[00:00:01]
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF WE COULD PLEASE HAVE OUR SPANISH INTERPRETATION SERVICES STATEMENT.MY NAME IS JOHN BUSANTE AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT FIVE ZONING COMMISSIONER.
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 SIPS AND I REPRESENT DISTRICT SEVEN.
THANK YOU FOR BEING DANNY KELLUM, DISTRICT ONE, JOHN WHITSETT, DISTRICT 10 MOSES VE, DISTRICT NINE MIA LOS DISTRICT TWO, IAN, DISTRICT SIX, ANA MAYOR APPOINTEE GEORG OSA.
DISTRICT THREE, EDDIE PETE EZ.
DISTRICT FOUR STAFF IS A QUORUM PRESENT.
WOULD EVERYONE PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE BLACK OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN OUR HEARING, I'M GONNA ASK FOR A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE AND I WANT TO WELCOME OUR NEWEST COMMISSIONER, THE MAYOR APPOINTEE COMMISSIONER PANA, UH, TO THIS BODY.
UH, SHE WILL BRING INVALUABLE INSIGHT I'M SURE AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
SO PRIOR TO BEGINNING OUR HEARING, IF STAFF WOULD PLEASE 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, 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 WILL INDICATE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST AND AN X WILL INDICATE 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 THE PROPOSED REZONING, YOU WILL BE CALLED IN THE ORDER THAT YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THOSE IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED A MAXIMUM OF TWO MINUTES PER SPEAKER AND YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO UTILIZE THE MAXIMUM TIME LIMITATION.
YOU WILL BE INFORMED THAT THE TWO MINUTES ARE UP.
FOR THOSE 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 SIX MINUTES.
THOSE GIVING UP THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AND SIGNED IN TO SPEAK AND MUST ANNOUNCE THAT WHEN THE SPEAKER'S GOING UP TO THE PODIUM 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.
[Zoning Items ]
WE WILL BEGIN WITH ANY ITEMS THAT ARE POSTPONED OR WITHDRAWN.ITEMS. NUMBER ONE IS POSTPONED.
ITEM NUMBER 22 IS POSTPONED AS WELL.
OKAY LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE OR ITEM NUMBER 22 OF THOSE PROPERTIES ON UH, PLEASANTON ROAD AND WEST PALOMA BOULEVARD AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY ON PERA STREET, UH, THOSE ITEMS WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY.
UH, THEY MAY BE HEARD AT A FUTURE MEETING BUT IF THEY ARE YOU WILL RECEIVE A FURTHER NOTICE IN THE MAIL.
UH, SO I CANNOT TELL YOU WHEN THOSE WILL COME BACK, BUT YOU WILL RECEIVE A MAIL NOTICE, UH, FOR THOSE ITEMS AND IF YOU'RE HERE FOR 'EM, ENJOY THIS RATHER WARM WEATHER.
UM, ALRIGHT, WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR COMBINED HEARING.
NUMBER ONE, IF WE COULD HAVE THE ITEMS LISTED ON THAT AGENDA.
ITEM ITEMS ON THE COMBINED HEARING ARE 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18 21.
[00:05:05]
WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS FOR THOSE ITEMS AS WELL.ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS ON MY LEFT.
ANY ITEMS TO BE PULLED FROM THAT LIST AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE.
ANY ITEMS TO BE PULLED FROM THAT LIST AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD READ THOSE ITEMS ON THE COMBINED HEARING.
NUMBER ONE, THE CONSENT AGENDA INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R SIX TO C TWO LOCATED AT 7 3 5 CEDARHURST DRIVE.
ALL OTHER RELEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
10 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
SPRINGVALE NEIGHBOR RES ASSOCIATION IS THE OPPOSED THE APPLICANT IS AMENDING THE REQUEST TO C ONE.
A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C TWO NACD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER IS C TWO NACD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES.
FULL SERVICE LOCATED AT 41 31 CO ROAD.
ALL OTHER OVER LEASES REMAIN THE SAME.
THIRD THREE NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
ZERO POST CODA PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR CONTINGENT ON THE RESIDENT DEVELOPMENT OF 50 30 50 26 RITA AVENUE.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE ZONING FROM OH TWO TO RM FOUR LOCATED AT 1817 EAST HOUSTON STREET.
ALL ALTHOUGH RELEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
36 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
ZERO OPPOSE NUITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
ITEM NUMBER 12, A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM I TWO TO O OH ONE LOCATED AT 2 3 8 WEST VEST STREET.
ALL ALTHOUGH OVER LEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
25 NOTICES MAILED THREE IN FAVOR.
ZERO OPPOSED CALLING GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
ITEM 13 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C3 AND I ONE TO C TWO CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR TRUCK REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE LOCATED AT 64 64 HISTORICAL HIGHWAY 90.
ZERO POSTS NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
ITEM 14 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM I ONE TO IDZ ONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 700TH BLOCK OF EAST MYRTLE STREET.
ALL ALTHOUGH OVER LEASE TO REMAIN THE SAME.
10 OPPOSED TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR SO JOE CROSSING HOA IS OPPOSED AND SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET TO A OPPOSED ITEM 15.
A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C TWO TO C3 NR LOCATED AT 1632 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10.
ALL OF THE OVERLAYS SHOULD REMAIN THE SAME.
16 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR.
POST OAK PARK NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
ITEM 16 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM NP EIGHT TO R FIVE LOCATED AT 14 51 8 WATSON ROAD.
ALL OF OTHER OVER LEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
FOUR TO FOUR NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR OF ZERO POSTS.
STAR BRIGHT OVERLOOKED SOUTH GAVE NO RESPONSE.
ITEM 18 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R SIX TO C TWO GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE 8,000 BLOCK OF GIBO ROAD.
ALL ALTHOUGH LEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
FIFTH NOTICE IS MAILED ONE IN FAVOR.
THREE OPPOSED BRONZE STATION WEST COMMUNION IMPROVEMENT.
NEIGHBORHOOD HOOD ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED.
ITEM 21 A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM C3 NA AND C TWO NA TO C3 R GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE 100 BLOCK OF MORRISON BOULEVARD.
ALL OF THE OVER LEASE REMAIN THE SAME.
ZERO OPPOSED? HARVILLE MCCOLLUM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
DO WE HAVE ANY VO ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THESE ITEMS? WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP FOR ITEM SIX.
IF WE CAN HAVE THOSE TWO SPEAKERS NO VOICEMAILS PERFECT.
DAWN RIOS, MR. RIOS OR MS. RIOS? ALRIGHT, NOT PRESENT.
JIM P SIR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND TELL US WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE PROJECT YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT.
I LIVE AT 1 1 2 8 EAST EUCLID, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED.
[00:10:01]
THE SOJO CROSSING IS THE NAME OF OUR TOWN HOME PROJECT.27 UNITS REPRESENT, IF NOT ALL, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THERE, PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD.
UH, THE PROJECT CREATES, UM, A BIG CONGESTION FOR US.
PRIMARILY THERE'S ALREADY A TRAFFIC CONGESTION IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
UM, IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE PEARL, WHICH MOST PEOPLE HAVE, THIS IS ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM THE PEARL RESIDENTS ALL AROUND IT.
THEY'RE PROPOSING A, UM, TWO, THREE STORY BUILDING, NO ONSITE PARKING.
YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT'S DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM OUR COMPLEX.
SO WHEN YOU DRIVE OUT OF OUR COMPLEX, IT'S ALREADY VERY CONGESTED 'CAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF EUCLID AND MYRTLE, WHICH IS A, IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN DOWN THERE, WHICH I'M SURE MANY PEOPLE HAVE IS VERY CONGESTED.
THERE'S ALREADY A LOUD PARKING, WHICH WE ARE ALSO AGAINST, UM, IN THAT AREA BECAUSE THAT IS SO TIGHT AT THAT CORNER.
UH, YOU CANNOT GET THREE CARS THROUGH THERE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S PARKING ON EITHER SIDE SO THAT WE'RE KICKING THAT CAN DOWN THE ROAD FOR FUTURE.
UM, FUTURE WORK OR OBJECTION? YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBER OF CARS.
I JUST TOOK SOME PICTURES ONE WEEKEND AND IT IS JAM PACKED.
SO WITH THEM PROPOSING OFFICE, A RESTAURANT, A ROOFTOP BAR, UH, TOO CLOSE TO OUR RESIDENCE.
UM, THAT'S NUMBER ONE ISSUE NUMBER TWO, NO ONSITE PARKING.
THAT CREATES EVEN A MORE, MORE OF A PROBLEM.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE PICTURES.
SO THAT'S PRIMARILY, UH, GET CUT SHORT, BUT THAT'S PRIMARILY THE, THE OBJECTION.
ANY FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THESE ITEMS. HEARING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONERS ANY ITEMS TO BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? YES.
COMMISSIONER KELLEN, CAN WE PULL ITEM 14? OKAY.
IF WE CAN MOVE ITEM 14 TO INDIVIDUAL, UH, I'D APPRECIATE IT.
UH, ANY FURTHER ITEMS TO BE PULLED? LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE.
ALRIGHT, WE, UH, THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HUY, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER FOUR HAS APPENDED.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, NUMBER EIGHT, NUMBER 12, 13, 15, 16, 18 AND 21.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION? LOOKING LEFT, SEEING NONE.
UH, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS FOUR AS AMENDED.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WERE PRESENT FOR ANY OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE JUST LISTED, UM, THOSE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BY THIS BODY.
YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND TAKE UP THOSE ITEMS, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO STAY HERE TODAY.
SO IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ANY OF THOSE ITEMS, YOU CAN GO ALONG AND ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR DAY.
ALRIGHT, OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM WILL BE THE CONTINUANCE HEARING FOR MARCH 17TH, 2026.
ITEM 19 IS REQUESTING CONTINUOUS FOR TWO WEEKS.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? WE DO HAVE VOICEMAILS.
WE HAVE A NUMBER OF VOICEMAILS.
AND DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS AS WELL? NO SPEAKERS.
ALRIGHT THEN I DON'T HAVE TO GIVE MY LITTLE SPEECH ABOUT NOT DOING VOICEMAILS AND SPEECHES.
UM, SO WE WILL NOW LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PLEASE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS ELAINE DAGAN AND I LIVE AT CHATEAU DEON 77 0 9 BROADWAY IN UNIT ONE TWENTY FOUR.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (502) 807-7494
[00:15:05]
AND I'M CALLING REGARDING THE CASE Z 20 26 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.I HAVE LIVED AT CHATEAU DE JEAN FOR OVER FIVE YEARS.
I MYSELF AM APPROACHING 80 AND IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE PARK LIGHTS AREA THAT WE LIVE IN THE CLEAN AREA, THE CONVENIENCE OF GOING ACROSS OR SHOPPING AT HEB AND WE CANNOT LOOK AT HAVING A HUGE BUILDING IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO WHERE OUR POOLS AND THE TENNIS COURT ARE.
THERE IS A LARGE FOUR STORY BUILDING ALREADY ACROSS THE STREET THAT HAS LOTS OF HOUSING AVAILABLE.
UM, WE'RE CONCERNED THAT THE PATIOS AND THE POOLS AND WILL BE LACKING SUNLIGHT AND THAT THE NOISE AND EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS AND THE DUST DURING CONSTRUCTION CAN BE SUCH A NEGATIVE THING ON OUR COMMUNITY.
WE ALSO HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE IN WHEELCHAIRS AND MOTORIZED WHEELCHAIRS AND THEY DO THEIR SHOPPING BY GOING ACROSS THE WAY.
SO WE'RE VERY MUCH AGAINST, UH, DOING A FOUR STORY BUILDING ON SUCH A SMALL PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
MY NAME IS GARY RAIN AND MY ADDRESS IS 77 11 BROADWAY NUMBER 22 C.
I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE FOR 34 YEARS.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 826-3288.
I AM AGAINST THE ZONING CHANGE FOR CASE NUMBER Z DASH 2 0 2 6 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 15.
THIS ZONING WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION AND A HIGH VOLUME OF RESIDENTS NOT ONLY LIVING ON A SMALL AREA OF PROPERTY BUT ALSO USING THE SAME AREA.
THIS WILL BE, UH, CAUSE POTENTIAL HARM ON THE SAFETY OF ELDERLY RESIDENTS SUCH AS MYSELF WALKING TO THE SHOPS OF LINCOLN HEIGHTS.
OTHER POTENTIAL HARM IS THE LOSS OF PRIVACY FROM A FOUR STORY BUILDING LOOMING OVER OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY THE POOLS AND THE POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO OUR PROPERTY FROM HAVING CONSTRUCTION IN SUCH CLOSE PROXIMITY.
THANK YOU FOR THIS HELP, FOR YOUR HELP IN THIS MATTER.
HELLO, MY NAME IS GLORIA COUGHLIN, C-A-U-G-H-L-I-M.
I AM UH, AN OWNER OF THE CHATEAU DIJON UNIT NUMBER 11 AT SEVENTY SEVEN OH SEVEN BROADWAY.
MY CELL PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 716-6840.
I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO ZONING COMMISSION CASE Z DASH 2026 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5 THAT I AM LY VIOLENTLY OPPOSED TO HAVING, UH, UH, CONSTRUCTION HAPPEN, UH, WITH THIS, UH, AND HAVING THIS CONSTRUCTION MOVE FORWARD.
I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE HARM IT'S GONNA CAUSE THE CHATEAU DIJON COMMUNITY, THE STATUS OF, UH, ELDERLY RESIDENTS AND THE COMMUNITY LIVING THERE, LOSS OF PRIVACY AND UH, THE NOISE AND THE POLLUTION THAT WOULD COME WITH SUCH A LARGE CONSTRUCTION ENDEAVOR AND POTENTIAL EXISTING POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO, UH, OUR PROPERTY FROM HAVING CONSTRUCTION IN SUCH CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OUR UNIT.
SO I AM VERY MUCH AGAINST THIS ZONING ISSUE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
I LIVE AT 7 7 0 9 BROADWAY, APARTMENT 1 1 6.
I'M CALLING ABOUT CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 2 6 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.
I'M CONCERNED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OR THE PLANNED ZONING FOR THIS CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO CAUSE PROBLEMS WITH OUR ACCESS TO THE BUILDING AS WELL AS IT'S GOING TO CAUSE PROBLEMS, POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO OUR PROPERTY.
AND BECAUSE IT'S CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OTHER UNITS BEING DIRECTLY CROSSED, THE COLLAR BUILDING WILL TAKE THE NATURAL LIGHT AWAY FROM THE HOMES IN THE AREA.
AND WE DO HAVE A LARGE OLDER POPULATION IN THE BUILDING.
IT'S GONNA IMPACT THEIR ABILITY TO MOVE BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THEIR CONDOMS AND A TP.
WE NEED TO, YES, GOOD MORNING.
UH, MY NAME IS KEN SUCH AND MY WIFE AND I ARE OWNERS OF THE CONDOMINIUM IN THE 77 0 7 BUILDING AT CHATEAU DEJE.
[00:20:01]
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT REGARDING ZONING CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 2 6 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.THE PARTICULAR ZONING THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED WILL CAUSE A GREAT DEAL OF HARM TO OUR ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY AND THAT HARM INCLUDES POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THE SAFETY OF OUR ELDERLY RESIDENTS WALKING TO THE SHOPS AT LINCOLN HEIGHTS, THE LOSS OF PRIVACY FROM A FOUR STORY BUILDING MOVING OVER OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR UNIT PATIOS AND THE POLES, THE NOISE POLLUTION THAT COMES WITH CONSTRUCTION, THE POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO OUR PROPERTY FROM HAVING CONSTRUCTION IN SUCH CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OUR UNITS AND MANY UNITS BEING DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM A TALLER BUILDING AND LOSING NATURAL LIGHT IN THEIR HOMES AND SO FORTH.
OUR PARTICULAR BUILDING OF 77 0 7 WOULD BE IMPACTED DIRECTLY BY A FOUR STORY BUILDING, WHICH WOULD BE BLOCKING OUT NOT ONLY VISION BUT LIGHT GOING INTO OUR UNIT.
SO I ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER CHANGING THE PARTICULAR ZONING OR DECREASING THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING FROM FOUR STORIES TO TWO STORIES.
HELLO, MY NAME IS LESLIE TRO AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS (210) 636-1375.
MY ADDRESS IS 7 7 0 7 BROADWAY, NUMBER 25, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 9.
THE CASE NUMBER I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO IS Z 2 0 2 0 7 5.
UM, IT'S IN RESPONSE TO THE FOUR STORY CONDOMINIUM BUILDING THAT IS PROPOSED, UH, FOR THE CORNER OF BROADWAY AND NOTTINGHAM.
AND I'M JUST CALLING TO VOICE MY CONCERN AND DISAPPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION AT THIS SITE.
UM, WE FEEL LIKE, AND I DO TOO, THAT IT WOULD BE HARMFUL TO OUR COMMUNITY IN A NUMBER OF WAYS.
I PARTICULARLY LIVE ON THAT CORNER OF BROADWAY AND NOTTINGHAM THAT IS CLOSEST TO WHERE THIS BUILDING WOULD BE, UM, CONSTRUCTED AND IT WOULD DEFINITELY PRESENT A LOSS OF PRIVACY, UM, AND A LOSS OF LIGHT TO MY UNIT.
NOT TO MENTION THE AMOUNT OF NOISE POLLUTION THAT COMES FROM CONSTRUCTION.
WE ALSO HAVE ENDURED SEVERAL YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION FROM THE BUILDING THAT EMBRY CONSTRUCTED AT THE CORNER OF BASSEY AND BROADWAY.
UM, THAT TOOK MULTIPLE YEARS TO CONSTRUCT AS WELL AS ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAS HAPPENED AT HEB AT LINCOLN HEIGHTS.
AND SO THAT HAS BEEN A DAMAGE TO OUR PROPERTY AND CREATES A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF NOISE AND DUST AND DIRT, THE TIME THAT WE HAVE LIVED THROUGH FOR YEARS NOW.
UM, THE OTHER THING TOO, THESE UNITS ARE EXTREMELY CLOSE TO OUR PROPERTY AND WOULD PRESENT PROBLEMS WITH THE LIGHT THAT WE DEPEND ON IN OUR PROPERTY.
I ALSO WANNA SAY THAT I PARTICULARLY LIVE AT THIS LOCATION BECAUSE IT'S A WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, MY GIRLS, I HAVE THREE DAUGHTERS AND I, WE WALK TWO.
MY ADDRESS IS 7 7 1 1 BROADWAY, UNIT TWO C SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 0 9.
I AM CALLING IN REFERENCE TO PUBLIC HEARING OUR ZONING COMMISSION'S PUBLIC HEARING CASE Z DASH 2 0 2 6 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.
I AM CALLING TO PROTEST THE PLAN CONSTRUCTION OF A 50 UNIT FOUR STORY CONDOMINIUM BUILDING ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND NOTTINGHAM DRIVE IN ALAMO HEIGHTS.
THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT POSES SIGNIFICANT HARDSHIPS FOR THE RESIDENTS OF NEARBY CHATEAU DI JEAN.
AS A RESIDENT OF THE CHATEAU DIJE CONDOMINIUM COMMUNITY, I URGE THE DEVELOPERS TO RECONSIDER THE PROJECT AS IT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CHATEAU DIJON RESIDENTS.
THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS ALONE THREATENS TO DISRUPT OUR DAILY LIVES WITH EXCESSIVE NOISE, DUST, VIBRATION, AND CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC,
[00:25:01]
WHICH WILL NEGATIVELY AFFECT MY QUALITY OF LIFE AND UNDERMINE THE PEACE AND QUIET OF A 200 UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX THAT HAS FOSTERED A SENSE OF STABILITY AND SAFETY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE ITS CONSTRUCTION IN 1966 BEYOND CONSTRUCTION, THAT THE ADDITION OF 50 NEW UNITS IN SUCH A LIMITED SPACE WILL DRAMATICALLY INCREASE TRAFFIC VOLUME AND CONGESTION IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.THE STREETS SURROUNDING CHATEAU DIJON ARE ALREADY BUSY AND ACCOMMODATING.
SO MANY MORE VEHICLES WILL CREATE NOT ONLY DANGEROUS DRIVING CONDITIONS, BUT ALSO HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS FOR WALKERS.
MOREOVER, THE DENSITY OF THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT ON SUCH A SMALL AREA OF LAND IS CONCERNING.
PACKING A HIGH NUMBER OF UNITS INTO A COMPACT FOOTPRINT WILL STRAIN.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MARIA FRANCISCO MARTINEZ.
I'M THE OWNER OF THREE 13 DE LOCATED IN 7 7 0 9 BROADWAY STREET IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
I'M CALLING TO OPPOSE SUNNY STONE SIX TWENTY THIRTY SIX TEN SEVEN ZERO ZERO ZERO ONE FIVE.
THIS CASE IS ABOUT
EVEN THOUGH THIS PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE, OUR GATE IS IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO CHAT DE SO THE IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITY WILL BE DIRECT AND ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY WITH MANY SENIORS AND LONG TERM RESIDENTS.
WE CHOSE TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S WALKABLE, RELATIVELY QUIET AND FEELS SO CLOSE AND SAFE.
OUR BUILDINGS, SCHOOLS, PATIOS, WALK AWAY SOME PARKING AREAS AND THE GATES TO NOTTINGHAM ARE ALL VERY CLOSE TO THIS PROPOSED SITES.
SO ANY CHANCE THERE AFFECT US EVERY DAY.
MY STRONGEST CONCERN IS SAFETY, ESPECIALLY AROUND OUR FACING AREAS.
IN THE PAST YEAR, WE HAVE ALREADY EXPERIENCED SEVERAL SMALL STEPS ON THE INCIDENTS IN THE PARKINSON.
ADDING THE DENSE FOUR STORY PROJECT NEXT TO OUR PROPERTY MEANS MORE PEOPLE, MORE VEHICLES, AND MORE CIRCULATION NEAR OUR GATES AND PARKING SPACES AND ALARM CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
WITH MANY OUTSIDE WORKERS, THIS CLEARLY INCREASED THE, THE RISK OF THEFT, TRESPASSING, AND UNSAFE SITUATIONS, PARTICULARLY AT NIGHT.
I'M ALSO WORRIED ABOUT OUR ELDERLY RESIDENTS WHO WALK ALONG NOT INCOME TO REACH THESE SHOPS AT THE LINCOLN HEIGHTS CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC DELIVERY TRUCKS AND LATER A HIGHER VOLUME OF CARS FROM THE NEW BUILDING WILL MAKE THE WALK MORE DANGEROUS FOR PEOPLE WHO ALREADY FEEL VULNERABLE.
IN ADDITION, OUR FOUR A FOUR STORY BUILDING WITH MARIE DAHLSTROM.
7 7 0 9 BROADWAY NUMBER 1 1 4 SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 0 9, CALLING ABOUT Z 2 0 2 6 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.
I'M EXPRESSING MY CONCERN FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, UH, WITH THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT, UH, PARTICULARLY DURING CONSTRUCTION AND, UM, POST-CONSTRUCTION.
CURRENTLY TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY ON NOTTINGHAM.
THERE ARE NO SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFELY SAFETY, UH, AND UM, THE CITY MUST ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH VISION ZERO AND COMPLETE STREETS ELEMENTS TO PROTECT PEDESTRIANS THAT LIVE HERE IN CHATEAU DE JEAN, INCLUDING A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE OF OLDER PEOPLE.
CHATEAU DE JEAN RESIDENTS REQUEST BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE INPUT WORKING WITH THE CITY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGNED FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
HELLO, MY NAME IS NORMA ERBACHER.
I'M A SENIOR RESIDING IN CHAT DEON CON, LOCATED ON 7 7 0 9 BROADWAY STREET, UNIT THREE 20.
