* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:05] WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22ND PLANNING, COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER. WOULD STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ PRESENT. COMMISSIONER COOPER PRESENT. COMMISSIONER MILLER. COMMISSIONER WALLER. DEAD. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMANTE. HERE. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? HERE. COMM. UM, CHAIR. PECK HERE. A QUORUM IS PRESENT. THANK YOU. CAN WE GET THE SPANISH ENGLISH INTERPRETER PLEASE? GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GREAT, THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE WE MOVE ON WITH THE REST OF THE AGENDA, I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO, UH, HONOR, UH, EX COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GARCIA, WHO WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, UNTIL THIS PAST, WELL, UNTIL I GUESS TODAY, , UH, MICHAEL HAS BEEN ON THE, OR WAS ON THE COMMISSION FOR 13 YEARS. UM, I THINK HE GOT ON THERE IN 2013, IF I REMEMBER, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT. UM, AND SERVED THE COMMISSION WELL FOR ALL THOSE YEARS. UM, I WANT TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE A MOMENT TO THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE. IT WAS A PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU ALL THAT TIME AND, UH, IT WAS GREAT HAVING YOU ON THE COMMISSION. THANKS FOR ALL YOUR VALUED INSIGHT AND PARTICIPATION AND, UH, CONSIDERATION DURING YOUR TIME HERE. SO THANK YOU. GIMME A ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR FROM COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GARCIA. ALL RIGHT. SO [Plats  ] TODAY, UH, WE'LL HAVE TWO AGENDAS. WE WILL HAVE THE COMBINED HEARING AGENDA CASES ON THE COMBINED HEARING AGENDA ARE CASES WHERE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY, DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY FURTHER DETAILED DISCUSSION, AND NOBODY, UH, HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. ALL THOSE CASES WILL BE HEARD IN, UH, ONE UNIFIED MOTION. AND, UM, ANYTHING NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ON INDIVIDUAL HEARING AGENDA. THOSE CASES WILL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY BEFORE ANY ACTION IS TAKEN BY THE COMMISSION. ALL RIGHT, SO WHAT I HAVE TODAY IS I HAVE EVERYTHING EXCEPT ITEMS 9, 10, 11, AND 12 ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE WILL BE RECUSING FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE HE HAS TO RECUSE FROM ITEMS 2, 5, 6, AND SEVEN. THAT IS CORRECT, . OKAY. AND I ALSO BELIEVE ITEMS NINE AND 10 ARE REQUESTING A THREE WEEK CONTINUANCE TO THE MAY, WHATEVER IT IS, 13TH. FIVE. SO ITEMS NINE AND 10 YES. ARE REQUESTING CONTINUANCE TO, UM, FIVE, MAY 13TH, MAY 13TH. UH, DO WE NEED TO READ THOSE CONTINUANCES IN BEFORE, OR YOU SHOULD. THEY WILL HAVE TO BE VOTED ON, SO, OKAY. WE CAN JUST LEAVE THEM. WE'LL JUST LEAVE 'EM ON INDIVIDUAL. MM-HMM . ALL RIGHT. SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION OR DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR SECOND APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ TAB. PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ? YES. COMMISSIONER COOPER? YES. COMMISSIONER MILLER? YES. COMMISSIONER WALLER? YES. AND CHAIR? YES. MOTION PASSES FOR [Comprehensive Master Plan Amendments  ] APPROVAL. GREAT. ITEM NINE, SOMEBODY CALL COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. BACK IN, IT IS 2 0 6 AND COMMISSIONER BUSANTE HAS REENTERED THE MEETING. JUST FOR THE RECORD CHAIR. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE STEPPED THAT AT 2 0 5. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER NINE IS REQUESTING A THREE WEEK CONTINUANCE TO THE MAY 13TH MEETING LOCATED AT 1 1 3 9 [00:05:01] NOON LAREDO HIGHWAY. OKAY. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OR A MOTION ON THAT CONTINUANCE? MOVE TO CONTINUE? ITEM NINE TO THE MAY 13TH, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BUS DEANTE, AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL. STAFF, PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE COMMISSIONER BOOST DE MONTE AYE. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ? YES. COMMISSIONER COOPER? YES. COMMISSIONER MILLER. COMMISSIONER WALLER. CHAIR PECK. YES. MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE ITEM 10. ITEM 10 IS REQUESTING A THREE WEEK CONTINUANCE TO THE MAY 13TH MEETING. LO GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 3,200 BLOCK OF SOUTH FOSTER ROAD. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTION ON CONTINUANCE FOR ITEM 10? MOTION TO CONTINUE CONTINUES FROM MAY 13TH. WE HAVE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO MAY 13TH BY COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ TO SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MILLER. UH, PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ? YES. COMMISSIONER MILLER? YES. COMMISSIONER COOPER? YES. COMMISSIONER WALLER STOOD. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR PECK? YES. MOTION PASSES FOR CONTINUANCE. THANK YOU. ITEM 11. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS SAMANTHA BENAVIDEZ, PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 11 IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE NOS AND SOUTH SAA PLAN FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 1904 NOS. THERE ARE 47 NOTICES MAILED ZERO IN FAVOR, ONE OPPOSED THE PALM HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GAVE NO RESPONSE. THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO REGIONAL COMMERCIAL TO REZONE TO C3 RS. GENERAL COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIVE ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A TOBACCO STORE, RETAIL, HOOKAH LOUNGE, SMOKING ROOM, VAPE SHOP, OR CONSUMABLE HEMP PRODUCTS RETAILER WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOL, DAYCARE OR INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING. THE PROPOSED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE REQUEST WOULD PERMIT THE ENCROACHMENT OF A VAPE SHOP WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF COLLINS GARDEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, LOCATED AT 1 6 7 HARRIMAN PLACE, WHICH IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH UDC SECTION 35 DASH 3 98 0.02, PROHIBITION OF TOBACCO AND OR VAPE SHOPS WITHIN CERTAIN USES. ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL CLASSIFICATION IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION DESIGNATIONS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. PROPERTIES DESIGNATED WITH REGIONAL COMMERCIAL TYPICALLY CONSIST OF LARGER TRACKS, GENERALLY 20 ACRES OR MORE GIVEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SIZE AND ITS PROXIMITY TO PROTECT TO THE UH, PROTECTED USE. STAFF FINDS THAT IT DOES NOT MEET THE ESTABLISHED LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR THE REQUESTED CHANGE. STAFF AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND DENIAL AND THE APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENT. THANK YOU. UH, NOBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. SO WE'LL MOVE DIRECTLY ONTO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. WE'LL START ON THE LEFT WITH COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. UH, MS. BEDO, UH, WAS THE APPLICANT INFORMED ABOUT TODAY'S MEETING? YES, THEY WERE. UH, HE WAS AWARE HE WAS SUPPOSED TO ATTEND? YES, I SPOKE TO HIM ON THE PHONE THIS MORNING SPECIFICALLY. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER MILLER? NO QUESTION. NO QUESTIONS. UH, NO QUESTIONS, BUT I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. SECOND. OKAY. JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE DO HAVE A COM, A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL FOR DENIAL OF THE REQUEST. AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ. WE'LL CONTINUE WITH COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS WITH COMMISSIONER, UH, WALLER SAID ANY QUESTIONS? NO, NO QUESTIONS. NO QUESTIONS. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL ECHO COMMISSIONER SIEGEL AND COMMISSIONER BUSANTE THAT YOU KNOW THE APPLICANT'S AWARE OF THE MEETING'S NOT HERE THEN I DON'T SEE A POINT IN, UH, BELABORING THE ISSUE AND WOULD SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ? YES. COMMISSIONER COOPER? YES. COMMISSIONER MILLER? YES. COMMISSIONER WALLERS DID COMMISSIONER BUSTI AYE. CHAIR PECK? YES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 12. [00:10:03] GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS AT EITHER GOMEZ SENIOR PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. ITEM NUMBER 12 IS THE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE IH 10 EAST CORRIDOR PLAN GOING FROM REGIONAL COMMERCIAL AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LOCATED GENERALLY AT 37 30 WHITEHILL ROAD AND THERE WERE 33 NOTICES MAILED OUT. ZERO IN FAVOR TO OPPOSE. THERE IS NO REGISTERED AMATOR ASSOCIATION WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FROM REGIONAL COMMERCIAL TO AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL IS REQUESTED TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LAND USE IS CONSISTED WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE PROPOSED CHANGE FACILITATES LOGICAL INFO DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THIS ESTABLISHED CHARACTER OF STANUS ROAD BY POSITIONING COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AT THE PERIPHERY. THE REQUEST SERVES AS A FUNCTIONAL TRANSITION BETWEEN HIGHER INTENSE USES IN THE INTERIOR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH. FURTHERMORE, THE DESIGNATION COULD FA COULD FACILITATE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING AMENITIES WHILE SHEETING SHIELDING RESIDENCE SET SIZE STREETS FROM THREE TRAFFIC AND COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON THE ITEM AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THE APPLICANT LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION YOUR PRESENTATION COMMISSIONER, UH, MEMBERS, UH, SORRY, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONER, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I'M TRE JACOBSON. I'M, I'M, UH, WITH MOMENTUM ADVISORY SERVICES HERE IN SAN ANTONIO AND I'M RECOMMEND, UH, REC, UH, REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER OF THE SUBDIVISION WHO'S ACTUALLY THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO STAFF DID A GOOD JOB COVERING THE PRESENTATION. BUT LET ME JUST KIND OF FURTHER GIVE YOU SOME, UH, OVERSIGHTS ABOUT THE PROJECT. THIS IS FAR OUT EAST, UH, TOWARD THE END OF THE CITY LIMITS AT 1604 AND I 10. THIS IS SITE, UH, THIS IS AN OLD SITE AERIAL. UH, THIS SHOWS THE SITE. IT IS, IT'S JUXTAPOSED AGAINST SOME OF THE MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CLOSER TO THE INTERSECTION JUST FOR A SENSE OF SCALE. UH, THAT PROPERTIES ARE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LESS THAN 750 FEET FROM THE HIGHWAY INTERSECTION. SO IT'S, IT'S REALLY CLOSE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND IT, IT'S AGAIN, RIGHT NEXT TO SOME FAIRLY INTENSE ACTIVITIES. NOW, THE REASON THAT'S NOT A GOOD AERIAL IS BECAUSE IT'S ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. THIS IS A AREA THAT WAS OPEN SPACE AND NOT DEVELOPED AS PART OF IT. AND SO THAT, THAT'S, AND IT, THERE'S TWO, UM, ROADS THAT, UH, ABOR IT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL ZONING, AND THIS IS WHAT THE ASSOCIATED CASE IS RELATED TO THIS, THE OVERALL ZONING THERE IS FAIRLY INTENSE. IT'S C3, IT'S I ONE, THERE'S SOME OTHER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA WHICH IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S OUT THERE IN THAT PART OF I 10. AND AT THAT INTERCHANGE, AND AGAIN, THE DEVELOPER OF THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ADJACENT TO IT IS THE ONE THAT'S ACTUALLY HOPING TO BRING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TO HELP SERVE THE AREA, WHICH IS IN LARGE PART DEVELOPING. AND SO THE, THE ZONING CASE, WHICH IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED TODAY, IS ACTUALLY STEPPED DOWN TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF THAT SMALL TRACK FROM A LESS INTENSE ZONING THAT'S SURROUNDING IT, WHICH IS MORE OF A C TWO, MORE OF A TRADITIONAL, I MEAN LIKE A, A TRANSITIONAL TYPE OF USE. SO THAT POINTED OUT, BUT THIS MAY ILLUSTRATE A LITTLE BIT MORE BECAUSE OF THE HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE, UH, HISTORICALLY PLANS AROUND HIGHWAY INTERCHANGES HAVE A FAIRLY INTENSE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE BULK OF THIS SITE IS ACTUALLY INTENDED TO BE REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ACCORDING TO THE LAND USE PLAN. WE'RE PROPOSING TO ACTUALLY STEP THAT DOWN TO A LESS INTENSE USE TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND TO UNIFY IT, THERE IS A PORTION OF IT YOU CAN SEE, WHICH IS ALREADY PART OF A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UH, OVER IN THE AREA. THIS WOULD UNIFY IT AND, AND REDUCE ITS AND SCALE AGAIN. AND SO OUR PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST IS TO, UH, AGAIN, UNIFY THE SITE TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL. AND UM, I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT. IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS 'EM NOW OR IN A REBUTTAL FORMAT. GREAT. THANK YOU TREY. APPRECIATE IT. UH, WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GWEN VANDERPOOL POOL. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. YES, GWEN VANDERPOOL. MY ADDRESS IS 3 0 1 5 SELHURST STREET, CONVERSE, TEXAS 7 8 1 0 9 2 5 8 8. AND IF IT PLEASES THE COMMITTEE, I DO HAVE THE HOA ADDRESS AND CONTACT INFORMATION TO SUBMIT TO Y'ALL. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND UH, SO, SO THERE IS AN HOA AND I ALSO SENT, UH, HIM LIKE 20 SOME ODD PICTURES OF THE, UH, PROPERTY ACTUALLY FACING IN BECAUSE OF ALL THE PICTURES THAT Y'ALL SAW THERE ARE ACTUALLY FACING OUT. SO YOU DON'T REALLY SEE THE PROPERTY. ALRIGHT, SO THE, UH, SO THERE IS A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND, UH, THE PROPOSED PLANNING WOULD, UH, DRASTICALLY IMPACT THE RESIDENTS OF PALOMA [00:15:01] PARK SUBDIVISION AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IN THIS PARCEL DIRECTLY ABUTS THE BACKYARDS OF THAT SUBDIVISION. NOW, IN THE PROPOSED PLAN THAT HE HAD, THERE IS AN EASEMENT ON THE FRONT AND ON THE SIDES OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE, BUT THERE IS NO EASEMENT ON THE BACK OF THAT WHOLE PROPERTY BETWEEN, UH, OUR SUBDIVISION BACK FENCE, WHICH ARE THE HOMEOWNER'S BACK FENCE AND THE PROPERTY. SO THEY COULD PAVE ALL THE WAY UP TO IT OR BUILD ALL THE WAY UP TO THAT AS WELL. SO WITH, UH, MAYBE JUST PLANTED TREES OR SOMETHING. SO WITH NO BUFFER, UH, NO PLANS TO AMEND THAT OR AMELIORATE THAT. UH, THIS WOULD CREATE DIFFICULTIES WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION THAT SHARE THE AFFECTED PROPERTY LINES. AND ALREADY THERE IS, UH, A NOISE AND SITE POLLUTION AND A LOT OF TRAFFIC FROM THE 24 HOUR OPERATION OF THE GAS STATION THERE AND THE WHATABURGER. AND THERE IS INCREASED TRAFFIC THROUGH THE OTHER SUBDIVISIONS COMING THROUGH THERE BECAUSE THERE IS NO THROUGH TRAFFIC FOR Y COLD ROAD OR STANDARDISH ROAD OR I 10 OR 1604. SO THEY CUT THROUGH THE, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET INTO THERE AS A SHORTCUT. SO OTHER ROADS WOULD HAVE TO BE BUILT AND OF COURSE THAT WOULD BE THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO DEVELOP THAT. SO TRAFFIC IS ALREADY CONCERN LIGHT AND SOUND POLLUTION THERE. AND, UM, WE WERE ASKED, WE WERE ASKED BY THE PROPOSAL OF IF IT WAS TO CHANGED TO THIS, UH, OTHER ZONING CHANGE OR RATING CHANGE, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO BE BUILT ONTO THERE. SO I HAD PROPOSED EITHER THAT THE LAND BE USED AS A COMMUNITY PARK WITH FITNESS TRAILS, UH, JUNGLE GYM EQUIPMENT, THINGS LIKE THAT. OR IF IT HAD TO BE USED SOMETHING COMMERCIALLY, PERHAPS A GARDEN CENTER OR A NURSERY SO THAT YOU COULD MAKE BEST USE OF THAT IRREGULARLY SHAPED, UH, PARCEL BECAUSE AS IT IS, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE TWO STRIP MALLS. AND HE SAID THERE WOULD BE 154 PARKING SPACES THERE IN THAT