[00:00:04]
IT IS TWO OH THREE AND WE WILL CALL THE OCTOBER 9TH, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.
WOULD STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER FAULKNER? HERE.
CAN WE HAVE THE SPANISH ENGLISH INTERPRETER PLEASE? GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
[Plats ]
YOU.WE'LL HAVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THE INDIVIDUAL HEARING AGENDA.
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS ARE CASES WHERE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES NOT REQUIRE FURTHER DETAILED DISCUSSION, AND NOBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM.
ALL CASES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD IN ONE UNIFORM MOTION.
IF SOMEONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM ON AN ITEM, IT WILL BE PLACED ON THE INDIVIDUAL HEARING AGENDA.
SO RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE I HAVE EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR ITEMS 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, AND 19 ARE ON CONSENT.
UH, SO WE WILL NOW MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF VOICEMAILS FOR ITEM 13, WHICH IS ON CONSENT.
IF WE COULD GO AHEAD AND PLAY THOSE BEFORE TAKING ANY ACTION.
GREAT NAVAJO, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS SEVEN EIGHT TWO FIVE SEVEN.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 313-7667.
I AM CALLING ABOUT CASE NUMBER PA DASH 2 0 24 1 6 0 70.
UM, I'M CALLING IN RESPONSE TO THE, UH, NEW, UH, DEVELOPMENT, UM, WHICH IS TO BE PLACED AT CARRIE LOUISE AND WEST HAYHOUSE TRAIL RIGHT OFF OF CAMP BULLIS ROAD.
I DO NOT LIVE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS PARTICULAR ADDRESS, HOWEVER, I DO LIVE ON, UM, ON THE TOP OF THE HILL THERE.
AND SO ALL THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS ARE, MICRO TRAFFIC CONCERNS ARE THE SAME AS WHAT, UM, IS TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, I HAVE, UH, BEEN LIVING HERE FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS, AND OF COURSE, DEVELOPMENT WILL CONTINUE TO, UH, OCCUR.
HOWEVER, AT THIS POINT, THE SITUATION IS BECOMING UNSUSTAINABLE IN THAT WE HAVE A ONE LANE BRIDGE THAT GOES, UM, FROM OUR AREA AND CONNECTS TO THE REST OF THE WORLD AT IH 10, UM, IT IS NARROW AND, UM, NOW IS, IS GETTING VERY CONGESTED AND IT'S SO NARROW THAT IN FACT, IF A CAR IS TURNING LEFT, UM, NO CARS CAN GO AROUND IT TO BE ABLE TO, UM, ACCESS I 10.
UM, I'M ESPECIALLY CONCERNED BECAUSE IF THERE SHOULD BE A FIRE, UM, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAVE ONLY ONE WAY OUT, AND IT IS OVER THAT ONE BRIDGE.
UM, I PLEASE, I WOULD LOVE, I'M SORRY, UM, PLEASE TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT IN YOUR PLANNING, UH, UH, MEETING, UM, BECAUSE I, I JUST AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE DANGEROUS SITUATION, ESPECIALLY IN THE PANICKY EVENT OF A FIRE THAT IS OCCURRING IN OUR AREA.
HELLO, MY NAME IS RACHEL BALINSKI.
I LIVE AT 2 0 8 1 1 EAST TEJAS TRAIL, SEVEN EIGHT TWO FIVE SEVEN.
MY PHONE NUMBER'S (210) 823-5446, AND THE CASE NUMBER ENDS IN, UH, 0 7 0.
I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO SOME THE ISSUES THAT I HAVE ABOUT THIS CHANGE IN POTENTIAL ZONING CHANGES.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS THE IMPACT ON INFRASTRUCTURE.
[00:05:01]
ARE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF A VERY NARROW TWO LANE BRIDGE.THAT IS THE ONLY EXIT FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT AREA.
IT ALSO SERVES A, UH, PINEAPPLE SCHOOL, TMI MIL, THE MILITARY INSTITUTE CAMPUS, THE BACK ENTRANCE FOR ALL THE DOMINION RESIDENTS AND A NEW, UH, COMMUNITY THAT'S BEING BUILT ON CAMP BULLIS.
IT'S ALREADY OVERWHELMED, AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL BE A HUGE IMPACT ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT IT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THIS, AND THAT THE TRAFFIC'S JUST GONNA BE UNBEARABLE.
I ALSO THINK THAT THERE IS A SAFETY CONCERN BECAUSE, LIKE I SAID, ONLY ENTRANCE IN AND OUT OF THAT AREA.
SO IF EMERGENCY VEHICLES NEED TO GET TO ANYBODY ON THIS SIDE OF THAT BRIDGE, WE'RE JUST OUT OF LUCK BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY FOR THEM TO GET THROUGH DURING A HIGH TRAFFIC TIME, AND THERE'S REALLY NO WAY FOR PEOPLE TO GET OUT OF THE WAY IF, IF A FIRE TRUCK OR AN AMBULANCE NEEDED TO GET THROUGH.
UM, I THINK THE, UH, THERE'S POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
UM, WE CURRENTLY ALREADY HAVE FLOODING IN THAT AREA, THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
UM, THE FLOODING IS PROBABLY NOT SO MUCH THE AREA BECAUSE THERE IS RUNOFF, BUT I ALSO WONDER HOW THAT AFFECTS THE AQUIFER BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF RAIN WATER THAT'S IS SOAKED INTO THE, YOU KNOW, TO THE LAND AT THAT AREA.
UM, SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT THERE'S NO WAY TO STOP THIS.
YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA HAPPEN THERE, JUST WOULD LIKE THE PLANNING TO BE DONE BETTER.
I I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT THESE THINGS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT BEGINS.
YOU KNOW, ALL THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT, YOU KNOW, IS GONNA PUT A LOT OF STRAIN ON THAT BRIDGE THAT'S VERY OLD TO BEGIN WITH.
YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF SOMEBODY NEEDED TO GET OUT TO TAKE SOMEBODY TO A HOSPITAL OR, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST TRYING TO GET OUT OF HERE, THERE'S NO OTHER OPTION.
WE ALL HAVE TO GO OVER THAT BRIDGE.
SO AGAIN, I, I HOPE YOU WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THESE CONCERNS.
AND I, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT OTHER PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE LEAVING MESSAGES AS WELL.
SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
UH, I LIVE AT 2 0 8 3 5 GREAT NAVAJO 7 8 2 5 7 IN THE FOREST CREST NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.
UH, THIS IS REGARDING CASE NUMBER PA 2 0 2 4 1 1 6 0 0 0 7 0.
UM, AND I NEED TO BRING UP SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DO NOT LIVE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPOSED REZONING OF THE FOUR MENTIONED PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS ENTIRELY AFFECTED BY ANY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC.
WE HAVE A SERIOUS ISSUE DEVELOPING IN THE FOREST CREST AREA AS A DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY WITHIN FOREST CREST IS BOOMING IN 2001, CAMP BULLIS MILITARY POST CLOSED THE ROAD THROUGH CAMP BULLIS FOR US TO HAVE ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 1604.
THE OLD CAMP BULLIS ROAD HAS CLOSED ACCESS AROUND THE SAME TIME.
THEREFORE, OUR ONLY INGRESS AND EGRESS OUT OF THIS AREA HAS TO BE, UH, TO CROSS A SMALL BRIDGE NEAR VERA RIDGE, WHICH THIS YEAR INSTALLED A STOPLIGHT.
BECAUSE OF RECENT REZONING APPROVAL OF THE PINEAPPLE SCHOOL, THERE HAS BEEN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE OF VEHICLES PASSING THROUGH THE BRIDGE.
WHEN SOMEONE TURNS LEFT ONTO VERA RIDGE, THE TRAFFIC BEHIND IS STUCK UNTIL THAT CAR OR CARS TURN LEFT BEFORE AND AFTER SCHOOL HAS INCREASED THE TRAFFIC FLOW ACROSS THIS ONE LANE BRIDGE.
A NEW REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY AND OTHER PROPERTIES PLANNED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WILL ADD MANY MORE CARS THAT THIS BRIDGE CANNOT SUPPORT IN ITS CURRENT CONDITION AND MUST BE WIDENED IN ORDER TO CONTROL THE PLANNED INCREASE OF DEMAND.
MANNY, PAULA, OUR COUNCILMAN FOR THIS DISTRICT, HAS ORDERED A TRAFFIC IMPACT IMPACT STUDY FOR THE BRIDGE AT CAMPBELL BULLIS TO EVALUATE THE NEED TO WIDEN THIS BRIDGE, I RECOMMEND THAT ANY REZONING FOR FOREST CREST BE POSTPONED OR TABLED UNTIL A FRA TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY IS COMPLETE AND A SOLUTION
[00:10:01]
PROPOSED FOR WHAT WILL BE A TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE FOR ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS.HELLO, MY NAME IS SHERRY BEIGER.
I LIVE AT 2 0 7 8 2 EAST TEJAS TRAIL.
I ALSO OWN THE PROPERTY AT 2 0 7 9 OH EAST TEJAS TRAIL, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 5 7 ON BOTH THOSE PROPERTIES.