MY CONCERNS IS, UH, UH, THE SUNNING COMMISSION OR CASE NUMBER Z DASH 2 0 26 DASH 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.
UH, THIS SUNNING CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR FOUR STORY AND 50% OCCUPANCY CONDOMINIUMS
[00:30:01]
BUILDING WILL IMPACT OUR GATE ACCESS TO NOTTINGHAM STREET IN ADDITION TO A NEGATIVE NOISY MASSIVE CONSTRUCTION OF A LARGE BUILDING, UH, OBSTRUCTING OUR UNITS.WE ARE A LARGE NUMBER OF SENIORS RESIDING IN CHATEAU DECON.
MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (830) 776-8692.
HELLO, THIS IS SARAH TROTMAN IN REFERENCE TO BROADWAY CONDOMINIUM EIGHT C AT THE CHATEAU DEJON.
AND I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON, UM, TRYING TO GET A CHANGE ZONE CHANGE ON, UM, TO TOMORROW.
AND I AM AGAINST THE ZONE CHANGE.
I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE A, AN ADDITION TO A COMPLEX BEING BUILT.
HIGH RISE, HIGH-RISE FOR FOUR STORIES.
THE CASE NUMBER IS Z AS IN ZEBRA HYPHEN 2026 HYPHEN TEN SEVEN ZERO ZERO ZERO ONE FIVE FOR CONDO EIGHT C FOR ALON FAMILY TRUST.
I'M CALLING IN REGARD TO CASE Z 2 0 2 6 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5 AND I LIVE AT UH, CHATEAU DEON 7 7 0 7 BROADWAY.
I AM IN NUMBER 27 AND UM, SO I WILL BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED AS MY NEIGHBORS WILL BE.
UH, NOW THE NEW, UH, OCCUPANTS OF THIS, UH, PROPOSED BUILDING AND SOME OF MY OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THIS THAT I THINK SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION IS THAT THERE WILL BE, UH, HUGE IMPACT TO MY HOME AND TO OUR COMMUNITY WITH THE BUILDING BEING SO CLOSE, UH, TO OUR PROPERTY.
AND WE HAVE JUST LIVED THROUGH THAT TYPE OF NOISE FOR A YEAR AND A HALF WHILE A GB EXPANDED AND THEN THROUGH THE BUILDING AND CHANGES TO, UH, 7,600 BROADWAY.
AND IT IS VERY, VERY DISRUPTIVE.
AND SO I'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER THAT.
SECOND OF ALL, HAVING 50, UH, OCCUPANTS IN THAT SMALL OF A LOCATION IS CERTAINLY GOING TO BE INTRUSIVE.
IT SEEMS EXCESSIVE AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE, UH, TAKEN UNDER CONSIDERATION IN THAT THAT IS NOT A VERY LARGE SPACE TO PUT, UH, CONDOMINIUMS THAT WOULD HOUSE THAT MANY PEOPLE AND IT WOULD DEFINITELY IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY.
AND THIRDLY, WHERE I LIVE, ADDING A BUILDING OF THAT HEIGHT WOULD CERTAINLY TAKE THE SUNLIGHT AWAY FROM MY HOME.
UM, IT WOULD FILTER IT OUT JUST BY WAY OF SHADE AND UM, THAT WOULD BE VERY, VERY DISSATISFACTORY TO ME IS THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS I PURCHASED THIS HOME IS WAS FOR THE LIGHT THAT COMES THROUGH ALL OF MY WINDOWS AND UM, I WOULD REALLY HATE TO SEE THAT GO AWAY.
SO I APPRECIATE YOUR, THAT IS IT FOR VOICEMAILS.
I AM THE OWNER OF 77 0 9 BROADWAY, UNIT NUMBER 2 1 1.
THIS IS REGARDING CASE NUMBER Z TWENTY TWENTY SIX ZERO SEVEN ZERO ZERO ONE FIVE.
UM, MY PHONE NUMBER IS (808) 399-9399 AND UM, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MY COMMENT INCLUDED HERE AND I AM IN OPPOSITION OF THE, UH, ZONING COMMISSION, UH, THAT IS PROPOSED.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE SIX MORE VOICEMAILS ON THIS ITEM, SO WE ARE GONNA LISTEN TO 'EM.
FIVE, NOW WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS.
I'M A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF CHATEAU DE JEAN MINNEAPOLIS.
I LIVE AT 7 7 0 7 BROADWAY NUMBER ONE A.
MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (210) 912-8218.
I'VE LIVED AT THIS COMPLEX FOR MANY YEARS.
UM, I ASK THAT YOU VOTE AN UNEQUIVOCAL NO FOR THIS ZONING CASE Z 2 26 1 0 7 0 0 1 5.
[00:35:07]
THE PROPOSED FOUR STORY 50 PERSON CONDOMINIUM BUILDING FOR THE CORNER OF NOTTINGHAM AND BROADWAY IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.THE DENSITY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS TOO MUCH FOR THE PROPERTY TO HANDLE DUE TO ITS SPIES AND ITS NARROW CONFIGURATION.
THERE IS NO ROOM TO PROVIDE FOR APPROPRIATE SETBACKS SO THAT THE CHATEAU DE JEAN COMPLEX IS NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY A LOOMING FOUR STORY BUILDING.
IT CREATES A LACK OF PRIVACY FOR CHATEAU DE JEAN, CREATES NOISE, POPULA POLLUTION, AS WELL AS BLOCKING ALL NATURAL LIGHT ON THE NORTH SIDE.
ADDING A HIGH VOLUME OF RESIDENTS TO THIS SMALL PATCH OF PROPERTY WILL CREATE A TRAFFIC AND PARKING NIGHTMARE.
WHERE ARE THESE 50 TO A HUNDRED OR MORE PEOPLE GOING TO PARK? HOW ARE THEY GOING TO ACCESS THIS PROPERTY WITHOUT CREATING A DANGEROUS SITUATION ON OUR ENTRY EASEMENT THAT IS USED NOT ONLY BY CARS, BUT ALSO OUR RESIDENTS WHO WALK THEIR DOGS GO TO THE NEIGHBORING HEB, UH, FOR THEIR GROCERIES AND IN MANY CASES OUR ELDERLY PEOPLE AND ARE HANDICAPPED.
HOW WILL THESE NEW 50 TO 100 NEW RESIDENTS ACCESS THIS PROPERTY? THE CORNER OF NOTTINGHAM AND BROADWAY IS ALREADY A VERY BUSY INTERSECTION WITH A A LEFT TURN LANE THAT HAS, YES, THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z TWENTY TWENTY SIX TEN SEVEN HUNDRED ZERO ONE FIVE.
MY NAME IS BARBARA ALLEN, 77 11 BROADWAY NUMBER 19 B 7 8 2 9.
I WANNA PROTEST HAVING A FOUR STORY BUILDING BUILT ADJACENT TO MY, UM, COMPLEX, THE CHATEAU DIJON WHERE I'VE LIVED FOR 32 YEARS.
I SAID, WILL BLOCK MY NATURAL LIGHT, UM, TO A TERRIBLE EXTENT ON MY BALCONY IN MY, UH, LIVING ROOM AND THE CONSTRUCTION NOISE, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, WILL BE REALLY, REALLY HARD TO DEAL WITH AND TO LIVE WITH.
OH, MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS TWO ONE OH EIGHT OH FIVE EIGHT OH EIGHT TWO FIVE FIVE.
MY NAME IS BARBARA OLSON, O-L-S-O-N.
MY TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (210) 834-1092 AND I LIVE AT THE CHAT DIJON APARTMENTS ON BROADWAY, APARTMENT NUMBER 3 0 5 B AND I'M CALLING ABOUT THE CASE NUMBER Z 2 0 2 6 1 0 7 0 0 5 1 5.
UM, I'M CALLING TO STRONGLY DISAGREE ABOUT THE BUILDING OF ANOTHER COM APARTMENT COMPLEX ON BROADWAY, WHICH IS SO CLOSE TO OUR COMMUNITY.
WE'VE JUST GONE THROUGH FOUR YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE ANGRY BUILDING ON BROADWAY AND THEN THE REMODELING OF THE HEB AT LINCOLN HEIGHTS WITH ALL THE STAGING BEHIND OUR COMMUNITY.
NOT ONLY WAS THE NOISE AND DUST DURING ALL OF THIS BUILDING INCREASING, UH, UNCEASING DURING THE DAY WITH LARGE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES COMING AND GOING AND STAGED ALONG NOTTINGHAM, THIS WILL BE EVEN WORSE, ESPECIALLY FOR THE TENANTS THAT BACK DIRECTLY ONTO THE PROPOSED SITE.
THE INCREASED TRAFFIC WILL MAKE THE ALREADY TIGHT TURN ON BROADWAY WORSE AND CAUSE THE DANGER TO OUR WALKERS.
I HAVE RECENTLY RETIRED AND I OFTEN WALKED TO THE A GBI CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT DANGERS THIS WILL CAUSE FOR US.
ALSO, THE LACK OF CONCERN FOR OUR HISTORIC AND WELL-RESPECTED COMMUNITY NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AND NOT BE HIDDEN BEHIND ANOTHER BORING APARTMENT BUILDING.
PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS REBUILD.
CHRIS LEAK, L-I-E-C-K UH, AU DE 36 B 77 11 BROADWAY, 7 8 2 0 9.
CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 6 1 0 7 0 1 5.
I VIE, UH, I I OPPOSE THE BUILDING OF A NEW BUILDING, UH, IN THE PARKING LOT.
IT DOES NOT MATCH THE ESTABLISHED FRENCH, OUR FRENCH ARCHITECTURE OF CHATTO DEJA AND OUR CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY, THE PARKING LOT IN QUESTION THAT THEY'RE BUILDING IT ON.
[00:40:01]
UM, LOOKS LIKE PART OF OUR BUILDING.UH, CONSTRUCTING SOMETHING NEW THAT PEOPLE WILL THINK WILL MATCH ALAMO HEIGHTS.
THE MOTIF OF OUR BUILDING AND THE HISTORY OF THE ALAMO HEIGHTS BUILDINGS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED, IT NEVER HAPPENS.
THEY ALWAYS BUILD SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T MATCH LIKE A ADJACENT ACROSS THE STREET.
THE LARGE SORE THUMB THAT STICKS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB.
THE BUILDING THAT THEY BUILT, THE CONDOMINIUMS, UM, IT'S GONNA HURT OUR VALUE.
I ALSO THINK IT'S KIND OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT'S GONNA CREATE HAVOC.
IT'S IN OUR PARKING LOT, IT'S IN OUR ENTRANCE.
IT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE WE'RE THAT BUILDING'S ATTACHED TO OUR BUILDING.
UM, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NEXT TO EO FIOS PIZZA, IT'S UNNECESSARY CONSTRUCTION.
IT'S, OH, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, LIGHT INTRUSION.
IT'LL NEV IT'LL NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR PROPERTY TO ENTER OUR PROPERTY AND SO FORTH.
AND SO, UM, ALAMO HEIGHTS IS KNOWN AS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, KEEPS ITS INTEGRITY AND ITS ERODING AND THIS IS JUST ADDING TO THAT EROSION.
SO I, UH, RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED THE BUILDING OF THIS, OF THIS CONDO FOUR STORY CONDO IN THE PARKING LOT OF WHAT I CALL AU DE JEAN'S PARKING LOT.
HELLO, MY NAME IS DOLORES MULISH.
I OWN UNIT 37 C AT SEVENTY SEVEN ELEVEN BROADWAY.
MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN SIX SIX EIGHT SIX NINE THREE SEVEN.
EMAIL DOLORES MOISH@GMAIL.COM.
I'M CALLING REGARDING ZONING COMMISSION CASE NUMBER Z AS ZEBRA 20 26 1 0 7 0 0 0 1 5.
I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF CHATEAU DEJAN FOR 14 YEARS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT I'M PASSIONATELY OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
FIRST, TRAFFIC AT BROADWAY AM BASSI ON NOTTINGHAM DRIVE AND ENTERING AND EXITING THE EASEMENT AT FLORIO'S AND OSES IS ALREADY A NIGHTMARE.
AS A VISUALLY IMPAIRED SENIOR CITIZEN WHO WALKS TO BUY GROCERIES AT LINCOLN HEIGHTS SHOPPING CENTER.
BECAUSE I DO NOT OWN A CAR, I MUST BE EXTRA CAUTIOUS WHEN ENGAGED IN WALKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF THE PROPOSED BUILDING HAS 50 UNITS, THERE WILL BE MANY MORE THAN 50 CARS ENTERING AND EXITING THE NEW PROPERTY, COUNTING VISITORS.
THERE ARE ALSO TWO PEOPLE IN MOTORIZED WHEELCHAIRS FROM DILON NORTH JUST NORTH OF US WHO EXIT THROUGH OUR EASEMENT IN ORDER TO GO TO THE SHOPPING CENTER.
OUR MOBILITY SITUATION IS TREACHEROUS ENOUGH WITHOUT ADDING MORE TRAFFIC IN THE AREA, PLEASE CONSIDER OUR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATION WHEN DELIBERATING YOUR DECISION.
THIS NEW BUILDING WOULD BE SO CLOSE TO CHATEAU DIJON THAT OUR RESIDENTS WOULD BE EXPOSED TO LONG-TERM NOISE POLLUTION DURING CONSTRUCTION.
A NUMBER OF US ARE RETIRED AND EITHER STAY AT HOME OR WORK AT HOME PART-TIME OR EVEN FULL-TIME.
HOW ARE WE TO WORK AT HOME IN THE MIDDLE OF CONTINUAL CACOPHONY? DAY AFTER DAY FOR MANY MONTHS, TRAVELING TO AN OFFICER SCHOOL FOR WORK WOULD REQUIRE AT LEAST TWO BUSES PER TRIP FOR ME, INCLUDING DURING PUNISHING SUMMER MONTHS.
WORKING REMOTELY FOR ME IS A MUST AND I EXPECT TO BE BEGIN SEARCHING FOR MY THIRD PART-TIME JOB IN RETIREMENT WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS.
PLEASE DO NOT BLOCK AT-HOME JOB PROSPECTS FOR THOSE OF US WHO WANT TO WORK FOR THE EXTRA MONEY.
SO SOCIABILITY THIS TIME, THAT IS ALL THE VOICEMAILS.
AT THIS TIME THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR A MOTION REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 19, SET ON THE CONTINUANCE HEARING DOCKET FOR MARCH 17TH.
I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO CONTINUE AND I'M SORRY ABOUT THE EMAILS SINCE THEY GOT MISINFORMED, SO
THERE IS A MOTION TO CONTINUE.
UH, COMMISSIONER KELLUM, I'M GONNA GIVE IT TO YOU.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF ITEM NUMBER 19 TO MARCH 17.
COMMISSIONER PIE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
UH, WE'RE GONNA HEAR THAT AGAIN IN TWO WEEKS, HOPEFULLY WITH CORRECT INFORMATION THIS TIME.
BUT WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO OUR CONTINUANCE HEARING FOR THE MAR UH, SORRY, APRIL 7TH, 2026 MEETING ITEM NUMBER 11, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UH, IS THERE, PLEASE SAY NO THERE IS ANY PUBLIC COMMENT.
THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 11, WHICH IS ON THE CONTINUANCE HEARING FOR APRIL 7TH, 2026.
[00:45:02]
I MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, CONTINUOUS TO APRIL 7TH.MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ TO CONTINUE ITEM NUMBER 11 TO APRIL 7TH.
ROLL CALL VOTE ON MOTION TO CONTINUE.
UH, WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR INDIVIDUAL DOCKET.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE FIRST ITEM, PLEASE.
IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ITEM 11 OR 19, YOU MAY GO ALONG YOUR WAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONER SAID GOMEZ OING, SENIOR PLANNER WOULD WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS LOCATED AT 20 31 8 EBNER ROAD, GOING FROM C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO C TWO S COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING SERVICES.
THERE WERE 16 NOTICES SENT OUT, ZERO IN FAVORS, ZERO OPPOSED THE STONE, OAK AND SUNTER.
PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
STAFF HAS NOT FOUND INDICATION OF LIKELY ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE BASED ON THE REQUEST.
THE CURRENT C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS INAPPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED C TWO S COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR LAUNDRY AND DRY CLEANING SELF-SERVICES.
THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL NATURE OF THE SURROUNDING BLOCK.
THE SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION IS BEING REQUESTED TO SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE DISTRICT ERZD OVERLAY, ENSURING ALL ENVIRONMENTAL AND IMPERVIOUS COVER STANDARDS ARE MET.
THE REQUEST, THE REQUEST OF SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION REPRESENTS A COMPATIBLE EXPANSION OF THE ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES RATHER THAN A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE IN LAND USE.
INTENSITY SAWS IS HERE WITH THE REPORT AS WELL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE SAWS REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE.
GOTTA WAKE UP AFTER ALL THOSE VOICEMAILS.
UH, MY GALA IS AQUIFER PROTECTION AND EVALUATION SECTION.
UM, WE REVIEWED THE ZONING APPLICATION LOCATED AT UH, 2 0 3 1 8 EBNER ROAD, ALLOWING FOR A SELF-SERVICE LAUNDROMAT.
THE SITE IS CURRENTLY A 0.9 ACRE EXISTING, UH, BUSINESS SUITE LOCATED IN THE CREEK AT STONE OAK, UH, RETAIL CENTER.
THE BUSINESS WAS BUILT, UH, BUSINESS SUITE WAS BUILT IN 2018 AND IS CLASSIFIED AS A CATEGORY ONE.
THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE WILL OCCUPY AN EXISTING 11,392 SQUARE FOOT SUITE CONSISTING OF WASHER, DRYER AND DRYER MACHINES WITH, UH, FOLDING STATIONS.
THEREFORE, NO INCREASE TO THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER.
STORMWATER RUNOFF IS BEING TREATED BY AN EXISTING WATER QUALITY BASIN AND WAS FOUND TO BE COMPLIANT AT THE TIME OF OUR SITE VISIT.
NO PORTION OF THE SITE IS IN A FLOODPLAIN AND NO SENSITIVE GEOLOGIC FEATURES WERE DOCUMENTED, UH, NOR OBSERVED ON SITE.
WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH ALL ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE SAS REPORT TO INCLUDE NO INCREASE TO THE EXISTING 70% IMPERIOUS COVER FOR THE 0.9 ACRE LOT.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO.
IF YOU WOULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF, TELL US YOUR ADDRESS AND TELL US ABOUT THE PROJECT.
UM, I, MY OFFICE IS IN 1717 AND NORTH LOOP 1604 EAST.
UM, THE, THE PROJECT IS ALREADY EXISTING.
IT'S A, IT'S A 11,000 SQUARE FEET, UH, BUILDING.
WE ARE, WE HAVE AN INQUIRE, UH, ONE OF OUR, UH, FUTURE TENANTS.
HOPEFULLY IT'S A VERY, UM, HIGH-END LAUNDRY WITH, UH, SELF SERVICE AS WELL AS WITH, UM, UM, FULL SERVICE.
UH, SO I, I'M NOT SURE, UM, WE'D LOVE TO, TO, FOR THE CASE TO BE APPROVED.
WHY DON'T YOU SIT IN THE FRONT ROW THOUGH IN CASE SOMEONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS A DISTRICT NINE CASE, SO COMMISSIONER DUL TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS AND I'LL BE BRIEF WITH THE NUMBER OF ITEMS ON THE INDIVIDUAL HEARING DOCKET, UH, TO, UH, STAFF.
SO EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER, EXISTING BUILDING SPACE, EXISTING WATER QUALITY BASIN.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE S REQUIREMENT COMES FROM THE USE TABLE, RIGHT? ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY BECAUSE THIS IS A LAUNDROMAT, WE'D BE CONCERNED IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE.
SO WE WANNA PUT ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY ON IT.
[00:50:01]
CASE WHERE THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT OR FEEDBACK, THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, EVERYTHING'S ALREADY EXISTING.UH, IS, IS THERE LIKE A LOWER LEVEL OF REVIEW WITH SAWS AND STAFF OR IS IT ALL TREATED THE SAME BECAUSE THERE MIGHT BE A MISMATCH THERE POLICY WISE COMPARED WITH LIKE GREENFIELD PROJECTS WHERE THERE'S MUCH HIGHER, YOU KNOW, RISK OF WATER INTRUSION AND EVERYTHING.
UH, NO, THEY'RE ALL TREATED THE SAME.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH COMMISSIONER ELL, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT? SEEING NONE, RIGHT? SEEING NONE.
WE'RE GONNA GO TO COMMISSIONER UL FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION, UH, OO ONLY THAT WE, WE MAY WANT TO CONSIDER A ADDRESSING THE, UH, THE, THE REQUIREMENTS ABOUT COMBINED CALENDAR VERSUS INDIVIDUAL CALENDAR FOR THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RE RECHARGE ZONE.
JUST BECAUSE LIKE THIS IS A PERFECT CASE WHERE, I MEAN, THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON, THIS SHOULD BE ON COMBINED, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT'S UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.
UM, SO WITH THAT, I'LL I, UH, UH, MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
THERE'S A MOTION FOR, OH, SORRY, COMMISSIONER.
I I WAS AFRAID WE'RE GONNA MOVE BACKWARDS AND I THERE JUST SOME MORE VOICEMAILS.
I WAS, I WAS IN SHOCK FOR A SECOND.
UH, THERE'S A MOTION FOR TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO BY COMMISSIONER VE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WITT DISCUSSION.
AGAIN, THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO BY COMMISSIONER DUVALL WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WITT.
YOU'RE GOING ON TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
ALRIGHT, UH, OUR NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER THREE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS NAME'S FOREST WILSON, PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO ITEM NUMBER THREE IS LOCATED AT 21,000 6 0 7 ROWAN BLUFF.
IT IS GOING FROM PUD R SIX PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO PUD R SIX CD PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENT RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME.
UH, THERE WERE 20 NOTICES SENT.
SIX RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET.
THE CAVALLO CREEK HOA PREVIOUSLY INDICATED SUPPORT, ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY UM, ALSO EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS AFTER THAT.
THE, UM, THERE WERE THREE OPPOSED OUTSIDE OF 200 FEET.
THE EXISTING PUT R SIX PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED PUT R SIX CD FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS IS ALSO APPROPRIATE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CHANGES ZONING WOULD PRESERVE THE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE PROPERTY BUT ALLOW TWO ADDITIONAL UNITS, UM, RATHER THAN UH, THE TWO ADDITIONAL UNITS THAT ARE CURRENTLY PLANNED.
THE CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST REQUIRES A SUBMISSION OF A SITE PLAN THAT CANNOT BE CHANGED WITHOUT FURTHER PUBLIC REVIEW.
THE PROPOSED ZONING IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WHICH ENCOURAGES THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE HOUSING TYPES TO ACCOMMODATE THE CITY'S GROWING POPULATION AT ALL INCOME LEVELS.
ADDITIONALLY, THE SAWS IDENTIFIED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS A CATEGORY ONE PROPERTY AND RECOMMENDS UH, APPROVAL OF THE ZONING REQUEST PROVIDED THAT IMPERVIOUS COVER SHALL NOT EXCEED 50%.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE SAWS REPORT PLEASE.
MIKE, MIKE ESCALANTE IS SAW A FOR PROTECTION EVALUATION, UH, SECTION WE REVIEW.
WE REVIEWED THE ZONING AC APPLICATION LOCATED AT UH, 2 1 6 0 7.
UH, ROWAN BLUFF ALLOWING FOR A DUPLEX UNIT.
THE SUITE, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY A 2.27 ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT WITH AN EXISTING HOUSE, UH, COVERED PATIO, GAZEBO, POOL, WALKWAYS, AND A DRIVEWAY.
THE HOUSE WAS PREVIOUSLY BUILT IN 2004 AND IS CLASSIFIED AS A CATEGORY ONE.
THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE WILL ALLOW FOR A 1600 SQUARE FOOT DUPLEX WITH A GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY TO BE BUILT, UH, TO THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY LIES IN THE WEST ELM CREEK FLOODPLAIN.
THE FLOODPLAIN AND CREEK ARE LOCATED WITHIN A ONE ACRE NATURALLY VEGETATED LOT.
NO SENSITIVE GEOLOGIC FEATURES WERE DOCUMENTED NOR OBSERVED ON SITE.
WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH ALL ENVIRON ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE SAS REPORT TO INCLUDE THE IMPERIOUS COVER
[00:55:01]
AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DUPLEX UNIT SHALL NOT EXCEED THE 15% ON THE OVERALL 2.27 ACRE LOT.A FLOODPLAIN BUFFER SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. ESCALANTE.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE AND IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I LIVE AT TWO 1-823-PROSPECT HILL.
I'M HERE TODAY TO REPRESENT A FAMILY WHO IS RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING YOUR SUPPORT FOR A REZONING APPLICATION AT 2 1 6 0 7 RONE BLUFF TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DUPLEX ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS REQUEST IS NOT DRIVEN BY INVESTMENT.
SHORT-TERM LEASING OR COMMERCIAL USE.
THE HOMEOWNERS ARE SEEKING TO BUILD A DUPLEX THAT WILL HOUSE BOTH SETS OF THEIR PARENTS AS THEY AGE.
THEY WANNA ENSURE THEY'RE CLOSE TO THEM, NOT JUST GEOGRAPHICALLY, BUT RELATIONALLY AND PRACTICALLY.
THIS ARRANGEMENT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO PROVIDE DAILY SUPPORT, ASSISTANCE WITH MEDICAL NEEDS, COMPANIONSHIP AND STABILITY, WHILE STILL PRESERVING THEIR PRIVACY AND INDEPENDENCE.
THEY'RE NOT SEEKING TO INCREASE TRAFFIC, CREATE RENTAL TURNOVER, OR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS DUPLEX WOULD FUNCTION AS A FAMILY RESIDENCE, ESSENTIALLY ONE EXTENDED HOUSEHOLD UNDER ONE OWNERSHIP ON THIS 2.67 ACRE LOT.
IT WILL BE OWNER OCCUPIED AND MAINTAINED THE SAME STANDARDS AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
FROM A COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE, THIS APPROACH OFFERS SEVERAL BENEFITS.
IT KEEPS AGING RESIDENTS WITHIN THE FAMILY STRUCTURE.
IT STRENGTHENS MULTI-GENERATIONAL LIVING.
SOMETHING THAT HAS LONG BEEN PART OF STRONG COMMUNITIES.
IT PRESERVES NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY AS A PROPERTY WILL NOT BE USED FOR TRANSIENT RENTAL PURPOSES, BUT FOR LONG-TERM COMMITMENT.
ARCHITECTURALLY THE DESIGN WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING HOMES AND SCALE MATERIALS AND APPEARANCE AND ARE COMMITTED TO ENSURING THAT IT ENHANCES NOT DETRACTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AESTHETIC.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT ZONING DECISIONS MUST BALANCE PRIVATE NEEDS WITH PUBLIC INTEREST AND WE BELIEVE THAT THIS REQUEST DOES BOTH.
IT SUPPORTS FAMILY CARE WHILE MAINTAINING RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT.
AND WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS AND HOA AS WELL AS OUR DISTRICT NINE, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN ALLOWING US TO BUILD A HOME THAT KEEPS PARENTS CLOSE, CARED FOR, AND CONNECTED TO THE FAMILY AND THE COMMUNITY THEY LOVE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THIS READY? YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LITTLE REBUTTAL.
I'M SURE SOMEBODY GONNA SIT IN THE FRONT ROW.
ANY VOICE VOICEMAILS? NO VOICEMAILS.
ANTONIO DOMIN AND SIR, IF YOU WOULD SAY YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
HOW ARE YOU? MY NAME IS ANTONIO DOIT.
RON CROSSING, IIII DO NOT AGREE WITH THE REASONING OF THE SON BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO CHANGE THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, IF THIS CANNOT BE DENIED TODAY, I'D LIKE TO ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE.
SO OUR HOA ATTORNEY IS ABLE TO BE PRESENT.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT WAS PROPOSED TO THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE WAS NOT A DUPLEX.
OUR BYLAWS STATE THERE'S ONLY TO BE ONE SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE ON OUR PROPERTIES.
IT ALSO STATES THERE SHOULD BE NO STRUCTURE OVER 1300 SQUARE FEET.
THE A CC HAVE STATED THEY WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED A DUPLEX.
AND SINCE LEARNING THAT IT SHOULD BE A DUPLEX, THEY'VE RESCINDED THE APPROVAL.
WE JUST DON'T WANT TO SET A PRECEDENT BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE ONE ENTRANCE AND EXIT AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS NOT BUILT TO ALLOW FOR MORE STRUCTURES.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR REZONING.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR FUTURE OWNERS? COULD THEY SELL THIS PROPERTY SEPARATELY? THANK YOU MS. HOLDER SAWYER.
AH, EXCELLENT AND GOOD, GOOD TEACHING MOMENT.
SO IF YOU WANNA GIVE YOUR TIME TO SOMEONE, YOU HAVE TO DO IT BEFOREHAND.
SO TO WHOM DO YOU WANT GIVE IT? ALRIGHT, WHO ARE YOU? DEB MANEL.
MS. SAWYER IS GIVING IT TO, SORRY, LAST NAME AGAIN? MANEL.
I SHOULD HAVE, I SHOULD HAVE REMINDED EVERYONE.
UM, I'D JUST LIKE TO PUT MY VOICE AS OPPOSED
[01:00:01]
TO THIS.THE REASON BEING IS I DO BELIEVE IT SETS A PRECEDENCE OF OFFERING, BRINGING MORE RESIDENTIAL INTO OUR COMMUNITY WITH, UH, RENTERS POSSIBLY, I MEAN, UNDER THE SKIES OF, UH, FAMILY.
BUT ONCE THEY MOVE OR IF THEY MOVE, IT DOES OPEN UP THE OPPORTUNITY TO SELL IT AS ANOTHER, UH, RENTER STRUCTURE.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST PUT MY IMPOSE ON IT.
HI, MY NAME IS VICKI MANGEL AND I LIVE IN, UH, CAVALLO CREEK.
OUR HO BOARD IS, OR OUR HOA IS NOT ON BOARD WITH THIS.
THEY, THEY HAVE SENT A LETTER TO OUR LAWYER SAYING THEY RESEND IT BECAUSE HE DID NOT APPLY FOR A DUPLEX.
HE APPLIED FOR A, UH, AN A DU, WHICH ALL OF YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
I, I ASKED IN OUR, UM, I ASKED, AND HE SAID, I'M, I'M DOING A, A GUEST HOUSE ON OUR COMMUNITY.
AND, AND IT HAS JUST TWO SIDES.
THAT'S WHY IT HAS TO BE REZONED.
NEVER WAS THE WORD DUPLEX MENTIONED BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALLOWED IN OUR H-O-A-H-O-A WAS CONTACTED BY ME AND THEY SAID WE NEVER WOULD'VE APPROVED IT.
HAD HE FILLED OUT THE RIGHT FORM, HE AS A REALTOR, I THINK HE WOULD'VE KNOWN TO PUT THAT IT WAS A DUPLEX, NOT AN A DU.
UM, HE WILL ONLY SPEAK TO PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IF THEY GO TO HIS HOUSE.
I, I PRINTED EVERYONE A COPY OF, UM, OF WHAT WAS STATED, HOW HE DOES.
HE NEVER SAYS THAT IT IS A DUPLEX.
AND ALSO WE HAVE TO IMAGINE, I KNOW PROBABLY NOT EVERYONE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CAN AFFORD TO DO A DUPLEX, BUT LET'S SAY 40 FAMILIES CAN, THAT DOUBLES THE SIZE OF OUR COMMUNITY AND IT ONE WAY IN ONE WAY OUT ONE LANE IN ONE LANE OUT IT, IT, IT JUST OPENS PANDORA'S BOX.
IF YOU CANNOT SAY NO, THIS ZONING DOESN'T GO THROUGH.
I'M ASKING THAT YOU, UM, POSTPONE IT BECAUSE OUR LAWYER, WE DO HAVE LAWYERS.
IT'S NOT ONE PERSON THAT IS AGAINST THIS.
IT'S, IT'S MORE THAN ONE PERSON.
WE HAVE LAWYERS THAT ARE, ARE TRYING TO GET THIS OUT.
THE HOA IS NOT ON BOARD WITH US.
UM, OUR, OUR BOARD MEMBERS, I, WE, I'VE SPOKEN TO A COUPLE OF BOARD MEMBERS, THEY SAID WE NEVER WOULD'VE APPROVED THIS HAD WE KNOWN THAT IT HAD TO BE REZONED OR THAT IT WAS A DUPLEX BECAUSE THAT IS NOT ALLOWED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALRIGHT, MR. MANAL, YOU WILL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
MY NAME IS NAV MANGEL AND I'M A NEIGHBOR IN CAVALLO CREEK ESTATES.
UH, THE ADDRESS IS 2 1 5 0 2 RONE CHASE.
I DO NOT SUPPORT THE REZONING FOR MULTIPLE REASONS.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT TO, TO SUSTAIN LESS THAN 100 RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
REZONING TO ALLOW DUPLEXES COULD POTENTIALLY TRIPPER TRIPLE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IT NOT ONLY AFFECTS THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 FEET AROUND MR. LOCK'S RESIDENCE, IT AFFECTS THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE REZONING.
WE, AS YOU'VE HEARD, WE'VE HAD ONE SINGLE LANE LOCATION TO ENTER AND LEAVE, WHICH THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD MUST USE.
THE INTERSECTION WE HAVE TO USE IS RIDDLED WITH TRAFFIC IN THE MORNINGS AND AFTERNOONS, OFTENTIMES FORCING DRIVERS TO TAKE ALTERNATE ROUTES TO GO TO WORK AND THEIR FINAL DESTINATION.
THIS IS MAINLY BECAUSE WE BORDER A MIDDLE SCHOOL.
A TRAFFIC FEASIBILITY STUDY IS ALREADY REQUIRED FOR THIS INTERSECTION WITHOUT ANY INCREASE IN POPULATION ENTERING OR EXITING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE DO NOT HAVE SIDEWALKS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH MEANS YOUNG CHILDREN, ATHLETES, DOG OWNERS, JOGGERS, AND EVERYONE ELSE MUST SHARE THE SAME ROAD AS AUTOMOBILES, TRUCKS AND MOTORCYCLES.
WE HAVE MANY PEOPLE THAT EXERCISE ON THE STREETS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT ALL TIMES OF THE DAY AND WALK THEIR DOGS MORNING AND NIGHT.
WE ALSO HAVE PLENTY OF YOUNG CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS FEEL SAFE KNOWING THEIR KIDS ARE PLAYING OUTSIDE IN CAVALLO CREEK.
MY DAUGHTER IS A SOCCER ATHLETE GOING TO TENNESSEE ON A SCHOLARSHIP NEXT YEAR, TWO OF OUR NEIGHBORS ARE PREPARING FOR A MARATHON THIS MONTH.
I WOULD LOVE FOR MY DAUGHTER TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO TRAIN SAFELY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN SHE COMES BACK FROM UNIVERSITY FOR VISITS.
WITH THE ADDITION OF UNKNOWN FAMILIES LIVING IN DUPLEXES IN BACKYARDS, THE MAIN PLUS THE MAIN RESIDENT, THAT TRUST FACTOR WILL BE DRASTICALLY REDUCED.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS SIMPLY NOT BUILT TO TRIPLE IN SIZE IF THE FLOODGATES ARE OPEN AND EVERYONE IS ALLOWED TO HAVE DUPLEXES WITH MULTIPLE FAMILIES IN OUR BACKYARDS.
THIS BRINGS ME TO THE NEXT POINT, WHICH IS THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
OUR ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL BOARD WAS MISLED.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BOARD WAS MISLED.
OUR HOA WAS MISLED AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WAS MISLED, IS VERY CONCERNING TO ME AS THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING WAS GRANTED UNDER FALSE PREMISES, WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED, THIS MEETING SHOULD HAVE NEVER TAKEN PLACE.
[01:05:01]
APPLICANT HAS MADE MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO WIN APPROVAL AND FAILED.THE APPLICANT HAS BOTH RETIRED MILITARY AND A LICENSED REALTOR, AND IT IS VERY DISTURBING THAT HE JUST TRIED TO DISGUISE A DUPLEX WITH THE VERBIAGE.
IT IS SIMPLY A GUEST HOUSE WITH TWO SIDES.
ANY LICENSED REALTOR WOULD KNOW IT IS A DUPLEX AND ANY RETIRED MILITARY PERSON WOULD ALSO KNOW IT IS A DUPLEX.
SO THE QUESTION IS, WHY DID HE TRY TO SO HARD TO HIDE IT? WHY DID HE OPENLY SAY THAT IT IS NOT A DUPLEX, BUT A GUEST HOUSE WITH TWO SIDES.
THE APPLICANT CLAIMS THEY WOULD NEVER DO ANYTHING TO AFFECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN A NEGATIVE WAY, BUT IMMEDIATELY ATTACKED THE FIRST PERSON ON OUR COMMUNITY FORUM WHO ASKED THE QUESTION LAST WEEK, THE APPLICANT'S REZONING SIGN WAS DOWN FOR FIVE DAYS AND HE WAS INFORMED DAY AFTER DAY, ONLINE AND BY THE CITY.
THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE WAS, IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, PICK IT UP FOR YOURSELF.
AND THAT IS IN THE HANDOUT THAT YOU HAVE.
WHAT KIND OF ANSWER IS THIS? WHEN IT IS A LEGAL REQUIREMENT OF THE CITY AND AN OBLIGATION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HE WOULD NEVER HURT PICTURES OF THE APPLICANT AND HIS WIFE AND THE DRIVEWAY COMPLETELY NEGLECTING THE DOWN SIGN CAN ALSO BE PROVIDED.
WE ARE SEEING THE APPLICANT MANIPULATE EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE IN HIS WAY TO GET WHAT HE WANTS FROM THE START OF THE PROCESS.
YET HE HAS BEEN EXTREMELY DEFENSIVE WHEN QUESTIONS ARE ASKED, TO THE POINT THAT HE WILL OPENLY INSULT ALL OF US NEIGHBORS AND ACCUSE US OF BEING COWARDS.
I'M EXTREMELY WORRIED ABOUT HIS REAL INTENTIONS AND BEHAVIOR KNOWING THAT HE'S MANIPULATED HIS WAY TO THE CURRENT SITUATION.
WE'RE IN THIS FAR NO TO REZONING, PLEASE.
YOU WEREN'T AS GOOD AT TIMING AS YOUR WIFE.
UM, AND CONGRATULATIONS TO YOUR DAUGHTER.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS CHARLES STYE AND, UH, MY WIFE AND I LIVE AT 2 2 0 2 2 RONE BLUFF AND WE'VE LIVED THERE, UH, 18 YEARS.
WE'RE APPROXIMATELY, UH, 0.6 MILES BEYOND THIS LOCATION.
AND I WON'T TAKE YOUR TIME TO REITERATE AGAIN ALL THE OBJECTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.
I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THEM, BUT I DO WANNA STRESS ONE THING THAT, UM, UH, I THINK WE HAVE TOUCHED ON SLIGHTLY, AND THAT'S ONE OF SAFETY AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE ONE, UH, R BLUFF IS THE, UH, ONLY ACCESS AND EGRESS, UH, INTO THE SUBDIVISION.
AND AT THIS LOCATION THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING, THERE ARE NO STREETLIGHTS.
UH, SINCE THIS IS A, UH, A PRIVATE, UH, SUBDIVISION, STREET LIGHTING IS, IS MINIMAL.
AND, UM, AND THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS.
SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THAT'LL, THAT WILL OCCUR AT THIS, AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
UM, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE MORNING AND IN THE EVENING WHEN IT'S NICE AND COOL, WE'LL WALK AND JOG IN THAT AREA.
I STILL NEED TO DO THAT AGAIN.
AND, UM, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY AND, UH, AND SO THIS HOUSE HAS A LITTLE BIT OF A HISTORY, UH, APPROXIMATELY 10 YEARS AGO, MAYBE A DIFFERENT, UH, OWNERSHIP.
THERE WERE SEVERAL FAMILIES THAT LIVED THERE, AND THE, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE LOOKED LIKE A PARKING LOT.
NOW, MAYBE THAT MIGHT BE RESOLVED, UM, WITH WHAT THE, THESE, THE, THE NEW HOMEOWNERS TEND TO DO.
BUT AGAIN, UM, I'LL STILL GO BACK TO THE SAFETY ISSUE.
NO SIDEWALKS, NO STREET LIGHTING.
IT COULD BE A, A REALLY PROBLEMATIC AREA.
NEXT, THAT IS IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, NOW I'M GONNA BUTCHER YOUR NAME.
I APOLOGIZE, MS. TI UH, BRIEF.
SORRY, SIR, YOU'VE, YOU'VE HAD YOUR TIME.
BUT MAYBE, MAYBE, UH, COMMISSIONER WILL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, MS. RETI, UH, BRIEF REBUTTAL, HOMEOWNER, UH, I'LL ALLOW IT IN THIS INSTANCE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, PHILLIP LATKA, TWO ONE SIX ZERO SEVEN ROME BLUFF.
PHONE NUMBER IS AREA CODE (334) 470-3961.
AS YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD, I AM RETIRED MILITARY.
I AM A REALTOR, WHICH I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
I WAS A PILOT BEFORE, WHICH ONCE AGAIN, DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE TO THIS CASE.
UM, I, I APPLIED FOR THIS BACK IN OCTOBER.
I DID NOT START THE PROCESS UNTIL FULLY APPROVED BY THE ZONING COMMITTEE OR THE HOA COMMITTEE.
THERE'S FALSE THINGS COMING ON RIGHT NOW.
THE HOA COMMITTEE APPROVED THIS BACK IN OCTOBER WITH THE EXACT SAME DOCUMENTS THAT I PRESENTED TO THE ZONING COMMITTEE, ARCHITECTURAL SCANS, UM, ENGINEERING DESIGNS, ALL THAT STUFF.
THIS WAS APPROVED FULLY BY THE A CC.
NOTHING WAS AN ISSUE UNTIL A SIGN GOT PUT IN MY NEIGHBOR AND MY, MY, MY LAND, UM, BY PEOPLE THAT AREN'T EVEN NEAR US.
I'M GONNA TRY TO SAVE YOU SOME TIME, SIR.
THE HOA IS OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW.
OKAY? WE'RE JUST ABOUT LAND USE.
OKAY? SO LAND USE, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
WE WE'RE DOING A, WE'RE NOT GOING OUTSIDE OF THE, UM, 1800 SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM FOR A SINGLE RESIDENCE.
WE'RE GOING 800 FOOT SIDE, EAST SIDE.
[01:10:01]
RESIDENCE FOR MY, MY MOTHER, SHE'S A SINGLE FEMALE.MY WIFE'S PARENTS ARE STILL MARRIED, SO WE NEED OUR INDEPENDENCE.
WE DO WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THEM FOR THE DURATION.
MY SON'S AT UTSA, SO WE'RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE.
I KNOW THAT 10 YEARS AGO, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE HOUSE WAS.
WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE FIVE YEARS AGO.
WE'VE DONE NOTHING BUT CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVE.
WE SIT ON MORE ACREAGE IN THAT THERE'S ONLY SIX PEOPLE WITHIN OUR, OUR HOA THAT HAVE LIKE, KIND OF ACREAGE.
WE'RE ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES.
THE OTHER PEOPLE ARE ROUGHLY AROUND ONE ACRE.
OUR, OUR HOUSE IS ALSO ON A SLOPING LAND.
YOU CANNOT SEE THE, YOU CANNOT SEE THE RESIDENCE FROM OUR PROPERTY, LET ALONE ANYBODY ELSE.
SO THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO DISTANCE.
WE ALSO MADE A, WE ALSO HAVE TO INCREASE THE DRIVEWAY ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK FOR EMS SERVICES TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S AMPLE PARKING.
SO WE LIVE IN A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE, MEANING THAT THE, THE TRAFFIC, IF I PUT MY PARENTS INSIDE MY HOUSE, WOULD NOT CHANGE AT ALL.
THEY JUST, IT WOULD BE UPSTAIRS AND THEY CANNOT GO UP AND DOWN THE STAIRS.
THIS IS THE REASON WE'RE MAKING INDEPENDENT LIVING.
THERE'S NOTHING, THERE'S NOTHING HIDDEN.
YES, I DID TELL PEOPLE TO COME BY MY HOUSE.
THIS IS BECAUSE I WANT TO TALK TO THEM, EXPLAIN THAT.
I TRIED TO DO THE RIGHT THING, ALTHOUGH PROCESS, THE THING HAS BEEN GOING SINCE OCTOBER.
YOU PROBABLY HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU FACEBOOK MESSAGES, WHICH I DON'T OPERATE ON SOCIAL MEDIA, SO I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
UM, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, THAT IS MY REBUTTAL.
BUT I'VE WALKED FACE TO FACE TO EVERYBODY WITHIN 200 FEET, TALKED INDIVIDUALLY TO EVERY ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS EXPLAINING THE SITUATION, AND ALL OF THEM ARE ON BOARD.
THESE PEOPLE LIVE A MILE AWAY FROM ME.
AT THIS TIME, THIS IS A DISTRICT NINE CASE, SO COMMISSIONER DUVAL TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
IF I COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP AGAIN.
SO I KNOW THAT THE, UH, COUNCILWOMAN STAFF YES, SIR.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE COUNCILWOMAN STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT YOU REACH OUT TO YOUR HOA.
I, I PROVIDED THE COUNCILWOMAN AND HER, UM, HER ASSISTANT, THE DOCUMENTS FROM THE HOA AS WELL AS THE DOCUMENTS FROM MY NEIGHBORS WITH THE PRINTOUT WITH THEM SIGNED ON EACH ONE WITH THEIR ADDRESS.
EVERYTHING WAS PRESENTED TO HER.
SHE'S THE ONE WHO EXPEDITED MY CASE AS WELL.
SO, YES, THAT, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT WHAT WAS REPRESENTED WAS THAT THE HOA WAS ON BOARD, CORRECT? THEY WERE ON FAVOR.
UH, THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, CORRECT.
UNTIL I RECEIVED FROM STAFF THE FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS JUST AFTER OUR HOA MEETING TWO DAYS AGO.
SO COULD YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND HERE? RIGHT.
SO I WAS COMING IN, PREPARING FOR THE MEETING WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE HOA WAS SUPPORTIVE.
IT WAS AND AND, SORRY, GO AHEAD, SIR.
REALIZE I MIGHT HAVE MADE TOO BROAD A STATEMENT.
WHEN I SAY WE'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE HOA, THE HO A'S OPINION YEAH.
ON THE ZONING CASE MATTERS OF COURSE, BUT THE INTERNAL MACHINATIONS, RIGHT.
AND GOVERNANCE OF THE HOA NO, I CAN IS OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW.
SO IN OCTOBER, EVERYTHING WAS APPROVED BY THEM.
WHEN I TALKED TO THE COUNCILWOMAN AND HER, UH, OUR ASSISTANT, EVERYTHING WAS APPROVED BY THEM.
WE HAD A HOA MEETING ON FRIDAY.
SO I, I I, I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH YOU DIRECTLY, BUT I WAS IN COMMUNICATION WITH JACQUELINE.
SORRY, I WAS TALKING TO JACQUELINE, I BELIEVE.
SO IN MY COMMUNICATIONS WITH JACQUELINE, YES, SIR.
