[00:00:05]
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE OUR SPANISH INTERPRETATION STATEMENT PLEASE.
MY NAME IS JOHN BUSANTE AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT FIVE ZONING COMMISSIONER.
THE TIME IS ONE OH ONE AND I HEREBY CALL THIS REGULARLY NOTICED MEETING OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION.
IN THE SESSION, I LIKE TO DO ROLL CALL BY ALLOWING THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON MY FAR LEFT.
MY NAME IS ROB SIPES AND I REPRESENT DISTRICT SEVEN.
I REPRESENT DISTRICT EIGHT MOSES VE, DISTRICT NINE, JOHN WHITSETT, DISTRICT 10.
PETER RODRIGUEZ, DISTRICT FOUR, JANELLE CHASE MAYOR'S OFFICE.
ALRIGHT, STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT.
IF EVERYONE WOULD PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR.
ALRIGHT, PRIOR TO BEGINNING OUR HEARING, I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF IF YOU WOULD, BEFORE I BEGIN, PLEASE TURN YOUR PHONES ON VIBRATE OR TURN THEM OFF.
THE ZONING COMMISSION IS AN 11 MEMBER BODY APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON ZONING CASES.
UPON RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION, YOU WILL HAVE SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO FORWARD YOUR CASE TO CITY COUNCIL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROCEDURE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CASE MANAGER.
STAFF WILL BEGIN EACH CASE WITH A SHORT PRESENTATION OF THE REQUEST.
PART OF THE PRESENTATION INCLUDES A MAP THAT SHOWS THE AREA TO BE CONSIDERED FOR REZONING AND PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE SUBJECT.
PROPERTY CHECK MARKS INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X INDICATES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION.
FOLLOWING THIS PRESENTATION AND ANY QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR REQUEST.
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A PROPOSED REZONING, YOU WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER OF THAT YOU HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT IN OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
YOU WILL BE INFORMED THAT THE THREE MINUTES ARE UP AND FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER, THAT SPEAKER WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE GIVING THEIR TIME FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK.
AND PLEASE NOTE WHEN THAT PERSON IS GOING UP TO THE PODIUM, UM, THAT YOU ARE YIELDING YOUR TIME, THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL LIMITED TO ONE SPEAKER WITH A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT STAFF, JUST FOR EVERYONE'S INFORMATION, WE ARE MOVING ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO INDIVIDUAL.
[Zoning Items ]
ARE THERE ANY POSTPONED, WITHDRAWN, OR PULLED ITEMS? YES.OKAY, SO LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER 14 ON WEST JONES AVENUE, UH, THAT ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY.
YOU WILL GET SOMETHING IN THE MAIL THAT SAYS 17 OR 14, I'M SORRY, 17.
I'M ALREADY CHECKED OUT FOR THE HOLIDAYS,
UM, BUT ITEM NUMBER 17 WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY.
UH, SO IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THAT PROPERTY ON WEST JONES AVENUE, UH, FEEL FREE TO GO ABOUT AND ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR DAY.
MAYBE FINISH YOUR HOLIDAY SHOPPING AS I SHOULD.
UM, BUT OTHERWISE LET'S GO ON AND IF WE COULD PLEASE SEE WHAT'S ON OUR FIRST CONSENT AGENDA COMBINED HEARING NUMBER ONE, IF WE COULD JUST LIST THOSE ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, AND 19.
[00:05:03]
SORRY, DID YOU READ SIX ON THERE? SIX IS ON THERE.SO JUST TO REFRESH, WE HAVE ITEMS 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, AND 19 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ANY, ANY FURTHER ITEMS TO BE PULLED? COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT? NO.
COMMISSIONER'S ON MY RIGHT LOOKING REMOTELY, COMMISSIONER.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD PLEASE READ THE ITEMS INTO THE RECORD FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM OH TWO TO MF 33 LOCATED AT 1 0 4 OGDEN STREET.
ALL OF RELEASE TO REMAIN SAME.
24 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
SA, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
THE APPLICANT WILL BE AMENDING THE REQUEST TO C TWO.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R SIX TO C TWO LOCATED AT 70 38 BRANCHING COURT.
ALL OF THE LEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
NOTICES MAIL ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO POSTS.
THERE IS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM OH TWO TO I ONE LOCATED AT 96 25 BROADWAY STREET.
ALL ALTHOUGH OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME.
18 NOTICES MAILED ONE IN FAVOR AND ZERO OPPOSED.
THERE WAS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C3 CD WITH THE CONDITION USE FOR OUTDOOR FLEA MARKET TO C3 CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR VOCATIONAL TRADE OUTSIDE STORAGE TRAINING AREA PERMITTED LOCATED AT 93 33 SOUTHWEST LOOP FOUR 10.
ALL OTHER OVER LEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
ZERO OPPOSED, THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITH INTUITIVE FEET.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, THE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C TWO TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TATTOO PARLOR LOCATED AT 1449 ROAD.
ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME.
25 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
ZERO OPPOSED WEST END HOPE IN ACTION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PROSPECT HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WOODLAWN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND SA TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
ITEM NUMBER 10, THE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM OH TWO C TWO AND MF 33 2 T MX THREE LOCATED AT 6 0 2 WEST FRENCH PLACE ALL OTHER OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
23 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED ALTA VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, TOBAN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION AND S SA TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
ITEM NUMBER 11, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R SIX TO IDZ ONE LOCATED AT 2 1 9 KELLER STREET ALL OVER THE LEASE TO REMAIN THE SAME.
THIS IS FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS.
38 NOTICES MAILED TWO IN FAVOR.
ZERO OPPOSED CALLING GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND LONE STAR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
ITEM NUMBER 13, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM I ONE TO IDZ ONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN C ONE AND THREE DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT 2024 SOUTH FLORIST STREET.
ALL THE OVERLAYS THE SAME 26 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO POSTS.
COLLINS GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IS IN FAVOR GIVEN THAT MOORE PARKING IS PROVIDED AND LONE STAR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT GIVE A RESPONSE.
APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED AN AMENDMENT TO THE SITE PLAN AT NUMBER 14.
A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM I ONE TO C TWO LOCATED AT 2324 BLANCO ROAD.
36 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
ZERO OPPOSED NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
ITEM NUMBER 15, THE REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C TWO AND C TWO S WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR HOSPITAL TO C TWO S WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR HOSPITAL TALLER THAN 35 FEET.
ONE UNABLE TO ACHIEVE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT PURSUANT TO 35 DASH FIVE 17 D SETBACKS FOR HEIGHT INCREASES LOCATED AT 3 0 8 EAST EVERGREEN STREET.
ALL OF THE RELATES TO REMAIN THE SAME.
43 NOTICES MAILED TWO IN FAVOR.
ONE OPPOSED TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND SA TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
ITEM NUMBER 18 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R SIX TO RM SIX LOCATED AT 1 3 6 UNIVERSITY AVENUE.
ALL ALTHOUGH RELATES TO REMAIN THE SAME.
24 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
ZERO POST THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN
[00:10:01]
SUPPORT.LETTER NUMBER 19, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C TWO AND C TWO NA TO C TWO S WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A CAR WASH LOCATED AT 33 3 VALLEY HIGH DRIVE.
ALL OTHER OVERLAYS REMAIN THE SAME.
20 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
ZERO OPPOSED? THE SPRINGVALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? WE DO NOT HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THOSE ITEMS. VERY GOOD.
IF I COULD PLEASE HAVE THE APPLICANT, DR.
STRAND FOR YOU, UH, FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE.
YOU WANTED, WANTED TO AMEND OUR ZONING TO, UH, C TWO.
AND MR. VEGA, IF YOU WOULD COME UP FOR ITEM NUMBER 13.
UH, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM NUMBER 13, YOU DID SUBMIT AN ADMITTED SIDE PLAN, CORRECT? YES I DID.
AND THAT REFLECTS WHAT YOU WANT TO GO FORWARD? YES.
ALRIGHT, UM, THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION, MR. CHAIR? YES.
COMMISSIONER HUE MOVE TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. NUMBER THREE HAS AMENDED.
NUMBER FIVE, NUMBER SIX, NUMBER SEVEN, NUMBER EIGHT, NUMBER 10, NUMBER 1113 AS AMENDED.
NUMBER 14, NUMBER 15, NUMBER 18 AND NUMBER 19.
UH, SO WITH 13 IT'S JUST AN AMENDED SITE PLAN, CORRECT? AMENDED SITE PLAN? YES.
UH, THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE ITEMS AS READ ON THE RECORD, UH, BY COMMISSIONER HUEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DUO.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION LOOKING LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER DUO? UH, JUST A QUESTION IN REGARDS TO, UH, 10.
I WAS, I SEE THERE'S A HISTORIC PROPERTY ON THE LOT.
I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU GUYS COULD GIVE A QUICK SUMMARY OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW THAT'S DONE SUBSEQUENT, SUBSEQUENT TO TO THIS HEARING.
SO ANY UM, ANY CONSTRUCTION OR ANY SITE PLANS WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH HDRC JUST BECAUSE IT IS A HISTORIC LANDMARK AND AND THEY'LL REVIEW IT TO, YOU KNOW, DO THEY LOOK TO PRESERVE THE STRUCTURE? WHAT'S, WHAT'S THEIR CHARTER? I'M THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION TO OHP, SADLY.
BUT THERE, THERE, THERE WILL BE HISTORIC DISTRICT REVIEW ON THIS PROJECT.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER ON MY RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER CHASE, SEEING NONE.
UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS NUMBER THREE AS AMENDED 5 6 7 8 10 11 13 WITH AMENDED SITE PLAN 14, 15, 18, AND 19 BY COMMISSIONER HUEY WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DUO ROLL CALL.
COMMISSIONER LOAF ARRIVED AT 1:05 PM THANK YOU FOR THE RECORD, I APPRECIATE THAT.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
IF YOU WERE ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAD THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ, YOU ARE NOW UH, GOING TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SO YOU CAN GO ABOUT THE REST OF YOUR DAY AND ENJOY IT.
FINISH UP WHATEVER HOLIDAY SHOPPING YOU NEED TO DO.
BUT, UH, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS TO GO BEFORE CITY COUNCIL SO Y'ALL CAN HEAD ON OUT.
ALRIGHT, I'LL SEE OUR NEXT DOCKET IS A CONTINUANCE DOCKET.
UM, I DO WANNA BRING TO ATTENTION, I BELIEVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR WAS PULLED TO INDIVIDUAL, BUT THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE PUT THIS ON THE CONTINUANCE DOCKET SINCE THEY WILL NOT BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER LAWS, I HAVE HEARD THAT PERHAPS THERE'S REPRESENTATION FOR THAT PERSON HERE.
UM, IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REMOUNT ITEM NUMBER FOUR? ANY REPRESENTATIVE HERE PRESENT FOR THAT ITEM? 1 1 6 REMOUNT DRIVE.
[00:15:01]
OKAY, GOOD.ALRIGHT, IN THAT CASE, LET'S GO TO OUR FIRST CONTINUANCE DOCKET.
UM, SO WE CAN EITHER MOVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO THE, UH, FOR FIVE WEEKS TO THE JANUARY 20TH MEETING, OR SEVEN WEEKS TO THE FE FEBRUARY 5TH MEETING.
WHAT WOULD YOU PREFER? SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I WAS CONCERNING THAT NO ONE ELSE HERE FOR THEM.
SO WE HAVE A FIVE WEEK CONTINUANCE TO THE JANUARY 20TH MEETING, AND I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL NOTICED AT THE TOP OF THIS AGENDA, BUT WE DO HAVE ABOUT ALMOST 30 ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR THAT MEETING.
BRAND NEW, OR IT CAN BE SEVEN WEEKS TO THE FEBRUARY, UH, FEBRUARY 3RD MEETING.