UM, I HAVE GREAT CONCERN, UM, ABOUT, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, POSSIBLY AGREEING TO A REZONING OF PROPERTY, UM, IN THE AREA OFF OF KEMP BULLIS ROAD.
UM, A I HAVE A REFERENCE NUMBER OF PA DASH 2 24 DASH 1 1 6 0 7 0.
UM, IT'S, UH, UP FOR REZONING LESS THAN A MILE FROM MY HOME, UM, TO ALLOW FOR, UM, H HOUSING FOR DUPLEXES.
AND IT'S 24 ACRES AND IT'S GONNA BE APPROXIMATELY 300, 350 UNITS.
WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION AND FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO REACH US LIVE BEYOND, UM, THAT DEVELOPED AREA BECAUSE IT'S ONE LANE IN EACH DIRECTION OVER A BRIDGE, UH, OF, UM, OF A, A GOOD CREEK LEON CREEK THAT CAN GET, YOU KNOW, REALLY HIGH AND IT NEEDS TO BE WIDER.
THE BRIDGE NEEDS TO BE RIGHT, THE ROAD TO FACILITATE WELL, WHAT IT GOT CONGESTION IN THE AREA.
AND PEOPLE COME FROM THE DOMINION OFF OF
SO IT'S, IT THERE'LL BE TOO MUCH TRAFFIC.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT DEMOLITION, UH, OF THE TREES IN THE AREA FOR GROUNDWATER ABSORPTION BECAUSE IT'LL BE PAVED OVER AND WILDLIFE IN THAT AREA, LIKE THE GOLDEN CHEEK WARBLERS, MORE HABITAT WILL BE DESTROYED.
UM, I HAD GREAT MANY CONCERNS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS AREA BEING ABLE TO GET OUT TO I 10 BECAUSE WE'RE ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT ON CAMP BULLIS ROAD.
AND MORE TRAFFIC GOES POSSIBLY AT LEAST 300, UH, NEW CARS, MAYBE TWO CARS PER HOUSEHOLD.
UM, THAT WOULD BE TOO MUCH, TOO MUCH.
SO PLEASE, UH, DO NOT ALLOW THIS REZONING TO HAPPEN.
UM, IF SO, PLEASE GIVE US THE INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, WIDER BRIDGE EITHER ROAD.
THAT'S ALL THE VOICEMAILS FOR ITEMS NUMBER 13.
UH, WE HAVE ONE FOR NUMBER 10 AND ONE VOICEMAIL FOR ITEM NUMBER 14 D 1 0 5 RENO STREET.
I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE 0 6 6.
UM, WE CALLING, UH, AS A BOARD MEMBER FOR GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW.
UH, AS USUAL, WE REMAIN NEUTRAL AS FAR AS VOTING OR, OR RESPONDING TO THE CASE, BUT WE DID MEET WITH, UM, SEAN DALEY, UH, ABOUT THIS ZONING CHA I MEAN THIS, UH, PLAN AMENDMENTS AND, UM, THE REQUEST TO GO DOWN TO URBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS CERTAINLY, UM, WELL, UH, ACCEPTED BY NEIGHBORS.
UM, THIS ALLOWS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND, UH, FITS IN WELL WITH SURROUNDING URBAN LOW DENSITY.
AND, UH, NO ONE, UH, NONE OF THE SIX NEIGHBORS THAT, UH, ATTENDED THE MEETING AND SPOKE WITH, UH, MR. DALEY.
UH, WE'RE EXPRESSING OPPOSITION.
AND MY FAMILY LIVES AT 6,001 FM 78.
THE PROPERTY THAT DIRECTLY BACKS UP TO WHAT THE GREEN SPACE IS GOING TO BE.
WE ARE CALLING ABOUT PLAN AMENDMENT CASE, PA 2 0 2 4 1 1 6 0 0 0 7 1.
MY FAMILY HAS LIVED ON THAT PROPERTY FOR AN EXCESS OF 60 YEARS.
[00:15:01]
MY GRANDMOTHER, MY MOTHER AND MY UNCLE STILL RESIDE AT THAT PROPERTY.I, FOR ONE, AND THEM ARE ALL FOR THE GREEN SPACE BEING OPENED UP BEHIND OUR PROPERTY.
MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT MY FAMILY WILL BE MOVING TO THAT PROPERTY EVENTUALLY.
MY CONCERN IS FOR THE SAFETY OF MY FAMILY AND OUR PROPERTY.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE GREEN SPACE.
OUR FAMILY HAS ZERO PROBLEM WITH THE GREEN SPACE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT A FENCE BE BUILT TO HELP AT LEAST SLOW DOWN PEOPLE FROM COMING FROM THE GREEN SPACE ONTO OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
UM, WE'VE LIVED THERE FOR 60 PLUS YEARS.
THAT IS OUR HOME, THAT IS WHERE I INTEND TO SETTLE MY FAMILY.
UM, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE ALL FOR THE GREEN SPACE.
WE'RE ALL FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE, UM, WILDLIFE INCLUDING WILD TURKEYS, DEER AND OTHER ANIMALS THAT DO RESIDE ON OUR PROPERTY BACK IN THE WOODS AND THE GREEN SPACE.
UM, SO THAT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
THE GREEN SPACE IS FINE, BUT I WOULD ALSO, LIKE I SAID, LIKE TO HAVE A FENCE BUILT.
UM, JUST PROVIDE US SOME PRIVACY AND THE PREVENTION OF PEOPLE, UM, WALKING DIRECTLY ONTO OUR PROPERTY.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE (210) 683-2018 AND I'M CALLING FOR 6,001 FM 78.
CASE NUMBER PA 2 0 2 4 1 1 6 0 0 0 7 1.
ALRIGHT, THAT IS ALL THE VOICEMAILS, UM, FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO AT THIS TIME, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ANY QUESTIONS STARTING LEFT OF THE COMMISSIONER ORIAN? I JUST WANTED TO ENSURE ITEM 12 WAS NOT INCLUDED.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL.
RIGHT NOW WE'LL HEAR ITEM 12 AND I KNOW COMMISSIONER FAULKNER IS RECUSING FROM THIS ITEM.
SO IT IS TWO 20 AND COMMISSIONER FAULKNER IS LEAVING THE MEETING NOW.
COMMISSIONER ORIAN ALSO IS RECUSING FROM THIS ITEM.
UM, IS THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? IF NOT, WE WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MILAM.
UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL.
FELLOW COMMISSIONER BACK INTO THE ROOM.
IT IS 2 21 AND COMMISSIONER FAULKNER AND COMMISSIONER ORIAN HAVE
[Comprehensive Master Plan Amendments ]
[Other Items ]
REENTERED THE MEETING.THIS TIME WE'RE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH HEARING ITEMS NUMBER EIGHT AND 17 AT THE SAME TIME.
I'M A SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION REQUEST SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR PROPERTIES CURRENTLY WITHIN OUR EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION AS WELL AS AN ASSOCIATED PLAN AMENDMENT.
SO THE FIRST POINT OF DISCUSSION ON TODAY'S PRESENTATION IS A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER R CITY DEVELOPMENTS INC.
TO INCORPORATE A 794.5 ACRE AREA INTO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF NEW SOUL SPRINGS ROAD AND SOUTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10, AND CURRENTLY LIE WITHIN THE ETJ.
IN ORDER TO ACCEPT THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION, CITY STAFF MUST DETERMINE THAT THE AREA COMPLIES WITH TWO CRITERIA.
THE PROPERTY MUST BE CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BOUNDARY AND IT ALSO
[00:20:01]
MUST BE WITHIN OUR ETJ.THIS AREA MEETS THOSE CRITERIA AND IF SUCCESSFULLY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO DISTRICT THREE TO PROVIDE SOME INSIGHT INTO THE ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE INTO THE APPLICATION.
DEPICTED ON THE SCREEN ARE THE THREE REQUESTS SUBMITTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER, SORRY, PREVIOUS LINE.
THE INTENTION OF THESE APPLICATIONS IS TO GAIN COUNSEL APPROVAL FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO BE FUNDED BY A TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE, ALSO REFERRED TO AS A TS.
THE TS WAS PETITIONED BY THE CITY OR TO THE CITY BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AND IS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOUSING SERVICES LED PROCESS.
THE THREE REQUESTS TO INCLUDE THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION, THE ZONING AND LAND USE AND THE TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE DESIGNATION ARE GOING THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROCESS CONCURRENTLY AND ARE EACH ALIGNED IN THE GOAL OF ESTABLISHING A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE FULL 1854.6 ACRES.
AS A COMPONENT OF THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION PETITION, TEXAS STATE LAW REQUIRES A SERVICE AGREEMENT.
THIS AGREEMENT IS DRAFTED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AFTER A CANVASSING PERIOD WHERE VARIOUS APPLICABLE CITY DEPARTMENTS ARE ASKED FOR THEIR INPUT.
ONCE THE DRAFT IS COMPLETED, IT IS SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THEIR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE.
THE SERVICE AGREEMENT OUTLINES VARIOUS CITY SERVICES TO BE IMPLEMENTED AND GOES INTO EFFECT ON THE DATE OF ANNEXATION.
