY FOR A REBUTTAL? YES. UM, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE FOR NOT REACHING OUT TO SOME PEOPLE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AS, AS I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO. UM, A GOOD DEAL OF THE VOICEMAILS TO WHICH CAME INTO OPPOSITION IS BEING BASED OFF, I BELIEVE OFF THE FOUR UNITS. UM, AS A COUPLE OF THE VOICEMAILS THAT CAME IN, UH, FOR THE PROJECT SPOKE. UM, SAID, EXCUSE ME, I MET WITH THEM LAST NIGHT AT 7:00 PM I AT THE STARBUCKS. UM, SO I DO APOLOGIZE TO MR. DOMINGUEZ AND EVERYONE ELSE FOR, I GUESS MAYBE POSSIBLY WASTING THEIR TIME. UM, OR WITH THIS SITUATION, THE WHOLE MISHAP, UM, IT'S KINDA MY FAULT I DIDN'T SIGN A LITTLE NOTE THING ON THE PAPERS FOR IT CAN BE POSTED IN, IN TIME. UM, BUT, UM, I, ONCE AGAIN, IN CLOSING, I I THINK THAT IT KIND OF FITS IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, I BELIEVE WITH THE PAPER TO WHICH, UH, MR. DOMINGUEZ BROUGHT UP HERE I THOUGHT WAS VERY INTERESTING. UH, WHERE SHE LIVES AT NOW, UM, THE PATTERN OF DESIGN TO WHICH I HAVE NOW MATCHES THAT OF THE LOT TO WHICH SHE LIVES ON. WE'RE AT 7 1 5, I BELIEVE SHE SAID LAUREN'S, SHE'S ON THE BACK PART OF TWO [01:40:01] LOTS, WHICH ARE FACING SAM MEYER. UM, SO THE PATTERN IS, IS THERE, UM, AND I HOPE, UM, MS. DOMINGUEZ, UH, LIKES THE PROJECT NOW SINCE SHE CAME IN AND, AND TOOK TIME OUTTA HER DAY. UM, AND UM, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON FOR QUESTIONS. I HAVE DISCUSSION BUT NO QUESTIONS. SO I WILL DEFER TO MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY THAT YOU MAY HAVE. ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER BOB, I JUST WANTED TO, NOT A CONCERN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT I'M GONNA EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THIS, UH, CASE. UM, AND, UH, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE RULES AND ROLES OF THIS COMMISSION IS NOT ABOUT TRAFFIC. THAT'S A DIFFERENT CITY DEPARTMENT THAT HANDLES THAT. SO I'M JUST GONNA EXPRESS MY SUPPORT AND I WILL VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, UH, QUESTIONS? ANY COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT? OTHERS? NONE. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. IF YOU CAN ASK ABOUT TRAFFIC QUICK QUESTIONS. OKAY. YES. OKAY. EXISTING DRIVEWAYS, THE DRIVEWAY ON CARSON, THAT'S AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, SIR. YOU WILL NOT DISTURB THAT CROSSWALK AT ALL? NO, FOR I'M NOT, I WANT NO, THE DRIVEWAY ON CARSON, THE BOTTOM IS AN EXISTING ONE TO WHICH WE'RE GONNA USE. EXACTLY. YES SIR. NOW LET'S GO TO THE DRIVEWAY ON LAWRENCE. UH, LAWRENCE IS UNCURBED, WHICH MEANS THE DRIVEWAY LANDS INTO THE SIDEWALK ONTO THE STREET. SO THE SECOND DRIVEWAY WILL HAVE THE SAME DESIGN. I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS YOU WILL NOT HAVE TO DISTURB THE SIDEWALK BY PLACING THAT DRIVEWAY ON LAURENS. UM, HONESTLY, I BELIEVE SO. 'CAUSE LAURENS IS KIND OF ALREADY KIND OF WONKY AND JACKED UP. YES. IN A WAY. RIGHT? SO HONESTLY, I IT'S GONNA BE, UM, THE DRIVE WILL BE PUT THERE, OR I SHOULD SAY THE APPROACH WILL BE DONE PER CITY CODE. SO I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT GOES AS IT PERTAINS TO FALL OR ANY OF THAT KIND OF STUFF. RIGHT. I, I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT, IT'S BE SIMPLE TO BE, IT'LL BE EASY TO PUT IT IN. OH YES. YEAH. NO. YES SIR. YES SIR. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER HUEY. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. A QUESTION FOR STAFF PLEASE. SO, UM, IN THIS TYPE OF, UH, LOT, WHAT IS THE MINIMUM, UH, SETBACK THAT'S REQUIRED? THE 20 FOOT IN THE REAR, 10 FOOT IN THE FRONT, FIVE ON THE SIDE. UM, AND JUST FYI, THIS CURRENT SIDE PLAN, MOST LIKELY WE WILL NEED A VARIANCE FOR THAT REAR PROPERTY, UH, BECAUSE THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK THAT THEY'RE SHOWING SHOULD BE A 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. AND THEN TO THE, UH, PROPERTY A BUDDING THEM ON THE, UH, EAST. IT'S A FIVE FOOT SETBACK. YES SIR. AND THAT IS THE MINIMUM, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. FIVE FEET. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTION? UH, COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, MAYBE JUST A CLARIFICATION. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK ON THE REAR PROPERTY. ARE THESE SEPARATE LOTS OR ARE THEY, IS IT JUST LYING? IT'S ONE LOT. UM, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO SUBDIVIDE US INTO THREE LOTS. IT WOULD REQUIRE AT LEAST 18,000 SQUARE FEET. ALRIGHT. UM, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS SO TO YOU, COMMISSIONER, ACTUALLY, I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONER MR. MONTE, I APOLOGIZE. JUST FOLLOWING UP ON THAT LINE OF QUESTIONS, MR. FUQUA, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MIGHT NEED A VARIANCE, UH, IF THIS SITE PLAN WERE APP OR IF YOU WERE APPROVED WITH THIS SITE PLAN? YES, SIR. AND LOOKING AT IT? I DO BELIEVE SO. OKAY. UM, AND, AND YOU'RE FINE WITH THAT? I AM. OKAY. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. I AM ALRIGHT. AND I FAILED TO ASK COMMISSIONER CHASE, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER WATSON. OKAY. UH, I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS. UM, AND, UH, I DO HAVE SOME POINTS FOR DISCUSSION THOUGH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA GIVE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY. I'VE TAKEN THAT MOTION. . ALRIGHT. UM, SO I, AS, UH, YOU ALL MAY REMEMBER FROM LAST TIME, I THINK THERE WERE A NUMBER OF VALID CONCERNS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN WITH THE FOUR UNITS PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED. UM, I THINK EVEN THOUGH A VARIANCE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE THIRD UNIT, UM, THE WAY IT'S CONFIGURED DOES FIT THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. AND WHILE THESE ARE NOT GOING TO BE AT A PRICE POINT THAT WILL BE MAR WILL BE AFFORDABLE OR WORKFORCE HOUSING, IT WILL BE MARKET RATE AND THE TYPE OF MODALITY OF THIS HOUSING IS MORE APPROPRIATE FOR ATTRACTING FAMILIES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THE INCLUSION OF A GARAGE IN THIS DESIGN AND ON THE SITE PLAN, UM, IN ADDITION TO THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE DRIVEWAYS, DOES ADDRESS MANY OF THE PARKING CONCERNS. UH, BECAUSE IT'S TWO LOTS. THE TWO DRIVEWAYS ON LAUREN'S WOULD BE PERMITTED ANYWAY, UM, SHOULD THEY HAVE MAINTAINED THE TWO SINGLE FAMILY UNITS, UM, ON THE TWO LOTS PER THE EXISTING ZONING. UH, SO I DON'T THINK THAT IS A CONCERN. OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALWAYS GONNA BE A NEED FOR SAFETY AND AWARENESS NEAR AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BUT IT FITS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, ADDITIONALLY, UM, I JUST WANNA ADDRESS THE [01:45:01] POINT ABOUT, UH, COMMUNICATION. UH, MR. FUQUA HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB WORKING WITH, UH, THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 FEET. UH, THE CONFUSION ABOUT FOUR UNITS AND THE OPPOSITION THAT WE'VE HEARD RELATED TO FOUR UNITS IS CAME IN BEFORE, UH, THE MEETING LAST NIGHT. SO THAT WAS NOT THE FAULT OF ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD RELATED PARTIES. UM, AND I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT AND YOUR WORK, UM, WITH THE COMMUNITY. UM, I WOULD CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO, UH, DO OUTREACH WITH THE 200 FEET SPECIFICALLY. I THINK BOTH THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ARE SET AND ARE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT YOU'VE PROPOSED AS IT HAS ADDRESSED MANY OF THE CONCERNS. BUT JUST TO CONTINUE, UH, ENCOURAGING THOSE NEIGHBORS WHO YOU SPOKE WITH LAST NIGHT TO, UH, CALL IN FOR COUNSEL, UM, IF NOT SUPPORT, AT LEAST A NEUTRAL POSITION. UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, UM, I THINK THIS DOES A MUCH BETTER JOB OF, UH, FITTING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE ARE HAPPY TO SUPPORT, UH, DEVELOPMENT FROM THE COMMUNITY, UH, WHEN WE CAN. SO, UM, APPRECIATE ALL YOUR WORK ON THIS AND AGAIN, UH, MOTION FOR APPROVAL. ALRIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND, UH, WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT. NONE. DISCUSSION, UH, COMMERS ON HUEY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UH, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS, UH, MOTION BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, UM, SITE PLAN, I LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON 1610, UM, THEY'RE GONNA BE YOUR APARTMENT OR YOUR DWELLING THAT'S FIVE FEET, POSSIBLY 10 FEET AWAY FROM THEM IS GOING TO LOOM OVER THEIR HOUSE. AND THEN ON THE NEIGHBOR AND, AND TO THE BACKYARD, YOUR THIRD UNIT IS GOING TO OVERLOOK THEIR BACKYARD. SO FOR THOSE REASONS, AGAIN, UM, FOR THE NEIGHBOR ON 1610, UM, I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT SHE CALLED IN AND OPPOSED IT AND I'M GONNA SUPPORT THAT OPPOSITION, SO I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. I'M GONNA JUMP FOR SOME COMMENTS AS WELL. OKAY. I'M SORRY. I AM REALLY DOING GREAT TODAY ON THIS. I, I KNOW YOU SKIPPED, I, I'VE SAID NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, BUT I'M GONNA MAKE SOME IF I MAY. THAT'S FINE. UM, HOLD ON. LEMME MAKE SURE NO ONE ELSE ON MY, ON THE RIGHT. ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER ONE? ANY REBOOT, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT WITH DISCUSSION? NONE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. ALRIGHT. AND THEN I WILL GET TO COMMISSIONER CHASE. SORRY. UM, YEAH, MR. QUA, ONE THING YOU CAN EXPLORE ALSO, I THINK IS THE 20 FOOT SETBACKS ON THE FIRST TWO FACING CARSON CAN BE REDUCED, UH, TO SORT OF MAKE THAT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE REAR OF THE ACTUAL PROPERTY LINE AND THESE OTHER PROPERTIES, UH, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN THAT. FIVE FEET, YOU WOULD STILL MOST LIKELY NEED A VARIANCE, BUT IT MIGHT MAKE IT MORE PALATABLE. UM, SO SOMETHING TO EXPLORE AS YOU HEAD POTENTIALLY TO CITY COUNCIL. ALRIGHT. UM, HONORARY ARCHITECT BUSE , WORSE A LAWYER, MR. CHAIR. OH NO. AND IF I CAN ADD, IF ALTHOUGH NOT HERE, UH, OH, IF THAT, UM, IF THAT SETBACK IN AR REAR, IT CANNOT STAND UNLESS THERE IS A VARIANCE AND ADDITIONAL APPROVAL. JUST FYI. YES. YES. AND THAT'S ADDITIONALLY PART OF MY REASON FOR APPROVAL. THERE'S ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY BESIDES COUNSEL FOR THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK. SO, UM, AND THAT IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION, SO I'D BE AWAY. SO, YES. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER CHASE? ANY DISCUSSION? NO, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. AND, UM, I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. UM, I THINK IT, IT'S, UM, AS I, UH, UH, MR. FUQUA MENTIONED IT'S, IT'S ALMOST A MIRROR OF THE ARRANGEMENT OF PROPERTIES, UH, UH, ACROSS OR DIAGONALLY ACROSS THE STREET. UM, AND SO, SO I I, UM, AM GLAD THAT YOU MODIFIED IT FROM, FROM FOUR TO THREE. I THINK THE THREE WORKS A LOT BETTER. SO MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER WATSON WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARROS. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY? NO. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER WOODS? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. MOTION PASSES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, I GUESS QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION, UH, THREE O'CLOCK IS, IS IT THREE O'CLOCK THAT WE USUALLY TAKE A BREAK OR IS IT 4 3 0 3? DO WE WANT TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK BETWEEN ITEMS RIGHT NOW? ALRIGHT, WE WILL TAKE A [01:50:01] WHAT? I'LL BE REALLY QUICK. I, I NEED TO LEAVE. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. UM, I'M ASSUMING THAT, UM, ITEM NUMBER 11 IS NEXT. CORRECT. IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BEDA, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 11 IS LOCATED AT FOUR 20 EIDS AVENUE GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TWO C TWO AND A CD COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR CONSTRUCTION TRADES CONTRACTORS WITH ALL OVERLAY STAY IN THE SAME. THERE WERE 20 NOTICES SENT OUT. ONE IN FAVOR. TWO OPPOSED NO RESPONSE FROM ST. LOUIS NAB ST. LEO'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NO RESPONSE OUTSIDE 200 FEET. THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. THE CURRENT R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED C TWO AND A COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT IS NOT APPROPRIATE, IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICT BEING LOCATED ON A RESIDENTIAL STREET STAFF FINDS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT MEET THE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. ADDITIONALLY, INTRODUCING THE PROPOSED C TWO AND A ZONE WOULD INCREASE THE POTENTIAL OF COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT INTO AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE ARE HERE FOR TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE. UH, MY NAME IS MIKE VILLA REAL. I LIVE AT 6 3 9 MISSION STREET. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SQUEEZING ME IN BEFORE YOUR BREAK. . UM, I I HAVE A THREE O'CLOCK ON THE FAR NORTH SIDE, SO I'M, I'M, WE'LL MAKE THIS REALLY QUICK, UH, WANT TO JUST REMIND YOU THAT, UM, THE DESCRIPTION OF THIS SOUNDS LIKE, UH, WE'RE PROPOSING A COMMERCIAL BUILDING, UH, TO BE PARACHUTED IN AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, KINDA IN DISTURBING THE EXISTING, UH, LANDSCAPE. UH, THE TRUTH IS, AND IF, IF YOU HAVE A PHOTO OF THE BUILDING, UH, IT'D BE GREAT TO JUST SHOW THIS VERY HUMBLE BUILDING. THERE IT IS. IT HAS BEEN IN MY FAMILY SINCE THE 1960S. MY GRANDFATHER RAN HIS SIGN PAINTING BUSINESS OUT OF IT BEFORE HANDING IT OVER TO HIS SONS WHO RAN THEIR HOUSE PAINTING BUSINESS OUT OF IT, WHO THEN SOLD IT TO MY FATHER WHO RAN HIS AC REPAIR SERVICE COMPANY OUT OF IT. SO SINCE THE 1960S, IT HAS BEEN THIS MODEST COMMERCIAL SHOP. UH, IT, YOU MIGHT LOOK AT IT AND, AND SEE A, A SIMPLE BUILDING. I LOOK AT IT AND SEE A, A A, AN EXAMPLE OF WEALTH BUILT BY PEOPLE WHO WORKED WITH THEIR HANDS. IT HELPED MY PARENTS MAKE ENDS MEET IN RAISING THEIR CHILDREN TODAY. IT HELPS MY FATHER LIVE A MODEST, COMFORTABLE LIFE IN HIS TWILIGHT YEARS. IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING. UM, REPRESENTING MY DAD DURING THIS PROCESS HAS REALLY GIVEN ME GREAT APPRECIATION FOR THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING, THIS BODY. UM, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE ADVICE YOU GAVE US THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. WE'VE TAKEN THAT TO HEART. WE'VE FOLLOWED YOUR ADVICE, MADE THE CHANGES. UM, I ALSO WANNA STEP BACK FROM MY DAD'S PROPERTY 'CAUSE I'VE BEEN HEARING ALL THESE OTHER, OTHER, OTHER CASES AND FOLLOWING YOU GUYS IN THE NEWSPAPER LIKE I HAVEN'T BEFORE . AND I WANNA SAY YOU PLAY A HUGELY IMPORTANT ROLE BECAUSE OUR CITY GOVERNMENT COMES UP WITH GRAND VISIONS OF MAKING THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE THROUGH THEIR POLICIES. AND THEY MAKE POLICY WITH BROAD BRUSH STROKES. THEY, THEY TRY TO ACCOUNT FOR MOST SCENARIOS, BUT THEY CAN'T ACCOUNT FOR ALL SCENARIOS. AND SO YOUR GROUP HERE IS A PLACE WHERE WE CAN COME WITH OUR INDIVIDUAL CASES AND YOU CAN CORRECT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. FOLLOW BEHIND THE CITY WITH A MUCH FINER BRUSH AND MAKE THESE CORRECTIONS AND BRING JUSTICE. 'CAUSE LET ME TELL YOU, , UM, A SYSTEM WITHOUT YOUR WORK AND DEDICATION IS A SYSTEM THAT HARMS WORKING PEOPLE. 'CAUSE PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD LOBBYISTS AND LAWYERS DO NOT HAVE THEIR WEALTH TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. UM, PLEASE SUPPORT OUR APPLICATION TO RETURN THE PROPERTY TO NON-ALCOHOLIC [01:55:01] NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. UM, THANK YOU, UH, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND, AND I I ASK FOR YOUR HELP. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA FOR QUESTIONS? YES. UH, QUICK QUESTION. I KNOW I TALKED TO YOUR DAD. I THINK, UH, ONCE I'M ABLE TO MAKE A MOTION, WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD, UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF, UH, DOWNWARD LIGHTING AND THEN THE PRIVACY FENCE. UM, AND WE CAN GO FORWARD FROM THERE. SO IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH THAT THEN ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT? NONE. COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE? YEAH, I'M SORRY. MR. AL, WHAT IS THE REQUEST NOW? BECAUSE YOU SAID NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IN IN THAT LAST STATEMENT. YEAH, SO YOU WANNA READ IT C TWO C TWO. SO IT'S JUST REGULAR COMMERCIAL. OH, REGULAR COMMERCIAL, SORRY. OKAY. C TWO NA. SORRY. WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE. YES. WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE. CORRECT. CAUSED FOR THE DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING AS A CONDITION? CORRECT. USING THE DOWNWARD LIGHTING. AND THEN WHAT WAS THE OTHER ITEM? PRIVACY FENCING. THE PRIVACY. PRIVACY, PRIVACY FENCE. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE I WAS THERE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UH, OTHER QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER? COMMISSIONER ORTIZ. THANK YOU. I JUST HAD A QUESTION FOR MR. RIO. THE HOUSE THAT'S ADJACENT TO, IS IT 4 22 EIDS? IS THAT A RESIDENT OR IS THAT A BEING USED FOR LIKE SOME TYPE OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESS? UM, I, I BELIEVE THEY ARE RESIDENTIAL. THE, THE PROPERTY, UH, THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE, UH, IN FRONT OF OUR COMMERCIAL BUILDING YEAH. IS COMMERCIAL. SO THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY TWO RIGHT THERE AT THAT INTERSECTION OF ROOSEVELT AND EIDS. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. MM-HMM, . ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER TSET, DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? OH, AND MORE OF A COMMENT BECAUSE I SEE THAT IT, ORIGINALLY I LOOKED AT THE CASE AND IT WENT ALL THE WAY BACK TO F ZONING FROM THE THIRTIES OR THE FORTIES AND THAT'S WHEN YOU HAD A PURE MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD. SO YOU HAD SINGLE FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL ALL NEXT TOGETHER. SO I UNDERSTAND PROBABLY HOW IT HAPPENED AND THEN THE CITY DIDN'T CATCH IT AND THEY SHOULD HAVE GIVEN Y'ALL THAT COMMERCIAL ZONING BACK AT THE TIME BASED ON THE BUILDING AND THE USE. SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMERS ON MY LEFT. UH, COMMISSIONER CHASE, ANY QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT. UH, UM, JUST TO MAKE A CORRECTION, THE, THE PROPERTY ON THE LEFT, UM, FACING IT, IT HAS A FOOD BUSINESS OPERATING OUT OF IT. ALRIGHT, UM, BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER HA HALL, SETH, FOR A MOTION I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, FOR APPROVAL WITH THE UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OF THE DOWNWARD LIGHTING AND THE PRIVACY FENCE. SECOND. ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA WITH UH, THE AMENDMENT OF, UH, DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING AND PRIVACY FENCE. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. DISCUSSION, LOOKING LEFT. NONE. UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON, UM, I DO JUST WANNA REITERATE THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF CREATIVELY USING ZONING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. UM, AS MUCH AS I AGREE WITH THE SPIRIT OF YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THE ROLE OF OUR COMMISSION, UM, MY GRANDPARENTS OWNED A CONVENIENCE STORE AND THAT IS WHY I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM RATHER THAN THE FLATTERY. UM, BUT I DO THINK THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF, UH, UNDERSTANDING THE LONG-TERM CHARACTER OF A NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UM, WHAT GENERATIONAL WEALTH BUILDING MEANS AND THAT WE NEED TO PROTECT THAT IN OUR PLANS. UM, IT'S AS CLOSE TO A MAJOR INTERSECTION. UM, IT'S ALREADY PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY AND I THINK WE SHOULD DO, UM, AS MUCH AS WE CAN ON THIS COMMISSION TO SUPPORT, UH, THOSE KINDS OF BUSINESSES IN THE INTERESTS, UM, OF OUR NEIGHBORS AND, UH, THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER BECAUSE THIS FITS IN OF OUR COMMUNITY. SO THAT IS WHY I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONS ON MY LEFT. COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER CHASE DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. AND UM, JUST BEFORE WE MAKE A DO THE ROLL CALL, UM, FOR THAT PRIVACY FENCE, ARE YOU WANTING IT JUST ALONG THE SIDES IN THE REAR OR IS IT ALONG ANY PROPERTIES THAT ARE BY RESIDENCE? I THINK JUST THE BACK. SO IN THE FUTURE IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, ITEMS THAT ARE UN I BELIEVE THEY ALREADY HAVE ONE IN THE BACK, BUT DID YOU JUST ONE IN THE REAR OR ALONG AREAS THAT ARE JUST THE REAR? JUST ALONG THE REAR? YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. UM, SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL. UH, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER OSA? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER TSET? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? [02:00:02] YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. ITEM PASSES AS AMENDED. ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU. THE TIME IS 3 0 5 AND WE WILL BE ADJOURNED FOR A 10 MINUTE BREAK OR SO. THANK YOU. WANNA MAKE SURE? ALRIGHT, THE TIME IS THREE 17 AND THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS BACK IN SESSION. WE WILL BE MOVING ON TO INDIVIDUAL ITEM NUMBER 14. IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION PLEASE. THERE WE GO. AT OTHER GOMEZ ZONING, SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, ITEM 14 IS LOCATED AT 10 0 5 AND 10 0 7 NORTH SARA STREET. GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. THERE WERE 31 NOTICES SENT OUT. ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO POST WEST END HOPE IN ACTION. AND PROSPECT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE BOTH IN FAVOR. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST, THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE EXISTING C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE FOR THE ZONING TO BRING THE EXISTING HARDWARE SALES INTO COMPLIANCE. THERE ARE ALSO I ONE ZONE PROPERTIES WITHIN PROXIMITY, BUT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DIRECTLY ABUT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AN ALTERNATIVE OF C TWO CD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR HARDWARE SALES TO PREVENT ANY OTHER INDUSTRIAL USES THAT MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENCE. AB BUDDING ALLAN CREEK, THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE. HELLO? UH, MY NAME'S ISAAC RO, I'M THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR MR. JOSE MENDOZA, THE OWNER OF 1 0 0 5 AND 1 0 0 7 NORTH ZAMORA. UM, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST REQUESTING FOR IT TO BE, IT WAS ORIGINALLY WHEN IT WAS PURCHASED BY MR. MENDOZA IN MAY OF 2020. IT WAS ALREADY ZONED IN, UH, INDUSTRIAL. UH, HE APPLIED FOR A CERTIFICATE OF, UH, OCCUPANCY FOR HIS BUSINESS IN JANUARY, 2022 AS IN, AND, AND IT WAS ZONE INDUSTRY AT THE TIME. SO WE'RE JUST REQUESTING FOR IT TO BE REZONED BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL ZONING SO THAT WAY IT CONFORMS WITH THE CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS, UH, THE STORAGE AND CELL OF ROOFING MATERIALS AT THE PROPERTY. AND AS THE CITY MENTIONED THERE IS, THERE IS A PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET THAT ALSO ABUTS RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND IT'S, IT'S ZONE INDUSTRIAL. SO WE JUST FEEL THAT IT WAS NOT, I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN JUST OVERLOOKED THIS PROPERTY AND WE WOULD JUST LIKE FOR IT TO GO BACK FROM R SIX BACK TO INDUSTRIAL ZONING. ALRIGHT. UH, THANK YOU. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. ALRIGHT. THIS IS A DISTRICT FIVE CASE, SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE FOR QUESTIONS. UH, THANK YOU MR. OTTI. UM, IT'S CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR OUTSIDE STORAGE, CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. UM, WHEN, SO I THINK YOU SAID YOU APPLIED FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, IS THAT CORRECT? IT WAS, YEAH, IT WAS APPLIED AND IT WAS, AND WE WERE GIVEN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. OKAY. WHEN WAS THAT? THIS WAS IN JANUARY OF 2022. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. OTTE STAFF. I HAVE A QUESTION. WELL, ACTUALLY MR. COTE, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU. YES SIR. DO YOU INTEND TO CONTINUE USING IT FOR OUTSIDE STORAGE? YES SIR. OKAY. ALRIGHT. STAFF TO YOU, UM, THIS PROPERTY, MAKE SURE I'M GETTING MY TERMINOLOGY RIGHT, IS SUBJECT TO THE WEST SIDE CREEK'S WATER QUALITY DISTRICT, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND, AND IN FACT, IF WE LOOK AT THE BOUNDS OF DELGADO ZAMO AND ALLON CREEK, ALL OF THOSE PROPERTIES WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THAT WATER QUALITY DISTRICT, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND, AND PER THE UDC OUTSIDE STORAGE UNDER 35 DASH 3 99 0 6 E FOUR IS A PROHIBITED USE? [02:05:02] LET ME CONFIRM PLEASE. THAT THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. OKAY. ALRIGHT, SO I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. NOW, JUST TO CONFIRM WITH THE DEFINITION OF OUTSIDE STORAGE ITEMS THAT ARE COMPLETELY IN THE OPEN, BUT STORAGE THAT'S UNDER A, UM, COVERED A COVER OR, AND SCREENED FROM APPROPRIATE PROPERTY OR FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES, WE DO NOT CONSIDER AS OUTSIDE STORAGE. OKAY. OKAY. SO THE QUALITY QUALITY PROHIBITION APPLY TO THE PROPERTY, UH, GIVEN THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN, UH, DURING THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS ZONING REQUEST, IS THAT OUTSIDE STORAGE A ANYTHING STORED OUTSIDE IN AN UNROOFED AREA? UH, THE KEEPING OF ANY, WHAT THE CODE SAYS OF IN AN UNROOFED AREA, ANY GOODS, JUNK MATERIAL OR MERCHANDISE IN THE SAME PLACE FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS WOULD CONSTITUTE OUTDOOR STORAGE. OKAY. ALRIGHT, WELL I GUESS STAFF THEN I HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS. UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOK AT THE PROHIBITED ITEMS UNDER 35 3 99 0.06 E, UM, ALMOST ALL OR VERY MANY OF THOSE USES ARE INDUSTRIAL OR WOULD BE ZONED INDUSTRIAL ONE, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALRIGHT, I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, CAN YOU SOMEBODY EXPLAIN HOW IT, THE ZONING GOT CHANGED? WAS THIS JUST A ZONING OVER A BIG OVERLAY, MASSIVE REZONING OR SOMETHING? HOW MUCH I CAN ANSWER? THANKS. UM, UNDER THE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT, IT DOES SAY THAT IT WAS PART OF A LARGE AREA REZONING IN 2023 WHERE THEY DID REZONE IT TO THE CURRENT C TWO AND THE R SIX. SO THEY DIDN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE USE AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS OUTSIDE STORAGE. AND THEN PREVIOUSLY INDUSTRIAL FOR, AGAIN, BACK TO THE WAY BACK 50, 60 YEARS. LARGE AREA REZONING PROJECTS ARE INTENDED TO REZONE PROPERTIES TO BE CONFORMING WITH THE AS-BUILT CONDITION AT THE TIME OF THAT PROJECT. SO THE TEAM PULLS CFOS FOR WHAT THE BUILDING IS USED AS, UH, CURRENTLY, AND THEN THOSE ARE ZONED ACCORDINGLY. THOSE LARGE AREA REZONING PROJECTS SEEK TO ELIMINATE NON-CONFORMING USES NOT CREATE THEM. SO IT WAS USED AS RESIDENTIAL AT THE TIME? R SIX? NO SIR, IT WAS REZONED TO COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL. BUT IF YOU REZONED IT TO RESIDENTIAL, THEN YOU, IT HAD RESIDENTIAL USE. YOU JUST SAID YOU REZONED IT BASED UPON USE THAT OR IT'S A VACANT PARCEL. IT WAS VACANT. WELL, HOW WOULD A VACANT PARCEL, THE COMMERCIAL PART WASN'T VACANT. OKAY. AND SO NOBODY WAS OCCUPYING THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME. IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN THEY REZONED IT THAT OR IT CERTAINLY WOULD NOT HAVE HAD A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR AN INDUSTRIAL USE. THAT SEEMS, HE SAID HE HAS A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IN 2022 AND THIS WAS REDONE IN 2023. SO I'M TRYING TO GET THE GO AHEAD. YEAH, SO I'M, I I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THE PROPERTY AGAIN. BUT THE PURPOSE OF LARGE AREA REZONING PROJECTS, THOSE ARE INITIATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT OFFICE TO BRING PROPERTIES THAT HAVE CURRENT NON-CONFORMING ZONING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE. SO NOT REALLY PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THEIR CURRENT AND THEIR DEMANDS AND NEEDS ARE. I, I DISAGREE WITH THAT. ALL RIGHT. OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. SEEING NONE COMMERS ON MY RIGHT QUESTIONS. SEEING NONE OR, OR COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. SO TALKING ABOUT WATER QUALITY IS, UH, AND I MAY HAVE MISSED THIS ON YOUR SITE PLAN, BUT ARE THE MATERIALS INERT? UM, IS THERE AN A SW THREE P PLAN? IS, IS, IS, UH, I GUESS WHY I'M ASKING IS, IS WATER QUALITY A CONCERN FOR THIS CASE? UH, THAT WOULD BE FOR STAFF, YES. ANY OF THEIR, UM, PLANS MUST GO BEFORE, UM, OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JUST BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION WITHIN THE, UH, WATER EQUALITY OVERLAY OR WATER QUALITY OVERLAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? ON THE RIGHT. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS? UH, YES. UM, TO THE APPLICANT, WERE YOU [02:10:01] AWARE OF ANY OF THIS INFORMATION FROM COMMISSIONER EMANI OR STAFF ABOUT, UH, THE WATER QUALITY? UM, NO MA'AM. NOTHING WAS EVER MENTIONED TO ME ABOUT THE WATER QUALITY. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UM, BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE, ALTHOUGH I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE SOME CONCERNS REGARDING, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NONETHELESS. UM, ONE OF, I FEEL THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE DID IN DISTRICT FIVE IN THE LAST UDC AMENDMENTS WAS TO CREATE THESE WEST SIDE CREEK WATER QUALITY PROTECTION DISTRICTS. AND IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS REQUEST WITH OUTSIDE STORAGE AND WITH THE KIND OF TRAFFIC THAT IS INDICATED WITH THAT USE, UH, IS IN VIOLATION OF THESE AMENDMENTS. AND SO AS A RESULT, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER 14. ALL RIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION FOR DENIAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY, THERE IS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WATSON. DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT? NONE. COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT? NONE. COMMISSIONER CHASE DISCUSSION? I ALRIGHT. UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY DISCUSSION EITHER, SO. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MOTION IS FOR DENIAL. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE AYE. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? NO. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. MOTION PASSES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WE ARE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 17. IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S REPORT PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. BRONTE FOR A ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 17 IS LOCATED AT 77 0 2 SOUTHWEST LOOP FOUR 10 GOING FROM OUR SEC SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO MXD MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 30 UNITS PER ACRE WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME. THERE ARE 66 NOTICES SENT OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR. REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE EXISTING R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED MXD MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 30 UNITS PER ACRE IS NOT APPROPRIATE. THE SURROUNDING AREA ON THREE SIDES CONSISTS OF ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. INTRODUCING, INTRODUCING COMMERCIAL USE AND INCREASED DENSITY OF 30 UNITS PER ACRE OF MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS INCONSISTENT AND WOULD NEGATIVELY NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE EXISTING HOMES. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE. YEAH, THAT ONE. DO I HAVE CONTROL? YES. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. EMILY WEISLER WITH KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMAN 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE, SUITE TWO 50 HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT. UM, SO YES, THIS PROPERTY IS JUST OVER FIVE ACRES. IT'S LOCATED ON THE FRONTAGE OF LOOP FOUR 10. UM, WE ARE BETWEEN RAY ALLISON AND OLD PEARSALL AND COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR. UM, THERE IS A SMALL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO OUR NORTH, UM, AND RESIDENCE TO OUR SOUTH. UM, BUT AGAIN, LOOP FOUR 10 FRONTAGE AS WELL AS VALLEY HIGH DRIVE. UM, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. UM, WELL, SORRY, I GOT REAL EXCITED WITH THIS THING. UM, I'LL LEAVE IT ON THIS SLIDE. UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THIS LARGER AERIAL THAT THERE IS A MIX OF USES, UM, IN AND AROUND THIS PROPERTY. UM, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO STAFF, WE DO FEEL LIKE THE PROPOSED MXD IS CONSISTENT. UM, WE HAVE SELF-STORAGE, UM, IMMEDIATELY ABUTTING, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WE HAVE HIGHER DENSITY MULTIFAMILY OF 10 F 33. UM, TO [02:15:01] THE NORTH. THERE IS A MIX OF USES, UM, IN AND AROUND THIS COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY ON THIS SIDE OF FOUR 10, BUT ALSO ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF LOOP FOUR 10. UM, AND A LOT OF VARYING INTENSITIES OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS VARYING DENSITIES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. UM, THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE PORT SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL CENTER PLAN. IT WENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, UM, AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF IT. UM, YES, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED, UM, TO MATCH IT'S LOW DENSITY, UH, RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION, UM, BUT WITH A LARGER VIEW, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU IN A SECOND. UM, THE URBAN MIX USE THAT WE'RE REQUESTING, WHICH IS ALIGNED WITH THE MXD, UM, IS MORE THAN CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, UM, ALL AROUND THIS AREA ON BOTH SIDES OF LOOP FOUR 10. SO THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R SIX AND WE ARE PROPOSING AN MXD, UM, WHICH ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. UM, AND I'LL SHOW YOU THE SITE PLAN AND TALK YOU THROUGH THAT. UM, AS WELL AS A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 30 UNITS PER ACRE, WE ARE SURROUNDED. UM, YOU CAN SEE THE MF 33 TO THE NORTH MF 18, MF 33 ACTUALLY IS ON THE OTHER SIDE AS WELL OF FOUR 10. SO VARYING DEGREES OF INTENSITY, UH, BUILT AND PLANNED. UM, THAT LARGE SCALE C3 AND MF 18, UM, IS A PROJECT THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW. SO THIS IS THE MXD PLAN. THE LONG TERM PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY IS COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE ALONG LOOP FOUR 10. UM, THE STAFF REPORT ALSO INCLUDES THAT, UH, PRELIMINARY COMMENTS DO INCLUDE, UM, PERMISSIBILITY OF ACCESS OFF OF LOOP FOUR 10. WE'RE COORDINATING THAT WITH TXDOT. UM, THAT IS THE PLANNED PRIMARY ACCESS POINT OF THIS PROJECT. SO WE'LL HAVE COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD DRIVEN COMMERCIAL ALONG THE FRONTAGE, AND THEN A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT IN THE MIDDLE. THAT RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT IS GOING TO BE SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING. UM, SO THIS IS, UM, LOWERCASE A AFFORDABLE, UM, APPROXIMATELY A THOUSAND $1,500 A MONTH, NOT TO EXCEED $1,500 A MONTH RENTAL UNIT. BUT, UM, THE PURPOSE IS TO CREATE, UM, SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING HERE, UNITS THAT HAVE LARGER COMMUNITY SPACES, A DINING HALL, KIND OF ALMOST LIKE SENIOR INDEPENDENT DORMS. UM, SO THEY HAVE COMMUNITY CENTERS, AMENITIES, UM, LARGE DINING HALLS. SO YOU'RE CREATING THIS COMMUNITY WITHIN, UM, THIS GROUP OF INDEPENDENT LIVING SENIORS, UM, AS WELL AS SUPPORTIVE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL THAT GOES TO SUPPORT NOT ONLY THE PROPOSED NEW RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO THE EXISTING SURROUNDING RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. THE MXD ALLOWS US TO DO COMMERCIAL AND MIXED, UM, EXCUSE ME, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ON THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY AT THE SAME TIME. IT'S, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THERE IS COMMERCIAL VARYING INTENSITY. THERE IS MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL VARYING DENSITIES IN AND AROUND THIS AREA. THIS IS JUST ALLOWING IT TO OCCUR ON THE SAME PROPERTY WITH ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ACTUALLY FURTHER PROTECTS THOSE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS THAN, THAN THOSE STANDALONE ZONINGS WOULD OTHERWISE. UM, I I, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO STAFF, WOULD ARGUE THAT THE PROPOSED MXD, UM, IS CONSISTENT COMPATIBLE. IT IS OBVIOUSLY NOT ZONED, UM, TO MATCH THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. UM, AND WE TRY TO AVOID PLAN AMENDMENTS WHEREVER POSSIBLE. UM, BUT PLANNING COMMISSION DID AGREE THAT THE URBAN MIXED USE IS CONSISTENT. UM, IT IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AS I'VE MENTIONED A FEW TIMES. UM, I WILL SHOW YOU SOME, UM, EXAMPLE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN AND AROUND THIS PROPERTY. SO THAT IS THERE. UM, WE ARE DOING A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS REALLY COMPATIBLE, UM, AND CONSCIENTIOUS OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTS THERE, AND ALSO MAKES SENSE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF LOOP FOUR 10. UM, AGAIN, SITE PLAN MEETS CODE REQUIREMENTS, NO OBJECTIONS FROM JBSA. UM, AND THE FIVE ACRES IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE PROJECT. THIS IS THAT LARGER LAND USE MAP. YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE REGIONAL MIXED USE, REGIONAL, COMMERCIAL, URBAN MIXED USE, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT, FLEX MIXED USE. A LOT OF HIGHER INTENSITY USES, KIND OF REALLY ADJACENT AND IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO, UM, EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY. SO WE DON'T FIND THAT THE URBAN MIXED USE, WHICH IS LOWER INTENSITY, IS INAPPROPRIATE. UM, AGAIN, WE ARE REQUESTING A REZONING TO MXD WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 30 UNITS AN ACRE. IT'S LOOKING LIKE WE'RE CLOSER TO ABOUT 120 UNITS, UM, TO ALLOW FOR THOSE LARGER COMMUNAL LIVING SPACES AND AMENITIES THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN THIS PROJECT. UM, SO I MENTIONED THE MXD. UM, THIS IS KIND OF VERY HARD TO SEE. CAN I BORROW THIS POINTER THING VERY TERRIBLY. UM, SO MXD REQUIRES THAT THERE IS NO STRUCTURE WITHIN 25 FEET OF ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE OR ZONING. UM, AS WELL AS A HEIGHT LIMITATION WITHIN 50 FEET. SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE, THE GREEN LINE, THAT'S A GENERAL OUTLINE [02:20:01] OF WHERE THAT 25 FEET IS. UM, THESE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN FREEDOM HILLS, AND THEN THESE RESIDENTS TO THE SOUTH, UM, THOSE ARE ALL OF THEIR BACKYARDS. SO THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL MINIMUM 25 FOOT SETBACK THERE. AND THEN THAT YELLOW LINE ALSO GOES TO SHOW WHERE THAT HEIGHT REGULATION STARTS, UM, WHERE WE CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING, UM, LOWER THAN 35 FEET. THIS PROJECT IS PLANNED TO BE THREE STORIES, UM, AT MOST IN THE MIDDLE, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT A TWO STORY DEVELOPMENT HERE FOR THAT RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT ON THE FRONT EDGE WOULD BE THINGS LIKE MEDICAL OFFICES, UM, PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, COMMUNITY SUPPORTIVE, HAIR SALON, COMMUNITY SUPPORTIVE, UM, AND RESIDENTIAL SUPPORTIVE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THERE. SO THE MXD JUST PROVIDE THOSE ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS TO PROTECT THOSE SINGLE FAMILY, UM, NEIGHBORS. THIS IS A MAP OF PUBLIC TRANSIT. UM, YOU CAN SEE WE'RE WITHIN THE CADILLAC TRANSIT CENTER LINES, UM, PROPERTIES RIGHT DOWN HERE. SO THERE IS ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC TRANSIT IN AND AROUND US. UM, AND THIS IS JUST A QUICK SNAPSHOT OF, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTIES RIGHT HERE. HERE'S THE SELF STORAGE, BUT THERE ARE, UM, PUBLIC TRANSIT LINES IN AND AROUND THE AREA. UM, AGAIN, PROPOSED ZONING IS TO MXD TO ALLOW FOR A SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY, UM, ABOUT 120 RESIDENTS WITH LARGE SCALE COMMUNAL LIVING SPACES, UM, AS WELL AS COMMUNITY DRIVEN COMMERCIAL. UM, AND RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE. SO TO YOU COMMISSIONER REYES FOR QUESTIONS. ONE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. UH, THANKS FOR THE GREAT PRESENTATION. I DID STUDY THE MERITS OF THIS CASE AND IT'S, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THERE. UM, YOU'RE AWARE THAT TXDOT RECENTLY COMPLETED A PROJECT ALONG THE FRONTAGE ROADS TO, UH, MOVE SOME OF THE RAMPS? MM-HMM. , WHICH MEANS THAT, UH, BECAUSE OF THAT PROJECT, IT MAKES IT EASIER TO ACCESS. OKAY. SO YOU'RE, YES, SIR. OKAY. THAT'S, BUT THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAD. I, I DID STUDY THE MERITS AND I WILL LET OTHER COMMISSIONERS ASK QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT. ALL RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS? NONE COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. ANY QUESTIONS? UM, MAYBE JUST A LITTLE HISTORY. UM, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE IT ORIGINALLY MUST HAVE BEEN PLANNED FOR RESIDENTIAL LOTS, THE WAY IT'S SHAPED AND EVERYTHING AND THEY JUST DIDN'T COMPLETE IT. OR HOW LONG HAVE THESE PEOPLE OWNED IT? UM, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHEN THEY PURCHASED IT. UM, WITHIN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE LAST FEW YEARS. UM, AND, AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, ONE OF WHICH, UM, DR. PR YAME, HE IS THE OWNER AND OPERATOR OF LEGEND OAKS HEALTHCARE AND REHAB, ALSO IN DISTRICT FOUR. UM, HE'S A DOCTOR OF PHYSICAL THERAPY. HE'S BEEN WORKING IN THE SENIOR AND ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY ARENA. HE'S A LICENSED NURSING FACILITY ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE LAST ALMOST 20 YEARS. UM, SO VERY INTEGRATED IN THE SENIOR COMMUNITY AND REALLY TRYING TO PUT FORWARD, UM, ADDITIONAL SENIOR SERVICES AND RESIDENTIAL TO CONTINUE THAT IN DISTRICT FOUR. SO YOU'VE HAD NO PUSHBACK FROM THE RESIDENCES AND NO. SO, UM, THERE ARE NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, UM, REGISTERED WITHIN 200 FEET. FREEDOM HILLS, HOA DOES EXIST THERE TO OUR NORTH. UM, WE'VE REACHED OUT MULTIPLE TIMES, UM, WITH, AS THE ASSISTANCE OF DISTRICT FOUR AS WELL. UM, WE'VE NOT GOTTEN ANY DIRECT FEEDBACK, BUT OVER THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF COMMUNICATION WITH, UM, ACTUALLY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, AND NEIGHBORS AND RESIDENTS WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES KIND OF ON, ON ALL SIDES OF THE PROJECT. UM, AND IT'S BEEN REALLY WELL RECEIVED. UM, LOTS OF INTEREST IN NOT ONLY THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT, BUT UM, SENIOR LIVING OPPORTUNITIES, UH, FOR PEOPLE TO GROW AND STAY IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. SO, ARE THERE ELEVATIONS OR, I MEAN, ARE Y'ALL NOT THAT YOU'RE NOT AT, THAT WE'RE NOT THAT FAR AT. WE DON'T, YES. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT. COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS? NO, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I COULD ANSWER. UH, COMMISSIONER WIT THAT THIS WAS PROBABLY, THIS IS A 1960S RAY ELLISON DEVELOPMENT. YES. SO, UM, I KNOW THAT BECAUSE THAT'S MY OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL RIGHT THERE. SORRY, . UM, I KNOW STORY TIME I HAD TO THROW IT IN , BUT IT'S BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN EFFICIENT SO FAR. WE ALL RIGHT. SO BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER REYES FOR A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I SEE THAT THE, UM, THE DENSITY IS REASONABLE, UH, THE MIX OF, UH, COMMERCIAL AND, AND, UH, SENIOR LIVING. SO FOR THAT REASON, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 17. SECOND. WAS THAT YOU COMMISSIONER WHITSON. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. THE MOTION. THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER REYES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITIT DISCUSSION. LOOKING LEFT. SEEING NONE. LOOKING RIGHT. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER [02:25:01] CHASE DISCUSSION. NO DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSON? YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER OSA? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. MOTION CARRIES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, WE ARE GOING TO JUMP AHEAD TO THE AGENDA ITEM ON THE MINUTES. NO, NO, WE STILL HAVE ANOTHER ONE. WE STILL HAVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 20. I DID NOT MOVE THAT DOWN. NOT THAT EFFICIENT. SEE, I, I KNEW THAT WAS COMING BACK TO HAUNT ME. I TELL YA. ALRIGHT, I APOLOGIZE. THAT'S OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BEVA, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 20 IS LOCATED AT 3 3 0 UVALDE STREET. GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME. THERE WERE 26 NOTICES SENT OUT. TWO IN FAVOR. ZERO OPPOSED. THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET AND NO RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED FROM OUTSIDE 200 FEET. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS INCLUDE R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, AND C TWO AND A COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT. THE CURRENT R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE PROPOSED R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS IS ALSO APPROPRIATE. THE PROPOSAL WOULD RETAIN THE, THE SINGLE FAMILY BASED ZONING WHILE ALLOWING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF TWO DWELLING UNITS. THE PER THE PRESCRIBED SITE PLAN PREVENTS EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND ENSURES ADEQUATE PARKING IS AVAILABLE FOR THE PROPOSED UNITS. DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED DOCUMENT COULD POTENTIALLY WARRANT ADDITIONAL COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. FURTHERMORE, THE REQUEST ALIGNS WITH THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH SUPPORTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADDITIONAL AND ALTERNATE HOUSING TYPES TO ACCOMMODATE THE CITY'S GROWING POPULATION AT ALL INCOME LEVELS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE, UM, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE APPLICANT PLEASE. HELLO, MY NAME IS GREG CARLES, UH, THREE 30 UVALDE STREET. I'M OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, WE WILL FIND OUT. DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO NOT. ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THE PAGE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THIS, THIS IS IN DISTRICT THREE. SO COMMISSIONER HOSA TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS. YES. THANK YOU CHAIR. UH, COUPLE QUESTIONS. SO I'M LOOKING AT THE SIDE PLAN HERE. SO YOU'RE GONNA BUILD TWO ADDITIONAL UNITS, DWELLINGS, AND BEHIND THE SINGLE STRUCTURE CURRENTLY. UH, BUILD ONE HOUSE, ONE DWELLING UNIT. SO IT'LL, IT'LL BE TWO TOTAL ON THE PROPERTY. OKAY. AND ARE YOU PLANNING TO LIVE THERE OR WHAT? WHAT'S, UH, YES. I'M, EXCUSE ME. I'M PLANNING ON LIVING THERE, BUT THE CONDITIONAL USE IS ALSO TO BE ABLE TO, UH, HAVE FAMILY MOVE IN OR RENT EITHER OR WHEN I'M TRAVELING WITH WORK. 'CAUSE I'M OFTEN AWAY MONTHS AT A TIME. I'M IN THE MARINE INDUSTRY. AND, UH, YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THE CONDITIONAL USE. OKAY. AND THEN A QUESTION FOR STAFFING, UH, FOR STAFF, UM, EXCUSE ME, PARKING, I'M ASSUMING THEY HAVE ENOUGH ROOM, BUT FOR TWO DWELLINGS, PARKING WOULD BE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS, BE TWO PARKING SPOTS, CORRECT? OR MINIMUM? YEAH. ONE PER SPOT OR ONE PER UNIT FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS. OH, JUST ONE. REALLY? CORRECT. OH, OKAY. IT GOES TO THE 1.5 WHEN YOU GO THREE OR FOUR. THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. OKAY. YEAH. YEAH. . OKAY. THAT'S ENOUGH. UH, WELL THAT'S ALL QUESTIONS I HAVE. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT. COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS? NO, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. SO BACK TO YOU. COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA FOR A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS IS. ALRIGHT. THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, I'LL SECOND [02:30:02] I THINK. WAS THAT YOU FIRST? YES. OKAY. COMMISSIONER REYES GOT IN THERE FIRST. SORRY, WE WERE BEING POLITE. OH, I SEE. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO, UH, MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER ANSO WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER REYES. DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER'S. ON MY RIGHT. SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER'S ON MY LEFT. DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER CHASE, ONLINE DISCUSSION. NOTHING. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. I HAVE NOTHING. UM, SO ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. MOTION IS TO APPROVE. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES. YES. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE? YES. CHAIR SIPES? YES. MOTION CARRIES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, NOW MINUTES. CORRECT? [Approval of Minutes  ] CORRECT. ITEM NUMBER 28 MINUTES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY CORRECTIONS TO THE, TO THE MINUTES? IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? SO MOVED. ALRIGHT. MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. SECOND. SECOND. WHO WAS THAT? OH, COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE MINUTES BY, UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARTOS. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AND UH, THERE WAS COMMISSIONER CHASE ONLINE SAID AYE. UH, ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. ALRIGHT. UM, I GUESS WE DON'T NEED TO, WE'LL DO A DIRECTOR'S REPORT, I GUESS IF THERE'S ANYTHING LATER. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, THE TIME IS THREE 50 AND THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS ADJOURNED UNTIL 6:00 PM THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WELCOME LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE ARE BASICALLY GOING TO ALMOST START FROM THE BEGINNING. DO WE HAVE SPANISH TRANSLATION SERVICES? YES. COULD WE, COULD WE START WITH THAT AGAIN? THANK YOU. WHEN I, WHEN I STARTED THIS. IT'S ON. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS ROB SIPES AND I'M THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT SEVEN ZONING COMMISSION. I HEREBY CALL. HOW WOULD WHAT? OKAY. I'M LOOKING TO OUR LAWYERS THIS WE ARE RE ARE WE RECONVENING OR ARE WE ACTUALLY, WE ARE RECONVENING THE, UH, REGULAR NOTICE MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION. THE TIME IS 6 0 5 AND WE WILL AGAIN, START WITH A ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MARK ROS, UH, REPRESENTING DISTRICT NINE. JOHN BUS, DISTRICT FIVE. AL ORTIZ, DISTRICT EIGHT. DANIEL KELLUM, DISTRICT ONE. JOHN WHITIT. DISTRICT 10. TAYLOR WATSON. DISTRICT TWO. GEORGE OSA. DISTRICT THREE. EDDIE REYES. DISTRICT FOUR. KENE DISTRICT SIX. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. AND WE ARE WORKING TO GET COMMISSIONER CHASE ONLINE. UM, SINCE MANY OF YOU WERE NOT HERE EARLIER FOR OUR MEETING, WE WILL HAVE STAFF GO OVER OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR YOUR BENEFIT. AND A QUORUM IS PRESENT. OH, THANK YOU. SORRY. SORRY. IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WE START. WE HAD A MEETING THAN WE STOPPED, THAN WE START AT AGAIN. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. YES. IF WE COULD GO OVER OUR MEETING FORMAT. UH, BEFORE WE DO THAT, I JUST WANNA CHECK TO SEE IF COMMISSIONER CHASE, CAN YOU HEAR US? COMMISSIONER CHASE? SHE'S ON MUTE. UNMUTE. [02:35:01] SO TODAY, UM, WE HAVE, WE'RE LISTENING TO A TIME, CERTAIN ITEM AT 6:00 PM THIS EVENING. IT'S AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 26 AND 27. FOR ALL OF THOSE OF YOU IN ATTENDANCE, IF YOU HAVE SIGNED IN TO SPEAK, UH, WE WILL BE CALLING YOUR NAME AS THE ITEM IS HEARD. UH, YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES, UM, FOR EACH, UM, OF YOUR ITEMS AS YOU ARE COMING TO SPEAK. UM, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR PHONES OR TURN THEM OFF AND WE WILL BEGIN THE MEETING. YES. AND, AND YOU CAN ALSO, UM, RECEIVE UP TO TWO OTHER MEMBERS FOR TIME AS WELL. THAT IS CORRECT. YES, SIR. SO YOU WOULD HAVE, IF TWO OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED IN GIVE YOU THEIR TIME, THEN, THEN YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES. AND, UM, JUST LET US KNOW OF THAT WHEN YOU'RE COMING UP TO THE, TO THE MICROPHONE. ALL RIGHT. AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CHASE ONLINE. COMMISSIONER CHASE, CAN YOU HEAR US? SHE CAN HEAR US. SHE CAN HEAR US, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM THAT WE CAN HEAR HER. WELL, THAT'S FINE. WE CAN, WE'LL MAKE IT WORK. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, SO I BELIEVE ITEM NUMBER 26 IS OUR ITEM UP RIGHT NOW. IF WE COULD HAVE STAFF'S PRESENTATION PLEASE, IF YOU DON'T MIND. GIVE US ONE SECOND. OH, OKAY. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU SEE SAMANTHA? LET'S GO AHEAD AND PULL UP, UH, THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION WHILE THEY'RE DOING THAT, WHILE THEY'RE DOING THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO START AT LEAST THE, THE OPENING PART OF THE PRESENTATION? UM, SO YES, SO GOOD AFTERNOON, UH, COMMISSIONERS, MR. CHAIR. UM, RUDY NINO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. UM, I AM HERE TODAY TO, UH, THIS IS A FOLLOW UP ON OUR PREVIOUS, UH, COMMUNITY, UH, ON OUR COMMUNITY MEETING ON JULY THE SECOND THAT WAS CONDUCTED AT THE TEXAS, ON THE TEXAS A AND M CAMPUS. UM, AS PART OF THE REQUEST OF THE COMMISSION AT YOUR, THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING, UM, THE COMMISSION REQUESTED NUMBER ONE, UM, MOTION FOR A 60 DAY CONTINUANCE. AND ALSO RECOMMENDED TO THE, TO THE, UH, CITY STAFF THAT WE CONDUCT A COMMUNITY MEETING AND ALSO TO CONDUCT A MEETING IN THE AREA OF THE ACTUAL, UM, UH, AREA WITHIN THE ACTUAL, UM, AREA WITHIN WHICH, UH, THERE IS THE COMMUNITY IS IMPACTED. SO TODAY, UH, I AM HERE TO GIVE YOU THE UPDATE ON THAT MEETING AS, UM, AS WE COMMITTED TO. AND SO THERE WE GO. UM, SO THE COMMUNITY MEETING WAS CONDUCTED AGAIN AT TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY WITHIN THEIR, UM, WITHIN THEIR CAMPUS, UH, ON THE FOURTH FLOOR. UH, I'LL PROVIDE SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. BUT WE MAILED OUT 13,364, UH, COMMUNITY MEETING PACKETS. AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, UH, WE PROVIDED, UH, THE LOGISTICS OF THE MEETING ITSELF, WHICH YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN. UM, A MAP OF THE, UH, UH, INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARIES, THE, THE FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS HANDOUT, AS WELL AS A LINK TO THE WEBSITE THAT WAS DEDICATED FOR THE PROJECT ON SA SPEAKUP. UH, THE FORMS OF NOTICE WERE DIRECT MAIL TO PROPERTY OWNERS ALONG WITH THE WEBSITE, AND THEN COUNCIL OFFICES AND VARIOUS MEDIA PUBLICATIONS DID SEND OUT THE, UH, PLACE NOTICE WITHIN THE, UH, REGARDING THE MEETING AS WELL. OKAY. UM, AND SO THERE WERE 93 ATTENDEES THAT SIGNED IN FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING ITSELF. UH, SOME FOLKS DID, UH, DID NOT SIGN IN. SO IT WAS, YOU KNOW, UNDER A HUNDRED. I COULDN'T SAY EXACTLY HOW MANY, JUST GIVEN THE, THE FACT THAT WE COULDN'T CAPTURE EVERYBODY WHO WAS UNABLE TO SIGN IN. UM, WE ALSO PLACED AT THE REQUEST OF THE COMMISSION, HEY, HOW DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THIS MEETING? OF WHICH 50 ATTENDEES SAID THAT THEY RECEIVED, UH, THE MAILER, UH, AND HEARD ABOUT IT VIA THE MILLER, UH, THE WEBSITE, SOCIAL MEDIA, WORD OF MOUTH, AND OTHER WAS SEVEN. GO AHEAD. THERE WE GO. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, UM, AGAIN, CONDUCTED IN THE VISTA ROOM, WHICH IS THE [02:40:01] LARGE, UH, FOURTH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM OF THE TEXAS A AND M SAN ANTONIO CAMPUS. UM, WHAT WE DID WAS WE STARTED THE MEETING AT FOUR O'CLOCK AND WITH THE, AT THAT FOUR O'CLOCK TIME, UH, FOLKS WERE ABLE TO COME IN AND GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED. ONE-ON-ONE WITH STAFF. UH, WE HAD A SIGN-IN TABLE. UM, THEN WE HAD A STATION WHERE FOLKS COULD GO AND THEY COULD ACTUALLY, UH, SHARE THE, THE PROPERTY INFORMATION THAT THEY'RE MOST INTERESTED IN. THEY CAN, UH, ONCE WE FIND THEIR PROPERTY, THEY CAN SIT DOWN WITH THE STAFF MEMBER, GO FIND THE PROPERTY ON THE LAPTOP, AND DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS RELATED TO THEIR PROPERTY. UH, WE DID HAVE SPANISH INTERPRETATION, UH, SERVICES FOR THOSE THAT NEEDED IT. AND, UH, WE PROVIDED EVERYBODY WITH A COPY OF THE FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE ICOD. UM, ADDITIONALLY, WE HAD COMMON CARDS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO EVERY, UH, UH, PERSON WHO SIGNED IN TO SPEAK AND EVERYBODY WHO WANTED ONE. AND SO, UH, WE HAD COMMON CARD BOXES WHERE FOLKS COULD SUBMIT THOSE, THOSE, UH, COMMON CARDS. AND ULTIMATELY, WE USE THOSE COMMON CARDS AS PART OF THE MEETING FORMAT THEMSELVES. AND HERE ARE JUST SOME PICTURES, UH, FOR YOUR INTEREST FOR OF THE COMMUNITY MEETING THAT TOOK PLACE. YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE STATIONS THAT EXISTED, UH, IN THE, IN THE ROOM, UH, THE PRESENTATION THAT TOOK PLACE AND SO FORTH. YOU CAN JUST SEE, YOU KNOW, AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE MEETING LOOKED LIKE. AND AGAIN, WE RECEIVED 25 COMMENT CARDS BACK FROM THE PUBLIC. UH, WE DID ASK FOR NAME, EMAIL, AND PREFERRED CONTACT INFORMATION JUST IN CASE. UH, WE FOUND, UH, WE HAD SOME QUESTIONS RELATED TO THEIR, THEIR FEEDBACK, AND WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO GET BACK WITH THEM. SOME FOLKS DID IN FACT GIVE THAT, THE, THOSE COMMENTS TO US. UH, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ASKED, THERE WAS A LOT OF FEEDBACK RECEIVED, UH, SOME OF WHICH WAS, WAS REALLY GOOD FEEDBACK THAT WE THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED TO REALLY CONSIDER THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND SO WITH THAT, HERE ARE JUST SOME SAMPLES OF THAT FEEDBACK. UH, ONE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO, UH, THE SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY. ANOTHER RELATED TO THE IMPACT OF FOSTER HOMES WITHIN THE AREA. AND THEN ALSO, UM, EXISTING RESIDENCES BEING ABLE TO, UH, PROVIDE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE, AT THE LAST PUBLIC, UH, HEARING. UM, SO WITH THAT, BECAUSE THERE WERE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, A NUMBER OF COMMENTS, MANY OF WHICH WERE VERY GOOD, AND WE THOUGHT WE COULD ACTUALLY WORK INTO, UH, POTENTIALLY WORK INTO THE ICOD ORDINANCE AND THE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL BOUNDARY MODIFICATIONS AND SO FORTH WE MIGHT CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE. UH, WE THOUGHT THAT, UH, REQUESTING 90 DAY CONTINUANCE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE SO THAT WE HAVE TIME TO ACTUALLY WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY, HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL MEETINGS, MEET WITH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS, AND HAVE THAT, HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. SO, UH, WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY UPDATE RELATED TO THE COMMUNITY MEETING ITSELF. AND, UM, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOLLOWING, UH, COMMUNITY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND WE DO HAVE, UM, A NUMBER OF PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK. WE DO HAVE VOICEMAILS AS WELL, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES. ALRIGHT. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE? DID ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE LEAVE A VOICEMAIL? THE ONLY ONE THAT HAD SIGNED UP, UM, THEY HAD SIGNED UP EARLIER TODAY. UH, MR. PATRICK VON, UM, VAN DOLAN, ARE YOU HERE? OKAY. AND THAT'S IT FOR VOICEMAILS VERSUS, UH, FOLKS WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. ALRIGHT, GREAT. UM, IF WE COULD HEAR THE VOICEMAILS FIRST PLEASE. ONE ADDRESS, 1 4 5 4 6 BROOK HOLLOW BOULEVARD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO THREE TWO. PHONE NUMBER (210) 601-7059 DISTRICT NINE. AND CALLING ABOUT THE ZONING COMMISSION TODAY. AND WOULD LIKE, UH, TO REQUEST VOTING AGAINST COD, OUR INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICTS. UM, THAT'S NUMBER 26. AND ALSO A ZONING CASE NUMBER, UH, NUMBER, I THINK IT'S A AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 27, ZONING CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 24 1 0 7 0 0 1, 0 9. AND, UH, WANT TO AGAIN, REQUEST A ZONING COMMISSION TO VOTE AGAINST, UH, THESE TWO, UH, EXCUSE ME. UM, YES, AGAINST THE APPROVAL OF NUMBER 26, NUMBER 27, UH, ITEMS I COD AND THE ZONING CASE PREVIOUSLY REFERRED TO BOTH THESE CASES DEAL, UH, WITH AN INTRUSION ON PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TEXAS BEING ESTABLISHED ALL ABOUT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, OUR COUNTRY'S FOUNDING AND OUR CONSTITUTION ABOUT THE RIGHT TO PROPERTY. AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT BOTH THESE CASES WILL INTRUDE ON THAT BASIC RIGHT, RIGHT TO PROPERTY, RIGHT TO USE YOUR PROPERTY. AND, UH, IT SEEMS BASED ON THE INFORMATION AT THE LAST, UH, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO DSD MEETING THAT WAS HELD AT TEXAS M SAN ANTONIO CAMPUS THAT I ATTENDED, [02:45:01] UH, THAT THERE'S DIFFERENT ANSWERS COMING FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ONE ANSWER BEFORE WAS THAT LANDOWNERS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO, UM, DEVELOP ON THEIR LAND AND THEN THE ANSWER AT THE TEXAS END OF SAN ANTONIO MEETING, UH, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO, BECAUSE ZONING WILL BE APPLIED INDIVIDUALLY, THIS OVERLAY WILL BE AN INTRUSION NOT ONLY TO, HI, MY NAME IS STEVE ORTEIG, 1 0 5 BRUNO STREET. I'M CALLING ABOUT ITEM 26. THE, UH, UDC FOR THE ICON. UM, I, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE CREATING OVERLAYS THAT CREATE WIDESPREAD NON-CONFORMING USES. I THINK THIS IS THE WRONG APPROACH. UM, I THINK WE COULD USE OTHER METHODS THAT WE COULD CREATE AN OVERLAY THAT INCREASES FEES FOR CONSTRUCTION OR SOME OTHER WAY NON-CONFORMING USES ARE DIC ARE CONTROLLED BY THE STATE AND THE STATE COULD CHANGE THOSE LAWS. THEY COULD, SOMEONE COULD PROPOSE A BILL TO BOOST THE CONSTRUCTORS IN THE INDUSTRY AND SAY THAT ALL NON-CONFORMING USES HAVE TO BE, UM, DEMOLISHED. I MEAN, WE, THIS, I THINK THIS IS JUST TOTALLY THE WRONG WAY TO GO TO USE THE NON-CONFORMING USE METHOD. UM, AND ZONE B SEEMS OVERLY RESTRICTIVE, UH, REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU DO IT. UH, I THINK, I THINK THIS IS A BAD POLICY AND I'M OPPOSED TO THIS UDC AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS STEVE TI UH, 1 0 5 RENO STREET. I'M CALLING ABOUT ITEM 27. UM, THAT'S THE SAME 27 PLACES, UH, ICLOUD OVERLAY AROUND THE TOYOTA PLANT. UM, SO, UH, THIS PLACING OVERLAYS AROUND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, UM, IS, IS A BAD POLICY IN MY MIND. I, THERE'S HEAVY INDUSTRIAL IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I TOO, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE, WE'D ERADICATE MY NEIGHBORHOOD IF, IF WE USE THESE OVERLAY POLICIES. UM, ALSO, UM, TOYOTA IS, IS NOT, IS NOT ZONED JUST HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. THEY'RE MIXED HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. AND I THINK, UM, I THINK THAT MIX, UM, WOULD ENCOURAGE IT TO BE LESS INTENSE THAN THIS IMPLIES. UM, SO I THINK, UM, WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND THERE CAN BE SOME KIND OF BUFFER. BUT THIS, THIS OVERLAY IS, IS, IS THREATENING TO, UM, ALL OF SAN ANTONIO THAT'S NEARBY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. UH, I'M OPPOSED TO THIS. THANK YOU. SO THAT'S IT FOR VOICEMAILS. I'LL START CALLING SPEAKERS. FIRST WE HAVE MR. ANDREW NICHOLAS TO BE FOLLOWED BY MS. KATHLEEN. NICHOLAS, DO YOU HAVE THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP AT FIVE O'CLOCK ? YES, I HAVE BOTH, UH, THE ONE O'CLOCK AND THE FIVE O'CLOCK. OKAY. AND IF YOU WOULD GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS YEAH. WHEN YOU GET TO THE PODIUM. THANK YOU SIR. WE CAN PASS THOSE OUT FOR YOU. AND THEY CAN, THEY CAN PASS THOSE OUT. THEY CAN PASS 'EM OUT. GIVING HER TIME TO ANDREW NICHOLAS. ALRIGHT, SO MS. UH, KATHLEEN NICHOLAS, YOU'RE GIVING YOUR TIME TO MR. ANDREW NICHOLAS. SO THAT WILL GIVE YOU FOUR MINUTES, SIR. MS. DANA HONDO, YOU WANNA GIVE YOUR TWO MINUTES UP AS WELL, SO THAT'LL GIVE YOU SIX MINUTES, SIR. ALL RIGHT, SO I'LL GO AHEAD. SO YOUR NAME. OKAY, FIRST NAME IS ANDREW. ANDREW NICHOLAS. UM, ADDRESS IS, SORRY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. UM, ANDREW NICHOLAS, UH, ADDRESS IS 13 9 8 7 FM 1937 SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR GIVING THE LANDOWNERS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE I COD. THE ADDITIONAL TIME NEEDED TO REVIEW THE PLAN AND FOR RECOMMENDING, UH, THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HOLD A COMMUNITY-WIDE MEETING. UM, I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE I COD AND SPEAK TO THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT DIRECTLY REGARDING THIS MATTER. AND STILL OUR FAMILY OPPOSES [02:50:01] THE CREATION OF THIS DISTRICT. ON JULY 3RD, 2014, RUDY NINO WAS INTERVIEWED BY KEN'S FIVE REPORTER, RAYNA K. DURING THAT INTERVIEW, MR. NINO DENIED THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT, HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH ICOS EXPLAINING INSTEAD THAT ICOS CAME FROM THE TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL CENTER PLAN THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN 2019. UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, UH, THE TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL CENTER PLAN IS STILL IN DRAFT FORM AND NO LONGER CREATES A TWO MILE OVERLAY DISTRICT, UH, AROUND THE TOYOTA PLANT. IN ADDITION, THE PLAN HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL YET. SO THE FORMAL LANGUAGE FOR CREATING THE ICONS MAY HAVE BEGUN IN 2019, BUT THE CONCEPT AND PURPOSE FOR THE ICONS WAS DEVELOPED IN 2003 WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOYOTA AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. UH, MR. NINO FURTHER GOES ON TO SAY THAT THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT WAS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CENTER DEAL THAT WAS NOT, THAT WAS NOT JUST SIGNED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BUT IT WAS SIGNED BY BEXAR COUNTY ALL THE WAY TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, THAT IT WAS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE DEAL THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE CITY TO DO ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO LAND USE. WELL, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY DISAGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT, AND THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT DOES LAY OUT USED ZONING AROUND THE TOYOTA PLANT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT TAB AT THE RED TAB, THAT'S ORDINANCE 9 7 6 5 0 PROJECT STARBRITE AGREEMENT EXHIBIT C CITY AGREEMENT SECTIONS 24 AND 29. IT SPECIFICALLY STATES THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS THE CITY NEEDS TO FULFILL AS PART OF THE AGREEMENT WITH TOYOTA. UM, AS IT RELATES TO ZONING THE THAT AGREEMENT, THE STARBRIGHT AGREEMENT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THE CITY AGREES TO INITIATE APPROPRIATE ZONING CASES AND REVISIONS TO ITS UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ZONE THE LARGEST GEOGRAPHICAL AREA SURROUNDING THE TOYOTA PLANT WITHIN THE CITY'S JURISDICTION. AND WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE PERIMETER OF THE PROJECT SITE, WHICH IS KNOWN AS THE ENHANCED ZONING AREA, THE CITY AGREES TO COMMENCE SUCH ZONING PROCESS AS SOON AS PRACTICAL AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE. AND TO WORK WITH TOYOTA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES REQUIRED AND AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO ZONE THE AREA WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE CREATION OF AN APPROPRIATE NEW ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT. WELL FAST FORWARD TO 2024 AND THAT ZONING DISTRICT IS THE ICON, UM, IN THAT DISTRICT. THE OBJECTIVE IS TO IMPOSE UPON THE ENHANCED ZONING AREA, UH, WHICH IS THE THREE MILE BUFFER APPROPRIATE LAND USE GUIDELINES THAT SATISFY TOYOTA. SO IT HAS TO SATISFY TOYOTA REGARDING USES DENSITIES, SETBACKS, AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS CONSISTENT WITH PROJECT STARBRITE TOYOTA WAS DE TOYOTA MAY DESIGNATE A REPRESENTATIVE TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND THE CITY WILL WORK IN GOOD FAITH WITH SUCH REPRESENTATIVE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND USE PLANNING INITIATIVES IN THE ENHANCES ZONING AREA AND THE TARGET INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA. SECTION B, THE CITY AGREES TO EXERCISE ITS BEST EFFORTS TO FULL PURPOSE ANNEX IN A TIMELY MANNER, ANY LAND WITHIN THE ENHANCED ZONING AREA, WHICH IS LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEXED SO AS TO AVOID DIS ANNEXATION OF SUCH LIMITED PURPOSE ANNEXED AREAS. SECTION C, THE ZONING AND FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION HAVE BEEN AGREED TO BY THE CITY AS AN INDUCEMENT FOR TOYOTA TO LOCATE THE PROJECT ON THE PROJECT SITE. AND TOYOTA HAS RELIED ON THAT AGREEMENT IN ITS DECISION TO LOCATE ITS PLANT IN SAN ANTONIO. NOW SECTION 29 TALKS ABOUT LAND USE RESTRICTIONS. THE CITY HEREBY AGREES TO RESTRICT THE PORTION OF THE OVERALL TRACK THAT IS NOT THE PROJECT SITE TO ENSURE THAT SUCH LAND BE USED EXCLUSIVELY FOR ONE USES, UM, THAT CANNOT BE RESIDENTIAL OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE USE OF THE PROJECT SITE AND OR TO CONSERVATION. SO LET'S NOW COMPARE THE LANGUAGE FROM THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT TO THE I COD AS DESCRIBED IN THE CITY'S FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. THE I COD IS INTENDED TO LIMIT THE ENCROACHMENT OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES INTO AREAS AROUND THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT THAT IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO. THE PROPOSED OVERLAY DISTRICTS WOULD LIMIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES NEAR THE AUTO MANUFACTURING PLANT, MINIMIZING THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE ON SURROUNDING POPULATIONS. THE PROPOSED ICONS INCLUDES TWO DISTRICTS, ZONE A INCLUDES THE AUTO MANUFACTURING USE PROPERTY, AND EXTENDS FOR ONE MILE FROM THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY AND GENERALLY LIMITS NEW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES. ZONE B EXTENDS ONE MILE FROM THE BOUNDARY OF THE ZONE AND GENERALLY LIMITS NEW RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENCES BASED USES. IN MY OPINION, THE ICON LANGUAGE COPIES AND REINFORCES THE LANGUAGE LAID OUT IN THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT THROUGH THE USE OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE CITY IS TRYING [02:55:01] TO CODIFY THE LANGUAGE IN THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT TO FULFILL ITS OBLIGATION TO TOYOTA. SO IT NO LONGER HAS TO RELY ON THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT FOR ZONING. THE ONLY DEVIATION BETWEEN THE TWO CONCEPTS IS MOVING ENHANCED ZONING AREA, ALSO KNOWN AS THE BUFFER ZONE FROM A THREE MILE DOWN TO A TWO MILE, UM, DISTANCE FROM THE TOYOTA PLANT. ULTIMATELY, BOTH CONCEPTS ARE BEING USED TO REDUCE DEVELOPMENT AND TO CONTROL USES OF LAND SURROUNDING THE TOYOTA PLANT WITHOUT PRIVATE LANDOWNER CONSENT. UM, YOU KNOW, ON ITS FACE THE STARBRIGHT AGREEMENT APPEARS TO MEET THE DEFINITION OF CONTRACT ZONING. CONTRACT ZONING INCURS WHEN A GOVERNMENT ENTITY SUCH AS A CITY ENTERS INTO A BINDING CONTRACT IN WHICH IT PROMISES TO ZONE LAND IN A CERTAIN WAY. IN EXCHANGE FOR A LANDOWNER'S PROMISE TO USE THE LAND IN A PARTICULAR MANNER, THE COURTS HAVE HELD THAT THE CONTRACT ZONING IS ILLEGAL BECAUSE BY ENTERING INTO SUCH AGREEMENTS, THE CITY IMPER IMPERMISSIBLY RELINQUISS ITS AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE PROPER LAND USE, EFFECTIVELY BYPASSING THE ENTIRE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. MR. NICHOLAS, YOUR TIME IS UP. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANKS. UH, NEXT WE HAVE, UM, IS MR. FERIN OL HERE? ALRIGHT, SO YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES, SIR. HERE I AM AGAIN. FEIN OV 1901, UH, MILITARY DRIVE. THE OVERLAY DISTRICT IS THE LEGALIZATION OF THE STAR BY AGREEMENT. UH, YOU WILL SEE HERE THAT ABOUT 3000 LANDOWNERS PLUS HAVE BEEN AFFECTED FOR 20 YEARS FOR THE ILLEGAL CONTRACT THAT THE CITY AND TOYOTA SIGN. HERE'S AN A A PICTURE OF HOW MANY PEOPLE AND LANDOWNERS ARE AROUND TOYOTA. UH, THE THE IOT STUDY AND WHAT THE CITY TRIES TO IMPLANT IMPLEMENT HERE. I THINK IT WILL BE, I I THINK IT SHOULD BE SCRATCHED OUT. WE DON'T NEED AN OVERLAY. WHEN TOYOTA CAME HERE, CAME TO OUR CITY AND WE WELCOME THEM, WE DIDN'T GO TO JAPAN. IF THEY COME TO OUR CITY, WHY ARE THEY TELLING US WHAT TO DO WITH OUR LAND? IF I GO TO JAPAN AND BUY A PROPERTY, THEY'RE GONNA TELL ME WHAT TO DO WITH A PROPERTY. BUT WHY ARE THEY TELLING ME WHAT TO DO HERE IN SAN ANTONIO? I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE, I COULD STUDY THAT THE CITY HAS DONE IT'S LOUSY AND LAZY HERE. IT'S WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS GO AROUND WITH THE SAME CIRCLES ALL THE TIME. THE THREE MILE CIRCLE, THE TWO MILE CIRCLE, AND EITHER ONE TO IMPLANT, IMPLEMENT A ONE MILE CIRCLE HERE IS CO THREE MILES, TWO MILES AND ONE MILE. I MEAN, MY GRANDKIDS CAN DO THIS PROJECT. I AM A LANDOWNER AND I'M ALSO A DEVELOPER. WHEN I'M GONNA DO SOMETHING THAT IS GONNA REALLY GET THE, THE LAND RIGHTS FROM PEOPLE AND ALSO I NEED TO DO A STUDY OF WHAT I'M DOING AND I EXPECT THAT FROM THE CITY. THAT'S WHY WE PAY OUR TAXES. THEY SHOULD DO A-T-I-A-A, LAND USE ANALYSIS, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, A NOISE STUDY, STORMWATER STUDY. WHERE ARE THOSE STUDIES IN ORDER FOR FOR THEM TO BRING YOU HERE. SOMETHING TO EVEN EVEN WASTE YOUR TIME. WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME. WE'VE BEEN COMING HERE MORE AND MORE. WE WENT ON THE SECOND OF OF JULY TO A MEETING. WE CAME OUT EXACTLY THE SAME. THEY NEVER ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS CLEARLY FOR TRANSPARENCY. DON'T POSTPONE THIS. KILL IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE, UM, MR. WESTON MARTINEZ AND MR. MARTINEZ. DID YOU HAVE ANYONE GIVING THEIR TIME TO YOU? YES, I HAVE TWO PEOPLE GIVING THEIR TIME TO ME. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME SO THEY CAN HAVE IT. MOLLY BUCKLEY. RONALD . THANK YOU. YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES LEFT AND WE HAVE A THIRD ALSO, BUT IT'S OKAY, WE WON'T NEED IT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE BEFORE YOU HERE TODAY BECAUSE DOWN ZONING IS THEFT. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF YOU LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT YOU WANT US TO GO TODAY AND PUT A OVERLAY DISTRICT UPON YOUR HOUSE SO THAT YOU CAN STOP AND NO LONGER HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT THE STATE OF TEXAS ALLOWS FOR YOU. AND I'M SURE THAT IN YOUR GOOD GRACES YOU WOULD EQUALLY NOT DO IT TO THESE PEOPLE. WE KNOW THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU DID. WE KNOW THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS HANDED TO YOU. WE KNOW THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO CALL FOR AN EMERGENCY MEETING TO ADDRESS THIS UPON THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO BECAUSE THIS IS GONNA WIND UP BEING THE BIGGEST THEFT OF LAND IN MODERN HISTORY. THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIAL ZONING THAT EXISTS IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. TOTALITY TODAY, [03:00:01] YOU'RE GOING TO INCREASE THAT TO 150%. YOU'RE GONNA ALMOST COMPLETELY MAKE IT TWICE THE AMOUNT OF ALL OF THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING WE HAVE TODAY IN ONE SPELL SWOOP. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE TALK ABOUT POLLS. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK IN MY TIME, IF YOU'RE AGAINST THIS AGREEMENT, LET'S JUST SAVE SOME TIME. WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND UP? YOU SEE, THIS IS WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT. YOU SEE, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE A GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE NOT HERE TO LORD OVER THE PEOPLE. THESE PEOPLE AREN'T PAID ACTORS. THEY DIDN'T DRIVE IN BY SOME BILLIONAIRE THAT CAME OVER HERE TO DO SOMETHING, TO PUT AN AGENDA. NO. THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT SOME OF 'EM WORKED AT CPS ENERGY, SOME OF 'EM WORKED AT KELLY AIR FORCE BASE. SOME OF 'EM ARE LOCAL FAITH COMMUNITY LEADERS. SOME OF 'EM HAVE BEEN FARMING THIS LAND LIKE MY FAMILY SINCE THE THIRTIES AND THEY'VE BEEN HOLDING THIS ON SO THEY COULD PA PASS ON THAT GENERATIONAL WEALTH BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE WEALTH IS IN LAND. THAT'S WHY EACH ONE OF YOU WAS SPECIFICALLY CHOSEN TO REPRESENT THE GOODWILL OF THE CITIZENS IN THIS SCENARIO. BECAUSE YOU HAVE A TECHNICAL BACKGROUND, YOU UNDERSTAND THINGS THAT YOU'RE READING. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS ITEM RIGHT HERE, VERY SIMPLY, IF YOU CAN READ, I CAN'T READ IT FROM THERE, UH, TO DIRECT AND INFORM ALL STAFF DURING THE PROCESS OF ZONING, WHETHER PROPOSED ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT, THIS NOTIFICATION WILL TAKE PLACE AT THE TIME OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. THIS APPROVAL VIOLATED THE TERMS OF THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT. HOW CAN IT VIOLATE AN AGREEMENT THAT'S NOT IN EFFECT? LOOK, I WAS TEXAS REAL ESTATE COMMISSIONER, I UNDERSTAND PROPERTY RIGHTS. I'M NOT THE SMARTEST GUY IN THE ROOM. THIS IS SIMPLE. THIS IS SIMPLE CONTRACT LAW THAT EACH ONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. WE'LL CONTINUE RIGHT THERE. THIS WOULD PREVENT FUTURE COUNSELS FROM REZONING AFFECTED PROPERTY AND PROVIDE PROTECTION TO THE INTERESTED PARTY. WHO ARE THE INTERESTED PARTIES? WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THAT. PLEASE GO TO THE NEXT SECTION. I MENTIONED PLEASE AND I CAN'T SEE MY TIME ON THE CLOCK. SO GOT THREE MINUTES. OKAY, GREAT. YES PLEASE. STAFF RESPONSES, INTERESTING. STAFF RESPONSES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ESTABLISHED A POLICY P-O-L-I-C-Y POLICY. THE SUMMARY PORTION OF THE ZONING REPORT WILL INCLUDE THE STATEMENT. THIS ZONING CODE CASE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT. MR. SANCHEZ REPORTED THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ESTABLISHED A-P-O-L-I-C-Y TO ENSURE THAT STAFF REPORTS TO CITY COUNCIL TO INDICATE IF THE SUBJECT SITE IS WITHIN THE THREE MILES OF TOYOTA. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE DON'T THINK TOYOTA'S THE PROBLEM. WE THINK THEY'RE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. WE THINK THEY'VE HELPED THE ECONOMY AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. WE'RE NOT HERE TO DEMONIZE A GROUP THAT HAS COME AND INVESTED IN OUR COMMUNITY. IN FACT, WE EXPECT TOYOTA TO ISSUE A PUBLIC STATEMENT SIDING WITH THE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN THEIR GOOD NEIGHBORS SINCE ITS INCEPTION SO THAT WE CAN TRULY ALLOW FOR THE PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT THEY EXPECT. AND QUITE HONESTLY, THAT WE EXPECT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE IN THE ANNUALS OF TIME AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. WE KNOW THAT THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIX THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED BY CITY COUNCIL. IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY. BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOK AT THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1968, I WAS TALKING TO ONE OF THE STAFF EARLIER, THIS IS TEXTBOOK REDLINING. AND WHEN WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE A GOVERNMENT BODY IS CREATING AND ALTERING THE SURPLUS OF LAND IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AND BY THE WAY, UPDATING THEIR ENTIRE ETJ, AUTOMATICALLY, WE KNOW WHAT YOU CAN DO IN THE ETJ. DON'T WE GUYS? AND LADIES. SO IN THAT SITUATION, WHEN YOU ARE CODIFYING THE ACTUAL SURPLUS OF LAND, WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO THE REST OF THE LAND? YOU'RE DRIVING THE PRICE UP. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DRIVE THE PRICE OF LAND UP STAFF? YOU INCREASE PROPERTY TAXES. WHO DOES THAT BENEFIT? THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. WHY WOULD THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO THAT HAS A BUDGET THAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE INCREASED EVERY YEAR, WHY WOULD THEY BE INTERESTED IN INCREASING THEIR PROPERTY TAX BOTTOM LINE ON A REGULAR BASIS? AND IF WE TAKE THE LOOK AT THE STAFF MEMBERS THAT WERE THERE TODAY THAT ARE NOW SITTING IN PLACES LIKE THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING TRUST, HOW ARE THEY MAKING DECISIONS AGAINST THEIR DIRECT COMPETITORS WHEN WE HAVE THOSE SAME STAFF MEMBERS? IF YOU SHOW ME MY TIME, I'M SO [03:05:01] SORRY. 15 SECONDS. WHEN WE HAVE THOSE STAFF MEMBERS THAT ARE LOOKING, THAT USED TO WORK IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY AND NOW ARE IN DIFFERENT PLACES OF AUTHORITY IN THIS SITUATION, LADIES, GENTLEMEN, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. THIS BULLET IS NOT FOR YOU. THE CITY HALL NEEDS TO CALL FOR AN EMERGENCY SESSION. THEY NEED TO ADDRESS THIS. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TECHNICAL TIME AND THE CITIZENS HERE, THANK YOU FOR GIVING. ITS DUE CAUSE AND DUE PROCESS. NEXT WE HAVE MR. RONALD PEREZ. AND THEN TO FOLLOW MR. PEREZ, WE HAVE LORENZO SEGURA. UH, MY NAME IS RONALD PEREZ. I LIVE AT 1 3 9 8 5 FM 1937, LOT FOUR. I LIVE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN. UH, LIKE MR. MARTINEZ JUST SAID, HE SAID, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IF SOMEBODY COME TELL YOU WHAT YOU CAN DO AT YOUR, YOUR PLACE, YOUR HOUSE? I'VE BEEN THERE. I LONG TIME, SECOND GENERATION WHERE I LIVE, BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS IN THAT PROPERTY. I'M THE ONLY ONE OR ONE SIBLING. ME. I CAN'T EVEN GIVE IT TO MY KIDS, MY GRANDKIDS FOR THEM TO BUILD IF THEY WANTED TO. YOU KNOW, I WAS TALKING WITH MY NEIGHBORS JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOT IN THE COUNTRY ANYMORE. THAT'S WHERE WE WANT IT TO BE AWAY FROM THE CITY. YEAH, WE GOTTA GO INTO TOWN FOR THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. I'VE BEEN OUT THERE FOR YEARS AND I PLAN TO BE OUT THERE FOR QUITE A FEW MORE, BUT I'D BE, EXCUSE MY FRENCH IF I CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH MY PROPERTY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE MR. LORENZO RA TO BE FOLLOWED BY MR. ERNEST CHACON. I WISH TO GIVE MY TIME TO SOMEBODY ELSE. AND THAT WAS MR. LOREN LORENZO? YES. OKAY. UM, NEXT WE HAVE MR. ERNEST CHACON. MY NAME IS ERNEST CHACON AND I LIVE 2,600 WEST JED ROAD. AND, AND, UH, WE HAVE 180 ACRES, MY BROTHER AND I. AND I'M 85 YEARS OLD. MY BROTHER IS 90. AND WE REALIZE THAT, THAT, UH, WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO SELL. AND I, I HAVE A FEELING THAT YOU'RE DESTROYING THE VALUE OF THE LAND. WHEN YOU DO THIS. YOU'RE DESTROYING THIS. AND I HAVE TO, I GO THROUGH THIS EVERY NIGHT THINKING ABOUT IT. IT'S NOT EASY. AND UM, IT'S, IT IS, UH, IT'S BEEN A, UH, I'VE HAD, WHEN TOYOTA CAME IN, THE CITY CONTROLLED THE LAND AND WE WERE TRYING TO SELL IT THREE YEARS. BY THREE, FOUR YEARS AFTER THAT WE TRIED TO SELL IT. NOBODY WANTED, 'CAUSE THEY HAD IT CONTROLLED. I HAD A BACK OPERATION, A KNEE OPERATION, THREE HERNIA OPERATIONS. AND THIS IS THE REASON WE WERE TRYING TO SELL THE LAND AND WE COULDN'T DO IT. AND THEY, AND THEN THEY CAME IN TO SEE WHAT I WAS DOING ON THE FARM TWICE, WHETHER I HAD CATTLE ON THE FARM, WHETHER I WAS FARMING THE LAND. AND THAT WASN'T EASY. AND MY WIFE, SHE'S SITTING OVER THERE, SHE'S THE ONE THAT'S HELPING ME PICK UP THE SACKS OF FEED, UH, WHATEVER WE HAD. 'CAUSE I COULDN'T PICK 'EM UP. I I COULD ONLY PICK UP ABOUT 30 POUNDS. AND IT'S BEEN, IT'S BEEN, UH, IT HASN'T BEEN EASY FOR US. AND I HAVE A FEELING THAT THE, THE YOU ARE DESTROYING THE, THE PRICE OF THE LAND. AND AT OUR AGE, IT'S DIFFICULT. AND I HOPE, I HOPE THAT FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE PARENTS, THAT YOU DON'T ALLOW YOUR PARENTS TO GO THROUGH THIS WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH. AND THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE MR. DANIEL NEG, UH, NEG NEGLA. I APOLOGIZE TO BE FOLLOWED BY MS. MONICA NEGLA. UH, I'M GONNA USE HER TIME. OKAY. YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES. SIR, CAN YOU RESET THAT PLEASE? I'M OKAY. I AM DANIEL NEGREA. I'M AT 1680 MARILYN ROAD AND I'M GONNA, UH, READ SO I COULD STAY ON SCHEDULE HERE. UM, [03:10:01] POLLUTION GOES WHERE THE WIND BLOWS AND THE CITY CANNOT PROTECT US FROM THE WIND. THE CITY'S PROPOSED. IOD IS THE ONLY KNOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT IN SAN ANTONIO THAT DOWN ZONES AND TAKES AWAY PROPERTY RIGHTS WITHOUT COMPENSATION AND NOT INTENDED TO PROTECT CITIZENS OF ANY HARM. I WORKED FOR TOYOTA FOR 12 YEARS AND THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW HUNDREDS OF STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS WHERE THE AIR GOING THROUGH THEIR PROCESSES HAS TO EXIT CLEANER THAN THROUGH THEIR TERMINAL OXIDIZERS THAT IT CAME IN. AND THE PROCESSED WATER LEADING THEIR PLANT HAS TO BE OF DRINKING WATER QUALITY, MEANING CLEANER THAN IT CAME IN. SO WHAT ARE WE CONCERNED ABOUT? NO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES OR REPORTS, NO SPECIFICITY OF THE CONCERNS, DETAILS OF THE HAZARDOUS COMPONENTS, ET CETERA. WHO IS BEING PROTECTED AND FROM WHAT WE ARE NOW CONFRONTED WITH THE CITIES CREATING ITS OWN RULES UNDER THE DISGUISE OF SAVING THE POPULACE. BUT IN REALITY, IT'S TRYING TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF BIG BUS BUSINESS, EVEN OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND JURISDICTION. THE HYPOCRISY IS SKY HIGH, THAT RIGHT SMACK IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR PROPOSED OVERLAY. WE HAVE TEXAS A AND M AT A STUDENT BODY OF 8,000, PREDICTED TO BE AROUND 9,000 BY THE END OF THE YEAR, PREDICTED TO BE THE SECOND LARGEST CAMPUS. UT UT HOSPITAL PREDICTED 300 BEDS WITH FUTURE EXPANSION PLANS. 126 MILLION TEXAS A AND M APARTMENT COMPLEXES AND BED WITH SAN ANTONIO HOUSING AUTHORITY RIGHT NEXT DOOR. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENCE IS OVERWHELMING. THE SOUTH OF 14 4 10 LOOP BETWEEN HIGHWAY 16 AND PLEASANTON HIGHWAY, UH, 2 81. WITH 38 NEW COMMUNITIES ARE JAMMING THIS AREA, JCB FACTORY AT BORDER OF THE RING OF FIRE, WHERE THE TWO MILE RADI, WHERE'S THE TWO MILE RADIUS FOR THEM? NAVI STAR MANUFACTURING. 427 ACRES EXPANDING ANOTHER 150 ACRES WHERE THE HALLIBURTON FACILITY USED TO BE SURROUNDED BY THOUSANDS OF RE RESIDENCES. WHERE'S THEIR BOUNDARY? AND THIS ENVIRONMENTAL MAP HERE THAT I'M LOOKING AT, UH, AS FAR AS UH, HOW MUCH THE CITY CARES ABOUT OUR ENVIRONMENT, WE HAVE, UH, MITCHELL LAKE NATURAL PRESERVE RIGHT NEXT TO NAVISTAR. WE HAVE TOYOTA RIGHT NEXT TO EMBED EMBEDDED WITHIN THE MEDINA RIVER NATURAL AREA. WE HAVE JCB, UH, RIGHT NEXT TO LEON CREEK. SO, SO MUCH FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT IS A CRIME, NOT JUSTICE. THE HYPOCRISY CANNOT BE MORE APPARENT. THE ONLY REAL PROTECTION THE CITY IS CONCERNED ABOUT IS TOYOTA'S POCKETS. CITY CLAIMS TO HAVE NO MONEY TO PREVENT CONDEMNING OUR LAND. BUT THEY HAVE 1.2 BILLION TO PURCHASE SPURS, ARENA AND OTHER WASTEFUL PROJECTS. FOR THE SIXTH TIME, WE WERE NOT NOTIFIED AT ALL OR IN TIME FOR THESE PLANNING COMMUNITY MEETINGS, EVEN UNDER THE RADAR AND REPORT IN THE LOCAL NEWS WHILE BEING WATCHED REAL CAREFULLY DESPITE THE CLAIMS THAT YOU'RE HEARING FROM THE OTHER SIDE. THIS IS COMMUNISM 1 0 1. I LIVED UNDER COMMUNISM AND I CAME HERE TO BE A FREE MAN. THE FIRST THING THAT COMMUNISTS DID WAS CONFISCATE LAND TO CREATE THESE COMMUNAL FARMS. THEN THEY TOOK YOUR TRACTORS, THEY TOOK YOUR CATTLE FOR, AS YOU GUYS SAY, THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY. I DID NOT KNOW THAT TOYOTA IS PART OF OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. NOW. UNELECTED AND IMPOSING PLANNING MEETING THAT WAS MENTIONED ON JULY 2ND WAS PRACTICALLY REVOLT. WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO ASK PUBLIC QUESTIONS. BASICALLY THEIR TACTIC WAS DIVIDE AND CONQUER. I WAS THERE FOR TOYOTA. I'M A TOYOTA MAN. UM, AND I LOVE INDUSTRY. IT'S IN MY BLOODSTREAM, BUT I ALSO HAVE RIGHTS. SO PLEASE, UM, VOTE NO ON THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE HAVE NEXT MR. DAVID TREVINO AND THEN TO BE FOLLOWED BY MR. JESUS CORONADO. OKAY, MY NAME IS DAVID TREVINO. I LIVE AT 5 96 MARMON ROAD, UM, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 2 4. UH, I'M AGAINST THIS, UM, CONTRACT ZONING. UH, FOR ALL THE REASONS GIVEN BEFORE, UH, I THINK EVERYBODY ELSE MADE A REALLY GOOD CASE, UH, ALREADY. UM, UM, WE HAD A VERY UNIQUE AND SUSTAINABLE PLANS FOR OUR PROPERTY. IT'S 25 ACRES WE WERE WORKING. I'VE BEEN IN PART OF THE PLAN, UH, FOR THE TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL AND I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS UNTIL THIS YEAR. I STARTED WORKING WITH THEM IN 2019, GOING TO MEETINGS, TALK, LOOKING AT MAPS, TALKING TO PEOPLE. AND NONE OF THIS WAS MENTIONED AT ALL. MY PLANS FOR OUR PROPERTY INCLUDE, UH, SMALL HOMES FOR RENTER SALE, COMMUNITY GARDENS, UH, A FARMER'S MARKET, UH, MAYBE HIGH TUNNELS AND HOOP HOUSES TO GROW FOOD LOCALLY. SO WE CAN, BECAUSE WE'RE LIVING IN A FOOD DESERT OUT THERE, UH, MAY BIKING, WALKING, PA UH, PATHS, ANIMAL SHELTER, UM, [03:15:01] FOR FOSTERING ANIMALS. MY PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THE LEON CREEK PRESERVE. SO IT'S IDEAL FOR THESE KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS. COMMUNITY TEACHING EVENT SPACES. ALL OF THESE PLANS WERE COMPATIBLE WITH THE TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL PLAN UNTIL THE IOD OVERLAY WAS STUCK IN THERE IN THAT NEW LANGUAGE. AND NOW APPARENTLY IT'S BEING REMOVED 'CAUSE THEY, EVERYTHING'S BEEN MADE PUBLIC AND NOW EVERYBODY SEES WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHAT KIND OF SNEAKY THINGS, UH, IS GOING ON IN THE CITY. BUT, UH, ALL THOSE PLANS ARE ON HOLD NOW. NOW WE HAVE TO DO IS SIT HERE AND HOLD OUR BREATH WHILE YOU GUYS DECIDE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH OUR PROPERTY. IS THAT FAIR? NO, I DON'T THINK SO. NEXT WE HAVE MR. JESUS CORONADO TO BE FOLLOWED BY MR. KEVIN KLEIN. HELLO, MY NAME IS JESUS CORONADO. I MOVED INTO THE AREA LAST YEAR, MY ADDRESS 1 2 0 6 0 PLEASANT ROAD. UM, YOU KNOW, I MOVED IN WITH THE DREAM, YOU KNOW, BELIEVE IT. I'M, I'M 30 YEARS OLD. JUST GOT MARRIED LAST YEAR, UM, HAD MY FIRST BORN SEVEN MONTHS. THE AMERICAN DREAM IS REALLY JUST TO MEAN TO BUILD WEALTH. OBVIOUSLY THIS ITEM 26, ITEM 27, I'M AGAINST IT. I REQUEST THAT YOU GUYS VOTE AGAINST IT. OBVIOUSLY IT'S GONNA HURT OUR WEALTH AND ALL IT DOES THAT MAKES OUR WORLD GO DOWN. WE ONLY HAVE ONE BUYER AND THAT SINCE IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE, THAT WOULD BE TOYOTA. SO TOYOTA WOULD OBVIOUSLY JUST BE ABLE TO GIVE US MAYBE HALF OF WHAT IT WAS WORTH RIGHT BEFORE THIS WOULD'VE. THIS WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED, I THINK YOU ALL KNOW TO, TO REJECT THIS. UH, THEY HAVE ALL MADE THE GRAY CASES. UH, YOU GUYS WOULDN'T WANT THIS ON YOUR PROPERTY EITHER. AND ALL I ASK IS THAT YOU LOOK OUT FOR OUR FUTURE. I BOUGHT THIS HOUSE LAST YEAR. IMAGINE THAT THIS FROM A, A PROPERTY THAT WAS ABOUT FOUR GENERATIONS OLD. AND WE, WE BOTH SET ON A PRICE. THAT'S AN AMERICAN DREAM RIGHT THERE. I HOPE THAT ONE DAY MY SON CAN EITHER BUILD ON THE HOUSE, MAYBE HOMESTEAD, IT'S 1.7 ACRES AND, OR, OR HE CAN SELL IT. EITHER WAY IT BUILD WEALTH. BUT IF YOU IMPLEMENT THIS, IT'S OBVIOUSLY, IT'S GONNA HURT ALL THAT. I BELIEVE YOU GUYS ARE THE CITY COMMISSIONERS. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO, UH, PROTECT OUR INTERESTS, SERVE OUR INTERESTS, AND REPRESENT US WELL. IF YOU IMPLEMENT THIS WELL, THEN YOU'RE JUST GONNA, UH, BASICALLY DO THEFT. YOU'RE GONNA REMOVE OUR VALUE. YOU'RE GONNA REPRESENT TOYOTA AND YOU'RE JUST GONNA LOOK THE OTHER WAY. SO I'LL ASK THAT YOU GUYS, UH, LISTEN TO ME AND LISTEN TO EVERYBODY ELSE HERE. AND I'M SURE IF WE CAN BRING EVERYBODY ELSE WHO'S NOT BUSY. I'M SURE THEY'RE VERY BUSY. THIS THE SOUTH SIDE IS OBVIOUSLY A MORE WORKING CLASS AND, BUT I BELIEVE THEY WOULD SAY THE SAME. AND SO, AND THAT IS ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE MR. KEVIN KLEIN. UM, YOU WILL HAVE MR. LORENZO'S TIME SO THAT I'LL GIVE YOU FOUR MINUTES. AND THEN FOLLOWED BY MS. ELENA KLEIN. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. UH, MY NAME IS KEVIN KLEIN. I LIVE AT 9 1 2 FM 2 5 3 7. BUT I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE. LAND HERITAGE HAS REGISTERED OPPOSITION FOR THE PROPOSAL ZONING CHANGES FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. FIRST THING, THE ZONING CHANGE WOULD PROMOTE A MAJOR CHANGE IN PROPERTY USE FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES. LAND HERITAGE SITS ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE MEDINA RIVER. THESE PROPERTIES WOULD, UH, WOULD BE AFFECTED AND, AND HAVE THE ABILITY TO ATTRACT VISITORS TO OUR PARK FROM THE ADJACENT AREAS. OUR VISITATION WOULD BE REDUCED BY GREAT DEAL. SECOND, INDUSTRIAL USES HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT DUE TO ENLARGED WASTE WATER FROM A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. THE WATER QUALITY ON THE RUNOFF IS MUCH HIGHER IN TOXINS AND PETROLEUM DISTILLS. THIS WOULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE AREA. THIRD INDUSTRIAL USES CREATE A HEAT ISLAND EFFECT, WHICH WOULD ALSO NOW GET NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE QUALITY OF WILDLIFE. HABITAT AT THE PARK IS CLEAR THAT INDUSTRIAL USES ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE GOALS OF LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE. SO WE REQUEST THAT ZONING CHANGE BE DENIED ON TOP OF THE PARK. I MY 9 1 2 FM 2 5 3 7, NONE OF THESE MEETINGS I NEVER GOT NOTIFIED ABOUT, I FOUND OUT ABOUT ON THE NEWS. SO YOU GUYS ARE LEAVING PEOPLE OFF OF THESE NOTIFICATIONS FOR THESE ZONING COMMISSIONS. AND MYSELF, I HAVE TWO SMALL HORSE BAR HORSE STALLS THAT ARE, THEY'RE BARELY THERE. IF A STRONG WIND TEARS THOSE UP, THIS IS GONNA AFFECT ME BEING ABLE TO BUILD A NICE BARN FROM MY HORSES. THANK YOU. AND LASTLY, WE HAVE MISS ELENA KLEIN. HELLO, MY NAME IS ELENA KLEIN. I LIVE AT 9 1 2 FARM ROAD 25 37. THAT WAS MY HUSBAND. [03:20:01] UM, I JUST WANT TO INVITE Y'ALL TO COME AND SEE. CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? I WOULD INVITE Y'ALL TO COME AND SEE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TOYOTA PLAN. JUST PAST THE RIVER, THERE'S A BEAUTIFUL 1200 ACRE PARK THAT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IT'S, IT'S A LIVING. IT'S CALLED THE LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE. IT IS A LIVING MUSEUM. PRIOR TO THE, UH, PANDEMIC, THEY HAD SCHOOL KIDS COME OUT AND THEY WOULD WALK AROUND THE GROUNDS AND THEIR TEACHERS WOULD TEACH 'EM ABOUT LIFE IN GENERAL AND, AND THE FLORA AND THE FAUNA RIGHT UP THE ROAD. YOU'VE GOT PLEASANTON ROAD AND YOU'VE GOT THE AUDUBON SOCIETY, RIGHT? YOU HAVE ALL THESE BEAUTIFUL, NATURAL, UH, AREAS THAT, UM, ARE LACKING IN THE CITY. THIS IS CLOSE TO THE CITY THOUGH. PEOPLE CAN COME AND, UH, ENJOY THE OUTDOORS. AND THERE ITS TOYOTA RIGHT NOW. OKAY, FINE. NOT TOO BAD. WE HAVE SOME SEMIS COMING DOWN THE ROAD. THEY KILL A FEW CHICKENS, THEY KILL A FEW DOGS. UH, IT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE BREATHING TOXIC FUMES AT THE MOMENT, BUT WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING. WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING TO KEEP OUR PLACES NICE, TO KEEP THE AREA NICE, UM, TO, UH, EXPAND ON WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE AND, AND BRING PEOPLE TO SEE IT. IT'S A HORSEY AREA. ALL OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE HORSES. PRETTY MUCH. UM, IT'S, AND THEN I GOTTA TELL YOU THIS, I'M RETIRED AIR FORCE AND I HAVE TO GO, MY MIND GOES TO THE POLITICAL, UH, I LOVE TOYOTA. WE HAVE A TOYOTA TRUCK, OKAY, THAT SAID THAT TO THE BUSINESSES IN JAPAN ARE HAND IN HAND. THEY'RE EMBEDDED WITH THEIR GOVERNMENT. THEY GET HELP FROM THEIR GOVERNMENT. THIS ISN'T CAPITALISM WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS IS ANOTHER COUNTRY HELPING THEMSELVES AND THE IDEA THAT THEY'RE GONNA HELP THEMSELVES TO DESTROY MY HOME. AND, AND YOUR NATURAL AREAS FOR WHAT? YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE MONEY. THEY HAVEN'T PAID TAXES IN MA'AM, YOUR TIME. 12 YEARS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC, UH, SPEAKERS. ALRIGHT. UM, USUALLY ON, ON ITEMS THAT ARE ON A CONTINUANCE, ANYONE CAN MAKE A MOTION. BUT SINCE THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE AND FOUR CASE, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO Y'ALL TO FLIP A COIN TO SEE WHAT Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO DO AS FAR AS WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS, ASK QUESTIONS, AND MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE. LET ME ASK A COUPLE OR WE CAN ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS. WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS. THAT'S, SO WHO WANTS TO, ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER HENO, HOSA, WE'LL START WITH QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS. UM, FOR MY KNOWLEDGE, WHY DOES A CITY HAVE OVERLAYS? APOLOGIES. I'M SORRY, IT'S PROBABLY OF A GENERIC QUESTION, BUT, BUT BASICALLY WHY, WHY DOES A CITY CONSTRUCT OVERLAYS? THERE'S A NUMBER OF REASONS WHY A CITY WOULD DEVELOP AN OVERLAY DISTRICT. UM, IT IS TYPICALLY IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH AN AREA WHERE, BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT PARTICULAR AREA, UM, YOU PLACE AN ADDITIONAL SET OF LIMITATIONS. IT'S, IT'S LIKE ZONING. ZONING HAS ZONING, COMES WITH ITS RIGHTS AND IT COMES WITH ITS LIMITATIONS. IN THE, IN THE CASE OF AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, THERE MAY BE A PARTICULAR SPECIFIC INSTANCE WHERE AN ADDITIONAL RESTRICTION OF SOME SORT MAY BE NEEDED IN AN AREA. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE KNOW THIS ON OUR TOP OF OUR HEAD, UM, BUT HOW MANY OVERLAYS DO WE HAVE NORTH OF DOWNTOWN, OR LET'S USE HIGHWAY 90 MM-HMM. , UH, COMPARED TO OVERLAY SOUTH OF 90. I, I COULDN'T TELL YOU OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT'S THERE. THERE'S A, A LARGE NUMBER I WOULD SAY THAT NORTH OF, WE'RE LOOKING THEM UP, SIR. LOOKING 'EM UP. ALRIGHT. WE CAN, WE, WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION. AND, AND THE REASON WHY I ASK, AND I, I KNOW THEY'RE GONNA LOOK THIS UP, UH, 'CAUSE, YOU KNOW, BEING SOMEBODY WHO'S LIVED IN THE SOUTH, SOUTHEAST SIDE OF TOWN FOR, FOR MY WHOLE LIFE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE SOUTH SIDE'S KIND OF BEEN WITH A, WITHOUT A LACK OF A PROPER WORD, YOU KNOW, THE, THE BACKYARD, THE, THE, THE DUMP OF SAN ANTONIO. RIGHT. SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, I MEAN, WE HAVE BEAUTIFUL LANDFILLS AND WE HAVE BEAUTIFUL, UH, DUMPSTER PLACES AND [03:25:01] REFINERIES. UM, AND I KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT. AND NOW THE SOUTH SIDE, I THINK SOMEBODY HAD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, I, I, I MOVED OUT HERE TO BE OUT IN THE COUNTRY, UM, BUT NOT THE CITY. I MEAN, I KNOW WE CAN'T FIX THAT. I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE MOVING IN. OUR HOUSES ARE TOO CHEAP HERE. RIGHT. IN CALIFORNIA THEY'RE WHAT, 800,000 OR SOMETHING? BUT ANYWAY, BESIDES THE POINT, AND JUST JUMP IN GUYS, WHEN YOU, WHEN Y'ALL, DO YOU KNOW THE NUMBER? OKAY, YES. YEAH. WE, WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 15 OVERLAY DISTRICTS IN SAN ANTONIO. I THINK YOU SAID NORTH OF HIGHWAY 90, AT LEAST EIGHT OF THOSE WOULD BE APPLICABLE. SO THERE'S EIGHT OF THOSE NORTH OF HIGHWAY 90. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN, SO THE REST, SO THE OTHER, UH, THOSE INCLUDE OVERLAY DISTRICTS THAT ARE CITYWIDE, LIKE THE AIRPORT HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT IS LOCATED AROUND, YOU KNOW, EVERY AIRPORT FACILITY IN TOWN. SO, BUT AT LEAST EIGHT OF THOSE 15 ARE LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 90. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. AND THEN MY LAST, UH, QUESTION, WELL, MAYBE THE LAST, WELL PRETTY MUCH WILL BE, UM, HOW MANY, HOW MANY CASES DOES THE CITY, AND MAYBE THIS MORE FOR CITY STAFF, BUT HOW MANY CASES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL, BUT THEN GET APPROVED, UM, AT CITY COUNCIL? I MEAN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I MEAN, LIKE, YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY YEAH. WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF US, SIR. I'M SORRY. BUT IT, BUT IT DOES HAPPEN. YES, SIR. SO, SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS IF, IF FOR SOME REASON, I MEAN, WHATEVER THE OUTCOME IS, IF THERE'S A ZONING REQUEST, THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS. THEY WOULD COME, UH, TO US AND WE WOULD JUDGE, YOU KNOW, EVALUATE THE, THE, THE MERITS OF THAT ZONING REQUEST AND WE COULD APPROVE IT. JUST, JUST MY QUESTION IS THAT COULD BE POSSIBLE. YEAH. YOU'RE, YOU WOULD PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN THAT RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE PROVIDED TO CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE ULTIMATELY CITY COUNCIL, EVEN AT THIS LEVEL OR THIS THIS CASE, I MEAN, THEY'RE GONNA MAKE, MAKE RECOMMENDATION FINAL. ANYBODY. EXACTLY. YES. OKAY. MR. REYES, HOW THAT CALL WITH THE STAR? I'M SORRY LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE THERE'S COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS GOING ON? PLEASE HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD MR. REYES. SO YOU'RE READ THIS? I HAVE NOT. NO, YOU HAVE NOT. NO. YOU'VE NEVER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE HOLDING . I BELIEVE THAT THE DOCUMENT WAS, WAS SHOWN ON THE, UH, ON THE OVERHEAD. THIS SAYS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ESTABLISHED A POLICY TO ENSURE THAT STAFF REPORTS THE CITY COUNCIL INDICATED THE SUBJECT SITE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF TOYOTA. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT? I'M WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SO I COULDN'T OKAY, SO YOU DON'T NO, NO COMMENT ON THAT. NO. SO THE ICON SHAPE, I WAS JUST CURIOUS, IS IT JUST A COINCIDENCE THAT THE SHAPE OF THE OVERLAY IS PRETTY MUCH THE SHAPE OF THE TO PLANT? IS THAT A COINCIDENCE? THE SHAPE OF THE TOYOTA PLANT? THE SHAPE? YEAH. WELL, THE, THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED BY USING THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT AS THE CENTER POINT. UH, AS, AS IS WITH, WITH ALMOST EVERY OVERLAY DISTRICT, THERE WAS A, THERE'S AN ESTABLISHED CENTER POINT OUT AT, AT WHICH POINT YOU, YOU TAKE A RADIUS OR BUFFER AROUND THAT AREA. AND SO IT IS WITHIN THAT AREA THAT WE, THAT IT WAS DETERMINED, UH, WE WOULD ESTABLISH SOME SORT OF A RADIUS AROUND THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT. SO THAT'S WHY IT APPEARS TO MIRROR THE SHAPE OF, OF THE, THE PROPERTY. OKAY. SO WE CAN SAY IT WAS BECAUSE THE TOYOTA PLANT YES. BECAUSE OF THE SHAPE OF THE TOYOTA PLAN. CORRECT. OKAY. LAST QUESTION, AND THIS IS WHERE YOU CAN, MAYBE STAFF CAN HELP ME OUT. WHAT ADDITIONAL BURDENS DOES THIS ICO PLACE ON A EXISTING PROPERTY OWNER? AS FAR AS, UH, COMING UP HERE AND ASKING FOR REZONING? WHAT ADDITIONAL BURDENS DOES THIS CREATE MONEY-WISE, COST-WISE TIMEWISE, IT DOESN'T PLACE ANY ADDITIONAL PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS ON ANYBODY. ANYBODY CAN REQUEST A ZONING CASE AT ANY TIME. A ZONING CHANGE AT ANY TIME. I AGREE WITH THAT. BUT IF WE PASS THIS ICOT, WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON EXISTING PROPERTY? SURE. NO, THE ANSWER IS NO. NO, THANK YOU. I MEAN, SO, UH, CHAIR QUESTION. UM, SO LET'S SAY I OWN A PROPERTY THERE. I, I DO NOT, BUT I, LET'S SAY I OWN A PROPERTY. MM-HMM. . AND THIS DOES PASS, AND I BELIEVE, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, UH, LET'S SAY I PASS IT OVER TO MY SON. HE HAS KIDS AND HE WANTS TO BUILD ANOTHER HOUSE THAT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE WITHIN THIS OVERLAY. CORRECT. [03:30:01] ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IS WHAT IS TRYING, IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DISCOURAGE. OKAY. AND SO I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT IS A WHILE THAT IS, UH, THEORETICALLY, UH, CORRECT. THERE ARE ALSO A NUMBER OF EXCEPTIONS WRITTEN INTO THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY. OKAY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET LET HIM ANSWER THE QUESTION, PLEASE. UH, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE BUILT INTO THE, UH, INTO THE ICON THAT WOULD, THAT MAY ACCOMMODATE. THERE ARE JUST SO MANY DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT THAT AFFECT DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNERS. HENCE THE REASON WHY WE THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT FOLKS GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED. ONE-ON-ONE DURING, AT, AT VARIOUS TIMES BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO GET AN ANSWER FOR THEIR SPECIFIC QUESTION AND THE SPECIFIC PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS. AND, AND IN SO WORST CASE SCENARIO, LET'S SAY IT DID STOP HIM, THEN HE WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE FEE FOR, FOR A NEW ZONING REQUEST AND ALL THAT WORST CASE SCENARIO IF IT, IF IT DIDN'T FIT THE WORST CASE, POTENTIALLY POTENTIAL POTENTIALLY, IF THEY DON'T QUALIFY FOR AN EXCEPTION. OKAY. SO THAT, THAT BRINGS ME TO MY, MY LAST STATEMENT, I GUESS, OR QUESTION, REALLY A STATEMENT. AND THEN WE'LL LET, UH, OTHER FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ASK, UM, THEIR QUESTIONS. BUT I, I WILL, I SEE THERE'S STILL A LOT OF DISINFORMATION, RIGHT? I MEAN, WITHIN THE, THE, THE PEOPLE HERE WITHIN THE CITY. MM-HMM. , THERE'S STILL A LOT. UM, I KNOW OUR FIRST MEETING HAD A LOT MORE PEOPLE. UM, BASICALLY SOME OF THE THINGS I CAN THINK OF IS LIKE, THEY LIVE IN BEAR COUNTY AND THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE GONNA BE AFFECTED. CORRECT? OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A CITY, NOT A BEAR COUNTY, UH, UH, ISSUE. SO THAT TOOK CARE OF THOSE IN THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS. UM, I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE MET WITH OTHER, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS AND, AND YOU'VE GOTTEN SOME POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM SOME, SOME OF THEM JUST BY THE, THE SHEER NUMBER OF PEOPLE AT THE FIRST MEETING TO THIS MEETING. UM, SO I THINK THAT'S GOOD AS FAR AS COMMUNICATING, WE'RE, WE'RE DOING A LITTLE BETTER ON THAT. SO ONCE WE FINISH ALL THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE QUESTIONS, I, I, I WILL BE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION, UM, BECAUSE SOMETIMES I HEAR FROM THE, THE RESIDENTS AS WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT IT'S, IT'S PROPERTY THEFT, OR THEY'RE STEALING THIS, OR THEY'RE DOING THIS, OR SOME OTHER MISINFORMATION THAT IT'S NOT TRUE, BUT IT'S KIND OF ALMOST LIKE THEY'RE HEARING HEARSAY, RIGHT? SURE. SO I THINK COMMUNICATION TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS CROSSED, ALL THE T'S ARE, ARE CROSSED, AND ALL THE I'S ARE DOTTED. UM, I WILL BE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION, UM, FOR A MOTION AFTER EVERYTHING, FOR A CONTINUOUS, FOR 90 DAYS SO THAT WE COULD CONTINUE THIS TALKING AND, AND INFORMATION. I, I, I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ONE SIDE THAT DO NOT WANT THIS ONE SIDE THAT DOES WANT THIS. I THINK THIS IS THE MIDDLE TO GET EDUCATED. I DON'T THINK THIS IS GONNA, YOU KNOW, EITHER WAY, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO LEAN, YOU KNOW? UH, BUT THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. UH, JUST TO LET EVERYONE KNOW ONCE, ONCE WE COME TO THAT FOR THE MOTION. AND, AND JUST, JUST TO COMMENT ON, ON THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU GAVE, UM, THAT ACTUALLY WAS AN EXAMPLE THAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY MEETING. AND THROUGH ONE OF THE FEEDBACK COMMENT FORMS WAS THIS IDEA THAT THERE WAS A GENTLEMAN THAT HAS A HOME AND HIS PARENTS BUILT ANOTHER HOME. THEY GAVE IT TO THEM, BUT THEY WANT TO OWN IT OUTRIGHT IN THEIR OWN PROPERTY. AND THEY SAID, WELL, COULD THE I COD IMPACT US OR NOT? AND IT APPEARED AS THOUGH THE IIC COD MAY IN FACT IMPACT THEIR ABILITY TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY. SO, UM, WE ASKED THEM IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO MEET ADDITIONAL TALK. MAYBE WE, MAYBE THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN BUILD IN SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE OR EXCEPTION, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT BUILDING ADDITIONAL DENSITY, THE ISSUE IS REALLY SUBDIVISION. AND SO, UM, THEY WOULD BE, FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF THE, THE, THE FOLKS THAT WE WOULD BRINGING TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW CAN WE REMEDY THAT SITUATION. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HUEY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UH, MR. NINO, I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR HOLDING THAT ENGAGEMENT MEETING, BUT MOSTLY I WANT TO THANK THESE FOLKS HERE FOR ATTENDING THAT MEETING. AND I WAS THERE WITH YOU AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD ALLOCATED AN HOUR TO QUESTIONS, AND I GUARANTEE THAT YOU COULD HAVE BEEN THERE FOR THREE MORE HOURS AND THESE FOLKS WOULD'VE HAD QUESTIONS FOR YOU. MM-HMM. . SO AGAIN, I, I DO COMMEND THE COMMUNITY FOR MEETING NOW, AND WHAT I HEARD AT THAT, UM, COMMUNITY MEETING WAS, AND IT'S THIS POPPED UP OVER AND OVER AGAIN, IT'S, HOW DID YOU GUYS FIGURE OUT THE DISTANCES TO USE FOR YOUR ZONE A AND ZONE B? MM-HMM, , I MEAN, PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND, HELP THE FOLKS HERE IN THE STAND. WHY NOT HALF A MILE? WHY NOT 10 MILES? WHY DID YOU PICK ONE MILE AND TWO MILES? SURE. AND SIMPLY PUT, WE WORKED WITH, UH, THE PLANNING TEAM [03:35:01] TO MAKE A DETERMINATION. UH, THEY WANTED TO OPEN UP AREA ON THE SOUTH SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THERE HAS BEEN THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE, THE, WITHIN A THREE MILE AREA OF TOYOTA, WE DO GIVE ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY TO LAND USE AND ZONING CASES FROM THE PERSPECTIVE THAT WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT, THAT, UM, THERE IS APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY MEASURES FOR FOLKS THAT THERE, THAT THEY'RE NOT ALONG ONE OF THE MAJOR ARTERIALS WHERE THERE MAY BE A LOT OF HEAVY TRUCK TRAFFIC, UH, FOR INSTANCE. AND SO WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THAT ADDITIONAL LOOK AT THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE WITHIN THREE MILES OF, OF A MANUFACTURING PLANT AND, YOU KNOW, ANY MANUFACTURING PLANT, ANY HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE, NOT JUST TOYOTA. AND SO THE PLANNING TEAM SAID, YOU KNOW, REALLY THREE, THREE MILES OF ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY. WE'VE HEARD QUITE A BIT ABOUT THE NEED FOR, UM, ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE SOUTH SIDE, ADDITIONAL, UH, RETAIL AND, AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES, ADDITIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES ON THE SOUTH SIDE. SO THEY SAID, WHY TALK TO THE, THE STAKEHOLDERS, YOU KNOW, DOWN AT TOYOTA AND ASK THEM, YOU KNOW, CAN WE REDUCE, CAN WE REDUCE THIS ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY DOWN TO A TWO MILE AREA? AND WE DID THAT AND THEY DID NOT HAVE, UH, ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT. I MEAN, THEY, YOU KNOW, WE ASKED THEM ABOUT IT. THEY SAID, UH, WELL, OKAY, IF YOU ALL THINK THAT THAT'S SAFER AND THAT THAT'S, THAT'S APPROPRIATE AND THAT THAT'S A GOOD LAND USE AND ZONING DECISION, THEN I'M SORRY LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE, IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE LAND USE TRANSITION FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM THIS AREA, THEN WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THAT. YEAH. BUT THAT'S, WE TOOK THAT BACK TO THE PLANNING TEAM. RIGHT. BUT THAT SOUNDS GOOD. GUT FEEL. WHERE IS THE QUANTITATIVE DATA? MM-HMM. THAT PROVED TO YOU AND TO THE RESIDENTS HERE? MM-HMM. THAT THOSE BOUNDARY DISTANCES ARE CORRECT. LIKE I SAID, WHY NOT QUARTER MILE? MM-HMM. . MM-HMM. , WHY NOT 10 MILES? SURE. WHY NOT 30 MILES? WAS THAT MM-HMM. , YOU KNOW. SURE. THIS WAS THROUGH A CONVERSATION WITH THE PLANNING TEAM AND THROUGH THE COMMUNITY. IT WAS A QUALITATIVE EFFORT TO DETERMINE WHAT, WHAT THE MOST APPROPRIATE BUFFER WOULD BE FROM THIS AREA. I MEAN, SIMPLY PUT THAT, THAT IS THE, THE RATIONALE IS WORKING TO DETERMINE THROUGH A COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS, WOULD THIS BE AN APPROPRIATE AREA FOR A BUFFER. WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING, UH, THE LAST COMMUNITY MEETING OF THE TOYOTA, UM, OF THE TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN. IT WAS VERBATIM ON, ON THE WALLS RECOMMENDING THAT IT WOULD BE A, A TWO MILE AREA THAT WE'RE GENERALLY LOOKING AT FOR TO DO LAND USE AND ZONING. UH, WE HAVE A FUTURE LAND USE MAP THAT REFLECTS SOMETHING SIMILAR IN TERMS OF THE LEVELS OF INTENSITY AND DENSITY THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE MANUFACTURING PLANT. AND THAT ULTIMATELY WE FELT THAT THAT WAS GOOD, A GOOD PRACTICE. AND SO WE MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION AND, AND MOVED FORWARD WITH IT. I UNDERSTAND. MM-HMM. . BUT AGAIN, WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THE RESIDENTS HERE IS THAT WHAT ABOUT THE IMPACT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES, WHAT ABOUT HYDROLOGY STUDIES? WHAT ABOUT WIND STUDIES? MM-HMM. . I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT PROVIDE US THE DATA TO DRIVE DECISIONS. AND RIGHT NOW, I MEAN, I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE DOING THE BEST YOU CAN, BUT I'M HEARING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE BEST GUT FEEL AND THE FOLKS HERE, FOR THE FOLKS HERE, I BELIEVE YOUR GUT FIELD IS PROBABLY NOT GOOD ENOUGH AND THAT THEY NEED SOME PART DATA TO WORK ON. MM-HMM. . OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. ALRIGHT. UM, COMMISSIONER HO AND JOSE J JUST REAL QUICK, JUST FOR MY CURIOSITY. UM, C CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE WITHIN THE ONE MILE RADIUS? IF YOUR PROPERTY'S IN ONE MILE, UH, PUT YOUR HANDS DOWN AND THEN RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE IN THE, WITHIN THE TWO MILE RADIUS. OKAY. THANK YOU. SORRY, NOT IN STAKEHOLDER MEETING THAT HE REFERENCED. ALRIGHT. OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS AND WE CAN'T HEAR YOU, COMMISSIONER CHASE. SORRY. UM, WE CAN CALL HER AND SEE IF SHE CAN JUST COMMUNICATE THROUGH THE PHONE. GIVE US ONE SECOND. ALRIGHT. WHAT IF WE COMMISSIONER CHASE, THEY'RE GONNA CALL YOU AND SO WE WILL MOVE ON TEMPORARILY AND COME BACK TO YOU . SO COMMISSIONER'S ON MY LEFT. SORRY. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. UM, OKAY, SO THE CITY, AS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE CONTINUANCE FOR 90 DAYS, UM, I THINK I'VE HEARD ONE EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU WOULD DO DURING THOSE 90 DAYS WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT SORT OF MAYBE TWEAKING THE LANGUAGE TO LOOK AT SOME OF THESE EXCEPTIONS. MM-HMM. TO THE USE CASES. I'M NOT THERE YET. CONVINCE ME. WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU DO DURING THESE 90 DAYS TO EITHER TWEAK [03:40:01] THE LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS ISSUES? UM, TELL ME WHY A CONTINUANCE IS APPROPRIATE. BECAUSE WE, EXCUSE ME, BECAUSE WE HAVE, WE ARE STILL ACTUALLY WORKING THROUGH ALL OF THE DIFFERENT COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM SOME OF THE COMMON CARDS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING. UM, IT'S A LOT. SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE GO THROUGH ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WE CAN CONTACT PROPERTY OWNERS SO THAT WE CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THEIR SPECIFIC SITUATIONS AND SEE IF THERE IS, WE WEREN'T CONTACTED AND SEE IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN POTENTIALLY TWEAK SOME LANGUAGE, POTENTIALLY EVEN TWEAK THE MAP. WE'RE JUST NOT SURE YET, UH, IN TERMS OF THE BOUNDARIES. UH, THERE'S JUST, THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION THAT WE THINK THAT WE CAN STILL DEVELOP AND THEN ULTIMATELY RESPOND TO WHEN IT CAME TO THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK. OKAY. UH, IS, AND I KNOW I CAN'T MAKE ANY DEMANDS OF YOU MM-HMM. , UM, BUT IS STAFF WILLING TONIGHT? YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD SOME PEOPLE EXCLAIM MM-HMM. , BUT THEY WERE NOT CONTACTED. THEY DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. UH, IS STAFF PRESENT HERE TODAY WILLING TO GET THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION AND CERTAINLY DURING THE 90 DAY PERIOD MM-HMM. AND IDEALLY WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS TO A MONTH GET IN CONTACT WITH THOSE FOLKS? SURE. I, I MEAN, AGAIN, WE FEEL THAT WE HAVE DONE THAT. WE HAVE CONTACTED FOLKS THROUGH THE, OKAY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, HE'S TRYING TO ANSWER THE QUESTION AND I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE Y'ALL GET CONTACT, BUT RIGHT NOW THE SPEAKING OUT IS NOT HELPING THIS CONVERSATION OR PROGRESSING THIS. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR FRUSTRATION AND I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT STAFF ADDRESSES THOSE FRUSTRATIONS. THANK YOU. YEAH. AND SO, SHORT ANSWER, YES. THE WAY THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE USED IS SIMILAR TO EVERY OTHER PROCESS RELATED TO ZONING WHERE WE USE UTILIZE BEXAR COUNTY, UM, APPRAISAL DISTRICT INFORMATION, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO GET CONTACT INFORMATION TONIGHT FROM PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE CONTACTED SPECIFICALLY TO TALK ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS IS, I THINK SOMEONE POINTED OUT THIS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE SITUATION. MM-HMM. , UH, WE TALKED EARLIER IN THIS ZONING CASE ABOUT THE FACT THAT USUALLY LARGE AREA REZONINGS ARE TO MAKE SURE THE USE IS CONFORMING TO WHAT'S ON THE GROUND. AND IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A LARGE AREA REZONING, BUT, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE NOTICE AND GIVEN SOME OTHER ISSUES, I THINK THERE IS A NEED FOR EDUCATION. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? I SURE, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. THE OTHER THING YOU TALKED ABOUT WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT WHAT YOU WOULD DO DURING THE 90 DAYS IS SORT OF LOOKING AT DIFFERENT MAPS. MM-HMM. . OKAY. SO ONE THING I I THINK YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT BEFORE THE LAST MEETING WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY OF THESE PARCELS, UH, BISECT OR OTHERWISE INTERSECT WITH THE ZONE A AND ZONE B LINES? MM-HMM. , RIGHT? CORRECT. UM, AND, AND DID YOU DO ANY ANALYSIS OF THAT? WE'VE ACTUALLY RUN ANALYSIS ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT, THAT WERE AVAILABLE. UM, WE ACTUALLY HAVE SOME MAPS WE'RE STILL RUNNING, WE'RE STILL RUNNING QUITE A, QUITE A FEW NUMBERS TO DETERMINE, BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, THERE ARE SOME PROPERTIES THAT ARE BISECTED BY THE TWO MILE LINE. WE LOOKED AT PROPERTIES THAT WERE BISECTED BY BOTH AREAS. UM, AND GIVEN THE COMMUNITY'S FEEDBACK AND SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, WE'RE, WE'RE WILLING TO ALSO LOOK AT THAT AS, AS AN OPTION. OKAY. AND I THINK ONE OTHER THING WE TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY WAS, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS ALSO IS THAT THERE WAS THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT OUT THERE. MM-HMM. . AND THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL, I BELIEVE, FROM SITTING THROUGH THESE HEARINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SIMPLY A CODIFICATION OF THAT AND THAT MAKES IT VERY SUSPECT TO THEM. MM-HMM. , DID YOU LOOK AT OTHER WAYS TO POTENTIALLY DRAW AN INDUSTRIAL, UH, COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT BEYOND JUST SORT OF TAKING A CENTER POINT OR TAKING A CENTER PROPERTY AND MOVING OUT AT A CERTAIN RADIUS? UM, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF OPTIONS THAT WERE LOOKED AT. I WOULD SAY THAT WE DID START WITH A, A RADIUS OPTION SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT WAS THE MOST FAIR. THAT WAS THAT THAT PROVIDED EQUAL COVERAGE AND IT WOULDN'T PICK AND CHOOSE WHO WOULD ULTIMATELY BE IN OR OUT. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THE DIFFICULTY LIES IS THIS IDEA THAT WE WANNA ENSURE THAT WE ARE NOT, UM, THAT WE'RE TREATING EVERYBODY THE EXACT SAME WAY AND THAT WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, TAKING ONE PROPERTY OUT, BELIEVING ANOTHER END IF THEY HAVE A SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCE. RIGHT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, UM, THIS IS AN ISSUE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THIS IS AN AREA THAT DOES HAVE ESTABLISHED ROADS. MM-HMM. ESTABLISHED HIGHWAYS. DID YOU THINK ABOUT USING THOSE AS, YOU KNOW, THE BOUNDARIES OR THE LIMITATIONS FOR SOME OF THIS INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT? WE DID ACTUALLY, THAT WAS ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE DID LOOK AT. UM, I THINK THAT SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAD WAS FEELING THAT THERE WA IT APPEARED TO [03:45:01] BE ARBITRARY IN THAT WHAT IS THE, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN CONDITION FROM ONE SIDE OF THE STREET TO THE OTHER. AND SOME FO SOMEONE ACROSS THE STREET MAY HAVE A LIMITATION PLACED ON THEM THAT SOMEBODY ACROSS DOESN'T. SO THOSE WERE SOME OF THE FACTORS THAT WE LOOKED AT IN TERMS OF TREATING FOLKS EQUALLY, UH, WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE AND MAKING SURE THAT THE ORDINANCE IS DEFENSIBLE. UH, I HOPE THIS WILL BE MY LAST COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, UM, FOR EVERYONE'S SAKE. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE MR AND MRS. KLEIN WHO CAME UP WHO TALKED ABOUT THE LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE, A LOT OF THEIR CONCERNS WERE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FURTHER INDUSTRIAL GROWTH IN THIS AREA. IS THAT THE POINT OF THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT? THE INDU, THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVER THE DISTRICT IS ENCOURAGING INDUSTRIAL WITHIN THAT ONE MILE AREA? YES. OKAY. BUT IT DOES NOT IMPACT THOSE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE OPEN SPACE, LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE, AND OTHER PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES. IT DOESN'T IMPACT THEM. SO, SO USING THAT SPECIFIC EXAMPLE MM-HMM. , YOU KNOW, LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE, THEY OWN THEIR LAND. MM-HMM. , UH, YOU'RE NOT GONNA MAKE THEM BECOME INDUSTRIAL? NO, NO. WE CAN'T MAKE ANYBODY BECOME INDUSTRIAL. THE INTENT HERE IS NOT TO MAKE SOMEBODY INDUSTRIAL. THE INTENT HERE IS YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR BOUNDARY WHERE WE ARE LIMITING ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY. OTHER THAN THAT, FOLKS THAT HAVE THE ZONING THAT'S APPLIED TO THEIR PROPERTY CURRENTLY CAN CONTINUE TO UTILIZE THE, THE, THE PROPERTY FOR EITHER THE ZONING THAT THEY HAVE CURRENTLY OR THE, THE RESIDENTIAL USE IF THEY HAPPEN TO HAVE A RESIDENTIAL USE ON THE PROPERTY NOW. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. ALRIGHT. DO WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER CHASE AVAILABLE? YES. ALRIGHT. COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS, UM, JUST INTERESTED IN, UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER I COD IDENTIFIED AREAS THAT THE CITY IS INTERESTED IN APPLYING THIS TO? UM, YOU KNOW, AS COMMENTERS AND, AND OTHER PEOPLE HAVE MENTIONED, WE HAVE PLENTY OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ALL OVER THE CITY. SO WHY SPECIFICALLY ARE WE JUST FOCUSING ON THE TOYOTA PLANT? IS THERE PLANS TO USE THIS OTHER PLACES JUST LIKE TOD? AND IF SO, WHAT ARE THOSE IDENTIFIED PLACES? THERE ARE NO OTHER IDENTIFIED PLACES CURRENTLY. COMMISSIONER, SO WHY IS THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY THE FOCUS FIRST MM-HMM. WHEN WE HAVE OTHER HEAVIER, HIGHER INDUSTRIAL PLACES BECAUSE THIS, THE, THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR AREA WAS DISCUSSED AS PART OF THE, THE PLANNING PROCESS WITHIN THE TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN. AS PART OF THAT PROCESS STARTING IN 2019, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NEED FOR APPROPRIATE, UH, TRANSITIONS AND, AND, UH, TRANSITIONS AWAY FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES, NOT NECESSARILY JUST SPECIFICALLY THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A PROPERTY THAT'S ZONED MI TWO. AND SO FROM AN MI TWO ZONE PIECE OF PROPERTY, THE CONCERN WAS ARE THE LAND USE INTENSITIES APPROPRIATE ADJACENT TO, TO THAT SITE? AND SO THROUGH THAT DISCUSSION, IT WAS ULTIMATELY DETERMINED THAT, LOOK, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT APPROPRIATE LAND USE TRANSITIONS. LET'S LOOK AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPPING IN THE AREA TO DETERMINE WHERE THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, THE, UH, COMMERCIAL AND EMPLOYMENT FLEX MIXED USE AND SO FORTH WOULD BE UTILIZED. AND SO IT WAS THROUGH THE, THE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS WHERE THIS CONVERSATION FIRST STARTED. OKAY. THANK YOU. I, UM, I, UM, AS SOMEBODY WHO'S LIVED ON A BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL TESTING SITE, I UNDERSTAND SEPARATING HEAVY INDUSTRIAL FROM HOUSING I I, AND EVEN SOMETIMES AGAINST PUBLIC OPPOSITION, IT'S IMPORTANT TO, TO HAVE THOSE SAFETY MEASURES PUT IN PLACE. BUT MY CONCERN IS WHEN PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEIR LAND USES ARE BEING TAKEN AWAY OR THE RIGHTS ARE BEING STRIPPED OR THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT TELLS ME THAT, AND I'M GLAD YOU ARE TAKING THE 90 DAYS, BUT IT MIGHT TAKE LONGER THAN 90 DAYS BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF MISINFORMATION AND THEY HAVE NOT HAD THE TIME TO DIGEST WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THEM AND HOW IT CAN HELP THEM. AND THEY NEED THAT PROOF. THEY NEED TO SEE THE DATA THAT SHOWS THEM WHY WE'RE SAYING THAT THIS IS A GOOD IDEA FOR THEIR COMMUNITY. MM-HMM. . UM, SO THANK YOU FOR, FOR REQUESTING THE CONTINUANCE FOR 90 DAYS. I PERSONALLY BELIEVE IT MIGHT TAKE LONGER THAN THAT WITH THE EXAMPLE OF LIKE THE TOD OVERLAY, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT HAS A TASK FORCE. THERE'S COMMUNITY INPUT, THERE'S STAKEHOLDERS. I JUST, I DON'T SEE THIS AS HAVING THE SAME AMOUNT OF, UM, [03:50:03] DATA AND, UM, INPUT FROM CITY TWO RESIDENTS SO THAT THEY CAN DIGEST THAT DATA. I THINK WE AS A COLLECTIVE, WE, UM, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PEOPLE, UM, STAKEHOLDERS, RESIDENTS, WE CAN ALL DO A BETTER JOB OF UNDERSTANDING WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT AND UNDERSTANDING THE NEED FOR A SEPARATION OF HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, BUT WHAT IT ALSO MEANS FOR THESE RESIDENTS INDIVIDUALLY. SO I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE, THE 90 DAYS AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. UM, BUT I, I, I THINK IT, IT POSSIBLY MIGHT NEED MORE THAN THAT. AND COMMISSIONER, IF I CAN JUST COMMENT ON THAT, UM, IF IT TAKES LONGER THAN 90 DAYS, WE WERE HAPPY TO, TO WORK WITH WHATEVER TIMELINE IS MOST APPROPRIATE TO MAKE SURE THAT FOLKS FEEL THAT AT THE VERY LEAST THEY HAVE BEEN HEARD. WE MAY NOT ALL NECESSARILY AGREE AT THE END OF THE DAY, BUT SO THAT FOLKS ARE HEARD AND THAT THE INFORMATION HAS BEEN, THE CORRECT INFORMATION HAS BEEN PLACED OUT THERE. YES MA'AM. I FEEL LIKE I'M LOOKING AT THE SCREEN, NOT . IS THAT ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER CHASE? OKAY. I THINK THAT'S A YES. RIGHT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, BACK TO, UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT FOR QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER BARTOS, WHO ARE YOU GONNA SAY? YOU'RE GONNA ASK QUESTIONS NEXT? NOT MODERATING THIS. UH, UM, I JUST WANTED TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR ON SOMETHING. IN EVERY ZONING APPLICATION THERE IS AN APPLICANT. SO WHO IS THE APPLICANT ON THIS APPLICATION? IS IT TOYOTA OR THE CITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES? THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS THE APPLICANT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SECOND QUESTION, WHO CAME UP WITH THE ONE, TWO, AND THREE MILES? WHY, WHY ARE ALL THE SOUND WE HAD THREE OPTIONS. WHO CAME UP WITH THAT? WELL, THE, THE OPTION THAT HAS BEEN ADVERTISED AND IS PART OF THIS CASE IS THE OPTION THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN, WHICH IS THE ZONE A AND ZONE B UH, INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT, UH, WITH THE ONE MILE BEING THE INDUS, THE AREA THAT IS INDUSTRIAL ONLY AND WITHIN THE TWO MILES BEING INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL. SO THAT IS, THAT IS THE OPTION THAT IS BEFORE THIS COM, THIS COMMISSION. UM, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF, UH, COMMENTS ON THE SIDE. UM, I I I THINK WE MAY BE GOING FOR SIX MORE MONTHS ON THIS AND WE WILL, YOU KNOW, TO ME, WE'RE, WE'RE STILL GONNA BE TALKING. I THINK THERE'S A LOT MORE, UH, ISSUES AT, AT HAND HERE THAT A LOT OF THE COMMISSIONERS DON'T, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW. UH, I WANTED TO EXPLAIN SOMETHING FIRST, THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU FOR BEING HERE AS TAXPAYERS AND CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO. SECOND THING I WANTED TO SAY, UM, WE ARE, WE AS A COMMISSION ARE APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO WE ARE NOT THE FINAL DECISION. SO WHETHER WE VOTE THIS DOWN OR UP, UH, THE, THIS WHOLE OVERLAY ISSUE, THE FINAL DECISION MAKER WOULD BE THE 11 MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL. AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT VERY, VERY WELL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER . COMMISSIONER LUM, COMMISSIONER NINO, YOU MADE MENTION THAT YOU ARE NOT LOOKING TO MAKE RESIDENTIAL, UM, PROPERTIES INDUSTRIAL NOT, NOT TRYING TO, TO CHANGE THINGS. IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. THIS HAS NOT CHANGED THE BASE ZONING OF ANY PROPERTY. SO THEN IN SOMEONE WHO HAS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, HOW MANY GENERATIONS OF WILL THEY WILL BE, WILL THEY BE ABLE TO BEQUEATH THEIR LAND WITHOUT IT DEFAULTING TO AN INDUSTRIAL, UM, ZONING? THAT, THAT THAT THE BASE ZONING OF EVERY PROPERTY REMAINS EXACTLY THE SAME AND ZONING RUNS WITH THE LAND, NOT WITH OWNERSHIP. OKAY. SO THEN IF THEY GIVE IT TO THEIR KIDS AND THEN THEIR KIDS TO, TO THE COMMENT OF ONE OF THE, THE SPEAKERS THEY WANTED TO GIVE IT OR BE ABLE TO, TO CREATE GENERATIONAL WEALTH TO THEIR CHILDREN, THAT WILL NOT BE AFFECTED AT ALL. THE ZONING WILL RUN WITH THE LAND AND WE ARE NOT CHANGING THE BASE ZONE OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND WITH THAT, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT WITH THEIR PROPERTY. THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO WITHIN THE ZONING THAT THEY HAVE. SO LET'S JUST SAY, I MEAN, I'LL GIVE IT, FOR INSTANCE, LET'S JUST SAY SOMEBODY HAS AN MI ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MI ONE PIECE OF PROPERTIES IN THE, WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES. UM, SOMEONE HAS AN MI ONE PIECE, UH, ZONE PIECE OF PROPERTY. IF THIS WERE TO GET THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL AND IT WERE TO BE APPROVED, IT WOULD BE MI ONE ICOD DASH ONE. THAT MEANS THAT THEY HAVE AN MI ONE ZONE PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THEY CAN DO ANYTHING THAT IS PERMISSIBLE IN THE UDC UNDER THE MI ONE ZONING DISTRICT. OKAY. SECOND QUESTION IS, UM, THE PRESERVE RESIDENTIAL USE. SO IF SOMEONE OWNS A PIECE OF PROPERTY BUT HASN'T DEVELOPED IT YET, THEY WILL HAVE A TIME PERIOD TO WHICH THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO, TO COME UP WITH A PLAN, SUBMIT A PLAN, AND UM, BEGIN DEVELOPMENT WITH THAT. IS THAT RIGHT? TO, TO INFORM THE CITY THAT THEY DO HAVE A PLAN THAT IN PLACE THAT THEY MAY HAVE SOME SORT OF A PERMIT, EVEN NOT AN OLD OUTSTANDING PERMIT THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE [03:55:01] THAT IS, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN TRYING TO WORK ON DEVELOPING A PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO DO THAT. SO IF THEY WERE JUST TO, TO HOLD ONTO AN UNDEVELOPED PIECE OF PROPERTY AT INFINITUM, WILL THEY BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH THE, WITH THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL, UM, ZONING OR WILL THAT DEFAULT TO AN INDUSTRIAL IF IF THEY THERE, THERE IS NO, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A DEFAULT TO ANOTHER ZONING DISTRICT. IT'S ALWAYS THE ZONING THAT YOU HAVE ON THE GROUND TODAY, THE BASE ZONING IS NOT GONNA CHANGE. IT WOULD HAVE THE OVERLAY DISTRICT ON IT, YES. BUT THE BASE ZONING WOULD NOT CHANGE AND YOU ARE ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT PROPERTY FOR THE ZONING THAT IT HAS TODAY. FAIR ENOUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU. ONE LAST QUESTION IF I MAY. UM, YOU TALKED ABOUT, UH, PROTECTION, INDUSTRIAL PROTECTION, UH, FOR THE CITIZENS AROUND THAT AREA, YOU KNOW, WATER, AIR, THAT SORT OF THING. UM, DO WE, ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT SOME SORT OF ISSUE IN TERMS OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA? AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, DO WE INCORPORATE THIS OVERLAY ON ALL INDUSTRIAL AREAS, UM, SOUTH OF TOWN, SOME OF THE REFINERIES OR SOME OF THE STORAGE TANKS, THAT SORT OF THING? SO, FIR FIRST TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THE PROPOSAL IS NOT TO PLACE AN INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT, UH, ON ANY OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY. THIS IS THE ONLY PIECE OF PROPERTY, UH, AND THIS IS THE ONLY BOUNDARY THAT HAS BEEN ADVERTISED AND POSTED AND IS IS SUBJECT OF A, OF THE REZONING OF A REZONING. UM, SO NO, THERE, THERE IS NO OTHER LOCATION WHERE WE ARE EITHER CURRENTLY OR PROPOSING TO ESTABLISH AN, AN INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVER THE DISTRICT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT, NEXT. COMMISSIONER WHITSON. UM, JUST TO START FOLLOW UP, SORRY, JUST TO START TO FOLLOW UP WITH HIM. UH, TALKED ABOUT THE PRESERVATION OF RIGHTS. YOU'RE SAYING JUST YOU COULD HAVE AN OLD PERMIT AND YOU'D HANG ON TO IT AND IF YOU FIVE, 10 YEARS FROM NOW, YOU COULD PULL THAT OLD PERMIT UP AND BE ABLE TO DO THAT. UH, WHAT I READ IS THAT YOU HAVE TO FILE A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITHIN TWO YEARS OR FIVE YEARS, AND AT THE END OF FIVE YEARS, IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SOMETHING ABOUT IT, YOU LOSE IT. IS THAT CORRECT? IF JUST AS IT STATES ON THE SCREEN, IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU'RE UN PLATTED UNDEVELOPED WITH EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING, SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING, THE USE HAS TO BE A, A PERMISSIBLE USE FOR THE PIECE OF PROPERTY, UM, AS LONG AS YOU REGISTER IT BY DECEMBER 31ST, 2024. ALTHOUGH THAT COULD BE MODIFIED GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN EXTENDED ENGAGEMENT PERIOD, UM, THAT YOU'LL HAVE TWO YEARS TO SUBMIT SOME SORT OF A PLAT, AN MDP, AND YOU HAVE FIVE YEARS TO DEVELOP THE PROJECT AND OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SO IF I DO THAT, BUT I'M GOING TO, DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS TO DO AN MDP? THE, IT'S ACCORDING TO THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE. IT DEPENDS ON THE PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT DEPENDS ON THE SIZE. I'M, I'M ABOUT HIRING ENGINEERS, ATTORNEYS, ALL THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. YOU CAN SPEND 20, $30,000, UH, YOU'RE GONNA PUT THAT ON ALL THESE PEOPLE TO HAVE TO SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY. AND THEN IF THEY DON'T DEVELOP WITHIN FIVE YEARS, THEY LOSE IT. SO THEY'VE JUST WASTED THEIR MONEY. IS THAT IF THEY, IF THEY ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP A COMMISSIONER, WOULD THAT WE CAN, WE CAN CHIME IN ON THAT. OKAY, GOOD. SO A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS TRIGGERED WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO PLAT MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY IN PHASES. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE DOING MULTIPLE PHASES, 10 PHASES, UM, ONCE THAT IS APPROVED, IT'S REALLY A, A PROCESS TO GET THAT MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED. AND YES, THERE ARE ENGINEERING COSTS, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE. THE COSTS FOR OUR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, FOR PROCESSING ON OUR SIDE IS $500. UM, AND THEN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN ITSELF DOES HAVE A VALIDITY TIED TO IT ONCE IT'S APPROVED, WHICH IS EVERY FIVE YEARS. I, I ALSO WANT TO CHIME IN THAT NOT ICO IS IN PLACE. THAT PROCESS IS STILL REQUIRED ANYWAY, IF YOU FILE A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TO PRESERVE, YOU'RE REQUIRED, YOU WANT TO DEVELOP. YEAH, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'VE, I'VE TALKED TO ENGINEERS AND DEVELOPERS AND THEY SAID IT'S, YOU KNOW, 20, $30,000 TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. SO UNTIL YOU'RE READY TO DEVELOP, THERE'S NO POINT IN DOING IT. BUT HERE IT'S SOUNDING LIKE WITH, IF THEY DON'T FILE AND RECORD SOMETHING AFTER A FEW YEARS, THEY'RE GONNA, ANYTHING BE SUBJECT TO THEIR NON-CONFORMING USE THAT WILL BE IN EXISTENCE WHEN THIS IOG GETS LAID ON 'EM. CORRECT. ANYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY. SO IF ANYONE WANTS TO CHOOSE TO COME IN AND DEVELOP TODAY, THEY'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO SO. THIS IS IDENTIFYING A TIMELINE. IT PROVIDES THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AN A CERTAINTY IN THE PROCESS ON WHAT TO EXPECT IN THE FUTURE. IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED. YOU'VE, ALL OF THIS LAND THAT EXISTS IS ALREADY ZONED. THERE IS NOT ANY LAND THAT IS NOT ZONED, THAT'S IN THE CITY LIMITS. SO MY QUESTION RELATING TO THAT [04:00:02] IS WHY HAVE YOU TAKEN LINES OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS INTO COUNTY LAND THAT'S OUT OF CITY LIMITS. YOU SHOULD NOT BE TAKING IT INTO THE COUNTY. IF ANYTHING, IT SHOULD BE FOLLOWING THE CITY LIMIT LINES. THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVER THE DISTRICT, UH, ONLY APPLIES TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY. AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE, IT SHOULDN'T SHOW ON HERE THAT FOR THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN THE COUNTY, THAT IT APPEARS AS THOUGH IT WOULD APPLY. AND THE POINT HERE WAS JUST TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THIS IS A ONE MILE AND TWO MILE AREA, BUT IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY SAY THAT THIS IS THE AREA THAT WOULD BE ZONED. WELL, AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO CANNOT ZONE IN THE COUNTY. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT Y'ALL HAD FIVE YEARS TO FIGURE THIS OUT. YOU SAID YOU STARTED IN 2019, AND HERE WE ARE, AND ALL YOU'VE DONE IS SOME SIMPLE LINES. YOU'VE TAKEN 'EM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, IT APPEARS, AND THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE 2019, UH, ANNEXATION DOCUMENTS THAT TALKS ABOUT THE CITY CAN ANNEX LAND THAT'S IN AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WITHOUT PERMISSION. NOW, I, THERE MAY BE LOTS OF LEGAL QUESTIONS OVER THAT, BUT I'VE READ THAT LANGUAGE AND IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS A CAPTURE OF THAT. IN THE FUTURE, YOU COULD SAY THIS IS INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, WE'RE ANNEXING YOU. THIS ISN'T AN INDUSTRIAL, THERE IS NO INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ESTABLISHED. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UH, THE LAWS RELATED TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND THERE'S AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT IN THAT, IN THAT PARTICULAR SECTION OF STATE LAW, WE ARE NOT ESTABLISHING AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT HERE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COLLOQUIALLY. THERE IS A LARGE NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL USES OUT HERE. IT'S ESTABLISHING AS GENERALLY SPEAKING, AN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, JUST LIKE A ZONING DISTRICT, AT A MINIMUM, Y'ALL SHOULD PULL LINES OUTSIDE AWAY FROM ANY COUNTY LAND. SO THERE'S NOT CONFUSION AT A BARE MINIMUM, IF YOUR SUGGESTION IS TO CREATE AN UPDATED MAP THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT PROPERTIES WITHIN THE COUNTY ARE NOT DISPLAYED, WE CAN WORK WITH THAT. YOU'VE, YOU'VE STATED THAT YOU'RE PROTECTING FUTURE RESIDENTS AND ET CETERA, AND RESIDENTIAL FROM INDUSTRIAL. SO MY QUESTION IS WHETHER FOR YOU OR FOR OTHERS, IS WHY DID Y'ALL ALLOW NAVISTAR TO DEVELOP A FACILITY RIGHT NEXT TO MISSION DE LAGO? I DON'T KNOW WHERE NAVISTAR IS ON THE MAP AND I I REALLY CAN'T SPEAK TO NAVISTAR. WE'RE TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY. YOU'RE IN THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND YOU HAVE IN PLANNING, YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHERE NAVISTAR IS NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR MAP RIGHT HERE, WHERE, WHERE I'M LOOKING. NO, I KNOW THAT IT'S ALONG THE EDGE, BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT I'M MAKING REFERENCE TO THE I ICON AS IT'S DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN. UH, WE'VE ALSO, UH, INDICATED THAT YOU'VE SAID THAT IN A RECENT INTERVIEW YOU SAID YOU DENIED THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT HAVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH IOD INSTEAD EXPLAINING I COD CAME THE TEXAS A AND M SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL CENTER PLAN DEVELOPED IN 2019. AND WE HEARD, I THINK MR. NICHOLAS SPEAK TO THAT TOO A LITTLE BIT. UM, SPECIFICALLY WHAT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT, THAT IF YOU GO BACK TO THE, UH, TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL CENTER PLAN FOR THE VERY FIRST MEETING THAT WAS HELD IN JANUARY OF 2019, UH, THE PLANNING TEAM MEET MEETING, IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THERE THAT THEY NEED TO DEAL WITH THE THREE MILE RADIUS AGREEMENT WITH TOYOTA, UH, IN FEBRUARY OF 2019. IT SAYS CHALLENGES TOYOTA DEVELOPMENT RADIUS MAY OF 2019 LIMITATIONS DUE TO TOYOTA AGAIN, MAY OF 2019 LIMITATIONS TO BE UNDERSTOOD. TOYOTA BUFFERING. AND THEN IN JUNE SAYS, THE TEAM ALSO DISCUSSED THE IMPACT AND ALLOWABLE USES IN PROXIMITY TO THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT TEAM IS AWARE THAT PROPER LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ARE ESSENTIAL IN PROVIDING AN ADEQUATE BUFFER WITH APPROPRIATE USES IN PROXIMITY TO TOYOTA PLANT. MM-HMM, . SO RIGHT NOW, THE TEXAS A M LAND PLAN, LIKE HE MENTIONED, IS NOT APPROVED. SO YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING'S BASED OFF OF THAT. SO THE LOGICAL OPTION IS IT FALLS BACK TO THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT. NO. WHICH TALKS ABOUT ALL OF THAT. NO, SIR. BECAUSE WE, WE CAN, WE'RE REFERENCING A DRAFT PLAN THAT IS GOING THROUGH A PROCESS RIGHT NOW. AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP THAT IS PROPOSED IS ONE THAT IS, THAT IS A SOUND PLAN THAT HAS BEEN LOOKED AT THROUGH A COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS. AND I THINK THAT THAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WAS, WAS GOOD AND IT WAS SOUND AND THEY MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION. I, I HEAR THAT. SO YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE LOOKING, YOU'RE LOOKING TO THE TEXAS A MAM LAND PLAN AND IT SAYS VERY CLEARLY HERE IN THOSE EARLY MEETINGS THAT IT'S COMING FROM [04:05:01] THE AGREEMENT WITH TOYOTA. SO THAT NO, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT. I THINK AS I, AS I RECALL, I CAN SHOW YOU THE LINK, AS I RECALL, IT TALKS VERY SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE NEED FOR TRANSITIONAL LAND USE AND FUTURE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY AROUND THAT AREA, YOUR OWN LAND PLAN THAT SHOW WHERE, UH, THAT'S THERE. OKAY. SO GOING BACK AND I HAVE QUESTION OVER HERE, AND THIS GOES BACK TO THIS DOCUMENT THAT I'VE PROVIDED YOU, MELISSA, UH, ABOUT THE CCR. UM, MY QUESTION IS, IT SAID SPECIFICALLY THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE NOTIFIED AND THAT THERE WAS A STAFF POLICY THAT WHENEVER A ZONING CASE OCCURRED WITHIN THREE MILES OF TOYOTA WITHIN THAT AREA OF TOWN, THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE NOTIFIED. AND SPECIFICALLY THAT THERE WOULD BE A STATEMENT THAT SAYS THIS ZONING CODE CASE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT. THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT THEY HAD VIOLATED THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT PREVIOUSLY AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT AGAIN. SO MY QUESTION IS, DO Y'ALL STILL HAVE THAT POLICY IN PLACE TO NOTIFY COUNSEL BY PUTTING THAT STATEMENT ON EVERY ZONING CASE THAT GOES TO COUNCIL? THE, WELL, UH, JUST REAL QUICK, THIS IS JOSEPH HARNEY WITH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. JUST AS BACKGROUND, THE CCR IS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL CONSIDERATION REQUESTS, THOSE ARE BASICALLY HOW TO, TO START A CONVERSATION ON SOMETHING. SO THERE'S NOTHING THAT, UM, OBLIGATES, IT'S NOT AN ORDINANCE, NOT A RESOLUTION, ANYTHING THAT COMPELS, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, AN ACTION. UM, SO AS A LITTLE BACKGROUND, JUST, JUST TO KIND OF CLARIFY, IT'S NOTHING THAT'S, THAT'S MANDATED. I UNDERST THAT, BUT IN APRIL THERE, I THINK YOUR MICROPHONE TURNED OFF, I'M SORRY, IN APRIL, APRIL 2ND, 2008, CITY COUNCIL GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETING STAFF PRESENT INCLUDED ERIC WALSH, BEN GOEL, PEOPLE WHO ARE STILL INVOLVED, INCLUDED THE MAYOR MARY ALICE CISNEROS, UH, DISTRICT SIX, COUNCILMAN COUNCILWOMAN DISTRICT SEVEN, JOHN CLAMP, DISTRICT 10, DISTRICT THREE AND DISTRICT EIGHT. AND THEY SPECIFICALLY, UH, THERE IT SAID, CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST BY COUNCIL MEMBER PHILLIP CORTEZ REQUESTING TO DIRECT STAFF TO INFORM CITY COUNCIL DURING THE PROCESS OF ZONING. WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONING IS CON CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF THE STARBRITE AGREEMENT NOTIFICATION WOULD TAKE PLACE AT THE TIME OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE CITY COUNCIL PRESENTED BY ROD SANCHEZ, DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT STAFF RESPONSE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ESTABLISHED A POLICY TO ENSURE THAT STAFF REPORTS TO CITY COUNCIL INDICATE IF THE SUBJECT SIDE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF TOYOTA. THE SUMMARY PORTION OF THE ZONING REPORT WILL INCLUDE THE STATEMENT. THIS ZONING CODE CASE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE TOYOTA MANUFACTURING PLANT. SO THEY MADE A STAFF POLICY TO THAT EFFECT. AND SO I GUESS I HAVE A TWO PART QUESTION. ARE Y'ALL STILL IMPLEMENTING THAT? AND WHAT'S HAPPENED TO ALL THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T KNOW THAT TOYOTA WAS GOING TO BE ANOTHER LAYER OF APPROVAL IN ADDITION TO ZONING COMMISSION, PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL? SO I'M NOT AWARE OF A POLICY THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED AS A REQUIREMENT. I AS A REQUIREMENT TO PUT ANY LANGUAGE IN OUR BRIEFING MEMOS. I'VE BEEN OVER THE ZONING TEAM SINCE 2015 AND THAT HAS NEVER BEEN A DIRECTION THAT I HAVE BEEN GIVEN. AND WE ANALYZE EVERY SINGLE ZONING APPLICATION AS WE DO EVERY SINGLE ONE THAT COMES THROUGH BASED OFF OF ZONING PRINCIPLES. OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE JUST BASED OFF OF ZONING PRINCIPLES. AND IT IS THAT IT IS A RECOMMENDATION. THIS BODY IS A RECOMMENDING BODY THAT CAN PROVIDE THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE SAYING SINCE YOU'VE BEEN HERE, IT'S NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED, BUT APPARENTLY IT MUST HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BEFORE AND PRACTICED. WHAT JOSEPH HARNEY MENTIONED IS THAT THE CCR PROCESS, IT BEGINS THE DISCUSSION. SO THERE WAS SOMETHING ALONG THE WAY THAT THIS POLICY WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED. AND AS YOU STATED, IT'S A POLICY, IT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. IF IT WOULD'VE GONE THROUGH THE FULL PROCESS AND BEEN ADOPTED BY COUNCIL, THEN IT WOULD'VE BEEN DIRECTION TO STAFF EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER WAS PRESENT AT, AT THIS CITY COUNCIL GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE. MEETING GOVERNANCE IS NOT THE FINAL DECISION, BUT THEY WERE ALL PRESENT. GOVERNANCE IS NOT A FINAL DECISION. ALL ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT WE HEAR FROM PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY IS THAT THERE IS ANOTHER LAYER AND IT THINGS GET PULLED AT TIMES AND IT HAPPENS TO ALL CO COINCIDE WITH THE, THIS [04:10:01] DOESN'T HAPPEN IN OTHER PARTS OF TOWN. MR. CHAIR, MAY I RESPOND PLEASE? SUSAN GWEN, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. I'D LIKE TO BE VERY CLEAR. I'M NOT SURE I EVER SAW THIS CCR UNTIL TODAY THAT IT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, BUT IF EVERYONE READS IT, IT IS TALKING ABOUT A NOTIFICATION. COUNCILMAN CORTEZ SAYS, JUST LET US KNOW. LET US KNOW IF IT'S NEAR TOYOTA. BACK TO LAND USE PRINCIPLES. IT IS A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT PLACING RESIDENTIAL NEAR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. THIS WAS NOT AN ADOPTED POLICY BY COUNCIL. GOVERNANCE IS NOT THE FULL COUNCIL. IT WAS A DISCUSSION AND THAT WAS WHAT A CCR DOES IS BRINGS UP A TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION. IT WAS NOT AN ADOPTED POLICY BY CITY COUNCIL AND TOYOTA IS NOT A DECISION MAKER IN ANY OF THE CITY'S ZONING CASES. WELL, SUSAN, RIGHT HERE IT SAYS MR. SANCHEZ REPORTED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS ESTABLISHED A POLICY TO ENSURE STAFF REPORTS TO CITY COUNCIL TO INDICATE IF THE SUBJECT SITE IS WITHIN THREE MILES OF TOYOTA. AND I READ THAT TODAY AND I WOULD AGAIN SAY IT IS ALL ABOUT NOTIFICATION. COUNSEL, IT'S PROPERTY BEING ZONED IS WITHIN THREE MILES. IT'S A NOTIFICATION. IT IS NOT AN APPROVAL BY TOYOTA OR ANYONE ELSE. IT IS SIMPLY A REQUEST. AND THAT'S CCR TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT NOTIFICATION COUNSEL. WE WANNA KNOW THAT'S THE EXTENT OF THAT. OKAY. I'LL, UH, MOVE, LET SOMEBODY ELSE ASK A FEW QUESTIONS. ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. UM, I AM GONNA FOLLOW UP ON A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT OTHER COMMISSIONERS RAISED, UM, FOR ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION AND THEN HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS OF MY OWN. UH, SO COMMISSIONER KELLUM ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT, UH, PRESERVING EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, WITH THE BASE ZONING REMAINING THE SAME. I SEE HERE ON THE SLIDE THAT WE SEE THAT THERE IS A SPECIFIC RESTRICTION FOR EXISTING RESIDENCES THAT WHILE THEY MAY BE REPAIRED IN ENLARGED, NO ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS ARE PERMITTED AND THEY MAY NOT BE SUBDIVIDED. UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE ANSWER FOR ME. IF YOU CURRENTLY HAVE AN R SIX PROPERTY, FOR EXAMPLE, DO YOU BY RIGHT. HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE AN A DU ON YOUR PROPERTY IF YOU ARE A RESIDENT ON THE PROPERTY. SO TODAY, YES, YOU CAN. IF THEY LIVE, WOULD THAT BE PERMITTED? SHOULD THIS BE ADOPTED? IF THEY, I'M SORRY, I I SPECIFICALLY STATED IF THEY WERE A RESIDENT ON THE PROPERTY. THAT'S CORRECT. SO IF SOMEONE IN THIS AREA HAS AN R SIX, THAT RIGHT WOULD BE REMOVED WITH THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT BEING APPROVED AND IN PLACE? NO. OKAY. THEN WHY HERE? DOES IT SAY NO ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS? NO ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES? NOT, NOT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. ADDITIONAL, WHAT THAT SAYS IS MAY THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDE THE, AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE MAY BE REPAIRED OR ENLARGED AND NO ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS, MEANING NO ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, UH, MAY BE ESTABLISHED AND MAY NOT, THERE MAY NOT BE SUBDIVISION, UH, OCCURRING ON A PIECE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. SO AS, BUT AN A DU IS IS A SLIDE THAT IS AN EXAMPLE. I'M NOT GONNA SAY IT'S WHAT'S THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IN THE IPAD, BUT JUST THAT RIGHT THERE. MM-HMM. , WHICH WOULD IN FACT BE A DIMINISHMENT OF VALUE AND A DIMINISHMENT OF THE RIGHT TO USE THE PROPERTY AS YOU WISH, WHICH COULD LOOK LIKE MANY THINGS, WHETHER YOU'RE GETTING ADDITIONAL INCOME FROM AN STR, WHETHER YOU'RE HAVING A COLLEGE STUDENT THAT, UH, LIVES AT HOME LIVE ON THE PROPERTY, WHETHER YOU'RE TAKING CARE OF YOUR MOTHER-IN-LAW, IT NEEDS TO, THAT SPECIFICALLY IF YOU'RE WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU THIS 90 DAYS TO CONTINUE, IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MUST BE FORMALLY CODIFIED IN THE LANGUAGE IN ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL USE THAT IS GOING TO BE RESTRICTED. BECAUSE WHILE YOU'RE SAYING THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT, IT IS CLEAR FROM JUST THIS EXAMPLE ALONE, THAT SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION, THERE WILL BE AN IMPACT ON HOW PROPERTY OWNERS CAN USE THEIR PROPERTY. IT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED IF WE GIVE YOU THIS CONTINUANCE. UNDERSTOOD. SO I WANNA MAKE THAT POINT CLEAR. AND ANY OTHER SPEC SPECIFIC RESTRICTIONS THAT WILL EMERGE AND NEGATIVELY IMPACT A PROPERTY OWNER ALSO SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED IN ANY LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO APPROVE. SO MOVING ON FROM THAT, SUPPOSE, UM, WITH THIS EXISTING MAP, UH, YOU ARE GOING TO, UH, HAVE, HAVE A PROPERTY OWNER COME FORWARD AFTER THE I COD, SUPPOSEDLY, THEORETICALLY IS ADOPTED WHO, UH, IS IN A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT BISECTS THE CITY LIMITS, BUT ALSO THE ETJ. WE'VE HAD AT LEAST TWO CASES DURING MY TIME ON ZONING COMMISSION IN DISTRICT TWO WHERE THE ZONING REQUEST WAS FOR A PIECE, A PARCEL OF LAND THAT HAD SOME, UH, ACREAGE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND SOME ACREAGE IN THE COUNTY. HOW WOULD THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION REFLECT, BE DEVELOPED OR REFLECT THIS PROPOSED OVERLAY DISTRICT? IN THAT SITUATION? THE OVERLAY DISTRICT CAN ONLY APPLY FOR THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY [04:15:01] THAT IS IN THE CITY LIMITS. SO IF YOU EVEN HAD, SAY, A 40 ACRE PARCEL THAT HAD A PORTION IN THE COUNTY AND A PORTION, UH, IN THE CITY MM-HMM, , AND SOMEONE WANTED TO DEVELOP THE PARCEL AS A WHOLE BECAUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON THE DEED SAYS THAT THESE 40 ACRES ARE A PARCEL, BUT THE CITY LIMITS DIVIDE IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST REZONING. THAT IS DIFFERENT FOR DIFFERENT PORTIONS OF THE PARCEL BASED ON THIS. SO THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS CAN DEVELOP ACCORDING TO THE ZONING THAT IS ON THE GROUND, CURRENT WHATEVER, HYPOTHETICALLY, WHATEVER'S ON THE GROUND, THE PORTION THAT IS WITHIN THE COUNTY, THEY CAN DEVELOP WHAT THEY WANNA DEVELOP. UM, ZONING RESTRICTIONS DON'T APPLY FOR PROPERTIES IN THE COUNTY. HOW WOULD THAT BE IMPACTED WHEN IT COMES TO THE PERMITTING PROCESS OR ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOP DEVELOPMENT? IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY COMMON. THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT SEES THIS PRETTY FREQUENTLY WHERE PROPERTIES ARE WITHIN ONE JURISDICTION AND A PORTION OF IT'S IN ANOTHER JURISDICTION AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S WORKED, WORKED WITH. SO THERE WOULD BE NO AUTOMATIC, UH, REASON WHY SHOULD THAT TYPE OF PARCEL, UM, BE IMPACTED AND COME BEFORE SAY ZONING, UH, THAT THE OVERLAY DISTRICT WOULD NECESSARILY THEN ALSO APPLY. I THINK, AND, AND AGAIN, IT DEPENDS ALSO ON THE SPECIFICS OF THE PROPERTY. IS IT ZONED R SIX? IS IT ZONE, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN DEVELOP ACCORDING TO THE ZONING THAT IS ON THE GROUND. UM, CAN YOU PLEASE EXPAND A LITTLE BIT? UM, THIS IS MOVING TO A DIFFERENT SUBJECT, BUT MM-HMM, , WE JUST NEEDED TO CLARIFY. UNDERSTOOD. DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT THAT CONVERTS INTO CITY PROPERTY, UH, WITH CITY RESTRICTIONS. OKAY. SO YOU'VE TALKED A LOT, UM, IN THIS PROCESS IN MARKETING MATERIALS, WHATEVER, ABOUT THE TEXAS A AND M UH, SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL PLAN MAP. UM, AND YOU ALSO HAVE MENTIONED IN DEVELOPING THIS, UH, OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT YOU WENT TO TO A STAKEHOLDER TOYOTA TO GET FEEDBACK ON APPROPRIATE TRANSITIONAL ZONING. MM-HMM. . UM, COULD YOU PLEASE PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT FOR THE BENEFIT OF, UH, RESIDENTS AND JUST AS A REMINDER TO THE COMMISSIONERS MM-HMM. OF WHAT THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE IN A REGIONAL PLAN. AND SPECIFICALLY SPEAK TO WHAT YOU HAVE DONE SINCE 2019, UH, WITH TEXAS A AND M. I WOULD SPECIFICALLY AS SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN INVOLVED IN MULTIPLE PLANNING PROCESSES LIKE YOU TO TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN ENGAGING, UH, RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS, BUT ALSO THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS SUCH AS, UH, LARGE BUSINESSES, UH, ET CETERA, THAT MEET SEPARATELY FROM THE COMMUNITY WITH PLANNING, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT DOES HAPPEN. SURE. NO, UNDERSTOOD. AND SO THE TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN BEGAN DEVELOPMENT IN 2018 WITH A LOT OF, WITH A LOT OF, UH, BACKGROUND INFORMATION WITH AN EXISTING CONDITIONS ATLAS AND SO FORTH THAT ULTIMATELY STARTED THE PROCESS OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN 2019. IN 2019, WE STARTED THE PLANNING TEAM PROCESS. AND THE PLANNING TEAM REALLY SERVES AS A, A, A STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE PLAN PROCESS. AND WHAT WE DO IS WE REACH OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS, WE REACH OUT TO BUSINESS OWNERS, UH, WE GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF TRYING TO FIND ALL OF THE MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE WITHIN A PARTICULAR AREA. WE REACH OUT TO THEM AND TRY TO GET THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS. UM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL ASK, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, TEXAS A AND M, WE DID ASK TOYOTA. WE ASKED, UH, VARIOUS PROPERTY OWNERS, LAND HERITAGE INSTITUTE, UM, THE, THE, AT THE TIME VERANO LAND GROUP WHO OWNED A LARGE SWATH OF PROPERTY THAT HAD AN MDP ATTACHED TO IT, UM, AND OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IF THEY WOULD PARTICIPATE IN THE PLANNING PROCESS. UM, THOSE THAT RESPONDED, THOSE THAT WERE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE. UM, WE CONDUCTED PLANNING TEAM MEETINGS. WE ACTUALLY CONDUCTED 17 PLANNING TEAM MEETINGS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE, UH, TECH, UH, TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN PROCESS. UH, WE CONDUCTED FOUR COMMUNITY MEETINGS AS PART OF THE PROCESS. UM, AND TOYOTA, JUST FOR YOUR, FOR YOUR REFERENCE, WAS NOT ACTUALLY ONE OF THE PLANNING TEAM MEMBERS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PLAN. UH, THEY ASSIGNED, UH, UH, THEIR OWN REPRESENTATIVES TO, TO GIVE US FEEDBACK AND THEY SAID ALLOW THE COMMUNITY TO, TO CONDUCT THE COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS. WE'D JUST LIKE TO HAVE SOME INPUT WHENEVER, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BEING MADE AND SO FORTH. AND REALLY THAT WAS THE PROCESS. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A DIRECT, NECESSARILY SEAT AT THE TABLE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR, UH, SHARING THAT. UM, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO, UH, SOME OF THE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY GOING TO BE, UH, OR PROPOSED TO BE PERMITTED WITHIN ZONE B? THE COMMERCIAL USES, THE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE PERMITTED IN ZONE B ARE BASED ON THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT, UH, THAT IS TIED TO A PIECE OF PROPERTY. SO WHAT THEIR, WHATEVER THEIR COMMERCIAL BASE ZONING IS, IF THEY HAVE A COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO, TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY FOR WHATEVER ZONED FOR. SO LET'S SAY FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEBODY HAS A C3 PIECE, UH, ZONE PIECE OF PROPERTY, THEY CAN UTILIZE THAT C3 ZONING WITHIN THAT AREA OF ONE TO TWO MILES. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY, ANY LANGUAGE, UH, WITHIN THE DRAFT, UH, THAT CREATES, UM, OR INCENTIVIZES SPECIFIC TYPES OF COMMERCIAL USES IN ITS ATTEMPT TO [04:20:01] LIMIT ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AS A, YOU KNOW, A GOAL THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED BEING PART OF THIS? UM, THERE ISN'T ANY LANGUAGE THAT SPECIFICALLY IS INTENDED TO ENCOURAGE SPECIFIC TYPES OF COMMERCIAL USES. THEY, AGAIN, THEY CAN, THEY CAN DEVELOP, UH, BASED ON THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT THEY HAVE ON THE, ON THE GROUND AT THE TIME. OKAY. SO THERE'S NO LANGUAGE OR INCENTIVE BUILT INTO THE, UH, DRAFT THAT SPECIFICALLY ENCOURAGES SPECIFIC USES, BUT YOU HAVE STATED THAT PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS IS TO SPECIFICALLY DISCOURAGE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY? CORRECT. BUT, WELL, BECAUSE THE, THE DIS THE DISCOURAGING ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR, WITHIN BOTH ZONES, YES. AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE. BUT IN TERMS OF ENCOURAGING ADDITIONAL, LIKE, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, ENCOURAGING COMMERCIAL USES OR SO FORTH, AGAIN, ALL OF THAT IS BASED ON THE TYPE OF ZONING THAT THEY HAVE ON THE GROUND CURRENTLY WITHIN THAT PARTICULAR ZONE. OKAY. SO THE REASON I ASK THAT QUESTION IS BECAUSE PART OF THE RATIONALE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED FOR THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT BEING PROPOSED IS BECAUSE THERE IS A DESIRE TO OPEN THE SOUTH SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT. MM-HMM. AND YOU'VE SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED, OR STAFF AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS THAT HAVE INVOLVED IN DIFFERENT PIECES OF THE PROCESS HAVE SPECIFICALLY CITED THINGS LIKE MEDICAL USE COMMERCIAL, UH, USES THAT, UH, COMPLIMENT THE GROWTH OF TEXAS AM SAN ANTONIO AND THE UNI UNIVERSITY HEALTH CAMPUS OVER THERE. MM-HMM. . SO WHILE I UNDERSTAND YOU'VE CONFIRMED HOW THE LANGUAGE IS FRAMED, I WOULD SAY THAT AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, WHILE IT DOES RESPECT, UM, IN ZONE B MM-HMM, , THE EXISTING BASED ZONING FOR COMMERCIAL USES, THERE IS NO SPECIFIC, UH, INSTRUCTION OR INCENTIVES IN THIS PROPOSAL THAT ACTUALLY OPEN UP LAND FOR THOSE SPECIFIC TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT. SO I JUST WANT THAT TO BE ON THE RECORD. UM, YES, THAT IS BECAUSE AT THE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE ISN'T OTHERWISE A, A RECOMMENDATION TO CONDUCT A LARGER REZONING TO DETERMINE WHERE APPROPRIATE TYPES OF COMMERCIAL USES SHOULD BE LOCATED. THAT WOULD BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION TO ASK FOR THAT. OKAY. I'M GONNA COMMENT ON NOT LITTLE IN DISCUSSION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR ON THE RECORD. SURE. UM, COULD YOU, UH, PLEASE GIVE AN EXAMPLE? WELL, HERE, LET ME REPHRASE THE QUESTION. UH, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CASES COME BEFORE US, UM, IN THE LAST FOUR WEEK, FOUR, FOUR SESSIONS SINCE WE'VE MM-HMM. , YOU KNOW, OR FOUR WEEKS I GUESS IS PROBABLY BETTER, BETTER TIME, BETTER AFTER TIME, UM, THAT ARE POTENTIALLY IMPACTED, UH, BY THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT. UM, IF THEY HAD NOT ALREADY COME TO REZONING. SO IF THIS BODY PLANNING COMMISSION, ET CETERA, HAS ALREADY MADE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, UM, HOW WILL THEY BE IMPACTED SHOULD THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT BE ADOPTED? THAT RECOMMENDATION HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE. IF YOU CAN WALK THROUGH SORT OF THE STEPS OF THAT PROCESS. THOSE, SOME OF THOSE CASES HAVE ALREADY GONE TO COUNCIL, SOME OF THEM HAVE NOT, BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN THIS THEORETICALLY MIGHT BE ADOPTED, WILL THOSE BE IMPACTED AT ALL? OKAY. SO IF I, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, A CASE HAS COME BEFORE THE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COUNCIL. THEY MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE GONE TO THE CITY COUNCIL PROCESS YET. WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT? AND THAT IS ONCE THEY GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY GET THE FINAL DETERMINATION, WHETHER, IF LET'S JUST SAY THAT IT'S, THAT SOMETHING IS APPROVED, THEN THAT'S COUNCIL'S DISCRETION. THEY HAVE APPROVED THAT ZONING CASE. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE, THEY, THEY HAVE THE ZONING THAT THEY NEED TO CONDUCT THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED, SO IT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY IMPACT THEM AT THAT MOMENT IN TIME. AND IT'S WHEN COUNSEL ADOPTS THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT, SHOULD THEY ADOPT THE OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT IT WOULD ULTIMATELY APPLY ON THE, ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL. UM, IN RESPONDING TO QUESTIONS FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE MENTIONED, UM, DIFFERENT KINDS OF ANALYSIS THAT HAVE BEEN RUN, UH, IN CREATING THIS PROPOSAL. UM, CAN YOU LIST OR CONFIRM OR DENY WHETHER ANY SPECIFIC STUDIES THAT WE MIGHT EXPECT, UM, TO HAVE HAPPENED SUCH AS A TRAFFIC STUDY, SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES? UH, ANY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, UH, HAVE BEEN DONE IN TANDEM WITH, UH, DEVELOPING THIS DRAFT AND PROPOSAL, UH, TO CONFIRM, VERIFY, PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT, UM, THE INTENDED GOALS, UH, BEING ACHIEVED THROUGH THIS. MM-HMM, , UM, THE, THE, THE OUTCOME THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE, THE, THE, THE PRODUCT THAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE RESULT OF WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS. THERE IS NO STUDY THAT HAS BEEN CONDUCTED TO DETERMINE WHERE CERTAIN TYPES OF USE SHOULD GO. NO HYDROLOGY STUDY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? UH, WE DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC SCIENTIFIC STUDIES. I THINK THAT THE, I THINK THAT A SCIENTIFIC STUDY WOULD OFTENTIMES BE A HIGH BAR FOR ANY SORT OF AN OVERLAY DISTRICT TO MEET, UM, THE CITY. THE CITY DOESN'T INITIATE, UH, SPECIFIC STUDIES, UH, FOR OVERLAY DISTRICTS COMMONLY. UH, DID, UH, I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, BUT I JUST WANT IT TO BE ON THE RECORD. UM, WAS THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT, UH, PROPOSED OR INITIATED THROUGH A CCR OR A UDC AMENDMENT PROCESS THROUGH A-C-C-R-U-D-C [04:25:01] AMENDMENT? NO. OKAY. SO, UM, I ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE TYPICALLY WHEN A LARGE AREA REZONING, WHICH WE ARE IN LANGUAGE SEEMING TO EQUATE THIS WITH MM-HMM. , UM, OCCURS. IT'S USUALLY DRIVEN BY A COMMUNITY REQUEST. UM, AND IT IS TO REFLECT WHAT EXISTS ON THE GROUND, UH, TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY OF A NEIGHBORHOOD AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, UM, THAT ALIGNS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES OF THAT COMMUNITY AND THAT DISTRICT, UM, USUALLY IN RESPONSE TO OR IN ACCORD WITH ONGOING REGIONAL PLANNING PROCESS, UM, THAT IS SUPPOSED TO, IT IS STAKEHOLDER DRIVEN. IT REQUIRES COUNCIL SUPPORT. IT IS THE COMMUNITY COMING FORWARD TO SAY, WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LAND USE POLICIES THAT IMPACT US REFLECT WHAT WE HAVE TODAY AND OUR VISION FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMUNITY. AND WE HAVE OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROCESS AND THE REPRESENTATIVES THAT WE HAVE SELECTED, UM, ARE CONTROLLING AND DRIVING THAT PROCESS. UH, SINCE THIS WAS NOT INITIATED BY EITHER A CCR OR UDC AMENDMENT, UM, PROCESS, THIS WAS A DIFFERENT ONE ENTIRELY, WHICH WE'VE BEEN ASKING FOR SOME CLARITY AROUND HOW IT CAME TO BE. UM, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO JUST HAVE THAT IN THE RECORD. UM, IT'S, IT IS IMPOSING ZONING, UM, ON A COMMUNITY RATHER THAN THE COMMUNITY REQUESTING ZONING THAT REFLECTS THEIR LIVED EXPERIENCE AND VISION FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND WELL, AND COMMISSIONER, JUST TO BE THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS. UM, IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY COMMENTS, DON'T REMEMBER SHORT BECAUSE I HAVEN'T ASKED QUESTIONS YET. BUT YOU GO AHEAD AND I'LL, I'LL ASK YOU THAT AGAIN. YOU MAY COVER IT. I MAY COVER IT. ALRIGHT. UM, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS AND I'M TRYING TO, I'M TRYING TO REDUCE THEM. UM, RUDY, YOU MENTIONED, UM, DR. KELLUM COMMISSIONER, WELL, COMMISSIONER KELLUM MENTIONED DR. KELLUM. SAME, UM, ASKED, UM, YOU WERE NOT LOOKING TO CHANGE RE RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND YOU SAID NO, THE BASE ZONING STAYS, CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONER WATSON ASKED, UH, YOU KNOW, OR RECOMMENDED THAT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN, IF THIS EXTRA TIME IS GRANTED THAT ANY RESTRICTIONS BE EXPLICITLY LISTED AND YOU HAD STATED, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE TIMES, UM, THAT THEY CAN DEVELOP ACCORDING TO THE ZONING ON THE GROUND. CORRECT. SO CORRECT. PROVIDE, PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, PROVIDED THAT THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, R SIX, THEY CAN DEVELOP ACCORDING TO THAT, PROVIDED THEY MEET ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS AND SO FORTH. ABSOLUTELY. YOU CONTINUE, YOU CAN CONTINUE TO DEVELOP ACCORDING TO THE ZONING THAT YOU HAVE ON THE GROUND. OKAY. SO SAY I HAVE A R SIX ZONING AND SAY I WANT TO OPEN UP A, UM, AN ASSISTED LIVING IN A CURRENT R SIX ZONING. DO YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR ZONING IN ORDER TO OPEN UP AN ASSISTED LIVING? I BELIEVE THAT, THAT IT'S A PERMITTED USE, PERMITTED PERMIT. IT IS A PERMITTED USE FOR UP TO SIX, UM, YES. MM-HMM. RESIDENTS. YES. YES. UM, IF YOU WANT TO OPEN UP A CHILDCARE FACILITY, SAME THING. IT'S A PERMITTED USE BY RIGHT. IN THE I COD IN, UH, BOTH THE ONE MILE AND THE TWO MILE AREA. WOULD THOSE STILL BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT. WE HAVE LISTED THE SPECIFIC USES THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED. AND AS I, WITHIN THAT LIST, I BELIEVE THAT ASSISTED LIVING AND SO FORTH, ADDITIONAL DENSITY WITHIN SOME OF THOSE PROPERTIES WOULD, WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. OKAY. SO, SO THEY, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE SHORT OR ANYTHING. NO, UNDERSTOOD. UM, THEY REALLY CAN'T DEVELOP ACCORDING TO THE ZONING ON THE GROUND BECAUSE IT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE ZONING ON THE GROUND OF AN R SIX ZONING IN ANOTHER PART OF THE CITY. THEIR R SIX ZONING IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE ARE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS PLACED ON THAT. AND HENCE WHY, WHY I STARTED THAT, THAT PHRASE WITH DEPENDENT ON WHETHER OR NOT IT IS INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY OR INTENSITY ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND SOME OF THESE, IT'S DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH A HYPOTHETICAL IF SOMETIMES WE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW A PROPERTY IS IMPACTED POTENTIALLY BY AN EXCEPTION AND WHAT SOME OF THE SPECIFIC ISSUES ARE. BUT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT A USE AND THE CHANGE OF USE, IT, IT, IF THE USE IS LISTED AS A USE THAT INCREASES RESIDENTIAL INTENSITY ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY, THEN IT, IT WOULD BE LISTED. IT'S, IT'S, IT WOULD NOT BE AN ALLOWABLE USE THEN FOR A PIECE OF PROPERTY. OKAY. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. UM, AND SO I WOULD ECHO WHAT, UM, COMMISSIONER WATSON SAID THAT IN, IN THE FUTURE, YOU, THOSE NEED TO BE MORE EXPLICIT, UM, BECAUSE IT, YOU KNOW, YOU LIST, OH, WELL YOU'RE GRANDFATHERED, BUT YOU HAVE EXCEPTIONS AND EVERYTHING. IT'S LIKE, WELL, YOU HAVE EXCEPTIONS, SORT OF, YOU, YOU HAVE [04:30:01] A, A BUNCH OF EXTRA RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE MM-HMM. ARE ADDING ON. HE HENCE THE REASON WHY DURING THE MAILOUT AND THEN DURING THE COMMUNITY MEETING, WE HANDED A COPY OF THE ICON TO EVERYBODY AND ASKED FOR THEM TO SIT DOWN WITH US AND KIND OF TALK ABOUT HOW IT WOULD RELATE TO THEIR SPECIFIC PROPERTY. YES. BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT CAN BE TECHNICAL, WE UNDERSTAND THAT. YES. YES. AND, BUT I THINK IT'S OVERLY CONFUSING BECAUSE YOU GO IN AND IT SAYS THE FOLLOWING USES ARE PROHIBITED IN IOD ONE ZONE A, AND YOU LIST ALL THESE THINGS MM-HMM. . AND THEN YOU GO ON IT AND THEN IT, AND THEN IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, TO IOD B AND IT'S LIKE, OH, THIS, THIS, THIS. BUT THEN IT REFERS ALL USES LISTED IN SUBSECTION A 0.1 ABOVE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT, I WOULD RATHER THAT THOSE ACTUALLY BE RE-LISTED, THAT IT'S NOT JUST THE SAME. OH, SEE THAT. BECAUSE THEN THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE. UM, THE RESTRICTIONS ARE THE SAME. UM, UNDERSTOOD. AND, AND WE CAN FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON THIS. YES. YEAH. AND SO, UM, AND, AND I KNOW I ASKED THIS BEFORE IN AN EARLIER MEETING, BUT STR THOSE AREN'T INCREASING DENSITY. CORRECT. BUT ARE THOSE ALLOWED? YES. SO STR ARE ALLOWED. THEY ARE ALLOWED, YES. AND FOLLOWING THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING, BECAUSE YOU HAD STATED THE FACT THAT IT WASN'T EXPLICITLY LISTED, OKAY. THAT WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT DURING THE COMMUNITY MEETING AND DURING FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD, INCLUDING WITH THE MEDIA THAT WE STATED, THE FACT THAT ST ARE IN FACT ALLOWED BECAUSE THEY DO NOT INCREASE THE RESIDENTIAL INTENSITY OR DENSITY OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY. OKAY. SO THAT, THAT ITEM THEN UNDER, UM, TWO A 0.1 SHORT TERM RENTALS WOULD BE STRUCK? YES, WE DID TALK ABOUT THAT, YES. OKAY. OKAY. AND, UM, ALRIGHT, UM, ANOTHER QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN, UM, AND COMMISSIONER HUEY HAS ASKED THIS AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE THE STUDIES, HOW DID THIS, HOW DID THIS, UM, UH, ONE MILE, TWO MILE RADIUS, HOW WAS THAT CHOSEN? AND, UM, RECENTLY YOU JUST SAID THIS IS A RESULT OF WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY. UM, AND I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE MEANING THE, UH, TEXAS A AND M SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL CENTER PLAN, CORRECT. THAT, THAT'S THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE PLANNING TEAM PROCESS AND THEN SUBSEQUENT, SUBSEQUENT COMMUNITY MEETINGS RELATED. YES. OKAY. SO WERE MEMBERS WHO LIVE OUTSIDE OF THAT PLAN AREA INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PLAN. WHEN, WHEN WE SENT OUT NOTIFICATION, THE COUNCIL OFFICES ALSO SENT IT OUT TO EVERYBODY WITHIN THEIR, WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES. WE, WE, WE NOTICED, BUT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE, OF THE COUNCIL DISTRICT. OF THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNCIL DISTRICT, YEAH. THE COUNCIL OFFICES ASSISTED US WITH, AND WE, WE HAD A BROADER REACH JUST BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT, UM, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF FOLKS THAT HAD INTEREST IN THE PROJECT AND IN THE, OKAY. SO, SO A A RESIDENT IN MISSION DE LAGO WOULD BE ALLOWED THEN TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PLANNING OF THE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK AND COMMENT? ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, WE, WE WOULDN'T RESTRICT SOMEBODY'S ABILITY TO COMMENT ON ANY PLAN. OKAY. THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. BECAUSE MY CONCERN, WHICH I'VE VOICED OVER AND OVER IS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IMPLEMENTING A SUGGESTION FROM A PLAN THAT WAS INTENTIONALLY, IN MY OPINION, DRAWN TOO TIGHT, UM, THAT THE PLAN SHOULD HAVE BEEN, UM, AT THE SAME LEVEL AS THE TWO MILE MM-HMM. TWO MILE BOUNDARY. WELL, AT THE, AT THE START OF THE PLAN, IF I CAN JUST YEAH, AHEAD, AHEAD. COMMENT ON THAT. AT THE START OF THE PLANNING PROCESS, THE, THE PLAN BOUNDARIES WERE ESTABLISHED AND THEY WERE ESTABLISHED WELL BEFORE THE, WELL BEFORE THE START OF THE TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN. THE PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING THE PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING HOW THE PLAN BOUNDARIES WERE ESTABLISHED FOLLOWED THE ADOPTION OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHERE IT WAS DETERMINED WHERE, WHERE REGIONAL CENTERS WERE LOCATED, TEXAS A AND M AREA, REGIONAL CENTER BEING ONE OF THEM, AND WHERE ALL OF THE COMMUNITY AREAS ARE. AND WE HAD TO PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF, OF GUIDANCE FOR WHERE THESE PLAN, THE PLAN BOUNDARIES SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED. UM, WE WENT THROUGH A, A LENGTHY, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY NINE TO 12 MONTH PROCESS OF, OF PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS, THIS BODY ACTUALLY AS ONE, UM, TO DETERMINE THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO MAYBE DIVIDE OUT WHERE CERTAIN COMMUNITY AREAS ARE, WHERE CERTAIN, UM, UH, REGIONAL CENTER BOUNDARIES SHOULD BE LOCATED. UH, WE GOT SOME GUIDANCE FROM THE COMMISSION. WE HAD COMMUNITY MEETINGS WHERE WE HEARD FROM, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES THAT SOME OF THE, UH, CENSUS TRACKS OR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES MAY HAVE DIVIDED THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOUNDARIES. SO THERE WERE REQUESTS TO MODIFY BOUNDARIES. SO IT WAS A, IT WAS AN ITERATIVE PROCESS WITH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND, AND SO FORTH TO ULTIMATELY COME UP WITH A MAP THAT THE COMMISSION COULD ENDORSE AND SAY, YEAH, THIS IS A MAP THAT YOU SHOULD MOVE FORWARD IN TERMS OF BOUNDARIES. SO THIS BOUNDARY, THE BOUNDARY FOR THIS PLAN WAS THAT PLAN AT LEAST WAS WELL ESTABLISHED YEARS BEFORE THE PROCESS ACTUALLY BEGAN. OKAY. OKAY. [04:35:01] UNDERSTOOD. UM, I, AND I, I'LL LEAVE THAT FOR DISCUSSION. UM, I GUESS THE OTHER, THE OTHER QUESTION, SO THE TEXAS A AND M SAN ANTONIO LIES WITHIN THE ONE MILE OR TWO MILE, THE ONE MILE BOUNDARY, CORRECT. THE TEXAS A AND M CAMPUS. CAMPUS, UM, MAYBE PORTIONS OF THEIR PROPERTY MIGHT BE WITHIN THE, THE ONE TO TWO MILE AREA. OKAY. SO ARE THEY PROHIBITED? AND I, AND VERY QUICKLY, JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR, JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR WITH THE COMMISSION, I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY DO OWN A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS SEPARATE. IT'S LOCATED SEPARATE, IT'S NOT CONTIGUOUS TO THE A AND M BOUNDARIES. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. AND THAT IS ALONG THE LEON CREEK AREA. SO THEY DO OWN ONE ADDITIONAL LARGE PIECE OF PARCEL. YES, YES. YES. MM-HMM, . SO ARE THEY SUBJECT TO THE SAME RESTRICTIONS AS FAR AS DEVELOPING, BECAUSE IN THE LIST OF THINGS THAT SAY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, DO THEY, ARE THEY SUBJECT TO THESE SAME RESTRICTIONS? NO. NO. THEY'RE, IT'S A STATE OWNED PIECE OF PROPERTY. THEY'RE LAND CLASSIFIED, A STATE, UH, STATE, UH, LOCAL, STATE, FEDERAL. OKAY. THE, THE ICO DOES NOT AFFECT ANY PROPERTY THAT TEXAS A AND M OKAY. SAN ANTONIO OWNS. AND, AND THAT KIND OF IS MY CONCERN IS THAT, IS THAT PROPERTIES THAT LIE FARTHER AWAY FROM TOYOTA ARE IMPACTED MORE GREATLY THAN PROPERTIES THAT ARE CLOSER TOYOTA. SO A AND M YES, THEY'RE EXEMPT. THAT'S FINE. BUT WE'RE ADDING RESTRICTIONS TO PROPERTIES THAT ARE BEYOND A AND M. AND THAT SEEMS, THAT SEEMS A LITTLE UNFAIR AS IN TERMS OF IF YOU'RE, AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PROPERTIES GOING NORTH, WELL, GOING NORTHEAST NORTH. OKAY. BECAUSE MISSION DE LAGO SPECIFICALLY, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL I'LL SPECIFICALLY SAY MISSION DE LAGO. MM-HMM. , THE RESTRICTIONS ON MISSION DE LAGO SAY THEY DECIDE, HEY, WE WANNA BUILD OUR OWN LITTLE RECREATION FACILITY. MM-HMM. NOT PRO, IT'S PROHIBITED ACCORDING TO THE, THE, THE LIST THAT I'M SEEING HERE, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, AS I UNDERSTAND, THEY ALREADY HAVE A RECREATIONAL FACILITY, THEY, TO BUILD AN ADDITIONAL ONE, BUT, BUT SAY THEY WANNA ADD ANOTHER ONE. MM-HMM. SAY THEY WANT TO ADD ANOTHER ONE. MM-HMM. SAY THEY WANT TO ADD, SAY THERE'S A, A, A PRIVATE SCHOOL THAT WANTS TO MOVE IN, THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED IN THAT AREA, BUT YET IT'S OKAY FOR A LARGE UNIVERSITY TO OPERATE. WELL, KEEPING IN MIND THAT THE REASON WHY THE LARGE AREA UNIVERSITY, THE LARGE UNIVERSITY CAN OPERATE IS BECAUSE THEY ARE, THEY'RE A STATE PIECE OF PROPERTY. THEY'RE NO, I UNDERSTAND. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M, I'M, I'M JUST SAYING THAT IT, IT'S, IT'S, UH, AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A LOOPHOLE IN, IN MY OPINION. WELL, AND, AND AGAIN, WE, WE ARE SUGGESTING THE ADDITIONAL, THE, THE CONTINUANCE IN ORDER TO HAVE SOME OF THESE VERY SPECIFIC AND UNIQUE DISCUSSIONS. NO, AND AND I, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S WAYS TO CRAFT IT BETTER. AND THE, I THINK THAT WHEN IT COMES TO SCHOOLS, THE CONCERN ABOUT, WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION VERY, FOR A NUMBER OF WEEKS ABOUT THE TOPIC OF OUR SCHOOL'S REASONABLE AGAIN, JUST LIKE RESIDENTIAL, OUR SCHOOL'S REASONABLE TO BUILD WITHIN, WITHIN A, A TWO MILE AREA OF A MANUFACTURING PLANT, SHOULD, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S A NOISE SENSITIVE USE. YES. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT'S A NOISE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT'S JUST TOYOTA. IT COULD BE A NUMBER OF OTHER INDUSTRIAL USES, AND IS A SCHOOL COMPATIBLE WITH AN ENVIRONMENT LIKE THAT? UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. UM, YOU, YOU, YOU SPEAK OF NOISE AND INDUSTRIAL USE. ARE THERE ANY NEIGHBORHOODS IN SAN ANTONIO ADJACENT TO, UH, SAY A ROCK QUARRY? YES. ABSOLUTELY. AND SO WOULD, SO IS THERE A PROPOSAL IN THE WORKS TO RESTRICT ADDITIONAL USES FOR THEM? N NO, NOT AT THIS TIME. THIS IS THE FIRST, UH, INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT HAS, THAT HAS, THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED. OKAY. SEE, SO THAT, THAT, THAT'S WHERE THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S THE TROUBLE THAT I HAVE, IS THAT THERE'S NOT, THAT THEY'RE BEING TREATED DIFFERENTLY. WELL, AND I THINK, I THINK THE, I THINK THAT THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT WE ARE TAKING, WE, THESE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT COMPATIBLE LAND USES A FIRST STEP IS ALWAYS TAKEN. TRUE. THIS IS, THIS IS TRUE. AND I UNDERSTAND. AGREED. AND SO I KNOW THAT IT'S, IT MAY FEEL AS THOUGH THERE IS ONE AREA THAT IS BEING AFFECTED AND IMPACTED DISPROPORTIONATELY THEN OTHER AREAS. BUT I THINK THAT WHEN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ISSUE AT HAND, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO, TO PLAN PROACTIVELY SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE YOU JUST DESCRIBED CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE FUTURE WHERE RESIDENCES HAVE BEEN LOCATED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY HAVE AN INDUSTRIAL USE RIGHT NEXT TO NO. AND THAT, AND THAT'S A, THAT'S A GOOD, AND I, SO I, I, AND BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT. I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE UNFORTUNATELY CAN'T ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE IT'S ALREADY OCCURRED. THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. AND IT'S, IT IN MANY, IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN, BUT FAIR AND [04:40:01] EQUITABLE. OKAY. AND, OKAY. OKAY. I UNDERSTAND. ALRIGHT. UM, I THINK, I THINK THAT I'M DONE. I THINK I, I'M FINISHED WITH QUESTIONS. UM, DO WE WANT FINE FINAL ROUND OF QUICK COUPLE QUESTIONS? ONE QUESTION. IT'S A QUESTION. OKAY. ONE, ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION. UM, MR. WATSON. YES. UH, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES AND ASKED NUMEROUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. UM, I DO WANT A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION. HOW, UM, WOULD THE OVERLAY PROPOSED OVERLAY DISTRICT, DISTRICT IMPACT AN EXISTING FARM RANCH PROPERTY OR PROPERTY THAT IS, UH, UNDERGOING AGRICULTURAL USE? IT, IT DOESN'T IMPACT ANYONE'S CURRENT USE RIGHT NOW, ARE THERE, AND IT DOES NOT STOP ANYBODY FROM, SO IS THERE ANY, CAN, UH, SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO CHANGE THE WAY THAT THEY'RE DOING LAND PRODUCTION OR THE TYPE OF CATTLE, UM, OR LIVESTOCK THAT THERE, CAN THEY BUILD ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS? CAN THEY DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS BY RIGHT. THEY CAN CONTINUE OPERATING ANY INDUSTRIAL, IT DOESN'T STOP ANYBODY FROM DOING IT. IF YOU OPERATING A FARM AND RANCH DOES NOT, IS NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING ABLE TO BUILD ANY KIND OF STRUCTURE THAT WOULD FACILITATE WHATEVER IS CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN FARM AND RANCH ZONING. AND, AND THEY CAN BUILD ANYTHING THAT THEY WANNA BUILD THAT A FARM WITH THE EXISTING ZONE, A FARM AND RANCH, A A ADDING TO THEIR FARM AND RANCH USE IS, IS PERFECTLY PERMISSIBLE. IT DOESN'T IMPACT THEIR ABILITY TO UTILIZE THEIR FARM AND RANCH IN THE WAY THAT THEY'RE USING IT. SO THEY NOW, IF THEY WANT TO ADD ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY OR INTENSITY, THAT'S DIFFERENT. THAT DOES, THAT DOES IMPACT THE DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT. AND THAT'S SOMETHING WHERE WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND MAKE THOSE DETERMINATIONS. OKAY. BUT IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS, IT DOESN'T IMPACT THEIR THAT. OKAY. UM, I WOULD REQUEST THEN, MM-HMM. , BECAUSE THERE IS A NUMEROUS, THERE ARE NUMEROUS ADDITIONAL ISSUES SPECIFIC TO AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES, UM, THAT SHOULD BE EXPLORED. UH, IT IS NOT UNCOMMON, UM, AS SOMEONE WHOSE OWN FAMILY HAS DONE THIS FOR A MEANS OF MAINTAINING, UM, AN OPERATIONAL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, UM, AND MAINTAINING FAMILY WEALTH FOR FAMILIES TO MM-HMM. , UH, BREAK OUT ONE ACRE WATTS OR SMALLER ON THEIR FARM PROPERTY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN KEEP THE FAMILY THERE AND MAKE SURE THE FARM CAN RUN. UM, ADDITIONALLY, UM, I WOULD REQUEST THAT FOR FARM, RANCH, AND AGRICULTURAL USES, YOU SPECIFICALLY EXPLORE AND STATE EXPLICITLY IN WHATEVER THE FINAL DRAFT LANGUAGE IS, UM, CONDITIONS, INFORMATION RESTRICTIONS, REGULATIONS, OR NOT RELATED TO FENCING, UM, ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES, POLE BARNS, STORAGE, ANYTHING SO THAT THERE IS NO CONFUSION, UM, WHATSOEVER IF PEOPLE DECIDE TO BUILD ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES. UM, WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT THEIR OPTIONS ARE TO CONVERTING THEM TO ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF USE ON THE PROPERTY. UM, THE WAY THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE VALUE OF YOUR LAND IS VERY DIFFERENT WHEN YOU ARE RUNNING AN ACTIVE, UM, AGRICULTURAL OPERATION. AND ALL OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO MAKING SURE THAT IT CAN CONTINUE TO BE OPERATIONAL AS COSTS ARE SKYROCKETING. SO PLEASE EXPLICITLY EXPLORE, UM, AND STIPULATE WHAT ALL OF THOSE THINGS LOOK LIKE, UH, IF WE CHOOSE TO GIVE THE CONTINUANCE SURE. DRAFT LANGUAGE. ALRIGHT. UM, GOING BACK DOWN. COMMISSIONERS ON MY, SORRY, IS THIS LEFT SIDE? ALRIGHT, THEN FINAL QUESTIONS. FINAL QUESTIONS, MORE QUESTIONS. . COMMISSIONER WITT, ONE QUESTION. ONE QUESTION. ONE QUESTION QUESTION. UM, SINCE THE IOD IS REPORTEDLY BASED UPON THE TEXAS A AND M LAND PLAN AND THE STUFF THAT WENT ON DURING THAT, WHY WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT TO US AND STILL WHY WERE WE NEVER GIVEN A COPY OF THE TEXAS A M LAND PLAN STUDY TO LOOK AT AND REVIEW? IT WAS KEPT FROM US LATER WHEN I ASKED FOR IT, I HAD TO FIND IT ON MY OWN. UM, AND THEN I'VE ASKED FOR OPEN REC. I HAD TO GO TO OPEN RECORDS TO ASK FOR LOTS OF THINGS REGARDING THE TEXAS A AND M LAND PLAN BECAUSE THE STAFF WOULDN'T GIVE IT TO ME. SO THEY'VE TAKEN ME TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. AND SO I NEED RELIEF FROM THAT INSTEAD OF JUST BLANKETS SAYING YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING. AND, UH, IT'S, UH, THEY'VE USED ALL KINDS OF EXCUSES, LIKE IT'S ALL ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. UH, SO HOW COME THEY DIDN'T GIVE US IN THE VERY BEGINNING THE TEXAS A AND M LAND PLAN BACK IN MAY TO SAY THIS IS WHAT IT'S BASED UPON? IF YOU WANT A COPY OF THE TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL, HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. YOU ASKED THE QUESTION IF YOU WANT A COPY OF THE TEXAS A M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN, WE ARE HAPPY TO PROVIDE IT. WE PRESENTED, UH, A NUMBER OF MAPS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE TEXAS A AND M AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN. SO THAT'S, I HAVE A COPY. OKAY, GREAT. ASK QUESTION, BUT I HAD TO FIND MY OWN COPY. OKAY. [04:45:01] NONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS GOT ONE. IT WAS WHAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN TELL US THAT WAS WHAT THEY BASED, WE ASKED THEM, HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THIS IN THE VERY BEGINNING? MM-HMM. , THEY SAID, WE JUST FIGURED IT OUT. NO, THEY DID NOT. MR. CHAIR, THIS ITEM FOR THE TEXAS A M PLAN IS NOT ON THE AGENDA. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH. I'M DONE. YES. YES. AND, AND, UM, FOR THOSE, THE BENEFIT IN THE AUDIENCE, THE, THE REGIONAL, THE RE THE TEXAS A AND M REGIONAL CENTER PLAN, AND YES, I KNOW IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. UM, IF YOU GO TO, UH, ONE OF THE PAST PLANNING COMMISSIONS, THERE'S, THERE'S A LINK TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WEBPAGE AS WELL AND IT YES, YES, IT IS THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION LINKS. AND I, I WOULD JUST STATE, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN THAT EVERY SINGLE ITEM THAT THIS COMMISSION REQUESTED WAS, WE TOOK NOTES OF IT AND WE PROVIDED IN A FOLLOW-UP MEMORANDUM TO YOU ALL. NOW, THERE WERE OTHER ITEMS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN REQUESTED FOLLOWING THAT, AND THAT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE STANDARD OPEN RECORDS REQUEST PROCESS. IF IT WENT BEYOND WHAT Y'ALL REQUESTED HERE IN THIS COMMISSION, WE PROVIDED EVERY SINGLE THING THAT THIS COMMISSION REQUESTED, UH, VIA THE FOLLOW-UP MEMO. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, QUESTION, UH, COMMISSIONER REYES LAST QUESTION. I PROMISE. OKAY. OKAY. AND THIS IS JUST A CLARIFICATION OF WHAT I ASKED EARLIER. YES, SIR. AND MR. NGEL, I DON'T WANNA BE COMBATIVE OR ARGUE. NO, NOT AT ALL. AND I REALLY RESPECT, YOU KNOW, YOU TAKING THE TIME TO ANSWER A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT EARLIER I ASKED YOU IF THERE WAS ANY ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON EXISTING PROPERTIES AND, AND YOU ANSWERED NO. AND THERE'S A, A LARGE REACTION MM-HMM. TO THAT. NO, BUT I, I THINK AGAIN, AND YOU, YOU REALLY, I REALLY WANT TO KNOW THIS IS SINCE WE KNOW THAT THERE'S GONNA BE IMPACTS, AND THIS SLIDE RIGHT HERE SHOWS THESE BULLETS THAT SAYS MAY NOT BE SUBDIVIDED, MAY NOT BE SUBDIVIDED. SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, WELL, COULD THERE BE ADDITIONAL COSTS OR, UM, EXTRA ADDITIONAL STEPS THAT EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS WILL HAVE TO UNDERTAKE IF THEY WISH TO DEVELOP THEIR LAND AND AT THE, AT THIS PASSES? SURE. AND, AND AT THE TIME, I THINK THAT, THAT IT WAS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF TALKING ABOUT ADDITIONAL COST BURDENS ON PEOPLE WHEN IT COMES TO THE, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE TIED TO THE INDUSTRIAL COMPATIBILITY OVERLAY DISTRICT. YES. THERE, THERE ARE SOME EXEMPTIONS, EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE WRITTEN INTO THE ORDINANCE SO THAT FOLKS, UH, CAN GET SOME RELIEF. I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT FOLKS THAT HAVE EXISTING RESIDENCES AND THEY HAD RECEIVED A LETTER THAT SAID THAT THEY HAVE TO LEAVE. I MEAN, THEY LITERALLY GOT A LETTER THAT SAID THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO LEAVE THEIR PROPERTY. THAT IS ENTIRELY UNTRUE. UM, AND WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME CORRECTING MISINFORMATION LIKE THAT. UM, BUT THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THE, THE, THE POINT OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT IS TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ADDITIONAL INTENSITIES OF, UH, ADDITIONAL, UH, INTENSITIES OF RESIDENTIAL USES LARGE SUBDIVISIONS WITHIN, UH, TWO MILES OF A MAJOR INDUSTRIAL USE. SO YES, IF, IF, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN BE REPAIRED, A HOUSE CAN BE REPAIRED, IT CAN BE ENLARGED. UH, THE CONCERN IS ABOUT ADDING ADDITIONAL HOUSES ONTO A PIECE OF PROPERTY, UM, AND MAY NOT, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY MAY OR MAY NOT BE SUBDIVIDED BASED ON THE ZONING THAT THEY HAVE. AND IT CAN BE IN SOME INSTANCES, AND THAT'S WHY WE TALK ABOUT NEEDING TO MEET INDIVIDUAL WITH PROPERTY OWNERS. UH, LIKE IT SAYS THERE, IF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DO NOT EXCEED ONE ACRE, YOU KNOW, PER PER UNIT, THEN THERE'S, THERE'S A POSSIBILITY YEAH. THAT A PROPERTY MAY BE ABLE TO BE. SO I THINK A LOT OF IT JUST REALLY DEPENDS ON THE INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES FOR A PIECE OF PROPERTY. I WOULD HATE TO PROVIDE A BLANKET STATEMENT THAT SAYS YES OR NO, WHEN REALLY IT MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE TO SOMEONE'S INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. ALRIGHT. OTHER COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER CHASE, A FINAL QUESTION OR NO, MR. CHAIR, CAN I HAVE A MOMENT? OH, , OH NO, THAT'S OKAY. SORRY. . UH, COMMISSIONER CHASE, DID YOU HAVE ANY FINAL QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, AWESOME. ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER HNO HOSA A MOTION AND THEN A BRIEF, LIKE, WE'RE GONNA DO LIKE TWO MINUTE DISCUSS DISCUSSION. OKAY. SO YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL, WE WILL DO A CLOCK. I'M SERIOUS. NO, REALLY. SO, UM, SO, UH, COMMISSIONER HNO HOSA, SO TO FURTHER COMMUNICATE WITH THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE CITY TO DO ITS DUE DILIGENCE, UH, MAKE SURE WE TRY TO CROSS ALL OUR T'S AND DOT OUR I'S, UH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, FOR A CONTINUANCE FOR 90 DAYS, THAT'LL BE THE OCTOBER 15TH. MR. CHAIR, IF YOU DON'T MIND, IF WE COULD DO AN OPEN CONTINUANCE, UH, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN TO A, NOT A DATE SPECIFIC, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS THAT WE WOULD RESEND NOTICE BEFORE THE AGENDA ITEM IS PUT BACK ON THE AGENDA. WOULD THERE BE A MINIMUM TIME MR. CHAIR POINT OF INFORMATION? WOULDN'T THAT BE A POSTPONEMENT RATHER THAN A CONTINUANCE? SURE. WE CAN DO A POSTPONEMENT. SO AFTER THE MAYOR ? YEAH. ALRIGHT, [04:50:01] SO, SO, OKAY. SO, SO, UM, LET ME GET, LET ME, EXCUSE ME. THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE WOULD RE-NOTICE ANYWAYS FOR THE POSTPONEMENT AS WELL. ALRIGHT. SO WHAT THEY'RE SUGGESTING IS C COULD WE HAVE A MINIMUM OF 90 DAYS THOUGH? I MEAN, YES. WE COULD DO A MINIMUM OF 90 DAYS, SO, SO LET'S MAKE THE MOTION TO, OH, ACTUALLY WILL WE, WELL, 90 DAYS. OKAY. UM, MOTION FOR A POSTPONEMENT FOR A MINIMUM OF 90 DAYS. THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. COMMISSIONER REYES WITH A SECOND. ALRIGHT, UH, DISCUSSION. SHORT DISCUSSION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER CHASE? NONE. ALL RIGHT. SORRY. . COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE, MR. CHAIR. I HAVE TO SAY I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT MOVING FOR A POSTPONEMENT AT THIS TIME WITHOUT A DATE CERTAIN TO COME BACK. UH, EVEN IF THE RESULT WERE, UH, ANOTHER CONTINUANCE. I, I THINK BY ALLOWING A POSTPONEMENT THERE IS SOME CONCERN THAT IN MY MIND THERE IS SOME CONCERN THAT, UM, IT GIVES A BAD IMPRESSION AS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING AT THIS COMMISSION AND WHAT'S GOING FORWARD, SUCH THAT, YOU KNOW, IT APPEARS OR COULD APPEAR THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO SWEEP THIS UNDER THE RUG. AND SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ALRIGHT. UNDERSTOOD. UM, OTHER COMMENTS? YEAH. MR. COMMISSIONER BARTOS, UM, I'M ALSO, I AGREE WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER ANTE. I AM NOT GONNA SUPPORT ANY POSTPONEMENTS OR DELAYS OR, SO I'M GONNA VOTE AGAINST ANY DELAYS. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? COMMISSIONER. YEAH, SAME THING. I'LL BE SUPPORTING, UH, BUSTAMONTE AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER BOTTLES AND NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS 90 DAY POSTPONEMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. GOTCHA. COMMISSIONER KELLUM AS, AS WILL I, I THINK THE CITIZENS DESERVE AN ANSWER TODAY. OKAY. COMMISSIONER? UM, UNDER THE SAME PLACE. I SEE NO BENEFIT FOR THIS. THERE'S NO POINT IN HAVING TO OVERLAY WHEN ZONING EXISTS. IT MAKES LIFE MORE DIFFICULT. IT MAKES IT MORE EXPENSIVE, AND IF THEY'VE GOT CONTROL OVER IT RIGHT NOW WITH EXISTING ZONING, IT'S, THIS IS UNNECESSARY. ALRIGHT. UM, COMMISSIONER WATSON, I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING A POSTPONEMENT, UM, OR A CONTINUANCE. I THINK THIS IS COMPLETELY OUT OF CHARACTER WITHIN NORMAL PROCESS FOR OVERLAY DISTRICTS OR LARGE AREA REZONING. UM, AND IT PLACES UNDUE BURDEN, UM, ON RESIDENTS, UM, IS UNFAIR TO TAXPAYERS AND IS INCONSISTENT WITH A VARIETY OF THINGS I'VE EXPERIENCED IN MY OWN DISTRICT RELATED TO INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING BEING ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER, UM, AND IS THUS UNFAIR, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT'S NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED IN ALL INDUSTRIAL AREAS OF THE CITY. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING A POSTPONEMENT OR CONTINUANCE TODAY. ALRIGHT. I'M GONNA SPLIT, I'M GONNA SPLIT THE, THE IDEA, UM, I AGREE. I, I DON'T SUPPORT A POSTPONEMENT, BUT I DO SUPPORT A, UM, A CONTINUANCE BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO, AND I, AND I, AND THANK Y'ALL, THE CROWD, I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE, Y'ALL HAVE COME OUT MULTIPLE TIMES. UM, AND I RECOGNIZE Y'ALL FROM BOTH THE MEETING AT A AND M THE PREVIOUS MEETING AND AND PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, ON WHICH I ALSO SERVE AS, AS BECAUSE I'M REPRESENTING ZONING. SO I'VE SEEN Y'ALL A LOT OF TIMES AND, AND I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO, TO THAT THERE'S EVEN AN IDEA THAT THIS COULD BE, UM, DELAYED. UM, BUT I, I THINK THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDUCE THE, UM, BOUNDARY EVEN FURTHER TO, AND TO PROPERLY CLARIFY, UM, THE RESTRICTIONS ON RESIDENTIAL, MY SUGGESTION IS THAT IT ONLY BE ONE MILE AT MOST. UM, SO THAT IT, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW , UM, THAT WOULD, WHICH WOULD TAKE OUT A AND M AND END WHAT I CALL KIND OF A LOOPHOLE. UM, BUT THAT'S JUST ME. UM, BUT I DO APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S THOUGHTS. I HAVE, I HAVE TAKEN, I I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN A BUNCH OF Y'ALL'S COMMENTS. I UNDERSTAND WHERE Y'ALL ARE HERE AND, AND MY IDEA IS YES, AT THIS TIME I COULD, I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS, THIS OVERLAY. I CANNOT, I PROBABLY, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING ANY RESTRICTIONS ON EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USE. UM, BUT I THINK THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN THE OVERLAY AS FAR AS ENCOURAGING, UM, COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND, AND TRANSITIONS THAT COULD BE USEFUL. UM, SO WITH THAT AND [04:55:01] MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY JUST BRIEFLY, YES. YOUR POSITION AND MY POSITION ARE THE SAME. I DO NOT SUPPORT A POSTPONEMENT, BUT I DO SUPPORT A CONTINUANCE. GOTCHA. ALRIGHT. SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS FOR A POSTPONEMENT WITH A MINIMUM OF 90 DAYS BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER REYES. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA? NO. COMMISSIONER REYES? NO. COMMISSIONER KELLUM. HE'S SUPPOSED TO SAY YES, RIGHT? NO. COMMISSIONER WATSON? NO. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE? NO. COMMISSIONER HUI? NO. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? NO. COMMISSIONER BARROS? NO. COMMISSIONER WIT NO. O COMMISSIONER. CHASE THUMBS DOWN. CHAIR SIPES? NO. ALRIGHT. MOTION FAILS. YES. SO THE, THERE IS A, UM, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANOTHER MOTION CHAIR. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR DENIAL. I'LL SECOND THAT. OH, OKAY. SO THERE'S A MOTION FOR A STRAIGHT DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER ORTIZ WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BOTTLES. UM, IS THERE A NEED FOR SHORT DISCUSSION? NO. NO. ALRIGHT. THAT'S FINE. ALRIGHT. UM, ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? NO. YES. COMMISSIONER ORTIZ? YES. COMMISSIONER BARROS. COMMISSIONER KELLUM? YES. COMMISSIONER WATSON? YES. COMMISSIONER NOOSA? YES. COMMISSIONER REYES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE? NO. COMMISSIONER HUEY. AYE. COMMISSIONER WHITSETT? YES. COMMISSIONER CHASE. THUMBS UP. COMMISSIONER CHASE. CHAIR SIPES. I KNOW IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE. THE THING IS, YOU KNOW, BUT, UM, NO. UM, CHAIR SIPES. WAS THAT A NO, THAT IS, UH, NO THANK YOU. MOTION CARRIES. ALRIGHT. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. YES. THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING. UM, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO LET Y'ALL KNOW, AS, AS COMMISSIONER BARTOS HAS MENTIONED, UM, WE ARE A RECOMMENDING BODY TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH MEANS THAT, UM, THE FINAL DECISION RESTS WITH THEM SO THEY CAN, THEY, THEY TAKE OUR, OUR RECOMMENDATIONS SERIOUSLY, BUT THEY ARE THE FINAL DECISION MAKER. SO DO WE HAVE ANY DIRECTOR'S REPORT? NO ADDITIONAL UPDATES, SIR. ALRIGHT, WELL WITH THAT, THE TIME IS EIGHT 30 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.