I THINK YOU SHOULD FINISH THAT WITH WINK WINK NUDGE NUDGE
I'M JUST TRYING TO GO TO EVERYONE AWARE.
LET'S, LET'S MOVE IT TO THE SEVEN WEEK.
TO THE SEVEN WEEK FOR FEBRUARY 3RD.
SO JUST SO Y'ALL ARE AWARE, THEY WE ARE PUTTING IN A REQUEST FOR A SEVEN WEEK CONTINUANCE FOR ITEM NUMBER FOUR, LOCATED AT 1 1 16 REMOUNT DRIVE TO THE FEBRUARY 3RD, 2026 MEETING.
UM, ANY DISCUSS? THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT ONE AND THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON IT.
UH, COMMISSIONER LO TO YOU FOR A MOTION.
SORRY, I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUEST.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE WERE LOOKING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE STAFF HAS INFO ON IT.
CAN WE STILL DO THE, LIKE CAN, CAN I, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HEAR THE ITEM AND SEE THE STAFF OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT FROM STAFF AND THEN APPROVE IT? OR DOES THAT HAVE TO I KNOW THE OWNER'S NOT HERE.
UM, SO YES, HE DID GET, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT ACROSS THE STREET.
AND THEN HE HIMSELF SUBMITTED ONE WHICH ACCOUNTED FOR FOUR TOTAL.
SO THEY'RE THE ONLY RESIDENTIAL THAT ARE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIM.
I'M SURE THIS IS NOT PROCESS CORRECT.
CAN I, CAN I APPROVE THAT? CAN WE MOVE TO CONSENT AGENDA THERE, THERE IS NO MOTION RIGHT NOW.
UH, WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE CAN TAKE IT UP IN INDIVIDUAL, UH, WITHOUT THE APPLICANT PRESENT AND WE CAN MAKE A MOTION AT THAT TIME.
AND UH, JUST SO PARK VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DID NOT GIVE A RESPONSE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE NEEDING.
I WAS MORE JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, THE ACROSS THE STREET NEIGHBORS.
SO WE'LL MOVE IT, WE'LL LEAVE IT ON INDIVIDUAL THEN.
SO DISREGARD THAT CONTINUANCE REQUEST.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE STRAIGHT TO INDIVIDUAL WHEN I SAY SO.
UH, WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR INDIVIDUAL, UH, DOCKET AT THIS POINT.
UH, SORRY FOR THE LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION, BUT WE ARE NOW GONNA BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE PLEASE.
BRONTE FOR ZONING PLANNER OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ADMIN NUMBER ONE IS LOCATED AT 1514 RIGSBY AVENUE, GOING FROM R FOUR TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES.
ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
FOUR RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED OUTSIDE 200 FEET SIX ARE RECEIVED IN FAVOR.
THERE'S NO REGISTERED NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
STAFF DOES FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C TWO CD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A ADDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MIDDLE OF AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL BLOCK AND INTRODUCE COMMERCIAL USES THAT WOULD ADVERSELY IMPACT THE RESIDENCES.
THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WOULD FURTHER PERMIT AN INTENSE COMMERCIAL USE WITHIN THE BLOCK, WHICH IS CONTRARY TO COMMONLY USED LAND USE PRINCIPLES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE.
UM, SO ACTUALLY IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM DR.
HINOJOSA THAT THIS WAS GONNA BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO I'M A LITTLE SURPRISED HE IS NOT HERE.
DID THAT, WAS THAT DISCUSSED WITH A, WITH A RECOMMENDATION WITH NILE? IT WILL ALWAYS BE ON INDIVIDUAL.
HINOJOSA, UM, CAME DOWN ILL AND SO HE IS NOT WITH US TODAY, HOWEVER, HIS CASE WILL BE HANDLED BY COMMISSIONER CHASE WHO'S PREPARED TO DO SO.
AND, UM, WERE HIS THOUGHTS ON THE PROJECT DISCUSSED WITH ANYONE OR DO I NEED A CONTINUANCE FOR HIM TO, YOU DO NOT NEED A CONTINUANCE.
'CAUSE HIS THOUGHTS WERE DISCUSSED? YES.
UM, AND SO, ALTHOUGH, SO WHEN IT'S DIRECTED THAT THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD, I DO WANT, I I DID PROVIDE SOME VIDEOS.
[00:20:02]
WERE THOSE, I PROVIDED THEM TO YOU BEFORE THE LAST HEARING.UM, SO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS ABOUT THREE BLOCKS FROM THE CORNER OF ROLAND AND RIGSBY.
AND, UM, I THINK ALL OF US KNOW THAT INTERSECTION WELL BECAUSE OF THE BARBECUE RESTAURANT AND THE TAMALES THAT ARE AVAILABLE THERE.
I KNOW I'VE GONE THERE SINCE I WAS A KID.
AND, UM, THIS BLOCK OF RIGSBY, ALTHOUGH THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK DOES HAVE SOME MORE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS AREA IS MIXED USE.
THERE'S BOTH COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ALL WITHIN THE THREE BLOCK RADIUS.
MS. RUSSELL, I'M SORRY, WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF? OH, I AM SO SORRY.
I DO THIS HALF, ABOUT HALF THE TIME I'M HERE.
ELIZABETH RUSSELL, I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT FROM THE LAW OFFICE OF ELIZABETH RUSSELL 1 0 1 STONEBERG, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 4.
UM, AND SO THERE IS, UM, QUITE A BIT OF MIXED USE IN THIS AREA.
THERE'S ALREADY BEEN TWO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE RECENTLY BEEN APPROVED FOR COMMERCIAL THAT ARE WITHIN TWO, WITHIN THE TWO BLOCK RADIUS OF THIS AREA.
AND, UM, THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY HAS ALWAYS BEEN USED FOR INDUSTRIAL USE.
UM, WHEN YOU SEE A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY, YOU'LL KNOW IT BECAUSE IT'S THIS BRIGHT YELLOW METAL BUILDING.
UM, AND SO I ACTUALLY KNEW THIS PROPERTY BEFORE I EVEN RECEIVED THIS CASE BECAUSE OF THE BRIGHT YELLOW BUILDING.
UM, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN USED FOR INDUSTRIAL, IT WAS REZONED AND A MASSIVE REZONING, I WANNA SAY AROUND 2008, UM, WHEN THERE EVERYTHING WAS JUST BEING REDRAWN AND REZONED.
BUT THIS PROPERTY HAS ALWAYS BEEN INDUSTRIAL.
UM, ACRO DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET IS A, I THINK IT'S EITHER VID VIA OR CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BUT SOME TYPE OF FLEET, UM, LIKE A FLEET LOT, THERE'S NOTHING DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET AND THERE'S QUITE A FEW NEIGHBORS THAT ARE IN SUPPORT OF MY CLIENT DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY HERE.
UM, BECAUSE OF THOSE REQUESTS WE WOULD REQUEST, UM, FOR THE COMMITTEE TO APPROVE.
ADDITIONALLY, WE DID PROVIDE DR.
HESO WITH, UM, THE, HIS TWO REQUESTS ON THE, UM, SIGNAGE AND THE LIGHTING.
SO DOWNWARD LIGHTING ONLY, UM, WITH NO, UM, NO OVERNIGHT LIGHTING, NO UM, SPECTRUM LIGHTING.
AND THEN, UM, NO MONUMENT SIGNS, NO FLAGS OR WAIVERS ONLY.
UM, THE BUILDING SIGN ON THE BRIGHT YELLOW BUILDING, UM, WE WILL HAVE TO PROCEED WITH A VARIANCE IF APPROVED BECAUSE THE YELLOW BUILDING DOES NOT QUITE HAVE THE APPROPRIATE SETBACK FROM THE FRONT.
UM, BUT AGAIN, IT HAS BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
UM, I THINK AT LEAST 10 YEARS.
MY, I'M NOT QUITE DONE WITH THE RESEARCH.
I'M, WE'RE ONE, ONE STEP AT A TIME.
UM, BUT IT HAS BEEN THERE FOR AT LEAST THE LAST SIX YEARS.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MS. RUSSELL.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.
AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, UH, THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE CASE, UH, BUT AS COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA IS NOT ABLE TO JOIN US TODAY, IT WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER CHASE FOR, UH, QUESTIONS.
UM, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I TALKED TO UM, COMMISSIONER OSA AND HE BOARDED ME THE EMAIL THAT YOU SENT WITH THE AGREEMENT TO THE STIPULATIONS FROM DOWNLOAD LIGHTING AND ALL THE OTHER BULLET POINTS YOU HAD.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS IF THEY HAVE ANY.
COMMISSIONER CHASE, UH, COMMISSIONERS TO MY RIGHT QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
WHY DID STAFF, WHY IS STAFF RECOMMENDING DENIAL
AND THAT IS WHY WE WERE RECOMMENDING DENIAL FOR SUCH AN INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL USE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER HUEY QUESTIONS? NOPE.
COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, UH, LET'S GO WITH COMMISSIONER.
WHAT'S THAT? FIRST? I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE BARE APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORDS AND IT SHOWS THAT THE BUILDING APPARENTLY WAS BUILT IN 1992 AND IT SHOWS IT AS A SHED.
UH, DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY OTHER HISTORY OF OPERATIONS ON THAT PROPERTY? WE DO NOT.
WE DO, WE TRY TO DO A PRIOR HISTORY SEARCH ON ANY CFOS OR ANYTHING, BUT WE COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING WITHIN THE LAST 20, LIKE I WANNA SAY THE LAST 10 YEARS OR SO.
SO NO VIOLATIONS OF, WELL THERE THEY BUILT A FENCE THAT REQUIRES A PERMIT AND SO THAT WAS WHY THERE IS AN OPEN INVESTIGATE INVESTIGATION.
BUT OTHERWISE IT WAS JUST THE FENCE? YEAH, NOT, NOT THE BUILDING OR THE USE.
AGAIN, THERE'S NO ONGOING CFO AT THE MOMENT, SO WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY ONGOING USE.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER VE UH, WHEN, UH, THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED LAST, I WAS HOPING IT'D
[00:25:01]
BE ABLE TO FIND ITS WAY TO THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR.UM, BUT I GUESS THEY HAVEN'T MET, IT WAS CONTINUED TO THE JANUARY, UH, I BELIEVE 15TH MEETING OR 14TH MEETING 14TH, YEAH, BY REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT.
UM, I TYPICALLY, MY CUSTOM IS TO HANDLE ZONING FIRST AND THEN PLANNING AND SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON, UM, WE TACKLE ONE PROJECT AT A TIME.
I'M DISAPPOINTED YOU, UH, CHOSE TO DO THAT.
UM, STAFF MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT CONSISTENCY, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT, UH, WITH THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT AND, UH, UNTIL THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHANGES THAT AND RECOMMENDS A CHANGE TO IT, UH, WE'RE PUT IN A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFICULT POSITION TO TRY TO IMAGINE WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MIGHT DO
UM, SO YEAH, I WAS, I WAS HOPING, UH, WE WOULDN'T BE PUT IN THAT POSITION.
UM, BUT, UH, THE, UH, ZONING ACROSS THE STREET, SO ACROSS RIGSBY, UM, UH, TO STAFF IT'S C3, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, I BELIEVE WE RE WE RECOGNIZED LAST MEETING.
YEAH, IT'S A MIX OF C3 AND I ONE AS, UM, MS. RUSSELL DID MENTION, AND I BELIEVE IT IS THE SCHOOL YARD OR THE SCHOOL BUS, UM, LOCATION, UM, HOLDING STORAGE OF SCHOOL BUSES FOR ONE OF THE ISDS.