THE SECOND COMPONENT OF TODAY'S DISCUSSION IS THE PLAN AMENDMENT, WHICH SEEKS TO ASSIGN LAND USE TO THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA IF APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, THE 794.5 ACRES, THE ANNEXATION AREA WOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THIS ESSAY TOMORROW SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY AREA.
PLAN PROJECTED ONTO THE SCREEN IS THE PLAN AMENDMENT NOTIFICATION MAP, WHICH INDICATES THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS, WHICH ARE URBAN MIXED USE TO THE NORTH AND BUSINESS INNOVATION MIXED USE TO THE SOUTH.
THERE WERE 125 PROPERTIES WITHIN THE 200 NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY WITH ONE NOTICE RETURNED IN FAVOR AND SIX RETURNED IN OPPOSITION.
THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT AREA.
SO HERE WE HAVE AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE GREATER AREA, WHICH INDICATES LAND USE ALREADY PRESCRIBED BY THE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY AREA PLAN, AS WELL AS THE SA TOMORROW BROOKS AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN.
THIS IS NOT PART OF THE BROOKS AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN.
JUST THIS MAP KIND OF SHOWS A CORNER OF THAT.
SINCE THE SUBJECT AREA FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT IS CURRENTLY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND IS NOT WITHIN ANY ADOPTED PLAN BOUNDARIES, THERE IS CURRENTLY NO LAND USE ASSIGNED.
THE PROPOSAL IS TO DESIGNATE A TOTAL OF 576.2 ACRES AS URBAN MIXED USE WITH BUSINESS INNOVATION, MIXED BUSINESS INNOVATION, MIXED USE LAND USE PROPOSED FOR THE REMAINING 218.3 ACRES.
URBAN MIXED USE IS A LAND USE DESIGNATION WHICH PERMITS RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT AT A MEDIUM INTENSITY LEVEL BUSINESS INNOVATION.
MIXED USE IS SIMILAR IN THAT IT ALSO PERMITS A MIX OF ZONING DISTRICTS.
HOWEVER, IT DOES FEATURE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AS ALLOWABLE UNDER THIS DESIGNATION AND IS CHARACTERIZED BY A, BY A GREATER LEVEL OF OVERALL INTENSITY THAN BUSINESS MIXED USE.
I'M SORRY, THAN URBAN MIXED USE.
SO HERE WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS TAKEN IN THE AREA.
THIS IS, UH, FACING NORTH, THIS IS FACING EAST, THIS IS FACING SOUTH, AND HERE'S A VIEW FACING WEST.
THE TWO ITEMS DISCUSSED WITHIN THIS PRESENTATION ARE ON TODAY'S AGENDA FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION WITH THE ZONING COMMISSION HEARING SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 5TH AND COUNCIL CONSIDERATION 10 WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 5TH.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION TO ANNEX 794 ACRES OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AND APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE THE ANNEXATION AREA INTO THE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY AREA PLAN WHILE ASSIGNING URBAN MIXED USE AND BUSINESS INNOVATION MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATIONS, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'RE AVAILABLE AS IS THE APPLICANT.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH THE PODIUM? HI, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
KEVIN DENDA WITH ORTIZ MCKNIGHT, ONE 12 EAST PECAN STREET REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPLICANT AND PROPOSED DEVELOPER SERA DEVELOPMENT.
UH, I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION GEARED MORE TOWARDS THE LAND USE COMPONENT OF THIS REQUEST AND I'LL WALK THROUGH THAT, UH, AT THIS TIME.
UM, SO THE OVERALL REQUEST, AS STAFF MENTIONED FOR THIS PROPERTY IS TO DESIGNATE THIS PROPERTY, UH, WITH A LAND USE DESIGNATION BECAUSE IT IS PRIMARILY, UM, OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS.
CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE? HERE YOU'LL SEE AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY IS OUTLINED IN RED.
HOWEVER, THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY IS ALSO HIGHLIGHTED IN
[00:25:01]
A YELLOW DOTTED BOUNDARY LINE.IT'S APPROXIMATELY 794 ACRES, UH, JUST LOCATED JUST SOUTHEAST OF LOOP FOUR 10 IN NEW SULFUR SPRINGS ROAD WITH A PORTION OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, UH, FRONTING ON NEW SULFUR SPRINGS ROAD.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND ADJACENT TO SINGLE LOT UH, RESIDENCES.
OUR OVERALL REQUEST IS TO DESIGNATE THIS PROPERTY OUTLINED IN RED AS BUSINESS INNOVATION MIXED USE AND URBAN MIXED USE WITHIN THESE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY PLAN.
THIS EXHIBIT HERE SHOWS A, UM, THE CURRENT LAND USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS WITHIN CITY LIMITS, UH, IS OUTLINED IN PURPLE AND A LIGHT BLUE.
IT IS URBAN MIXED USE AND BUSINESS INNOVA INNOVATION MIXED USE.
THE PORTION THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY DOES NOT HAVE A DESIGNATION BECAUSE AGAIN, IT IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS.
UH, WE ARE REQUESTING URBAN MIXED USE AND BUSINESS INNOVATION MIXED USE TO MIRROR THE, UH, LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS WITHIN CITY LIMITS.
THOSE PROPERTIES WERE, UH, DESIGNATED AS URBAN MIXED USE AND BUSINESS INNOVATION MIXED USE IN DECEMBER OF 2022.
SO THIS EFFECTIVELY WOULD BE A CARRYOVER OF WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED UH, EARLIER IN 2022.
THE OVERALL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS WOULD ALLOW FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE SITE AS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT TO INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL AND BUSINESS PARK OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.
SO HERE AGAIN YOU'LL SEE A LAND USE MAP, BUT THIS TIME THE MAP ITSELF HAS BEEN UPDATED TO SHOW WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING.
UH, THE URBAN MIXED USE, YOU CAN SEE, UH, CARRIES OVER FROM THE AND IS DESIGNATED IN A LIGHT PURPLE AS WELL AS THE BUSINESS INNOVATION MIXED USE BEING DESIGNATED IN A LIGHT BLUE.
UH, THE OVERALL REQUEST AGAIN WILL MEET, UH, WHAT STAT WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION HAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN 2022, UH, BUT WILL FURTHER MEET, UH, THE SOUTH GOALS OF THE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY PLAN, INCLUDING FOSTERING DEVELOPMENT OF LOOP FOUR 10 AS A MIXED USE INNOVATION EMPLOYMENT CORRIDOR AND PROMOTING MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS, PATTERNS TO REINFORCE MOBILITY PATTERNS IN THE AREA.
UH, AS I MENTIONED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THIS LAND USE DESIGNATION WILL ALLOW A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO FURTHER GROWTH DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT THAT IS CONTEMPLATED FOR THIS AREA.
UH, AND ALL OF THAT BEING OUTLINED IN THE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY PLAN ITSELF.
SO HERE'S A PROPOSED LAND PLAN OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF IS MIXED USE.
I INCLUDES RESIDENTIAL, UH, INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL USES AND BUSINESS PARK OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.
UH, I DO KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME INDIVIDUALS WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND FROM SPEAKING WITH A NUMBER OF THEM OUTSIDE AND BEFORE THIS MEETING, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IN THIS AREA.
SO I DID WANT TO TAKE A A MINUTE TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
UM, THIS DEVELOPMENT ITSELF WILL COVER APPROXIMATELY 1800 ACRES AND WE ARE COGNIZANT THAT THERE ARE SOME PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES IN THE AREA.
UM, AND AS STAFF POINTED OUT, WE ARE PURSUING WHAT IS CALLED A TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE, UH, ON THIS PROPERTY AS WELL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS LAND USE COMPONENT.
UH, AND THE TURS, UH, WILL BE USED TO FUND SOME OF THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS NECESSARY NOT ONLY FOR OUR DEVELOPMENT, BUT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT FOR FOR ENTRANCE AND EXITS FROM, UH, FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE OVERALL REQUEST TODAY IS TO DESIGNATE THE PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS AS BUSINESS INNOVATION, MIXED USE AND URBAN MIXED USE.
THESE PLANNED DESIGNATIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED LAND USES AND WILL SATISFY GOALS OF THE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY PLAN.
UH, CITY STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE OVERALL REQUEST AND THE NEXT STEPS WITH THE LAND USE COMPONENT ARE TO GO BEFORE ZONING COMMISSION, WHICH IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 5TH AND CITY COUNCIL, WHICH IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 5TH.
UH, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE, UH, BUT WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THE ANNEXATION OF THE 794 POINT 0.5 ACRES AS WELL AS THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR, UH, THE PROPERTY.
OKAY, UM, WE HAVE A FEW FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
SO WE WILL START WITH LEWIS ESCALANTE.
[00:30:02]
STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.I LIVE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET AT 72 60 SOUTH FOSTER ROAD.
AS RESIDENTS OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION BY THE STATE OF SAN ANTONIO, WE HAVE SEVERAL PRESSING CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS THAT WE FEEL MUST BE ADDRESSED BEFORE ANY FURTHER ACTIONS TAKEN ZONING IMPACT ON RURAL HOMES, WHAT WILL ANNEXATION MEAN IN TERMS OF ZONING FOR OUR NEARBY RURAL AREAS? WILL THERE BE CHANGES TO HIGHER HOMES AND LAND ARE CLASSIFIED OR REGULATED, ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE? NUMBER TWO, CITY CODES AND REGULATIONS.