MY UNDERSTANDING FROM HER SPEAKING WITH YOU, I UNDERSTAND IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A GAME OF TELEPHONE.
I WASN'T THE ONE SPEAKING WITH SIR, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT SHE COMMUNICATED TO YOU CLEARLY THAT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE PROCESS TO GET CONSENSUS FROM THE HOA CORRECT.
I KNOW JACQUELINE, SO THE COUNCILWOMAN STAFF REACHED OUT WITH YOU ABOUT THE DISTINCTION IN YOUR FIRST LETTER THAT YOU PROVIDED.
IN THAT FIRST LETTER, WE IDENTIFIED THAT THAT LETTER DIDN'T REFER TO THE ZONING CHANGE.
YOU GUYS GAVE FURTHER ASSURANCES AT THAT POINT, CORRECT.
YOU PROVIDED AN ADDITIONAL LETTER, CORRECT.
I THINK IT WAS FROM THE PROPERTY MANAGER, IT FROM THAT, YEAH.
THAT DID SAY THAT THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING CHANGE.
SO THAT'S WHAT ALL I HAD UNTIL A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.
MY IMPRESSION WAS THAT THAT WAS THE END OF THE STORY.
IT WAS, SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS HOW, HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? SO MANY MEMBERS OF THE HOA ARE COMING HERE TODAY OPPOSED? SOME, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE.
SO YEAH, IF, IF, IF I MAY, JUST TO GIVE YOU EVERYTHING SO YOU CAN ANSWER, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LETTERS FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE HOA SAYING THAT YOU BULLIED YOUR WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS, YOU KNOW, ALLEGING ABOUT THE SIGN THAT YOU, YOU KNOW, WEREN'T BEING FAIR ABOUT POSTING OF THE SIGN.
SO HOW, HOW DO I MAKE SENSE OF THAT? I CAN TELL YOU EXACTLY, AND I'M, I'M ASSUMING YOU GUYS HAVE THE FACEBOOK POST.
THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT SHE FOR SALARY.
SO, ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T, I DON'T OPERATE ON FACEBOOK.
I DID, I DID SAY LIKE, HEY, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE, A LOT OF THOSE ARE ANONYMOUS.
SO NOBODY WANTED TO SAY WHO THEY WERE.
SO I DID ANNOUNCE SAY, HEY, IT WASN'T A THREAT.
IT WASN'T NOTHING CON LIKE CONTROVERSIAL.
IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT, PLEASE COME TO ME.
THEY ALSO MADE UP A FAKE, A FAKE NOTICE AND A, A FAKE NOTICE AND PUBLISHED IT ON EVERYBODY'S LIKE TAPED ON EVERYBODY'S DOOR
[01:15:01]
OUTSIDE OF THE PEOPLE WITHIN 200 FEET SAYING THAT IT WAS FROM FOREST.THAT IS WHAT THEY SAID ON THE FACEBOOK.
WHICH IS NOT, ONCE AGAIN, I'M NOT THE ONE BULLYING ANYBODY.
I JUST RESPOND AND SAY, HEY, COME TALK TO ME IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
THEY WANTED TO KNOW THAT THE DETAILS ABOUT MY, MY PARENTS' ILLNESS, THE AILS ME, WHICH IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS BY ANY MEANS, INSIDE THE HOA.
SO AT THE HO MEETING ON HOA MEETING ON FRIDAY, TYLER SMITH, WHICH IS OUR HOA REPRESENTATIVE, OUR HOA BOARD, HE SPECIFICALLY SAID TO THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE SAYING SOMETHING RIGHT NOW THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, IF WE WANT TO CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE HOA DOCUMENTS, WE NEED TWO THIRDS VOTE AND WE CAN PUT IT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
BUT THIS ONE WAS ALREADY APPROVED BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING IN THE HOA GUIDELINES THAT STOPS IT, HENCE THE REASON IT WAS PROCESSED BACK IN OCTOBER.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.
WHY, WHY OTHER PEOPLE NOW WHY ARE PEOPLE COMING TO HERE? I MEAN, JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE, THE PEOPLE ARE GONNA OPPOSE CERTAIN CHANGES.
SO I GUESS JUST ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION.
NO, BECAUSE I WANNA BE SENSITIVE OF TIME ON, YOU KNOW, FOR THE I UNDERSTAND COMMISSION.
UM, THE, THE, THE QUESTION IS, WHEN DID YOU LEARN THAT THERE WAS OPPOSITION IN THE COMMUNITY? BECAUSE AGAIN, THE REPRESENTATIONS COUNCIL WOMAN'S OFFICE WAS THAT THERE WAS CONSENSUS.
SO AT WHAT POINT DID YOU UNDERSTAND THE FIRST DAY THAT THAT WAS POSTED ON FACEBOOK? I, I, I WOULD HAVE TO PULL THE FACEBOOK POST.
WHAT DAY WAS THAT? AND ONCE AGAIN, I, I DON'T THINK OPPOSITION ON FACEBOOK IS, IS A RELEVANT I IRRELEVANT CONCEPT, BUT, BUT YOU'RE, THANK YOU.
I, I THINK I'LL, MAYBE I COULD ASK WHO, WHO SHARED THIS FROM THE YEAH, DO, YEAH.
IF YOU COULD LOOK UP JUST THE DATE, THAT'D BE GREAT.
UM, A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR STANDING, SO TO STAFF, UM, THE PROPOSED ZONING IS A, UH, CONDITIONAL USE AUTHORIZATION THAT ALLOWS FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS.
UH, SO ADUS, AN A DU WOULD BE BY RIGHT, RIGHT.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS FOR AN A DU.
SO WHY IN THIS CASE DID THE APPLICANT NEED TO ASK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE AUTHORIZATION FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS? BECAUSE THEY WANTED A TOTAL OF THREE FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY.
SO IF IT WAS A PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE A DU, IT WOULD BE TWO.
AND SO HE BASICALLY WANTED THAT THIRD ONE PUTS 'EM OUTSIDE OF THE A DU RULES.
AND WHAT OTHER DIFFERENCES ARE THERE IN THE A-D-U-A-D-U RULES THAT WOULDN'T APPLY IN THIS CASE? FOR THE, SO IF YOU, BASICALLY YOU, YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED ONE A DU BY W RIGHT.
ON A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
SO HE'S WANTING TO DO TECHNICALLY TWO.
ARE THERE OTHER, THERE'S SIZE COMPETENCY REQUIREMENTS SIZE, REQUIREMENTS SIZE, YES.
THERE SIZE SHARED DISTINCTIONS.
SO AN A DU REQUIRES, UM, AGAIN, IT'S ALLOWED BY WRIGHT ON ANY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
IT CAN BE UP TO 800 SQUARE FEET OR 1600 SQUARE FEET IF, UM, OR 50% OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
SO IF YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, A 3000 SQUARE FEET PROPERTY, YOU CAN GO A LITTLE BIT BIGGER.
AND THEN ARE THERE OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MAIN STRUCTURE WITH ADUS? NO.
SO LIKE, COULD YOU NO, NOTHING OUTSIDE OF THE NORMAL OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENTS THAT GO FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL UNIT.
SO I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH AN A DU, COULD YOU LEASE OUT THE MAIN STRUCTURE AND THE A DUN, SO HE WOULDN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE A DU RULES? SO ONE OF THE MAIN RULES THAT, SORRY, LET ME ADD THAT, IS TO QUALIFY FOR AN A DU, YOU HAVE TO LIVE IN EITHER THE A DU OR THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
SO THAT RULE WOULDN'T APPLY WITH IF THIS, WITH THE REZONING THAT HE'S REQUESTING.
SO WITH AN A DU, THE OWNER WOULD HAVE TO OCCUPY CORRECT.
ONE OF, ONE OF THE UNITS ON THIS LOT.
WITH THIS, IT WOULD NOT BE A REQUIREMENT.
ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES IN PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR A CD WITH THREE UNITS VERSUS AN A DU? NO, HE WOULD, WELL, IF SO, IF HE DID AN A DU, IT'S ONE SPACE PER UNIT, SO HE WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED TWO WITH WHAT HE'S REQUESTING.
HE WOULD BE REQUIRED ONE SPACE PER UNIT, SO THREE TOTAL.
UM, AND THEN THE NATURE OF ZONING, RIGHT? WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LAND USES AND NOT THE STATED USES BY THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE IF THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD, THAT CD WOULD RUN WITH THE LAND, RIGHT? CORRECT.
UM, SO COULD A SUBSEQUENT OWNER LEASE OUT THE UNITS TO ANYBODY ELSE? LIKE WOULD THERE BE RESTRICTIONS ON IT ABOUT THE INTENT OF THE CURRENT APPLICANT? NOT FROM THE CITY? SO, AND I SAY IT THAT WAY BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE, FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD IS THE HOA MAY HAVE SOME RESTRICTIONS THAT WE WOULD NOT ENFORCE.
UM, AND CAN I, I'LL JUST ADD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HOA IF YOU DON'T ACTUALLY, YEAH.
SO, UM, I DID SPEAK WITH THE HOA PRESIDENT TYLER SMITH.
UM, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, UH, WE, SO WE DID RECEIVE AN APPROVAL LETTER THAT DID LIST IT AS AN A DU.
WE SPOKE WITH THE COUNCIL OFFICE AS WELL.
THEY EXPRESSED THE SAME CONCERNS THAT YOU HAD SPOKEN ABOUT.
AND, UM, SUB SUBSEQUENTLY, THE HOA PRESIDENT HAS REACHED OUT AND DISCUSSED ON THE PHONE WITH ME SOME CONCERNS, BUT I HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVEN'T RESCINDED THEIR INITIAL APPROVAL.
[01:20:01]
THAT I'M AWARE OF THIS SITUATION, BUT OFFICIALLY THEY HAVE NOT SAID WE'RE EITHER OPPOSED OR IN FAVOR SINCE THE ORIGINAL, UH, SUPPORT THAT THEY GAVE.UH, IN REGARDS TO THE, THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS, SO MY UNDERSTANDING ZONING COMMISSION, IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHECK FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
UM, THE ONE THING THAT IS, I, I AM TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THOUGH, UM, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING FOR ADVERSE IMPACTS, AND IN THAT ANALYSIS, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO CHECK FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE PREVAILING USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
WOULDN'T THE CCNRS BE RELEVANT TO THAT ANALYSIS? SO IF THERE ARE CCNRS THAT SAY THAT THE PREVAILING AREA IS SUPPOSED TO BE LIMITED TO SAY ONE DWELLING UNIT PER LOT AND NOT THREE, WOULDN'T THAT, WOULDN'T THAT BE RELEVANT TO THAT ANALYSIS? YEAH, SO WE DID LOOK INTO THE PLATTED, SO THE PLAT, UM, BECAUSE IT IS A PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO SEE IF THIS WOULD SOMEHOW EXCEED THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS IN THE AREA.
BUT, UM, AS FAR, AGAIN, AS FAR AS THE DEED RESTRICTION GOES, WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANY LEGAL AUTHORITY OVER THAT.
SO, AGAIN, TO CLARIFY WHAT I'M TRYING TO PARSE OUT HERE, I KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE, NOT ALLOWED, RIGHT? THAT'S THE PURVIEW OF THE COURTS.
IT'S NOT THE PURVIEW OF THE MUNICIPALITY TO REVIEW CONSISTENCY WITH THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
WE SHOULDN'T BE LOOKING AT 'EM.
WE SHOULDN'T BE REVIEWING THEM.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT JUST FOR THE ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE TO DO ABOUT THE PREVAILING USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
WOULDN'T THE CCNRS BE RELEVANT TO UNDERSTANDING WHAT THOSE PREVAILING USES ARE LIKE? SO LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT I'M THINKING.
WE CAN LOOK AT THE ZONING OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND SEE THAT IT'S SINGLE FAMILY, BUT IF WE'RE NOT EVEN AWARE OF THE FACT THAT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THERE'S A LIMIT IN THE CCN S ON THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS PER LOT, UM, IF WE'RE NOT EVEN ABLE TO BE AWARE OF THAT, IT WOULD SEEM TO BE A BIG BLIND SPOT ABOUT WHAT THE EXISTING USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA ARE.
UM, SO CAN YOU GUYS, YEAH, I, I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER, YOU'VE ALMOST ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION.
I MEAN, YOU, YOU'VE HIT EVERYTHING NAIL ON THE HEAD.
IT'S NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION.
IT SHOULDN'T BE DISCUSSED BY THIS COMMISSION.
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE LAND USES AND THE REGULATORY REGIME THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY, NOT PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS, WHICH WILL BE ENFORCED AS A SEPARATE MATTER BY THE HOA.
I, SO I UNDERSTAND
WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS WHEN I'M DOING THE ANALYSIS ON ADVERSE IMPACTS, AND I'M CONSIDERING THE PREVAILING SURROUNDING USES, AND I LOOK AND I SEE, OKAY, YOU KNOW, IF I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, BUT LIKE, WOULDN'T IT BE A RELEVANT FACTOR THAT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THE SURROUNDING USES ARE LIMITED TO ONE DWELLING UNIT PER LOT? ISN'T THAT RELEVANT IN THAT ANALYSIS? NOT, NOT IN THE SENSE THAT WE'RE ENFORCING THE CCNRS, BUT JUST WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT ADVERSE IMPACTS, LIKE IN, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WOULDN'T IT BE AN ADVERSE IMPACT TO HAVE A LOT THAT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVAILING U UH, USES ON THE SURROUNDING LOTS? SO I WOULD ANSWER THAT BECAUSE THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE THE PURVIEW OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL HOAS, AND THEY CAN BE CHANGED.
THEY CAN ALSO BE INTERPRETED BY THOSE HOAS DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT WE AS THE CITY MIGHT POTENTIALLY INTERPRET THEM.
AND SO WE DON'T INVOLVE OURSELVES IN, IN, IN TRYING TO INTERPRET THEIR DOCUMENTS IN ANY KIND OF WAY.
SO WHAT MAY SEEM OBVIOUS AS FAR AS A RESIDENTIAL HOUSING KIND OF, UM, CRITERIA, THEY MAY ENFORCE IN A WAY THAT IS NOT OBVIOUS TO US BECAUSE OF THEIR PRACTICES, BECAUSE OF THEIR INTERPRETATIONS, BECAUSE OF THEIR RULES, THEIR POLICIES, WHATEVER.
SO, NO, WE DON'T, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND IT MIGHT BE RELEVANT OVERALL, BUT FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, WE DON'T INVOLVE OURSELVES IN TRYING TO INTERPRET THEIR DOCUMENTS.
AND I SUPPOSE WHAT IS DIFFICULT FOR ME IS MEMBERS FROM THE HOA ARE COMING, THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY SEE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD FROM THE INCREASED DENSITY, AND THEY'RE COMING AND SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROJECT FOR THAT REASON.
THEY MENTIONED THAT THEIR EXPECTATION WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTIES WAS THAT IT WAS ONLY GOING TO BE MR. FERRO.
BEFORE YOU TALK, LET ME SEE IF I CAN, I THINK I, I CAN MAYBE THREAD THIS NEEDLE.
UM, SO I THINK ONE THING THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IS, WHILE WE DON'T, WE DON'T NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN THE, YOU KNOW, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS OR ANY HOMEOWNER RESTRICTIONS, ET CETERA.
I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT THE USE IS.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE WAY I'M LOOKING AT IT IS IGNORING ANY OUTSIDE PRIVATE AGREEMENTS OR PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS, WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW.
WE SEE THIS IN THE INNER CITY ALL THE TIME.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, USE IS NOT THE EXACT
[01:25:01]
SAME THING AS ZONING, RIGHT? AND SO IN THIS CASE, USE IS NOT THE EXACT SAME THING AS THE RESTRICTIONS OR WHATEVER.AND SO I THINK FOR THE ADVERSE IMPACT, YOU CAN LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT GOOGLE MAPS 'CAUSE WE DON'T HAVE STREET VIEW.
UH, LOOK AT THE SATELLITE IMAGE AND SAY, OKAY, THESE SEEM TO BE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, AND YOU CAN JUDGE ADVERSE IMPACT IN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THAT WITHOUT GOING INTO THE CCNRS.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I I MEAN, I I APPRECIATE THAT.
THAT'S USEFUL, RIGHT? AND YOU KNOW, THE ANALYSIS WORKS OUT THE SAME.
UM, SO JUST TO ALSO, WE GO WITH BASIC PLAN USE PRINCIPLES THAT WE DO FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
AND SO THIS CITY, THIS DOESN'T MATTER WHERE IT'S LOCATED, BUT BASICALLY, YES, I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BUT THEY'RE KEEPING A BASE ZONE OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THEY'RE ASKING TO ADD TWO MORE UNITS.
WE SUPPORT THESE KIND OF ITEMS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY.
AND SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT IS.
WE LOOKED AT THE LAND USE, IT IS STILL A SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT.
AND I WILL ALSO ADD ONTO THAT, WHILE THE CITY STAFF MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY GET INTO THE HOA AND THE DOCUMENTS AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF, WHEN IT REACHES THE COUNCIL LEVEL, THE COUNCIL WOMAN IS FREE TO LOOK AT ALL DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE CASE.
UM, AND SO SHE IS CERTAINLY ABLE TO LISTEN TO THE HOA AND THE CONCERNS THAT THEY BRING UP RELATED TO, TO THE, THE ISSUE.
UM, SO ARE WE OR ONLY THE COUNCIL, THE COMMISSION IS NOT ABLE TO, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT CITY STAFF RECOMMENDS.
SO, AND, AND AGAIN, FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF AS A COMMISSION OR BOARD, IT'S REALLY NOT WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW EITHER, BUT WHEN IT REACHES THE COUNCIL LEVEL, AGAIN, THE COUNCILWOMAN IS FREE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHATEVER SHE BELIEVES IS APPROPRIATE RELATED, RELATED TO THE CASE.
WELL THAT, THAT'S ENOUGH QUESTIONS FOR ME.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DUBAL, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON MY LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER WHITSETT, I, I THINK IT WAS YOU AND THEN COMMISSIONER I, YEAH, I GUESS I HAVE SEVERAL, BUT MAYBE ONE THAT'S JUST KIND OF ALONG THOSE LINES.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT, UH, IF 30 OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THEIR CAME UP NEXT WEEK AND SAID THEY WANTED A DUPLEX ON THEIR PROPERTY, UH, Y'ALL WOULD APPROVE IT, RECOMMEND, RECOMMEND APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO COMING TO US.
NO, THESE ARE CASE BY CASE, BUT THIS IS OF A COMMON NATURE THAT WE SEE, BUT I CAN'T SAY THAT WE WOULD GUARANTEE APPROVAL FOR THAT.
SO THIS IS A ONE-OFF FOR THIS SITUATION.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SIZE OF THESE LOTS.
I MEAN, THIS IS A TWO ACRE LOT.
UM, AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER ITEMS THAT GO INTO CONTEXT.
I CAN'T SAY IT'S GONNA BE THE SAME, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT BASIC LAND USE PRINCIPLES.
NOW, GOING BACK TO THE IDEA THAT IF THE PARENTS MOVE OUT AT SOME POINT, THEY CAN THEN RENT THESE ON SHORT-TERM RENTALS OR HAS TO BE MONTHLY RENTALS.
WELL, THEY, THEY WOULD NEED A, A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PERMIT, UH, TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
THE, AS FAR AS THE LONG-TERM NORMAL RENTER, THE CITY WOULDN'T DICTATE HOW THEY RENT THEM OUT THAT WAY.
BUT FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL, THEY WOULD NEED TO COME APPLY FOR A PERMIT.
SO THERE'S NO OPTION WHERE IF BOTH THE PARENTS LEFT, THEY SOLD THE PROPERTY THAT THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT TO BE CONVERTED BACK TO A SINGLE, UH, AD UNIT? NO, NOT THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS.
I, ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WITT.
ONE, UM, READING THROUGH THE, THE SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS.
UM, AND I'LL SAY I DON'T PARTICIPATE ON FACEBOOK EITHER, UM, BUT UM, I DID READ THE COPY.
UM, IT IS THE REASON THAT THERE IS THE NEED FOR THE THREE UNITS BECAUSE OF THE DOUBLE KITCHENS, IF, IN OTHER WORDS, IS, IS IS THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S WHAT I'M, I THINK THAT WAS A BIG, UH, A BIG PART OF WHY THEY WERE MADE THAT REQUEST, MADE THE REQUEST THE WAY THAT THEY DID BECAUSE, UM, TYPICALLY A UNIT IS, YOU KNOW, A KITCHEN, A LIVING SPACE, AND A BATHROOM.
AND THEN, UM, DOES THE, THE, THE GRANTING OF THE THREE UNITS ON THE PROPERTY, DOES THAT, UM, THEN, UH, PREVENT AN ACTUAL A DU BEING CONSTRUCTED LATER ON? OR, OR COULD AN A DU STILL BE CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE IT'S THE PROPERTY PLUS AN A DU, BUT YOU'VE GOT THE DUPLEX.
YEAH, YOU COULD, YOU COULD STILL DO AN A DU AS WELL.
UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THIS TIME.
[01:30:01]
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH.COMMISSIONER SIPES, THAT'S A UDC ITEM IN MY MIND.
ALRIGHT, UH, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON MY LEFT? UH, NOT YET.
ALRIGHT, UH, QUESTIONS ON MY RIGHT? UH, YES, COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE HOA, UH, BUT WE DON'T HAVE PURVIEW OVER THOSE.
UH, THEY HAVE TO DO WITH THE CCRS.
SO, UM, WE DO HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE OPPOSING, UH, ESPECIALLY THE BOARD.
IS THERE A BOARD MEMBER HERE? NO BOARD MEMBERS LAW THAT WE WEREN'T ALLOWED HIM.
WELL, HOA BOARD MEMBERS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
THE H OA WASN'T ALLOWED HERE BECAUSE WE HIRED A LAWYER.
WHY, SORRY, MS. MOL, LET'S, UH, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION OF MS. MUNGS? GO AHEAD.
NA, WHY DON'T YOU, WHY DON'T GO AHEAD, JUST ASK WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OF HER.
THE BOARD SAID TODAY THAT THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO COME HERE AS WELL AS TYLER BECAUSE WE HAD TYLER TOLD THEM THAT THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO COME HERE BECAUSE WE HAD HIRED LAWYERS BECAUSE OUR HOA HAD HIRED LAWYERS AND THEY SAID THAT IT WAS, UM, OH, I CAN'T THINK OF THE WORD RIGHT NOW.
THEY SAID IT WAS A LIABILITY FOR THEM TO BE HERE, UM, BECAUSE WE HAD HIRED LAWYERS AND I WAS LIKE, IT'S KIND OF MORE OF A LIABILITY FOR THE OWNERS HERE WITH HIM.
WE LIVE WITH HIM, YOU KNOW, NOTHING PERSONAL AGAINST HIM.
WE WOULD BE AGAINST A DUPLEX BECAUSE YOU STILL CAN PUT AN AN A DU ON A PROPERTY.
I MEAN, AND IT, IT TECHNICALLY IS THREE PROPERTIES.
LIKE I ASKED IN THE EMAIL AND HE SAID NO.
AND FEBRUARY 18TH WAS THE DATE THAT THIS ALL BE OKAY.
THAT HE KNEW WHERE THAT THREE 18TH IS, THE DATE THAT HE KNEW THAT THE, THAT IT WAS NOT.
WHERE ARE YOUR LAWYERS? WHERE ARE THE HOA LAWYERS? I'M SORRY.
WE, THEY, I, OKAY, YESTERDAY WE GOT A NEW LAWYER YESTERDAY.
SORRY LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET'S JUST LIMIT TO WHOEVER CAN ANSWER UP HERE.
THE LAWYER WAS, WE, THEY CHANGED LAWYERS YESTERDAY AND SO WE JUST GOT A NEW LAWYER TODAY.