BUT IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WERE TO SELL THE LAND, THE LAND COULD BE DEVELOPED ALONG RIGSBY WITH OTHER C3 USES, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND COULD YOU GIVE, YOU KNOW, AN EXAMPLE OF SOME OF THE KIND OF USES THAT MIGHT, YOU MIGHT SEE IN POTENTIALLY ACROSS THE STREET? I MEAN, IT WOULD DEFINITELY ALLOW A LOT OF THE RETAIL OR THE SERVICE USES, BUT IT ALSO GOES INTO MORE, UH, COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE ITEMS LIKE CAR SALES OR AUTOMOTIVE, UH, SORRY, REPAIR THOSE KIND OF ITEMS. YEAH, SO, AND TO BE CLEAR, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY INDICATION THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS LOOKING AT SELLING LIKE SURPLUS LAND.
NO, BUT IT COULD POTENTIALLY THOUGH YOU COULD THEORETICALLY HAVE AUTO SALES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE, IT IS ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
UM, COMMISSIONER CHASE TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION FOR DISCUSSION? YES, I WAS GOING TO GO AHEAD AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THIS.
UM, MOSTLY BECAUSE OF THE, THE CURRENT SETUP THAT IT'S AT AND ALSO THE SURROUNDING AREA.
UM, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE RESIDENTIAL, THE RESIDENTS ARE IN SUPPORT, UM, DR.
UH, OSA SPOKE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THEY ARE IN SUPPORT AND IN FAVOR OF SEEING SOMETHING THERE INSTEAD OF AN EMPTY LOT.
UM, SO WITH RESIDENT SUPPORT AND WITH HOW THE STREET IS ALREADY SET UP AND EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, I BELIEVE IT, IT'S ONE OF THOSE CASES WHERE IT'S UM, MAYBE IT GOES AGAINST STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT IT GOES ALONGSIDE WITH WHAT RESIDENTS WANT AND WHAT KIND OF PARTY EXIST.
SO IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS? YES.
MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE CONDITIONS THAT MS. RUSSELL EMAILED.
CAN YOU READ THOSE FOR THE RECORD PLEASE? CAN WE ASK MS, UH, THE APPLICANT TO MAYBE READ THE CONDITIONS? I'M SORRY, I'M TRYING TO OPEN IT UP, BUT IF MS. RUSSELL CAN GET IT SOONER, IT'S A RACE.
THIS, THIS IS HOW THESE THINGS GET EXCITING.
THIS IS THE PINNACLE OF EXCITEMENT.
UM, UM, WE AGREE TO USE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IF A VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
AM I OKAY THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT ONE WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT.
DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING SIGNAGE.
UM, ON THE LIGHTING PLAN, DOWNWARD DIRECTED LIGHTING ONLY USING FULLY SHIELDED FIXTURES, NO UPWARD LIGHTING, FLOOD LIGHTS OR GLARE PRODUCING FIXTURES, LIGHTING LEVELS LIMITED TO WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY.
NO SPILLOVER LIGHTING INTO ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
I GOT DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING.
AM I GOING? THAT SHOULD WORK ALL OF THAT.
AND THEN ON THE SIGNAGE COMMITMENT, NO MONUMENT SIGNS, NO SPINNERS, FEATHER FLAGS, BANNERS OR ANIMATED? NO TEMPORARY SIGNAGE.
NO MONUMENT SIGNS? NO TEMPORARY SIGNS.
SO NO MONUMENT SIGNS OR TEMPORARY SIGNS? YES.
AND COMMISSIONER CHASE, THAT IS YOUR MOTION? YES.
[00:30:01]
THANK YOU.ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITIONS AS STATED ON THE RECORD.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ SECONDS IT, UH, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER TO MY RIGHT.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER SIPES AND THEN COMMISSIONER DUO.
THIS IS ACTUALLY MORE GONNA BE MORE OF A QUESTION FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER CHASE.
UM, NOTICING THAT THERE'S OTHER COMMERCIAL ON THAT BLOCK THAT ARE EITHER IN A FOR NON-ALCOHOL OR ARE RESTRICTED.
I WAS WONDERING IF, UH, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA HAD DISCUSSED ANYTHING ABOUT ADDING THAT TO THE, TO THE ZONING CHANGE? HE DID NOT.
TECHNICALLY SHOULDN'T ASK QUESTIONS OF OTHER COMMISSIONERS, BUT I KNOW DID OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
NO, I'LL WAIT TILL COMMISSIONER'S DONE.
THAT WOULD BE BASICALLY LIKE YOUR CONVENIENCE STORES.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ADD R WHICH IS, WHICH MATCHES A, UM, PROPERTY DOWN THE STREET ON THAT SAME BLOCK I BELIEVE.
I JUST NEEDED YOU TO NOD YOUR HEAD.
UH, COMMISSIONER CHASE, DO YOU ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED? ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ, ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER SIPES? ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER DUO.
YEAH, I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION RELATED TO THE, UM, CONDITIONS.
I HEARD SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF LIGHTING EXCEPT WHAT'S NEEDED FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY.
SO WE ARE CALLING THAT DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING AND WE ARE STOPPING THERE.
OKAY, SO IT'S A NO DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING OR ONLY DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING.
ONLY DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING.
YEAH, WHAT DID I SAY? OKAY, PERFECT.
DID I SAY THE OPPOSITE, MAN? I'M NOT DOING WELL.
COMMISSIONER DUO TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, WE'RE IN THE SITUATION TO BE ASKED TO REVIEW THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT.
UM, I SUPPOSE THE, THE RIGHT THING FOR US TO DO IS TO THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PUT OURSELVES IN THEIR SHOES AND IMAGINE WHAT WE THINK THEY SHOULD DO.
UM, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHAT I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD DO THAT IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, BUT I COULD IMAGINE THE PLANNING COMMISSION GOING WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND, UH, DENYING THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT JUST ON THE BASIS THAT THE SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY AREA PLAN WAS ONLY ADOPTED BACK IN DECEMBER, 2022.
SO COMMUNITY INPUT NEIGHBORS ARE ALL ENGAGED.
THEY THOUGHT IT SHOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE.
UM, I DON'T THINK ON ITS FACE THAT THEY GOT IT WRONG.
I THINK IT'S, THERE'S A FAIR ARGUMENT TO BE SAID THAT IT SHOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE.
SO I MEAN, I I, FOR THAT REASON, I'M GONNA BE, UM, UNFORTUNATELY VOTING NO.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT.
ALRIGHT, BRIEFLY, UH, WHILE I UNDERSTAND AND FREQUENTLY AGREE THAT PLANNING SHOULD OCCUR BEFORE ZONING, UH, WE ARE A RECOMMENDING BODY, UM, AND OUR PURVIEW IS LAND USE, ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF WHICH IS, UH, CONFORMANCE TO THE AREA PLAN.
BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS PLANNING WILL HEAR THIS NEXT MONTH.
UM, AND WE'LL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION JUST AS WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND THOSE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS CAN BE RECONCILED BY THE ULTIMATE ARBITER, WHICH IS CITY COUNCIL.
SO, UH, THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
READ ON THE RECORD AND AMENDED TO R ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
OUR NEXT CASE IS ITEM NUMBER TWO.
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS IS GOMEZ SENIOR PLANNER WITH ZONING LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS LOCATED AT 62 27 SOUTHWEST
[00:35:01]
LOOP FOUR 10 GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C TWO NACD COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLE STORAGE AND SALES.THERE WERE 10 NOTICES SENT OUT.
THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY.
STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THIS CHANGE OF ZONING REQUEST.
THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE CURRENT R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE ZONING PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C TWO AND A CD COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLE STORAGE AND SALES IS MORE APPROPRIATE.
THE REQUEST OF ZONING WILL RE WOULD SERVE AS AN APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN SOUTHWEST INTERSTATE FOUR 10 AND THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE WEST.
WHILE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE STONE MF 18 AND R SIX, THE CURRENT USE CONSISTS OF VACANT LAND AND A CHURCH GIVEN ITS LOCATION ALONG THE INTERSTATE FOUR 10 ACCESS ROAD.
THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ZONING IS SUITABLY POSITIONED TO ACCOMMODATE HIGHER INTENSITY USES WHILE MAINTAINING ADEQUATE SEPARATION FROM NEARBY RESIDENCES.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE AND IF YOU WOULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US YOUR ADDRESS.
I AM MARCUS SALAS, UH, REPRESENTING CAESAR RAMOS, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, I LIVE AT 2 2 9 0 3 EVANGELINE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 5 8.
SO, UM, YEP, WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE THIS FROM R SIX TO C TWO.
NA UH, WE KIND OF HAD TO GO WITH LARGE VEHICLE SALES AS WELL AS STORAGE, UH, BECAUSE WE DO PLAN TO HOST FOOD TRUCK STORAGE THERE, UH, WITHIN THE GATED AREA.
SO, UH, I I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONCERN FROM THE SCHOOL THAT WAS NEARBY.
UH, BUT I'VE BEEN UNABLE TO TRACK DOWN EXACTLY WHO HAS THE ISSUE WITH THAT, THAT ZONING CHANGE OR WITH THAT CONDITION.
UM, I WAS IN TOUCH WITH THOMAS KRUEGER AT SOUTHWEST ISD.
UH, HE, HE KNEW THAT THERE MAY BE AN ISSUE BUT WAS, UH, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BECAUSE AGAIN, HE, HE SAW NO CONCERN WITH PARKING, FOOD TRUCKS.
OBVIOUSLY, UH, I WOULD SEE CONCERN PARKING 18 WHEELERS NEXT TO A SCHOOL.
UM, BUT THAT IS NOT GONNA BE THE CASE.
WE'D BE WILLING TO PUT THAT IN WRITING, UH, IF NECESSARY.
SO THE OTHER PLANS FOR THIS SPACE ARE ALSO TO HAVE A RETAIL, UH, IN THE FRONT AND THEN HAVE STORAGE UNITS IN THE BACK.
UM, MY CLIENT DOES HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH SOME FOOD, UH, FOOD TRUCK MAKER IN EAGLE PASS WHO IS ALSO EXPANDING TO SAN ANTONIO.
SO THAT IS THE PRIMARY USE OF THESE, UH, OR THE PRIMARY REASON FOR STORING THESE VEHICLES THERE AT THE PROPERTY.
UM, HE ALSO, FOR THE, THE RETAIL SPACE, UH, IS PLANNING TO HOST PO BOXES, UH, AND SELL OUTDOOR ACTIVITY GOODS SUCH AS COOLERS, WATER BOTTLES, BACKPACKS, CLOTHING AND RELATED OTHER RELATED ITEMS. UH, ONE OF HIS MAIN BRANDS THAT HE SELLS IS YETI COOLERS.
UH, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WITH THESE PLANS IN MIND, HE OBVIOUSLY WANTS TO CREATE MORE JOBS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA AND PROVIDE MORE STABILITY AS WELL.
WE HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE CHURCH THAT IS NEXT DOOR.
WE DID BUY THAT PROP PROPERTY FROM THEM, UM, AND ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING A SUPPORT LETTER FROM THEM.
AND I AM ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING A SUPPORT LETTER FROM THOMAS KRUGER AS WELL FROM SOUTHWEST ISD.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.
YOU DON'T GET ANY REBUTTAL MR. SALAS? YEAH, NOTHING TO REBUT.
ALRIGHT, THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE.
UH, SO COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, UH, QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER CHASE, NO QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONER DUO, UH, THE, UH, SITE PLAN SHOWS ALONG LAKE VALLEY DRIVE AND, UM, LOOP FOUR 10 ACCESS A PROPOSED CONCRETE WALK AND A CURRENT CONCRETE WALK.
UH, WOULD THE, UH, APPLICANT BE ABLE TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT ABOUT, UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPLANATION? WHAT, UH, FIRST OFF, WHAT'S THE, THE CURRENT CONCRETE WALK ALONG? LOOP FOUR 10 ACCESS.
