* 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. [00:00:01] HI CHAIR. WE'RE READY TO BEGIN WHEN YOU ARE. OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY, SO A FEW MORE SECONDS TILL ONE. OKAY, IT'S ONE O'CLOCK. GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS JOY MCGEE AND I AM THE CHAIRWOMAN OF THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT THREE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ZONING COMMISSION INTO SESSION. MAY YOU PLEASE HAVE OUR INTERPRETERS READ THE INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THIS MEETING, PLEASE. THANK YOU SO MUCH STEPH. UH, MAY [Roll Call:] HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER GRAY. YOUR COMMISSIONER JONES, MAKE SURE TO HIT ON MUTE. COMMISSIONER JONES. UH, LOOKS LIKE SHE, I DON'T SEE HER YET. I'LL COME BACK TO HER JUST IN CASE SHE WAS GETTING BACK ON. UM, UH, COMMISSIONER KAM? UH, HERE. COMMISSIONER, WE HERE. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? HERE. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? HERE. COMMISSIONER WHITE. I DON'T SEE HIM THERE EITHER. COME BACK TO HIM. UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? HERE. COMMISSIONER HERE. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. HERE YOU TRY AGAIN. UH, COMMISSIONER JONES HERE. UM, YOU MIGHT WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN SEE YOU CAN'T SEE YOU ON THE VIDEO, SO JUST UH, MAKE SURE YOU ENABLE YOUR CAMERA. UH, COMMISSIONER WHITE HERE. OKAY. AND UH, CHAIR. CHAIR MCGEE PRESENT. ALRIGHT, WE CAN SEE EVERYBODY. UH, I JUST WANNA ANNOUNCE FIRST, UH, CHAIR THAT ALSO PRESENT, UH, ON THE CALL ARE SUSAN GWYNN FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. CHRISTIE FLORES FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND MYSELF, CAPTAIN HERNANDEZ FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THANK YOU. AND THE FLOOR IS PRESENT. WONDERFUL. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY, SO PRIOR TO STARTING OUR WITH OUR ITEMS STAFF, COULD YOU PLEASE REVIEW THE FEEDING MEETING FORMAT? RIGHT. SO TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF COVID 19, THE ZONING COMMISSION IS HOLDING MEETINGS VIA VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE. THESE MEETING STANDARDS ARE BASED UPON VARIOUS SUSPENDED PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ISSUED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNOR IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID 19 CRISIS AND ARE IN PLACE UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH AND LISTEN TO THIS MEETING BY VISITING WWW SAN ANTONIO.GOV/CSB OR BY CALLING IN FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3 TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE, THERE ARE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES. THESE INCLUDE EMAIL OR MAIL COMMENTS, DROPPING OFF COMMENTS, LEAVING VOICEMAIL, OR ASKING TO BE CALLED DURING THE MEETING. STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT. STAFF WILL READ INTO THE RECORD ANY EMAILS OR LETTERS RECEIVED. STAFF WILL ALSO PLAY ANY MESSAGES RECEIVED BY VOICEMAIL. AND LASTLY, FOR THOSE THAT SIGNED UP TO RECEIVE A CALLBACK, WE WILL CALL THEM TO STATE THEIR TWO MINUTE COMMENTS. THE SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS NEEDED. WE GIVE THEM BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COMMISSION QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU PLEASE [1. (POSTPONED) ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700031 S (Council District 3): A request for a change in zoning from "C-2 AHOD" Commercial Airport Hazard Overlay District and "C-2 CD AHOD" Commercial Airport Hazard Overlay District with Conditional use for Auto and Light Truck Repair to "C-3 S AHOD" General Commercial Airport Hazard Overlay District with Specific Use Authorization for Auto Paint and Body on P-15, P-16, and P-17, NCB 11166, located at 9931 Roosevelt Avenue and 9915 Roosevelt Avenue. Staff recommends Denial. (Mercedes Rivas, Senior Planner, (210) 207-0215, Mercedes.Rivas2@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] REVIEW THE CURRENT LIST OF CONSENT INDIVIDUAL AND ANY POSTPONEMENT OR WITHDRAWN ITEMS? YES MA'AM. THIS IS CHRISTIE EZ, PLANNING MANAGER FOR ZONING. UH, THE POSTPONED ITEMS TODAY ARE ITEM NUMBER ONE LOCATED AT 99 31 AND 99 15 ROOSEVELT AVENUE. THAT WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. ITEM NUMBER [7. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700012 CD (Council District 6): A request for a change in zoning from "C-2NA CD MLOD-2 MLR-1 AHOD" Commercial Nonalcoholic Sales Lackland Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 1 Airport Hazard Overlay District with a Conditional Use for Auto Repair to "C-2NA CD MLOD-2 MLR-1 AHOD" Commercial Nonalcoholic Sales Lackland Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 1 Airport Hazard Overlay District with a Conditional Use for a Carwash on Lot 28, Block 2, NCB 15587, located at 2310 Westward Drive. Staff recommends Denial. (Lorianne Thennes, Planner (210) 207-7945, lorianne.thennes@sanantonio.gov; Development Services Department)] SEVEN, LOCATED AT 2310 WESTWARD DRIVE THAT WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. AND ITEM NUMBER [16. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700036 (Council District 3): A request for a change in zoning from "I-2 AHOD" Heavy Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District to "MXD AHOD" Mixed Use Airport Hazard Overlay District on 202.807 acres out of CB 4007, generally located between the 11900-12600 Block of IH-37 South. Staff recommends Approval, pending Plan Amendment. (Associated Plan Amendment PA2020-11600008) (Justin Malone, Planner (210) 207-0157, justin.malone@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department).] 16, LOCATED IN THE 11 900 TO THE 12 600 BLOCK [00:05:01] OF IH 37 SOUTH. NONE OF THESE ITEMS ONE, SEVEN OR 16 WILL BE HEARD TODAY IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE CONSIDERED. A NEW NOTICE WILL BE SENT OUT WHEN THE APPLICANTS ARE READY TO PROCEED. FOR THE COMBINED HEARING ITEMS, THE FOLLOWING ARE TO REMAIN ON COMBINED HEARING. NUMBER ONE, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, ITEM NUMBER 12 13 15, 17, 18, 20, 21 AND 22. AND ITEM NUMBER 19 WILL BE ON A COMBINED HEARING. NUMBER TWO FOR A RECUSAL. UM, DID YOU SAY ITEM NUMBER FIVE? NO MA'AM. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS ON INDIVIDUAL. IT'S STILL SHOWING ON THE, UH, PAPER HERE. I MEAN ON THE SCREEN. UH OH, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. YES, THIS WAS, UH, MOVED IN WORK SESSION. THAT'S CORRECT. ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS FOR, UH, COMBINED HEARING NUMBER ONE. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALRIGHT. UM, THE ITEMS FOR THE COMBINED HEARING ITEM NUMBER ONE HAVE BEEN READ. IS THERE A SECOND? OH, MA'AM, I HAVE TO ACTUALLY READ EACH ITEM IN. OH, THAT'S, THANK YOU. WE'RE JUST GOING OVER THE, UH, THE, UH, THE SUMMARY. ALL RIGHT. SO IF YOU'RE READY I CAN READ THOSE INTO THE RECORD. YES, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. ITEM [Items 4, 5, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22,] NUMBER FOUR TO REZONE FROM C TWO HSS TO C2 WITH ALL OVERLAY REMAINING THE SAME. LOCATED AT 29 14 PLEASANTON ROAD STATE EXCEPT PORTION 0.24 HIVE ACRES OUT OF N C B 9 4 8 3. THERE WERE 14 NOTICES, MAIL SIX RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER FIVE TO REZONE FROM R FOUR TO R FOUR CD WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR A BARBER BEAUTY SHOP WITH THE CONDITION THAT PARKING BE LOCATED ALONG BDO STREET. THE ADDRESS IS 8 27 BDO, THERE WERE 25 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM LOS ANGELES HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ITEM NUMBER 12 TO REZONE FROM R FIVE TO R FIVE CD WITH CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT ONE 10 SAPPHIRE DRIVE. THERE WERE 14 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION AND NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER 13 TO REZONE FROM R SIX RIO, FOUR TO R SIX CD RIO. FOUR WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. AND A CONDITIONAL USE FOR BARBER BEAUTY SHOP LOCATED AT THREE 30 MCKAY AVENUE. THERE WERE 25 NOTICES MAILED. ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION AND NO RESPONSE FROM ONE STAR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER 15 TO REZONE FROM C THREE A H 18 A H O D LOCATED AT 86 23 PAR VITAL AND 26 11 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10 THERE WERE 26 NOTICES MAILED TO RECEIVE IN FAVOR. NONE IN OPPOSITION AND VILLAGE. NO RESPONSE FROM VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER 17 TO REZONE FROM R SIX H UC, FIVE A H O D AND R SIX H A H O D TO RMM FIVE H UC. FIVE A H O D AND RMM FIVE H A H O D LOCATED AT 3 21 EAST COURTLAND PLACE. THERE WERE 29 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. TOBIN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. ITEM NUMBER 18 TO REONE FROM R M FOUR TO I D C ONE WITH USE IS PERMITTED IN MF 18 C ONE AND SILK PRINTING LOCATED AT 1 22 WEST FORMOSA BOULEVARD. THERE [00:10:01] WERE 17 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ITEM NUMBER 20 TO REZONE FROM M MS 33 TO R FOUR R THREE WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1138 ALVO STREET. AND ACTUALLY THIS ITEM WE ARE GOING TO PULL TO INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. WE DID RECEIVE A PHONE CALL TO FOR A CALL BACK ON THIS ONE, SO PLEASE DISREGARD ITEM NUMBER 20. ITEM NUMBER 20 IS GOING TO INDIVIDUAL. CONTINUING WITH THE COMBINED HEARING, ONE ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 21 TO REZONE FROM R SIX G C TWO TO I ONE ON LOT P SEVEN B 0.8992 ACRES I ONE GC TWO ON LOT P SEVEN C, 12.5 ACRES AND I ONE F GC WITH A SPECIFIC USE AUTHORIZATION FOR A ROCK CRUSHER ON LOT T SEVEN B 31.948 ACRES. ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. LOCATED AT FOUR 40 PIN ROAD AND 4 46 PIN ROAD. THERE WERE EIGHT NOTICES MAILED. NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. HOWEVER, CABLE WESTWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OUTSIDE THE 200 200 FOOT NOTIFICATION AREA IS IN SUPPORT. AND FINALLY, ITEM NUMBER 22 TO REZONE FROM PUD D THREE TO R FIVE. ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE 1700 BLOCK OF WEST POND DRIVE. THERE WERE 11 NOTICES MAILED. NINE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM RAINBOW HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. MADAM CHAIR, THOSE ARE ALL OF THE ITEMS ON THE COMBINED HEARING. ONE AGENDA. THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS IF APPLICABLE AND AS STATED ON THE RECORD ARE ITEMS NUMBERS 4, 5 12 13, 15, 17, 18, 21 AND 22. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER? SECOND. THANK YOU. UH, ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY, UH, COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE WITH A SECOND MADE BY COMMISSIONER SITES. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER CAIT. COMMISSIONER KAMIT. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL COME BACK TO HIM. COMMISSIONER, WE YES. YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. UH, YES. I THINK WITH THAT COMMISSIONER KAMAN. COMMISSIONER KAMATH. MAKE SURE TO HIT UNMUTE. COMMISSIONER KAMATH. I DON'T SEE HIM ON THE CALL THERE. I CAN'T GET THE MIC. MIGHT WORK. OKAY. WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW. WE CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY. SO I THINK YOU HAD SAID YES. THERE YOU ARE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. YES. OKAY. I GOT, I GOT COMMISSIONER CAIN'S RESPONSE. COMMISSIONER WHITE. YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKE? YES. COMMISSIONER BUS. AYE. CHAIR MCGEE? YES. MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE WITH A VOTE OF 11 TO ZERO AND IF I CAN REMIND YOU THERE'S A SLIGHT ECHO IN THE BACKGROUND, MAKE SURE THAT YOU HIT MUTE AFTER YOU SPEAK. THANK YOU SO MUCH. [19. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700043 S (Council District 9): A request for a change in zoning from "C-3 AHOD" General Commercial Airport Hazard Overlay District and "I-1 AHOD" General Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District to "I-1 S AHOD" General Industrial Airport Hazard Overlay District with a Specific Use Authorization for Outside Storage (Open With No Screening Required) on 10.201 acres out of NCB 12694, located at 306 West North Loop Road. Staff recommends Approval, pending Plan Amendment. (Associated Plan Amendment PA-2020-11600011) (Michael Pepe, Planner, (210) 207-8208, Michael.Pepe@sanantonio.gov, Development Services)] MAY WE CONTINUE ON WITH COMBINED UH, HEARING, UH, NUMBER TWO AND FOR THIS ONE WE WILL HAVE A RECUSAL BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. SO SHE'S GOING TO UH, TURN OFF HER CAMERA FOR THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. ALRIGHT. WE'VE NOTED THAT SHE'S TURNED OFF THE CAMERA AND SHE IS OFF. GO AHEAD. ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER 19 IS TO REZONE FROM C THREE AND I ONE TO I ONE S WITH SPECIFIC [00:15:01] USE. AUTHORIZATION FOR OUTSIDE STORAGE OPEN WITH NO SCREENING REQUIRED. ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. LOCATED AT 3 0 6 WEST NORTH LOOP ROAD. THERE WERE 27 NOTICES. MAILED TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 19. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER JONES? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, ROLL CALL. VOTE CASE. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY COMMISSIONER ANTE WITH A SECOND MADE BY COMMISSIONER JONES. UH, COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? YES. COMMISSIONER HUI? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKE? YES. COMMISSIONER MR. MONTE? UH, CHAIRMAN D? YES. MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE WITH THE VOTE OF 10 TO ZERO. THANK YOU. UM, LIKE TO BRING COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE BACK INTO THE MEETING PLEASE. ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE BACK ON UH, CAMERA AND [2. ZONING CASE Z-2019-10700322 ERZD (Council District 10): A request for a change in zoning from “NP-10 ERZD” Neighborhood Preservation Edwards Recharge Zone District to “R-6 ERZD" Residential Single-Family Edwards Recharge Zone District on 16.29 acres and "MF-18 ERZD" Limited Density Multi-Family Edwards Recharge Zone District on 5.313 acres, a total of 21.6 acres out of NCB 17194, located in the 16600 block of Jones Maltsberger Road. Staff recommends Approval, pending Plan Amendment. (Associated Plan Amendment PA-2019-11600094) (Michael Pepe, Planner, (210) 207-8208, Michael.Pepe@sanantonio.gov, Development Services)] WE'D LIKE TO MOVE TO THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS PLEASE. ALRIGHT, AND JUST TO NOTE BEFORE WE START, WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT WHO WILL BE, UH, JOINING THE CALL LISTENING IN AND THEN AFTER THE STAFF DOES THEIR PRESENTATION, WILL DO THEIR PRESENTATION, THEN WE'LL BRING THE APPLICANT ON. THANK YOU. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM MP 10 E R D D ON 16.29 ACRES AND MF 18 E R D D ON 5.313 ACRES. THIS IS LOCATED IN THE 16 600 BLOCK OF JONES BERGER ROAD. MM-HMM , THERE WERE 64 NOTICES MAILED THAT TWO WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR. 11 WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION. STAFF HAS NOT FOUND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. BOTH THE REQUESTED MF 18 AND R SIX ALLOW FOR A MORE EFFECTIVE USE OF SPACE IN A WAY THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. CHAIR WILL HAVE SAS RIGHT CHAIR IF YOU'RE READY. WE DO HAVE SAS ON THE LINE. YES PLEASE. MAY WE HAVE THE SAS REPRESENTATIVE PLEASE? HELLO? UH, MY NAME'S MICHAEL WITH UH, SAN SYSTEM UP FOR PROTECTION AND EVALUATION SECTION. UH, WE HAVE REVIEWED THE ZONING APP APPLICATION LOCATED AT 16 1 90 JONES BERGER ROAD TO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY WITH MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON 21.6, UH, SIX ZERO ACRES. SO IS RECOMMENDING 35% PER HIS COVER FOR THE OVERALL 21.6 UH, ZERO ACRES. THE FLOODPLAIN BUFFER SHALL BE PROVIDED AND AN EXISTING WELL SHOULD BE PROPERLY PLUGGED. NO SENSITIVE GEOLOGIC RECHARGE FEATURES WERE NOTED ON THE SUBMITTED GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT, NOR WERE ANY OBSERVED ONSITE DURING A SITE VISIT. A PERMANENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE STRUCTURE TO TREAT ONSITE STORMWATER RUNOFF WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. UH, SO I RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH ALL RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE REPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO I BELIEVE SO WITH THE NEW FORMAT, IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, WE NEED TO DO IT WHILE WE HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE ON THE PHONE, IS THAT CORRECT? OH, WHAT WE DID IS WE'RE KEEPING, UH, THE SELF REPRESENTATIVE, UH, ON THE CALL THROUGHOUT THE UH, CASE SO WE CAN READ THROUGH THE QUESTIONS FOR HIM AT THE END. IT'S UP TO YOU IF YOU WANNA START WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE DO HAVE A WRITTEN STATEMENT, UH, FOLLOWED BY VOICEMAILS, UH, FOLLOWED BY A LIVE UH, CALL. OKAY. SO YES, LET'S KEEP THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM SASS ON THE LINE AND THEN THE APPLICANT NEXT. YES, THE APPLICANT IS NEXT. THANK [00:20:01] YOU. OKAY. ALRIGHT. EMILY, IF YOU'RE ON THE PHONE, UM, GO AHEAD PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. EMILY WEISLER WAS KILLING GRIFFIN FAIRMAN 100 NORTHEAST LUKE FOUR 10 C SIX 50. SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO IS ALSO THE PPLICANT, WHO IS ALSO THE DEVELOPER. UM, I WANNA FIRST SAY HOW GRATEFUL WE ARE TO BE IN FRONT OF THE ZONING COMMISSION TODAY AND HOPE FOR SOME GRACE AS WE GET THROUGH THIS NEW FORMAT TOGETHER. BEFORE I DIVE INTO THE SITE ITSELF, AND I BELIEVE STAFF WILL BE BRINGING UP THE PRESENTATION, I WANTED TO GIVE A BRIEF RECAP OF OUR TIMELINE THUS FAR. THIS CASE WAS FILED ON NOVEMBER 27TH. PRIOR TO THANKSGIVING, WE FIRST MET WITH RED RANCH STATE BOARD MEMBERSHIP ON DECEMBER 16TH AND THEN AGAIN HAD A LARGER OPENING COMMUNITY MEETING JANUARY. SINCE THEN, WE HAVE REMAINED IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS THE COUNCIL OFFICE ON FEBRUARY 26TH. THE SAS REPORT WAS SIGNED AND RECEIVED ALMOST THREE FULL MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF SUBMITTAL OF OUR APPLICATION. IT WAS AN EXTENSIVE REVIEW PROCESS WITH LOTS OF COMMUNICATION BACK AND FORTH, AGAIN, THREE MONTHS LONG. UM, AND WE ARE VERY GLAD TO HAVE SAW SUPPORT FOR THIS CASE AS WELL AS STAFF SUPPORT. THIS CASE WAS NOTICED, PUBLISHED, SIGNED, POSTED, AND PLACED ON THE MARCH 17TH AGENDA, WHICH WAS PUBLISHED THROUGH THE PUBLIC ON MARCH 13TH. IT IS NOW MAY 5TH, HAPPY DE ALMOST EIGHT WEEKS SINCE THE CASE AND ALL OF THE BACKUP DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING THE SONGS REPORT WAS PUBLISHED ONLINE FOR THE GREATER COMMUNITY BETWEEN A THREE MONTH REVIEW BY SIDE CONSTANT COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE COVID 19 CRISIS HALTING OUR HEARING, WE ARE ECSTATIC TO FINALLY BRING THIS FORWARD FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY. HAD WE BEEN ABLE TO PROCEED ON MARCH 17TH AS ORIGINALLY PLANNED, UM, THIS CASE COULD HAVE BEEN SET FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION THIS THURSDAY. SO IT HAS BEEN A VERY LONG, UM, VERY INVOLVED FIVE PLUS MONTHS SINCE I'M WORKING ON THIS CASE AND THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF WORK DONE THIS FAR. I WILL DO MY ABSOLUTE BEST TO MAKE THIS PRESENTATION MUCH MORE BRIEF THAN THE TIME IT TOOK TO GET HERE THIS TIME TODAY. UM, BUT I HOPE I BEGAN TO HAVE PROVIDED ENOUGH INFORMATION, UM, AND REASONING TO RESPECTFULLY HAVE GARNERED YOUR SUPPORT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. OKAY, GOOD. JUST TELL HER WHICH SLIDE TO GO TO AND WE'LL GO TO IT. OKAY. NUMBER TWO, SLIDE PLEASE. OKAY, GO AHEAD. HEY, THIS IS JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AS YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD FROM STAFF AND SIZE, THIS IS A 21.6 ACRE SITE LOCATED IN THE 16,000 BLOCKS OF JONES MOSSBERG SOUTH OF REDLAND ROAD. AS CODE SETS THE THRESHOLD OF DWELLING UNITS AT 125 TO REQUIRE SECONDARY ACCESS POINTS. AND THIS PROJECT IN TOTAL WOULD PRESUMABLY DO APPROXIMATELY 80 TOTAL UNITS ACROSS ALL 22 ACRES ACRES. WE ARE STRUCTURING PRIMARY ACCESS ALONG JIM MUSBURGER AND THAT WILL BE SHOWN IN JUST A FEW SLIDES. WE ARE ADJACENT TO REDLAND RANCH ESTATE, BUT THERE IS NO VEHICULAR CONNECTION BETWEEN OUR TWO DEVELOPMENTS, MEANING THAT BY DOING THIS PROJECT, WE WILL NOT BE INCREASING ANY TRAFFIC WITHIN THEIR EXISTING SUBDIVISION. AS WE CAN SEE, TRAFFIC FLOWS SOUTH, UM, ALONG DOWN TO THOUSAND OAK AND GO NORTH TOWARDS AND 1604. THERE ARE A LOT OF SURROUNDING USES. UM, PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE ZONED R SIX AND R FIVE. WE'RE NEAR THE REDLAND OAK COMMUNITY CHURCH JUST UP NORTHWEST OFF OF REDLAND IS THE JUST POT SITE AND THE FOOD TESTING LAB. AND THERE ARE THREE MAJOR SCHOOLS, UM, PRETTY MUCH IN LESS THAN HALF A MILE FROM US. REDLAND OAKS ELEMENTARY, THROUGH SCHOOL, MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND THE GREAT HEARTS CAMPUS. THIS IS A HY-VEE SOUGHT ACTOR COMMUNITY WITH WONDERFUL AMENITIES AND GREAT MARKET INTEREST. BUT AS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IN THIS MAP, THE PROPERTY IS VERY ALY SHAPED. IT IS LIKE A JIGSAW PUZZLE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, AND I'M SURE MANY OF US ARE FAMILIAR WITH PUZZLES THESE DAYS. UM, SO MAKING EVERYTHING FIT AND WORK TOGETHER SEAMLESSLY IS BEEN NO EASY FEAT. THIS SITE IS INCREDIBLY BEAUTIFUL AS IT IS TODAY. THERE'S A LOT OF NATURAL VEGETATION AND IT'S ALMOST 22 ACRES INSIDE. HOWEVER, IT HAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UNIQUE FEATURES THAT MAKES DEVELOPING IT AS CURRENTLY ZONED. VERY DIFFICULT. WE HAVE WORKED VERY HARD BEFORE AND BEEN FILING THIS APPLICATION TO DESIGN A PROJECT THAT EMBRACES THOSE UNIQUE FEATURES [00:25:01] AND RESULTS IN A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT DELICATELY AND PURPOSELY FIT WITHIN THE EXISTING SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS. SOME OF THOSE FEATURES INCLUDE BEING ENTIRELY OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, HAVING A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN BY STEP, A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VASTLY UNDERDEVELOPED, COMPLETELY UNDEVELOPED AND OVERGROWN. THE VEGETATION CREATING AN OVERALL NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE DRAINAGE FLOW FOR THIS ENTIRE AREA. AND AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, ITS SHAPE IS A STRUGGLE TO BEGIN WITH. UH, SLIDE NUMBER THREE, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY IN 1994 AND ZONED RA IN 1996. THAT RA WAS THE RESIDENCE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT, WHICH WAS APPROPRIATE