IF ANNEX, ARE WE REQUIRED TO PERHAPS COMPLY WITH ALL CITY CODES AND ORDINANCES? HOW WILL THIS AFFECT OUR WAY OF LIFE, PARTICULARLY IN RELATION TO LONGSTANDING RURAL PRACTICES FOR, FOR INSTANCE, LIVESTOCK? WILL WE STILL BE ABLE TO RAISE CATTLE OR KEEP LIVESTOCK ON OUR PROPERTY AS WELL AS OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES? CAN WE CONTINUE LAWFUL ACTIVITIES SUCH AS SHOOTING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OR CONTROLLED BURNS? NUMBER THREE, TAX INCREASES.
HOW WILL ANNEXATION IMPACT OUR PROPERTIES? WILL TAXES RISE DUE TO THE CITY'S INTEREST IN OUR LAND OR WILL THEY REMAIN SIMILAR TO THE CURRENT LEVELS? MANY OF US ARE CONCERNED THAT ANNEXATION WILL LEAD TO SIGNIFICANT TAX BURDENS WITHOUT ADEQUATE REPRESENTATION OF SERVICES, UTILITY CHARGES AND ACCESS.
IN PREVIOUS AN ANNEXATION DISCUSSIONS, THERE WERE ATTEMPTS TO CHARGE RESIDENTS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES.
EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT CONNECTED TO CITY WATER SERVICES.
HOW WILL THE CITY HANDLE UTILITY SERVICE THIS TIME? WILL WE FACE SIMILAR CHARGES OR BE FORCED INTO CITY UTILITY SYSTEMS? NUMBER FIVE, LAND CLASSIFICATION.
HOW WILL THE AREA BE CLASSIFIED AFTER ANNEXATION? WILL IT REMAIN RURAL? WILL IT BE CLASSIFIED AS SUBURBAN OR URBAN? THE CLASSIFICATION AFFECTS NOT ONLY ZONING, BUT ALSO THE CHARACTER AND LIFESTYLE OF OUR COMMUNITY.
NUMBER SIX, TRAFFIC AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
OUR ROADS ARE ALREADY SMALL AND POORLY MAINTAINED AND AND ALL EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE CURRENT LEVEL OF TRAFFIC, EVEN WITH ONLY TWO DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA.
WHAT PLANS DOES THE CITY HAVE TO IMPROVE ROADS AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT, PARTICULARLY CONSIDERING THE POTENTIAL FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH? RESIDENTS ARE ALREADY ALL, ARE ALREADY LEAVING EARLIER AND EARLIER IN THE MORNING TO AVOID CONGESTION.
WHAT WILL THE CITY DO TO ACCOMMODATE THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC FLOW AND IMPROVE ROAD CONDITIONS? NUMBER SEVEN, FLOODING AND WATER MANAGEMENT.
OUR AREA IS PRONE TO FLOODING AND WE HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT HIGH ANNEXATION MIGHT IMPACT FLOOD MANAGEMENT.
WILL, WHERE WHERE WILL ACCESS WATER DISCHARGE AFTER NEW DEVELOPMENT? AND WHAT STEPS WILL THE CITY TAKE TO ENSURE THAT FLOODING DOES NOT WORSEN? WILL THE CITY INVEST IN INFRASTRUCTURE TO MITIGATE EXISTING FLOODING RISKS? IN CONCLUSION, WE, WHILE WE UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S INTEREST IN EXPANDING ITS BOUNDARIES, WE URGE THE CITY OFFICIALS TO CAREFULLY CONSIDER THE IMPACTS ON THOSE OF US WHO HAVE LIVED THERE FOR YEARS, IF NOT DECADES.
WE DO EXPECT SOME TRANSPARENCY, A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF HOW ANNEXATION WILL BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY, AND A CLEAR PLAN TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS WE HAVE RAISED.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THE MATTER.
IF YOU WANT TO, UM, ANSWER SOME, SOME ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS, YOU CAN TALK WITH CITY STAFF THOUGH, CAN PROVIDE SOME ANSWERS HERE.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
I LIVE AT 57 10 CAS THAT'S ON THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF THIS.
AND, UH, YOU GOTTA KNOW WHEN TO HOLD THEM AND WHEN TO FOLD THEM.
BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER ISSUES I NEED TO BRING TO ATTENTION TO THE CITY SO THAT THESE ARE ALSO ADDRESSED IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS OF ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT.
FIRST OF ALL, TO THE EAST OF THE, TO THE WEST OF THIS PROPOSED AREA IS A CREEK BY THE NAME OF CIO CREEK.
FIVE YEARS AGO, WE HAD SOMEBODY WHO MADE PROBABLY A COUPLE MILLION DOLLARS DUMPING, UH, ROOF TILES RIGHT BESIDE THE CREEK.
THEY'RE SITTING UP THERE NOW, THEY'RE NOT IN PART OF THIS ANNEXATION DEVELOPMENT WHERE THEY'RE SITTING THERE AND, UH, SOONER OR LATER THE CITY'S GONNA HAVE TO ADDRESS THOSE BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA LEACH INTO THE CREEK AND THAT'S IT.
PLEASE DRIVE ON THIS ROAD, BUT PLEASE BUCKLE UP.
YOU WILL BE BOUNCED AROUND LIKE EVERYTHING.
ONLY GONNA GET WORSE AT THE END OF THIS ROAD GOING TOWARDS SAN ANTONIO.
WE HAVE, UH, WW WHITE AND HILDEBRAND COME IN.
WE HAVE ALL THESE ROADS COME IN AND, UH, BEFORE IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE, SOMEBODY WILL BE KILLED THERE.
THE PROBLEM IS PART OF IT'S IN THE CITY, PART OF IT'S IN THE COUNTY.
OUR FAMILY, BY THE WAY, I'VE BEEN, MY FAMILY'S BEEN OUT THERE SINCE 1875.
UH, OUR FAMILY HAS BEEN ENCOURAGING THE CITY.
[00:35:01]
A GREAT PLACE FOR A ROUNDABOUT AND WE WOULD EVEN DONATE SOME OF OUR PROPERTY TO HELP GET THAT ROUNDABOUT.SO FAR, THE CITY AND THE COUNTY HAVE BEEN DOING THE ALPHONS AND GAS STONE THING.
THE FINAL ISSUE IS THERE ARE SOME OLD STRUCTURES ON THERE, HISTORICAL STRUCTURES THAT NOW I DON'T THINK HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.
UH, THERE IS, THIS IS PART OF THE OLD GAMBLER CINEMA PROPERTIES.
UH, THE GAMBLER PROPERTY, UH, HAS A LIMESTONE BUILDING ON IT THAT HAS BEEN, HAS BEEN RE RE REFURBISHED BY THE CURRENT OWNERS.
WE THINK THAT DESERVES HISTORICAL PRESERVATION.
THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER OLDER BUILDING, THE CINEMA PROPERTY THAT'S WOODEN, WOODEN PROPERTY AND IS PROBABLY IN REAL BAD SHAPE.
UH, AT LEAST ONE OF THOSE SHOULD BE, SHOULD BE RESTORED OR SHOULD BE SOME WAY SOMEHOW PROTECTED IN THIS REDEVELOPMENT.
UH, BY THE WAY, BOTH OF MY, I HAD BOTH GREAT GRANDPARENTS BORN ON ON THOSE PROPERTIES.
IF, IF IT'S NOT DEVELOPED, WE WILL CONTACT THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY AND LET THOSE LITTLE LADIES AND THE YELLOW ADDRESS ADDRESS THIS.
JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UM, I LIVE AT 7 7 5 4 SOUTH FOSTER ROAD ON A CORNER OF CASILLAS AND FOSTER.
UM, MY PROPERTY, I HAVE 112 ACRES THERE.
IT'S OUTSIDE THE ANNEXED PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA.
UM, MY MAIN CONCERN IS, IS, UM, TRAFFIC RIGHT NOW WITH CONSTRUCTION GOING ON THE SOUTH SIDE WITH NEW HOMES AND ALSO ON SUPPER SPRINGS AND FOSTER WITH NEW SUBDIVISIONS GOING IN.
THE TRAFFIC IS JUST HORRENDOUS IN THE MORNINGS AND IN THE AFTERNOONS.
UM, ALSO WITH, UM, THAT MANY HIGH HOUSES PROPOSED IN THAT SITE.
UM, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCHOOLING TOO.
I KNOW EAST CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT IS ALREADY OVER YOUR OVERPOPULATED ON THE PLAN THAT, UH, VERSA TERRA HAS, IT SHOWS TWO PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROPOSED FOR THAT, UM, WITHIN THAT 700 ACRE PLOT.
BUT, UM, SCHOOL BOARD IS NOT AWARE OF ANY NEW SCHOOLS GOING IN THAT AREA THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF THEM ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, ARE THEY GONNA BE PRIVATE SCHOOLS? I MEAN PRIVATE SCHOOLS OR PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE EAST CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ALSO? UM, THE FLOODING WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, NEW HOUSING CONSTRUCTION THAT HAS GONE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MY PROPERTY.