WHEN I LOOKED ON GOOGLE MAPS, I DON'T THINK I SAW ANY SIDEWALK THERE.
I WANNA SAY THERE WAS, BUT I CAN CLARIFY THAT AND, AND PROVIDE AN UPDATED PLAN IF THAT IS INCORRECT.
UH, BUT I, I COULD HAVE SWORE THERE WAS WHEN I WENT OUT THERE AND WALKED.
UM, WHAT'S THAT? IT'S ON THE SATELLITE IMAGE, IS IT? IT IS ON, YEAH, IT'S ON GOOGLE.
IT'S ON GOOGLE ALONG, UH, THE SOUTHWEST LOOP FOUR 10.
THERE IS A SIDEWALK, BUT IT'S UNDEVELOPED.
THAT'S ALL I CAN SEE FROM THE, UM, FROM GOOGLE IMAGES.
[00:40:01]
THE, SO I GUESS TO CLARIFY WITH STAFF, THE SITE PLAN WOULD BUY, YOU KNOW, REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PUT IN A PROPOSED CONCRETE WALK THAT'S A SIDEWALK RIGHT ALONG LAKE VALLEY DRIVE.IS THAT CORRECT? IF IT'S PART OF THE PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK, IT'D HAVE THAT MAINTAIN IT OR REPAIR IT IF AS NEEDED.
I SUPPOSE THE QUESTION WOULD BE WOULD THE SITE PLAN OBLIGATE THEM TO DO THAT? NO.
UM, AND THEN, UH, I SEE, SO THE SATELLITE IMAGE THAT WE HAVE UP SHOWS YEAH.
WHAT LOOKS LIKE AN UNDEVELOPED SIDEWALK.
WHEN I LOOKED AT GOOGLE STREET, SO THIS IS BING MAPS, WHEN I LOOKED AT GOOGLE STREET VIEW, UM, I DON'T THINK I SAW, UM, A WALK, BUT MAYBE I, IT LOOKS PRETTY WHITE, SO MAYBE IT'S NEW
IT'S NOT ON THE STREET VIEW BECAUSE THAT PICTURE'S FROM 2020.
UM, SO THE, UH, I GUESS A QUESTION THEN FOR, FOR STAFF, UM, WHEN I LOOKED AT GOOGLE STREET VIEW, YOU KNOW, I SAW SOME, SOME KIDS IN THEIR, OR A KID, UH, CHILD AND HIS AND HIS FATHER WALKING WITH A BACKPACK FROM THE SCHOOL.
I ALSO SAW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
THERE'S, UH, AN ACCESS POINT STAIRS AND A, UH, GATE FROM THE SCHOOL INTO THE CHURCH PARKING LOT.
UM, I'M GONNA GUESS FAMILIES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN LAKE VALUE DRIVE CROSS ACROSS, UH, WHAT IS NOW AN EMPTY FIELD TO MAKE IT TO THE CHURCH PARKING LOT TO REACH THE SCHOOL.
UM, HOW COULD WE ENSURE, UM, THAT THEY CONTINUE TO HAVE A SAFE WAY TO REACH THE SCHOOL FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? REALLY? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT WOULD WE NEED TO DO, UM, TO, UH, ENSURE THAT THERE WE, WE, YOU KNOW, HAVE A, A CONCRETE SIDEWALK ALONG LAKE VALLEY DRIVE AND, AND THAT THERE IS A CONCRETE SIDEWALK ALONG LOOP TEN FOUR ACCESS? WELL, I WAS JUST, I WAS ASKING, UM, CITY ATTORNEYS FOR THEIR OPTION.
IT'S NOT REALLY WITHIN A ZONING PURVIEW.
IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE A TRANSPORTATION MAYBE IN INFORMATION WITH THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
SO WE WOULDN'T THE INGRESS EGRESS, UH, CONDITIONS UNDER THE CONDITIONAL USE AUTHORIZATION, THOSE WOULDN'T COVER SIDEWALKS.
AND I GUESS, SO THE, THE, UM, IN IN WHAT, UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS WOULD, UM, PUBLIC WORKS BE REQUIRING A SIDEWALK THAT WOULD REALLY DEPEND ON TECHNICAL REVIEW AND IF THEY SEE IT NECESSARY, BUT NOT UNTIL THEN WOULD WE KNOW AND NOTHING WE WOULD DO ON THE SITE PLAN WOULD BE ABLE TO FORCE THEM TO INCLUDE ANY OF THAT.
UM, IF I RECALL UNDER THE, UH, LIST OF, UH, THE CHEAT SHEET OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN THE UDC, THERE WAS ONE RELATED TO, UH, LANDSCAPING FOR, FOR SITE NON FOR BEAU NON BEAUTIFICATION PURPOSES.
SO LANDSCAPING FOR, FOR SITE AND ACCESS THE EXISTING LANDSCAPING.
I DON'T, AT LEAST I DON'T SEE ANY EXISTING LANDSCAPING, BUT THE, THE LANDSCAPING THAT'S SHOWN ON THE, UM, UH, SITE PLAN, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO INCLUDE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL RELATED TO LINE OF SIGHT FOR THE ENTRANCE AND, AND EXIT? OR IS THAT ALSO SOMETHING THAT, UH, WOULD BE DONE IN LATER REVIEW? THOSE WOULD TYPICALLY BE HANDLED AT PERMITTING.
OUR TRAFFIC TEAM, THEY HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS FOR VISIBILITY WITH ALL TRAFFIC.
AND ALSO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BUFFERING, UM, THERE IS LANDSCAPING THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED AS WELL FOR ANY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THIS AS A COMMERCIAL.
UM, IF IT GETS REZONED TO THE COMMERCIAL BASED ZONING, THERE ARE SPECIFIC LAND, UM, LANDSCAPING BUFFER, UH, REQUIREMENTS.
THAT, THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTIONS.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ TO YOU AS THIS IS A DISTRICT FOUR CASE FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION, I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS WITH, UH, DOWNWARD LIGHTING.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITSETT DISCUSSION TO MY RIGHT DISCUSSION REMOTELY.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION AS READ ON THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITSETT ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
ALRIGHT, UH, THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH YOU KNOW, WHOEVER
[00:45:01]
THE CASE MANAGER IS, CAN YOU SPEED TALK IT? 'CAUSE THIS CAN BE VERY SHORTMY NAME IS SAMANTHA BEA, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS LOCATED AT 1 1 6 OUN REMOUNT DRIVE GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO L LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 21 NOTICES MAILED FOREIGN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED.
PARK VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED LAND USE DESIGNATION IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED LI ONE C3 C AND C3 AND A.
THE EXISTING R SIX DISTRICT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED L DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE.
THE A THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RELA UH, 1 0 8, 1 12 AND ONE 16 REMOUNT DRIVE TO CONSTRUCT A WAREHOUSE.
THOUGH THERE IS RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL ZONES AND STRUCTURES IN THE AREA, SOME ARE NONCONFORMING, VACANT ARE BEING USED AS OFFICES, THE ONES BEING UTILIZED AS RESIDENCES OR OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA.
ADDITIONALLY, MOST OF THE USES AND ZONES ARE SIMILAR TO THE REQUEST THAT'S MAKING THE CURRENT RESIDENTIAL ZONE INAPPROPRIATE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE REPRESENTATIVE IS NOT HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE, SO COMMISSIONER LO, UH, TO YOU FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER DULE, UH, ONLY I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT THERE WAS NO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT LIKE SECTOR OR REGIONAL OR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN FOR THIS AREA.
UM, I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT IS THAT I'M NEW HERE.
SO IS THAT, IS THAT COMMON? THERE ARE POCKETS WITHIN THE CITY THAT DO NOT HAVE AN ADOPTED PLAN? YEP.
I ARE THEY GOING GET ONE WITH THE, UH, SA TOMORROW? EVENTUALLY? YES.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT QUESTIONS? RIGHT? QUESTIONS? REMOTE.
UH, MOTION DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION TO YOU COMMISSIONER LO YES.
THANKS STAFF FOR DOING THE WORK.
UM, I, WE WERE REALLY CONSTRAINED WITH NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT, WHICH IS IMPORTANT FOR DISTRICT TWO.
SO THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME ON THAT.
I'M IN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER LO WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WITT.
DISCUSSION LEFT DISCUSSION RIGHT.
UH, MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR BY COMMISSIONER LO.
OUR NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, PLEASE.
ALEX RATANA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS LOCATED AT 1530 LAMAR STREET.
GOING FROM R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO R FOUR RESIDE R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 24 NOTICES SENT OUT.
ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET HARVARD PLACE.
EASTLAWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE AND NO RESPONSE OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R FOUR CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS IS ALSO APPROPRIATE.
THE REZONING IS REQUESTED TO DEVELOP TWO SEPARATE DWELLING UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE MIX OF HOUSING DENSITIES, INCLUDING DUPLEXES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS.
ADDITIONALLY, THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY OF BUTSON ALLEY, WHICH CAN POTENTIALLY ALLOW FOR MORE FLEXIBLE SETBACKS TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY.
THE PROPOSAL WOULD ALSO CONTRIBUTE TO THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN BY PROVIDING DIVERSE HOUSING CHOICES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
OH, I BEG YOUR PARDON? SHE SPOKE SO FAST.
WELL WE'RE DONE WITH THE SPEED NOW IF THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US YOUR ADDRESS.
HELLO, MY NAME IS FRED HOBBS, THE MANAGING MEMBER OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
I RESIDE AT 1 0 2 LONGBOW ROAD IN CHAU PARK, TEXAS 7 8 2 3 1.
BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, DO YOU HAVE, DO YOU WANNA JUST GIVE US A QUICK OVERVIEW? YES.
YOU SAW THE PICTURE THERE JUST A MINUTE AGO FOR ABOUT THE LAST EIGHT OR NINE YEARS.
UH, IT IS IN BAD DISREPAIR, NEEDS TO BE TORN DOWN.
AND THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THAT PROPERTY IS, UM, A MULTIFAMILY TYPE ARRANGEMENT.
[00:50:01]
WISH TO DO.THE, THE PROPERTY, UH, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO US WAS REZONED TO A SIMILAR ZONING.
AND THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET ALSO IS, IS ZONE MF 33 AND HAS I THINK FOUR UNITS ON IT.
UM, ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
COMMISSIONER LO TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER? WHAT'S THAT? I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
UM, IN 2024, THIS WAS
WHAT'S THAT? CAN YOU TALK INTO THE MIC? SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.
UH, SO I'M, I'M TRYING TO SORT OF UNDERSTAND WHY 16 MONTHS AGO OR WHATEVER IT WAS JUSTIFIED TO CHANGE THIS AND REMOVE THE MULTIFAMILY AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN MULTIFAMILY ISS ACCEPTABLE.
UH, AT THIS POINT I ASSUME THAT THE SITE NEXT DOOR MUST HAVE BEEN EXISTING THAT GOT THE CD TO ACCOMMODATE THE FACT THAT IT WAS THERE AT THE TIME.
UM, MIKE, CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT WE REZONED BASED ON THE WAY THE PROPERTY'S BEING USED AT THE TIME AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUESTS AS IT'S PRESENTED TO US BY CITY COUNCIL, UM, WHICH IN THIS CASE WAS ZONED THE USE PROPERTIES AT THE TIME IT WAS BEING MULTIFAMILY.
UM, SECOND PART OF MY QUESTION IS THERE'S LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS, UH, THE BACK ALLEY I'LL SHOW ACCESS OFF OF THERE, THE BACK ALLEY TO, I THINK IT'S, UM, BACK TOWARD GEVERS.
UH, THERE'S A GIVER'S COURT, IT DOESN'T APPARENTLY EXIST.
AND THE ALLEY ON THE PORTION FROM THE PROPERTY BACK TOWARD AVERS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE PAVED.