OUR HOA SENT OUT THE LETTER TO THE LAWYER SAYING WE RESCIND THIS TODAY.
THANK YOU MR. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO THIS SINCE FEBRUARY 18TH.
ALRIGHT, MR. COMMISSIONER R PETE RODRIGUEZ, I GOT NO, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ, I WILL NOPE, NO STATEMENTS.
STATEMENTS AFTER WE DO, AFTER WE FINISH QUESTIONS.
UH, I'M GONNA GO TO COMMISSIONER HUEY, BUT COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA FIRST JUST A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UH, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WITH EVERYTHING HERE, BUT IF, IF WE MAKE A, UH, RECOMMENDATION FOR CITY COUNCIL, COULD THAT RECOMMENDATION CHANGE WITH THEIR CURRENT STATUS THAT THEY HAVE GOING ON? YES.
UH, CITY COUNCIL COULD MAKE, I MEAN, BUT DEPENDING ON WHAT THE CHANGE IS, IT COULD REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, A RESTART OF THE CASE OR ANY POTENTIALLY.
UH, BUT YES, CITY COUNCIL COULD MAKE AN AMENDMENT.
I'M SORRY, I JUST KIND OF MISREAD LIKE, ONCE ZONING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION THAT RECOMMENDATION CANNOT CHANGE, IT'LL BE FINAL VOTE.
SO CITY COUNCIL, BUT CITY COUNCIL MAKES THEIR OWN DECISION.
IT'S NOT THE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.
I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.
COMMISSIONER HUI, UH, MR. WILSON CALLING BACK.
SO HELP ME, HELP ME UNDERSTAND, UH, IN YOUR INITIAL STATEMENT YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS WAS TECHNICALLY TWO UNITS AND I THINK, UM, YOU MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER S SIPES COMMENTS, QUESTIONS THAT WAS BASED ON THE FACT HAVE TWO KITCHENS.
WAS THAT THE REASON WHY YOU ASSESSED IT AS TWO UNITS? NO, THAT WAS WHAT THE APPLICANT REQUESTED WAS FOR A TOTAL OF THREE UNITS.
SO I DIDN'T MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
TYPICALLY THE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERS A UNIT, YOU KNOW, A SPACE THAT HAS A KITCHEN, LIVING SPACE AND RESTROOMS. AND SO THAT'S HOW WE WOULD CONSIDER A UNIT.
BUT AGAIN, I, I WASN'T THE ONE MAKING THAT DETERMINATION.
THIS IS JUST THE WAY THAT THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THE, THE CASE.
THANK YOU FOR CLAR THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND ALSO JUST SAYING ALSO WITH THE, COMING FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL DECISION, YOU HAVE SEPARATE ENTRANCES.
SO BASICALLY IF THIS WAS ALL CONNECTED INSIDE, WE WOULD, FROM A PLAN REVIEW, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED ONE UNIT, BUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO EXIT TO GET TO THE OTHER UNIT THAT'S GIVES IT THAT SEPARATE UNIT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THERE'S NOT A LIMITED NUMBER OF KITCHENS OR BEDROOMS. YOU CAN HAVE PROVIDED YOU STAY WITHIN THE ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE A DU, BUT IF YOU HAVE TO EXIT ONE PORTION OF THE BUILDING, TURN TO ANOTHER, THAT BECOMES A DUPLEX.
ALRIGHT, WHICH LEADS ME TO MY FUN QUESTIONS.
UH, ONE, THIS IS WHY WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT DWELLING DEFINITIONS IN THE, IN THE
[01:35:01]
UDC, UH, IN OUR NEXT REVISION.SO WE'RE PROBABLY GONNA MESS OTHER STUFF UP, BUT WE'RE GONNA TRY TO FIX THIS.
UM, ALRIGHT, BUT MY QUESTION IS, OKAY, ONE THING THAT WAS RAISED, UH, AMONGST SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS CONCERNS WAS THE ABILITY TO SELL THESE SEPARATELY.
NOW THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.
CORRECT? THEY WOULD TECHNICALLY HAVE TO REPL OR YEAH, IF THEY WANTED TO DO SOME SORT OF FEE SIMPLE TRANSACTION, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REPL THE PROPERTY FIRST OR, OR EVEN A LIFE ESTATE.
IF YOU WANTED TO GO BACK TO MY PROPERTY LAW IN LAW SCHOOL, UH, SORRY,
UM, OKAY, SO SELLING'S NOT REALLY A THING, BUT YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS AN R SIX WITH THREE UNITS, THREE DWELLING UNITS, THEY COULD EACH BE RENTED INDIVIDUALLY OR LEASED INDIVIDUALLY, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND SO AGAIN, WITH RESPECT TO THE A DU, IF THERE WAS A DOOR IN BETWEEN THESE TWO UNITS IN THE BACK THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO BRING THIS INTO THE A DU AS OF RIGHT? CORRECT.
I WOULD, I WOULD WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONFER WITH OUR FOLKS IN PLAN REVIEW ON THAT LITTLE LOOPHOLE BEFORE I ANSWER THAT ONE.
UH, IF THERE WAS A CENTRAL KITCHEN THAT CONNECTED THE TWO UNITS WITH SORT OF TWO DIFFERENT BEDROOM SUITES ON EITHER SIDE WITH INDEPENDENT BATHROOMS, UH, THAT WOULD BE A SINGLE UNIT? THAT'S CORRECT.
I JUST WANTED THE ANSWER I WANTED.
UM, ALRIGHT, SO I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
UM, ALRIGHT, WE ARE NOW GONNA GO BACK AROUND THE HORN.
SO TO THE LEFT FIRST, UH, COMMISSIONER ELL, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU, UH, I'LL GIVE YOU THE LAST BUT ME ON ON YOUR TERMS IF YOU WANNA HAVE MORE QUESTIONS.
SO COMMISSIONER, WHAT'S IT REGARDING THE, UH, QUESTION OF SUBDIVIDING? MY UNDERSTANDING TO RELA IT'S JUST TO NEED TO 20 FEET OF FRONTAGE SO THEY COULD CUT IT INTO TWO LOTS UNLESS THERE'S SOME KIND OF A FURTHER DEED RESTRICTION AGAINST, YOU KNOW, MINIMUM LOT SIZE.
UH, THERE, THERE MAY BE, I'M NOT SURE, BUT YOU KNOW THAT YEAH, THE IDEA OF BEING ABLE TO REPL WHERE THEY DID JUST STRAIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OR A FLAG LOT OF SOME KIND.
SO THEY, AS LONG AS THEY FOLLOW THE RULES ON PLATTING, THEY COULD CARBON UP POTENTIALLY.
LET, LET ME JUST OFFER THOUGH THAT SHOULD THAT HAPPEN, THIS ZONING CASE WOULD BE A CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL TIED TO A SITE PLAN AND TO GO CHOPPING UP THE LOT AFTER THE FACT WOULD INVALIDATE THAT SITE PLAN.
SO WE WOULD BE RIGHT BACK HERE TO AUTHORIZE OR REAUTHORIZE A DUPLEX ON A STANDALONE LOT.
YOU'D HAVE A HOUSE IN THE BACK AND A HOUSE IN THE FRONT THAT THEY COULD THEN ASK FOR A TO USE.
SO, SO IF, IF YOU GOT CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR THREE UNITS AND THEN CUT THE LOT IN HALF, THAT DOES NOT GIVE YOU THE PERMISSION TO HAVE SIX.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER TSET, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT? SEEING NONE QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER VE TO YOU? YEAH, MY QUESTION WAS ACTUALLY ANSWERED THE FEBRUARY 15TH OR WAS IT 18TH? 18TH, 18TH, YEAH, SO, OKAY.
ALRIGHT, UM, IN THAT CASE, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED, IT IS TIME FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION COMMISSIONER DULE.
SO I, I'M DISAPPOINTED ON THIS CASE.
UM, I, I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE, UH, COUNCIL, UH, WOMAN'S STAFF THROUGH THE PROCESS IN REVIEWING THE APPLICATION.
UM, I WAS ACTUALLY THE, THE ONE WHO IDENTIFIED, UH, THAT THE ORIGINAL A CC LETTER, UH, REFERRED TO, UM, AN A DU AND NOT A DUPLEX.
SO I KNOW THAT THE COUNCIL OFFICE WAS AWARE OF THAT DISCREPANCY 'CAUSE I WAS THE ONE WHO FOUND IT.
UH, SO WHEN THE COUNCIL PERSON'S OFFICE WENT BACK TO THE APPLICANT AND ASKED THEM TO CONFIRM THAT THE HOA WAS IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING CHANGE WITH ALL OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ZONING CHANGE AS OPPOSED TO AN A DU, UH, WE WERE, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I ENCOURAGED THE, UH, COUNCILWOMAN STAFF TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
UH, BECAUSE WE WANTED TO AVOID THIS SITUATION, THE, YOU KNOW, UPSET NEIGHBORS.
UM, WHEN THE PERSPECTIVE WAS THAT THERE WAS CONSENSUS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THIS ZONING CHANGE, UM, I WAS AT THAT POINT INCLINED TO SUPPORT IT, EVEN IF I WOULDN'T WANT IT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S IN FAVOR, THEN THEN FINE GO FOR IT.
UM, BUT IT, IT, IT REALLY, UH, IS A DIFFERENT SITUATION WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS OPPOSED TO THIS KIND OF A ZONING
[01:40:01]
CHANGE.UM, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE CITY STAFF'S CONCERNS ABOUT CROSSING THE LINE INTO INTERPRETATION OF CCNRS, UH, REASONABLE INVESTMENT BACKED EXPECTATIONS ON THE PART OF NEIGHBORS IS SOMETHING THAT DOES REALLY WEIGH ON ME WHEN CONSIDERING ADVERSE IMPACTS.
SO TO THAT END, HEARING ABOUT THEIR CCNRS AND EXPECTATIONS ABOUT DENSITY WITHIN THESE LOTS, THESE ARE LARGE LOTS, BUT THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE BUY THEM WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT IT'S NOT GONNA BE HIGHER DENSITY, UH, THAT REALLY WEIGHS ON ME.
AND I, YOU KNOW, ON FUTURE CASES WOULD REALLY WANT TO SEE, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN SUPPORT, UM, BEFORE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING TO SUPPORT, UH, PROJECT LIKE THIS.
SO, UH, WITH THAT, I, UH, MOVE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE UH, CASE.
ALRIGHT, THERE'S A RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE BY COMMISSIONER VILLE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND IT.
UH, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA SECOND.
I, I SAW, I SAW MOVEMENT OUT OF THE CORNER OF MY EYE.
UH, ALL COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ'S SECOND.
ALRIGHT, DISCUSSION TO MY LEFT.
UM, I GET TO USE THE, THE, THE FIRST TIME THIS MEETING.
UM, THIS IS A DIFFICULT CASE, UM, BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, LIVING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH HAS A DU, EVERYBODY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AN A DU JUST 'CAUSE WE'RE OLD.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, THE, THE, THE IDEA OF HAVING A SECOND UNIT, UM, BEHIND A MAIN HOUSE IS NOT FOREIGN TO ME, NOR, UM, OFFENSIVE IN ANY WAY TO ME.
UM, I THINK WHERE IT SHIFTS IS THAT I, I RECOGNIZE THAT THE IDEA OF HAVING A DUPLEX IS, IS, IS UM, DIFFERENT THAN AN A DU.
UM, AND, UH, IF THIS WERE A SINGLE A DU, OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD NOT BE HERE IF IT WAS LIKE, UM, REZONING FOR TWO UNITS BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT WE DO THE A DU WHERE YOU CAN'T RENT AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
BUT ANYWAY, WE'LL FIX THAT, RIGHT? UM, I, I, I WOULD NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT.
IT IS, HOWEVER, IT'S THAT EXTRA UNIT THAT, THAT GIVES ME PAUSE IN REGARDS TO, UM, THE, THE CURRENT LAYOUT, I GUESS YOU MIGHT SAY, OF, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIPES.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? LEFT COMMISSIONER WHITSETT AND THEN LO I'LL JUST REITERATE WHAT HE SAID AND I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THAT IT WOULD, EVEN THOUGH THEY SAY IT DOESN'T, IT WOULD SET SORT OF A PRECEDENCE FOR OTHERS TO COME IN AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT THE SAME THING AND OKAY, CHANGE THE NEXT.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHITSETT.
UM, I, THIS IS GONNA BE PHRASED STRANGE, BUT I'M GOING TO BE DENY
I'M AN EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO THE DENIAL.
I WOULD RATHER SEE A, A CONTINUANCE OR AN APPROVAL.
I THINK I WANNA PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT AGAINST THE PRECEDENT.
I UNDERSTAND THERE'S NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN.
WE DO HAVE TO REVIEW EVERY SINGLE ZONING THAT COMES BEFORE US, SO I DON'T SEE THIS AS, UM, YOU KNOW, OPENING FLOODGATES TO A BUNCH OF DUPLEXES.
I DO THINK LOOKING AT THE AERIAL VIEW, UM, LOOKING AT THE LOT, IT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS AM IN SUPPORT OF MORE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND MORE DIFFERENT VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS IN SAN ANTONIO.
I THINK SOMEBODY SAID EARLIER, THIS IS HOW WE APPLY, THIS IS MY MENTALITY FOR ALMOST EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IN SAN ANTONIO.
AND, UM, THESE LOTS ARE PRETTY LARGE AND DEFINITELY HAVE THE SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE.
I OBVIOUSLY WANNA BE SENSITIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND THE HOA PERSPECTIVE AND I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE YOUR OWN RULES, WHICH IS WHY I WOULD BE PUSHING FOR A CONTINUANCE TO HOPEFULLY FIGURE OUT A BETTER SOLUTION.
UM, BUT SINCE THAT'S NOT ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW, I'M JUST, UM, GOING TO EXPRESS MY DENIAL, UH, MY OPPOSITION TO THE DENIAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER LO UH, DISCUSSION, RIGHT, COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ, YOU WANNA REALLY QUICK? UH, I WOULD SUPPORT THIS IF THE HOA WAS ON BOARD WITH IT.
UH, BUT NOPE SIR, THE PUBLIC HEARING'S OVER.
ALRIGHT, SORRY, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU LIVED IN A, IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAD NO HOA, THEN I WOULD VOTE FOR APPROVAL, BUT IN THIS CASE I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO WITH THE PRO, UH, WELL, WAS RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HUEY TO YOU.
SO I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO WHAT THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO DO AND I THINK IT'S A, A, A LAUDABLE APPROACH TO HOUSING FOR YOUR SENIOR PARENTS.
BUT, UH, GIVEN THAT WE'RE THE ZONING COMMISSION AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT LAND USE THAT HAVING A DUPLEX, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO FIT INTO THIS AREA.
[01:45:01]
KNOW, AGAIN, HAD THIS BEEN AN A DUI DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAPPEN IN ISSUE, BUT AS A DUPLEX, I, I CANNOT SUPPORT IT, SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE DENIAL.UH, I AM NOT GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION.
I THINK, UH, FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD NECESSARILY SUPPORT, UH, A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
UM, BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD RECOM I WOULD SUPPORT A CONTINUANCE AT THIS TIME.
I KNOW THAT YOU MOVED TO EXPEDITE THIS OR THE COUNCIL OFFICE DID.
UM, NONETHELESS, UH, I I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CONCERNS THAT, UH, COULD BE ADDRESSED BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
UH, WHAT CONCERNS ME MORE IS SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FRACTURES THAT I SEE COMING HERE.
AND I, I WOULD PREFER TO SEE Y'ALL WORK THROUGH SOME OF THESE ISSUES IN A CONTINUANCE MEDIATED BY PERHAPS COMMISSIONER ELL OR SOMEONE LIKE THAT TO ADDRESS SORT OF THESE BIGGER PROBLEMS. I ALSO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, AND THIS IS NOT ANYONE'S FAULT, BUT THE DEVELOPER, THIS COULD HAVE, UH, BEEN A RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.
THESE COULD HAVE BEEN ONE ACRE PLUS LOTS.
THERE WAS ALL SORTS OF POSSIBILITIES POTENTIALLY HERE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE ZONING CONTEXT.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHY EVERYONE'S CALLING IT THREE UNITS.
I, I THINK A SINGLE CONNECTION DOOR WOULD MAKE IT AN A DU THAT WOULD BE POTENTIALLY ALLOWED BY RIGHT? UM, BUT, UH, BUT I AM CONCERNED SORT OF ABOUT THE FRAYING OF OUR COMMUNITIES AS WE EACH GET DUG IN, UH, UH, LOBBYING ACCUSATIONS.
AND I THINK A CONTINUANCE COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY HELPED THAT AND WE COULD HAVE POSSIBLY GOTTEN TO A RESOLUTION THAT EVERYONE COULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY WITH.
BUT THAT'S NOT ON THE TABLE, SO NOT MY PROBLEM.
ALRIGHT, SO AT THIS TIME THE MOTION IS FOR DENIAL OF ITEM.
HAVE A, YOU KNOW, JUST QUICK, QUICK REBUTTAL THAT, UM, TO, TO THE APPLICANT.
UM, IF A SOLUTION WITH STAFF'S REVIEW COULD COME SIMPLY FROM ADDING A DOOR BETWEEN THE TWO TO MAKE IT AN A DU, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF THAT IS IN FACT THE CASE, UM, THAT'S AN EASY SOLUTION THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE, UH, THE ZONING COMMISSION TO MAKE AN APPROVAL.
UM, THE RECOMMENDED INUNDATION OF DENIAL HERE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WOULD NOT LIMIT THE ABILITY FOR ONE TO MAKE AN A DU APPLICATION SEPARATELY, INDEPENDENTLY, ALTHOUGH STAFF CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
UH, SO WITH, WITH THAT IN MIND, I, I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THE, THE THE NEED FOR A CONTINUANCE.
UM, WHAT I HAD BEEN LOOKING FOR GOING INTO THIS HEARING WAS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT BROKE DOWN WITH THE HOA AND IF I, YOU KNOW, MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT THE NATURE OF THAT DISAGREEMENT WAS.
AND IF IN THAT CASE I WOULD'VE SAID, OKAY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE NEED TO WORK THROUGH.
UH, BUT AS IT IS NOW, AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, FOR, I KNOW FOR THE, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S AN NON-STARTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE OPPOSED.
UM, RESPECTFULLY, JUST IN, IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER, UH, LO I THINK THE, THE, THE CITY STAFF'S POLICY OF TREATING EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD SIMILARLY, UM, IS UH, UH, NEEDS TO BE REVISED IN THIS INSTANCE JUST IN THAT OUR CITY IS VERY LARGE.
SOME AREAS ARE VERY DIFFERENT THAN OTHER AREAS AND WHERE THAT POLICY MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE IN SOME AREAS OF THE CITY AND OTHER AREAS NOT APPROPRIATE.
UM, AND HERE IS ONE OF THOSE PLACES WHERE, UH, AGAIN, I THINK IT, IT MAKES IT A NON-STARTER IF THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T WANNA SEE THAT CHANGE OR AT LEAST SHOULD MAKE IT A NON-STARTER.
ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA BRIEFLY ADDRESS SOMETHING SINCE WE'RE REBUTTING.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE IDEA THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME IS THAT WE SHOULD APPLY THE SAME PRINCIPLES, WE SHOULD APPLY THE SAME PRINCIPLES ACROSS.
AND SO USE IN CERTAIN AREAS, UH, DO TAKE, DOES TAKE ADVANTAGE OR DOES TAKE INTO ACCOUNT RATHER, UH, WHAT THE NEIGHBORING USES ARE, WHAT THE AREAS ARE IN VARIOUS PLANS FOR EXAMPLE.
AND SO THAT BEING SAID, WE ARE WELL AWAY FROM WHAT WE NEED TO BE DOING RIGHT NOW.
AND SO THE MOTION IS FOR DENIAL, FOR RECOMMENDATION OF A DENIAL FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE BY COMMISSIONER DOVE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
[01:50:01]
KELLY? YES.CHAIR ANTE? NO MOTION CARRIES.
UH, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL THE APPLICANT CAN MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.
THIS IS ONLY A RECOMMENDATION, UH, AND SO YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU WANNA DO, BUT I WISH YOU ALL THE BEST OF LUCK.
I HOPE THAT THIS DOES NOT END UP WITH A CISM SCHISM.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE IT, UH, OF YOUR COMMUNITY AND THAT YOU CAN REMEDY SOME OF THOSE ISSUES.
UH, BUT BEST OF LUCK TO ALL OF YOU.
ALRIGHT, AND THANK YOU TO THE MICS FOR COMING OUT.
YOU ARE NOW RELEASED
UM, THE TIME IS 10 MINUTES TILL THREE COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS PRETTY CLOSE TO OUR TRADITIONAL BREAK TIME.
ALRIGHT, WE ARE GONNA TAKE APPROXIMATELY A SEVEN MINUTE BREAK.
WE WILL TRY TO RECONVENE AROUND 2 52.
SORRY, 2 58 IS WHAT I MEANT TO SAY.
ALRIGHT LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE TIME IS 2 59.
THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS BACK IN SESSION.
OH, WE'RE STILL MISSING COMMISSIONER LO.
UH, BUT THE TIME WILL BE 2 59 AND COMMISSIONER LO HAS REJOINED THE MEETING.
I APOLOGIZE AND THAT'S MY FAULT.
UM, WE ARE MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM ON THE INDIVIDUAL AGENDA, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BENAVIDEZ, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS LOCATED AT 3 0 5 HAR HEARTLINE GOING FROM MF 33 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT TO C TWO CD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR RECORD SERVICE WITH ALL OVERLY STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 22 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED NO REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
THE EXISTING MF 33 DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING.
THE PROPOSED C TWO CD DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A RECORD SERVICE IS NOT APPROPRIATE WHILE SIM SIMILAR ZONING DISTRICTS AND LAND USES ARE PRESENT IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THESE USES ARE NONCONFORMING AND EXCEED THE INTENSITY RECOMMENDED FOR THE THIS LOCATION UNDER THE SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT VICINITY LAND USE PLAN, ESTABLISH LAND USE PRINCIPLES, FURTHER SUPPORT THE PLACEMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES ALONG MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY ROADWAYS IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE CONGESTION ON LOCAL STREETS AND REDUCE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS WITH ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL UH, RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
GIVEN THIS THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON A LOCAL STREET AND DIRECTLY ABUTS AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, STAFF FINDS THAT IT DOES NOT MEET THE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA NECESSARY TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED USE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS UH, PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, HE WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE REQUE THEIR REQUEST TO NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE WAS IT ON ALREADY? OKAY, SORRY.
THIS IS MY FATHER ARNOLD URIBE.
UM, WE ARE HOPING TO CHANGE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR THIS.
UM, AT THE MOMENT THE PROPERTY IS BEING USED, UH, FOR PARKING AND STORAGE AND SO THAT'S WHY I THINK IT WAS MISINTERPRETED THAT IT WOULD BE USED FOR A RECORD SERVICE.
UH, I GUESS THAT'S HOW IT SORT OF LOOKS ON THE PICTURES AT THE MOMENT, BUT, UM, THAT IS NOT, NOT OUR INTENTION.
UM, WE HAVE A SMALL MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE BETTER USE OF THAT SORT OF VACANT LAND AND UH, PUT A SMALL OFFICE THERE FOR US, UH, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT PROPERTY.
UM, ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE COMMISSIONER LAWS OF TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
THANKS FOR AMENDING THE REQUEST.
UM, WERE YOU ABLE TO REACH OUT TO NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET SUPPORT OR LIKE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA? YES, WE DID GET SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBOR BEHIND US AT 1 0 3 NORTHGATE.
UM, UH, IT'S IN THE EMAILS SOMEWHERE, UM, ON, ON HER NAME.
UM, I'M BLANKING AT THE MOMENT 'CAUSE I FORGOT THE FOLDERS.