UM, IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS THERE HAS BEEN, THE FLOODING HAS PROBABLY INCREASED A HUNDRED PERCENT.
I HAVE PROPERTY LINES ON THE NORTH SIDE AND THE SOUTH SIDE AND THEM PROPERTIES GET FENCE, LINES GET WASHED OUT EVERY TIME WE HAVE A TWO OR THREE INCH RAIN.
SO THERE IS TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WATER COMING OFF OF THEM SUBDIVISIONS.
AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE CALIBERS CREEK, WHICH IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME THAT'S GONNA COME OUT OF THIS PROPOSED SITE.
THEY DID, UH, THE COUNTY DID BUILD TWO NEW BRIDGES ON CASILLAS PROBABLY FIVE, SIX YEARS AGO.
BUT, UM, I DON'T SEE THE ONE CLOSER TO FOSTER EVEN HANDLING THAT MUCH WATER IN THAT, THAT CALIBER'S CREEK ZONE THERE.
SO, UM, I WILL TALK TO THE CI THE CITY AND, AND THE DEVELOPER ON SOME MORE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, BUT THANK YOU.
NAME AN ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
UH, I'M HERE FOR STRICTLY, EXCUSE ME, SORRY.
I AM 200 FEET OUTSIDE THE ANNEXATION.
UM, I'M WORKING WITH TOMMY CALVERT.
HOW AT BEAR COUNTY AND WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO CALL CENTER.
'CAUSE NOBODY WANTS ME TO, WANTS ME TO HAVE THEIR NAME AND NUMBER.
WE ARE TRYING TO GET THAT ROAD FIXED.
IT HAS TOMMY CALVERT SPENT MILLIONS ABOUT FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO TO FIX THOSE LOW WATER CROSSINGS.
I WATCHED, EXCUSE ME, I'M SORRY.
UH, AN EAST CENTRAL BUS ALMOST FLIP ON ITS SIDE.
I HEAR THIS BIG OLD RUMBLING SPEED LIMIT IS 35.
I WATCHED THIS LONG YELLOW BUS HIT THE FIRST BUMP, THE BACK REARS UP, GOES THIS WAY AND COMES BACK.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE KIDS ON THAT BUS OR NOT, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT.
THE POINT IS THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWING SPEED LIMITS OF 35.
[00:40:01]
IT'S A TWO LANE ROAD WITH A YELLOW LINE.THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS, NO EASEMENT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
I'M GONNA SEE BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES.
I'M SORRY, I GET, THIS IS JUST A VERY PASSIONATE THING FOR ME.
BUT THAT ROAD IS JUST, UM, I CALL IT THE TRIAD OFF OF WW WHITE TO HILDEBRANDT AND CASILLAS ROAD.
SO WHEN YOU WANNA CROSS OVER FROM CASIAS ROAD TO WW WHITE, YOU HAVE TO CREEP OUT, CREEP OUT, CREEP OUT AND PRAY.
OKAY? THERE'S, THERE WAS A ROLL OVER THERE ABOUT FOUR WEEKS AGO.
THERE WAS A YOUNG LADY WHO RAMMED INTO A, A UTILITY POLE A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET FROM MY HOUSE BECAUSE THE ROAD IS SO BAD, BUT NO ONE IS TAKING ACTION.
AND I'M, I'M AT MY WIT'S END HERE.
IF THAT BUS HAD FALLEN OVER, EVERYBODY WOULD BE OUT THERE FIXING THAT ROAD RIGHT NOW.
SO WITH, THERE'S FOUR NEW SUBDIVISIONS AT WHAT I CALL THE TRIAD THAT HAVE GONE UP.
TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED TREMENDOUSLY.
UM, WHAT WAS I GONNA SAY? AND THEN, UM, UH, THE BUILDING, THE, THE BIG SEMIS WITH THE BUILDING MATERIALS COMING ACROSS AT 45, 50 MILES AN HOUR ON CASILLAS ROAD.
IT'S ALREADY STARTED IN THE LAST THREE YEARS.
I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT THAT ROAD IS GONNA BE LIKE ONCE ALL THIS OTHER DEVELOPMENT STARTS.
CAN WE RESTRICT THE USAGE OF CASILLAS ROAD? THERE ARE WEIGHT LIMIT SIGNS ON EITHER END OF THE ROAD THAT NOBODY BOTHERS TO LOOK AT.
UH, I'VE SPOKEN TO SHERIFF SALAZAR ALREADY AND HE'S, HE'S SENT A MOTORCYCLE PATROL OUT THERE A COUPLE OF TIMES.
THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGH TO GO AROUND.
SO THAT IS MY CONCERN AND MY SELFISHNESS HERE TODAY IS CASSIAS ROAD.
MY NAME IS GAIL CALDER AND I LIVE AT 6 0 1 4 CAS ROAD.
I AM LAURA'S NEIGHBOR, AND I HAVE THE VERY SAME CONCERNS.
IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS JUST AN ONGOING PROBLEM IN ALL OF SAN ANTONIO.
NOT JUST OUR AREA, OUR ROADS, OUR ROADS, OUR ROADS.
WERE ALWAYS BEGGING FOR PLEASE HELP ON OUR ROADS, WHICH SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT.
I WOULD LOVE FOR Y'ALL JUST ONCE, ONE TIME, TAKE A RIDE AND GO TO THE CORNER OF HILDERBRAND CASILLAS AND WW WHITE.
AND THE TRAFFIC IS SO BAD NOW THAT I TAKE MY LIFE IN MY OWN HANDS JUST TO TRY TO GET TO THE FREEWAY.
I'M ONLY TWO MILES FROM THE FREEWAY.
TWO MILES, EXACTLY TWO MILES, ONE MILE FROM THAT CORNER AND MY LIFE.
AND THEY SAY MOST ACCIDENTS HAPPEN CLOSE TO HOME.
DO YOU HAVE TO WAIT? DO Y'ALL HAVE TO WAIT TILL SOMEBODY GETS KILLED TO BE ABLE TO FIX SOMETHING? OUR ROAD IS A NIGHTMARE CASILLAS ROAD.
TRAFFIC IS GETTING PUSHED OFF OF SULFUR SPRINGS ROAD ONTO OUR ROAD.
THE HIGH SCHOOL, THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, THE PEOPLE THAT WORK AT CALAVERAS LAKE AT THE BIG, UH, ELECTRICAL PLACE OVER THERE.
AND THEY USE OUR ROAD LIKE A RACE TRACK.
AND LIKE SHE SAID, THAT YOUNG LADY, THE PEOPLE, THEY DON'T KNOW THIS ROAD, AND THEY'RE, YOU HEAR THEM BOTTOMING OUT CONSTANTLY.
STARTING AT FOUR O'CLOCK, FOUR 30 IN THE MORNING.
BIG TRUCKS ARE COMING THROUGH.
WE HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME BETWEEN SIX AND NINE O'CLOCK.
IT'S A RACEWAY, HIGH SCHOOLERS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND ALL THE SCHOOLS ARE STAGGERED.
PEOPLE ARE LEAVING EARLY FOR WORK.
PEOPLE ARE GETTING TO SCHOOL EARLY, AND THEN HIGH SCHOOL DOESN'T START UNTIL EIGHT 20.
SO THEN WE HAVE THE HIGH SCHOOL TRAFFIC.
IF YOU'VE EVER TRIED GOING DOWN SULFUR SPRINGS ROAD, YOU'LL FIND OUT ALL THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE DOWN THERE, I FEEL SORRY FOR 'EM.
THEY CAN'T EVEN GET OUT ONTO THE ROADS.
A YEAR AND A HALF AGO WE TALKED TO TOMMY CALVERT, WE TALKED TO, UM, REPRESENTATIVE LUHAN, AND WE EXPLAINED ABOUT THESE ROADS.
WE'RE NOT BEING BABIES ABOUT THIS.
WE REALLY, SERIOUSLY WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ALL THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION.
WE KNOW THAT IF YOU SAY IT'S ON FOUR 10, WE KNOW THAT Y'ALL SAY IT'S GONNA BE ON SULFUR SPRINGS ROAD, BUT THAT PUSHES EVERYTHING OUR WAY.
[00:45:01]
FARM ROAD, WHAT DO YOU DO? AND THEN THE BRIDGES WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THE BRIDGES, BUT THEY SPENT ALL THAT MONEY AND THEY STILL FLOOD.AND NOW WITH ALL THIS CONSTRUCTION, WATER'S GONNA RUN EVEN FASTER OFF OF THOSE COM OUTTA THAT COMMUNITY AND THE IT'S GONNA FLOOD WORSE.
I APPRECIATE Y'ALL TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO US.
PLEASE, PLEASE, IF YOU CAN TAKE A FEW MINUTES OUTTA YOUR DAY AND JUST DRIVE OUT THERE, YOU'LL UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND THAT IS EVERYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
SO WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND START WITH COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
WE'RE GONNA START ON THE RIGHT WITH COMMISSIONER ZUKI.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY THAT CAME IN TODAY TO SPEAK ABOUT THEIR CONCERN ABOUT THE ROADWAYS THAT IT'S SURROUNDING, THE PROPOSED, UH, DEVELOPMENT AREAS AND THE ANNEXATION.