UH, SO HOW'S THAT GONNA BE DEVELOPED? UH, YOU KNOW, FROM A FIRE STANDPOINT, UH, ET CETERA AND ACCESS, IS THAT GONNA BE REQUIRED TO BE PAVED FOR THEM TO GET THIS APPROVAL? IF THEY WERE TO, OH, IF THEY WERE TO UTILIZE THE, UM, THE ALLEYWAY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN STANDARDS, WHICH WOULD BE DICTATED BY OUR STREET TEAM DURING THE PERMITTING PHASE.
UM, BUT AT THE MOMENT THEIR ACCESS IS OFF LAMAR SO GATHERS IN THE ALLEYWAY WOULD ONLY COME INTO EFFECT AGAIN IF THEY NEEDED ACCESS FROM THOSE DURING THE PERMITTING STAGE.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S NO CURB, THERE'S NO ACCESS, NO CUT TO, UH, THE, UH, ALLEY IN THE BACK? I CAN'T SAY RIGHT NOW IF THERE'S NONE 'CAUSE I'M NOT ON THE SITE.
BUT NO, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO ACCESS.
WE HAVE A FENCE ACROSS THE BACK.
WE HAVE NO PLANS TO USE THE ACCESS ROAD.
SO Y'ALL JUST BACK HAVE THE CARS BACK OUT INTO THE LITTLE DRIVEWAY? YES.
EGRESS AND EGRESS BOTH FROM LAMAR STREET.
I GUESS THAT COVER WHAT I'VE GOT.
COMMISSIONER WILL SET QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER VE THE, UM, LARGE AREA REZONING.
I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE BACKGROUND OF IT.
DO, UH, DOES ANY, DO ANY OF STAFF HAVE, UH, ABLE TO RECOLLECT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WAS THE GROUNDS FOR THAT LARGE AREA REZONING? WAS IT AN ATTEMPT TO DECREASE ALL OF THE INTENSITY OF THE USES IN THAT AREA OR WAS THERE SOME OTHER REASON FOR IT? NO, IT'S, UH, AS I SAID, JUST TO REZONE TO MATCH THE CURRENT USE OF PROPERTIES.
THE ISSUE, UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF PROPERTIES AND, AND THIS IS A COMMON THING WITH LARGE AREA REZONING, WHERE PROPERTIES DON'T HAVE, THEY'RE NONCONFORMING.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE CORRECT ZONING THAT MATCHES THEIR PROPERTIES.
SO THEY HAVE ISSUES SOMETIMES WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO GET BUILDING PERMITS OR, OR OTHER THINGS FROM THE CITY.
AND SO, UM, NOT EVERY PROJECT IS LIKE THIS, BUT IT'S PRETTY COMMON FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO HELP, UM, THE RESIDENTS IN MY AREA.
AND SO IF WE DO THIS LARGE AREA REZONING, THAT WILL MOST LIKELY HELP A LARGE NUMBER OF THEM BE ABLE TO GET THE PERMITS THAT THEY NEED TO GET TO IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTIES.
AND THIS WAS BEFORE MY TIME, BUT ONLY LIKE ONE MEETING BEFORE MY TIME.
UH, THE COMMISSION HAD CONSIDERED A LARGE AREA REZONING, UM, IN, UH, ALSO IN, IN D ONE.
UM, AND THAT WAS RELATED TO DECREASING THE INTENSITY OF THE USES THAT WAS, THAT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THIS? YEAH, THAT, THAT ONE WAS THE TWO AND THAT ONE HAD, UM, UM, ITS OWN SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS.
BUT IT, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO BE CAUTIOUS THAT THIS WAS A DIFFERENT KIND OF LARGE AREA REZONING.
IT WASN'T THE SAME KIND OF LARGE AREA REZONING.
THEY HAD DIFFERENT MOTIVATIONS.
THEY'RE ALL, THEY'RE ALL DIFFERENT.
THEY'RE BASED ON THE REQUEST FROM THE COUNCIL LAW.
[00:55:01]
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS LEFT? YES.
ONE LAST COMMISSIONER, WE, WE'LL COME BACK AROUND TO YOU ONCE WE DO THE, ONCE WE GO AROUND THE HORN.
LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, UH, THE BACK HOME, UH, THE TWO PARKING SPACES THERE, THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'D BE REALLY TIGHT IF THE BACK IS FENCED OFF, LOOKS LIKE IT'D BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR A VEHICLE TO PULL IN AND OUT OF THOSE, AT LEAST THE BACK FURTHER SPEC SLOT PARKING SLOT.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW THAT WOULD WORK? WELL, THAT, THAT WAS DRAWN BY OUR DESIGNER, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT IT'S, THAT IT'S ADEQUATE SPACE.
IF, IF I CAN JUMP IN QUICKLY AS WELL.
THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVIDES FOR SOME DESIGN FLEXIBILITY.
UH, WHEN IT COMES TO APPROVED SITE PLANS, THERE ARE CERTAIN PERCENTAGES THAT CAN BE ADJUSTED.
SO WHAT YOU ARE, UH, LOOKING AT BEFORE YOU, I WOULDN'T TREAT IT AS THE LAST WORD IN ENGINEERING OF SPOTS THAT'LL BE HANDLED AT THE BUILDING PERMIT STAGE.
AND WE DO HAVE FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN FOR AMENDMENTS TO SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT NEED 10% REDUCTION IN THE BUILDING SIZE OR 10% INCREASE IN THE IMPERVIOUS COVER TO ACCOUNT FOR THOSE.
UM, SO CERTAINLY BUILDING PERMITS WILL NOT BE ISSUED IF IT DOESN'T PASS, UH, THE REQUIRED UH, CODES.
WELL IT DOES LOOK LIKE POTENTIALLY THE, THE REAR MOST, UH, BUILDING COULD BE MOVED SLIGHTLY MORE TOWARD LAMAR STREET AND GIVE A LITTLE MORE SPACE FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KELLY.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER TO MY LEFT.
COMMISSIONER TSET, WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU ONCE WE GO AROUND.
COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS, NOW WE'RE BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER TSET.
UM, QUICKLY, UH, BACK TO THE PARKING, UH, ISSUE THAT'S NINE FEET BETWEEN THE, FOR THAT DRIVEWAY AND I, I AGREE THAT THAT IS GONNA BE A REAL DIFFICULT IF THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO TURN OUT INTO THAT ALLEY, IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE.
AND I'VE GOT 16 FEET WHEN I BACK OUTTA MY CARPORT AT HOME AND I HAVE TO BACK AROUND, UH, OF THAT SO I CAN SEE WHERE THAT WOULD BE A REAL CHALLENGE.
AND THEN THE LAST WOULD JUST BE, WHAT IS EP DASH ONE? I'VE SEEN THAT AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS.
IT'S A OVERLAY DISTRICT CALLED THE EVENT PARKING OVERLAY DISTRICT.
IT WAS ADOPTED 20 ISH YEARS AGO AS A MEANS TO TRY TO REGULATE THE PROLIFERATION OF, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS ALLOWING PEOPLE TO PARK ON LAWNS FOR EVENTS AT THE FROST BANK.
FROST FROST BANK, I WOULD SAY AT THE TIME, WHAT WAS IT CALLED? BUT THE FROST BANK CENTER TODAY.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT QUESTIONS? RIGHT? QUESTIONS REMOTE? NO.
THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE COMMISSIONER LO TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
THANKS FOR THE, UM, INFORMATION AND PRESENTATION.
WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS A PRETTY MODEST INCREASE IN DENSITY AND MATCHES A LOT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND, UM, ALSO WANNA SEE A, A NON-USE BUILDING GO INTO USE, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S USED FOR HOUSING.
SO, UM, NO ISSUES ON OUR END FOR DISTRICT TWO.
I'M IN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.
ALRIGHT, THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER NINE.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIPES, UH, DISCUSSION LEFT.
I, I AGREE THIS, UM, ESPECIALLY IN THE OLDER AREAS, A LOT OF TIMES WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE, THE, THE B TO TO OUR CONVERSION WHERE YOU GET THE ABILITY TO DO A DUPLEX JUST OUT OF RIGHT.
UM, SO I THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD, UM, UH, USE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
UM, I DID WANT TO MAKE TWO POINTS.
ONE I WANTED TO COMPLIMENT STAFF FOR SAYING, FOR USING THE ALLEY AS AN ADDITIONAL, ALMOST AS A BUFFER OR, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT, UM, WHERE THAT ALLOWS THE ADDITIONAL SEPARATION BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE'VE HAD, UM, ADDITIONAL UNITS BEING BUILT, ALTHOUGH IT'S TOO CLOSE, IT'S ONLY FIVE FEET AWAY FROM, FROM AN ADDITIONAL UNIT, FROM THE, FROM THE NEIGHBOR.
AND THIS WAY BY SAYING THAT, OH WELL YOU HAVE AN ALLEY, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL BUFFER.
I THINK THAT WAS A EXCELLENT POINT THAT I HAD NEVER THOUGHT OF BEFORE.
UM, AND I ALSO WANTED TO, UH, ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE, THE PARKING.
UM, IF I PARK IN MY GARAGE, I HAVE TO BACK OUT 150 FEET ON A SINGLE LANE DRIVEWAY BECAUSE IT'S AN OLD HOUSE TO GET OUT OF ONTO THE STREET.
SO, UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK IT'S A EXCELLENT USE FOR THIS, UH, PROPERTY.
[01:00:01]
YOU.UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER LOAF FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE.
YOU'RE ON YOUR WAY TO CITY COUNCIL.
ALL RIGHT, WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12.
BRONTE FER ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 12 IS LOCATED AT 1 4 1 CASTILLO AVENUE GOING FROM R FOUR TO IDZ TWO FOR SIX DWELLING UNITS.
ALL OVERLAYS TO REMAIN THE SAME.
THERE ARE 42 NOTICES SET, ZERO IN FAVOR AND ZERO TWO OPPOSED.
AND ROOSEVELT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED IDZ TWO MEDIUM INTENSITY IN FIELD DEVELOPMENT ZONE DISTRICT WITH USES PERMITTED FOR SIX DWELLING UNITS IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
WHILE A SURROUNDING AREA DOES HAVE MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS, THE DENSITY IS LIMITED TO FOUR UNITS PER PROPERTY.
A REQUEST FOR SIX UNITS WOULD INTRODUCE A DENSITY THAT IS UNCHARACTERISTIC OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF IDZ.
ONE LIMITED INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE AND WHEN PERMIT ADDITIONAL HOUSING CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
UM, TEN FOUR FOUR SIX TRAILWAY OAK REPRESENTING THE OWNER.
UM, I THINK I SENT A PERFECT, THANK YOU.
UM, DO YOU WANT, I GUESS JUST PERFECT.
SO THE, UM, SO YEAH, SO THE, THE ACTUAL, UH, BUILDING, UM, IT'S AROUND 4,600 SQUARE FEET.
THE SIX UNITS IS AN EXISTING, ARE, ARE, IS ARE EXISTING.
SO THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN, UM, YOU KNOW, IT HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE MAYBE 2021 SINCE THE LAST, UH, LEASE HE WAS THERE.
UH, WHAT WAS THE, WHEN THE LAST, UH, TENANT WAS THERE? UH, THE LEASE WAS, UM, KINDA LET, UH, IT WAS EXPIRED WITH THE IN WAS, UH, WITH THE, IN INTENT TO RENOVATE IT, BUT OBVIOUSLY COVID HIT AND SO THINGS GOT DELAYED.
BUT NOW THAT, UM, WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF, UH, RENOVATING IT.
WE'RE BASICALLY TAKING WHAT WAS THERE AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLEAN IT UP.