SO LET ME CHIME IN REALLY QUICK ON THAT.
SO I DID RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF POINT OF CONTACT WHERE THEY WERE DISCUSSING IT, BUT THERE'S NO EXPLICIT I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS.
SO
SO, UH, IT WENT IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, BUT WE DID, UH, SPEAK, UH, WITH HER IN GENERAL.
WE HAD JUST REACHED OUT TO THE COMMUNITY FOR 4 2 2, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
[01:55:01]
UH, A LITTLE INVASIVE TO KEEP JUST KNOCKING ON DOORS WHEN A LOT OF PEOPLE SEEMED HESITANT TO, UM, TO SPEAK TO US IN THE FIRST PLACE.AND THAT WAS ONLY LIKE TWO OR THREE MONTHS AGO.
UM, BUT UM, AS I UNDERSTAND THERE, THERE ISN'T ANY OPPOSITION AT THE MOMENT FOR THIS, ESPECIALLY IN CONSIDERATION FOR WHAT THE USE WILL BE NOW.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? NO.
COMMISSIONER DVE, UH, TO STAFF, UH, STAFF REPORT SAYS, UH, INDICATION OF LIKELY ADVERSE EFFECTS.
COULD YOU JUST CLARIFY WHAT, WHAT, WHAT DID YOU UH, IDENTIFY? SO THE ADVERSE EFFECTS WERE FOR THE ORIGINAL USE FOR THE WRECKER SERVICE AND IT WAS DUE TO THE INTENSITY OF THE USE BEING SO CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL AS THEY ABUT IT TO THE REAR AND AS PROPOSED DOES THAT, SO NOW THEY'RE AMENDING TO NC WHICH REDUCES THAT INTENSITY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, MAKING IT MORE APPROPRIATE.
IT IS ALREADY DESIGNATED LAND USES, NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL, UM, AND YOU KNOW, THEY'RE DOING AN OFFICE THERE INSTEAD OF A WRECKER SERVICE.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS LEFT? SEEING NONE QUESTIONS.
I'M JUST GONNA DO THIS FOR BELT AND SUSPENDERS, BUT YOU ARE IN FACT AMENDING YOUR REQUEST RIGHT NOW TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
ALRIGHT, UH, THERE BEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER LAWS OF TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UH, THANKS FOR AMENDING THE REQUEST.
FORMALLY I MOVE TO APPROVE THIS AS AMENDED, UH, CHANGE TO NC.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED TO NC.
COMMISSIONER WOODS SAID IS THE SECOND DISCUSSION.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, TO NC BY COMMISSIONER EF.
WE'RE MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM PLEASE.
ALEXA, ANA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS LOCATED AT 7 3 1 PROBATE STREET AND 1 3 4 KING ROGER STREET GOING FROM I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT MF 33 MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT AND R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO I DZ TWO MEDIUM INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND IDZ ONE.
LIMITED INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR A NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 37 NOTICES SENT OUT.
ONE IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED WITHIN THE 200 FEET AND LONE STAR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE.
THE EXISTING I ONE IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICT.
THE EXISTING MF 33 AND R SIX R APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICTS.
THE PROPOSED IDZ TWO MEDIUM INTENSITY INFO DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS ALSO AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED ZONING IS INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE THE USE OF A CONVENIENCE STORE IN TWO ADDITIONAL TENANT SPACES.
THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO UTILIZE THE EXISTING BUILDING ACCOMPLISHING GOALS OF ADAPTIVE FREE USE.
USE IS PERMITTED WITH THE C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ALIGN IN INTENSITY WITH SURROUNDING COMMERCIAL USES AND CONSERVE THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPOSED IDZ ONE LIMITED INTENSITY INFO DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED FOR A NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE LOCATION FOR THIS PROPERTY IS SITUATED MID-BLOCK OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE INTRODUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL USE AND REMOVING THE POTENTIAL FOR A FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY USES.
ADDITIONALLY, PROPOSING THIS SITE AS PARKING FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING COULD CAUSE AN INFLUX OF TRAFFIC ON KING ROGERS STREET AND CONTRIBUTE TO COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT INTO THE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD.
FURTHERMORE, THERE IS EXISTING PARKING ON THE PROPOSED IDZ PROPERTY WHICH WOULD BE FURTHER AIDED BY THE IDZ BASE ZONE, WHICH RELIEVES PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY 50%.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7 3 1 PROBAND STREET AND STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1 3 4 KING ROGERS STREET.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND AMEND THEIR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES FROM LOT 12 AND LOT 19.
BLOCK FOUR N CCB 3 5 31 AND LOT 22 BLOCK ONE N CCB 6 1 7 0 2
[02:00:01]
LOT 19 BLOCK FOUR N CCB 3 5, 3 1 AND LOT TWO OR LOT 22 BLOCK ONE NNC B 6 1 7 0 REMOVING THE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1 3 4 KING ROGER FROM THE REQUEST.ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE, IF YOU WOULD COME UP, TELL US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND YOU CAN KEEP IT SHORT.
MY NAME IS JUANMAR MOJO AND MY ADDRESS IS 21 7 43 ANDREWS GARDEN.
YOU WANNA TELL US JUST BRIEFLY ABOUT THIS PROJECT? WE HEARD ABOUT IT LAST MEETING, SO OKAY, YOU WANNA HEAR THE STORY AGAIN?
BUT UH, BASICALLY UH, WHAT WE HAVE IS AN EXISTING BUILDING, UH, AND THE OWNER WANTS TO, UH, CHANGE THE U ACTUALLY THE REZONING FOR, FOR PUTTING A, UH, CONVENIENCE STORE, UH, ALONG WITH TWO OTHER UH, LEASE SPACES.
RIGHT NOW I'M SORRY, WE'RE JUST GONNA BE UH, APPLYING FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS A DISTRICT FIVE CASE, SO IT'S TO ME FOR QUESTIONS.
YOU HEARD THE, UH, CASE MANAGER MENTION THAT YOU ARE AMENDING THE BOUNDARIES FOR YOUR REQUEST, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND SO YOU ARE ONLY SEEKING CHANGES TO LOT 19 BLOCK FOUR N CCB 3 5, 3 1 AND LOT 22 BLOCK ONE N CCB 6 1 7 0 LOCATED AT 7 3 1 PROB BAM STREET, CORRECT? THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
YOU ARE NOT ASKING FOR ANY UH, CHANGE TO LOT 12 BLOCK FOUR NCB 3 5 3 1 LOCATED AT 1 34 KING ROGERS STREET, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND YOU ARE AMENDING YOUR REQUEST AT THIS TIME? YES.
ALRIGHT, STAFF TO YOU MR. ANA, UM, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THE TWO PROPERTIES? I, I, NOW I'M TRYING TO GO TOO FAST.
STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THE REQUEST AS TO THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT ARE ADDRESSED AT 7 31 PROBAND, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND THEY RECOMMENDED DENIAL ON THE ADDRESS OR THE PROPERTY ADDRESS AT 1 34 KING ROGER STREET? CORRECT.
UH, NO MORE QUESTIONS FROM ME.
QUESTIONS LEFT, QUESTIONS RIGHT.
UH, THEN IT'S TO ME FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UM, THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH THIS APPLICATION WAS THE USE OF COMMERCIAL PARKING OR SORRY, NON-COMMERCIAL PARKING IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
UH, YOU HAVE DROPPED THAT FROM YOUR REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THOSE PORTIONS THAT REMAIN.
AT THIS TIME I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AS AMENDED.
THERE IS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VE DISCUSSION TO MY LEFT.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN BY ME AND WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ELL ROLL CALL, VOTE CHAIR BUSANTE AYE.
YOU ARE HEADING TO CITY COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED.
ALRIGHT, WE ARE MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS LOCATED AT FIVE 19 B STREET.
GOING FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT R SUCCEED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A CONDITION FOUR DWELLING UNITS.
THERE WERE 35 NOTICES SENT OUT TO IN FAVOR ZERO POST THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE, UM, AND GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS DID NOT PROVIDE A RESPONSE.
WE DO HAVE SOME EMAILS THOUGH, I'M SORRY, VOICEMAILS.
STAFF HAS NOT FOUND INDICATION OF LIKELY ADVERSE EFFECTS OF PUBLIC ON THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY OR WELFARE.
REGARDING THIS REQUEST, THE CURRENT R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE POST R SIX CD RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY FOR WITH THE CONDITION OF USE FOR FOUR DWELLING UNITS IS ALSO APPROPRIATE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL BLOCK CHARACTERIZED BY EXISTING DUPLEXES.
THE REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE MAINTAINS THE AREAS RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER WHILE PERMITTING AN INCREASING DENSITY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDINGS OF MULTI-FAMILY LAND USE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE CD CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTS REQUIRES THE SUBMISSION OF A SITE PLAN THAT CANNOT BE CHANGED WITHOUT FURTHER PUBLIC REVIEW.
THE PROPOSED ZONING IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
WHICH ENCOURAGES THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE HOUSING TYPES TO ACCOMMODATE THE CITY'S GROWING POPULATION STEP.
DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON THIS REQUEST AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
[02:05:04]
ALVIN PETERS 1 0 1 6 STATE HIGHWAY 46 EAST BURN, TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE, UM, VACANT LOT, BIG 15,232 SQUARE FOOT A HUNDRED PERCENT.UM, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS RENTALS.
I MEAN, I WALKED IT MYSELF, I THINK.
BUT, UM, I, I THINK THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD REALLY GREATLY IMPROVE IT.
IT KIND OF, UM, SHIELD THE, THE, THE BACKGROUND OF FORT SAM HOUSTON, WHICH ISN'T ENTIRELY BEAUTIFUL, AND I'M A MILITARY BRETT, BUT, UM, UM, SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. PETERS.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YES, WE HAVE VOICEMAILS ON THE SPEAKER.
UH, HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE? ONE IN ONE.
MS. HAWKINS, YOU DIDN'T LEAVE A VOICEMAIL, DID YOU? DID YOU LEAVE A VOICEMAIL? NO.
I, I GOT AN ANSWER TO MY QUESTION.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S PLAY THE VOICEMAIL.
HELLO? UH, 2107 NORTH INTERSTATE 35.
UH, PHONE NUMBER (210) 420-4320.
CALLING REGARDING CASE NUMBER Z 20 25 1 0 7 0 0 2 5 OH.
UH, PROPERTY ADDRESS IS FIVE 19 B STREET.
UM, I, THE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ISN'T SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, UH, ZONING REQUEST.
WE HOPE THAT Y'ALL, THE ZONING COMMISSIONERS WILL APPROVE THIS.
WE FEEL THAT THIS IS AN AREA WHERE IT IS DEFINITELY NEEDING SOME NEW DEVELOPMENT IN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF WALTER STREET.
AND SO THEREFORE, THESE, UM, UH, THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT HAS COME TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING, AND THE COMMITTEE IS ALSO IN FAVOR OF THIS.
SO, AGAIN, PLEASE, UH, APPROVE FIVE 19 BG.
MARLENE HAWKINS, ARE YOU ALVIN? YES.
I HAVE COMMUNICATED BY EMAIL WITH ALVIN TO EXPRESS WHAT I'M GONNA EXPRESS TO Y'ALL TODAY, AND I'M VERY SURPRISED AT THE, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS BASED ON OUR COMPREHENSIVE AND OUR EAST SIDE COMMUNITY, UH, UH, EAST SIDE COMMUNITY PLAN.
MS. HAWKINS, MY NAME IS MARLENE HAWKINS.
I LIVE AT 6 0 1 EAST CARSON, AND I'M WITH GOVERNMENT HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS A 5 0 1 C3 CORPORATION, WHICH MEANS THAT WE HAVE FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO WORK IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR, OF OUR MEMBERS.
THE EAST SIDE COMMUNITY PLAN, UH, WAS ADOPTED IN JUNE 20TH, UH, 2024, AND BECAME PART THERE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE PLAN DESIGNATES NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE AS BEING LOW DENSITY WITH ARTERIAL CARDIO AS MIXED USE.
THE FOUR UNITS, THE FOUR UNITS PROPOSED FOR THE FIVE 19 B STREET DEFINITELY ARE NOT LOW DENSITY.
WE HAVE A MAP, IF YOU LOOK AT THE VERY TOP OF THE MAP, THAT'S WHERE B STREET IS, AND YOU SEE THE GOLDEN COLORS.
THIS COMES, I'M SORRY, THIS COMES FROM OUR COMMUNITY AREA PLAN.
THEY ALL ALSO, THE, THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS CRITERIA FOR Y'ALL TO USE IN MAKING DECISIONS ALSO.
AND SOME OF THOSE ARE COMPREHENSIVE CONSISTENCY WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALSO THE COMPATIBILITY.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON THIS ISSUE TO SAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALRIGHT, MR. PETERS A BRIEF REBUTTAL.
UM, YEAH, I APOLOGIZE MS. HAWKINS.
UM, AND I'M SURE THE PROBLEM WITH MY OFFICE, I DON'T GET ALL MY EMAILS AND SO TYPICALLY I'M COMPASSIONATE AND, UH, I DON'T, I I MEAN, I'D CERTAINLY LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR OBJECTIONS.
[02:10:02]
I, I THINK ANY, ANYTHING CAN BE WORKED OUT.UM, AND THAT'S WHAT I'LL SAY, UH, YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF, IF, IF THE BOARD IS CONSIDERING OR THE COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING NOT SUPPORTING THIS, I MEAN, LET ME KNOW AND, AND WE'LL QUICKLY, UH, REGROUP AND, AND MEET WITH THIS YOUNG LADY,
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. PETERS.
ALRIGHT, THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO QUESTION, SO SORRY, THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE, SO IT'S TO YOU COMMISSIONER LOS FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, CAN I GET THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK UP HERE? SURE, THANKS.
UH, SO AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, THERE'S MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN THIS AREA.
UM, THERE'S TWO WE HEARD FROM TODAY.
I THINK THERE'S EXTRA A THIRD.
UM, AND IT'S ALSO A AREA WITH A LOT OF CHANGES.
UM, I WANTED TO KNOW WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE, WHAT YOUR OUTREACH LOOKED LIKE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
DID YOU END UP TALKING TO THE VOICEMAIL AND AS WELL AS THE ONE REPRESENTED HERE? WHAT DID IT LOOK LIKE IN GENERAL? NO, NO, NO.
I DIDN'T PERSONALLY GO TWO DIFFERENT MEETINGS AND IT WAS, UH, VERY POSITIVE.
I MEAN, FULL SUPPORT, I MEAN, EX EXCITEMENT, ET CETERA.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S, IT'S DILAPIDATED.
UM, UM, I MEAN, ANY SORT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION WOULD HELP.
ANY SORT OF NEW TENANTS WOULD HELP.
UM, THERE WERE, THERE WERE
I MEAN, I PERSONALLY WALKED IT, UH, TO TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT EVERYTHING.
THERE ARE UNITS WITH PIT BULLS.
I COULDN'T EVEN GET TO THE FRONT DOOR.
UM, THE ONLY TWO INDIVIDUALS I TALKED TO IN THE UNITS WERE RENTERS AND ONE SAID, HEY, I'M GOING TO HONDURAS.
YOU KNOW, I'D LOVE IT TO HAPPEN.
AND THE OTHER GUY WAS A, UH, FIRST AZTEC I'VE EVER MET, UH, MET IN MY LIFE, MOST INTERESTING LAST NAME.
BUT HE, HE WAS A, UM, A CONTRACTOR, UH, A TREE TRIMMING SERVICE.
AND THE ONLY THING HE TOLD ME, AND WE TALKED FOR A LONG TIME, I LIKED TO TALK TO PEOPLE.
AND, UM, HE JUST TOLD ME, UM, I JUST WANT IT TO BE TWO STORIES, ALVIN, WHATEVER YOU DO, MAKE IT NOT, NOT TWO STORIES, ONE STORY, I, I DON'T WANT, I'LL SEEM LIKE I'M DWARFED HERE.
I GO, OKAY, WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT.
BUT YOU KNOW, I'M PROPOSING OR THE OWNER, THE CLIENT IS PROPOSING A TWO STORY STRUCTURE, TWO, TWO STORY STRUCTURES, UM, UH, TWO DUPLEXES, A TOTAL OF FOUR UNITS TO BE CLEAR.
SO INCLUDING YOUR STAFF, YOU DID ACTUALLY ATTEND THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS? BOTH FOR THE, MY STAFF DID.
AND THEN I FOR WHICH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS? I'M SORRY, JUST WHICH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS? I DON'T KNOW.
I'D HAVE TO LOOK THROUGH THE NOTES.
WAS IT GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE, GOVERNMENT HILL, IT, IT ROSE HILL REPRESENTATIVE? YES.
AND SO, UM, WHO YOU JUST MET? I JUST MET WHO REPRESENTS GOVERNMENT HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION.
DID YOU GUYS END UP CHATTING BEFORE THIS MEETING OR WAS THIS NO.
AND THEN I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR, UM, MARLENE.
UH, WANTED TO CHECK IN TO SEE, DO YOU GUYS HOLD REGULAR MEETINGS THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT COULD ATTEND TO? DO YOU GUYS HOLD REGULAR MEETINGS THAT THE APPLICANT COULD ATTEND TO TALK ABOUT THIS PROJECT TO GET APPROVAL OR DENIAL? I DIDN'T REALLY GET TO FINISH.
THERE WERE OTHER THINGS IN THE ELEMENTS THAT ARE NOT IN, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE GARAGES IN THE FRONT ARE NOT PART OF THE PLAN.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE SIDE OR THE BACK.
MS. HAWKINS, I'M SORRY, BUT THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOUR ASSOCIATION HAS MEETINGS THAT THE APPLICANT CAN ATTEND TO, HAS MEET MEETINGS, REGULAR MEETINGS OR SPECIAL MEETINGS? WE ARE WORKING ON GETTING A PLACE TO MEET.
WE'VE, UH, USED TO MEET AT ONE PLACE AND COULDN'T MEET THERE ANYMORE, SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET A PLACE AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH TO GET A MEETING THERE.
AND I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA ASK IF YOU WANTED TO FINISH ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT, UM, STATING YOUR OPPOSITION TO THE, TO THE, UM, APPLICATION.
IF YOU WANNA FINISH ANYTHING THAT THE TIMER CUT YOU OFF FOR.
JUST TO STATE IT, THIS SAME EVENT CAME UP PREVIOUSLY AS YOUR CHAIRMAN MENTIONED, AND IT WAS VOTED DOWN BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE DESIGN, THE SIZE, AND THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO FIX UP THEIR PROPERTIES.
IT'S A VERY LOW ECONOMIC AREA AND THEY'RE BEGINNING TO FIX UP THEIR PROPERTIES AND THEY'RE ALL ONE STORY PROPERTIES AND, AND, UH, SINGLE FAM IN ONE STRUCTURE ON EACH LOT.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD, WHAT, THAT'S WHAT OUR PLAN ASKS FOR.
ALSO, THE CEMENT IN THE FRONT AND ONE DRIVEWAY THAT'S NOT APPROPRIATE.
[02:15:01]
AND THE CITY, THE UDC REQUIRES AT LEAST 50% OF THE FRONT LONG FRONT YARD TO BE GREEN.THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME EXTRA TIME.
UM, ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS TO MY LEFT QUESTIONS? YES.
COMMISSIONER DVE, UH, STAFF REPORT REFERS TO, UH, SURROUNDING MULTIFAMILY LAND USES THAT THIS INCREASE IN DENSITY WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING MULTIFAMILY.
HELP ME, UM, HELP ME, MAYBE IF WE COULD PULL UP THE MAP JUST TO, I, YOU KNOW, I, I LOOKED ON GOOGLE STREET VIEW AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT I, UH, I UNDERSTAND.
SO IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE ZONING MAP HERE, THERE'S, UH, SEVERAL CDS AROUND THE AREA FOR DUPLEXES.
THE SIZE OF THIS LOT SPECIFICALLY IS QUITE LARGE ENOUGH TO WHERE IT ACCOMMODATE TWO AND STILL MAINTAIN THE GENERAL CHARACTER.
SO IF, UH, IF WE COULD LOOK ON GOOGLE STREET VIEW FOR THE, UH, THE ACTUAL USES, WELL THAT WOULDN'T REALLY CLASSIFY THE ALLOWANCE, RIGHT? BUT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT SURROUNDING MULTIFAMILY LAND USES, AREN'T WE LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL USES AND NOT THE POTENTIAL USES? SO YOU CAN SEE ON THERE THAT THERE ARE DUPLEXES.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS R SIX, SO THAT MEANS YOU'RE A MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
THIS LOT IS 13,000 SQUARE FEET, MEANING IT COULD BE SUBDIVIDED INTO TWO AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO STICK WITH THE DUPLEXES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
SO THAT'S WHY STAFF WAS SUPPORTING THE FOUR UNITS.
SO DU DUPLEXES ARE NOT, I MEAN AS FAR AS ZONING IS CONCERNED, DUPLEXES ARE NOT MULTIFAMILY THOUGH, OR ARE THEY? NO, IT IS NOT.
THEY'RE CONSIDERED LIKE AS PER, UM, HE WAS JUST SAYING MULTIFAMILY AS PER LIKE MORE THAN JUST ONE.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER DOELL, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS LEFT? YES.
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A STREET BEHIND THERE FROM THE ZONING MAP, BUT THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GOOGLE MAP, JUST A VISUAL OF IT DOES, THE STREET DOES NOT EXIST.
THERE WOULDN'T, THERE IS NOT A STREET BEHIND THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S A, THE MILITARY BASIS BACK THERE.
AND WHY DOES THE ZONING MAP WHAT SHOW WHAT LOOKS LIKE A STREET? JUST PAPER LOT OR DO YOU EVEN KNOW? MY QUESTION IS WHETHER THEY COULD HAVE ACCESS BACK THERE IF THEY BUILT UH, NO, THAT WAS FENCED UP WHEN WE SAW YOU GO TO THE IMAGES FROM THE SIDE VISIT.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK YOU WANT TO HEAD BACK THERE.
THAT'S AN ACT OF MILITARY BASE THAT IS NOT AN ENTRANCE.
THE ONLY ACCESS ACCESS OBSERVED WAS OFF OF B STREET.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S A WEIRD ARTIFACT OF THE ZONING MAP.
UH, THE OTHER QUESTION IS, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S TWO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS HERE.
ONE'S ARE THEY, DO THEY OVERLAY EACH OTHER THERE? THERE ARE TWO, YES.
UM, IT'S GOING TO BE GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE, WHICH IS ROSE HILL AND GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW, WHICH IS MS. HAWKINS HERE.
SO THEY BOTH HAVE, SAY IN THIS SPECIFIC LOT, WE WOULD ACCEPT RESPONSES FROM BOTH OF THEM.
YES, WE WOULD ACCEPT RESPONSES FROM BOTH ASSOCIATIONS.
COMMISSIONER SIPES QUESTIONS?
IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN LONGER THAN FOUR YEARS AGO, BUT YOU AND I COMMISSIONER HUEY ANY MEMORY THAN YOU AND ME.
OKAY, SO WE WE HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE.
ALRIGHT, SO FOR BEING THAT LONG AGO THEN, THEN, OKAY, THAT MAKES SENSE WHY.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHY WE HAD, I THOUGHT IT HAD BEEN LIKE EITHER POSTPONED OR, OKAY, NO QUESTIONS THEN.
UH, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS LEFT? SEEING NONE, GO BACK AROUND THE HORN.
COMMISSIONER ELL QUESTIONS I JUST C COULD SOMEBODY HELP ME MAKE SENSE WITH THE UH, DIFFERENT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS? SOME ARE REGISTERED, YEAH, SOME ARE NOT.