UH, WHILE I CAN, I CAN TRUST EVERYBODY SAYING HERE ABOUT THE PROBLEMS AT THE SAME TIME.
UH, ANY ACTIONS BY THE CITY TO MAKE THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
UH, UH, WHEN WE VOTE ON IT TODAY, UH, ROADWAYS AND TRAFFIC AND BACK STUDIES, UH, CONSTRUCTIONS OR EXPANSIONS OF THE ROADS WILL BE PART OF ANY DEVELOPMENT.
UH, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR SURE ABOUT THAT, BUT, UH, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT COMING IN, NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENT THAT COMING IN, I BELIEVE, UH, THE CITY AND THE COUNTY SHOULD STEP IN AND MAKE, UH, THE CHANGES THAT'S NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE THE TRAFFIC IN THE AREA.
SO I HOPE THAT WILL BE A POSITIVE THINGS THAT COMES INTO THE AREA.
SO I, I CANNOT TRUST THAT I CAN BE HAVING THE TIME TO GO AND CHECK, EXCUSE ME.
UH, MY QUESTION TO THE CITY, THE ANNEXATIONS THAT, UH, UH, THAT THE CITY HAS LOOKED AT IT, IT IS JUST THE TWO POINTS THAT IS WITHIN THE CITY LIMIT.
UH, DOES THE CITY LOOK INTO OTHER ASPECT AS WELL, MORE THAN THOSE TWO POINTS TO ACCEPT A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, LIKE A TEXT, LIKE, UH, ECONOMIC IMPACT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT? DOES THE CITY DO THE DUE DILIGENCE TO LOOK INTO THOSE ASPECT AS WELL? SO THOSE TWO CRITERIA ARE WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR A PETITION TO BE CONSIDERED AND ACCEPTED.
NOT NECESSARILY WHAT GOES TOWARDS A CITY RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE ANNEXATION.
THOSE TWO THINGS JUST NEED TO BE MET FOR US TO ACCEPT THE PETITION.
THE THIRD REQUIREMENT WOULD BE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER'S PETITION FOR THE, THEY HAVE TO OWN THE PROPERTY.
IF THEY DON'T OWN THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET SIGNATURES FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS APPROVING THE PETITION TO BE FILED FOR ANNEXATION.
THE CITY CAN'T UNILATERALLY ANNEX.
SO IT'S THOSE TWO CRITERIA PLUS THE OWNERSHIP ASPECT.
SO IF WE VOTE ON IT TODAY, THIS IS STILL GOING TO GIVE THE CITY THE CHANCE TO, TO LOOK INTO THAT PETITION.
R YES, IT'S STILL IN THE REVIEW PROCESS.
JUST, UM, HI, I AM PRISCILLA ROSALES, THE PLANNING MANAGER.
JUST WANTED TO ADD, SINCE THE, IF THE PROPERTY COMES INTO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO LIMITS, THEN THE CITY CAN ALLOCATE, PUT IT INTO A CAPITAL PROJECTS IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
AT THIS POINT IT IS OUT IN THE COUNTY.
SO A LOT OF THE CONCERNS, AND THERE WOULD BE COUNTY PROJECTS, SO IT WOULD HELP IF THOSE ROADS ARE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
BUT SOME OF THE ROADS ARE NOT IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AT THIS POINT AND ARE, AND WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ANNEX THEM BECAUSE IT IS A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION.
THE, THE OTHER ITEM I WANT TO ADD, ANNEXATION, SIR.
THE PUBLIC PUBLIC, SORRY, THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED.
PLEASE REFRAIN FROM SPEAKING AT THIS TIME.
THE OTHER ITEM THAT I WANTED TO MENTION IN RELATION TO THE ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE IS THAT IT'S NOT MERELY A MATTER OF DOES THE CITY BUILD IT AND MAINTAIN IT AND DOES THE COUNTY BUILD IT AND MAINTAIN IT.
THE CITY, IF IT IS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, CAN APPLY THE FULL SUITE OF MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS.
ONE AMONG WHICH IS THE ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY OF THE PROJECT.
WHAT ITS IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY IS, AND THE CITY'S ABILITY TO REQUIRE THAT THE DEVELOPER FOR THE PROPERTY IMPROVE ROADWAYS SO AS TO PROVIDE THE, THE NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS.
SO IF THE PROPERTY IS BROUGHT INTO THE CITY LIMITS, WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPLY MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS, WHICH THE COUNTY DOES NOT APPLY.
AND, AND I ALSO WANNA ADD THAT THIS, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PART OF THE TS UM, PROJECT, WHICH ACTUALLY WOULD ALSO HELP, UH, FUND SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DI WITHIN THE DISTRICT IN THIS OR THIS T DISTRICT.
SO THAT'S ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THEM THAT THEY WOULD ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO APPLY.
[00:50:02]
I CAN SEE, UH, WITHIN THE PLAT THERE IS A RED LINE FOR A SURROUNDING AREA WITHIN, UH, SEPARATE THE PROPOSED URBAN MIXED FROM THE SOUTH PROPOSED BUSINESS MIXED USE.THIS IS PART OF THE LAND THAT WE ARE VOTING ON THE MIDDLE.
YEAH, I THIS LIKE A POCKET IN THE MIDDLE THAT'S NOT INCLUDED.
WHAT IS IN THERE? IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.
IT IS, IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY.
THIS IS A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION.
THOSE ARE PROPERTIES THAT THE DEVELOPER PROPERTY OWNER DOES NOT OWN.
SO THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION.
SO THIS IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PARTICULAR? IT IS NOT.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER SIPES LOGAN ANSWERED MOST OF MY QUESTIONS.
UM, UH, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS REGARDING THE TURS.
CAN, UM, WOULD SOME OF THOSE FUNDS ALSO BE USED? IS ARE, ARE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS USED ON THE STREETS ON THE PERIPHERY OR IS IT ONLY FOR WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF? TS ONES WOULD BE USED FOR A MIXTURE, PRIMARILY FOR, UM, DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TS.
BUT IF RUSH, I'M SORRY, EXCUSE ME.
IF ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY COMES BACK AND REQUIRES THAT WE MAKE IMPROVEMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARIES, WE'LL BE REQUIRED TO MAKE THOSE AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER MILAN? NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? NO QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FUNNER? NO QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONER GARCIA, UH, MY QUESTION WAS IF THE CITIZENS OR WORKING IN COMMITTEE WITH, UH, ANY OFFICIALS THAT HAVE, UH, ANY AUTHORITY TO, TO THIS PROPERTY? SO IS IT OFF THE OFF LIMITS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE'VE NOT ACCEPTED IT SO I LET, YEAH, LET ME TAKE A STAB AT THAT ONE.
SO IT SEEMED LIKE WE HEARD THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S NAME MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES.
SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY THE APPROPRIATE POLITICAL ENTITY TO BE REACHING OUT TO.
IF THIS WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS, UM, I'M ASSUMING IS THIS COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO OR THREE THAT IT WOULD BE THREE.
SO IT WOULD BE PART OF COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE AND YOU'D HAVE THE ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION AT THE CITY COUNCIL OFFICE COMMISSIONER IAN? YEAH.
SO ON, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPOSED URBAN NEWS ON THE WHOLE EAST SIDE OF THIS, OF THE SANITATION AREA IS IT SHOWS UP ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN.
IT'S AN 86 FOOT RIGHT OF AWAY, BUT IS THAT, IS THIS PROPERTY INCLUDING THE LAND THAT IS THE MAJOR THIRD THAT'S ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE? OR IS THIS A BUDDING IT IS A BUDDING NEW SULFUR SPRINGS ROAD.
I THINK THAT'S THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE THAT ON YEAH, IT'S ON, IT'S RUNNING NORTH AND SOUTH ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY APPEARS TO BE A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
NO, THAT IS, YEAH, WE ARE NOT INCLUDING THAT.
SO WHEN THIS GETS DEVELOPED, SO FOR STAFF WHEN THIS GETS DEVELOPED, UM, IF THAT LAND, WHICH IS TAGGED TO BE AN 86 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, CAN THE, WHEN AND WHEN THEY PLAN A BUDDING THAT, CAN THE CITY MAKE THEM DO IMPROVEMENTS IF, IF THAT'S IN THE COUNTY OR IS THAT OFF LIMITS DURING THE PLATING PROCESS? I NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT ONE.
I'M JUST, AND YOU KNOW, I'M GLAD IT'S THERE 'CAUSE I THINK IT WOULD HELP WITH PRIORITIES.
BUT THAT GOES TO MY NEXT QUESTION IS CONIUS ROAD, WHICH WE HEARD A LOT FROM THE, THE COMMUNITY ABOUT CONCERNS ON THE ROADWAY THAT'S NOT ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN, NOT EVEN AS A COLLECTOR.
AND I'M WONDERING BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN, IS THAT GONNA RE IS THAT GONNA LOWER IT IN THE, IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS WHEN, WHEN MONEY IS ALLOCATED TO IMPROVE ROADS? AND THAT'S, THAT'S, I'M JUST TRYING TO ANSWER SOME OF THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS ON THAT.