UM, WHAT REALLY SPARKED THIS WAS, UH, AT THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LIGHT THAT CPS WAS TURNED OFF AND WHEN WE CAME TO ACTUALLY PULL PERMIT, UM, THEY, YEAH, THEY SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN WITHOUT LIFE FOR MORE THAN 90 DAYS, YOU GOTTA GO AND GET THIS BASICALLY TO MATCH THE RE UH, THE ZONING.
UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN, UH, IN CONTACT WITH THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION, UM, MR. UH, PRESIDENT UH, JEFF HUNT AND THE VICE PRESIDENT JACOB.
I DON'T WANT, I DON'T KNOW THE GENTLEMAN'S NAME, BUT WE'VE CANVASSED THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHAT WAS HIS NAME? STENO.
WE'VE, UH, WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM.
UM, WE'VE CANVASSED THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH LEFT NOTIFICATIONS AND FOR THE PAST, YOU KNOW, BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR THE PAST TWO AND A HALF WEEKS.
AND THEN THIS LAST SATURDAY, UH, THE OWNER NDA, UH, WALKED THE PROPERTY WITH BOTH, UM, JEFF AND, AND JACOB.
I MEAN, THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, IT'S A PRETTY BIG HOUSE, BUT THE FIRST UNIT, THE FIRST FLOOR IS TWO UNITS THAT ACCOUNT FOR ALMOST A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT EACH.
AND THE, THE SECOND FLOOR IS FOUR UNITS THAT ARE PLUS OR MINUS SIX 50, PROBABLY MORE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SMALLEST ONE BEING ALMOST LIKE 6 5, 6 50 SQUARE FEET.
[01:05:03]
UM, I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT WE DID MISS A, A BLANKET ZONING.SO THAT WAS, UH, THAT WAS ON US.
THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH A, A UPZONING ON A LOT OF THESE, UH, UNITS BECAUSE AS YOU SEE, THERE IS A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY ALREADY IN THIS BLOCK.
UM, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY TO, TO OUR FRONT AND EVEN SO, AND THEN THAT'S THE HOUSE RIGHT THERE THAT'S A SURVEY.
AND AS YOU'LL SEE FROM THE SURVEY TO THE IDZ SITE PLAN, NOTHING IS CHANGING.
THE ONLY THING WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE ADDING SIX, UH, PARKING SPOTS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WEREN'T, YOU KNOW, WE, A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE KIND OF PARKING IN THE FRONT, BUT NOW WITH KIND OF SPEAKING TO THE NEIGHBORS AND LETTING THEM KNOW THAT THESE SIX UNITS WILL BE BACK ONLINE, THEY REQUESTED WE ADDED THESE SIX UNITS, SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, ADDING THE TO THE BACK.
UM, AND THIS WAS JUST, YOU KNOW, SOME INFORMATION WE WANTED TO GIVE THE, UH, NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION.
I KNOW WE EXPLORED SEVERAL IDEAS OF HOW TO NOT DO IDZ, RIGHT.
SOMETIMES IDZ GETS PEOPLE A LITTLE SCARED, EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, I THINK, UH, THROUGHOUT THE YEARS HAS BEEN GREAT PROGRESS ON HOW TO KIND OF GET THAT NICE AND TIGHT.
BUT YEAH, I'M, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE OWNER'S HERE AS WELL.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
I THOUGHT JEFF LEFT A MESSAGE.
THERE'S NO ONE SIGNED IN TO SPEAK.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE ROOSEVELT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I LIVE AT 1 21 LORETTA PLACE, 7 8 2 1 0 2 1 0 3 8 7 7 9 1 9.
I'M CALLING IN THE CASE REGARDING, UH, NUMBER 2 7 9 ON 1 41 CASTILLO AVENUE.
UM, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS APPROVED A MOTION TO CONDITIONALLY SUPPORT THE CHANGE OF ZONING.
UM, WE HAVE MET THE CURRENT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND AGREE, UH, TO THE CHANGES WITH GOOD FAITH IN HIS FUTURE INTENTIONS.
OUR SUPPORT IS CONDITIONAL WITH HIS ASSURANCE THAT HE WILL PROVIDE AT LEAST SIX PARKING SPOTS BEHIND THE HOUSE WITH ALI ENTRANCE.
THIS WILL PROVIDE AT LEAST ONE PARKING SPOT PER APARTMENT AND NOT STREET PARKING.
UM, WE BELIEVE THIS ZONING CHANGE CAN PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR AT LEAST SIX SAN ANTONIO CI CITIZENS.
AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE RPNA IS SUPPORTING THIS PROJECT.
YOU DON'T GET A REBUTTAL TO THAT.
UH, IN FACT, THIS IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
I AM A MEMBER OF THE ROOSEVELT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD.
HOWEVER, I RECUSE MYSELF FROM ANY DISCUSSION OR CONSIDERATION OF ZONING MATTERS SO I CAN CONSIDER THEM HERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID NOT KNOW, AND I'VE LIVED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE 2014, I LIVED ON THAT STREET UNTIL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.
UM, IS THAT THESE WERE ALREADY SIX ESTABLISHED UNITS? YES, SIR.
'CAUSE IT'S BEEN EMPTY SINCE 2021.
WAS ANY ATTEMPT MADE TO MAKE IT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE? NO, SIR.
'CAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE, DOES IT? WELL, I THINK IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SIX.
SO WE SAID, HEY, WE'LL JUST, YOU KNOW, CLEAN THIS UP.
WELL PROBABLY BACK, NOT BACK IN 1920 WHEN IT WAS FIRST BUILT.
THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR IS SOLD FOR A MILLION DOLLARS.
BIG MAGNOLIA TREE IN FRONT, SO, YEAH, I GET IT.
UM, OKAY, SO YOU KNOW THE NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT PARKING? YES SIR.
AND SO YOUR SITE PLAN DOES PROVIDE SIX TOTAL SPOTS ON THE BACK WITH ACCESS FROM THE ALLEY, CORRECT? YES SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMERS TO MY LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER VE UH, FOR TO STAFF, THE STAFF REPORT REFERS TO, UM, THE SURROUNDING AREA HAVING SOME MULTIFAMILY WITH DENSITY LIMITED TO FOUR UNITS PER PROPERTY.
UM, WHAT, WHAT, WHERE DOES THAT RESTRICTION COME FROM? WHERE DOES THAT LIMIT COME FROM? UM, JUST BASED OFF OF THE ZONING, I BELIEVE IT'S A MIX OF R FOUR CD OR RM FOURS THAT PERMIT ONLY FOUR UNITS.
SO THE BASE ZONING ON THE NEARBY ONLY, ONLY, UH, ALLOWS UP TO, UH, FOUR UNITS MAYBE.
WELL, I MEANT WITHIN THE 200 FEET THERE IS A SMALL MF 33 TO THE EDGE ALL THE WAY TO THE EAST, BUT THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED OFF OF THEIR, UM, ACREAGE TIMES 33.
I'M NOT CERTAIN HOW MANY UNITS THEY'D BE PERMITTED, BUT AGAIN, WE WE'RE JUST GOING OFF IN PRO WITHIN PROXIMITY.
[01:10:01]
UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.LAND USE DESIGNATION IS URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT ENTAIL? WHAT'S THE VISION FOR, FOR THAT DESIGNATION? SO, WITH THE URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IT IS GOING TO BE A MIX OF YOUR LOWER, UM, YOUR, A LOT OF YOUR SINGLE FAMILY, BUT ALSO MIX IN SOME OF THE DENSITIES OF LIKE, I THINK RM UH, FIVE, RM SIX, AND EVEN MF 18.
UM, AND SO THE SIX UNITS JUST GOES ABOVE THAT DENSITY A LITTLE BIT AND HENCE WHY THEY'RE NEEDING TO REQUEST THE PLAN AMENDMENT TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PERMIT THAT HIGHER DENSITY, WHICH DOES BRING UP RIGHT.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S GONNA HAVE TO HEAR IT AFTER US AS WELL.
AND IT IS SCHEDULED FOR TOMORROW.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ON MY LEFT? YES.
GOTTA REMEMBER TO PUSH THE BUTTON.
I NOTICE THAT IT'S, UH, CONSISTS OF THREE LOTS AND I KNOW THAT THE CITY IN THE PAST DOESN'T ALLOW BUILDING ACROSS LOT LINES.
ARE THEY GONNA BE FORCED TO REPL WITH THIS ISSUE THAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH HERE INTO A SINGLE LOT OR IT'S AN EXISTING BUILDING SO THEY'RE ONLY LIMITED TO OVER THE COUNTER RESIDENTIAL REPAIR PERMITS, WHICH WOULD NOT, UM, CALL FOR A NEW PLAT.
SO THE ZONING CHANGE DOESN'T, UH, IT WOULDN'T AFFECT IN THIS CASE ISSUE.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT? QUESTIONS? RIGHT QUESTIONS? REMOTE.
ALRIGHT, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.
UM, SO DISCUSSION TO ME, UH, FOR A POTENTIAL MOTION, UH, I APPRECIATE STAFF'S, UM, RECOMMENDATION.
I, I, HOWEVER, DO NOT AGREE WITH IT.
I, I WOULD'VE PREFERRED NOT TO USE IDZ IN THIS CASE, BUT GIVEN THE NUMBER OF UNITS AT SIX, UM, I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'D BE LOOKING FOR NINE PARKING SPOTS AND THAT WOULD BE TOUGH.
UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, HAVING LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, HAVING SOMEWHAT BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAST LARGE AREA REZONING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SURVEYING THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR VARIOUS MULTI-FAMILIES THAT WERE NON-CONFORMING, UH, TO TRY TO BRING THEM INTO CONFORMANCE.
UH, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE DO HAVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD A NUMBER OF FIVE AND SIX UNIT BUILDINGS, UH, THAT LARGELY FOLLOW THIS FORMAT.
UH, A GRAND OLD HOUSE THAT, YOU KNOW, IS INCOMPATIBLE ECONOMICALLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, AND SO HAS BEEN DIVVIED UP AND DIVIDED TO ALLOW HOPEFULLY, GENERALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UH, I LOVE TO SEE THESE PROJECTS.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF THE CASES WHERE COMMISSIONER SIPES AND I DISAGREE TO SOME DEGREE TO SOME DEGREE, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE BACK ALLEY PARKING MM-HMM
UH, BUT I VIEW THIS KIND OF REUSE OF SOME OF THESE HOUSES AS A GOOD ENTRY POINT FOR PEOPLE TO JOIN A NEIGHBORHOOD TO SET DOWN ROOTS AND BECOME PART OF THAT COMMUNITY.
SO AS A RESULT, UH, I'M GOING TO MOVE AND DO SO MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 12 AS SUBMITTED.
DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? TO MY LEFT? YES.
ALRIGHT, I'M, I'M ACTUALLY GONNA SUPPORT THIS.
UM, AND, UH, PRIMARILY BECAUSE, UM, OF THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S INVOLVEMENT AND, AND APPROVAL, UM, AND YEAH, I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF ACCESSING PARKING FROM AN ALLEY, BUT, BUT I, BUT I MUCH PREFER HAVING THE PARKING IN THE BACK VERSUS PARKING IN THE FRONT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY WE, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.
IT'S EVERY, EVERY CASE IS DIFFERENT.
EVERY CASE YOU HAVE TO DECIDE INDIVIDUALLY.
SO, UM, SO YEAH, I'M, I'M FINE WITH THAT PART OF IT.
UM, AND, UH, USUALLY I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF, UM, OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ONLY FOUR UNITS.
UM, BUT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE CASE BY CASE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT.
UM, IT'S A, A HUGE HOUSE THAT, THAT'S BEEN DIVVIED UP INTO, INTO SIX UNITS.