SO WHO'S IN SUPPORT? WHO'S OPPOSED? OKAY, SO WE HAVE BOTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS GOVERNMENT HILL ALLIANCE, WHICH IS IN SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT
[02:20:01]
ORGANIZATION, WHICH IS GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW IS OPPOSED, BUT TECHNICALLY THIS IS GOVERNMENT HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION.SO WE'RE NOT ON THE REGISTRY BECAUSE THEY ONLY ALLOW ONE ON THE REGISTRY.
BUT THERE ARE IN FACT THREE DIFFERENT ASSOCIATIONS FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
GOVERNMENT HEALTH AND AS PER STATE CODE OR UDC, WE WILL ACCEPT REGISTERED CORRECT? UM, IN THE COUNTS, BUT, BUT WE DO ACCEPT OUTSIDE GROUPS.
THEY WOULD JUST BE PUT WITH THE OUTSIDE 200 FEET NOTICE AND, UH, INCLUDING, UH, THE, UH, THE SPEAKER DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, THERE ARE THREE ORGANIZATIONS TO STEP OUTSIDE OF THE USER.
SO THERE'S THREE ORGANIZATIONS.
TWO WERE IN SUPPORT, WILMA'S OPPOSED? NO, WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE THIRD ONE.
SO IF SHE'S NOT REPRESENTING GOVERNMENT HILL TOMORROW, NEGATE WHAT I JUST SAID ABOUT THAT.
GOVERNMENT HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION.
THEY ALL START WITH GOVERNMENT HILL, SO WE HAVE THAT GOING FOR US.
ALRIGHT, MS. SANDERS, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT MS. HAWKINS BROUGHT UP, UH, WAS ABOUT SOME OF THE, WHAT SHE SEES AS DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PLAN AND, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF.
CAN YOU ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS PLEASE? UM, SHE IS CORRECT THAT THE EAST SIDE PLAN, UH, WAS RECENTLY ADOPTED, BUT IT IS NOTED AS URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
AND WITH THAT URBAN LOAD DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IT DOES ALLOW UP TO A DENSITY.
IT ALLOWS A MIX OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND LOW DENSITY, UH, MULTIFAMILY INCLUDING MF 18.
AND SO LOOKING AT THE SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY, EVEN IF THEY WENT WITH MF 18, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE EAST SIDE PLAN THAT WAS RECENTLY ADOPTED, THEY WOULD BE PERMITTED UP TO FIVE UNITS.
ALRIGHT, I'M NOT GONNA ASK ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
I THINK WE'VE GONE AROUND THE HORN, SO I THINK WE'RE DONE.
ALRIGHT, SO COMMISSIONER LOAF, IT'S TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
UM, FOR FOLKS NOT FAMILIAR WITH GOVERNMENT HILL, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON, UM, WHICH IS FINE AND WE LOVE ENGAGED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
UM, I WILL SAY JUST FOR AWARENESS, REGARDLESS OF THE SPECIFIC RULES AS IN TERMS OF UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS', FEEDBACK FOR THE DISTRICT TWO OFFICE, WE WILL HEAR EVERYONE AND KIND OF CONSIDER THEM ALL EQUALLY SINCE YOU GUYS ARE ALL NEIGHBORS.
UM, DUE TO THE MULTIPLE ASSOCIATIONS INVOLVED.
AND ALSO SINCE WE HAVEN'T EVEN HEARD FROM GOVERNMENT HELD TOMORROW, I'M INCLINED TO, UM, CONTINUE THIS ITEM SO THAT YOU TWO CAN WORK TOGETHER.
YOU FOUR ACTUALLY THE APPLICANT AND THE THREE ORGANIZATIONS.
I WANTED TO ASK THAT THE, NOT A QUESTION, BUT MY HOPE IS THAT THE APPLICANT CAN GET SUPPORT FROM ALL OF THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATIONS AND HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
I THINK AS YOU PROBABLY JUST HAVE HAD THE ONE-TO-ONE FACE-TO-FACE CONVERSATIONS ARE REALLY HELPFUL.
UM, JUST TO GET CLEAR ON WHAT'S THE PROPOSAL IS, UM, MY STANCE, I MEAN, I LIVE VERY CLOSE TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
VACANT LOTS ARE KIND OF THE WORST OUTCOME FOR ANY LAND USE.
UM, SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF USING IT FOR HOUSING AND DEVELOPING IT IN GENERALLY, BUT I DO WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT.
SO I'M GOING TO MOTION FOR A TWO WEEK CONTINUANCE IN HOPES THAT YOU GUYS CAN, UM, SPEND THAT TIME TALKING AND GETTING FOLKS ON BOARD.
ALRIGHT, THERE IS A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO MARCH 17TH.
UH, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA IS THE SECOND, UH, DISCUSSION LEFT.
UH, MOTION IS FOR CONTINUANCE TO MARCH 17TH BY COMMISSIONER LO SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, PLEASE.
ALEX ANA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS LOCATED AT 74 39 WEST MILITARY DRIVE, GOING FROM C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO C3 CD GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR MANUFACTURED HOME, OVERSIZED VEHICLE CELL SERVICE AND STORAGE WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAY THE SAME.
THERE WERE 30 NOTICES SENT OUT.
SIX IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED WITHIN 200 FEET IN LOCKLAND TERRACE.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
THE EXISTING C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL
[02:25:01]
DISTRICT IS INAPPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.THE PROPOSED C3 CD GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR MANUFACTURED HOME SLASH OVERSIZED VEHICLE.
SELF SERVICE OR STORAGE IS NOT THE SUBJECT.
PROPERTY IS SITUATED WITHIN A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES.
THE PROPOSED ZONING IS REQUESTED TO ACCOMMODATE THE USE OF AUTO STORAGE FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLES.
A USE ONLY PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.
THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS INDUSTRIAL USE CAN IMPEDE ON THE CHARACTER OF THE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST AND MODERATE COMMERCIAL USES TO THE NORTH AND EAST.
ADDITIONALLY, COMMON LAND USE PRINCIPLES RECOMMEND THAT INTENSE LAND USES ARE SEPARATED BY LOWER INTENSE USES TO BUFFER AND REDUCE THE IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL AREAS PERMITTING.
THE REQUESTED INDUSTRIAL USE WILL REMOVE THIS BUFFER.
AND THIS CASE WAS HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION ON JANUARY 14TH, 2026, WHERE IT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
AND SIR, YOU PROBABLY DON'T NEED THE REMINDER AT THIS HOUR, BUT NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
ZAMAL, BC 7 4 3 9 WEST MILITARY DRIVE.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND, UH, STAFF MEMBERS.
UH, THIS IS THE SECOND TIME I COME HERE.
UM, AS IT, IT SAY THE CURRENT ZONING IS C3, WHICH IS FOR SURE COMMERCIAL AND INTENSE.
WE ARE REALLY ADDING TO IT, UM, TO, UH, MAKE IT AS, UM, UM, MORE USED AS IS.
UM, UM, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO START BY HAVING THE, THE, UH, TALK ABOUT THE PREVIOUS CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY.
IT WAS REALLY, UH, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, OPEN LAND, A LOT OF, UH, TRASH DUMPING PLACE, UH, TRAFFIC, DRUG TRAFFIC PEOPLE, AND HOMELESS.
UNFORTUNATELY, AS IT SHOWS IN THE, IN THE PICTURES, WE REALLY, UM, HAD IT, UH, FENCED CLEANED UP AND, UH, PREPARED WITH LIGHTS AND, UH, SECURITY FENCING.
UH, I LIKE TO REALLY EMPHASIZE THAT I WENT THE RIGHT, RIGHT WAY AND WENT BY THE, UH, CONDITIONS.
FIRST I CONTACTED, UM, HOME, UH, HOME ASSOCIATION.
I ATTENDED THE MEETING AND THANK GOD I GOT, UH, THE APPROVAL.
I WAS IN CONTACT WITH THE DISTRICT SIX, MR. UH, DEREK ALL THE WAY.
AND I, I GOT HIS RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHANGES AND MOST IMPORTANT, I WENT HOME TO HOME TO THE NEIGHBORS.
UH, THERE IS, I BELIEVE EIGHT HOMES IN THAT AREA.
I COULD NOT GET AHOLD OF THE OTHER TWO.
I HAVE A MECHANIC SHOP VERY CLOSE TO IT.
UM, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, OH, BY THE WAY, I'M SORRY.
ON THE, ON THE PLAN, UH, BEFORE I EVEN WAS ASKED, I, I HAVE A 20, UH, 20 FEET BUFFER ZONE BETWEEN ME AND THE NEIGHBORS.
UH, BEHIND ME THERE IS A APARTMENT COMPLEX.
WE ALSO PROVIDED A 20 FEET BUFFER ZONE ON THE RIGHT.
THERE IS, UH, COMMERCIAL, UH, BUILDINGS.
IT'S ALL COMMERCIAL AS NOTED IN THAT AREA.
IT'S REALLY HIGH TRAFFIC, UH, ALREADY COMMERCIAL, UH, MARBA AND MILITARY, VERY CONTENTS.
SO I BELIEVE, UH, IN THE VISION OF SAN ANTONIO CITY, THE HELP DEVELOP THE CITY HELPS SMALL BUSINESS.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.
UH, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS A DISTRICT SIX CASE TO, SO COMMISSIONER HUEY TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, SO I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE, UH, MR. AND I HAD, UH, UH, COMMUNICATED ON THIS CASE FOR SEVERAL WEEKS NOW.
AND I, I DO WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING YOUR TIME TO MEET WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS.
AND BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, RIGHT? LET'S MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE SUPPORT FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS.
SO, UM, AND YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA DO A, UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES.
I DO HAVE A STORY TIME I'VE DRIVEN BY, I HAVE DRIVEN BY THIS LOCATION HUNDREDS OF TIMES.
AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS CASE, I HAD TO FIGURE OUT WHERE IS THIS LOT.
AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW IT, HOW UH, DEVELOPMENTS NEED TO BLEND IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WITH THE WAY THAT THIS LOT IS SITUATED.
YOU HAVE TO GO DRIVE REALLY SLOW TO LOOK AND SEE THAT IF THIS IS GOING TO BE A, UH, OVERSIZED VEHICLE STORAGE, YOU BETTER SLOW DOWN AND LOOK.
SO, AGAIN, I'M ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT HOW, YOU KNOW, BUSINESSES AND DEVELOPMENTS FIT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT AGAIN, THIS LOT IS TUCKED INTO THE BACK AND YOU'RE GONNA GO REALLY SLOW TO LOOK FOR IT, TO FIND IT.
SO AGAIN, I, I DO COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING YOUR TIME TO TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND TALK WITH YOUR, UM,
[02:30:01]
NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION.SO I'M GONNA OPEN IT UP FOR THE REST OF MY COMMISSIONERS FOR THEIR QUESTIONS.
BUT, UM, AND I'LL HOLD MY, UH, RECOMMENDATION AFTER THAT.
COMMISSIONER HUI, UH, YOU ALSO COMMISSION, YOU ALSO WERE EMULATING, UH, COMMISSIONER BOTTLES, BUT, UM, IN ANY EVENT, UH, TO THE RIGHT QUESTIONS, NONE LEFT QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER DVE, UH, STEPH MENTIONED LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS.
UM, THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE AUTHORIZATION SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT CONDITIONS.
SO WHAT, UH, LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS WERE IDENTIFIED? SO THE ADVERSE IMPACTS WOULD RELATE MORE TO THE INDUSTRIAL USE.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A USE ONLY PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
SO THAT'S WHERE THAT COMES FROM.
IT'S, UM, NOTHING REALLY WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT COULD BE ADDED.
UM, INTRODUCING OVERSIZED VEHICLES, UM, NEAR RESIDENCES.
UH, JUST TO, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT WAS ALREADY WORKING, UM, WITH THE COUNCIL PERSON'S OFFICE ON BUFFERING AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT LIKE, UH, DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, WOULD LIGHTING BE ONE OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS MORE SO THAN THE COMMERCIAL USE OR, I WOULD SAY IT'S MORE THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BIG BOX TRUCKS TO THAT AREA, RATHER THAN ANY POTENTIAL CONDI CONDITIONS THAT COULD BE ADDED, LIKE BUFFERING, DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING OUR OPERATION.
UH, SO IT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE.
WELL, BUT SO LIKE, UH, I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMPACTS FROM THE TRUCKS HOURS OF OPERATION, IF THEY'RE DRIVING TRUCKS IN AND OUT EARLY MORNING, UM, COULD THAT POSSIBLY BE, UM, SO WHEN LOOKING AT THIS SPECIFIC REQUEST, THE REQUEST IS FOR THE USE OF THE OVERSIZED VEHICLE AND INDUSTRIAL USE.
UM, SAY IF THIS WAS A REQUEST FOR STRAIGHT I, ONE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULDN'T RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR.
SO BECAUSE THE USE IN NATURE IS INDUSTRIAL, THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE ADVERSE IMPACTS.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER HUEY TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR AND CHAIR, SINCE YOU INVOKED THE FORMER, UM, COMMISSIONER BOWS.
I JUST WANNA SAY, AS LONG AS THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT IMPACT MY DAIRY QUEEN
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10.
UM, ALRIGHT, UH, DISCUSSION, RIGHT? SEEING NONE.
ALRIGHT, WELL, COMMISSIONER HUEY BROUGHT IT UP.
UM, BUT, UM, I GREW UP IN A, IN THE SUBDIVISION JUST OVER SOUTHWEST OF HERE CALLED LACKLAND CITY.
SO ANYWAY, UM, BUT UH, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS BROUGHT UP WAS ABOUT, UM, DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING.
I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT.
I BELIEVE THIS IS IN THE MLLD, SO DOWNWARD FACING LIGHTING IS ALREADY GOING TO BE JUST PART OF THE NORMAL PART OF IT, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND OTHER THAN THAT, I, I APPRECIATE THE OUTREACH THAT YOU'VE DONE AND SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION LEFT? SEEING NONE.
THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10 BY COMMISSIONER HUEY WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM ROLL CALL VOTE.
COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ? YES.
YOU'RE ON YOUR WAY TO CITY COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
UH, ITEM NUMBER 14 I BELIEVE IS NEXT.
ANA ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 14 IS GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 700 BLOCK OF EAST MYRTLE STREET GOING FROM I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO IDZ ONE.
LIMITED INTENSITY INFIELD DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH ALL OVERLAYS STAYING THE SAME.
THERE WERE 57 NOTICES SENT OUT.
TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
SOJO CROSSING HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IS OPPOSED IN SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
[02:35:01]
DISTRICT ONE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE OUTSIDE THE 200 FEET.THE EXISTING I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED IDZ ONE LIMITED INTENSITY INFILL DEVELOPMENT ZONE WITH USES PERMITTED IN NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE.
THE CURRENT INDUSTRIAL ZONING IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA AND WOULD ALLOW FOR INTENSE ACTIVITIES INTENDED TO BE REMOVED FROM RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
ALTERNATIVELY, THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE WOULD ALLOW FOR FEASIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH USES MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA.
ADDITIONALLY, THE USE IS PERMITTED IN NC NEIGHBORHOOD.
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW FOR SMALL SCALE RETAIL AND SERVICE USES THAT ARE ABLE TO SERVE THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE BASE ZONE OF IDZ ONE WOULD ALSO LIMIT THE SCALE OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 35 FEET.
THE SAME HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND ALLEVIATION OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS WOULD ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT AT THE PEDESTRIAN SCALE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M ANIS SHELL WITH ORTIZ MCKNIGHT 1 1 2 EAST PECAN REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, THIS PROPERTY, UM, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT ONE.
MARY'S, UM, NEAR THE PEARL AND IT'S WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS, UH, ABOUT ONE POINT, I'M SORRY, 0.161 ACRES.
UM, GENERALLY IT'S SURROUNDED BY TOWN HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, VACANT LAND, AND THE PEARL AS WELL AS OTHER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY FROM I ONE TWO IDZ ONE WITH USES IN NC.
UM, AGAIN, IT IS SURROUNDED BY OTHER, UM, RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES AS WELL AS HIGH INTENSITY INFILL.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT PROPERTY CATTYCORNER IS IDZ THREE, UM, AND I THINK IT HAS A MAX DENSITY OF 325 UNITS.
THE FUTURE LAND USE HERE, UM, IS AN URBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, THIS IS WITHIN THE MIDTOWN AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN.
UM, THE PERMITTED ZONING DISTRICTS INCLUDE NC USES, UM, AND I-D-Z-I-D-Z ONE IS CONSISTENT WITH THIS PLAN AND NO PLAN AMENDMENT IS REQUIRED.
I ALSO WANNA MENTION THE TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
UM, THIS PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN 2008 AND INCORPORATED INTO THE 2019 MIDTOWN REGIONAL CENTER PLAN.
THIS AREA WAS IDENTIFIED BY THE NEIGHBORS, UM, IN THAT COMMUNITY INPUT PROCESS AS, UM, LOW DENSITY MIXED USE.
AND THEY ALSO WANTED TO SEE MIXTURES OF LOW INTENSITY, UM, COMMERCIAL MIXED IN WITH RESIDENTIAL IN THIS AREA.
UM, AS YOU SAW BEFORE, OUR HEIGHT WILL BE LIMITED TO 35 FEET TO KEEP THIS, UM, AT A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE.
AND, UM, THE NEXT SLIDE INCLUDES A CONCEPT DRAWING OF WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE.
UM, THEIR PROPOSED USES, I'M SORRY IF WE COULD GO BACK.
THE PROPOSED USE IS, UM, SMALL SCALE OFFICE RETAIL, UM, MAYBE SOME COWORKING SPACE, UM, WHICH WE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DEMAND FOR THAT IN THIS AREA.
UM, WE'VE DONE SOME OUTREACH, UH, ON THIS PROJECT BEFORE.
UM, THE APPLICANT CAME TO US IN 2025.
THEY MET WITH THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ZONING COMMITTEE.
INITIALLY THEY WERE PROPOSING, UM, A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT INCLUDED RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY AND PARKING, UH, FOR THIS AREA.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT SHARPENED THEIR PENCILS, WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND CAME BACK WITH THIS PROPOSAL.
UM, INITIALLY WE WERE GONNA ASK FOR C ONE USES, UM, BUT NC IS MORE IN LINE WITH THE LAND USE PLAN.
UM, WE SENT EMAILS TO TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION AND TO THE SOJO CROSSING HOA, WHICH IS NEARBY.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM SOJO CROSSING.
UM, ALTHOUGH THE CASE MANAGER WHO'S BEEN VERY HELPFUL, UM, DID PASS ALONG THEIR RESPONSES TO ME.
UM, I DID EMAIL 10 INDIVIDUALS, UH, THAT ALL LIVE AT SOJO AND DID NOT RECEIVE RESPONSES FROM ANY OF THEM.
TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, UH, DID REVIEW THE REQUEST AND THEY ASKED THAT WE ADD BIKE RACKS THAT WERE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE, UM, BECAUSE THAT WAS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THEIR PRIORITIES FOR KEEPING THIS AREA BIKEABLE AND WALKABLE.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO DO THAT.
SO IN SUMMARY, WE ARE ASKING TO REASON THE PROPERTY FROM I ONE INDUSTRIAL TO IDZ ONE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL USES.
[02:40:01]
IT IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN C.THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YES.
ALRIGHT, MR. PLETZ, ANY, ANYTHING FURTHER YOU WANT TO ADD? UM, I WOULD JUST MAYBE DRAW ATTENTION TO THEIR PLAN AND IF YOU LOOK, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S A ONE, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT SHE SAID, 0.136, IS THAT CORRECT? AS FAR AS SIZE? AND SO LOOK AT THE, THE FOOTPRINT, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO PUT SOMETHING ON EVERY INCH OF THAT.
UM, ONE OF THE PICTURES THAT I PUT UP EARLIER IS OUR DRIVEWAY ACCESS, UH, IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS.
UM, WE ALREADY, AGAIN, I'M GONNA BRING UP MY FAVORITE WORD CONGESTION IN THAT AREA.
UM, AND THE PARKING ALONG THE STREET.
AND IF WE ACTUALLY LOOK AT ONE OF THOSE PICTURES THAT I, I BROUGHT, THIS IS ON A SATURDAY OR A SUNDAY WHERE I WENT OUT AND JUST TOOK SOME PICTURES OF, UM, THE PARKING ALONG THE STREETS.
AND YOU CAN SEE WHEN THEY PARK WHERE SHE HAS HER HAND ON THAT BOTTOM RIGHT.
SO THAT'S PARKING ALONG EUCLID.
UM, IF YOU NOTICE THAT PROPERTY ALSO HAS A REAL STRANGE CORNER.
SO WHEN YOU GET PEOPLE PARKING ON WHAT I'LL PROBABLY CALL THE EAST SIDE OF THE ROAD, UH, YOU GET CARS COMING BOTH WAYS.
UM, I'VE TAKEN VIDEO OF PEOPLE STOPPING AND WAITING AND UH, THEY JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.
IT'S SO CONGESTED IN THAT AREA.
SO THEN, UM, VIA THE 3 1 1, THERE WERE ENOUGH COMPLAINTS IN THAT AREA ABOUT PEDESTRIANS TRYING TO GET TO THE PEARL AREA, WHICH IS POPULAR NOW, UH, THAT THEY FINALLY PUT FOUR-WAY STOP SIGNS UP IN THOSE AREAS.
SO WE WERE VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT.
AND IT HAS HELPED AS FAR AS USE WITHIN EVERYTHING AROUND THERE IS RESIDENTIAL AND THE OXBOW, WHICH IS THE PEARL DEVELOPMENT ARM, UM, IS CATTYCORNER FROM THIS.
AND ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL THAT ARE GONNA, THAT'S GOING ON, THAT PARTICULAR BLOCK IS GONNA BE ON ELMIRA, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE PEARL AREA.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT IT AND GOING, YOU KNOW, IT JUST, THEY SAY IT FITS, IT DOESN'T FIT.
AND THEY'RE THANK YOU MR. PLA RESTAURANT.
UM, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THIS LARGER AREA THAT, UM, GOING, IT'S A AERIAL.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY HERE IN BLUE, UM, HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ON THE LEFT OF THE SCREEN, UM, ARE THE VIA BUS STOPS FOR THE NUMBER EIGHT BUS, WHICH RUNS UP AND DOWN NORTH ST.
THAT BUS COMES EVERY 10 TO 15 MINUTES.
UM, THOSE BUS STOPS ARE APPROXIMATELY 800 TO 850 FEET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UM, DEPENDING ON WHICH STOP YOU'RE GETTING OFF OR ON.
UM, SO PART OF THE REASON WHY, UM, IDZ ONE IS A GREAT FIT FOR THIS LOT, BESIDES REMOVING THE INDUSTRIAL, WHICH WOULD ALLOW, YOU KNOW, MATERIAL STORAGE OR OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING, IS IT, UM, IS SOMETHING THAT CAN KEEP THIS AREA WALKABLE.
IT CAN PROVIDE RETAIL, UM, IN A WALKABLE WAY.
IT'S PRIORITIZING PEDESTRIANS OVER ADDITIONAL CARS AND NOT GOING TO BE BRINGING ADDITIONAL CARS INTO THIS AREA.
SO, UM, THAT'S PART OF WHY THE ASSOCIATION WAS SUPPORTIVE AND WHY THEY HAVE ASKED FOR BIKE RACKS.
ALRIGHT, THIS IS A DISTRICT ONE CASE COMMISSIONER KELLUM TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, JUST SPEAK TO THE RESTAURANT
SO, UM, INITIALLY THEY TALKED ABOUT DOING A ROOFTOP RESTAURANT.
UM, IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
THEY DO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS AND THE NOISE REQUIREMENTS, UM, THAT ARE ORDINANCE WITH THE CITY.
SO IT'S GONNA BE MAINLY RETAIL SHOPS.