UM, I KNOW THAT WE'RE HEARING THE ANNEXATION, WE'RE HEARING THE LAND USE COMPONENT, BUT SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE ALSO BE LOOKING AT A, A POSSIBLE ALLOCATION OF A COLLECTOR ASSIGNMENT, UH, TO CASIA AT THIS TIME AS WELL? NOT AT THIS TIME, BUT AT LEAST SOON, JUST TO HELP ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS.
I THINK, I THINK THE ANSWER TO THE, SO THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT IN THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO IS GOING TO BE TAKING A LOOK AT A MAJOR OVERHAUL TO THE CITY'S MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLANNED THAT WAS INITIALLY SLATED FOR CONSIDERATION THIS YEAR, BUT THEY WERE TASKED WITH OTHER PROJECTS LIKE TOD.
UM, AS YOU ARE PROBABLY WELL AWARE, THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN WAS ADOPTED MANY YEARS AGO AND WHILE IT'S UNDERGONE SOME AMENDMENTS, IT HASN'T GONE THROUGH THE FULL REVIEW.
UH, SO I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THAT WOULD BE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THIS BODY IN THE FUTURE MOVING FORWARD.
BUT AGAIN, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THAT'S NOT AN AGENDIZED
[00:55:01]
ITEM.SO WE CAN, AND THEN MY, MY LAST QUESTION, THAT LANDLOCKED PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S EXCLUDED, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S GONNA BE A, A HYBRID OF ESD DISTRICTS, SAN ANTONIO FIRE, POLICE AND COUNTY PROVIDING SERVICES THAT BECAUSE IT'S LANDLOCKED, IS, DOES THIS, CAN CITY ENTITIES SERVE THAT AREA OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE COUNTY? I'M JUST WONDERING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THEM GETTING TO IT AND HOW THAT WORKS.
THERE'S USUALLY SOME, UM, MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS AND THE ESDS.
SO IN THIS CASE THERE IS SOME EXISTING ONES ALREADY.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT WOULD BE EFFICIENT.
THAT'S ALL TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, UM, ON THE, THAT NORTH SOUTH ROADWAY, EVEN IF IT IS NOT INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT RUNS UP TO IT, WE CAN REQUIRE IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT ROADWAY AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
WELL THAT SOUNDS LIKE GOOD NEWS FOR THE COMMUNITY AT LEAST.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH COMMISSIONER LOPEZ.
OKAY, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, JUST A GENERAL STATEMENT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, BEFORE US TODAY IS NOT, YOU KNOW, CASSIAS ROAD OR CONSIDERING THE ANNEXATION AND THE PLAN AMENDMENT, BUT TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, HEARING ALL THE DISCUSSION, THE FASTEST AND MOST EFFICIENT WAY FOR CASSIAS ROAD TO SEE ATTENTION IS BY ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY, QUITE HONESTLY, UM, BECAUSE OF THE, THE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO CAN BRING TO THE TABLE AND THE RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS PLACED ON THE DEVELOPER.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT MR. ORIAN SAID, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT'S A POSITIVE THING FOR CASILLAS ROAD THAT THIS MAY HAPPEN.
UM, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME.
I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AMENDMENT EIGHT AND, UM, ANNEXATION ITEM NUMBER 17.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FAULKNER FAULKNER.
UH, STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL.
OKAY, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER NINE.
ALEXA RATANA PLANNER WIT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE NEAR NORTHWEST COMMUNITY PLAN.
FROM URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 10 10 WARNER AVENUE, THERE WERE 21 NOTICES MAILED FIVE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET.
KEYSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE AND THREE IN FAVOR OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET.
THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FROM URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL IS REQUESTED TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO C3 CD GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLE STORAGE.
THE EXISTING URBAN LOAD DENSITY PERMITS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH IS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE EXISTING SURROUNDING AREA.
THERE ARE A COUPLE MODERATE COMMERCIAL USES WITHIN PROXIMITY, BUT STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION, WHICH SUPPORTS LARGE SCALE COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL INCONSISTENT WITH THE BUDDING LAND USES.
INTRODUCING THE DESIGNATION TO THE AREA WOULD ALLOW HIGH INTENSE COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT INTO THE ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS CASE WENT TO ZONING COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2024, WHERE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, MY NAME IS MRS. MARTIN, OWNER OF THE 10 10 AVENUE.
I LIVE BEHIND THE PROPERTY OVER 20 YEARS WITH MY SMALL FAMILY, MY HUSBAND, MY TWO KIDS, AND SUDDENLY I LOST MY HUSBAND FOUR YEARS AGO.
THERE'S THE REASON I DON'T WANT TO MOVE BECAUSE OF THE, MY MEMORIES WITH MY TWO KIDS AND I HAVE BEHIND THE, THE LAND SITTING THERE, THEN I'M THINKING TO IMPROVE.
AND THE OTHER SIDE IS MY DAD GIFTED THAT PROPERTY AND I DON'T WANT TO SELL ALSO, BUT IF YOU GUYS CAN HELP ME FOR THE IMPROVE THEN FOR LIVING WITH MY KIDS FOR HELPFUL AND THE THIS SITUATION, I, I MET THE DISTRICT ONE RYAN SALT AND HE DIDN'T SEE ANY PROBLEM.
HE SAY AROUND 200 FEET A NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NO PROBLEM, THEN I'M OKAY WITH THE IMPROVE THE
[01:00:01]
PROPERTY.NOBODY'S SIGNED UP TO SPEAK SO WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
WE WILL START ON THE LEFT WITH COMMISSIONER LOPEZ.
UH, MY QUESTION IS IT, IF IF ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED THIS, DID ANYTHING COME OUT OF THAT MEETING THAT, THAT WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THAT AFFECTS THE LAND USE OR, OR AT ALL? UH, THEY PRETTY MUCH REVIEWED THE ACTUAL LAND USE.
UH, MS. MARTIN WAS UM, SUGGESTING, SO THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
BUT YOU GUYS SPECIFICALLY ARE LOOKING AT LAND USE AND AGAIN, Y'ALL ARE RECOMMENDING BODY AND IT IS CITY COUNCIL WHO MAKES THAT FINAL DECISION? I WAS, I WAS WONDERING WHY STAFF WAS IN DENIAL IF, IF IT WENT THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING AND EVERYONE ELSE SEEMS HAPPY WITH IT, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT.
NO, UM, SIMPLY STAFF IS A SECONDARY GROUP THAT MAKES THEIR OWN RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO WE ALL DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO ALIGN.
WAS THAT CONSIDERED AT ALL? I THINK, UH, STORAGE USE, YOU KNOW, LIKE I CAN DO THE, LIKE BECAUSE THIS IS A FLOOD ZONE AND YOU KNOW I CAN DO THE LIMITED CONSTRUCTION THEN IF I USE FOR THE C3 OR C DOESN'T MATTER FOR ABOUT THIS SITUATION BUT, UH, C3 ZONING AND I DON'T WANT TO BE LOWER BECAUSE YOU KNOW, IN FUTURE SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, CHANGES WISE OR ANYTHING, THEN I CAN DO THE CONSTRUCTION OR ANYTHING THEN C TWO.
IF I GO C TWO FOR STORAGE, THEN NOT, YOU KNOW, LIKE SITUATION WISE NOT WORTH IT.
WELL OUR, OUR HESITANCY, UM, LAST WEEK AND, AND THERE WAS ACTUALLY A MOTION TO DENY YOUR REQUEST LAST TIME AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE THIS PIECE OF LAND IS VERY SMALL FOR A REGIONAL COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION, IT IS ABOUT ONE 40TH OF THE SIZE, UM, THAT IT WOULD NORMALLY BE FOR THIS KIND OF LAND USE DESIGNATION.
SO, UM, SO THERE WAS A WAY FOR YOU TO ACCOMPLISH THE VEHICLE STORAGE? MM-HMM
BUT IF, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU'RE INTERESTED IN CONSIDERING.
IS THAT CORRECT FOR THE C TWO C TWO ZONING? C TWO C TWO CD ZONING? RIGHT, RIGHT.
NO, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, IN FUTURE PROBABLY IN CASE THE DENY FOR THE STORAGE, THEN IF I NEED TO BUILD SOMETHING THEN I DON'T, I WANT TO SEE THREE ZONING IF I NEED TO DO THE CONSTRUCTION FOR ANYTHING LIVING FOR, BECAUSE BEHIND I HAVE THE HOUSE I LIVE 20 YEARS LIKE, YOU KNOW, WITH MY TWO KIDS AND I DON'T WANT TO MOVE THEIR PLACE.
THAT'S THE REASON I NEED TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY THEN FOR MY LIVING WITH MY KIDS.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER MILER? NO QUESTIONS.
I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS EITHER.
I JUST WANNA ECHO COMMISSIONER SIEGEL'S COMMENTS.
IT WAS EXACTLY WHAT WAS ON MY MIND.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? NOT WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I MOVE TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MILAM STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL VOTE.
MOTION DENIED OR MOTION CARRIES RIGHT? MOTION CARRIES.