UM, I'VE HAD, I'VE, I HAVE A FAMILY MEMBER WHO USED TO LIVE IN, IN ONE OF THE, IN, IN A SIMILAR CASE, JUST A LITTLE BIT NORTH OF HERE, UM, THAT WAS YEARS LATER, UM, CONVERTED BACK INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
UM, SO THAT, THAT THE, THE PRESERVATION OF THE, UM, EXISTING CONDITION TO ME IS, IS, IS VERY IMPORTANT.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER SIPS? YES, COMMISSIONER DUBAL
[01:15:01]
PRESERVATION OF THE STRUCTURE.UM, I, IT DOESN'T, DIDN'T APPEAR TO ME THAT IT HAS ANY HISTORIC DESIGNATION, BUT IT'S A, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING AND IT'S NOT LOST ON ME THAT WITH THE CURRENT R FOUR ZONING, IT COULD BE TORN DOWN AND BUILT INTO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT AS BEAUTIFUL.
UM, SO THIS IS ONE WAY TO KEEP THAT, UM, AS WELL JUST, YOU KNOW, TO EXPRESS, EXPRESS THE DESIRE PLANNING COMMISSION IS MEETING TOMORROW, WHATEVER THEIR DECISION IS.
THIS IS ANOTHER CASE WHERE IT WOULD WEIGH HEAVILY ON WHETHER I'D SUPPORT OR OPPOSE
UM, BUT IN THIS CASE THOUGH, GIVEN THE INFORMATION ABOUT THERE BEING OTHER UNITS SIMILARLY SITUATED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE FIVE, SIX UNITS IN IT, UM, AND THE FACT THAT THE ROOSEVELT, UM, SORRY ROOSEVELT PARK, PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT, UM, I'LL BE, YOU KNOW, SUPPORTING THIS.
ANY FURTHER? UH, DISCUSSION LEFT DISCUSSION.
AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES.
THAT WAS A POINT I MEANT TO MAKE, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, I DO HOPE YOU KNOW THAT THIS DOES PRESERVE IT IF THE MARKET ALLOWS TO TO BE REPURPOSED BACK INTO SOME OF ITS NEIGHBORING HOUSES.
AND THERE ARE SOME GREAT EXAMPLES OF THE EARLY 1920S, THE ORIGINAL BEATTY MANSION WHO DEVELOPED THE PERSON WHO DEVELOPED THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
HIS HOUSE IS, I THINK EITHER TWO DOORS DOWN OR ONE DOOR DOWN, AND IT HAS BEEN REDEVELOPED INTO A SINGLE FAMILY AND IT'S BEAUTIFUL.
ALRIGHT, ENOUGH COMMENTARY FROM ME.
UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 12 AS SUBMITTED WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CHASE.
9:00 AM ALRIGHT, OUR NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 16.
MY NAME IS FORREST WILSON, PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 16, LOCATED AT 7 2 5 MONTEZUMA STREET.
IT'S GOING FROM R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C TWO PNA COMMERCIAL PEDESTRIAN, NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 50 NOTICES SENT, ZERO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED IN THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT.
THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C TWO P AND A COMMERCIAL PEDESTRIAN NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT, UH, IS NOT APPROPRIATE AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BEHIND SEVERAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ALONG GUADALUPE STREET, BUT THE ABUTTING PROPERTY TO THE EAST AND WEST ARE PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL.
THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING TO EXPAND THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT FRONTS ON GUADALUPE STREET TO THE MONTEZUMA PROPERTY STAFF PROPOSES AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF C ONE LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AS IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE PROPOSED FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT.
LIMIT THE BUILDING SIZE TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET AND LIMIT FUTURE USES THAT COULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT TO THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION TO C ONE AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE, AND IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MUNDUS CAMILLA, 1926 GUADALUPE STREET, UH, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 7.
WE ARE PROPOSING, UH, CHANGE OF ZONING BECAUSE WE WANT TO EXPAND OUR, THE, THE BUILDING LIKE FOR SET AND JUST, UH, WE ARE NEW TO THIS WHOLE THING OF ZONING, SO WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SETBACKS AND THE, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.
SO WE WE'RE JUST WORRIED ABOUT THE SETBACK ON THE BACK ON MONTEZUMA STREET 30 FEET.
UH, THE, WE WANT TO BE, UH, SORRY ABOUT MY ENGLISH.
WE WANT THE, THE COMMISSION TO UM, HAVE IT HAVE A RE ZONE.
THE WAY THEY, THEY, UH, PLAN, THEY, THEY THINK THAT IT'S OKAY, BUT WE WANT TO EXPAND THE BUILDING, THE, THE, HOW DO YOU SAY? UH, AS FAR AS, AS FAR AS WE CAN ON THE, ON THE, ON THE LAND.
SO THE, THE SETBACKS ARE, WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT IT.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
MR. ESCAMILLA, IF YOU COULD SIT BACK FOR A SECOND OKAY.
[01:20:01]
SOME PEOPLE.HI, MY NAME IS LETICIA SANCHEZ AND I'M THE CO-CHAIR PERSON OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION.
UH, MY ADDRESS IS 1710 VERA CRUZ 7 8 2 0 7, AND THIS PROPERTY AT 7 25 MONTEZUMA IS WITHIN OUR BOUNDARIES.
UM, OUR ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, MR. MARTINEZ AND THE FAMILY TO ENSURE THAT THE ZONING, UM, THAT IS SELECTED IS THE BEST OPTION FOR THEM AND OUR COMMUNITY.
MR. MARTINEZ IS THE OWNER OF THE COLONIAL TORTILLA COMPANY, WHICH IS A LEGACY BUSINESS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, THEIR BUSINESS IS ON THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND 1725, WHICH FACES GUADALUPE STREET.
UM, THEIR GOAL IS TO EXPAND THE BUSINESS TO THE BACK PROPERTY AND OUR ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THEIR ZONING REQUESTS FOR A C TWO P AND A ZONING.
ALTHOUGH OUR ASSOCIATION WOULD NOT TYPICALLY SUPPORT THIS TYPE OF ZONING ON MONTEZUMA, WE DO SUPPORT THIS REQUEST BECAUSE A TORTILLA COMPANY IS A LEGACY BUSINESS.
UM, ALSO PARKING FOR THIS BUSINESS IS ON GUADALUPE STREET, SO THERE WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE FOR RESIDENTS ON MONTEZUMA.
AND FINALLY, MR. MARTINEZ, UH, HAS AGREED TO SUBMIT A DEED RESTRICTION, UH, LETTER TO US, TO OUR ASSOCIATION ENSURING THAT IF THE PROPERTY WOULD EVER BE SOLD, IT COULD NOT BE SOLD TO ANY BUSINESS ANYONE WISHING TO START.
BUSINESSES LISTED ON C TWO ZONING THAT THE ASSOCIATION HAS NOT, UM, THAT THE ASSOCIATION HAS INDICATED IT DOES NOT WANT ON THAT PROPERTY.
SO WE THEREFORE ASK THAT YOU VOTE TO SUPPORT MR. MARTINEZ'S APPLICATION FOR C TWO P AND A ZONING.
MS. SANCHEZ ESIA, HE'S THE, UH, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, HE WANTS TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND HE WANTS TO ENLARGE THE PROPERTY WHERE THE ENLARGE THE PROPERTY, UH, WHERE HE HAS HIS TORTILLA FACTORY.
UH, IT'S A BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN INTEGRATED INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE'VE KEPT IT AS, UH, GOOD CONDITION AS WE CAN.
THEY, THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO ENLARGE THEIR BUSINESS.
SO IT'S, IT WILL BE TORTILLAS AND FOOD SERVICE.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, MR. ESCAMILLA, ANYTHING YOU WANNA SAY FURTHER? I'M THE THIRD GENERATION OF TORTILLA TO, UH, OF TORTILLA MAKERS.
UH, AND THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN ON THE FAMILY FOR THREE GENERATIONS SINCE IT HAS BEEN OWNED BY MY FATHER'S UNCLE.
SO WE JUST WANT TO DO WHATEVER IS RIGHT TO THE COMMUNITY, UH, THE ZONING.
BUT, UH, HOPE, UH, HOPEFULLY WELL, WELL WE, WE'VE BEEN GROWING THE, THE BUSINESS, UH, THANKFULLY AND WE, WE WANT TO KEEP ON GROWING AND KEEP DOING BUSINESS AND GIVING JOBS AND EVERYTHING TO THE COMMUNITY THAT, THAT WE ARE IN.
AND WE, YES, WE JUST WANT TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT, UH, FOR THE ZONING, UH, COMMISSION AND, UH, HAVE THE BUILDING, UH, BIGGER.
THANK YOU MR. MAKE MORE TORTILLAS.
UH, SO IT IS TO ME FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, FOREST ONE, ONE THING, UH, THAT YOU MENTIONED IS THAT THERE IS AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FOR C ONE.
IF C ONE WERE TO OCCUR, WHAT WOULD BE THE SETBACKS? SO WITH C ONE IT WOULD'VE A 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK AND A 10 FOOT SIDE SETBACK.
[01:25:01]
MR. ESCAMIA, TO YOU NOW 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK WOULD IMPEDE WHAT YOU'RE ABLE TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY, RIGHT? YES.IT'S, UH, YOU'RE TAKING LIKE THE HALF, HALF OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S 30 FEET FROM THE BACK AND 10 FEET FROM THE SIDE.
AND, AND YOU WANT TO CONNECT THE TWO BUILDINGS? YES.
THE BUILDING FACING GUADALUPE EXISTING? YES.
AND A FUTURE BUILDING ON MONTEZUMA? YES.
AND WE, WE, WE WILL HAVE TO REPL, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER, YEAH.
AND SO, UH, MR. WILSON, SORRY, I CALLED YOU FOREST EARLIER.
UM, WOULD C TWO P ALLOW THEM TO HAVE NO REAR SETBACK SUCH THAT THEY COULD CONNECT THOSE TWO BUILDINGS? THAT'S CORRECT, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT, UH, IT DOESN'T, THE PROPERTY DOES NOT ABUT RESIDENTIAL IN THE REAR.
THE 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK WOULD BE WEIGHED WITH THE C TWO P.
UH, AND THE ONLY SETBACK WOULD BE IF YOU'RE FACING THE PROPERTY FROM MONTEZUMA, A SETBACK ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE.
IS THAT CORRECT? WHEN YOU'RE FACING THE PROPERTY FROM MONTEZUMA, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND HOW MUCH IS THAT? 10 FEET.
AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT 10 FOOT RIGHT SIDE SETBACK? YES.
UH, I WILL SAVE EVERYTHING ELSE FOR DISCUSSION, UH, BUT ANY QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER, WHAT? SO YOU ARE RE PLATTING? YES.
AND WHEN THEY REPL, THAT GIVES THE OPTION TO BUILD ALL THE WAY BACK AND THEN THEY ONLY HAVE THAT SETBACK FROM THE STREET BACK THERE? YES SIR.
QUESTIONS TO MY RIGHT, COMMISSIONER CHASE.
UM, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A DIS DISTRICT FIVE CASE, SO MY DISCUSSION, UM, I PROBABLY WOULD'VE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN IDZ HERE, UH, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED MM-HMM
MR. ESCAMILLA, BRIEFLY, UH, I THINK WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE EVEN GOTTEN YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE ON THIS PROPERTY.
UH, BUT YOU KNOW, AS WE DISCUSSED, YOU, YOU WANT TO GO FORWARD.
C TWO P APPEARS TO BE THE BEST OPTION.
I APPRECIATE STAFF'S ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF C ONE.
UM, BUT GIVEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT AND GIVEN THE DESIRES FOR THIS PROPERTY AND ITS USE, UM, I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 16 AS SUBMITTED, INCLUDING THE NA DESIGNATION.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 16 AS SUBMITTED.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODSON, UH, DISCUSSION TO MY LEFT? YES.