AND YOU SAID, UH, OFFICE SPACE COWORKING SPACES.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
COMMISSIONER KELLUM, UH, QUESTIONS TO THE LEFT.
COMMISSIONER KELLUM TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION.
WELL, I APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME AND WAITING THROUGH TODAY.
[02:45:01]
I, I LIKE THE PROJECT.I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE CONGESTION AND, AND, UM, IS SENSITIVE TO THAT.
BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO IMPROVE THE, THE, UH, INDUSTRIAL ZONING TO SOMETHING LESS INTENSE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ONE STOP, IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY IDZ ZONING.
I DO THINK THAT THE, UH, AT SOME POINT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT CREATES WALKABILITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK THAT THIS, THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT MAY BE THAT START.
SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M GOING TO MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
THERE IS A MOTION, UH, FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM ON ITEM NUMBER 14.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINO HOSA, UH, RIGHT.
UH, JUST THAT, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE, UM, GENTLEMAN CAME UP DURING PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE, UH, UM, APARTMENTS OR CONDOS ACROSS THE STREET, TOWN HOMES.
UM, O ONLY THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I SEE THIS AREAS IN TRANSITION WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER FROM THE PEARL.
UM, IT'S, IT'S AN AREA THAT'S CHANGING.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK PROBABLY THE, THE VISION AND THE HOPE IS THAT THE RESIDENTS OF THE, UH, THE TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT CAN BENEFIT FROM THAT.
AND, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY, UH, THE REDEVELOPMENT ON THIS LOT WILL ALSO PROVIDE AMENITIES FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ACROSS THE STREET.
UH, SO WITH THAT, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
I USED UP MY STORY ON THE LAST ONE.
UM, BUT, UM, I AM A LIVING IN AN OLDER NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL, SEEING, UM, PROPERTIES THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO, TO DEVELOP.
UM, THAT'S WHAT IDZ WAS MEANT FOR.
UM, SO I, I AM APPRECIATIVE THAT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT, UM, UM, IN JUST THE LAST COUPLE YEARS TO SEE ALL OF THOSE APARTMENTS BEING BUILT, IT IS JUST INCREDIBLE.
UM, UH, MY KIDS COME HOME FROM COLLEGE BECAUSE THEY WENT TO SCHOOL RIGHT THERE AT HAWTHORNE AND THEY'RE LIKE, THERE'S A NEW APARTMENT COMPLEX.
SO IN JUST THE LAST, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, EIGHT YEARS, UM, SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD LOCATION.
I THINK THAT THE PEOPLE THAT WILL PARK MAY END UP PARKING AT THE, AT OFF OF ELMIRA, YOU KNOW, IN THOSE PARKING LOTS.
UM, I MEAN, WE ALWAYS JUST PARKED OVER AT, AT THE SCHOOL ITSELF AND WALKED.
UM, SO I, I THINK THAT THIS AREA OF SAN ANTONIO RIGHT THERE IS, IS IS A IDEAL SITE FOR THIS, FOR THIS PROJECT.
SO I'M KIND OF EXCITED TO SEE HOW IT TURNS OUT.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, UM, INDUSTRIAL DOES NOT FEEL LIKE THE CORRECT USE OF THIS AT ALL.
I'VE RUN AROUND HERE, BIKE AROUND HERE.
DEFINITELY NOT MEANT FOR INDUSTRIAL, SO I APPRECIATE THE INTENT TO ACTIVATE IT.
UM, THE PARKING CONCERN IS REAL.
I THINK IT'S A GENERAL THING WHERE WE NEED MORE PEOPLE ON THE BUS AND MORE PEOPLE BIKING AND THAT'S NOT LIKE WHAT'S GONNA BE SOLVED HERE.
SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT, UM, JUST, UH, WANTED TO NAME THAT INDUSTRIAL FEELS REALLY NON, UM, DOESN'T FIT.
ALRIGHT, VERY GOOD DISCUSSION.
SEEING NONE BRIEFLY, UH, MICHELLE, I DO HOPE YOU CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MR. PLETZ.
SHOULD THIS GO FORWARD, UH, TO CITY COUNCIL? UH, I AM GONNA SUPPORT IT AS WELL.
I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO, AND THIS IS NOT IN THE PURVIEW OF ZONING, SO EVERYONE CAN YELL AT ME AFTERWARDS FOR BREAKING MY OWN RULES, BUT LOOK AT PERMITTING PARKING TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE PARKING ISSUES IN THESE AREAS AND OTHERS.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 14 BY COMMISSIONER KELLUM WITH THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA.
ALRIGHT, OUR NEXT ITEM IS NUMBER 17.
COMMISSIONER SIPES, ARE WE LOSING YOU? UM, I'M GONNA TRY TO STICK OUT.
MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BEEZ, ZONING PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM 17 IS LOCATED AT 6 0 1 PRUITT AVENUE.
GOING FROM R FIVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO RM FIVE S RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM WITH A REDUCED
[02:50:01]
SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OF 24 FEET WITH ALL OVERLAY STAYING THE SAME.THERE WERE 16 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FA, ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED.
COLLINS GARDEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN FAVOR.
THE EXISTING R FIVE DISTRICT IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED R FIVE S DISTRICT WITH SPEC WITH A SPECIFIC USE FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TOWER COMMUNICATION SYSTEM WITH A REDUCED SETBACK FROM RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OF 24 FEET IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE PROJECT IS UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUIRED 200 FOOT UDC SETBACK FOR A TOWER FROM ESTABLISHING OF FAMILY HOMES, ALLOWING POTENTIAL HIGH RISE COMMERCIAL BUILDING ENCROACHMENT INTO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL ON THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO PRESENT, UH, UH, IS PRESENT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, KEN BROWN, 100 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10, SUITE 1385.
IF YOU WERE ON THIS COMMISSION IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR, THEN THIS WILL LOOK FAMILIAR TO YOU.
UM, WE, WE DID, UM, GET APPROVAL FROM THIS BODY AND IT DID GO TO COUNSEL.
IT WAS CONTINUED A COUPLE OF TIMES.
THE COUNCILWOMAN HAD CONCERNS.
UH, WE FINALLY MET WITH HER AND, UM, AGREED TO WITHDRAW THAT CASE AND RESUBMIT THIS CASE TO ADDRESS HER CONCERNS.
DO YOU HAVE MY, DOES SOMEONE HAVE MY PRESENTATION? IT'S UP.
OR WHAT DO I HIT THIS? NO, I DO.
WE'RE IN A, UH, A CORRIDOR, UH, HIGHWAY, UH, WITH COMMERCIAL AROUND US.
UH, THERE ARE ALSO OTHER COMMUNICATION TOWERS IN THE AREA.
UM, WE DID NOT NEED A PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, LAST TIME OR THIS TIME.
UH, WE'RE STICKING WITH THE RM FIVE BASED DISTRICT.
UM, THE REASON WHY WE INITIALLY, UH, SUBMITTED IT, I'M NOT, UH, AN EXPERT ON THIS, BUT WE HAVE SOMEONE IS, IS THAT THERE'S LOW CONNECTIVITY IN THAT AREA.
THERE'S UM, THERE'S, THERE'S GAPS WITH COMMERCIAL, SINGLE FAMILY AND SCHOOLS IN THAT AREA.
UM, SO THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN THAT YOU LOOKED AT LAST TIME IS ON THE LEFT.
UH, THE NEW SITE PLAN IS ON THE RIGHT.
UM, AND IN THIS CASE THE NEW SITE PLAN.
WE'RE PRESERVING THE SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE ON THE LOT.
UM, WE HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE CURRENT TENANT WHO WILL REMAIN LIVING IN THE STRUCTURE.
UH, WE STILL HAVE SUPPORT FROM COLLINS GARDEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, WE HAVE A SEALED LETTER FROM THE ENGINEER, UH, DETAILING THE MAXIMUM 20 FOOT FALL RADIUS.
UM, AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS, WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT.
UH, THE COUNCILWOMAN DID, UH, FAST TRACK THIS ITEM.
SO WE ARE ON CITY COUNCIL ON THURSDAY.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, AND SO IT IS TO ME FOR QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER DOUGLE, IF THERE WAS ALREADY TOWERS IN THE AREA, UH, WHAT MADE CO-LOCATION NOT POSSIBLE? COMMISSIONERS, UM, UH, CO-APPLICANT VINCE INGER FOR THE, UH, UH, TOWER OWNER IN AT T.
UH, THE QUESTION WAS, WERE THERE ANY OTHER TOWERS IN THE AREA? WELL, I BELIEVE IN THE PRESENTATION THERE WAS OTHER TOWERS IN THE AREA.
SO WHAT MADE CO-LOCATION NOT POSSIBLE THERE, THERE, THE CLOSEST TOWER IN THE AREA IS A VERIZON TOWER, 3,100 FEET TO OUR NORTHEAST.
IT DOESN'T COVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'VE GOT, UH, SOME RF DOCUMENTS HERE IF YOU NEED TO SHOW THOSE AS WELL.
BUT THE, THE, THAT, THAT, THAT'S ALMOST OVER A HALF A MILE AWAY, IT DOESN'T WORK.
SO WE'VE TRIED EVERY VERTICAL OPPORTUNITY.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER DOWELL, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? LEFT.
UH, THIS IS A DISTRICT FIVE CASE.
SO TO ME FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION, UH, WE HAVE HEARD THIS CASE BEFORE, UH, NOTHING HAS CHANGED EXCEPT FOR THE PERSON WHO'S LIVING THERE HAS SUPPORT.
UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD STILL SUPPORTS IT.
I MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 17.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 17 BY ME WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA.
[02:55:01]
CARRIES.YOU'RE GOING TO CITY COUNCIL THURSDAY.
ITEM NUMBER 20 IS GENERALLY LOCATED UNDER THE 3000 BLOCK OF CITY BASE LANDING.
GOING FROM C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS C3 S GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR AUTO PAIN AND BODY REPAIR WITH OUTSIDE STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND PARTS PERMITTED BUT TOTALLY SCREENED FROM VIEW OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND PUBLIC ROADWAYS.
THERE WERE 12 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR OF ZERO POSTS.
THERE IS NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET.
STAFF HAS FOUND INDICATION OF LIKELY ADVERSE EFFECTS IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE.
THE CURRENT C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS INAPPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THEY'RE PROPOSED OR REQUESTED C3 NAS GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR AUTO PAIN AND BODY AND REPAIR OUTSIDE STORAGE VEHICLES.
PARTS PERMITTED TOTALLY SCREENED FROM VIEW OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNED AND PUBLIC ROADWAYS IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE GUIDING VISION OF THE BROOKS AREA REGIONAL CENTER PLAN EXPLICITLY STATES THAT MANY OF THESE COMMERCIAL AREAS ARE INTENDED TO EVOLVE INTO MIXED USE AREAS TO CREATE A VIBRANT CORRIDORS AND SMALL SCALE CENTERS CONNECTING LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
A NEW AUTO REPAIR FACILITY WOULD CEMENT A HEAVY COMMERCIAL PRESENCE DIRECTLY HINDERING THE CORRIDOR'S INTENDED TRANSITION INTO A VIBRANT MIXED USED ENVIRONMENT.
ADDITIONALLY, THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH MAY BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY POTENTIAL NOISE ODORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE REQUESTED USE.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND IF WE COULD HAVE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
EMILY WEISLER WITH KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMAN 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE SUITE TWO 50.
I WILL DO MY BEST TO BE BRIEF.
I KNOW IT HAS BEEN A LONG DAY.
UH, THIS CASE IS LOCATED ALONG CITY BASED LANDING IN THE BROOKS AREA.
UM, I WANNA START OUT BY SAYING THAT PRIOR TO FILING THIS CASE IN DISCUSSION WITH DISTRICT THREE, THE IMMEDIATE RESPONSE FROM THE COUNCIL OFFICE WAS YOU NEED TO ENGAGE WITH BROOKS.
WE HAVE DONE THAT SINCE FILING.
UM, MYSELF DIRECTLY WITH BROOKS, UM, AS WELL AS OUR CLIENT PINNACLE DEVELOPMENT, WHO IS THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS PROJECT.
THEY HAVE ALSO BEEN ENGAGING WITH BROOKS SO MUCH TO THE POINT OF SITE PLAN REVIEW, MONUMENT SIGN REVIEW, UM, AND THAT SHOULD THIS CASE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING FOR CONSTRUCTION, UM, ALL OF THOSE PLANS WOULD GOOD GO TO BROOKS, UM, A CC FOR THEIR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
SO A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT WITH BROOKS.
I WOULD NOT BE HERE, UM, IF BROOKS WAS A CONCERN.
SO, UM, WANNA START WITH THAT ON THE OUTSIDE? UM, THIS IS, I'M GONNA CONTINUE.
DO I HAVE CONTROL? OH, WE GOTTA DO, SORRY.
UM, THIS IS JUST OVER TWO ACRES.
UM, BUT, AND THIS WILL BE RE PLATTED SEPARATELY.
UM, WE HAVE THE ANDERSON TO THE REAR, UM, AND THEN A SPAY NEUTER CLINIC NEXT DOOR.
THERE IS ALSO, UM, WALMART, UH, SELF STORAGE UNIT, HAMPTON INN.
UM, THERE'S ALSO A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL LAND THAT IS VACANT AND UNDEVELOPED HERE.
UM, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO STAFF, WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE, THE GUIDING VISION OF THE BROOKS AREA FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I THINK THIS IS A VERY SMALL COMPONENT, UM, WITH A REALLY LOVELY USE.
SO, UM, WE ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE FROM C3 TO C3 NA.
SO NO ALCOHOL SALES FOR ON OR OFF CONSUMPTION.
UM, WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FUNCTIONALLY FOR THE PAINT BOOTH INSIDE OF THIS COLLISION SHOP.
THIS IS THE ONLY CODIFIED USE THAT ALLOWS THAT PAINT BOOTH.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO REQUEST IT.
UM, SO, BUT, AND I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THE S DOES NOT MEAN THAT A USE IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE C3.
IT JUST MEANS THAT ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT IS WARRANTED AND THAT IS WHAT IS TRIGGERING THE SITE PLAN.
UM, SO THIS IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH, UM, AND I'M GONNA SCROLL THROUGH HERE.
UM, WITH A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND ZONED C3 ALL THROUGHOUT THE BROOKS AREA, UM, THIS USE IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THAT.
UM, WE ARE JUST ASKING FOR THE SPECIFIC USE TO ALLOW FOR THE INTERIOR PAINT BOOTH.
UM, THE USER IS GERBER COLLISION AND GAS.
THEY'RE A NATIONAL COMPANY OVER 80 YEARS EXPERIENCE.
THIS IS AN ENTIRELY INTERIOR DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THIS IS AN ORIGINAL SITE PLAN.
THERE WAS ONE SMALL CHANGE, UM, NOT NECESSARILY ENOUGH TO DEBATABLY WARRANT A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, BUT SINCE I'M HERE, UM, WE HAVE SENT STAFF AN UPDATED AMENDMENT, UM, THAT JUST SHOWS THROUGH OUR PPR, UM, AND ENGINEERING.
WE NO LONGER NEED THIS LARGE DETENTION POND, UM, THAT WAS ON THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN.
THAT AREA, HOWEVER, IS GOING TO REMAIN OPEN SPACE.
THERE'S A LARGE ELECTRICAL EASEMENT GOING THROUGH IT.
SO THAT IS THE ONLY DIFFERENCE.
THIS IS ABOUT A 16,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING OUT OF AN
[03:00:01]
ALMOST 90,000 SQUARE FOOT PIECE OF PROPERTY.UM, VAST MAJORITY OF THE PARKING IS BEHIND THE GATES.
GERBER AUTO COLLISION FUNCTIONS ON AN APPOINTMENT BASIS.
SO YOU HAVE A COLLISION IN YOUR VEHICLE, YOU MAKE AN APPOINTMENT THROUGH YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY, YOU COME AND DELIVER YOUR CAR, THEY MAKE THE BODY REPAIRS.
THERE'S NO INTERNAL, THERE'S NO LEAKING OF OILS, THERE'S NO ENGINE REPAIR, THERE'S NONE OF THAT.
THIS IS STRICTLY EXTERIOR, UH, COLLISION REPAIR.
YOU MAKE THE APPOINTMENT, YOU DROP OFF YOUR VEHICLE, THEY FIX IT, YOU PICK IT UP AND THAT'S THAT.
UM, SO VERY, VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD, VERY QUIET, VERY CONTROLLED.
UM, MOST STANDARD OPERATIONS ARE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, UM, WITH SMALL I I'M HURRYING COMMISSIONER ANTE.
UM, THIS IS A EXAMPLE OF A COMPLETED PROJECT AND THEN I WILL ALSO SHOW YOU EXTERIOR RENDERINGS OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, THIS WILL BE WELL SHIELDED, WELL SCREENED, UM, AND WELL PROTECTED FOR THOSE RESIDENTS OF THE ANDERSON.
SO THERE'S NO IMPACT, UM, ON THEIR NO ADVERSE IMPACT, ON THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.
UM, AND SO RESPECTFULLY WITH THAT, I REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, THIS IS THE DISTRICT THREE CASE.
UH, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA TO YOU FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, SO WHAT'S THE BUFFER BETWEEN PAINT BOOTH AND THE APARTMENTS? IS THERE A SPECIFIC LIKE, UH, 15 FEET, 20 FEET? WHAT, WHAT IS THAT? SO, UM, SORRY.
AND ALSO BETWEEN, 'CAUSE I ACTUALLY TAKE MY PETS TO THAT SPAY AND NEUTER CLINIC.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I CAN NEUTER MY PET, BUT, UM, JUST KIDDING ME IF I SAID, I THINK I SAID THAT WRONG, BUT, UM, BUT YEAH.
SO WHAT, WHAT'S THE, UH, BUFFER? THERE WE GO.
SO LET ME GO TO THIS SITE PLAN.
SO, UM, HERE YOU HAVE A, UH, SIX FOOT WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE.
THERE IS ALSO AN INTERIOR FENCE IN HERE.
SO THERE IS A MINIMUM 16 FEET, UM, ON ALL SIDES.
UM, THIS IS, UH, ALMOST 40 FEET.
AND THEN THIS IS A SI ALMOST 60 FEET ON THE SIDE TO THE BUILDING.
THE PAINT BOOTH IS ENTIRELY INSIDE.
ALL WORK IS DONE ON THE VEHICLES INSIDE.
WITH THOSE DOOR CLOSED, THE DOORS ARE THERE FOR VEHICLES TO COME IN AND OUT OF.
BUT ALL OF THAT WORK IS DONE COMPLETELY INSIDE.
SO, UM, WE HAVE, AGAIN, IT'S 16 FEET FROM THE EXTERIOR PRIVACY FENCE ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THEN THERE IS A SECONDARY INTERIOR FENCE FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY TO WHERE YOU GET TO THE VEHICLES.
THE DUMPSTERS, UM, THIS IS 25 FEET ON THE INTERIOR FROM THAT INTERIOR FENCING TO THE BUILDING ITSELF.
SO 50 AND 60 FEET WELL INSULATED.
AND HOW MANY SPACES, OR HOW MANY CARS CAN, CAN THIS AREA HOLD? SO THIS IS 42 PARKING SPACES.
SO AGAIN, PEOPLE ARE JUST, THIS IS VERY APPOINTMENT BASED ONLY.
UM, PEOPLE ARE COMING IN AND OUT, SO 12 ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE GATES AND 30 ON THE INTERIOR.
SO, AND THEY TAKE ON AVERAGE ABOUT FIVE APPOINTMENTS A DAY.
SO WE ARE NOT STORING, UM, WE'RE NOT REPAIRING CARS, CERTAINLY NOT SELLING THEM.
UM, REPAIRING ON THE INTERIOR, EXCUSE ME, WE'RE NOT DOING ENGINE REPAIRS, THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
UM, SO THIS IS, THIS IS WELL SUFFICIENTLY PARKED.
AND YOU MENTIONED THAT I, I JUST DON'T KNOW, MAYBE FOR CLARIFICATION FOR MYSELF, YOU SAID THEY MAKE APPOINTMENTS.
ARE CARS GONNA BE TOWED TO THE FACILITY AS WELL OR IS IT JUST LIKE, BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THEY DRIVE INTO THEIR APPOINTMENTS.
UM, VERY, VERY RARELY IS THERE A TOW.
UM, BECAUSE ALL THAT SHOULD BE DONE, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, ALL THAT SHOULD BE DONE HERE IS EXTERIOR BODY WORK REPAIR.
SO, UM, THE INTENT IS, AGAIN, TO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CARS ARE DRIVABLE.
THIS IS JUST FOR EXTERIOR BODY REPAIR WORK.
AND I'M ASSUMING ALL VEHICLES WILL BE BEHIND THE, THE FENCING IN THE BACK? YES.
THERE'LL BE NO STORAGE OUTSIDE OF THAT AREA OR COURSE ON THE STREET OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? YEAH, CORRECT.
I LIKE THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE, YOU'VE MADE HAVE WITH DISTRICT THREE AND THEN ALSO WITH BROOKS.
AND BROOKS OBVIOUSLY IS THE OVER LINING FACTOR HERE, I GUESS I BELIEVE, UH, SINCE YOU'RE WITHIN THEIR, THEIR THEIR AREA, BUT, OKAY.
SEEING NONE QUESTIONS LEFT? YES.
COMMISSIONER ELL, UH, TO STAFF CURRENT ZONING IS C3.
UM, SO TO TALK ABOUT WHAT OTHER USES WOULD BE ALLOWED WITHIN C3, UM, WOULD AUTO REPAIR BE ALLOWED BY WRIGHT? UH, MUFFLER REPAIR AUTO? YES.
SO A LOT OF THE AUTO USES ARE, UH, OKAY.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY THEN, THE, THE SPECIFIC REQUEST IS BECAUSE PAINT IS SET APART FROM THOSE OTHER AUTO USES? THAT'S CORRECT.
[03:05:01]
EXPLAINED THE S IS NOT BECAUSE IT'S AUTO CHARACTER, BUT SIMPLY BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE PROCESS FOR THIS USE.ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS LEFT? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL MOTION? SURE.
UM, AGAIN, I LIKE THE FACT THAT, UH, BROOKS IS KIND OF NOT FIGHTING US ON THIS.
I BELIEVE IT'S WITHIN THEIR, THEIR THEIR AREA.
AGAIN, YOU'VE, YOU'VE REACHED OUT TO DISTRICT THREE.
UM, I, I DON'T SEE A, A BIG PROBLEM.
I, I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR AREA.
WE RECENTLY HAD ANOTHER, UH, PAINT PAINT SHOP THAT HAD BEEN IN THE AREA FOR 60 YEARS AND THERE WAS SOME COMPLAINTS AND SOME COMMENTS ABOUT, WELL THIS WOULDN'T BE A LOT AT BROOKS.
THIS IS A MIXED USE AREA AND WE'RE GONNA BRING IN A PAINT AND BODY SHOP.
SO I'D LIKE THE FACT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
THERE IS A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 20 BY COMMISSIONER HINO HOSA.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 20 BY COMMISSIONER HINO HOSA WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
ALRIGHT, THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS
[Approval of Minutes ]
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.UH, ANY CHANGES? AMENDMENTS, AMENDMENTS, REVISIONS.
OTHER WORDS FOR CHANGES? UH, LOOKING LEFT.
THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE THE, UH, UH, MINUTES AS, AS SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER WHITSETT.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PETE RODRIGUEZ.
UH, THIS CAN BE DONE BY ACCLAMATION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION APPROVING THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, SAY AYE.
UH, ONE ABSTENTION BY COMMISSIONER DUVALL MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
[Director’s Report ]
REPORT.WE WILL NO LONGER BE ACCEPTING VOICEMAILS.
THIS MEETING OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO IS ADJOURNED.