VERY SMALL AREA PLUS THAT NATURAL GAS PIPELINE GOING THROUGH THERE. SO IT HAVE TO BE BIFURCATED. SO I THOUGHT IF IT HAD TO BE DEVELOPED, A NURSERY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE, UH, GOOD FOR THAT USE OF THAT LAND. SO ALSO ADDITIONALLY, THIS PROPOSAL CHANGE WOULD BE PROPOSING TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE PARCEL TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, IN WHICH CASE THAT WOULD CHANGE THE ZONING ON THE EXISTING HOMEOWNERS LAND UNDERNEATH THEM. INSTEAD OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IT WOULD BE TURNING IT INTO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AND THAT WOULD, UH, AFFECT THEIR TAX BASE. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, MR. JACOBSON, WOULD YOU LIKE A MOMENT TO REBUT? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANNA, I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN ANYTHING WAS KIND OF THE LAST COMMENT IS, UH, ALL THE REQUEST TODAY IS ONLY APPLICABLE TO THE FIVE ACRE TRACK THAT IS BEING CONTEMPLATED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND IT WOULD NOT CHANGE THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT ALL. UH, IF THERE'S PARTICULAR QUESTIONS, UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, I CAN GIVE YOU SOME ANSWERS TO THAT IF THERE ARE PARTICULAR QUESTIONS. BUT I, I DID WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THIS IS ONLY SUBJECT TO THE, THE RATHER, THIS IS ONLY PART PERTAINING TO THE FIVE ACRE, 5.7 ACRE TRACK SUBJECT TO THE PLAN AMENDMENT TODAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THAT IS EVERYBODY THAT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. SO WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MOVE TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. WE'LL START ON THE RIGHT WITH COMMISSIONER COOPER. NO QUESTIONS. UM, YOU HAVE TO HOLD THE BUTTON. OH, . OKAY. UM, WHAT HAVE YOU PLANNED FOR THE BUFFERS? I CAN KIND OF ANSWER TREY. UM, WITH ZONING THERE ARE REQUIRED BUFFERS. SO ANY C TWO PROPERTY WITH DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE REQUIRED ABOUT A 15 FOOT BUFFER THAT HAS TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PLANTINGS AND WHATNOT. AND THEN ALSO THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO BUILD A SOLID SIX FOOT FENCE. AGAIN, THESE ARE CODE ITEMS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH WITH ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IF THE ZONING WAS TO GO THROUGH AND, SORRY, TRY IF I MAY, IN ALSO IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A GRAPHIC THAT WE TRY TO PUT PUT TOGETHER AND WE SHARED THIS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD BRIEFING. SO THERE'S ALSO A 30 FOOT A REAR SETBACK, SO FOR ANY BUILDING THERE. AND THEN THERE'S A, A 15 FOOT, UH, LANDSCAPED AND BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO, UH, WITH SIGNIFICANT TREE BUSH SHRUB PLANTINGS BETWEEN THE TWO. SO THAT'S, THAT IS WHAT IS THE REQUIREMENT OUTTA THE C TWO AGAINST RESIDENTIAL ZONING. SO, OKAY. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL, UM, WELL THIS DIAGRAM ANSWERS ANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD. UM, I GUESS, UH, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK STAFF [00:20:01] IS WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT MIGHT BE DEVELOPED ON THE PART OF THIS PROPERTY THAT'S REGIONAL COMMERCIAL CURRENTLY? SO WITH REGIONAL COMMERCIAL THAT IS SUITED FOR MORE HIGHER INTENSE USES, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE BARS, NIGHTCLUBS, ALSO AUTO SALES, UH, FULL SERVICE, MECHANICAL WORK. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE COMMON ITEMS THAT ARE PERMITTED BY WRIGHT IN, UH, C3 A K, A REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, UH, ZONING OR LAND USE. AND THOSE USES HOLD EVEN WHEN THE PROPERTY ABUTS, UH, RESIDENTIAL. CORRECT. THANK YOU. NOW I HAVE NO WITH THE BUFFER PROVIDED. ARE THERE ANY INTENTIONS IN THE FUTURE DURING PERMITTING THAT YOU, THE OWNER COME IN FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE TO TRY TO REDUCE THAT IN ANY WAY OR, UM, REDUCE THE PLANTING OR, OR THE SIZE OF THAT? UH, COMMISSIONER THE, THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN BASED UPON THE NORMAL SETBACKS REQUIREMENTS. SOME OF THE HISTORIC, I MEAN THE, UH, TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS AND ACCESS POINTS. THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN BASED OFF OF A STRIP OR OF A RETAIL CENTER THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED THERE. THAT IS THE DEVELOPER AND, AND APPLICANT'S INTENTION. BUT, UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER AND I DON'T, I CAN'T REPRESENT WHAT ANOTHER DEVELOPER MIGHT COME IN AND DO. I, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY GIVEN THIS THE, THE WAY THIS PROPERTY'S SHAPED FROM MY EXPERIENCE. BUT I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S, IF IT COULD HAPPEN, ANYTHING'S PLAUSIBLE, BUT I CAN'T REPRESENT WHAT SOMEBODY MIGHT DO IN THE FUTURE. SO. SO IF, IF I MAY, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT KELLY SPOKE TO EARLIER, THE REQUIREMENT THAT A, THAT A SETBACK BE PROVIDED, THE REQUIREMENT THAT A LANDSCAPE BUFFER YARD BE PROVIDED, THOSE WOULD BE REQUIRED UNLESS AND UNTIL THEY WERE GRANTED A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WHICH WOULD BE ANOTHER PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS. SO COMMISSIONER MILLER, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AND SO LOOKING AT, AT THIS CONJECTURAL SITE PLAN, BECAUSE THIS IS, WE'RE GETTING INTO ZONING A LITTLE BIT AND SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF OUR CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT ZONING, BUT BECAUSE THIS IS SIMPLY A C TWO, THIS IS NOT, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE BOUND TO THIS SITE PLAN. CORRECT? THE REQUEST FOR C TWO YES. WOULD NOT REQUIRE A SITE PLAN. THIS IS SOMETHING LIKE TREY SAID, A CONCEPTUAL ITEM JUST TO SHOW. BUT AS WE'VE ALREADY SAID TWICE, THE BUFFERS ARE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ARE REQUIRED ANYTIME A COMMERCIAL USE IS A BUDDING, A RESIDENTIAL USE. CORRECT. SO THAT'S GONNA BE REQUIRED NO MATTER WHAT, NO MATTER WHAT. AND THEN FINALLY THAT, UH, STRIP AT RUNNING AT AN ANGLE TO THE INTERSECTION OF WOLD AND THE OTHER STREET THAT IS THE 50 FOOT NATURAL GAS PIPELINE EASEMENT. IS THAT CORRECT? TRE? I'LL LET TREY ANSWER. YEAH. FOR THE RECORD COMMISSIONER, THAT'S CORRECT. THERE'S A 50 FOOT WIDE, A NATURAL GAS, UH, PIPELINE THAT RUNS THROUGH THAT AND THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION, SO OKAY. AND, AND SO NO BUILDING CAN OCCUR THERE? THAT'S CORRECT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. UH, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I WOULD, YOU KNOW, KIND OF IN CONJUNCTION WITH COMMISSIONER SIEGEL'S COMMENT ABOUT WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED UNDER THE, UH, REGIONAL COMMERCIAL. TO ME THIS IS A, UM, LESSER INTENSE, UH, EFFORT THAN WHAT COULD GO THERE. IF IT WAS, IF THIS WAS DENIED AND IT WAS LEFT REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, UM, TO ME THAT'S BETTER FOR THE SITUATION THAN, THAN THAT. SO, UM, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT. IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS? NOW WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COMMISSIONER SIEGEL SECOND. SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ. STAFF PLEASE DO A ROLL CALL. VOTE. COMMISSIONER SIEGEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ? YES. COMMISSIONER COOPER? YES. COMMISSIONER MILLER? YES. COMMISSIONER WALLER. COMMISSIONER BUSTI. AYE. CHAIR PECK? YES. MOTION PASSES FOR APPROVAL. GREAT, THANK YOU. UM, THAT'S IT FOR OUR REGULAR AGENDA. IS THERE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT TODAY? THERE IS NOT. THIS IS GONNA BE THE FIRST TIME I HAVEN'T ASKED ABOUT PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS IN LIKE SIX MONTHS. ? THAT IS CORRECT. . OKAY. NO FURTHER BUSINESS. IT IS 2 26 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. WE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.