SO FROM THE STAFF REPORT AND HADN'T, HADN'T BEEN CLEAR TO ME THE DISTINCTION WITH THE SETBACK BETWEEN C ONE AND C TWO.
UM, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN HELPFUL WHEN I WAS, WHEN I WAS REVIEW, REVIEWING IT FOR THE HEARING, UH, BECAUSE I WAS PREPARED TO COME AND ASK, OKAY, WHY, WHY DON'T WE DO C ONE AND, YOU KNOW, PREVENT A, A FUTURE, YOU KNOW, OWNER IF THERE EVER WAS A FUTURE OWNER FROM, YOU KNOW, NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE THE USES IN C TWO.
BUT NOW THAT I, I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE AROUND THE SETBACK, THAT'S A LOT MORE CLEAR WHY THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING C TWO.
UM, SO FOR THAT REASON I'LL BE SUPPORTING.
COMMISSIONER CHASE DISCUSSION? NOPE.
ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 16 BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITSETT.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
ALRIGHT, OUR NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 20.
MR. ZONING ZENER PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
HONOR NUMBER 20 IS LOCATED AT 14 SIX WEST HILL DEBR AVENUE GOING FROM C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
THERE WERE 36 NOTICES SENT ONE IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED THE KEYSTONE.
LOS ANGELES HEIGHTS, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
STAFF DOES FIND LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUESTS.
THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ZONED C3, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY.
THE EXISTING C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE HIGHER INTENSE ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR A BROADER RANGE OF POTENTIAL TENANT OPPORTUNITIES WHILE THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED
[01:30:01]
FOR COMMERCIAL USE, THE REQUEST A C3 DISTRICT WOULD PERMIT MORE INTENSE USES INCLUDING NIGHTCLUBS, AUTO AND LIGHT TRUCK REPAIR AND OTHER HIGHER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES.GIVEN THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD DIRECTLY ABUTTING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES SOUTH, THE INTRODUCTION OF THESE HIGHER INTENSITY USES COULD RESULT IN ADVERSE IMPACTS TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENCE AND IS THEREFORE A COMP COMPATIBILITY CONCERN.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE OUR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE.
AND IF YOU WOULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND TELL US YOUR ADDRESS.
UH, ADDRESS IS 1 4 1 6 WEST HOLDER BRAND.
IF YOU WOULD TELL US ABOUT YOUR REQUEST AND WHY YOU WANT IT.
UM, YES, SO THIS WAS, UM, IT'S BEEN OWNED BY UH, MY FATHER FOR THE LAST 12 YEARS.
WE HAD A, A COUPLE TENANTS ALL IN THE FOOD BUSINESS.
UM, PARKING WAS ALWAYS AN ISSUE, SO WE KIND OF HAD TENANTS COMING IN AND OUT.
UM, SO THIS, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT FOUR MONTHS AGO WE DECIDED TO RENOVATE A LITTLE BIT.
WE DID SOME PAINT WORK AND UH, OPENED UP THE INSIDE A LITTLE BIT.
UM, AND I'M IN THE MOTORCYCLE BUSINESS.
I DEAL VINTAGE LIKE BMW HARLEY, UM, INDIAN.
SO I WAS LOOKING FOR LIKE KIND OF A SHOWROOM AND IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR THAT TYPE OF SALES THAT THEY, IT WAS MADE CLEAR TO ME THAT I NEEDED C3.
SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRETY REASON WE'RE NOT PLANNING ON SELLING OR, OR MOVING OUT.
BUT, UM, I DID WANNA MAKE THIS MY, UM, LIKE A SHOWROOM.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE.
KELLUM IS NOT HERE IT IS TO COMMISSIONER CHASE FOR QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS TO MY LEFT? YES, COMMISSIONER.
WHAT'S IT, WE'LL GO DOWN THE LINE HERE.
IT'S C3 AND A C3 AND A UH, SO O THERE IS C3 EXISTING, IT JUST HAS A NO ALCOHOL.
UH, IS THAT SOMETHING Y'ALL WOULD ACCEPT WITH A I'M NO, I'M NOT, YEAH, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN ANY ALCOHOL BUT BASICALLY LEFT OR RIGHT.
YEAH, YOU, THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING.
THERE'S C3 ALREADY SO THAT'D BE MORE THAN ENOUGH TO COVER THE SALES OF MY MOTORCYCLES.
AND NEXT DOOR IS BAD BOYS MACHINE SHOP AND CAR REPAIR AND UH, SO I GUESS THIS IS BAD MOTORCYCLE.
UH, STEP AND IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS.
UM, WHAT, WHAT WERE THE, UH, IMPACTS STAFF IDENTIFIED? SO AS I MENTIONED IN MY LITTLE BRIEF REPORT THERE AND IN THE STAFF REPORT, UH, C3 DOES ALLOW FOR OTHER MORE INTENSE USES IN THE CURRENT C TWO.
SO WHILE THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING THAT CURRENTLY A FUTURE OWNER COULD POTENTIALLY OPEN UP OTHER BUSINESSES THAT MIGHT IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE, IN THE SOUTH.
BUT JUST FOR, FOR CONTEXT, NEXT DOOR IS ALREADY C3.
SO WHAT, WHAT ADDITIONAL, UH, NEGATIVE IMPACTS LIKE SPECIFIC, YOU KNOW, MORE OF THE C3 WOULD BE, THERE WOULD BE MORE C3 THAT WOULD BE THE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS.
BUT I'M JUST, WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THE STAFF REPORT, I WAS TRYING TO THINK THROUGH OKAY.
WHAT I UNDERSTAND SPECIFICALLY, YOU WERE CORRECT.
THERE ARE SOME EXISTING, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF FROM PRINCIPAL LAND USE OR BASIC LAND USE PRINCIPLES THAT WE WOULD NOT SUPPORT.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL.
BUT I, I SUPPOSE THE TROUBLE WOULD YOU LIKE EXAMPLES? YEAH.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS LOOKING FOR, WELL JUST A FEW THAT I MENTIONED, UH, JUST NOW, UH, WOULD BE AUTO AND LIKE TRUCK REPAIR.
UH, YOU COULD DO A NIGHTCLUB USE AS WELL AND THE BAR.
SO WITH THOSE TWO EXAMPLES, UM, THIS ISN'T A CD OR A AN S SO WE CAN'T BE TALKING ABOUT TIME OF DAY RESTRICTIONS.
COULD WE CONSIDER THE NA TO PREVENT THE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL FUTURE? UH, OKAY, THANK YOU.
YEAH, LIKE I THINK IT'D BE GOOD WITH THE NA TO MITIGATE ANY OF THAT CONCERN.
AND LIKE I SAID, THERE'S REALLY NO PARKING SO I DON'T THINK LIKE A NIGHTCLUB OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE OF THAT NATURE WOULD BE DOING VERY WELL THERE ANYWAY.
COMMISSIONER SIPES AND MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE ALREADY LIKE ASKED AND, AND GOTTEN A GOOD RESPONSE.
UM, MY QUESTIONS WERE SPECIFICALLY
[01:35:01]
GONNA BE ABOUT THE NA UM, BUT I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF.AND IF THE DESIRE IS FOR A, A SHOWROOM, COULD THAT BE HANDLED IN A C TWO CD AND IF SO, IS THAT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME? IT IS AVAILABLE, YES.
AND IT COULD BE AN OPTION, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN SO WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT THIS ITEM ON HOLD UNTIL WE GET THAT C SITE PLAN.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES QUESTIONS, RIGHT QUESTIONS? REMOTE WAIT, YOU'VE ALREADY DONE, YOU'VE ALREADY ASKED YOUR QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER CHASE, UM, OR HAD YOUR FIRST ROUND.
OKAY, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND I THINK ASK SORT OF THE VERY DIRECT AND QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU AMENDING YOUR REQUEST NOW TO ADD NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES IN A UM, I MEAN I DIDN'T REALLY GIVE THAT ANY THOUGHT UNTIL IT WAS LIKE MADE, BROUGHT TO ME, BUT LIKE I SAID, PERSONALLY I HAVE NO INTENT OR USE WITH ANYTHING OF THE ALCOHOL.
SO IF COMMISSIONER CHASE WERE TO RECOMMEND, UH, APPROVAL WITH AN AMENDMENT TO NA, YOU WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE? SURE.
THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOU? YEAH, AS LONG AS I COULD SELL MOTORCYCLES.
ALRIGHT, THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER CHASE QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER CHASE TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION? I HAVE NO DISCUSSION, BUT OUT OF, UH, RESPECT TO DR.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TWO WEEKS.
THE NEXT MEETING WOULD BE FIVE WEEKS FROM NOW.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR, UH, CONTINUANCE TWO.
IS THERE A SECOND? LOOKING LEFT.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER S SIPES IS THE SECOND.
ALRIGHT, UH, DISCUSSION LEFT? YES.
UH, WAS THERE ANY REASONS GIVEN AS TO THE, UH, WHY THERE WAS GONNA BE A REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE? THERE WAS NOT ANY REASON.
HE JUST WANTED TO HAVE SOME TIME WITH THE APPLICANT.
OH, I'M, I'M SENSITIVE TO THE IMPACT OF TIME ON THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
UM, I'M, I'M GONNA BE VOTING NO ON THE CONTINUANCE.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER SIPES, I GUESS THIS WOULD BE A QUESTION TO STAFF.
HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT DOES THAT MAKE TO, UH, CONSIDERATION FOR COUNCIL? 'CAUSE COUNCIL WILL BE OFF AS WELL.
WELL, BASICALLY IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS VOTED ON TODAY, THEY WOULD GO TO COUNCIL POTENTIALLY ON ONE 15.
UM, BUT IF THIS IS CONTINUED TO THE ONE 20 CITY COUNCIL, IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL UNTIL THE FEBRUARY, THE SECOND MEETING IN FEBRUARY, WHICH I BELIEVE WOULD BE FEBRUARY 20TH I BELIEVE AS WELL.
SO THERE, SO IT WOULD, THERE IS AN IMPACT.
I AM GONNA SEE WHAT HAPPENS AND I'LL SEE WHERE I VOTE.
ALRIGHT, THE MOTION IS FOR, UH, CONTINUANCE TO JANUARY 20TH.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? NO.
WAIT, DID WE SKIP SOMEONE? YES.
COMMISSIONER VO, WHAT'S YOUR VOTE?
THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
THE FIRST ONE WAS BY HUEY AND THE SECOND, SORRY.
FIRST WAS BY HUEY AND THE SECOND WAS BY VO COMMISSIONER HUEY AYE.
[01:40:01]
PETE RODRIGUEZ.THE FLOOR'S NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 20, UH, WITH THE AMENDMENT OF C3.
OH, WHO, UH, COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
SO, UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 20 AS C3 AND A BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
YOU'RE GOING ON TO CITY COUNCIL.
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE COUNCIL OFFICE AND START WORKING WITH THEM.
[Approval of Minutes ]
THE FINAL ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS APPROVE, CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE DECEMBER 2ND, 2025 ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES.ANY CORRECTIONS? AMENDMENTS? AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, SUBTRACTIONS.
UM, THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION.
MOVE TO, UH, APPROVE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.
UH, COMMISSIONER ELL HAS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
UH, THIS VOTE SHALL BE BY ACCLIMATION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE.
COMMISSIONER WHO HE ABSTAINS UH, MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
IS THERE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT? NO DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
BUT I JUST WANTED TO WISH EVERYONE A HAPPY HOLIDAYS FOR SINCE I WON'T SEE Y'ALL UNTIL THE NEW YEAR.
THANK YOU EVERYONE, UH, FOR YOUR SERVICE THIS YEAR.
UH, IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE SERVING WITH ALL OF YOU.
I HOPE YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES HAVE A HAPPY HOLIDAYS.
UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION STAFF, THANK YOU ALL AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.
THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS ADJOURNED.