OKAY, ITEM NUMBER 11, ALEXA RATANA PLANNER WITH
[01:05:01]
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.ITEM NUMBER 11 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE EAST SIDE AREA.
COMMUNITY PLAN FROM URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 2 2 2 CORLESS THERE WERE 37 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
THREE OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET COLISEUM.
WILLOW PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE AND FOUR OPPOSED OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET.
THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FROM URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS REQUESTED TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO RM FOUR RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT.
THE EXISTING URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PERMIT, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT WHICH IS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE EXISTING SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION WHICH SUPPORTS MORE INTENSE RESIDENTIAL USES, INCONSISTENT WITH THE BUDDING LAND USES SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
MAINTAIN A DENSITY CONSISTENT WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IS APPLICANT PRESENT, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
SO LUANN GONZALEZ REPRESENTING ADDRESS 2 2 2 COURT LIST.
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR ANY ADDRESS? COMMISSION JUST I LIKE TO MENTION THAT UM, I WAS DOING THIS ZONING SO THAT IN CASE I WENT TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, FOUR UNITS LATER ON, IT'S ALREADY IN THE RIGHT ZONING.
THE SEVEN OUP POSITIONS THAT ARE ON THERE ARE FROM A REAL ESTATE AGENT THAT OWNS SEVEN PROPERTIES, NOT ACTUALLY HOMEOWNERS.
UM, I AM PART OF THE HOME ASSOCIATION.
I SPOKE WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE HOME ASSOCIATION.
UM, HE IS IN FAVOR OF IT AND TELL ME THAT, YOU KNOW, HE'LL WRITE A LETTER, SEND AN EMAIL.
I'M HOPING IT'S NOT TOO LATE FOR THAT, BUT I DO, I HAVE SPOKE WITH THEM.
THEY ARE IN FAVOR OF IT AND JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I POINTED OUT THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO RESIDENTS IN THE AREA THAT ARE HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS.
SO WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS START ON THE RIGHT WITH COMMISSIONER ZUKI.
COMMISSIONER SIPES QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, SO THE, THE REQUEST IS FOR EVENTUALLY LIKE AN RM FOUR, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, CURRENTLY IN URBAN LOAD DENSITY, WHICH YOU KNOW, ITS CURRENT LAND USE, LOOKING UP THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY, IT APPEARS THAT RM FIVE OR RM SIX WOULD ACTUALLY BE AVAILABLE, CORRECT? OR GIVE ME ONE SECOND.
UM, THE, SO THE PROPERTY SIZE IS 0.1435 ACRES, WHICH IS TECHNICALLY, OH, JUST GIMME ONE SECOND.
SO IT IS APPROXIMATELY 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
SO THE, UM, YOU ARE CORRECT, THE RM SIX, UM, OR EVEN AN RM FIVE WOULD BE, COULD BE USED.
AND THOSE I BELIEVE ARE PERMIT, BUT THEY'RE LESSER DENSITY THAN THE FOUR.
WHEREAS THE RM FIVE ALLOWS THREE UNITS, RM SIX ONLY ALLOWS TWO.
YES, I I GUESS THE LONG WAY TO GET TO MY POINT IS THAT MULTIFAMILY WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED IN, IN THE CURRENT DESIGNATION.
THE MULTIPLE UNITS WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED, CORRECT? YES.
UH, THAT WAS ALL MY QUESTIONS.
NO QUESTIONS MR. SIEGEL? I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER GARCIA? NO QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER ORIAN? NO QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, I GUESS JUST CLARIFY, SO SHE WANTS TO BUILD FOUR UNITS AND RIGHT NOW INTO THE CURRENT DESIGNATION, SHE COULD BUILD FOUR UNITS.
IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? NOT WITH THE CURRENT, NO.
SHE'S EXISTING R FOUR, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BUT SHE'S WANTING TO DO THE REZONING TO RM FOUR.
RIGHT, WHICH WOULD PERMIT THE FOUR UNITS.
UM, WHAT WHAT DOES REMAIN AVAILABLE WITHOUT A PLAN AMENDMENT IS YOU, THERE ARE ZONING DISTRICTS YOU COULD REQUEST THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED FUTURE LAND USE PLAN THAT STILL ALLOW MULTIPLE UNITS.
YOU COULD REQUEST R FOUR FIVE OR SIX WITH CONDITIONAL USE FOR FOUR UNITS.
YOU COULD REQUEST RM FIVE, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THREE, RM SIX WOULD ALLOW TWO.
NONE OF THOSE SCENARIOS WOULD REQUIRE A PLAN AMENDMENT.
AND SO THIS, HAS THIS CASE GONE TO ZONING ALREADY? NO.
[01:10:01]
NO.IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION MOVE TO DENY THE REQUEST.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST BY COMMISSIONER MILAM.
A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FAULKNER STAFF, PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL VOTE.
UH, IT IS THREE 13 AND COMMISSIONER FAULKNER IS LEAVING THE MEETING AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 16.
JUST TO MAKE YOU AWARE, BOTH OF THE FOLKS SIGNED UP FOR ITEM 16 HAVE LEFT.
KELLY SANDERS, PLANNING COORDINATOR WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
ITEM 16 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE SOUTH CENTRAL SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY PLAN FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE LOCATED AT 3 5 0 STONEWALL AVENUE.
THERE WERE 46 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND WITHIN 200 FEET.
LEO'S NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, NO RESPONSE FROM THEM.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO MIXED USE TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO IDZ THREE HIGH INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN C TWO DISTRICT AND 125 DWELLING UNITS.
THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE IS REQUESTED TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO IDZ THREE.
AS I MENTIONED, GIVEN THE PROXIMITY TO PROPERTIES WITH THE MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE IN THE AREA.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED LAND USE WOULD SUPPORT THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH ENCOURAGES ADDITIONAL HOUSING FOR ALL GROWING OR FOR THE GROWING SAN ANTONIO POPULATION AT ALL INCOME LEVELS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 15 EAST COMMERCE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 5.
UM, I MEAN, NO ONE'S HERE, BUT I'LL GO OVER REAL QUICK.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, I MEAN THIS IS REALLY GOOD INFILL DEVELOPMENT.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY A BAR, A NIGHTCLUB, AND A CLOSED USED CAR LOT.
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS A SMALL FOUR STORY, FOUR FIVE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX.
WE'RE STILL KIND OF NEGOTIATING THAT WITH THE CITY STAFF, UM, FOR THE PROPERTY WITH SOME SURFACE PARKING.
WE BELIEVE IT'S A GOOD ADOPTIVE USE AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CORRECT A LITTLE A**L, IF YOU WILL, IN THE, UM, LAND USE DESIGNATIONS.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE LAND USE MAP, IN A PERFECT WORLD, IF WE CAN GET THERE, THERE, IN A PERFECT WORLD, THE MIXED USE WOULD'VE JUST KIND OF ALIGNED, YOU KNOW, STRAIGHT LINES UP AND DOWN PLEASANTON ROAD, BUT THIS PROPERTY WAS, WAS LEFT OUT FOR WHATEVER REASON.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, TO CORRECT THAT SO WE CAN DO SOME, SOME GOOD INFILL DEVELOPMENT THAT THAT'D BE GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
LEO'S REAL QUICK, I'LL JUST ADD, I MEAN, THEY, THEY'RE KIND OF DEFUNCT NOW, SO I'M KIND OF TRYING TO WHACK-A-MOLE WITH PEOPLE THAT COME AND, AND SPEAK, BUT THEY LEFT BEFORE I COULD GRAB 'EM.
UM, SINCE THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ARE NO LONGER HERE, WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER GARCIA, NO QUESTIONS.
AND I'LL MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
NO QUESTIONS AND SECOND NO QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER ZUKI, HOW BIG IS THE LOT AND HOW MANY UNITS ARE PROPOSED? UM, THE LOT IS 1.29 ACRES.
WE WERE ASKING FOR THE 125 UNITS WERE GONNA COME DOWN.
UM, I'M KIND OF NEGOTIATING WITH STAFF ON WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS GONNA BE FOR THE ZONING COMMISSION PORTION OF THIS.
SO I'VE, I'VE REACHED OUT TO MY CLIENT.
I'M JUST KIND OF PLAYING PHONE TAG WITH HIM, BUT I'M THINKING WE CAN MAYBE REDUCE THAT AND COME INTO SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE IN CONJUNCTION WITH STAFF WANTS.
BUT WE DEFINITELY WANT A MULTI-STORY BUILDING 'CAUSE THEY WANT TO HAVE SOME GROUND FLOOR, UH, RETAIL.
[01:15:02]
ALL RIGHT.UH, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MILAM.
[Approval of Minutes ]
LAST UP IS THE MINUTES FROM LAST MEETING.IS THERE ANY CORRECTIONS, COMMENTS, ISSUES WITH THE MINUTES? HEARING NONE.
MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL.
THE MINUTES ARE THE HARDEST ITEM OF THE DAY.
CAN STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL? VOTE.
IS THERE ANY STAFF PRESENTATIONS OR ANNOUNCEMENTS OR ANYTHING OF THE NATURE? NO.
IT IS THREE 19 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.