IN THE NINETIES WHEN THIS WAS PRIMARILY USED AS A HORSE FARM AND AT A HOMESTEAD AND MANY STABLES THAT USE HAS BEEN COME AND GONE AND IT HAS REMAINED VACANT AND UNDEVELOPED FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. THE CURRENT NP 10 WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE 2001 U D C CONVERSION OF THE RA AND THAT'S REALLY IT. THE CURRENT MP 10 WAS NOT DONE AS A MEANS OF BETTER CONSERVING LAND OVER THE RECHARGE OR ANYTHING ELSE. IT WAS A CONVERSION FROM A ZONING DISTRICT THAT NO LONGER EXISTS AND AS STAFF OUTLINED, UH, THE CURRENT MP 10 IS NO LONGER APPROPRIATE. BASED ON THE EXTENSIVE AND ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THIS OVERALL LARGER COMMUNITY, WE ARE PROPOSING TODAY A DUAL DISTRICT FREE DON THE MAJORITY BEING 16.3 ACRES OF R SIX. GIVEN THE PATTERN OF R FIVE AND R SIX FOR SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS REQUEST IS FAR MORE CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE FOR THE COMMUNITY. OVERALL. THE OTHER 5.3 ACRES IS BEING PROPOSED AS M MS 18. THE COMMUNITY, BY AND LARGE HAS MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TRADITIONAL APARTMENTS AND WE HAVE COMMITTED THEM AS WELL AS TO A COUNCIL OFFICE NOT TO BUILD ANY APARTMENTS IN THE M F 18 PIECE. INSTEAD, WE ARE PROPOSING A HANDFUL OF DETACHED SMALL LOT GARDEN STYLE TOWN HOMES THAT ARE TRANSACTIONALLY DIFFERENT THAN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THE R SIX, MEANING A CONDO REGIME TYPE OF TRANSACTION. THE MF 18 AS PROPOSED AND OUTLINED OF STAFF REPORT AS WELL AS APPROVED BY SIDE, SERVES AS A BEAUTIFUL BUFFER BETWEEN JONES MOSPER, WHICH IS A LARGE THOROUGHFARE AND THE PROPOSED AND EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY THAT SET FURTHER BACK INTO THE OVERALL PROPERTY ALIGNING WITH THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS AREA. SOMETHING TO NOTE THE USE OF PER THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES IN NP PEN AND THE REQUESTED R SIX ARE THE EXACT SAME. THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE IN THE CURRENT VERSUS PROPOSED ZONING IS LOP SIZE. IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE OUR DESIGN, WHICH YOU'LL SEE SHORTLY, THE FLEXIBILITY TO CONSTRUCT LOSS AT A MINIMUM OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET VERSUS 10,000 SQUARE FEET IS CRITICAL IN THE SAME BREATH, THE R SIX IS FAR MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. WE HAVE R FIVE AND R SIX ON BOTH SIDES AS JONES MALBOROUGH FOR THESE ESTABLISHED COMMUNITIES. THE MF 18 ACHIEVES THAT PLANNING PRINCIPLE GOAL OF AIR CHECKING DENSITY. BUT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DOING APARTMENTS AND WE'RE DOING A HANDFUL OF GARDEN TOWN OWNED, WE ARE NOT FOCUSED ON GOUGING DENSITY WITH THIS REQUEST. WE'RE DOING THIS REQUEST AND MAKING THIS REQUEST TO BALANCE OUT NOT ONLY THE PRESERVATION OF THE NATURAL FEATURES OF THIS SITE, BUT ALSO WORKING WITHIN THE RESTRAINTS OF DOGS. RECOMMENDED 35% INAPPROPRIATE COVER LIMITATION AS WELL AS CREATING A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT FITS ON THIS PROPERTY AND SNUGGLED RIGHT IN TO THESE SURROUNDING USES AND ZONING. UH, SLIDE FOUR PLEASE. ALRIGHT, GO AHEAD. TO BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE OUR PROJECT GOALS, YOU'VE KIND OF BROKEN THEM DOWN INTO FOUR CATEGORIES. THE FIRST IS TO CREATE A COHESIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND IT. THAT OF PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AS WELL AS NOW A FEW GARDEN STYLE TOWN HOMES. GIVEN THE MARKET INTEREST IN THIS COMMUNITY AS WELL AS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT KIND OF BUYERS WITH DIFFERENT AGENDAS, WE WANT TO PROVIDE A DIVERSE PRODUCT PORTFOLIO TO REACH ALL OF THOSE DEMOGRAPHICS. SO FROM FAMILY TO SINGLE BUYERS TO EMPTY NESTERS, WE WANT TO COVER EVERYONE AND GIVE THEM AN OPTION [00:30:01] TO LIVE IN THIS AREA WHERE THERE IS A HUGE INTEREST IN ADDITION TO THE ONSITE DETENTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE ARE GONNA PROVIDE TO MITIGATE OUR OWN RUNOFF, WHICH IS REQUIRED. WE HAVE DONE EXTENSIVE DRAINAGE STUDIES AS PART OF OUR DESIGN PROCESS OVER THE LAST FIVE PLUS MONTHS. PART OF THAT EFFORT WILL INCLUDE CRITICAL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO RECTIFY EXISTING DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT WHALE OF THE RESIDENTS HAS SHOWN US VIA VIDEO AND PHOTOS OF WHAT WATER LOOKS LIKE IN THIS AREA AFTER BIG RAIN. AND AS MUCH AS WE LOVE HOW BEAUTIFUL THIS SITE IS IN ITS CURRENT NATURAL STATE, THERE IS NO CONTROL TO GUIDE THE STORMWATER INTO ITS PROPER CHANNEL. AS IT STANDS NOW, I AM NOT AN ENGINEER. WE HAVE OUR ENGINEER ON THE LINE. UM, IF THERE ARE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME. BUT I DO KNOW THAT PART OF OUR FIX IS A COMPLETELY EARTHEN DRAINAGE CHANNEL THAT WILL HELP CONTROL THE WATER AS IT'S INTENDED TO BE CONTROLLED. THAT FLOWS CURRENTLY, IT FLOWS CORRECTLY THROUGH THE FLOOD PLAIN INTO MUD CREEK WATER DRAINS FROM THE NORTH TO THE SOUTH HERE. AND WE WANT IT TO FLOW EXACTLY WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO FLOW AND NOT CONTINUE TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE RESIDENTS AROUND US. OUR LAST TWO GOALS ARE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT AND PART OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING TO LEAN INTO THE NATURAL BEAUTY OF THIS PROPERTY. AS YOU'LL SEE, WE HAVE A LARGE AMOUNT OF PRESERVED OPEN SPACE AND ARE WORKING TO RESTORE AND PRESERVE THOSE NATURAL FEATURES LIKE SO THERE IS A LARGE POND ON SITE AS WELL AS SAVING TREES AND ALLOWING FOR, YOU KNOW, THE HABITAT. THERE ARE A LOT OF DEERS AND RABBITS THAT ROAM ON THIS PROPERTY AND WE WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SPACE TO DO THAT. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE ARE DOING ALL OF IT, ALL FOUR OF THESE MAJOR THINGS WITHIN THE CONFINES OF SAS. 35% IN PREVIOUS COVER LIMITATIONS, MEANING 65% PERVIOUS COVER FOR THE OVERALL PROPERTY, WHICH WILL GO EXTRAORDINARY, WILL BE LONG WAY TO PRESERVING OUR WATER TABLE AND OUR AQUIFER. UH, SLIDE FIVE, PLEASE GO AHEAD. NOW WHAT YOU'VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR, THIS IS OUR LOT LAYOUT ASH SHOWN AND WHAT WE'VE PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY SHOWING A TOTAL OF 68 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. 67 OF THOSE LOTS WILL BE FOR SALE. THE LARGER LOT AT THE NORTH END KIND AT THE TOP OF THE MAP IS WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER SLASH DEVELOPER SLASH APPLICANT CURRENTLY LIVES. HE RESTORED THE ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD AND HAS MADE HIS HOME HERE ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE HE REALLY LOVES IT. THIS IS A HUGE PLUS IN THE COMMUNITY. THE PERSON THAT OWNS THIS PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO BE DOING THE DEVELOPMENT LIVES ON SITE, HE HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY ACCESSIBLE AND RESPONSIVE OVER THE LAST ALMOST SIX MONTHS AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE THERE ON SITE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. THERE IS NO NEED TO HAVE TO CALL AND TRACK DOWN SOMEONE TO COME OUT THERE BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHY THERE'S A TRACTOR. HE'S GOING TO BE THERE. UM, AND IF THIS CASE AND THIS PROJECT WAS REALLY ABOUT DENSITY, ABOUT SQUEEZING IN AS MANY HOMES AS POSSIBLE, HE WOULD'VE TORN DOWN THE OLD HOMESTEAD AND CARVED OUT MANY MORE LOCKS. I SEE AT LEAST FIVE, PROBABLY MORE. UM, AND HE CERTAINLY WOULDN'T LIVE THERE. SO NOT ONLY IS HE AS WELL AS I AM PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS PROJECT, HE ALSO REALLY RESPECTS THE SITE AND THAT'S WHY HE'S CHOSEN TO LIVE HERE AS WELL AS HELP OTHERS LIVE IN THIS AREA. THE VIEW OF THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS PRIMARILY VEHICULAR ACCESS THROUGHOUT THE SITE WITH PLENTY OF ROOM TO QUEUE CARS, UM, WITHOUT CREATING A TRAFFIC ISSUE ON JONES MALL RIVER. AGAIN, THERE IS NO VEHICULAR ACCESS THROUGH RULAND RANCH ESTATE, MEANING NO INCREASE TO THEIR INTERNAL TRAFFIC AND THIS IS JUST THE ROAD TO SERVE THIS DEVELOPMENT AND KEEP IT MOVING. YOU CAN ALSO SEE, UM, THIS IS A LITTLE TOUGHER TO SEE, BUT YOU CAN ALSO KIND OF SEE HOW THE INTERNAL LOTS AS SIZE AND ORIENTED WITHIN OUR DEVELOPMENT ARE VERY SIMILAR, IF NOT EXACTLY COMPARABLE TO THE INTERNAL LOTS OF REDLAND RANCH ESTATE. AND IN A LARGER MAP YOU CAN SEE HOW THEY'RE VERY COMPARABLE WITH ALL THE OTHER SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THERE IS A VARIATION OF LOT SIZES. AS WE ALL KNOW, THE ZONING DISTRICT'S PLACE PROVIDES A MINIMUM LOT YEAR REQUESTING OUR SIX FOR THESE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, MEANING A MINIMUM OF 6,000 SQUARE FOOT. AND WHILE THERE ARE SEVERAL LOTS IN HERE THAT ARE MUCH CLOSER TO THAT MINIMUM OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET, THERE ARE ALSO PLENTY OF LOTS THAT ARE MUCH LARGER [00:35:02] IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. KIND OF ON THE LOWER RIGHT HAND SIDE, YOU CAN SEE ALSO A LARGE CORNER LOT THAT IT WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED, IT'S NOT NUMBERED. UM, AND THAT IS FOR ONSITE DETENTION TO MITIGATE ANY AND ALL RUNOFFS FROM OUR PROJECT. AS YOU ALL KNOW IN THE DRAINAGE ORDINANCE, WE CANNOT CREATE MORE RUNOFF. WE CAN ALERT THAN WHAT IT IS PREVIOUS AS PRE-DEVELOPED. SO WE CAN EITHER MAKE IT THE SAME RUNOFF OR WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER AND WE ARE CHOOSING TO MAKE IT BETTER OVERALL. IF WE ARE TO DISCUSS DENSITY AND LOOK AT THE PROPOSED 68 SINGLE FAMILY LOCKS, THE BASIC CALCULATIONS OF THIS WOULD EQUATE TO APPROXIMATELY FOUR UNITS PER ACRE THAT IS THE SAME DENSITY AS ALLOWED UNDER MP 10. I'M SURE SOMEONE IS WONDERING IF WE CAN ACHIEVE THE SAME DENSITY WITH R SIX AS MP 10, WHY NOT LEAVE IT ALONE? THAT IS BECAUSE WE ARE REQUESTING R SIX AS IT IS OVERWHELMINGLY MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THIS COMMUNITY. MOST OF THESE SUBDIVISIONS, IF NOT ALL OF THEM IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, ARE R FIVE OR R SIX. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS SITE PLAN, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT WE HAVE SHOWN, THE COMMUNITY SHOWN THE COUNCIL OFFICE, THIS IS NOT A PROJECT FOCUSED ON GOUGING DENSITY. IT IS INTENDED TO FIT A COMPARABLE PRODUCT IN A ROUGHLY CONFIGURED AND SHAPED SITE. ADHERE TO ALL OF THE REGULATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, INCLUDING THE 35% IN COVER LIMITS. ER SIX ALLOWS US TO CREATE A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AS LAID OUT HERE WITH MINIMAL DENSITY ALMOST EXACTLY AS WHAT IS PERMITTED NOW, BUT THAT FITS THIS SHAPE WELL AND KIND OF FLEE IN RIGHT THERE AND FITS EXACTLY HOW IT CAN. AND THEN THIS IS DONE THOUGH IN A WAY THAT YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH OPEN SPACE WE ARE WORKING ON PRESERVING AND THIS ALLOWS FOR A LOT MORE TREES TO BE PRESERVED AS WELL. SLIDE SIX, PLEASE GO AHEAD. BUT THIS IS A ZOOMED IN VERSION OF THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE M F 18. EVERYTHING OUTLINED IN BLUE IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO BE REZONED TO M F 18. AS I'VE MENTIONED, THE COMMUNITY HAS MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT WANT APARTMENTS. SO WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO APARTMENTS AND HAVE FOCUSED ON GARDEN STYLE TOWN HOMES TO ACHIEVE OUR DESIRE TO PROVIDE A MIXED PRODUCT OF A COHESIVE DEVELOPMENT THAT DOESN'T BRING UNWANTED DENSITY. WE ARE ANTICIPATING PROBABLY FOUR TO EIGHT TOWN HOMES IN THIS HATCH AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE KIND OF ON THE BOTTOM CORNER, THE HATCH AREA, THAT'S ABOUT HOW MUCH LAND WE HAVE LEFT DEVELOPED, VERY MINIMAL AND MUCH LESS DENSE THAN WE COULD ACHIEVE WITH APARTMENTS AND WE ARE FULLY COMMITTED TO THAT PLAN. FOR OUR ARGUMENT'S SAKE, I'VE DONE THE DENSITY CALCULATION FOR AN EVEN NUMBER OF A TOTAL OF 80 UNITS AT 68 OF THE PLANNED SINGLE FAMILY LOSS AND A MAXIMUM OF 12. GRANTED, THERE'S A VERY GOOD CHANCE WE WILL NOT HIT THAT MAXIMUM, BUT KNOWING 80 IS A GOOD NUMBER, WE'RE NOT GONNA GO OVER THAT. SHOULD WE ACHIEVE FULL 80 UNITS ON THIS 21.6 ACRES, OUR DENSITY WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 3.7 UNITS AN ACRE. AGAIN, MP 10 ALLOWS FOR FOUR UNITS AN ACRE R SIX ALLOWS FOR SEVEN UNITS AN ACRE AND S 18 IS OBVIOUSLY 18 UNITS AN ACRE. IF WE WERE ATTEMPTING TO MAXIMIZE DENSITY HERE, WE WOULD BE PUSHING FOR CLOSER TO WELL OVER A HUNDRED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND ALMOST A HUNDRED APARTMENTS. THAT'S OVER 200 UNITS WE COULD DO ON SITE. SO THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DOING. THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THE DEVELOPER OF THE APPLICANT HAS MADE THIS PLAN AND COMMITTED WITH THIS PLAN. THIS IS WHAT HE WANTS TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY. WE HAVE UTILIZED THIS PLAN WITH THOUGHT DURING THEIR REVIEW PROCESS AND OVER THE LAST FIVE MONTHS WITH THE COMMUNITY. SO IN ADDITION TO BEING THE PROPERTY OWNER, APPLICANT DEVELOPER, UM, IT'S ALSO A RESIDENT ON THIS PLAN, SO THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO SQUEEZE OUT AS MUCH DENSITY ON SITE AS POSSIBLE. THIS IS A PLAN THAT IS CAREFULLY, PASSIONATELY, DELIBERATELY DESIGNED TO MATCH THESE EXISTING COMMUNITIES AND PROVIDE A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT SITS JUST FITS RIGHT IN THE KIND OF TWO FINGER WIDE RIBBON THAT YOU CAN SEE BY DISSECTING THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD [00:40:01] LANE. WE SUBMITTED OUR PULL MARKER REVIEW, WHICH TAKES, UM, I THINK AT LEAST SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS TO MY UNDERSTANDING. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TIRELESSLY WITH THE CITY TO CREATE AND SUBMIT PLANS THAT MAKE THIS PROJECT AS LAID OUT BEFORE YOU GUYS TODAY AND SHOWN THE SAW AND SHOWN TO THE COMMUNITY TO MAKE IT WORK. WE'VE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. THE FACT THAT THE FLOODPLAIN BY SEC, THE BIG PORTION OF OUR PROPERTY, IN ADDITION TO HAVING FLOODPLAIN, WHICH IS UNDEVELOPABLE SIZE ENTITY ORDINANCE, REQUIRES A FLOODPLAIN BUFFER, WHICH WE WILL ABSOLUTELY DO AND THAT FURTHER REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE LAND WITHIN THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ULTIMATELY FOR THE COMMUNITY ESPECIALLY MEANS MORE PRESERVED OPEN SPACE. THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND IN THIS MF 18 PORTION THAT IS UNDEVELOPABLE REGARDLESS. UM, AND WE ARE PROPOSING A HANDFUL OF THOSE TOWN HOMES TO IN THE DEVELOPABLE LAND WE HAVE LESS, BUT AGAIN, NO APARTMENT. I DID MENTION OUR ONSITE DETENTION IN THE LAST SLIDE THAT WILL SERVE OUR PROJECT, BUT WE'VE ALSO PLANNED FOR A COMPLETELY EARTH AND DRAINAGE CHANNEL TO HELP GUIDE THE STORM WATER SO THAT IT DRAINS FROM NORTH TO SOUTH INTO MUD CREEK CORRECTLY. WHILE WE WOULD LOVE TO BUILD MORE UNITS ON THIS SITE, OF COURSE, UM, WE'VE DESIGNED IT WITHOUT DENSITY IN MIND. WE'VE DESIGNED IT TO FIT ITS ODD SHAPE IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS RESPECT TO THE DRAINAGE MEANS AND ALL OF THE REGULATIONS BOTH FROM THE SAWS, CITIES T C E Q AND FEMA THAT ARE APPLICABLE. UM, AS YOU GUYS, AS I MENTIONED, WE CANNOT INCREASE RUNOFFS BY DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY. WE CAN EITHER DO THE SAME OR BETTER AND WE HAVE CHOSEN TO DO BETTER, NOT JUST FOR OURSELVES WITH OUR ONSITE DETENTION, BUT WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. UM, AND SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT THE APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST TO READ THEM THE PROPERTY DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT WE CAN PULL BUILDING PERMITS AND START WORK. THIS SITE IS EXTREMELY INVOLVED AND VERY UNIQUE BEING OVER THE RECHARGE, UM, WITH FLOODPLAIN, BY DISSECTING IT. WE HAVE FOUR MAJOR AGENCIES FOR REVIEW THIS PROCESS, UM, AND MANY, MANY MONTHS BEFORE WE CAN REALLY DO ANYTHING ON THIS SITE. UM, SO WE ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO HAVE ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES REVIEW EVERY PLAN, EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. OUR COMAR WITH FEMA, OUR W C A P, WITH T C E Q, ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES ARE GONNA HAVE TO SIGN OFF ON THIS PROJECT BEFORE ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN. AND SO WHILE THIS IS A VERY, VERY LENGTHY TIME CONSUMING PROCESS, MUCH OF WHICH HAS BEEN COMPOUNDED BY THE LAST FIVE MONTHS, UM, TRYING TO GET THE ZONING APPLICATION TO YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY, WE KNOW THAT THE WORK IS NOT DONE AND WE ARE GONNA CONTINUE TO ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY AND ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. UM, THE PROPOSED REBUILDING IS THE FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS. UM, AND THEN THOUGH WE HAVE REALLY GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND WITH DRAINAGE STUDIES AND PLANS TO KEEP THINGS ON TRACK, WE STILL HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO BEFORE BUILDING ANYTHING AND A WHOLE LOT OF AGENCY REVIEWS THAT ARE REQUIRED BEFORE THAT. UM, THIS IS I BELIEVE ON YOUR SCREEN, THE LAST SLIDE AND I PROMISE WE'RE ALMOST DONE. UM, THIS IS JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT. YOU ARE PROPOSING A COHESIVE, THOUGHTFUL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION BASED ON NOT ONLY THE SITE ITSELF, BUT BASED ON NOT MAXIMIZING THE DENSITY. HERE, THE PROPOSED TO R SIX AND M F 18 IS TO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY AND COMPATIBILITY WITH ALL OF THESE SURROUNDING EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND USE THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE. THE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF THIS STATE WE'RE PROPOSING THE SIGNIFICANT RANGE INFRASTRUCTURE ALL WITHIN THE CONFINES OF BOG CONDITIONS, WHICH WERE OUTLINED IN THEIR REPORT. AND THE 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATIONS, NOT ONLY TO MITIGATE THINGS ON OUR SITE, BUT TO REMEDY THE EXTENSIVE FLOODING FOR EVERYONE AROUND US WHEN THERE IS A BIG RAIN. UM, ONE THING TO MENTION A FEW WEEKS AGO AS PART OF THE VISTA RIDGE PROJECT, DOGS TESTED THEIR AQUA VISTA STATION, WHICH RESULTED IN A HUGE AMOUNT OF RUNNING WATER WITHOUT A BIG RAIN TO BLAME. THAT WATER RAN BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND REDLAND RANCH ESTATE WITH A WHOLE WATER OF FERVOR. ONCE OUR EARTH AND DRAINAGE PANEL AND ALL OF THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE, WE SHOULD REMEDY THAT NEGATIVE IMPACT WITH THE COMMUNITY EXPERIENCED IN THIS CASE, BUT ALSO HAS BEEN EXPERIENCING FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. AGAIN, DENSITY IS NOT OUR [00:45:01] DRIVING FACTOR. UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER FELT IN LOVE WITH HIS PROPERTY AND SO MUCH SO THAT HE MADE IT HIS HOME TOO. PRESERVING THE NATURAL BEAUTY, UM, IS VITALLY IMPORTANT. COUNCILMAN CARRIE HAS ACCESS TO LOOK INTO WAYS TO UTILIZE OUR OPEN SPACE FOR A POCKET PARK OR WALKING TRAIL OF MED STATE PARK AND PROVIDE HIM WITH OUR PROPOSAL BEFORE CITY COUNCIL. AND WE ARE WORKING ON THAT. WE LOVE THAT IDEA. UM, SO THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING INTO CONSIDERATION, A LOT OF EFFORT THUS FAR OVER THE LAST FIVE AND A HALF MONTHS WHEN WE FILED THIS CASE ORIGINALLY. UM, I KNOW THAT I'VE GIVEN A LOT OF INFORMATION, UM, AND, UH, RECYCLING REQUEST A BRIEF AMOUNT OF TIME FOR REBUTTAL FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC COMMENT. UM, AND I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS, UM, BUT HOPE THAT IT IS APPARENT HOW PASSIONATE AND COMMITTED WE ARE TO THIS PROJECT. UH, WE RESPECTFULLY WITH THAT, UH, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE ZONING AS PROPOSED. KNOWING THAT THIS IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE, CAREFULLY PLANNED WITHIN ALL OF THE REGULATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS IS SUPPORTED BY BOTH STAFF AND SO, AND WAS DESIGNED WITHOUT THE DESIRE TO MAXIMIZE DENSITY, BUT WITH RESPECT FOR THE SITE ITSELF, THE COMMUNITY AROUND US AND THE RECHARGE ZONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT? YES, MA'AM. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND I WILL JUST START READING THOSE AND THEN WE WILL GO TO THE VOICE RECORDED MESSAGES AS WELL. AND THEN ALSO THE ONES THAT HAVE REQUESTED A PERSONAL CALLBACK. I WILL BEGIN WITH THE LETTERS THAT I HAVE IN MY HAND. THE FIRST LETTER IS FROM GLORIA PASS AT 1 6 6 3 5 STALLION CROSS, ALONG WITH MS. ELIZABETH HUFF AT 3 1 0 2 PINTO PASS. MS. HUSS HAS BEEN A HOMEOWNER FOR 24 YEARS AND PUR PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND SPECIFICALLY THE LOT BECAUSE OF THE GREEN MILK AND THE PRIVACY THAT ALLOWED AND MS. HUFF, UH, HER PROPERTY DIRECTLY ABUTS THE MUSTANG OAKS DEVELOPMENT. AND SO THE REASON I'M READING THIS IS IT'S THE VERY SAME FORM LETTER IN THE BODY. IT SAYS, I AM OPPOSED TO THE REZONING AT THIS TIME. I WILL REMAIN OPPOSED UNTIL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS PROVIDED THAT IS SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS MY CONCERNS REGARDING THE FOLLOWING. THREE IMPORTANT ISSUES. FLOODING CONCERNS, DEVELOPMENT OF MUSTANG OAKS PROPERTY WILL LIKELY HIGHLY INCREASE THE POTENTIAL OF FLOODING RISK TO MY PROPERTY AND THOSE A FELLOW RESIDENTS OF REDLAND RANCH ESTATE, EVEN WITH THE RECOMMENDATION LIMITATION OF NO MORE THAN 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER. ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS A VERY HIGH PROBABILITY FOR SERIOUS PROPERTY DAMAGE AND POSSIBLY LOSS OF LIFE TO RESIDENTS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THE MUSTANG OAK PROPERTY. MY POSITION IS CLEARLY SUPPORTED BY THE HISTORY OF FLOODING ON THAT PROPERTY IN RECENT HISTORY. I WANT TO BE INFORMED OF CLEAR AND DEFINITIVE PLANS THE DEVELOPER AND ANY ENGINEERS ENGAGED BY THE DEVELOPER HAVE COME UP WITH TO ADDRESS THESE VERY SERIOUS CONCERNS AND INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS TO DETERMINE IF THOSE PLANS ARE VIABLE AND WILL HANDLE THE FLOOD WATERS. I HAVE SEEN THE PHOTOS AND VIDEOS OF FLOODING FROM PREVIOUS YEARS. ANYONE WHO HAS VIEWED THESE AND DOES NOT HAVE A SIMILAR CONCERN IS SIMPLY NOT PAYING ATTENTION. NUMBER TWO, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO FLORA AND FAUNA DISPLACEMENT OF WILDLIFE AND DEFORESTATION. LITTLE TO NO INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER AS TO ANY STUDIES PERTAINING TO FURTHER SHRINKING THE ENVIRONMENT THAT SUSTAINS LOCAL WILDLIFE. NOR HAS ANY INFORMATION BEEN PROVIDED REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF CLEARING THE LAND FOR THE CREATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE BUILDING OF CONES. CERTAINLY FLOOD WATERS WILL MOVE MORE SWIFTLY THROUGH CLEAR LANDS. THESE ARE ISSUES THAT WILL CERTAINLY IMPACT THE RESIDENTS OF REDLAND W RANCH ESTATES, BIRDS AND ANIMALS RESIDENTS MUST ENJOY, WILL BE DISPLACED, WILL LESS THAN WILL LESS THAN DESIRABLE ANIMALS SUCH AS POSSUMS AND SNAKES BE DRIVEN INTO OUR PROPERTY HAVING BEEN DISPLACED. IS THERE SUFFICIENT SPACE IN WOOD CREEK TO ACCEPT THE DISPLACED ANIMALS? AND IT IS UNKNOWN HOW MANY BEAUTIFUL OLD TREES WILL BE CLEARED TO ALLOW ECONOMIC CONSTRUCTION OF MUSTANG OAKS INFRASTRUCTURE AND HOUSE BUILDING FOR THE DEVELOPER AND BUILDERS TO MAXIMIZE THEIR PROFITS. I BELIEVE UNLESS THEY'RE OBLIGATED TO DO OTHERWISE NEAR CLEAR CUTTING IS PO NEAR CLEAR CUTTING IS POSSIBLE. NOT ONLY DOES [00:50:01] IT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE AESTHETICS OF WHAT IS SEEN FROM THE BACK DECK OF MY HOUSE, BUT THE OVERALL IMPACT TO THE ENVIRONMENT WILL BE NEGATIVE. I WANT TO BE PROVIDED WITH CLEAR AND DEFINITIVE INFORMATION AS TO THE INTENT OF THE DEVELOPER REGARDING CLEARING OF THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES HE HAS OBTAINED IMPACT TO EDWARDS AQUIFER. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITS ON THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE THEM. THERE'S A REAL POTENTIAL FOR CONTAMINATION BOTH JURY CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER POTENTIAL FOR PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS, AND HYDROCARBON POLLUTING THE AQUIFER INCREASES. IF THIS AREA IS DEVELOPED, HOW CAN WE BE COMFORTABLE THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS SUFFICIENT SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST AND MONITOR FOR THESE POLLUTANTS? THANK YOU. IN BEST REGARD, MELISSA BRYANT FROM SARAH. SHE'S THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL SERVICES. THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY WOULD LIKE TO VOICE OUR CONCERNS REGARDING THE POTENTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE SATO AND DAM FOR FROM STORM WATER RUNOFF. THIS AREA IS IN THE RECHARGE ZONE AND THERE ARE A FEW RECHARGE FEATURES WITHIN THE AREA THAT WOULD BE PROTECTED. WE ALSO HAVE A CONCERN FOR THE RIPARIAN HABITAT PROTECTION IN THE VICINITY THAT PROVIDES A NATURAL BARRIER TO THE CREEK OTHER. OUR OTHER CONCERN IS THE DECREASED QUALITY OF THE WATER CAUSED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCREASED IMPERIOUS COVER THAT WILL BE DRAINING TO THE AREA. THE RIVER AUTHORITY WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND FLOODPLAIN AND CHANNEL PRESERVATION ALONG THE ENTIRE OF MUD CREEK AND TREATING IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH BIO RETENTION ROUTES IN THE TRADITIONAL SAND FILTERS. THE AREA IS AN AMENITY, WHICH SHOULD BE PRESERVED INSTEAD OF CLEARING THE SITE AND BUILDING A CONCRETE IMPACT EMBANKMENT TO CHANNEL FLOWS, WHICH LEADS TO THE DEGRADATION OF THE CREEK. WE WILL HAVE BRENDA CARMEN AND HE'S GONNA, HE'S GONNA BE A CALL IN, SO WE WILL RESERVE, UH, BRENDA HERMAN'S COMMENTS. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY, MELISSA BRYANT. THIS ONE IS FROM RICHARD KILFORD AT 1 6 6 0 7 STALLION CROSS. I RECENTLY RECEIVED A NOTICE OF A ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING AS A RESIDENCE THAT OWNS PROPERTY SHARING OFFENSE WITH THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE. I'M JUST DEEPLY CONCERNED AS ARE THE RESIDENTS OF STALLION CROSS AND REDMOND RANCH ABOUT THE PROPOSED REZONING. FIRSTLY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY REGULARLY EXPERIENCES SEVERE FLOODING. I WILL ATTACH PICTURES IN A SEPARATE EMAIL, WHICH I BELIEVE I DID SEND TO THE COMMISSION YESTERDAY. MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO AND A HALF YEARS. THIS AREA HAS FLOODED BOTH YEARS WITH WATER REACHING THE FENCE ON THE REAR OF OUR PROPERTY. OTHER RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN HERE SINCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS CONSTRUCTED AND HAVE INDICATED THAT SIMILAR EVENTS ARE EXTREMELY COMMON GIVEN THE STALLION BAT STALLION CROSS IS ON THE BOTTOM OF A TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE. ALL THE WATER FROM SURROUNDING ROADS TO NO PASS, VATO PASS, REDLAND ROAD AND JONES BERG FUNNELS DOWN INTO THE CURRENT EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY IN QUESTION. WITH STRUCTURE IN PLACE OF THE CURRENT CLAIMS, THE WATER WILL BE DISPLACED INTO SURROUNDING AREAS. INTRODUCING A HIGH RISK OF FLOODING TO EXISTING PROPERTY. RECENTLY DOGS DISSEMINATED A FLYER TESTING, TESTING 1, 2 3 DATED MARCH, 2020, CLAIMING THAT IT TAKES A SOUTH TEXAS ZOEY WASHER TO GET MUD CREEK FLOATING AND TOUTING THAT FLUSHING, FLUSHING OF THE WATER OF SAWS. AQUA VISTA STATION TURNS THAT NORMALLY DUSTY CREEK MADE INTO A TEMPORARY RIVER OF, OF SUN RENOWNED. GIVEN THAT THE 142 MILE PIPELINE HAS NOT BEEN ACTIVE PRIOR TO APRIL, 2020, IT BRINGS FURTHER CONCERN FOR EVEN MORE SEVERE FLOODING IN THE PROBLEMATIC PROPERTY UNDERGOING RE DONING AND PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS TO COMPOUND ISSUES TO FLOODING THE PROPERTY. MR. AUSTIN HAWI AND HIS REPRESENTATION, EMILY CHRISTENSEN, HAVE COMPLETELY NEGLECTED TO CONTACT THE REGIONAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT OFFICE. THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPERTIES HAVE FAILED TO ADDRESS FLOOD OR STORMWATER MITIGATION EFFORTS AND PLANS, AND HAVE TAKEN STEPS TO ACTIVELY CIRCUMVENT VIA PREMATURE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER. RICHARD TOPER. JOSE RODRIGUEZ, PLEASE BE ATTACHED. IMAGE. AND THIS WAS AN EMAIL FORWARDED TO THE COMMISSION AS A WHOLE YESTERDAY. IT IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF YOU TO KNOW THAT MUD CREEK IS A NATURAL WATER RUNOFF FOR SAS VISTA RICH PROJECT AND ITS AQUA VISTA PLANT. IT WAS SUCH A BIG AMOUNT OF WATER FLOWING DOWN MUD CREEK THAT IT MADE THE NEWS. WE SAW THE FLOOD PASS RIGHT BEHIND OUR HOMES EXACTLY WHERE THE PROPOSED ZONE IS HAPPENING. ZONING CHANGE IS [00:55:01] HAPPENING. SEE THE LINK FROM THE NEWS? IT INCLUDES FACTS. AND THERE WAS A LINK CONNECTED TO THIS EMAIL. WE OPPOSE THIS REZONING. JOSE RODRIGUEZ AT 1 66 19 STALLION CROSS DR. KAT. HE IS A RETIRED LIEUTENANT COLONEL WITH THE U UH, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE. THE R R E H O A IS THOROUGHLY ENGAGED. REGARDING CONCERNS MENTIONED IN THE EMAIL, I, ALONG WITH MEMBERS OF THE H O A AND AFFECTED RESIDENTS, ALSO DISCUSSED OUR CONCERNS IN EMAIL CONVERSATIONS AND MEETINGS WITH MR. HAAR, MS. WEISLER AND MS. MEYER. AN IMPROMPTU COMMITTEE WAS FORMED TO REVIEW SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION REGARDING FLOODING WILDLIFE STUDIES AND POTENTIAL SECURITY CONCERNS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW COMMUNITY. SOME OF OUR INITIAL DISCOVERIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE SHARED HERE, BUT THE FOCUS IS ON MY FIRSTHAND EXPERIENCES. AGAIN, MY INTEREST IS ON THE SAFETY AND WELLBEING OF ALL TO INCLUDE THE PROPOSED MUSTANG OAKS DEVELOPMENT AND RESIDENCE. BECAUSE THE COAST STORM DRAINED AGAINST NORTH HIGHWAY 2 81 AND LUKE 1604, I AND OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY REMAIN IN CONTACT WITH THE MUSTANG OAKS DEVELOPER AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE TO SHARE THOUGHT CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. UPON RECEIVING THE FEBRUARY 26TH, 2020 FILED REPORT, I NOTICED A DISCREPANCY IN THE FE MAP THAT SHOWS THE FLOOD CLAIM BY HAPPENSTANCE. I POINTED OUT THE DISCREPANCY TO AUSTIN HAWAR AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE AS EARLY AS SEPTEMBER, 2019 TO COUNCILMAN PERRY'S STAFF IN SEPTEMBER THROUGH DECEMBER LAST WEEK TO MR. TREK, MR. POWELL AND MR. PEPE AND OTHERS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED MUSTANG OAKS BERM DEVELOPMENT SLIDES FOR INITIAL FLOODING PHOTOS AND CONCERNS SHARED TO HIGHLIGHT THE DISCREPANCY, FLOODS, SPANS AND FILLS THE GREEN BELT RECENTLY LEARNING ABOUT FLOOD PLAINS. BELIEVE ONE SHOULD BE ANNOTATED ON THE SIDE OF R R E BASED ON THE FLOODING EVIDENCE. NEW POTENTIAL FLOODING THREAT IS THE NEWEST COSO WATER STATION ALWA VISTA IN THE STONE OAK AREA NEAR STONE OAK PARKWAY AND ER ROAD. DURING THE AL VISTA TEST. FLOODING OCCURRED IN THE GREEN BELT BEHIND R R E AND WE'RE MUSTANG OUT THE SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION WE HAVE REQUESTED, BUT AS OF THIS EMAIL HAVE NOT SEEN A DETAILED PLAN FROM AUSTIN OR EMILY REGARDING THEIR DEFINITIVELY ADDRESSING ADDRESSING THE FLOODING. WE REALIZE THE REGIONAL STORM WATER OFFICE MANAGEMENT OFFICES TYPICALLY INVOLVED IN THE LATER PROCESS. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF A CONTINUING EMINENT FLOODING DANGER IMPACTING ENVIRONMENTAL PROPERTY AND PERSONAL SAFETY, RECOMMEND ANY ZONING VOTE BE POSTPONED. AGAIN, MY GOAL IS TO ENSURE FULL DISCLOSURE OF THE FLOODING THAT OCCURS IN THE PROPOSED MUST. MUSTANG OAKS DEVELOPMENT IN OPPOSITION AT THIS TIME. KIND REGARDS, DR. CASTRO, JOSE AND NANCY FLORES AT 16 6 38 STATE, UH, SALLY AND CROSS. WE OPPOSE CHANGING THIS ZONING FOR THE PROJECT WE WANT TO BUILD ON GREEN BELT. MIXING IN MEDIUM DENSITY IS THE WORST IDEA. YOU WILL CREATE FLOODING FOR EXISTING HOMES, INCREASED TAXES TO OLDER HOMES. HOW DID THIS PROJECT GET THIS FAR? BUT THEN NANCY FLOOD IS WILLIAM KNIGHTLY AT 16 6 23 ALIEN STALLION CROSS. I VOTE NO TO THE MUSTANG OAK DEVELOPMENT. THE ROAD AND BARRIERS SHOWN ON EMMA'S SKETCHES MY FLOODPLAIN. THE COMMISSIONERS ARE NOTIFIED THAT MUD CREEK FLOODPLAIN EXISTS. MY PERSONAL MUD CREEK FLOODPLAIN 300 TO 400 FEET WIDE AND FIVE FEET DEEP. JANUARY, 2018, TAKEN FROM MY LIVING ROOM. AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF PICTURES AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE SLIDES. I BELIEVE MY FLOODPLAIN, A THREE YEAR FLOODPLAIN CYCLE EXTENDS FROM SOUTH THE STALLION CROSS BACK FENCE TO JONES MUL BURGER BLOOD BARRIER. AND THERE ARE BLOOD PICTURES ATTACHED. I VOTE NO MUSTANG OAK DEVELOPMENT, WILLIAM KNIGHTLY AND ELISA PEACE, THE GREATER EDWARDS OFFICER ALLIANCE. THE SITE LOCATED IN CITY COUNCIL, DISTRICT 10 NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF JONES BERGER IN REDLAND ROAD IS AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OF 21.6 ACRES THAT IS TRANSECTED BY WEST ELM CREEK AND ENTIRELY WITHIN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE. THE OVERALL PROPERTY IS VEGETATED WITH NATIVE TREES AND, AND UNDERSTORY, WHICH PROVIDE EXCELLENT FILTRATION FOR WATER RECHARGING THE AQUIFER. [01:00:01] THE CHANGE IN ZONING HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY THE LAW FIRM OF BROWN AND ORTIZ DC TO ALLOW FOR AN UNSPECIFIED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY UNITS SINCE 2001. THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS ADHERED TO AN INFORMAL POLICY OF NOT GRANTING REQUESTS FOR ZONING CHANGES ON THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE WITHIN THE CITY'S JURISDICTION. IF THE REQUEST INVOLVES A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE. FOR THIS, ANOTHER REASON TO FOLLOW THE GREATER EDWARDS AQUIFER ALLIANCE STRONGLY OPPOSES THIS REQUEST. A WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE TEXAS COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. WE HAVE REPEATEDLY REQUESTED THAT AN APPROVED W P A P BE REQUIRED AS A CONDITION FOR CONSIDERATION OF THIS TYPE OF REQUEST ON THE E R G D. G E A A IS DISMAYED AT THAT, THAT ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM, WHICH IS DESIGNATED BY THE CITY TO ENFORCE WATER QUALITY WITHIN E R G D WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL IN THE ABSENCE OF W T A P THAT DETAILS HOW THE DEVELOPER PLANS TO MITIGATE STORM WATER POLLUTION ON THE SITE. D E A A RECOMMENDS THAT THE ZONING COMMISSION POSTPONE OR DI DENY THIS REQUEST. DAVID WRIGHT AT 1 6 5 0 2 REDLAND RANCH. I LIVE IN REDLAND RANCH ESTATES AND MY LOT IS ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT MUSTANG OAKS. INITIALLY I WAS NOT GOING TO OPPOSE THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT AFTER THE DISCOVERY OF NEW INFORMATION REGARDING FLOODING ISSUES THAT MIGHT IMPACT OTHER HOMES IN REDLAND RANCH, THE STATES, I MUST OPPOSE THE REZONING AT THIS TIME. I WAS RECENTLY MADE AWARE OF SOME INFORMATION REGARDING WATER FLOW AND DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT MIGHT EXACERBATE FLOODING ISSUES THAT CURRENTLY THREATEN MY NEIGHBORS. I WILL WITHHOLD MY VOTE IN SUPPORT A MUSTANG OUT UNTIL I HEAR INFORMATION NECESSARY TO CALL OUR CONCERN. SINCERELY, DAVID WRIGHT. AND THEN FINALLY THE WRITTEN ONES. UM, ALSO RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION FROM BRENT MITCHELL AT 1 6 5 0 7 SADDLE. THIS AREA PROVIDES A SIGNIFICANT SOUND REDUCTION FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT WILL INCREASE THE RISK OF CONTAMINANT CONTAMINATION TO THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. THIS MAY BECOME A NATURAL HABITAT FOR MIGRATING HOKS DUCK BIRDS, OTHERS ENJOYING HABITAT. THIS WILL REDUCE THE VALUE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HOME. THIS, UH, IS A LOSS OF THERE WILL BE A LOSS OF LIMITED TRAFFIC TO OUR AREA. AND THAT WAS BRITT MITCHELL. NOW WE HAVE CALLERS. I HAVE ROBERT MILLER ON THE LINE THAT ARE REMINDER TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. GO AHEAD PLEASE. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS ROBERT MILLER. I LIVE AT 16 6 0 3 SCION CROSS AND I'M THE ORIGINAL HOMEOWNER OF THIS PROPERTY. SO I'VE BEEN HERE OVER 23 YEARS. IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME, YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT FLOODING AND I'VE WITNESSED THE FLOODING TO THE DEGREE THAT LITERALLY UP TO MY FENCE WITH A LAKE BEHIND OUR PROPERTY. AND MY CONCERN IS TWOFOLD. ONE, THAT I'M NOT SURE THAT THE FLOODPLAIN IS ACCURATE AS WRITTEN AND NEEDS TO BE RETU. NUMBER TWO, THAT IF YOU TAKE A, A PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED FOR 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOGS AND YOU GO TO 6,000 WORTH OF LIVES, THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU DON'T INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ROOFS, DRIVEWAYS, ROADS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. SO YOU ARE GOING TO INCREASE ONE ELSE. NOW, WHAT I HEARD EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION IS THAT THIS SHOULD THE KEY WORK. WE SHOULD UPDATE THE FLOODING ISSUES. I I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF A SHOULD. I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE A MUST. AND I DON'T THINK THAT IT CAN BE A MUST UNTIL THE, THE STUDIES ON THE FLOODING ARE FULLY REALIZED. SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE. THE SECOND CONCERN I HAVE IS IF YOU LOOK AT MP 10, IT IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT EXISTING PLATTED SUBDIVISIONS, WHICH ARE SUBSTANTIALLY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY UNITS. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS PROPERTY SHOULD BE, IS A PROPERTY THAT'S DESIGNED TO PROTECT THOSE PROPERTIES AROUND IT. MANY OF US MOVED IN SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN, UM, PLATTED THAT WAY. UM, THE THIRD CONCERN IS THAT IT, THERE ARE NO PROTECTIONS FOR US. FOR EXAMPLE, THE MULTI-FAMILY 18, WE HEARD AND, AND I HAVE NO REASON TO NOT TRUST THE DEVELOPER, BUT THEY SAID, WE'RE NOT GONNA BUILD MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING. WE'RE GONNA BUILD THESE. I'VE FOUND 'EM ONCE IT'S RE FREE ZONE, THERE'S NO PROTECTIONS FOR US AS A SUBDIVISION. UM, SO I I I SAY FOR THOSE THREE REASONS I'M HIGHLY CONCERNED, I WOULD RECOMMEND [01:05:01] THAT THE FLOODING ISSUE BEED BEFORE THERE'S ANY THOUGHT OF REZONING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, BEFORE, BEFORE YOU DO THAT, I DIDN'T KNOW IF, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE SEVERAL CALLERS ON THE, THE, UH, TO BE CALLED IN. UH, IF, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS ONE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE ASK THOSE QUESTIONS NOW, UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DISCONNECT WITH THEM IN ORDER TO BRING MORE CALLERS IN. SO THIS IS MR. MILLER IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HIM. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UM, ANY QUESTIONS FROM ANY, UH, COMMERS? YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND. I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU FOR MR. MILLER. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. MR. MILLER, HAVE YOU EVER DONE A FLOOD CERTIFICATION OR ELEVATION ON YOUR PROPERTY? ANY TYPE OF ELEVATION CERTIFICATE? DOES YOUR INSURANCE REQUIRE THAT BECAUSE OF THE FLOODING? I, YEAH, SO I ACTUALLY, I HAVE NOT, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT I PURCHASE FLOOD INSURANCE EVERY YEAR AND I PURCHASE FLOOD INSURANCE BECAUSE I'VE LIVED HERE AND I'VE WITNESSED THE FLOODING BEHIND OUR PROPERTY. SO I WAS CONCERNED FOR THAT. EVERY YEAR I BUY FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE. AND WHEN YOU DUNNO IF THAT YOUR QUESTION, BUT THAT'S FINE. WHEN YOU PURCHASED A PROPERTY, DID IT GIVE YOU ANY FEMA'S FLOOD ZONE WHEN YOU PURCHASED IT? IT DID NOT. IT DID NOT. SO IT WAS SUBSEQUENT TO THAT WHEN I SAW THE FLOODING BEHIND THE PROPERTY THAT I STARTED BUYING THE FLOOD INSURANCE, I WAS NOT MANDATED TO DO SO. I WASN'T REQUIRED TO DO SO. I JUST DID THAT ON MY OWN BECAUSE OF WHAT I WITNESSED. AND SO YOU WITNESSED THAT THERE'S BEEN NO IMPROVEMENT TO THE DRAINAGE BO OR THE, THE GRASSY AREA BEHIND YOU. SO WITH AN IMPROVEMENT FROM A DEVELOPER THAT WILL BE REQUIRED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DOES THAT HELP YOU GOING FORWARD THAT THIS WILL EASE THE FLOODING? YEAH, MY, WELL, MY CONCERN, AND I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER JUST, YOU KNOW, BY TRAINING, UM, MY CONCERN IS WHEN YOU START TO ADD ADDITIONAL ROOFS, ADDITIONAL ROADS, ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE, AND YOU TAKE AWAY SOME OF THE COVER THAT ACTUALLY ALLOWS INFILTRATION. SO THAT'S NUMBER ONE. AND THEN, AND THEN WHEN WE HEARD THE PRESENTATION EARLIER, AGAIN, WHAT I HEARD WAS WE'RE GONNA PUT IN A DRAINAGE DITCH THAT SHOULD HELP ABATE THIS. THAT'S, THAT'S NOT A VERY DEFINITIVE STATEMENT AND I'M NOT VERY CLEAR. AND SO MY CONCERN IS WE COULD ADD TO THE PROBLEM OF THE FLOODING NOT DECREASE. AND AGAIN, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE REALLY EVALUATED BEFORE WE REBUILD, NOT, NOT BASED ON A PROMISE OF FUTURE ACTIVITY. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT THAT'S A DUE DILIGENCE THAT DEVELOPERS DON'T NECESSARILY GO THROUGH, UH, TO PURCHASE, TO GO AHEAD AND PURCHASE THAT TYPE OF THING. BUT I DO TRUST THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DRAINAGE DEPARTMENT WOULD MITIGATE THIS AND MAKE SURE IT IS NOT FLOODING ANYONE BEYOND THE ITS BANKS. I THINK YOU'RE GONNA SEE AN IMPROVEMENT IS WHAT THE C IS GONNA REQUIRE OUT OF THAT DEVELOPER. AND THAT'S USUALLY THE CASE ON DEVELOPMENTS. IT'S THE DEVELOPER THAT'S GOTTA BRING IT UP TO, TO WHAT THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS ARE. SO I THINK THERE'S SOME SAFE SAFEGUARD THERE. SO WHAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I I WOULD JUST, YEAH, I WOULD JUST THANK YOU MR. MILLER. UM, OKAY. UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH, UH, QUESTIONS? RAISE OF HAND PLEASE? OKAY. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, PLEASE HOLD ON. SIR, SIR, UM, THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU. HOLD ON A SECOND. OKAY. HI, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. UM, JUST, UH, QUESTION FOR THE, FOR THE CALLER, UM, THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT THERE NOT BEING, UM, ANY REAL, UM, WAY FOR YOU TO ENFORCE THEIR CLAIMS THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS A MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTY. IS THERE A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IN WHERE YOU LIVE? YES. WE, WE DO HAVE AN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR REDLAND RANCH. UM, AND I KNOW THAT, UM, THERE'S AT LEAST I, I BELIEVE THERE'S AT LEAST ONE OR TWO REPS OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION CORE THAT ARE ON, YOU KNOW, EITHER CALLED ROAD LETTERS OR CALLED IN. SO WE DO HAVE A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION. OKAY. THANKS. UM, AND IF THE DEVELOPER WERE TO OFFER, UH, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, UM, THAT WERE ENFORCEABLE BY THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, WOULD THAT HELP ALLEVIATE YOUR CONCERN WITH RESPECT TO THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT? YEAH, THAT WOULD CERTAINLY HELP WITH THAT CONCERN. OKAY. PERFECT. THANKS. NO MORE QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. ANY OTHER [01:10:01] QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, MR. MILLER, WE HAVE A NEW, WE HAVE ANOTHER CALLER. OKAY. I HAVE MARTY THE LINE. UM, AS A REMINDER, MR. PIE, PLEASE MUTE UH, ANY BACKGROUND, UH, AND THEN, UM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES TO PROCEED. GO AHEAD. CAN YOU HEAR US? WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA TRY HIM AGAIN. IF NOT, WE'RE GONNA GET ANOTHER CALLER AND WE'LL PUT HIM BACK IN THE QUEUE. HOLD ON JUST A SECOND. I HAVE RICHARD, AS A REMINDERS, PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND COMMENTS. TWO MINUTES. GO AHEAD. HI, GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS RICHARD, K 1 6 6 7 CROSS, TEXAS 7 2 4 7. UH, SO I'D LIKE TO RECAP ON, ON WHAT MS. EMILY SAID EARLIER. UM, THEY, THEY HAD MENTIONED INITIALLY NOT INCREASING TRAFFIC AROUND RANCH, THAT IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE THEY COMMUNITY SO THAT THEY SENSE SET THE STAGE FOR SOMETHING I MIGHT HAVE LATER. THERE'S THREE SCHOOLS AROUND US THAT ARE ALREADY HIGH, HIGH POPULATED. UH, SO THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED AS WELL AS THE TEACHERS THAT ARE TEACHING AT BOTH SCHOOLS, UH, LOOKING AS SHE COULD CURRENTLY HAS MOTIVATED IMPACT OR HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THESE AREA. SO, AS MR. MILLER WAS SAYING, LET'S BUILD MORE HOUSES TO, TO INCREASE, UH, THAT NEGATIVE IMPACT. UH, MUCH OF THEIR ARGUMENT WAS BUILT ON, UH, CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT SURROUNDING AREAS. UH, THAT'S WHY GO FROM A 10 TO, UH, R SIX BECAUSE THE SURROUNDING AREAS ARE D FIVE TO SIX. HOW IS 18 CONSISTENT COMPATIBLE WITH THOSE SURROUNDING AREAS FOR AIMING FOR R FIVE AND R SIX ADDITIONALLY? UH, SO WE, WE ESTABLISHED THAT ACCORDING TO SLIDE FIVE, THEIR PRESENTATION AT THE SAME DENSITY, UH, REQUIREMENTS FOR R SIX. SO WHY NOT WE, IT'S CONSISTENT. OKAY, THAT'S GREAT. SO IT'S MUCH FOR TECHNICALITY. SO WE'RE DOING THIS TO CHANGE, UH, SOME DESIGNATION LETTERS ON A DUTY MAP. SO WHAT, WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS, THIS IS BASED OFF OF THE HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPER AND, AND HIS ASSOCIATES TAKING BACK TO SEPTEMBER OF AND JULY. THEY, THEY INITIALLY STARTED THIS WITH IS WE'RE GONNA BE DOING 10,000 FOOT LOTS. SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS AFTER YOU GUYS REONE THIS, UH, THE WILL TAKE OUT, THEY'LL CHANGE THE HIGHLY RESEARCHED AND STRONGLY PLAN AS SOON AS WE REONE THIS THING. SO THOSE 18, WE GONNA DO, YOU KNOW, SO MANY CONDO OR WHATEVER, THEY'RE GONNA APARTMENT AS THEY CAN ON THAT THING BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU MAKE MONEY AND SOMEONE'S GOTTA PAY FOR THIS IZATION OF MUD. UH, THE OVERVIEW THAT THEY DISCUSSED SAID THAT WE CAN'T JUST PULL PERMITS AND GET TO WORK. FUNNILY ENOUGH, THEY DID THAT EXACT THING IN SEPTEMBER WHEN THAT'S TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU WITH, UH, QUESTIONS, UH, SHOW OF HANDS PLEASE. OKAY. UM, THERE. OKAY. UM, WE THANK YOU SO MUCH, UM, MR. KILBURN. THANK YOU GUYS. HAVE ANOTHER CALLER. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE MARTY PS ON THE LINE. AS A REMINDER, MR. PS, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. OH, PI 1 6 6 3 COUNTY CROSS. I'M CURRENTLY THE BOARD MEMBER STATE AND ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENT, THE BOARD MEMBERS OF STATE, WE ASKING YOU TO NOT APPROVE THIS ZONING REQUEST. IN JANUARY, 2020, YOU MEETING WITH THE RESIDENTS OF ATION AND DEVELOPER OF LOS WAS HELD TO DISCUSS THE DEVELOPMENT OF LIGHT OAKS. STATED REQUEST, UH, 16.2 FROM R 10 TO R SIX AND BUILD ONLY 67 HOMES AS WELL AS RE 5.313 ACRES TO MF 18 TO ACCOMMODATE EIGHT 10 HOLY FAMILY HOMES AS WELL OF 16.9 ACRES EQUAL SEVEN 9,500 SQUARE FEET DIVIDED BY 10,000 SQUARE FEET BLOCKS AND EQUAL 67 LOTS. SO WHY THE REQUEST TO R SIX THREE? PROBABLY 67 LOTS. IF R SIX, THEN THE NUMBER OF POTENTIAL LOTS HOMES CAN BUILD JUMPS TO HUNDRED 18 ALMOST [01:15:01] THIS POTENTIALLY THE, THE SIZES WILL DOUBLING THE TRAFFIC CAN CAUSE UNNECESSARY CONGESTION ALREADY AREA. SO WITH A PLAN TO BUILD 118 HOMES FOR 67 HOMES, THAT'S PRESENTED. IF PRESENTING OF THE 5.313 ACRES TO 18 HAS PASSED, THEN THERE'S A POTENTIAL TO BUILD UP TO 75 PLUS MULTIFAMILY. HALS NOT EIGHT 10. AS STATED A DEVELOPMENT. ALSO, THE PROPERTY IN AND AROUND THE OLD POND WAS CREATED INTO A SAFE SPACE FOR WILDLIFE AND PARK FOR THE NEIGHBORS. WHICH ASSURANCES DO WE HAVE THAT WILL BE THAT, THAT BE KEPT? UH, DEVELOPER ALSO ATTEMPTED TO HAVE A LEGAL DOCUMENT SIGNED BY THE ORIGINAL, A PRESIDENT BEING SPECIFIC BETWEEN THE SUBDIVISION AND OAKS THAT RIVERLAND WOULD SUPPORT RE TECHNOLOGY CHANGES. BUT ACTUALLY, LIKE FIVE RESIDENT STATED THAT THEY WOULD APPROVE AND SUPPORT RE ZONING EFFORTS. THOSE FIVE RESIDENTS DID ALL RESIDENT ESTATE. THERE ARE MANY OTHER ITEMS THAT ASSOCIATED WITH OAK. THANK YOU'LL BE ADDRESSED BY OTHER COMMUNITY. SO APPROVE, NO REQUEST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER I SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE? NO, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL, YOU'RE STILL MUTED. THERE YOU GO. AM I THERE NOW? YES, YOU ARE. GO AHEAD. OKAY, SO A QUESTION FOR YOU AS THE BOARD MEMBER ON REDLAND ESTATES, H O A, UH, DID YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT HOLDING S AND TRYING TO, UM, WORK WITH HIM ON, UM, PUTTING THAT INTO RESTRICTIONS INTO RECORD? UH, NOT AT THIS MOMENT. ANYTHING RESTRICTIONS RECORD? I COULDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU. COULD YOU, YOU SAY THAT AGAIN AT THIS POINT WE HAVE NOT, UM, UH, RESTRICTIONS OR ANYTHING IN PLACE. WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO SO IF THE APPLICANT WAS WILLING TO DO SO? UH, POSSIBLY I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE TO THE BOARD MEMBERS AND TO THE PRESIDENTS. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME MR. PIUS. THANK YOU. ANOTHER CALLER I HAVE MR. PAUL UNWIND. AS A REMINDER, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. GO AHEAD PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS PAUL ROYAL. I WORK, I LIVE ON A1 ANTONIO, YOU HEAR ME GENTLEMEN? YES, GO AHEAD SIR. DO YOU HAVE CHAIRMAN MEMBER OF ZONING COMMISSION? DEVELOPER NEIGHBORS? AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS ONLY REQUEST TO SHIFT FROM NEIGHBOR. RESERVATION 10 TO OUR SIX IS VERY AGGRESSIVE AND I WOULD SAY IT IS RACIA. IT'LL PUT TREMENDOUS STRESS TO THE SURROUNDING FAMILIES. TRUCTURE THE CITY. LOOK, I HAVE DAUGHTERS AND THEY GO TO ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE, AND HIGH SCHOOL CLASSES ARE FULL, LITERALLY FULL. 30 PLUS KIDS PER CLASS BRING IN ANOTHER 106 TO 140 CHILDREN. HERE. OUR ROADS ARE CON CONGESTED BETWEEN REDLAND AND BULL ROAD. IT TAKES 15 MINUTES TO DRIVE ONE MILE IN THE MORNING OF EV OF EVERY GIVEN SCHOOL DAY. THESE ROAD HAVE BEEN IMPROVED RECENTLY, EVEN THOUGH ALL THESE WILL REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT SPENDING FROM THE CITY TO RESOLVE THESE MATTERS. NEW SETTING IN OUR BUT FOR NEW TEACHERS, NEW SCHOOL ROADS. ALSO IN THE PRESENTATION OF FAMILY, AS SHE MENTIONED, THERE'S A FEW AREAS SIMILAR RE ZONING, BUT I THINK SHE FORGOT TO MENTION THERE'S A FEW STEPS. THERE'S ONGOING DEVELOPING WITH 20, SO WHY WOULD THEY NOT CHANGE 2020? THIS WILL BE BRING ANY SPENDING FROM THE CITY BECAUSE THEY WILL PUT NICE, WONDERFUL HOUSES ON THIS AREA. I DO BELIEVE THAT OUR RESPECTFUL DEVELOPER, MR. AUSTIN, HAS TO ACCOMPLISH THE LOOK. AS WE SEE, WE'RE VERY WELL ORGANIZED, KNOWLEDGEABLE, AND ACTIVE COMMUNITIES. WE WANT TO USE OUR FREEDOM [01:20:01] TO PROTECT THE LAND, TO MAKE THE COMMISSIONER KNOW THAT WE ARE TO HAVE ROADS SAFE, CITY GREEN, AND, AND OUR WATER CLEAN AS ALREADY MENTIONED EARLIER FOR REPORTS. AND I'LL CONTINUE TO PRAY FOR YOU GUYS AND FOR OUR CITY. THANK YOU, SIR. I'M READY FOR THE QUESTIONS. OKAY. ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE. OKAY. UM, SEEING NO HANDS. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU MR. LEY. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. MY PLEASURE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS TIME AND, AND ALL HEALTH TO US. OKAY. HAVE ANOTHER CALL. I HAVE DR ON THE LINE. AS A REMINDER, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. HELLO? THAT'S ON THE BLANK. YES. I THOUGHT THEY WERE WAITING FOR QUESTIONS FOR SOMEBODY. NO, GO AHEAD. OH, UH, UH, TURN DOWN YOUR LIVESTREAM. THERE IS A DELAY. OKAY. READY? YES. OKAY. HI, I'M DR. KA. I'M A 1 6 6 1 1 STALLION CROSS AND I'M A RETIRED AIR FORCE LIEUTENANT COLONEL, A DISABLED VETERAN AND AN AIR FORCE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE WHO ALSO WORKS FULL-TIME TELEWORK BECAUSE SOME OF THE OTHER PRE PRESENTERS HAVE, UM, DISCUSSED A FILLING OF POINTS. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENHOUSE AND COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL FOR TALKING ABOUT RESTRICTIONS ON COVENANTS AND SO FORTH FOR OUR BOARD TO DISCUSS WITH, UM, AUSTIN AND EMILY AND SO FORTH BECAUSE WE'RE ALL LEARNING AS WE GO. WE ALL HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN AND ANXIETY BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN IN THE DARK ABOUT MANY THINGS. GRANTED THE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY, BUT IT DIRECTLY IMPACTS EVERYTHING WE DO. UM, THE SLIDES THAT I'VE PREVIOUSLY SENT, UM, TO AUSTIN, EMILY MEMBERS, COUNCIL PERRY STAFF AND CITY GOVERNMENT TO INCLUDE POWELL FROM STORE MANAGEMENT LAST FALL OFTEN BEGAN MODIFYING THE LAND BUILDING AN EARTH FIRM IN THE GREENVILLE. WHEN I ASKED FOR A PUBLIC PERMIT SHORTLY THEREAFTER, IT WAS IMMEDIATELY FLAT. HIS MOTIVATION TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT PERMIT SUGGESTS THE POSSIBILITY OF REZONING FOR DEVELOPMENT. OTHER THAN THAT PROMISING ORIGINAL DESIGN KINETIC TO USE TO SOLICIT THE COURT FOR THE PROJECT IS VIABLE. BUT NOW THAT WE'RE AWARE THAT THERE IS A POSSIBLE RESTRICTION OF GOVERNMENT TO BASICALLY ENSURE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PROVIDED TO US AND SCHEMATICS FOR THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS IS THE ONLY PLAN THAT WILL GO FORWARD, I THINK WILL BE HELPFUL, UM, AS THIS PROCESS CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD. RIGHT NOW, I'M STILL MORE UNDECIDED, BUT THE ONLY OPTION I HAVE IS TO OPPOSE. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO ADDRESS FROM SOME OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS IS REGARDING THE FLOODLIGHT. I SPOKE WITH MR. POWELL FROM THE STORE MANAGEMENT OFFICE TODAY. HE ALSO HAS NOT SEEN A COMPLETE, UM, WATER VACATION SYSTEM YET FROM THE ENGINEER WHO HE HAS BEEN WORKING WITH, UM, WHO IS ALSO WORKING ON BEHALF OF AUSTIN. AND AS EMILY HAD MENTIONED, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH MS. MS. POWELL AND WE'LL BE FOLLOWING UP WITH DISCUSSIONS IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING, IS RE-LOOKING THE FLOODLIGHTS, WHICH MAY REQUIRE A STUDY. IT WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE HUMAN MAP AGAIN, BASED ON THE CONTINUED CONSTRUCTION OF OUR CITY AND WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE WATER. UM, LIKE I THINK THAT WAS MY TWO MINUTE, TWO MINUTE BEAT. SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER CONCERNS, MY HOUSE ALSO HAVE ACCESS TO THE GREEN BELT AND I'D HAVE WATER AT MY FENCE LINE TO SHOW THEM MY PHOTOS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS BY SHOW OF HANDS PLEASE. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH DR. STRAUSS. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. WE HAVE ANOTHER CALLER. I HAVE MADELINE FLA ON THE LINE. AS A REMINDER, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. GO AHEAD PLEASE. HI ARCHITECTURE, I'M REPRESENT AND WORKING THE OWNER OF 15 4 23 PROPERTY ADJOIN DEVELOPMENT. UH, A COUPLE OF THINGS IS CURRENTLY FOUND ING PROTECTION, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR UNITS ON PROPERTY THAT THEY'RE ONLY GOING PUT UNITS ON THIS PROPERTY. SO WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THERE NEED TO RE SIX WOULD ALLOW FOR 72 APARTMENTS IN THE NORTHERN PART. DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THEY SAY TODAY. IF IT CAN ZONE THAT WILL BE ALLOWED IT, THE OTHER PART IS ALLOWED TO REZONED OR SIX, THERE WILL BE 116 HOMES ALLOWED IN THAT ZONING. [01:25:02] YES, AS , THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO DO 80 UNITS. THERE'S NO REASON FOR THE REDOING IS NECESSARY AND MY OPINION, BECAUSE RED CREEK WILL HAVE TO BE CHANNELIZED, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION. IT WILL HAVE TO BE CHANNELIZED. AND IN ORDER TO SEE THAT IT'S EXPENSIVE FOR THE DEVELOPER AND ENGINEERS AND WE'VE ASKED FOR IT IN HERE WORK L I BELIEVE THE HONOR ACTUALLY WORKS FOR K F L. YOU, WE ASKED FOR THAT. THEY PROMISE US THAT THEY WOULD SEND THAT THE THEY'VE DONE AND THEY HAVE NOT EVER TWO WEEKS EVEN THOUGH PROMISING THAT THEY WOULD SAY. SO WE HAVE MUCH TO GO ON HERE EXCEPT THAT WE HAVE SERVICE HE ALREADY ALLOWED ON NP. OKAY. SO WHAT REASONABLE NEED RESIGN R SIX TO ALLOW 188 UNITS IF THEY'RE ONLY PLANNING ON 80 UNITS, WHAT YOU CURRENTLY ALLOWED ON NP 10 MAJOR DRAINAGE WAY WE THE GOING IN INTO, THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER THINGS AND KNOW UNTIL WE CAN SEE EXACTLY WHAT IT'S, THEY'RE PLANNING TO THANK YOU MINUTES. THAT'S TWO MINUTES NOW. THANK YOU. MY OWN QUESTIONS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY, UM, QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? BY A SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. UH, THANK YOU SO MUCH MA'AM, UH, FOR CALLING. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. WE HAVE ANOTHER CALLER. I HAVE BRANDON ON THE LINE. HELLO. AS A REMINDER, MR. HERMAN STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. GO AHEAD PLEASE. HI, MY NAME IS BRANDON HERMAN, UH, SUSTAINABLE STORMWATER PLANNER AND , THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY 600 EAST ECL AVENUE 7 8 2 1 2. UH, MY COLLEAGUE MELISSA BRYANT HAS ALREADY SENT IN AN EMAIL COMMENT AND I WANT JUST, UM, ECHO HER, UH, HER, UH, CONCERNS WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, INCREASED IMPACT TO OUR AND DAM, UM, RECHARGE FEATURES FOUND WITHIN THE SITE. UH, AND OF COURSE THE RIPARIAN HABITAT THING I WANNA EXPLORE A LITTLE BIT IS THE ACTUAL MUD CREEK ITSELF. UM, THE REASON THAT THERE IS FLOODING IN THE AREA IS BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS AREA'S SUPPOSED TO DO. IT'S THE FLOOD PLANT FLOOD. UH, AND SO AS THE APPLICANT HAS SUGGESTED, UM, AN UP ZONE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING ZONING DENSITY, I'D ALSO, UM, CONSIDER, UH, FLOOD POINT AND CREEK PRESERVATION, UH, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING, UH, SUBDIVISIONS. UH, IF YOU LOOK TO SUBDIVISIONS TO THE RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE TO THE WEST, I'M SORRY, THE ELM CREEK ELM WATER HOLE CREEK, BOTH OF THOSE CENTER LINES AND BUMPERS HAVE BEEN PRESERVED, UH, IS SIMPLY, UM, PUSHING THOSE FLOOD WATERS DOWNSTREAM THROUGH A CONCRETE EMBANKMENT OR, UM, TRYING TO DIVIDE, DIVERT THEM IN ANY WAY. ALTHOUGH MAYBE IT'LL, UH, UM, MAYBE SOME OF THE FLOODING IMPACTS ON SITE, IT'LL OF COURSE INCREASE THOSE IMPACTS FOR FOLKS, FOLKS DOWNSTREAM, INCLUDING, UM, PRESSURES ON OUR DAM AS ALREADY IN PLACE. UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR FOLKS TO REMEMBER THAT THE REASON THAT THERE'S FLOODING, UH, AROUND THEIR HOMES AND THIS FLOOD POINT IS BECAUSE THERE IS DEVELOPMENT UPSTREAM THAT'S PUSHING THEIR FLOOD WATERS ON THE SITE DOWNSTREAM. UM, AND THAT'S MY COMMENT. THANK THANK YOU. UM, QUESTIONS FROM ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. HERMAN. WE APPRECIATE YOUR CALL. THANK YOU CHAIR. WE NOW HAVE COURSE. THANK YOU ALL. NO, GOOD DAY. THANK YOU CHAIR. WE NOW HAVE VOICEMAILS THAT WE NEED TO PLAY IN FOR THE RECORD, SO WE'RE QUEUING THOSE UP RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU . SORRY, THERE'S SEVERAL THAT WE HAVE TO SORT THROUGH. WE'RE GETTING TO THE ONES THAT ARE, UH, FOR THIS CASE. HERE WE GO. I DID NOT HEAR YOUR ENTRY [01:30:01] MESSAGES. PRESS ONE MESSAGES. MESSAGE ONE. WHY. HELLO, MY NAME IS BRANDON HERMAN. I'M AN URBAN STORMWATER PLANNER WITH THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY. MY PHONE NUMBER IS (810) 302-4229. THE ADDRESS IS 600 EAST EUCLID AVENUE, 7 8 2 1 2. THAT'S HERE IN, UM, THIS IS FOR CASE NUMBER 2 9 7 3 2 2 E R. TAKE ABOUT A MINUTE. WE WOULD LIKE TO VOICE OUR CONCERNS FOR THIS, UM, SUBMITTAL TO ELLING AREA. THERE'S, UH, ISSUES WE THINK COULD HAVE IMPACTS ON, UH, THE DAM THERE, LOT OF THE DAM, SO INCREASED PREVIOUS CAR, INCREASED WATER, AND ALSO SOME RECHARGE FEATURES WITHIN THAT PROTECTED AREA. HE MUST RECOMMEND, UM, IN ADDITION TO, UM, KEEPING THE TO THAT 35%, NO MORE THAN 35% OF THE SITE, UH, WE'D LIKE SEE THAT RIGHT PERIOD HABITAT, UH, ADJACENT TO THE SCREENING CHANNEL FOR CONNECT, UH, AND LIFTING PLACE WITH A NATURAL BUFFER RATHER THAN, UM, FLOODING IT AND TURNING IT TO A CONCRETE CONTAIN IT, IT MAY HAVE BEEN, WHICH WOULD THEN INCREASE FLOWS AND FLOW VELOCITIES FURTHER IMPACTING, ERODING, UM, RECHARGE FEATURES WITHIN THE AREA, UM, DOWNSTREAM. SO, UH, WE ALSO LIKE TO, UM, WE'D ALSO LIKE TO REQUEST THAT THESE SITE BE TREATED WITH, UM, EYE RETENTION RATHER THAN THE TRADITIONAL SAME FEATURES TO SAME FILTERS. WE SHOULD DO A BETTER JOB OF FILTERING OUT POLLUTANTS, UM, FROM THE INCREASED IMPROVE COVER. THANK YOU. DELETE MESSAGE TWO. HELLO, MY NAME IS JOSE RODRIGUEZ. I LIVE IN CASE NUMBER NINE DASH THREE RZ D COMMISSION. MANY WATER PIPELINE HAS BEEN ON THE CONSTRUCTION TO BRING WATER TO THE 60. IT'S COMPOSED OF 40 MILES OF WHICH IS A WATER TREATMENT PLANT THAT GOES OVER 8 MILLION. INCREASE OUR WATER BILL BY 10% A FEW WEEKS AGO, IOWA THE STATION, AND IT COULD BE OUT AS PART OF THE OPENING PROCESS. WATER QUALITY, ALL THE WATER FLUSH OUT ROCK NATURALLY INTO MUD CREEK FROM STONE OAK ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE AREA PROPOSED TO BE RESOLVED AND BEYOND. WE HAVE ARTICLES FROM CHARLES AND EVEN CHANNEL FOUR THAT CONFIRM ALL THIS INFORMATION. AND WE HAVE SENT OUT MUST CREEK RUNS OVER THE PROPOSED ZONE. DURING THE LAST WEEKS, WE SAW THE AREA FROM FLOODED DUE TO THE RELEASE OF THE WATER FROM THE AWA. WE FEEL LUCKY WE HEAVY RAIN DURING THIS TIME BECAUSE THE FLUSHING WILL HAVE CREATED A COMPOUNDING EFFECT AND, UH, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S VITAL FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE KEEP. IT'S KEY FOR THE WATER TO HAVE A WAY TO RUN FREELY WHEN THE STATION MAINTENANCE THAT MALFUNCTIONAL COURSE OF THE, WE NEED TO HAVE THIS PROPOSED AREA REMAIN IN GREENVILLE OR TO BE REZO AS AN MP 20 FOR THE SAKE OF OUR HOMES, OUR ENVIRONMENT, OUR FAMILIES IN THE WATER BY SAN ANTONIO, BY HOUSE IN OPPOSITION OF THE PROPOSED DELETED MESSAGE THREE. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS BARBARA FRAZIER AND I LIVE 6 2 7 STALLION CROSS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 4 7. MY NUMBER IS 2 1 0 6 0 2 8 0 0 0. TODAY I'M STATING MY OPPOSITION IN REGARDS TO DOMAIN CASE NUMBER 29 7 E R G D. ON SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2019, WE BEGAN TO HEAR A LOT OF MOTOR NOISE BEHIND OUR HOUSE. UPON INVESTIGATION, WE DUMP TRUCKS SPREADING OR TO DIRT AND JUMPING THEM IN A CONTINUOUS CURVE PATTERN BEHIND OUR HOME. THIS ULTIMATE, THIS DELIVERY ULTIMATELY CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 17 TRUCKLOADS OF DIRT TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE AND WENT ON FOR A TWO DAY PERIOD. AT THE END OF THE DELIVERY, A MAN AND A BOBCAT WORKED UNTIL TWO IN THE DIRT INTO INTO VERY HIGH PILES. A DAY OR SO LATER, MY NEIGHBOR CASTERS SAW A PICKUP TRUCK DRIVING AROUND ON THE PROPERTY AND CALLED OUT TO THE DRIVER. I KNOW HER, IT WAS HER, IT WAS AUSTIN HAGEL, THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER. THEY BEGAN [01:35:01] TO TALK AND AUSTIN CLEARLY STATED HE HAD PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND PLANNED TO BUILD HOMES. AS HER TALK PROGRESSED, HE WAS ASKED ABOUT THE DIRT AND STATED THAT HE WAS TRYING TO MITIGATE FLOODING THAT WAS KNOWN OF THE AREA. HE WAS REMINDED THAT HE NEEDED A PERMIT TO DO THAT AND WOULD ASK IF WE HAD, IF HE HAD ONE WITHIN THE NEXT TWO DAYS. THE LARGE PILES OF DIRT WERE FLATTENED. OBVIOUSLY HE HAD UP, HAD NO PERMITS. THE AREA BEHIND OUR HOME IS A FLOODPLAIN PART OF THE EDWARD EDWARD FOR A RECHARGE ZONE AND CURRENTLY ZONED IN 10 AND IT NEEDS TO BE LEFT ALONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. DELETE MESSAGE FOUR. MY NAME IS , I'M A RESIDENT AT STATE ONE SIX SIX ONE NINE SEVEN. PHONE NUMBER (305) 303-3191. CALLING FOR CASE NUMBER 20 19 10 73 22. JUST ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION. I LIKE TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS FOR LOW TEACHING SAFETY AND QUALITY LEARNING FOR OUR COMMUNITY. WITH THE REZONING OF THE PROPOSED AREA, I'M SURE MANY PARENTS, LOCATION, SAFETY AND SCHOOL IN THE FOR HOME. WE BOUGHT OUR CURRENT HOME BECAUSE THE GRADE SCHOOL IN OUR AREA WAS CLOSE TO HOME AND IT WAS A COMFORTABLE AMOUNT OF STUDENTS THAT WERE FOSTER QUALITY LEARNING COMPARED TO THE SCHOOL MY DAUGHTER USED TO ATTEND STUDENT, SHE WAS A STUDENT WHO CRACK OF A HUGE CLASS AND I WAS ONE FRUSTRATED MOTHER. I WON'T BORE YOU WITH HOW IMPORTANT QUALITY EDUCATION IS AND HOW UGLY YOU CAN GET WITH A FRUSTRATED MOTHER. SO I'M CONCERNED WITH THE RE RESULTING OF NP 10 FROM MS 18. FIRST I THINK IT'S AN AGGRESSIVE CHANGE AND THE SECOND, THE MORE HOME MEANS MORE FAMILIES, WHICH MEANS MORE CHILDREN IN OUR SCHOOL. AN OVERLY CROWDED SCHOOL IS NOT ONE THAT'S CONDUCIVE TO QUALITY LEARNING RIGHT NOW. REDLAND OAKS ELEMENTARY NEEDS UPDATING AND MODELING, NOT TO MENTION MORE, MUCH MORE WHEN WELCOMING MORE CHILDREN. SO ALSO WE ARE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING A LOT OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON THE INTERSECTION OF REDLAND ROAD AND JOEL MOPAR ROAD. TRUTH THINK THAT NOBODY LIKES THAT TRAFFIC AND I THINK THAT PEOPLE THAT DEVELOP ROAD RAGE AND OTHERS WILL PROBABLY DIE IF THEY SOME ROAD RAGE HAVE STREET CAR ACCIDENTS IN THE PAST HERE IN THAT AREA. AND JUST THE MORE CAR NEEDS MORE S COMMUNITY IS VERY IMPORTANT AND I WOULD LOVE TO WELCOME MORE FAMILIES. COMMUNITY AND WE'RE LEARNING IS FOSTERS OUR ROAD. SCHOOLS AREN'T READY FOR MORE FAMILIES AT THE MOMENT, BUT THAT SAID, I'M IN OPPOSITION OF THE PROPOSED RE ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERED RE 20. THIS WILL HELP IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP THE COMMUNITY SAFE. THANK YOU. DELETED MESSAGE FIVE PASS IN RIVER ESTATE. I'M CALLING YOU IN REGARDS TO THE CASE NUMBER C AS A A AND UH, MY VOTE IS AGAINST THIS, UH, ZONING REQUEST, UM, BECAUSE, UH, PEOPLE HAVE BOUGHT IN THIS AREA TO ISOLATED AND, UH, HAVE A LARGE GROUP OF IN AND EVERYTHING IN THE AREA BEHIND GREENVILLE, BEHIND US WAS KIND OF A DRAW TO THIS AREA. DELETED. MESSAGE SIX, SAVE. MESSAGE SEVEN. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS DAVID WRIGHT AT ONE SIX FIVE ZERO TWO REDLAND RANCH, SAN ANTONIO. PHONE NUMBER EIGHT SIX SEVEN CALLING REGARDING, UH, CASE NUMBER E R C E. THE IRONY OF THIS DAY ESPECIALLY CAN'T BE OVERLOOKED. WE AREN'T WITH YOU THERE IN PERSON BECAUSE OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATE, IT'S NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC. THE OWNER, DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY 16 REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE FROM ITS CURRENT STATUS OF E 10, R SIX FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION DISTRICT. [01:40:01] THEY WERE DESIGNED TO, AND I QUOTE, DESIGNED TO PROTECT EXISTING FLOOD SUBDIVISIONS, WHICH ARE SUBSTANTIALLY DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS. WE'RE ABLE TO BE THERE TODAY BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE A LOT OF PEOPLE SHARING A SMALL SPACE WHICH WOULD MAKE IT UNSAFE FOR ALL OF US. PRESENT THE ARMY IS THAT THE REQUESTING THAT YOU ALLOW, YOU PROTECT A BUNCH OF HOMES INTO AN AREA DESIGN FOR LARGER HOME SITES TO PROVIDE SOCIAL DISTANCING, TO PROTECT THE, AND KEEP EVERYONE SAFE AS MANY OF OUR EXISTING HOMEOWNERS WILL BE IMPACTED THAT HAVE EXISTED FOR DECADES THERE WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. JUST SO HAPPENED THE DAM WAS BUILT A SHORT DISTANCE FROM THIS PROPERTY JUST FOR THAT REASON, TO PROTECT US AGAIN, TO DRAW PARALLELS, TO STAY OUR ENTIRE COUNTRY HAS MADE, CONFINED OUR HOMES SO THAT WE WOULDN'T OVERWHELM OUR EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, ESPECIALLY OUR HOSPITALS. THIS PROJECT, IF THE ZONING CHANGES APPROVED, WILL OVERWHELM OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRAFFIC, OUR STREETS WILL CREATE CONGESTION. MOST CERTAINLY RESULTS MORE ACCIDENT AND POSSIBLY INJURIES OR DEATH. UH, MAY CONCERN, HOWEVER, FOR OUR SCHOOLS, OUR LOCAL ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE SCHOOLS ARE A CAPACITY NOW FAMILIES WILL OVERWHELM THOSE SCHOOLS. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO ME AND IT SHOULD BE A CONCERN FOR YOU AS WELL. OUR SCHOOLS THIS AND I KNOW OF NO AREAS IN NEIGHBORHOODS, ADDITIONAL SCHOOLS FOR THE OVERCROWDING. THE CURRENT ZONING IS SUFFICIENT TO ADD SOME HOMES, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO OVERWHELM OUR SCHOOLS OR ROADS AND ANOTHER CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE TIME BEING VOTE KNOW ON THE ZONING CHANGE AS REQUESTED. AND I HOPE THAT YOU'LL CONSIDER THOSE IMPACTED BY YOUR DECISION TODAY. YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH. MESSAGE EIGHT. HI JOSE. HEY, MESSAGE. THAT'S ALL THE CASE, THAT'S ALL THE CALLS RELATED TO THIS CASE. HEY, CAN I, UH, THIS IS MARK, MARK WHITE HERE. YES, SIR. OKAY, GO AHEAD. UM, DISTRICT 10, CAN I JUST GET CLARIFICATION? A LOT OF THOSE MESSAGES WERE FROM PEOPLE THAT ALSO WE SAW LETTERS OR WHO HAD ALREADY CALLED IN, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OH, OKAY. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WAS JU JUST CHECKING. THANKS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TIME FOR RESPONSE? UH, YES, MADAM CHAIR, WE WOULD THANK YOU SO MUCH AND I'LL KEEP THIS AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE TIME THAT YOU ALL HAVE GIVEN ALREADY TO THIS CASE. UM, FIRST AND FOREMOST, THIS PROPERTY, UM, IS NOT A GREEN BELT. IT WAS NEVER A GREEN BELT. UM, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN UNDEVELOPED. UM, IT HAD BEEN IN A SINGULAR PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, UM, BUT IT WAS NEVER AND HAS NEVER BEEN A GREEN BELT PRIOR TO ITS CURRENT STATE. IT WAS A HORSE FARM, UM, THAT MOVED ALONG MANY, MANY YEARS AGO. UM, BUT THIS PROPERTY, UM, WAS NEVER A GREEN BELT AND I AM SO SORRY TO ALL THE RESIDENTS. UM, WE HAVE EXPRESSED THIS NUMEROUS TIMES THAT THE COMMUNITY IN OUR COMMUNICATION THAT, UM, WE ARE SORRY THAT THEY WERE SOLD PROPERTY BEING TOLD THAT THIS WAS A GREEN BELT AND NEVER WAS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED. UM, THAT JUST IS NOT TRUE. AS FAR AS THE EXISTING FLOODING ISSUES GO, WE ARE WELL AWARE OF THE SURROUNDING ISSUES WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING VIDEOS AND PHOTOS AND COMMENTS FOR, FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS NOW. UM, AND I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT PART OF THE DRAINAGE ORDINANCE IS REQUIRING THAT WE NOT INCREASE THE RUNOFF BY DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY. WE CAN EITHER STAY WITH THE FREE DEVELOPED RUNOFF RATE OR DO BETTER AND WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO BETTER, UM, BY THE EXTENSIVE DRAINAGE PROJECT THAT WE HAVE PLANNED FOR THIS SITE WITH RESPECT TO THE FLOODPLAIN, UM, THAT ISING OUR PROPERTY, UM, AND AS WELL AS THE OVERGROWTH OF THIS PROPERTY THAT IS PUSHING WATER CLOSER TO REDLAND BRANCH THAN IT SHOULD BE. UM, AS FAR AS RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS GO, I KNOW COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE MENTIONED THAT, UM, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO COMMIT AND I AM COMMITTING ON THE RECORD THAT WE CAN AND WILL DO RESTRICTIVE EVIDENCE RESTRICTING THE MULTI-FAMILY USES TO EXCLUDE APARTMENTS ON THIS PROPERTY. UM, [01:45:01] WE HAVE SAID THAT TO THE TEMPLE OFFICE. WE HAVE REITERATED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES WITH THE COMMUNITY, UM, THAT WE WILL ON RECORD COMMIT TO DOING THAT PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. UM, THAT WILL TAKE SOME WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY, UM, MUCH MORE WORK THAN WE HAVE. UM, THEREFORE THAT, UM, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION AND HAVE THAT FINALIZED. UM, ONE OF THE CALLERS DID REFERENCE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, THEY HAVE REQUESTED A FENCE, UM, A VERY SPECIFIC, UH, LOCATION BUILDING MATERIALS, CONSTRUCTION TIMING. UM, WE COMMITTED TO THAT AND WANTED TO PUT THAT IN WRITING FOR THEIR SECURITY, UM, FOR THEIR COMFORT. UM, SINCE WE PROVIDED THAT TO THEM, UM, WE HAVE NOT HEARD THAT, BUT THAT WAS THE MAIN AND ONLY REQUEST THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO DO, UM, AND WE HAVE COMPLIED AND AGREED TO THAT FULL FLEDGE. UM, LASTLY, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED FREE ZONING, UM, ZONING, WANT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT ALL OF THESE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT, UM, FOLKS HAVE LIVED IN FOR DECADES, SEVERAL OF THEM HAVE LIVED HERE SINCE THE ESTABLISHED COMMUNITIES WERE BUILT. UM, THOSE PROPERTIES, IN ADDITION TO BEING ZONED OUR FIVE AND OUR SIX ARE ALSO OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. ALL OF THOSE DEVELOPED COMMUNITIES ON BOTH SIDES OF JONES MUSBURGER ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE RECHARGE ZONE, MEANING THAT THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT EXIST NOW ARE, WERE REGULATED BY CITY SIZE, T C Q, UM, AND FOR THOSE THAT HAVE FLOOD PLAIN IMPACT FEMA, ALL OF WHICH WE ARE SUBJECT TO COMPLYING WITH ON THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, UM, WE ARE REQUESTING YOUR SUPPORT TO THE RESILIENCE SO THAT WAY WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK NECESSARY TO PROVIDE THE DRAINAGE PLANS, BOTH NOT ONLY TO THE CITY SIDE STATE AND FEMA, BUT ALSO TO THE COMMUNITY. SO THEY HAVE A PLAN, BUT WE CANNOT BUILD THOSE PLANS BASED ON PROJECTED ZONING. THOSE PLANS ARE CREATED BASED ON THE ZONING THAT IS INTACT. SO IN ORDER TO CREATE A PLAN AND GET THAT PLAN APPROVED BY ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES THAT SAY, YES, WE ARE ON BOARD, THIS MAKES SENSE, THIS WORKS FOR THE PROPERTY, WE HAVE TO DO THAT WITH THE ZONING INTACT. WE CANNOT SUBMIT AND BE APPROVED, LET ALONE REVIEWED, UM, FOR A POTENTIAL PROJECT. UM, SO SECURING THE ZONING TODAY, GIVEN THE FIVE PLUS MONTHS THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS AND WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY AND KEEPING UP IN MIND OF COMMUNICATION, UM, AND WE ARE WILLING TO MAKE ANY CONCESSIONS, UM, WITHIN REASON THAT THEY'VE ASKED OF US THUS FAR, UM, INCLUDING RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. UM, BUT WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING TO GET TO THIS POINT. AND IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY WITH THE INFORMATION THAT THEY NEED TO FEEL BETTER, LIKE FULL FUNCTIONING DRAINAGE PLAN, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE ZONING IN PLACE THAT THE AGENCIES REVIEWING THEM CAN REVIEW THEM CORRECTLY. UM, I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ALSO ON MY LINE. IT'S BLAINE LOPEZ WITH K F W OR ENGINEER. SO, UM, IF THERE ARE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, WE WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER 'EM TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT TODAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. SO, UM, WE HAVE ER, UM, SAWS AND, UH, THE APPLICANT AND THEIR, UH, ENGINEER ON THE LINE. I WILL, UM, OPEN IT UP FIRST TO COMMISSIONER WHITE. YES, THANKS. UM, LISTEN, I JUST WANT TO BEGIN BY, UM, COMMENDING CITY STAFF AND ALL THE IT FOLKS AND EVERYBODY FOR, FOR MAKING THIS HAPPEN TODAY. I'M REALLY IMPRESSED BY, UH, BY HOW THIS HAS BEEN ABLE, UH, TO HAPPEN DESPITE EVERYTHING GOING ON. AND SO, SO GREAT, GREAT JOB BY BY EVERYBODY ON, UH, ON THAT. UM, ALSO TO, I JUST WANT TO SAY AT THE OUTSET TO THE APPLICANT, UM, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT A LOT OF GREAT WORK HAS BEEN DONE ON THIS. Y'ALL HAVE BEEN AT THIS NOW FOR I GUESS FIVE OR SIX MONTHS. UH, USUALLY WE KNOW THESE THINGS DON'T TAKE THAT LONG AND, UM, BUT WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL STAYING THE COURSE AND ALL THE GOOD WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE, UH, THAT IT APPEARS YOU'VE DONE WITH, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS AND, AND SORT OF PLANNING THIS, UM, TO GET TO THIS POINT. UM, I HAVE, UH, BEEN REALLY DOING MY HOMEWORK ON THIS ONE OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS. UM, I, I HAVE SOME, SOME DEFINITE THOUGHTS ON IT. UM, I WANT TO SAY THAT I SYMPATHIZE WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD TODAY. UM, BUT I WILL CHALLENGE US [01:50:01] AS A COMMISSION TO REALLY STAY FOCUSED HERE ON, UM, ON THE ZONING ISSUE. UM, THIS IS A ZONING CASE AND A LOT OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, BROUGHT UP REGARDING THE FLOODING AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER THINGS I THINK ARE A LITTLE BIT OUT OF OUR PURVIEW. UH, WE'RE HERE TODAY JUST DECIDE WHETHER THIS ZONING REQUEST, UM, IS APPROPRIATE. UM, SO WITH THAT SAID, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD FIRST AND JUST, UH, OPEN IT UP TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, UH, IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER WHITE. OKAY. UM, BY, UH, SHOW OF HANDS, 81 WITH QUESTIONS, UH, UH, START OFF WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. THANK YOU. UM, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. YES, ARE YOU THERE? OKAY. HI. SO I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND I DID HEAR SARAH'S, UH, CONCERNS ABOUT THE, THE FLOOD WATER AND WOULD ENCOURAGE, AND YOU PROBABLY WILL, BUT ENCOURAGE SOME CON CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE ENTITIES ON THAT MATTER. UM, BUT TELL ME AGAIN ABOUT THE DENSITY. SO YOU'VE AGREED TO NOT BUILD MORE THAN 80 UNITS, OR YOU'RE AT I THINK 78 UNITS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT BETWEEN THE TWO? CORRECT. UM, OUR SINGLE FAMILY PROJECT, UM, INCLUDES 68 TOTAL SINGLE FAMILY LOT, 67 OF WHICH WILL BE NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, AND THEN WE BELIEVE BASED ON WHERE THE FLOOD LANE BUYS US OUR PROPERTY AND SIZE REQUIREMENTS, THAT WE HAVE A FLOODPLAIN BUFFER, THAT THERE IS A VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF LAND BILLABLE IN THAT M F A PIECE, WHICH WE SHOWED ON SLIDE SIX, THAT KIND OF HATCHED AREA. UM, AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING APPROXIMATELY FOUR TO EIGHT. I WENT WITH 80 TOTAL UNITS, WHICH IS 12 TOWN HOMES. UM, THE REALITY OF GETTING 12 TOWN HOMES IS PROBABLY PRETTY SLIM. UM, BUT FOR SAKE OF ARGUMENT, UM, WENT WITH 80 TOTAL UNITS, BUT REALISTICALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT FOUR TO EIGHT AT MOST, UM, IN THAT HATCH AREA, WHICH IS WHAT'S LESS OF THE DEVELOPABLE LAND BECAUSE OF THE FLOOD PLAIN THAT BISECTS THE PROPERTY, THE REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE A FLOOD PLAIN SOFTWARE, UM, AND OUR OWN DESIRE TO PRESERVE AS MUCH NATURAL OPEN SPACE AS POSSIBLE. OKAY. AND JUST IN, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THIS CALCULATION, IF NOT, IT'S A QUESTION TO STAFF. IF MP 10 REMAINS ON THIS PROPERTY, GIVEN THE FLOOD PLAIN, WHAT IS THE DEVELOPABLE, UH, DENSITY FOR THAT SITE? UH, I GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD. OH, OKAY. I WAS JUST GONNA SAY CHIME IN THAT YOU WANT, BUT IF THE WHOLE ENTIRE ACREAGE, WHICH WAS A LITTLE OVER 21 ACRES WAS DEVELOPED AS MP 10, THE MAX DENSITY I HAVE IS ABOUT 94 UNITS. UH, BUT AGAIN, THEY HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY, UM, HAVE THE APPROPRIATE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE. OKAY. THAT IS CORRECT. YEAH. SO CLOSER TO 94 TOTAL UNIT. UM, BUT GIVEN THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY, IT LEANS TOWARDS AN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT SITUATION OF FITTING THOSE HOMES IN, IN A WAY THAT MESHES WELL WITH THE EXISTING SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. ALL OF THOSE ARE FIVE AND R SIX E R Z D PROPERTIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED. OKAY. AND I THINK YOU ALREADY, UH, ACKNOWLEDGED THAT YOU GUYS WOULD BE WILLING TO DO COVENANTS MAYBE WITH REDLAND ESTATES, H O A, WHO INDICATED THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT. PLEASE HAVE THE DISCUSSION OUTSIDE OF OUR HEARING TODAY. UM, ABSOLUTELY. WE, AND AND I REALIZE IT'S NOT IN OUR PURVIEW, BUT OF COURSE WE DO WANNA JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THE CONCERNS OF THE CONSTITUENTS THERE REGARDING THE FLOODING AND REGARDING WHAT TYPE OF CHANNEL MIGHT BE THERE TO HELP PROTECT WILDLIFE, ET CETERA. SO CONCRETE VERSUS EARTHEN TYPE CHANNELS. DOES THE DEVELOPER OR YOUR ENGINEER AT THIS POINT HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHAT THAT'S GONNA BE? UM, I WILL LET BLAME KIND OF TOUCH ON THAT. HE'S ALSO ON THE LINE, BUT, UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT WE ARE PROPOSING A COMPLETELY EARTHEN DRAINAGE CHANNEL. HELLO. THANK YOU, EMILY. YES, THIS IS BLAINE LOPEZ ENGINEERS AND WE ARE THE, UH, PROJECT ENGINEER ON THE PROJECT. AND SO JUST KIND OF GOING, I GUESS WITH THE DRAINAGE HERE FIRST. YOU ARE CORRECT. IT'S AN URBAN CHANNEL THAT WE'RE PROPOSING? UH, BOTH. UM, AND I THINK IF YOU CAN STILL SEE THE LAYOUT, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE MAIN ENTRY ROAD CROSSES OVER THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN. UH, THERE WILL BE A CONCRETE STRUCTURE UNDERNEATH THE ROADWAY, UH, WHICH WILL BE BOXES, AND THEN THOSE BOXES WILL [01:55:01] TIE INTO AN ING CHANNEL ON BOTH THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM SIDE OF THOSE BOXES. UH, THE UPSTREAM SIDE WILL TIE KIND OF DIRECTLY INTO WHERE THE EXISTING POND IS TODAY. UH, THE POND ITSELF MORE THAN LIKELY WILL PROBABLY, UH, BE DRAINED JUST BECAUSE OF THE ELEVATION THAT WE'RE GONNA BE AT AND THE WAY THAT THE WATER'S GONNA BE MOVED, WHICH ACTUALLY IS PROBABLY GONNA HELP, UH, THE DRAINAGE IN THAT AREA JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE, UH, THE POND WHENEVER IT'S THERE, IT'S ACTUALLY TAKING UP, UH, SOME OF THE CAPACITY THAT IT COULD BE FILLED UP. UH, WHEN A RAINSTORM EVENT HAPPENS, GOING DOWNSTREAM, THE PLAN IS TO CONTINUE AND NERVE IN, UH, ABOUT A 74 FOOT WIDE CHANNEL, UH, DOWN TO THE POINT THAT WE CAN TIE INTO EXISTING, UM, INTO EXISTING DRAINAGE SO THAT WE CAN HELP MOVE THE WATER THROUGH THERE. WHENEVER WE STUDIED THIS AREA, UH, WE LOOKED AT WHAT HAD HAPPENED BETWEEN, BECAUSE THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND BEAR COUNTY FLEW THIS AREA TO BOAT, UM, WITH WATER OUR CONTOURS IN 2010 AND 2017. AND IN 2017, WE NOTICED THAT THE, THE CONTOURS WITHIN THIS AREA HAD CHANGED. SO THERE'S EITHER BEEN SOME TYPE OF, UH, SOME TYPE OF ACCUMULATION OF SEDIMENT. UH, SO THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGE IN THE NATURAL GROUND, UH, THAT THIS URBAN CHANNEL WILL HELP, UH, REMEDIATE ACTUALLY HELP MOVE THE WATER THROUGH. AND WE DID NOTICE THAT ALSO THE EXISTING FLOOD PLAIN HAS DELINEATED BY ON THE CURRENT FEMA MAPS IS INCORRECT. UM, SO THAT IS PART OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN, IN BUILDING THAT, UH, CONCRETE STRUCTURE OF THE BOXES GOING OVER THE FEMA FLOOD PLAIN. WE WILL NEED TO GET FEMA APPROVAL, UH, PRIOR TO DOING THAT, THAT WORK. SO THEY WILL HAVE TO APPROVE OUR ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE EXISTING FLOODPLAIN IS AND WHAT THE FLOODPLAIN WILL BE AFTER, UM, AFTER THE WORK IS COMPLETED. AND IT BOTH GOES THROUGH BOTH FEMA AND IT GOES THROUGH, UM, CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. AND IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT THE, UH, LOCAL REVIEWER'S, UH, SIDE IS ACTUALLY SARAH. SO KIND OF ALL THE PARTY THAT HAVE, HAVE KIND OF HAD CONCERNS ON THIS, UH, ARE ALL GOING TO BE A PART OF THE REVIEW, UH, OF THE FLOOD POINT WORK THAT IS DONE. UM, AND THAT APPROVAL WILL BE NEEDED PRIOR TO THE WORK BEING COMPLETED. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, ONE OTHER QUESTION, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, JUST TO BE SHORT. SO THIS IS BEING SET UP AS A CONDO REGIME. THERE WILL BE A CONDO TYPE ASSOCIATION OR HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION TO HELP MANAGE SOME OF THE ISSUES COMING OUT OF THIS. CORRECT. UM, AND SOMETHING COUNCIL AND TERRY US, UM, LAST WEEK WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS WITH HIM, UM, HE'S BEEN HAVING SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS. UM, HE LIVES IN THE AREA, SO SEVERAL NEIGHBORS, UM, HAD ASKED HIM SOME QUESTIONS AND WE ARE GOING TO DO A FULL PRIVATE H O A, UM, FOR THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT. UH, THE PROPERTY OWNERS COMMITTED TO DOING THAT, AND SO WE'LL HAVE THAT FUNCTION IN THERE TO, UH, DO THE MAINTENANCE REQUIRED WITHIN THE CONDO REGIME, THOSE TOWN HOME CASES. OKAY. EXCUSE ME. AND ONE FINAL THING. I KNOW YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT A FENCE BETWEEN THE SUBDIVISIONS, BUT IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN DO AN ADDITIONAL BUFFER BETWEEN THOSE AREAS TO GIVE THEM SOME COMFORT THAT YOU'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, RIGHT UP AGAINST THEIR PROPERTY LINE? YES, AND SOMETHING WE HAVE DISCUSSED, UM, WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT, WHEN THIS REQUEST WAS MADE, UM, IT WAS CAME INTO US ON MARCH 31ST, UM, ON BEHALF OF MR. WRIGHT, UM, ON BEHALF OF HIS NEIGHBORS, UM, THAT THEY WANTED THIS FENCE BUILT. UM, PART OF THE BACK AND FORTH THAT WE WENT, UM, WITH DIRECTLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD H O A PRESIDENT, UM, WAS SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE FINAL LOCATION OF THAT FENCE LINE BECAUSE THERE IS CHANCE THAT WE'LL HAVE TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY LINE AND THEIR PROPERTY LINE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FACILITATING THE DRAINAGE CORRECTLY. AND SO PART OF THAT FENCE AGREEMENT, MORE OR LESS, UM, WAS FOR FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD DO, UM, A BUFFER VIA GREEN, UH, EASEMENT IF WE NEEDED IT. UM, AND THAT WE WOULD PLACE THE FENCE, UM, OF COURSE WITH THEIR PERMISSION AND THEIR REVIEW AND THEIR SIGN OFF, UM, IN THE PLACE THAT WORKS BEST, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THEM TO SERVE ITS PURPOSE, BUT IN A LOCATION THAT DOES SERVE ITS PURPOSE FOR THEM. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ROMERO. MY QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE, MRS. COMMISSIONER BUSMAN, AND MY QUESTIONS ALSO WERE ANSWERED. THANK YOU. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY, COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER DANIELS. VERY GOOD QUESTIONS. UH, I GUESS TO THE ENGINEER, IF HE'S STILL ONLINE [02:00:01] ON THE PHONE, SO THIS IS CURRENTLY BLOOD ZONED IN A AND AN AE. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THESE ARE, NOW YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE NOT, THOSE ARE NOT ACCURATE ZONING BLOOD ZONE FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA? UM, I WILL, IF IT'S OKAY. UM, , UM, THE PROPERTY WAS ZONED RA UM, BACK IN 1986 WHEN IT WAS STILL A HORSE FARM AT THE END, UM, AT THE END OF ITS LIFE, UM, THERE, BUT IT WAS CONVERTED TO N P 10 BY WAY OF THE U C CONVERSION. SO, AND THAT MPCA STATED IS INAPPROPRIATE TO REMAIN AS IS I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE, THE PLANE, THE FLOOD PLANE ZONES. SO IT SHOWS A, A D, IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT. OKAY. SO A IS AN A, A MEANS IT A DETAILED STUDY AND A MEANS IT IS A NON DETAILED STUDY. AND IS IT THE A THAT IS IN ACCURATE OR BOTH? UH, LET ME CHECK WHAT THIS ZONE IS AND Y'ALL BEAR WITH ME BECAUSE I'M AT THE HOUSE. I DON'T HAVE NEAR AS ACCESS TO INFORMATION. I OKAY. UH, I USUALLY DO. BUT ON THE AE THOUGH, THE ONE THAT'S BEEN STUDIED, IT'S STUDIED TO SAY THE BLOOD WILL RISE ONLY TO A CERTAIN LEVEL WITHIN A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD. CORRECT. SO IT'S, IT'S NOT RISE IS POSSIBLY NOT GOING TO RISE ANY MORE THAN WHAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE ALREADY OBSERVED. CORRECT. YES. SO THAT WILL BE PART OF THE STUDY IS, AND, AND THAT'S PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS TOO, IS IF YOU DO HAVE ANY RISE ON ANYBODY'S PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO, UM, GET ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FROM THAT PROPERTY OWNER ABOUT THAT RISE HAPPENING. SO, UH, WHAT WE DEAL WITH, AND, AND CITY SANTANA DOES A REAL GOOD JOB OF, OF, UM, OF OG IS, IS THEY JUST MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE NOT HAVING ANY TYPE OF RISE OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN PROPERTY LIMITS SO THAT YOU'RE NOT ADVERSELY IMPACTING ANYBODY THAT'S STREAM OR DOWNSTREAM VIEW. AND SO YOU DEVELOPING THAT IN THE CHANNEL WILL HELP TO, UH, ALLEVIATE WHAT THE RESIDENTS ARE SEEING, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. SO IT IS KIND OF, WE'RE IN A STRANGE SITUATION HERE WHERE THE EXISTING FLOOD POINT IS MAPPED INCORRECTLY. IT'S SHOWN IN A REALLY SKINNY FINGER, BUT THE ACTUALITY OF THE EXISTING FLOOD POINT TODAY IS WIDER THAN WHAT IT SHOWS THERE, UH, ON THE CURRENT FEMA MAPS. AND SO WHENEVER WE COME THROUGH WITH THE REVISION TO CHANNELIZE, IT IS GOING TO, IT IS GOING TO DECREASE WHAT THE ACTUAL FLOOD POINT LIMITS ARE, UH, IN REALITY TODAY, BUT IT WILL BE A SLIGHT INCREASE OVER WHAT IS MAPPED. AND THAT'S JUST BECAUSE WHAT IS MAPPED IS INCORRECT AND THE DECREASE WILL BE IN THE, THE, THE WIDTH OF HOW OF WATER COMES OR THE DEPTH OF HOW, OR THE HEIGHT OF HOW MUCH WATER COMES OR, OR BOTH. IT COULD BE IN BOTH. AND I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT RIGHT OFF. UM, I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING AT THE WHOLE SECTION, BUT WHENEVER THE WATER MOVES MORE QUICKLY, UH, NORMALLY YOUR, YOUR DEPTH WILL GO DOWN AND OF COURSE IF YOU'RE ADDING MORE CAPACITY, MORE ROOM FOR THE WATER TO MOVE THROUGH, THAT WILL ALSO BRING DOWN THE ELEVATION. SO IT COULD BE A, A COMBINATION OF BOTH THE, THE FLOOD PLANK IN A SLIGHTLY WIDER, BUT ALSO DECREASES THE, UH, THE ELEVATION, THE WATER SURFACE ELEVATION. OKAY. AND THEN AS FAR AS THE, THAT'S MY THOUGHT. UM, SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THE EARTH, IT, WHAT'S EVER EXISTING THERE RIGHT NOW HAS BEEN ITS OWN PROBLEM. IS THAT BECAUSE WHY WOULD THAT HAVE HAPPENED? WHAT, WHERE, HOW HAS THE EARTH BEEN? YEAH. YEAH. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT ANSWER OF WHAT'S CREATED THE, THE FLOODING BACK THERE. UM, AS FAR AS WHAT'S, WHAT'S CREATED IS A PROBLEM WITH THE, UH, WITH THE FLOW. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CONTOURS IN THIS AREA OF THE EXISTING GROUND, UH, IT JUST DOESN'T HAVE A VERY GOOD DEFINITION OF WHERE THE WATER, UH, IT NEEDS TO GO. AND SO IT KIND OF JUST BUILDS UP, UH, THAT POND THAT'S EXISTING POND, IT'S RIGHT THERE BY JONES FALLSBURG. THERE'S A GOOD EXAMPLE IF THE WATER JUST KIND OF FILLED IN, UH, FILLED INTO THAT AREA AND IT DOESN'T HAVE A CLEAR WAY OUT. AND SO I THINK THAT'S CAUSING SOME OF THE BACK WATER THAT, THAT, THAT BACKS UP, UH, AGAINST THE PROPERTY THERE, ALONGSIDE CROSS. SO THE CHANNELIZATION OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING WILL HELP MOVE THAT WATER THROUGH MORE QUICKLY. UH, WE ARE STILL LIMITED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF VELOCITY THAT WE CAN HAVE IN THE CHANNEL FOR EROSION PURPOSES, BUT THE FACT THAT THE WATER'S ACTUALLY COMING MORE QUICKLY WILL PREVENT THAT BACKUP THAT'S PROBABLY CAUSING IT TO RISE UP THAT THAT HILL UP TO THEIR FENCE LINE. [02:05:01] ALRIGHT. BUT, BUT WE'RE NOW, WE'RE ADDING HOMES, SO WE'RE ADDING ROOFTOPS. YES. AND, AND SO YOU HAVE, YOU COME IN, YOU HAVE THE EARTH HAS ITS OWN PROBLEM WITH, WITH THE WATER MOVING AND NOW YOU ADD THE PALMS. HOW COULD YOU EXPLAIN HOW YOU'RE GONNA ALLEVIATE BOTH OF THOSE THAT ARE GONNA SURE. OKAY. SO THIS PROJECT'S KIND OF UNIQUE, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU STILL HAVE A LAND PLAN IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK THE LAND PLAN PART OF THE PROJECT, UM, THE, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE MOST, I'M GONNA CALL IT OUR MOST WESTERN, UH, STREET THAT RUNS NORTH SOUTH, THE FURTHEST TO THE WEST IS GONNA COLLECT ALL THE STORM WATER THAT'S COMING OFF THE HILL FROM WHERE THAT EXISTING HOUSE IS THAT TODAY. SO WHERE THAT, WHERE THAT WATER COLLECTS, THERE'S A BIG LOT THAT YOU'LL SEE AT THE END OF THAT, UM, NORTH SOUTH RUNNING STREET THAT'S TO THE FURTHEST WEST. UH, THAT'S WHERE WE WILL HAVE A DETENTION FACILITY THAT WILL BE BOTH FOR DISTINGUISHED AND FOR WATER QUALITY. IT ONLY EXISTS IN THAT, THAT CORNER. SO OUR, OUR PROJECT HAS TWO COMPONENTS IN IT TO WHERE WE HAVE A VERY LARGE WATERSHED THAT'S COMING DOWN FROM, UH, THE DAM THAT'S ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF, OF JONES SMALLS BURGER. THERE'S, THERE'S MUCH CREEK COULD TELL THAT COMES, UM, THAT COMES FROM THE DAMNED AREA THAT COMES ACROSS JONES SMALLS BURGER. AND WE'VE GOTTA FIGURE OUT HOW TO THEN CONVEY THAT THROUGH OUR SITE. AND SO THAT CONVEYANCE IS WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE PLANNING ON THAT URBAN CHANNEL, SO THAT URBAN CHANNEL'S GONNA IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE GOING, UH, THROUGH THAT SECTION THERE. AND THEN BY US ACTUALLY INTERCEPTING THE WATER WITH OUR MOST WESTERN STREET IN THERE, WE'RE ACTUALLY PREVENTING SOME OF THAT WATER GETTING INTO MUD CREEK AT THAT UPSTREAM SECTION. WE'RE COLLECTING IT, AND THEN WE'RE PROVIDING THE DETENTION BEFORE WE RELEASE IT BACK INTO MUD CREEK AT THE END OF OUR PROJECT. SO THE, THE, THE EFFECT THAT WE HAVE ON THE UPSTREAM IS ACTUALLY BETTER. UM, IT, IT, IT'S PROVIDING BETTER CONVEYANCE AND AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE PUTTING LESS WATER THROUGH THAT, THAT SECTION OF MUD CREEK WE'RE, WE'RE BUTTING UP AGAINST OAKLAND STATE. SO. I SEE. OKAY. AND JUST ONE LAST QUESTION ON THE DETENTION FACILITY, THAT'S YOUR BUILDING WHO WILL MAINTAIN THAT? DOES THAT HAVE TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE H O A THAT YOU'LL DEVELOP? WHO'S MAINTAINING THAT? YES. YEAH. SO AS PART OF THE, THE DETENTION ORDINANCE, UH, THE, WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE ACCEPTANCE OF THE, UH, DETENTION FACILITY BY BOTH THE ENGINEER AND BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. AND THEN THERE WILL HAVE TO BE A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT IN PLACE, WHICH I'M 99% SURE THIS IS GONNA BE H O A MAINTAIN, UH, I CAN'T SAY THAT FOR SURE BECAUSE I'M NOT THE ONE THAT'S DOING THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT I WOULD, ALMOST A HUNDRED PERCENT OF ALL DETENTION BASINS WE DO WITHIN SUBDIVISIONS ARE MAINTAINED BY THE H O A. OKAY. AND I'M SORRY, I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. SO WHEN IT'S AN EARTH CHANNEL, HOW, HOW MUCH DO, AND MAYBE YOU CAN'T REALLY ANSWER THIS, BUT IN JUST MAYBE REASONING IT, ANIMALS PROBABLY STILL STAY WITHIN THE AREA IF IT'S MORE OF AN EARTH AND CHANNEL THAN IF IT WAS A CONCRETE ONE? YEAH, IT, IT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE, THE ECOLOGY EFFECTS OF BETWEEN EARTH AND AND CONCRETE AS FAR AS WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE WILDLIFE. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, IF YOU JUST THINK FROM A STANDPOINT OF, UM, UM, AESTHETICS I GUESS, OF WHAT YOU FEEL IS MORE NATURAL, OBVIOUSLY THE CONCRETE, UM, IS GONNA BE A LOT MORE UNNATURAL OR THE GENERAL WORK AFTER VEGETATED. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL MY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER BY SHOW OF HANDS. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES, THIS IS A QUESTION EITHER FOR STAFF OR FOR, UH, SAWS, AND THAT'S IN REGARDS TO THE EXISTING SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS. UM, WERE THOSE BUILT UNDER THE SAME KIND OF RESTRICTIONS THAT WE SEE FOR THIS DEVELOP THAT WOULD HAPPEN FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT? I'M TALKING ABOUT IMPERVIOUS COVER OR FOR ONSITE RETENTION, OR WAS THAT KIND OF BEFORE THE CITY ADOPTED SOME OF THOSE, UH, REQUIREMENTS? MIKE ANTE, ARE YOU STILL ON THE LINE? YES, YES, I'M HERE. UM, YEAH, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE THE RESIDENT RANCH NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, THAT, BUT THE, THE PROPOSED, UH, OR ZONING CASE, UH, IT WAS BUILT IN, IN 94, 95, AND THEY DID HAVE SUBMITTED A, UH, OR THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME HAD SUBMITTED A WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN. AND, UH, THEY WERE, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS 30 ACRES AND THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD WAS 39%. AT THE TIME, UM, THEY WERE REQUIRED TO PLUG AN EXISTING, WELL, BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT USED TO BE A, A FARM AT ONE TIME. [02:10:01] UH, HOWEVER, AT THE TIME, THIS WAS BACK IN 94 WHEN PC TWO APPROVED THEIR, UH, WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN, UH, UM, THEY WEREN'T REQUIRED TO, UM, INSTALL A PERMANENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE SUCH AS A WATER QUALITY BASIN. UH, T C E Q JUST WANTED THEM TO PLUG THE, UH, EXISTING WELL SO THAT NO CONTAMINANTS CAN GO INTO THE AQUIFER. UM, AND THEY, THEY HAD 'EM, UH, SEAL UP, UH, SOME LOW, LOW SENSITIVE, UH, UH, GEOLOGIC FEATURES SUCH AS CLOSE DEPRESSION AT THE TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT'S, UH, ALL OF MY QUE ACTUALLY, I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UH, A FROM THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AFTERWARDS ABOUT, UH, SARAH, BUT, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE ON THE LINE ANYMORE, SO NO, THEY'RE NOT. OKAY, THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, UM, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. THANKS. UM, MY ONLY QUESTION, UM, THAT REMAINS UNANSWERED IS WITH RESPECT TO THE TREES. UM, I KNOW ONE OF THE, THE FOLKS WHO EITHER CALLED IN OR SPOKE OR, OR WROTE IN, UM, HAD A CONCERN ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF TREES, AND I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THE TREE ORDINANCE WILL BE APPLICABLE TO THIS PROPERTY AND, UM, THAT THE, THAT THE TREES WILL BE PRESERVED THAT NEED TO BE PRESERVED UNDER THAT ORDINANCE. THIS IS KAT, JUST TO LET Y'ALL KNOW IT, UM, ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT GOES THROUGH OUR PROCESS HAS TO MEET OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SO IT WILL BE REVIEWED, UH, INCLUDING ANY, UH, TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS. UH, BUT THAT IS TYPICALLY DONE DURING THE SUBDIVISION PLAT PROCESS, UM, WHICH IT TYPICALLY FOLLOWS THE ZONING PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? UH, THANKS TO COMMISSIONER SYS. I NOW HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR SAWS JUST TO UNDERSTAND. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THE, UH, BEST PRACTICES FOR MANAGING POLLUTANTS AND HOW THOSE ARE SCREENED OUT, WHAT HAVE YOU, IS IT SAWS THAT ENFORCES IT OR DOES THAT FALL TO THE OAS TO BE SURE THAT THOSE BEST PRACTICES ARE FOLLOWED? IS THAT PUT INTO THEIR DEEP RESTRICTIONS? HOW DOES THAT WORK? UH, SO AS FAR AS, UH, THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE, UH, THE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE, UH, UH, FOR INSTANCE, UH, WATER QUALITY BASIN, UH, THE, THE H O A WOULD, UH, WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE, UH, MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF THE, UH, OF THE STORMWATER QUALITY, UH, UH, STRUCTURE. UH, WE, WE, UH, HAVE BEEN FOR SEVERAL YEARS, WE GO OUT AND INSPECT EVERY WATER QUALITY BASIN THROUGHOUT THE RECHARGE ZONE. AND SO ONCE IT IS, IS BUILT, UM, WE, WE, INCLUDING MYSELF AT TIMES, WE WILL GO OUT AND INSPECT THE BASIN, UM, USUALLY ONCE GO OUT AND INSPECT 'EM ONCE A YEAR. UM, AND IT'S AS FAR AS, UH, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER THE OTHER PART OF THE QUESTION AS FAR AS THE IMPERIOUS COVER LIMITATION, AFTER THE ZONING CASE GETS APPROVED THROUGH, THROUGH, UH, UH, UH, ZONING AND, AND CITY SAN ANTONIO APPROVES IT OR CITY COUNCIL, UM, WHEN HE COMES IN FOR, FOR BUILDING PERMITS AND, UH, PRIOR TO, TO THE, UH, BUILDING PERMITS GETTING APPROVED, WE HAVE TO REVIEW THE WATER QUALITY, UH, UH, WATER, UH, WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN AND, UH, MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE 35% REVERSE COVER LIMITATION. OKAY. JUST ONE MORE QUESTION. SO SAS WILL DO POSSIBLY YEARLY INSPECTIONS OF THESE BASINS. WHAT HAPPENS IN THE SITUATION THOUGH, WHEN THERE IS NO H O A OR MANAGING, UH, ENTITY FOR A SUBDIVISION THAT IS CONTRIBUTING IN THAT, TO THAT BASIN? WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S AN ISSUE? HOW DO YOU RESOLVE IT? W WHAT WE'LL TYPICALLY DO IS, UH, WE, WE WILL RESEARCH THE, UH, WATER PUSH ABATEMENT PLAN WITHIN THE, THE FILE ITSELF. THE, UH, OWNER OR THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME SIGNS OFF ON THE, UH, MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, WHICH IS, UH, SIGNED AND SUBMITTED TO, TO THE, UH, STATE, UH, TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND, [02:15:01] UH, SAWS, UH, OFFER PROTECTION. WE ALSO RECEIVED A COPY OF IT. WE, WE HOLD THE, THE DEVELOPER RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT MAINTENANCE UNTIL THEY DECIDE TO DO A TRANSFER OF, UH, OWNERSHIP, UH, OF THE WATER QUALITY BASIN. UM, WE'LL, WE'LL ALSO REFERENCE, UH, BEAR COUNTY APPRAISAL, UH, THE TAXING DISTRICT TO, UM, TO RESEARCH THE, THE OWNERSHIP ON, ON BASINS. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE JUST FORGOTTEN AND NOBODY EVER IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE. THERE IS STILL A METHOD TO DO THAT. YES, MA'AM. THERE IS. OKAY. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION PORTION OF, UM, THIS CASE, LET'S, UH, TAKE A QUICK, UH, BREAK. UM, IT'S FIVE MINUTES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. JUST, UM, SO WHEN WE DO OUR BREAKS, DO WE, UM, MUTE OUR CAMERAS, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROTOCOL IS HERE. SO WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD TAKE YOU OFF LIVESTREAM, BUT I WOULD GO AHEAD AND MUTE YOUR CAM, UH, MUTE YOUR AUDIO IF, UH, YOU'RE GONNA DO A, A BREAK AND IF WE CAN LIMIT IT TO FIVE MINUTES. FIVE MINUTES, THAT WAY YEAH. WE CAN GET BACK TO, UH, TO BUSINESS. OKAY. FIVE, FIVE MINUTES. IT'S CURRENTLY 3 16 0 3 21. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES, WE'RE READY. THE LIVE STREAM IS BACKED UP. GO AHEAD. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO, UM, START OFF WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, WHITE PLEASE. YES, ALL, UM, SO AS I MENTIONED, WE'VE BEEN DOING SOME HOMEWORK ON IT THIS OVER THE LAST COUPLE DAYS. AND, UM, WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE A, A COMPLEX, UM, PIECE OF PROPERTY. UM, AND, AND WE HAVE AN ISSUE AS WE HEARD TODAY, WHERE WE HAVE RESIDENTS, UH, IN THE AREA. I THINK A COUPLE OF TIMES I HEARD, UM, YOU KNOW, MY MIKE GREENBELT AND, AND SO, UH, MAYBE SOME, UM, CONFUSION THERE AS TO, TO WHAT THIS PROPERTY ACTUALLY ACTUALLY IS. AND WHAT IT IS, IS IT IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S OWNED BY A LANDOWNER, UM, IN MY OPINION, HAS, HAS, AND I THINK WE ALL AGREE, HAS THE RIGHT TO, UH, DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY, UH, WITHIN THE, UH, ZONING ORDINANCES SET FORTH FOR THE PROPERTY. AND, UH, WHILE THAT OBVIOUSLY IS GONNA CAUSE SOME FOLKS, UH, SOME HEARTACHE, UH, I AGAIN, CHALLENGE EVERYBODY HERE TO LOOK AT THIS IN THE CONTEXT, WHICH WE MUST, THAT IS THAT THIS IS A ZONING CASE AND WE NEED TO LOOK, UH, AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS ZONING REQUEST IS APPROPRIATE. UM, AND FROM WHAT I SEE, UH, IT REALLY IS, UM, WHAT I SEE HERE IS THIS ZONING CHANGE REALLY IS BRINGING THIS PROPERTY, UM, IT, IT FITS THE SURROUNDING AREA. UH, AS WE HEARD, WE'VE GOT R FIVES AND R SIXES ALL AROUND HERE. UM, AND SO THE REQUEST HERE REALLY DOES, UH, FIT THE AREA. UH, STAFF HAS APPROVED THIS, UM, SAW US AFTER AN EXTENSIVE REVIEW, UM, HAS GIVEN THEIR APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT. UM, THESE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'VE GOTTA GIVE GREAT WEIGHT TO. 'CAUSE, UM, OTHER THAN, UH, THE DEVELOPER, UM, I THINK SAS AND, AND STAFF HAVE, HAVE REALLY GIVEN THIS, UH, THE MOST THOROUGH LOOK. AND, AND AGAIN, THEY'VE, THEY'VE APPROVED THIS. UM, I DON'T SEE WHY, UM, ANY MORE TIME IS NEEDED HERE. I THINK WE, AS COMMISSIONERS, WERE ALSO INSTRUCTED, YOU KNOW, TO REALLY USE CONTINUANCES DURING THIS, UH, PANDEMIC SORT OF VERY JUDICIOUSLY BECAUSE FOLKS LIKE, UH, THE APPLICANT HERE HAD WAITED A LONG TIME AND, UM, PUSHING THIS DOWN THE ROAD FURTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT GOING TO, IS NOT GONNA SOLVE ANY, UM, I THINK THE PROPER WORK'S BEEN DONE BY THE APPLICANT. UM, I THINK SOME OF THE CONCERNS WE, WE'VE HEARD, WHILE I SYMPATHIZE WITH THOSE, UM, I THINK A LOT OF THOSE WITH RESPECT TO THE FLOODING AND OTHER ISSUES, UM, THAT'S NOT IN OUR PURVIEW TODAY. UM, WE'RE HERE TO JUST ANALYZE THE ZONING REQUESTS AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER PLANNING ISSUES I THINK ARE GONNA GET, UH, WORKED OUT BETWEEN, UH, TODAY AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, UH, AS THIS THING MOVES FORWARD. UM, SO I REALLY [02:20:01] COMMEND THE APPLICANT ON DOING WORK HERE, UM, TAKING A COMPLEX PIECE OF PROPERTY AND, UH, FITTING IT INTO SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS JUST, UH, VERY COMPATIBLE, UH, WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. AND, UM, THAT'S WHY I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT. AND WE'LL MAKE A MOTION, UH, THAT WE APPROVE THE REQUEST. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. WHO MADE THE SECOND? COMMISSIONER HUEY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. UM, THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR, UH, DISCUSSION, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH, UH, DISCUSSION. RAISE OF HANDS PLEASE. COMMISSIONER ROMERO. THANK YOU. I WILL TRY NOT TO PROLONG THIS. UM, I JUST WANNA SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS. I, I GENUINELY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER WHITE. UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF THINGS HERE THAT WE ALWAYS HEAR ABOUT THE PERMANENT GREEN BILL. UM, AND I, AND I'M SORRY, IT'S JUST NOT, UM, THE ONE THING, UM, THAT DOES CONCERN ME, UM, IS, UH, FIRST OF ALL THE, UM, I, I PAY A LOT OF ATTENTION TO ANYTHING FROM GIA AND FROM ANNA LISA PIECE, AND I TAKE HER CONCERNS VERY SERIOUSLY. UH, THEY CONSISTENTLY OPPOSE UPZONING IN THE RECHARGE ZONE. I DON'T REALLY THINK THIS IS UPZONING, UH, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT CAN BE BUILT WITH THE CHANGE AND WHAT CAN BE BUILT, UH, WITH, WITH WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, UH, BUT I DO APPRECIATE THAT THEY ARE ALWAYS CONSISTENT ON THAT. UM, I, I DO THINK YOU KNOW THAT IN A WAY, THERE, THERE IS A ZONING ISSUE IN THE SENSE OF THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT VERSUS THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. AND THAT'S WHAT GIVES ME PAUSE ON THIS. UM, AND I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M CERTAINLY NOT EXPERT ENOUGH TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UM, GROUPING, UH, DEVELOPMENT CLOSER TOGETHER AND LEAVING MORE OPEN SPACE VERSUS JUST HAVING MORE OR FEWER BIGGER LOTS. UM, THE THING THAT REALLY GAVE ME PAUSE ON THIS, UM, WERE THE COMMENTS, UH, FOR MELISSA BRYANT AND FOR MR. HARMON FROM SARAH. UM, BECAUSE ESPECIALLY KNOW MELISSA BRYANT, AND I KNOW SHE REALLY KNOWS WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT. I KNOW THAT SAWS, UM, IS VERY IMPORTANT, THIS AS WELL. BUT SARAH IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT IN LOOKING AT THE SYSTEMS OF, OF OUR DRAINAGE IN, IN THIS AREA. AND SO I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT LATER SAID, UH, THAT SARAH WOULD BE PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS. SO I, I'M WILLING TO SUPPORT THIS, BUT JUST WITH THE PROVISO THAT I REALLY DO HOPE THAT SARAH IS GIVEN A VERY PROMINENT ROLE IN MOVING THIS FORWARD. AND THAT IS IT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ROMERO. OKAY. UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. THANK YOU. UM, THIS IS SOMEWHAT OF A TOUGH CASE IN MY PERSPECTIVE, NOT BECAUSE THE LANDOWNER DOESN'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP IT, BUT JUST BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE DIFFERENCES IN THE LOT SIZE ARE SIX VERSUS THE MP 10. UM, I DON'T THINK THAT A FULL 94 UNITS COULD PROBABLY BE DEVELOPED ON THAT SITE, JUST GIVEN WHAT WE'VE HEARD TODAY WITH THE CONTOURS OF THE LAND AND THE, UH, THE FLOODING OF THAT AREA AND HOW THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE MANAGED. BUT GIVEN THAT, UH, AS WELL AS ALWAYS THE CONCERNS THAT WE FACE WITH WILDLIFE AND FAUNA AND LOSS OF THAT KIND OF HABITAT, I ALSO WANNA, UH, ECHO MY COLLEAGUE'S COMMENTS ABOUT SARAH AND THEIR CONCERNS WITH WHAT THAT FLOODING WOULD DO. BUT I ALSO LOOK AT WHAT THIS DEVELOPMENT COULD BRING, WHICH IS BETTER AND MORE CONTROLLED TYPE OF FLOODING AND CHANNELIZING OF THAT WATER. UM, AND I THINK THAT THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH SARAH AND SAWS IN THE CITY AND WITH FEMA CAN ONLY BENEFIT WHAT MIGHT NOT. WELL, IT WILL STILL BE, IT WILL STILL BE LOOKED AT WHETHER IT REMAINS THE SAME OR NOT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD JUST AT LEAST BE BETTER LOOKED AT NOW AND GIVE THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS FROM THIS THE OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AND TO PROTECT AS MUCH AS THEY CAN THEIR PERIMETER, BE THAT WITH THE FENCING OR ADDITIONAL BUFFERING. UH, SO I WOULD STILL LIKE TO SEE THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE COUNCILMAN COUNCILMAN'S OFFICE WORK TOGETHER ON TRYING TO HELP MAYBE, UH, ENCOURAGE SOME COVENANTS BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE, UH, THE NEIGHBORS. UM, AND THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. UM, COMMISSIONER, SHOW OF HANDS COMMENTS. UM, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. UH, REALLY JUST FOR THE APPLICANT AND [02:25:01] NOT TO BELABOR THE POINT, WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE Y'ALL WORK ON RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, UH, WITH THE SARAH, UM, ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE, BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS HERE. I THINK YOU HAVE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THEM AND WANT YOU TO ENCOURAGE, WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO SO BEFORE COUNSEL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONER . OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONER SIPES. YES. UH, MY, MY, UH, FEDERAL COMMISSION HAVE, UH, ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS THAT I HAD AS WELL AS FAR AS, UM, SARAH. UM, BUT I, I, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION BECAUSE OF THE, UH, SAUL'S REPORT AS FAR AS THE, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I ASKED WAS ABOUT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, AND, AND THIS IS TO HAVE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER THAN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS WITH ADDITION OF NOW HAVING TO DO SOME BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. AND YES, IT'S A DIFFICULT SITE, AND I THINK THAT'S FOR ME THE, UM, THE, THE DECIDING, UM, FOR SWAYING IT. SO I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UM, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE, THANKS. UM, I JUST WANNA ECHO THE CONCERNS OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, WHICH I THINK, UM, EVERYONE HAS SAID IT REALLY WELL. UM, BUT ONE THING I DID WANNA SAY, UM, I, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. UM, I DO THINK THAT ZONING, UM, WE DO HAVE TO LOOK AT, UM, ISSUES SUCH AS HOW THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE, UM, OR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE MADE AT THIS COMMITTEE AND THEN APPROVED AT CITY COUNCIL COULD POTENTIALLY AFFECT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. SO I THINK THAT, UM, WORKING WITH THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO DEVELOP RESTRICTED COVENANTS WITH RESPECT TO THE MF 18, UM, AS WELL AS THE DRAINAGE AND THE MAINTENANCE AND THE ISSUES THERE, I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. UM, NUMBER ONE, BECAUSE IT COULD HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT. AND NUMBER TWO, BECAUSE WHILE, UH, THE DEVELOPER WE HAVE NOW SEEMS TO BE VERY COMMITTED, UM, THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING THAT DEVELOPER FROM SELLING THIS PROPERTY TO SOMEONE ELSE WHO COULD THEN, UM, JUST GO, GO FORWARD. HOWEVER, THEY, THEY WISH, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY WITH RESPECT TO THE MF 18, I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, STAFF HAS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS ITS PROCESSES IN PLACE, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THOSE IN ORDER FOR THIS TO GO FORWARD AND, AND THE DRAINAGE ASPECTS. BUT I WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT, UH, THAT YOU DO, UH, PROTECT YOUR FELLOW NEIGHBORS WITH RESPECT TO THAT, UH, THAT DENSITY ON THE M OF 18. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? RAISE OF HANDS? UH, COMMISSIONER KAMATH. YEAH. UM, I KIND OF, UH, ECHO, UH, MOST OF THE COMMENTS BY THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS. THE, I'M KIND OF IMPRESSED BY THE DEVELOPER WANTING TO KEEP, UH, THE MF UH, UH, 18 AREA ONLY TO KNOW MORE THAN 12 GARDEN HOMES. YOU KNOW, THAT'S VERY IMPRESSIVE. UH, AND WE'LL GO ALONG WITH THE OTHER R SIX, UH, UH, LOTS. UH, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, MOTION. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. THANK YOU, CHAIR. UH, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA, AND IF THAT LAND CONTINUES TO REMAIN AS IT IS, IT WILL BECOME MORE OF A PROBLEM. UH, BLOOD ZONES ARE STUDIED. THEY CAN ONLY GET WATER. THEY STUDIED, AND THEY KNOW HOW HIGH IT SOUNDED LIKE. NONE OF THOSE RESIDENTS HAVE ANY TYPE OF FLOOD. ER, UH, DID A FLOOD SERT OR ELEVATION CERT TO HAVE ANY FLOOD INSURANCE, SO THEY'RE NOT FLOODING. UM, BUT THAT LAND IS DOING SOMETHING AND IT NEEDS TO BE MITIGATED, AND THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO DO THAT. AS FAR AS THE NP 10 IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, THOSE, THOSE ARE SIX HOUSES, IS WHAT IS MORE APPROPRIATE IN THAT AREA THAN THE NP 10, THE LARGER LOTS. UM, AND I THINK IT WILL SERVE THIS, UH, COMMUNITY VERY NICELY, AND IT WILL SERVE DISTRICT 10 VERY LONG. UM, I ALSO AM A LITTLE BIT, AND MAYBE HAVE SOME PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS WITH THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO IMPOSE RESTRICTED COVENANTS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S OUR PURVIEW. WELL, I THINK THAT'S A NICE PERK TO HAVE, MAYBE IN THE FUTURE AS COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION WITH THESE TYPE OF DEVELOPERS AND THE, AND THE, UH, UH, THE NEIGHBORS, I SUPPOSE. BUT IT'S NOT, I'M, I'M A LITTLE BIT PUZZLED [02:30:01] AS TO WHY THAT'S EVEN A DISCUSSION, UM, ON A ZONING CASE. SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OFF TABLE FOR ME AS TO WHY I WOULD CONSIDER, UH, VOTING YES OR NO. AND I, I THINK IT SHOULD BE FOR ALL OF US, ALTHOUGH IT'S NICE AND HAVING AS HELP OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO SHOW A LITTLE MORE IMPROVEMENT TOWARDS EACH OTHER. UM, AND WE'VE GOTTEN SOME WORK FROM THE DEVELOPER THAT THEY WILL DO. SO I JUST CAUTION THIS, AND I THOUGHT WE HAD HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE. UM, SOME OF US SAY THAT STRICTLY COVENANTS WERE NOT OUR PURVIEW AT ALL. SO I'M SURPRISED THAT THAT CAME UP. UM, BUT I THINK IT'S A GREAT DEVELOPMENT. YOU DID A WONDERFUL JOB OF PRESENTING THE CASE TODAY. UH, I COVERED ALL THE AREAS VERY NICELY AND WITH THE APPLICANT, I'M GIVING YOU A APPLAUSE HERE. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY. WITH, UH, NO OTHER DISCUSSION, UM, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. JUST TO REITERATE, MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HUY. COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE. UM, MADAM CHAIR. PARDON? YES, SIR. MR. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE, THAT'S WHI SAUL'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU. THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. YOU OKAY? COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMUS? YES. COMMISSIONER LOUIS? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE AYE. AND CHAIR MCGEE? YES. MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE BY A VOTE OF 11 TO ZERO. ALRIGHT, ARE WE READY FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE? YES. ALRIGHT. [3. ZONING CASE Z-2019-10700288 HL (Council District 1): A request for a change in zoning from "RM-4 AHOD" Residential Mixed Airport Hazard Overlay District to "RM-4 HL AHOD" Residential Mixed Historic Landmark Airport Hazard Overlay District on Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 30, NCB 3036, located at 214 Lotus Avenue. Staff recommends Approval. (Mirko Maravi, Planner (210) 207-0107, mirko.maravi@sanantonio.gov; Development Services Department)] ITEM NUMBER THREE IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM RM FOUR A H O V TO RM FOUR H L A H O V, LOCATED AT TWO 14 MOSES AVENUE. THERE WERE 32 NOTICES MAILED THREE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION. AND LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. THE REQUEST FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION WAS INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL. THE OWNER DOES NOT SUPPORT THE DESIGNATION. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVED A FINDING OF HIS HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE, IDENTIFYING THE PROPERTY AS HISTORICALLY SIGN SIGNIFICANT BASED ON CRITERIA LISTED IN SECTION 35 DASH 6 0 7 B OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. WE WILL HAVE, UH, O H P STAFF NOW ADDRESS THIS ITEM. OKAY. GIVE US A MOMENT TO GET THEM ON THE LINE. THIS IS JESSICA ANDERSON, THIS IS JENNY HAY. OH, HI JENNY. PLEASE GO AHEAD. UM, I HAVE A PRESENTATION, UM, THAT IS COMPLETE SENT OVER THAT I JUST WANTED TO SHOW, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. YES, IT ITSELF, JUST LET US KNOW WHAT SLIDE TO GO TO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YEAH, WE CAN START THE FIRST ONE AND I'LL TELL YOU WHEN TO CHANGE WHEN IT'S VERY SHORT. OKAY. GO AHEAD. ALRIGHT, THANKS. UM, UH, THIS IS DR. JENNY HAY. I'M THE PROGRAM MANAGER HERE AT THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. AND, UM, I'M GLAD TO BE HERE WITH YOU VIRTUALLY, AND I HOPE, UM, COMMISSIONERS THAT YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES ARE ALL SAFE AND HEALTHY. UM, THIS IS A DESIGNATION CASE THAT WE ARE BRINGING TO YOU BASED ON THE DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL, AND I WILL KEEP THINGS, UH, VERY BRIEF. UM, IF WE COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, I'M JUST SEEING A MAP ON THE, UH, [02:35:01] YEAH. UH, THE LIVE STREAM'S GONNA HAVE A, A DELAY, JENNY, SO JUST USE YOUR PAPER COPY AND TELL US WHICH SLIDE. OKAY. I'M ON SLIDE TWO, . OKAY, GO AHEAD. SO ARE WE. THANK YOU ALL. UM, SO WE DISTRICT F TWO 14 LOTUS, WHICH IS A SH SHINGLE STORY, QUEEN AND SOUND RESIDENCE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1909. IT'S LOCATED IN THE LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS IN, UM, COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE. IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAVACCA HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND THIS PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH, SOUTH ST. MARY'S NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT. THAT'S NCD ONE. UM, YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL NEARBY LANDMARKS, AND THOSE PROPERTIES ARE OUTLINED IN RED. AND COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? OKAY. UH, AFTER WE RECEIVED A REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION IN JUNE OF 2019, UM, O H P STAFF COMPLETED A HISTORIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BUILDING AT TWO 14 LOTUS. UM, BASED ON STAFF'S RESEARCH, WE DETERMINED THAT IT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION. AND, UM, I'LL SHARE THOSE CRITERIA OF SIGNIFICANCE WITH YOU IN JUST A MINUTE. UH, THE REQUEST FOR A FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE WAS HEARD BY THE H D R C ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2019. H D R C AGREED WITH STAFF THAT THE STRUCTURE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DESIGNATION. AND SO SENT THE CASE TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO BEGIN, UH, REZONING AS AN INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK. UM, THAT CASE WAS HEARD IN OCTOBER AND, UH, CITY COUNCIL, UM, DIRECTED STAFF AT THAT TIME TO BEGIN THE REZONING PROCESS. AND SO THE CASE RETURNED TO H C R C, UH, FOR A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT DESIGNATION ITSELF, AND NOW IS HERE WITH YOU TODAY. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS OPPOSED TO THIS CERTIFICATION. UM, IF WE COULD MOVE FORWARD TO THE NEXT SLIDE BEFORE, UM, SO THE CRITERIA THAT, UH, THAT SHE OR SHE EVALUATED, UM, THE PROPERTY ON, UH, WERE, UM, ITS, UH, ITS EMBODIMENT OF DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IN THIS CASE IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF THE IAN STYLE. UM, IT'S HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL AND CULTURAL INTEGRITY. UM, IN THIS CASE, UH, THIS, UM, HOME WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE FIRST TO BE BUILT ON MODUS STREET. UH, THE STREET WAS, UM, OPEN TO THE SAME YEAR THAT THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1909 AND, UM, AS PART OF WHAT DEATH WAS FOUND TO BE AN ELIGIBLE HISTORIC DISTRICT. SO FOR ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH, UM, THE, UH, OTHER SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURES ALONG THIS, UH, THIS STREETSCAPE. AND AGAIN, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE, UM, UH, NUMEROUS, UM, INDIVIDUAL LANDMARKS SURROUNDING THIS. AND IT IS SORT OF, UM, IN A, A KIND OF UNIQUE AREA JUST OFF OF DOWNTOWN THAT, UM, IS, IT IS NOT PROTECTED CURRENTLY BY A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THEN GO, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, AGAIN, UH, CITY COUNCIL, UH, SENT US, UH, THIS, UM, DIRECTION TO GO AHEAD AND INITIATE ZONING CHANGES THAT WOULD INDIVIDUALLY DESIGNATE, UM, TWO 14 LOADED. AND AFTER THIS CASE IS HEARD BY YOU, OF COURSE IT WILL STILL GO BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY. ALRIGHT. NOW, I BELIEVE WE, UH, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR, OR NO, I'M SORRY, THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE IS ON THE LINE, SO, OH. ALL RIGHT. SO LET ME JUST CLARIFY. O H P IS THE APPLICANT, THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OWNER WHO IS OPPOSED TO IT IS ON THE LINE. UM, UH, WE ARE HAVING TROUBLE TRYING TO REACH THE OWNER, UH, BUT WE DO HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO IS REPRESENTING THE OKAY. IF WE COULD HAVE THEM PLEASE. SURE. STAND BY FOR ONE MOMENT. OKAY. JOSE? JOSE, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? OH, I, I AM GUESSING HE'S HAVING DIFFICULTY FROM HIS END, BUT HE'S ON THE CALL ACCORDING TO OUR, WE HAVE A, UM, SO CHAIR IF YOU, UM, WANT TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON, BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THEY ARE OPPOSED. OKAY. IT, IT'S, CAN WE TRY TO WORK THAT OUT AND, UM, SO WE CAN HEAR FROM THEM? THAT WOULD BE GREAT. IS IT, IS THERE ANY ONE SIGNED UP FOR, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT? [02:40:03] THERE WAS NO ONE SIGNED IN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. AND CAN WE GET ANY, UM, EMAIL OR, UM, VOICEMAILS? YEP. VOICEMAILS, NO EMAILS. MM-HMM. , JUST, CAN WE JUST TRY IT ONE MORE TIME FOR THE REPRESENTATIVE, PLEASE? WE'RE, WE'RE CALLING HIM AGAIN, TRYING. ARE YOU ON THE WAY, LINDA, THERE? THIS IS A REPRESENTATIVE. THIS IS JOSE . I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN HEAR ME. APPARENTLY WE HAVE A BAD CONNECTION. YES, YOU'RE ON. GO AHEAD, SIR. OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. OKAY. UH, I, I, I WAS BROUGHT IN, UH, I DIDN'T HEAR THE, UH, INITIAL INTRODUCTION, SO I APOLOGIZE, BUT, UH, I PRESUME IT IS, UH, CHAIRWOMAN. UH, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OWNER. UH, AS, AS, AS YOU ARE AWARE, THIS IS A LITTLE CHALLENGING AND, UH, UH, UNCHARTERED TERRITORY. UH, SO IT'S, UH, A RATHER UNIQUE, UH, EXPERIENCE. BUT, UH, AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE OUR POSITION, UH, THAT WE STRONGLY, STRONGLY OPPOSE, UH, THE CITY'S DESIRE, UH, TO HAVE THE CASE OR, OR THE PROPERTY SUCH A PROPERTY, REONE, UH, I'D LIKE TO REMIND, UH, THE HONORABLE BOARD SEVERAL POINTS. ONE IS THAT IT IS OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LA BACA FOR DISTRICT. UH, THERE'S SOME CONFUSION THERE, BUT IT IS DEFINITELY OUTSIDE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, AND OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF, UH, SOUTHWEST SOUTH ST. MARY'S CONSERVATION DISTRICT. SO IT'S NOT CURRENTLY IN ANY ONE OF THOSE DISTRICTS. UH, THERE IS, UH, HISTORICAL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE AREA, BUT DEFINITELY THIS PROPERTY IS NOT, UH, PART OF THAT. UM, THE SATELLITE VIEW, UH, OF A PROPERTY INDICATES THAT, UH, THERE WAS AT LEAST FOUR PHASES OF, UH, ADDITION TO THE ORIGINAL, UH, CORE, UH, STRUCTURE. THIS IS BASED ON ERROR ABUSE, UH, TAKEN BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. UM, SO, UH, WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT, UH, THIS CASE DOES NOT MEET THE THREE ELEMENTS, A MINIMUM, THREE ELEMENTS, UH, TO BE DESIGNATED AS HISTORIC, UH, LANDMARK. UH, AND IN PARTICULAR, IT IS THE, THE COMPROMISING OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE. THE FACT THAT, UH, THE, THE FRONT PORCH THAT WAS ORIGINALLY, UH, CONSTRUCTED OUT OF, UM, UH, OF WOOD, UH, WAS REPLACED WITH A, UH, UH, CONCRETE PORCH. THE FRONT FACADE, UH, HAS, UH, BRICK VENEER, WHICH AGAIN, WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL, UH, CORE, UH, OF THE PROPERTY. UH, SEVERAL WINDOWS THAT HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS, AGAIN, NOT HAVING ANY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, UH, OF THE PROPERTY. SO, UH, JUST BASED ON, ON, ON THOSE, UH, MINIMAL, UM, UH, ISSUES, WE FEEL THAT IT WAS NOT CONSTITUTE, UH, AN ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY, UH, CONSTITUTING A, A HISTORICAL LANDMARK. UH, IT, IT IS, IT IS JUST BEEN, UH, REMODELED AND REDONE AND, AND MODIFIED FROM ITS ORIGINAL, UH, UH, CONSTRUCTION. AND, AND THERE THEREFORE, UH, IT CANNOT, YOU KNOW, AND THAT NOT MEET, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SIGNIFICANCE THAT, THAT THAT WAS USED TO, UH, UH, THE DESIGNATED. NOW, I WANNA WHEN OUT TO THAT, THE, THE REVIEW OF THIS PROPERTY BY CITY STAFF ALSO BECAME, AT ONE TIME IT WAS, IT WAS USED POSSIBLY, UH, FOR APARTMENTS. IT HAD BEEN, UH, SEPARATED INTO, UH, DIFFERENT APARTMENTS AND [02:45:01] WAS BEING UTILIZED AND RENTED AS, AS APARTMENT ONE. SO AGAIN, SPEAKING TO THE LACK OF INTEGRITY OF THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, IT HASN'T CONSTITUTED A CONTINUUM OF, UH, HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. UH, WE ALSO HAVE A, UM, A PROFESSIONAL, UH, ENGINEER, LICENSED ENGINEER, UH, WHO INSPECTED, UH, THE PROPERTY AND INDICATED THAT, UH, BASED ON HIS INSPECTION, UH, WE HAVE A CERTIFIED LETTER THAT, UH, HAS BEEN ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED, UH, IN OUR, UH, SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND OPPOSITION. AND, AND THE, UH, THE ESSENCE OF, OF HIS LETTER IS OPPOSING, UH, ANY, ANY SIGNIFICANT, UH, HIS FUL INTEGRITY OF THE PROPERTY. UH, THE, THE OWNER, UH, UH, AGAIN, FELT THAT HE, HE MADE A TREMENDOUS INVESTMENT, UH, BASED ON NEW IN THE AREA, UH, WAS NOT DESIGNATED A HISTORICAL PROPERTY, AND THEREFORE BOUGHT IT AS AN INVESTMENT PROPERTY. UH, WENT THROUGH ALL THE LOOPS AND, AND, UH, AGREED AND, AND TO COME TO, TO ALL THE, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY HAD, UH, FOR, UH, ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION. AT THAT POINT, HE REALIZED BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS FROM HIS CONTRACTORS, IT WAS GOING TO BE, UM, UH, JUST, UH, FINANCIALLY, UH, JUST NOT, NOT, UH, MERITING. THE, THE, UH, UH, REMODELING AT THAT POINT IS WHEN HE APPLIED FOR THE DEMOLITION. SO THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS NOT TO DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY, IN FACT WAS TO, TO REHAB IT AND TO POSSIBLY SELL IT ONCE IT WAS, UH, UH, REPAIRED. AND, AND, AND, UH, SO THEREFORE, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT, UH, IT WAS NOT DESIGNATED. IT HAS NEVER BEEN DESIGNATED AS OR EVEN, UH, IDENTIFY NOT, NOT IN, IN A, UH, UM, UH, PROMOTION, UH, SELF-PROMOTION. AND, UH, WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY AGAINST ANY OPPOSITION. WE FEEL THAT, UH, A NEW, UH, UH, ANOTHER SUBJECT PROPERTY DOWN THE STREET, UH, ABOUT THREE, THREE HOUSES OVER WAS JUST RECENTLY DEMOLISHED. UH, IT WAS GIVEN THE, UH, DEMOLITION PERMIT, UH, AND IN FACT, IT WAS DEMOLISHED, UH, LESS THAN 60 DAYS AGO. SO THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS REALLY IN TRANSITION AND, UH, WE FEEL THAT, UH, THE INTENT OF THE CITY, IN THIS CASE, TO SINGLE OUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, UH, DOES NOT WARRANT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT NEED THREE, AT LEAST THE THREE MINERAL DESIGNATION. SO WE STRONGLY AGREE WITH THAT, WITH THAT DESIGNATION, AND WE STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT WE DENY THE ON THIS PROPERTY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UM, WE DO HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE LINE. NOW, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HERE IS, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER. I HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER TO REMIND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. GO AHEAD, PLEASE, SIR. THIS IS HECTOR ALDO. UH, MY ADDRESS IS EIGHT PARKWAY, UH, HOUSTON, TEXAS. SEVEN SEVEN. GO AHEAD, SIR. STATE YOUR, YOUR CASE. UM, MY, MY CASE IS, UH, I, WHY I'M HAVE TO BECOME A HISTORIC PROPERTY WOULD, I'VE NEVER ASKED FOR THAT. UM, FIRST OF ALL, ANYBODY WHO BUYS A PROPERTY DOES NOT, DOES NOT WANT ANYONE ELSE TO TELL 'EM HOW, WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO WITH THEIR HOME. UH, THAT'S AN INDIVIDUAL, RIGHT, OF A PERSON TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH THAT HOME. THAT HOME WAS, IS NOT IN, IN ANY CONDITION, UH, TO BE, TO BE ACTUALLY REHABBED AND TURNED INTO THAT. I MEAN, WE WOULD'VE TO BE ALMOST REBUILDING THIS INTO A HOUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE HISTORIC, BECAUSE THAT HOUSE HAS HAD MANY ADDITIONS TO THAT HOME THAT ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL HOME PER SE. SO IF THE CITY PERMITTED THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE HOMES BEFORE TO DO ADDITIONS TO THE HOME WITHOUT EVEN [02:50:01] SUPERVISION THAT ARE DONE, UH, IN A VERY POOR FASHION, WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT? AND NOW SOMEONE ELSE IS JUST COMING OUT OF THE BLUE AND JUST WANTS TO PUT THAT THERE. NOW. AND, AND, AND FORGIVE ME, I DON'T KNOW IF JOSE AND HERE GOES HEAD SPOKEN BEFORE DOWN THE STREET, THEY JUST ACTUALLY DEMOLISHED THE HOME. THAT'S ALMOST FROM THE SAME TIMEFRAME THAT THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT. I MEAN, THAT 10, 10 YEARS OR 20 YEARS THERE THAT YEAR, THAT HOUSE EIGHT YEARS OLD, THE ONE THAT GETS TO SPACE DEMOLISHING RIGHT DOWN THE STREET, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? SO, EIGHT YEARS OLD. OKAY. SO HOW COULD YOU GUYS COME TO ME AND TELL ME THAT I HAVE TO REHAB THAT HOUSE WHEN FINANCIALLY IT MAKES NO SENSE TO REFINANCE IT, TO RE, TO REDO THAT WHOLE. NOW, LIKE I SAID, IF THE CITY WANTS TO, TO DO THAT, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO BUY IT FROM ME FOR WHAT I BOUGHT IT FOR. BUT I HAD WHY ARE YOU GUYS PUTTING ME IN THIS PREDICAMENT WHERE I HAVE TO GO IN AND, AND, AND DO SOMETHING TO A HOME THAT HAS NO VALUE TO IT, IN MY SENSE ECONOMICALLY, FINANCIALLY MAKES NO SENSE TO, TO DO THIS. THANK YOU, SIR. MADAM CHAIR. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. OKAY. SO WE'LL KEEP, UM, THEM ON THE LINE AND I AM GOING TO, UH, OPEN IT UP. OH, WAIT, I'M SORRY. UM, DOES O H P HAVE A RESPONSE? HI, THIS IS JENNY HAY. SURE. I, I CAN RESPOND TO SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP AND I'M ALSO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. UM, UH, THE, THE MOST RECENT, UM, I THINK , UM, BOTH THE OWNER AND, UH, HIS REPRESENTATIVES MADE WAS REGARDING THE DEMOLITION OF ANOTHER PROPERTY DOWN THE STREET. UM, THAT'S CORRECT. UH, WE REVIEWED THAT HOUSE AS WELL. IT IS QUITE A BIT, UH, YOUNGER. UM, SO OBVIOUSLY A HISTORIC AGE, UM, BUT IT HAD UNDERGONE, UM, SOME PRETTY DRAMATIC ALTERATIONS. AND SO, UM, THE, UH, THE HISTORIC FORM OF THE HOME WAS REALLY, UM, NOT PRESENT. AND SO STAFF FOUND THAT IT WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DESIGNATION, AND THAT'S WHY THE, UM, THAT DEMOLITION REQUEST WAS APPROVED. UM, I WILL ALSO SAY, UH, THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF, UM, POINTS MADE ABOUT, UH, ADDITIONS TO THE HOME. THAT IS ALSO CORRECT. WE ACTUALLY HAD OUR DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MAKE A COUPLE OF SITE VISITS TO TAKE A LOOK, UM, TO SEE, UH, UH, WHAT, UM, WHAT REMAINED INTACT IN THE HOME. UM, AND, UH, WE PROVIDED INFORMATION, UM, IN OUR, UH, CASE FILE ABOUT THOSE ADDITIONS BEING NON-CONTRIBUTING. AND SO WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS THAT, UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE ABLE TO REMOVE NON-CONTRIBUTING ADDITIONS, UM, WITHOUT NECESSARILY HAVING TO COME FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION FOR THAT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE. THERE WAS ALSO AN OUTBUILDING ON THE SITE, BUT WE ALSO DETERMINED TO BE NON CONTRIBUTING. SO, UM, SAME SITUATION THERE. UM, AND THEN, UH, I THINK FINALLY I WOULD POINT OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY AM, UM, SYMPATHETIC TO THE ECONOMIC CHALLENGES, UH, RESTORING HOMES, AND WE DO HAVE TAX INCENTIVES AVAILABLE TO HELP SUPPORT THAT WORK. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YES. THANK YOU. UM, I HAVE, UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, UM, BOTH FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT BEING H O P, UM, AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, SO I'LL START WITH, UM, WITH O H P. UM, COULD YOU ADDRESS, UH, THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, UM, THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE LAVACCA HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT, THAT HAD BEEN DESIGNATED AS HISTORIC LANDMARKS? I KNOW THAT YOU KIND OF OUTLINED THAT MAYBE ON YOUR SECOND OR THIRD SLIDE, HOW WERE THOSE PROPERTIES DESIGNATED HISTORIC? UM, DID THEY GO THROUGH A SIMILAR PROCESS AS THIS ONE? UM, COULD YOU JUST ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT? SURE. UM, I, I COULDN'T TELL YOU PROPERTY BY PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY HOW THEY WERE DESIGNATED, BUT, UM, I, UH, I CAN TELL YOU WITH, UM, GOOD CERTAINTY THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THEM IS ACTUALLY DESIGNATED WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, UM, AT BEHEST OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. AND, UM, I WOULD VENTURE A GUESS THAT THE REMAINDER OF THEM WENT THROUGH A VERY LARGE DESIGNATION INITIATIVE THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE LATE 1980S. UM, AND SO THAT WAS THE RESULT OF A CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY THAT THE CITY HAD DONE TO IDENTIFY, UM, ELIGIBLE PROPERTIES. AND AT THAT TIME, WE HAD SOMETHING, SOMETHING LIKE 1100 INDIVIDUAL LANDMARKS DESIGNATED MOST OF THEM IN THE CENTRAL DOWNTOWN AREA. AND SO, UM, I WOULD SAY, UH, AT LEAST A FEW OF THOSE THAT YOU CAN SEE, UH, DATES BACK TO THAT DESIGNATION INITIATIVE. UM, AND THAT WAS 1988. [02:55:05] OKAY. UM, AND THEN YOU, OKAY. YOU ADDRESSED THE CHANGES TO THE PARTICULAR PROPERTY IN QUESTION. UM, SO, SO AS FAR AS THE ADDITIONS TO THE PROPERTY, UM, I GUESS, SO YOU'RE SAYING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WITH RESPECT TO THOSE ADDITIONS, UM, THOSE COULD BE REMOVED OR OTHERWISE ALTERED, UM, AND THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD GO IN AND, AND MAKE FURTHER ALTERATIONS, BUT JUST NOT TO THE ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I CAN KIND OF CLARIFY THAT. SO, UM, I, I THINK, UH, GENERALLY YOUR STATEMENT IS CORRECT. THE, UM, THE NON-CONTRIBUTING ADDITIONS OF PIECES THAT COULD BE REMOVED. UM, HE, HE COULD MAKE CHANGES TO THE, UM, THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE. IT WOULD JUST REQUIRE, UM, THE COMMISSION'S APPROVAL, UM, OR, UH, O P STAFF APPROVAL, UM, MAKING SURE THAT IT WAS IN LINE WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. SO, UM, CHANGES ARE CERTAINLY POSSIBLE. UM, UH, IN FACT, THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD, UH, AFTER IT'S DESIGNATED, COULD REQUEST DEMOLITION. IT JUST CHANGES, UM, THE PART OF THE CODE THAT APPLIES TO THAT REQUEST, AND SO CHANGES THE PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THE PROPERTY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE, UH, WHOEVER'S STILL ON THE LINE, UM, HOW LONG HAVE YOU OWNED THIS PROPERTY? EXCUSE ME. I, I ASKED HOW LONG HAVE, HAVE YOU OWNED THIS PROPERTY? I, I'VE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR A YEAR NOW. OKAY. AND, UM, WHEN YOU PURCHASED IT, UH, WAS THERE ANYONE LIVING THERE? UM, WHAT WAS THE, YEAH, AND I WONDER, AND I WONDER HOW THEY WERE LIVING THERE. WHAT CONDITIONS WERE THEY LIVING THERE? JUST WHEN WE WENT, IT'S BESIDE THE HOUSE. IT WAS DEPLORABLE. IT'S ALMOST IN THE SAME CONDITION. IF ANYBODY GOES IN, INTO THAT HOUSE, IT'S, IT WAS ALMOST IN THE SAME CONDITION. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UM, MAYBE THE QUESTIONS, UM, COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. UH, THANK YOU, CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR O H P, UM, AND I'M GONNA HAVE TO TURN MY HEAD 'CAUSE MY AUDITOR WOULD, MY DETAILS IS ON SIDE HERE, LOOKING AT YOUR CRITERIA OF EVALUATION WE WENT TO, WHICH IS POINT UNDER APPLICABLE CITATIONS, WHICH IS GOING TO BE POINT B NUMBERS FIVE, EIGHT, AND 10 OR 13. OR IF WE GO TO NUMBER EIGHT, FIRST WE HAVE IT'S HISTORICAL, ARCHITECTURAL AND CULTURAL INTEGRITY OF LOCATION, DESIGN AND MATERIALS. SO I'M GONNA TAKE THAT IN PART AND NOT AS A TOTAL ONE SENTENCE. SO, IF I WERE TO SAY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF, OF ITS MATERIALS, YOU DON'T HAVE A HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF MATERIALS ON THE HOUSE, IS THAT CORRECT? TODAY, IS THAT CORRECT? DID I LOSE HER? OH, H OH, MISS, DR. UH, HAYES, JENNY. OH, JENNY MUST HAVE DROPPED OFF THE CALL. OH, WELL, LET'S TRY TO GET TO CONNECT AGAIN. YEAH, WE NEED HER BACK. YES, PLEASE. YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL GET HER, UH, WE'LL GET HER BACK ON THE LINE. IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK WE STILL HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE, UH, ON THE, ON THE CALL AS WELL AS THE OWNER IN CASE THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS WHILE WE GET HER BACK. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION THEN, FOR THE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE HOUSE, IF THEY'RE STILL LISTED. ARE THEY STILL THERE? YES, YES, YES. WE'RE STILL THERE. I'M STILL HERE. OKAY. NICE TO MEET YOU, . WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE HOUSE, UH, ANY DOCUMENTATION PICTURE WISE, STORY WISE THAT THIS WOULD INDICATE TO YOU A HISTORICAL VALUE BASED ON THESE CRI THREE CRITERIA BY O H P? NO, NO PICTURES, NO NOTHING. IF, IF I, THIS IS JOSE , I MAY ADD TO THAT. UH, JUST THE, THE ADDITIONS TO, TO THE, TO THE FACADE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, THE FACT THAT IT IS NOW, UH, AND HAS BEEN FOR SOME TIME, I WAS NOT ABLE TO, UH, ASCERTAIN [03:00:01] WHEN IT WAS IN FACT RECONSTRUCTED. BUT THE ORIGINAL PORCH WAS A WOOD STRUCTURE. NOW IT HAS A CONCRETE PORCH, THE ENTIRE, UH, ROUNDING, UH, AREA OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY. IT ALSO HAS A FACADE, A BRICK FACADE THAT WAS ADDED AFTER, UH, THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION. JUST THOSE TWO ELEMENTS SPEAK TO THE FACT THAT IT IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN COMPROMISED, THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE HAS BEEN COMPROMISED. OKAY. SO THOSE, THOSE, IF YOU GO INSIDE THE HOME, THERE'S A WALL THAT COMES DOWN, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE ORIGINAL HOME WAS, BECAUSE THEY STILL HAVE PART OF THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOME, INSIDE OF THE HOME WHERE YOU SEE THAT THEY'VE ACTUALLY ADDED TO THIS HOUSE IN A BAD WAY. SO THIS IS NOT, THE ORIGINAL HOME HAS ALREADY BEEN TAMPERED WITH BY MANY PEOPLE, AND PROBABLY IT WAS NEVER TOLD TO THE CITY, AND EVERYBODY WAS DOING THINGS TO THIS HOUSE THAT THAT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL HOME. OKAY. SO IF YOU, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSE, AND I HAVE, I'M JUST LOOKING AT IT FROM GOOGLE, AND GOOGLE KNOWS EVERYTHING. IF YOU, WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE HOUSE AND YOU BOUGHT IT, WHAT WAS YOUR FIRST IMPRESSION? OH, THIS IS A HISTORIC HOME I'M GOING TO BUY, OR THIS IS, NO, THAT'S NOT HOW I SAW IT. OKAY. THAT'S FOR THE, OKAY. BUT THE HOUSE ITSELF, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, NOT THE LAND, WHAT WAS YOUR IMPRESSION OF THE HOUSE, THIS OLD, DILAPIDATED HOME THAT NEEDED TO BE RE THAT NEEDED TO BE KNOCKED DOWN? THAT'S HOW I SAW IT. ALL RIGHT. SO I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T BUY THE HOUSE FOR THE VALUE OF THE HOME. THE HOME WAS TOTALLY RUINED. FOUNDATION PROBLEM, A CEILING PROBLEM, ROOF PROBLEMS. IF NOTHING WAS OPERATIONAL IN THAT HOME, I THOUGHT IT FOR THE PROPERTY VALUE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. I, I GUESS I'LL WAIT FOR H O O H P. I THINK WE HAVE JENNY ON THE LINE. YES. SORRY TO GET BACK ON. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. OH, THAT'S OKAY. DANNY, WE'RE ALL WORKING THROUGH . . UM, SO JENNY, THE QUESTION IS ABOUT INTEGRITY. IS THAT RIGHT? I'M LOOKING AT YOUR THREE CRITERIA. UM, CLASS 8, 5, 8, AND 13. AND, AND IN NUMBER EIGHT, IF IT IS HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL CULTURAL DESIGN, IF I SAY JUST THAT SENTENCE, WHEN I FIRST LOOK AT THE PICTURE OF THIS HOUSE, I DON'T SEE 1909. I KNOW CONCRETE WASN'T THERE, AND I KNOW ALUMINUM WINDOWS WASN'T THERE BEFORE ANYBODY SAID ANYTHING. THOSE WERE THE TWO ELEMENTS I SAW THAT WOULD NOT TELL ME THIS WAS A 1909 HISTORICAL HOUSE. SO BASED ON THAT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO TAKE NUMBER EIGHT OFF THE TABLE AS FAR AS ONE OF YOUR CRITERIA. COULD YOU EXPLAIN, MAYBE WALK ME THROUGH THAT THINKING? SURE. UM, UH, I THINK I WOULD START BY SAYING THAT, UH, CHANGE OVER TIME IS PRETTY COMMON, UM, IN OUR SAN ANTONIO NEIGHBORHOODS AND, UH, ARE NOT, UM, SURPRISED TO SEE A CONCRETE PORCH HERE. WE HAVE A LOT OF LOCAL LANDMARKS WITH CONCRETE PORCHES, AND SO I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL. UM, I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT, UM, THAT WE DID, UH, TRY TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS BY TAKING OUR DESIGN REVIEW, UM, COMMISSION OUT COMMITTEE RATHER, WHICH IS MADE UP OF COMMISSIONERS FROM THE HISTORIC AND DEFENDER REVIEW COMMISSION. AND SO, UM, THEY ACTUALLY WERE ABLE TO WALK THROUGH THE BUILDING AND SEE THE MATERIALS THAT WERE THERE AND IN TEXT, UM, AND THEY AGREED THAT IT, IT MET THAT CRITERIA. SO, UM, I KNOW, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF LIMITATIONS TO SEEING PHOTOS THE WAY THAT WE'RE SEEING 'EM RIGHT NOW. UM, AND, AND, UH, AND YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, THE EVIDENCE OF THE ADDITIONS, UM, IN THE REAR CERTAINLY, UM, WOULD, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, BE, UH, A CHANGE, YOU KNOW, UM, TO THE INTEGRITY. I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IN THIS CASE IS THAT THOSE ADDITIONS WERE MADE IN THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE. SO IT'S IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE STRUCTURE'S AESTHETIC STATEMENT TO THE STREET. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THE CHANGES ARE TODAY DON'T REFLECT THE DATE OF THAT HOUSE? YOU'RE SAYING THAT CHANGES COULD BE MADE TO REVERT IT BACK TO THE DATE OF 1909? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT, OKAY, FIRST ALL, UM, CHANGES ARE CERTAINLY, UM, UH, SOMETHING THAT THE, THE COMMISSION LOOKS AT WHEN IT CONSIDERS ELIGIBILITY, UM, THE, [03:05:01] THE REVERSIBILITY OF THOSE CHANGES. UM, I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT SOMETIMES CHANGE OVER TIME BECOMES SIGNIFICANT IN ITS OWN RIGHT. AND WHILE I DON'T INTEND TO ARGUE WITH YOU AT ALL ABOUT, UM, A CONCRETE PORCH BEING SIGNIFICANT, I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT, UM, THE, UH, THE PORCH SUPPORT THERE, THOSE COLUMNS ARE, UM, DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WERE ORIGINALLY THERE. AND WE CAN ACTUALLY SEE, UM, ONE OF THE ORIGINAL COLUMNS IS BUILT INTO A SIDE PORCH. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, AT LEAST AT ONE TIME, THERE WAS A SQUARE COLUMN, UM, UH, FOR PORCH BOOKLETS THERE. BUT, UM, THEY, UH, THEY ARE ALSO OF HISTORIC AGE AND, UM, UH, SPEAK TO THE HISTORY OF CHANGE OF THIS STRUCTURE. AND SO, UM, UH, AGAIN, IT WAS, UM, SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSIONER FELT COMFORTABLE WITH. ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT MAYBE THE OWNER COULD DEMOLISH THE HOUSE AND KEEP THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIC ELEMENTS OF THE HOUSE AND DONATE THEM TO SOMETHING? BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE, WE DON'T HAVE A HISTORICAL HOUSE. YOU WOULD LIKE A HISTORICAL HOUSE. YOU HAVE HISTORICAL, SOME HISTORICAL ELEMENTS, BUT SOME THAT ARE NOT HISTORICAL. BUT WE DON'T HAVE A HISTORICAL HOUSE. WE HAVE HOUSE WITH HISTORICAL ELEMENTS ON IT, BUT IT IS, I, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY, UM, YOU'RE DESCRIBING IT THAT WAY. AND SO I THINK I WOULD, UM, UH, SIMPLY SAY THAT BOTH THE HISTORIC AND DESIGNER REVIEW COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL FELT LIKE IT WAS IMPACT ENOUGH TO PROCEED DESIGNATION. I DON'T SEE HOW IT MEETS NUMBER EIGHT. UM, BUT THAT'S, WELL, I GUESS THAT'S FOR DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? SPECIAL OF HANDS? OKAY. IF THERE'S NO OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONER GRAY. UM, MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS CHRISTIE. I'D LIKE TO INTERRUPT FOR JUST ONE MOMENT. THERE WAS A LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD. YES, PLEASE. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIOS INKERS, THE STAFF APPROVAL, H C R C, APPROVAL AND CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR THE CHANGE IN ZONING FOR TWO 14 LOTUS AVENUE. THE ADDITION OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION TO THE CURRENT ZONING IS APPROPRIATE. THE HOME AT THIS LOCATION MEETS THREE OF THE CRITERIA REQUIRED IN THE U D C FOR DESIGNATION AS A LANDMARK. IT IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF A QUEEN ANNE STYLED VICTORIAN HOME. IT IS ALSO ASSOCIATED WITH THE NETTE FAMILY WHO HAD THE HOUSE BUILT IN 1909. THE NETTES WERE ORIGINAL, ALL STATIONED SETTLERS TO THE AREA, AND CONTINUE TO HAVE A PRESENCE IN SAN ANTONIO. THE BUILDING ALSO PROVIDES A CONNECTION TO THE EARLIEST HISTORY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVING HELPED SET THE STANDARD FOR HOUSING WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. THANK YOU, PATTY Z ZION, PRESIDENT OF THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THANK YOU, MS. HOUSE. THANKS VERY MUCH. UM, AND, UH, THANK YOU TO STAFF AND TO O H P, UM, AND, UH, AND THE H D R C AND ALL THE WORK I KNOW HAS GONE INTO THIS. I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN, UM, SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN BEING WORKED ON FOR A LONG TIME. UM, WITH THAT SAID, UM, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. UM, I AGREE WITH STAFF'S, UH, ANALYSIS OF THIS PROPERTY. UM, NUMBER ONE, I THINK THAT MAINTAINING THE HISTORIC NATURE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD IS, UM, REALLY IMPORTANT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND TO PRESERVING THE FABRIC OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. UM, AND I THINK THAT PRESERVATION OF BUILDINGS AS WELL AS THE USE OF THOSE BUILDINGS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THAT. UM, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT IT'S A GOAL AND THE LA IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO MAINTAIN AND PRESERVE HOUSING STOCK. THIS IS A ALMOST 110, OR EXCUSE ME, OVER 110 YEAR OLD BUILDING, UM, WITH SIGNIFICANCE. I TAKE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE H D R C AND O H P SERIOUSLY KNOWING THE EXTENSIVE LENGTHS THAT THEY GO THROUGH TO DOCUMENT THE HISTORY OF THESE PROPERTIES, UM, TO GO THROUGH AND ANALYZE THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND THE, UM, HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THESE HOMES SO THAT, THAT DOESN'T GO UNNOTICED. UM, I'M REALLY, I, I'M CERTAINLY NOT, UH, AN ARCHITECTURAL OR A HISTORICAL, UM, EXPERT. I'M A LAWYER, SO, UH, BUT I, SO I HAVE TO RELY ON THE FACT THAT THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB AND, UM, THAT WE HAVE REALLY COMPETENT FOLKS IN THOSE POSITIONS. UM, YES, THIS IS OUTSIDE OF HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, IT'S CLEARLY IN AN AREA THAT HAS HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE PROPERTIES THAT THAT HOUSED [03:10:01] FOLKS A REALLY LONG TIME AGO THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, OUR CITY HAS CHANGED A LOT. SO I THINK THAT PRESERVING THAT IS IMPORTANT. UM, WE'RE ALSO NEXT DOOR TO AN N C D AND THEIR HISTORICAL PROPERTIES, UH, HISTORICAL DESIGNATED PROPERTIES RIGHT THERE ON THE BLOCK. I COUNTED FIVE ON THE BLOCK ON LOTUS, AND THEN THE NEXT STREET OVER THERE WERE FOUR MORE. UM, SO I THOUGHT THAT THAT'S, THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT FACTOR AS WELL. UM, AND JUST TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE OWNER AND THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE, UM, THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS DESIGNATION. UM, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, UM, I'VE LIVED IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR 10 YEARS NOW. I'VE LIVED IN FOUR DIFFERENT HOMES IN THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, SEVERAL OF 'EM OVER 100 YEARS OLD. THEY'VE ALL HAD ADDITIONS, CLEARLY HAD ADDITIONS, UM, THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, UH, ENCLOSED PORCHES, UM, ENCLOSED BALCONIES, BATHROOMS ADDED. UM, AND THAT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY KIND OF THE FUN PART, I THINK, OF THESE HOMES, IS THAT THERE ARE, AS, AS, UM, DR. HAY SAID, THE ADDITIONS THEMSELVES BECOME HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT, AND THEY BECOME A PART OF THE STORY OF THE STRUCTURE. UM, SO I THINK THAT, THAT THE FACT THAT IT'S HAD ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO IT IS NOT DISPOSITIVE IN SAYING THAT THIS IS NOT STORE STRUCTURE AND THAT IT DOESN'T DESERVE TO BE PRESERVED AS SUCH. LOOKING AT SOME OF THE PHOTOS FROM ZILLOW, UM, I SEE JUST, AGAIN, I'M NOT AN EXPERT. FRENCH DOORS, POCKET DOORS, WAYNE'S COATING TRANSOMS ABOVE DOORS. SO CLEARLY WE DO STILL HAVE THAT INTACT AND EVEN INTACT WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED A YEAR AGO. UM, AND, AND WHAT APPEAR TO BE WORKING FEATURES, WORKING RIGHTS, AT LEAST. UM, JUST TO, TO GO A STEP FURTHER, UM, WHILE I RESPECT PROPERTY RIGHTS, UM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IN OUR STATE AND IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHEN YOU BUY A PROPERTY, THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU GET TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO WITH IT. UM, WE HAVE RULES. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ZONING. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, BECAUSE FOLKS ARE COMING BEFORE THE CITY ASKING TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IF EVERYONE COULD JUST DO WHATEVER THEY WANTED WITH THEIR PROPERTY, WE CAN HAVE, UM, A NUCLEAR PLANT NEXT TO SOMEONE'S HOME AND A LIQUOR STORE OR A BAR NEXT TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. WE, I UNDERSTAND INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT, BUT THERE HAS TO BE SOME CONTROL ON THAT, AND WE HAVE TO LIVE IN A COMMUNITY AND RESPECT THAT. UM, ONE OTHER POINT I JOTTED DOWN, UM, THE CONCRETE PORCH, UH, TO KIND MY BACK TO THIS. SORRY, THIS IS A BIT OF OUT OF ORDER, BUT, UM, I WAS JUST FLIPPING THROUGH, UM, A BOOK OF THE HOMES HERE IN MONTE VISTA THAT HAVE, UH, CONCRETE PORCHES THAT I BELIEVE SOME OF THEM WERE ORIGINAL, UM, TO THE HOME. SO AGAIN, THAT TO ME IS NOT, UM, A FACTOR IN THIS STATEMENT. THE HOME HAS A CONCRETE PORCH THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ADDED, UM, THAT SHOULD NOT, THAT SHOULD NOT NEGATE ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. AND, UH, WITH THAT, I WILL FORMALLY MAKE MY MOTION TO APPROVE. ITEM NUMBER THREE. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THIS IS COMMISSIONER ROMERO. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND, UM, DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONERS, BY SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE CO. UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. THANK YOU. I, UH, ECHO THE COMMISSIONER'S, UH, PERSPECTIVE ON THIS. I'VE ALSO LOOKED AT THE HOME THAT WAS PURCHASED ABOUT A YEAR AGO. I DID FIND HISTORICAL REFERENCE IN THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE AGE OF THE PROPERTY WAS DISCLOSED AT THAT TIME AS WELL. UH, LOOKING AT THESE OLD VICTORIAN HOMES DOWN THERE, YOU REALLY HAVE TO HAVE AN APPRECIATION FOR THE REMAINING PROPERTIES. THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH CHANGEOVER HAPPENING IN THAT AREA THAT I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO TRY. AND, UH, AND I KNOW THERE IS A WAY TO SALVAGE THAT AND MAKE THAT WORK. IT'LL BE A BEAUTIFUL PROPERTY ONCE YOU GET THAT DONE. UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UM, ANY OTHER, UH, DISCUSSION? SHOW OF HANDS, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE, UM, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL AND, WELL, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE AND I LIVE A LITTLE BIT OVER HALF A MILE FROM THIS PROPERTY AND A HOUSE THAT'S ONE YEAR YOUNGER. UM, THERE ARE OF COURSE DIFFICULTIES IN LIVING IN A HOUSE LIKE THAT, BUT WHEN I LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, THE LAP SIDING THAT DOES HAVE A LITTLE BRICK SKIRT ON THE BOTTOM, AND, UH, LOOK AT THE PICTURES [03:15:01] FROM INSIDE THAT COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE REFERENCED FROM ZILLOW, THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL STRUCTURE. I SEE NOTHING, UH, CERTAINLY TO MAKE ME DISAGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FROM H G R C. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. OKAY. UM, UH, OKAY. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. HEY, CHAIR. IF I WERE TO LOOK UP QUEEN ANNE HOMES, AND, UM, THIS IS A VERY MODEST OF ALL MODESTY OF QUEEN ANNE HOMES, AND I THINK THE H D R C TO DO BETTER. THIS IS NOT A HOME THAT HAS ANY REAL SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN TO IT THAT NEEDS TO TAKE IT OFF OF THIS MAN'S HANDS AND START TO TIE HIM UP WITH LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY. AND WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT IN EASY TIMES RIGHT NOW. WE'RE GOING INTO HARD TIMES AND TO TIE THIS MAN'S HOUSE HANDS UP WITH THIS PROPERTY THAT HE TOLD AND DIDN'T EXPECT THIS TO HAPPEN. BUT WHEN H G R C IS ALERTED OF A DEMOLITION, THEN THEY DECIDE TO DESIGNATE THIS SOMETHING. THIS IS NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A QUEEN. AND HOME ACROSS THE STREET, I CAN SEE THE TRANSOM AND I CAN SEE THE TURNED COLUMNS. THOSE WOULD BE MORE CLOSER TO A QUEEN AND HOME. THIS IS A COTTAGE. THIS WAS SOMEONE WHO BUILT SMALL HOMES IN THAT TIME FOR LOW, FOR THOSE WHO COULD AFFORD A HOME. BUT THIS TO ME, I, THAT I DO NOT IN ANY WAY, IF I WERE TO COMPARE THIS TO CLEAN END HOMES, DO NOT SEE A CLEAN END HOME HERE AT ALL. AND IT DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA OF NUMBER EIGHT WITH AN ALUMINUM WINDOW. THE CHANGES INSIDE THE CONCRETE PATIO, THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN ALTERED. NOW, YOU MAY SEE ARCHITECTURAL THOUGHTS ON THE HOUSE THAT TAKE YOU BACK TO THE ERA OF 1909. I SUPPOSE THERE OUGHT TO BE A CARRIAGE OR HOW HORSE AND BUCKY IN THE BACKYARD THEN. AND IF I WALK JUST TWO BLOCKS, TWO STEPS DOWN THE STREET, I'M, I'M IN MODERN WORLD. I SEE IF YOU LOOK ON GOOGLE, I SEE A MODERN THREE OR TWO STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX. WELL, WE CAN DEBATE WHETHER YOU THINK IT'S ARCHITECTURAL OR NOT, BUT I'LL TELL YOU, WE HAVE TO START AT THE POINT OF PROPERTY RIGHTS. THAT'S OUR STARTING POINT. NOT WHETHER GOVERNMENT CAN COME AND SAY, WE THINK IT'S THIS, AND THEREFORE WE WANT YOU TO DO THIS. WE START AT THAT MAN'S PROPERTY RIGHTS, HIS RIGHT TO OWN THAT PROPERTY AND MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT TO IT. AND ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ARE IN HARD TIMES RIGHT NOW, WE ARE IN UNSECURED TIMES. WE ARE IN UNKNOWN TIMES TO PUT UPON THIS MAN THAT THIS COMMISSIONER WOULD DO TODAY TO BURDEN HIM AND TAKE OFF OF HIM THE INVESTMENT THAT HE, HE DID. UH, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE VERY SAD THAN NOT CONSIDER AT THIS TIME, WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT AT THIS TIME THAT THIS MAN CONTINUE ON WITH HIS INVESTMENT OR THAT WE SAVE A HOUSE THAT IS NOT, DOES NOT MEET THE CRANE MAN'S STYLE. THIS IS A COTTAGE, I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS? OKAY, UH, LET'S SEE. UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, GREATHOUSE AND THEN COMMISSIONER WHITE. UM, IF I COULD PLEASE JUST RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. UM, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE, UM, WITH THE NOTION THAT JUST BECAUSE A HOME IS NOT A LARGE HOME OR THAT IT IS A COTTAGE, THAT IT DOES NOT HAVE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. THERE ARE HOMES BUILT ALL OVER THE CITY FOR FOLKS WHO WERE WORKING CLASS OR WHO WERE MIDDLE CLASS, AND WHO WEREN'T JUST THE RICH FOLKS LIVING IN THE BIG MANSIONS. AND THOSE HOMES ALSO DESERVE THE SAME CONSIDERATION WHEN IT COMES TO PRESERVING THEM. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT PRESERVING HOMES LIKE THAT DOES ALSO PRESERVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. UM, AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT, UH, IN ADDITION TO, UM, FINANCIAL CONCERNS THAT I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S OUR, IT'S NOT MY JOB AS A COMMISSIONER. IT'S NOT OUR JOB AS COMMISSIONERS, AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT THE CITY COUNCIL'S JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT A PROPERTY OWNER CAN MAKE MONEY ON THEIR REHABS OR ON THEIR PURCHASE OF A PROPERTY THAT IS SIMPLY NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION. THAT [03:20:01] IS 100% OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION, MAKING SURE THAT A DEVELOPER MAKES MONEY. AND THAT'S COMING FROM SOMEONE WHO'S A REAL ESTATE LAWYER WHO HELPS PEOPLE MAKE MONEY. SO, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE. COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER WHITE. UM, WELL, I, I ACTUALLY, I MEAN, I, I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE JUST SAID. UM, BUT, UH, I, I, I ALSO WANTED TO SAY THAT I, I DON'T THINK A LOT OF WHAT SHE SAID, UM, CONTRADICTS WHAT, WHAT COMMISSIONER GIVEN SAID. I THINK WE'VE JUST GOTTA BE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS ISSUE THAT WE STRUGGLE WITH, UM, SO MUCH I FEEL LIKE AS A COMMISSION AND, AND, UH, THIS THIS CASE, THIS CASE DEFINITELY RAISES SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS FOR ME. UM, AND SO, AND SO I JUST, I WANTED TO SAY THAT I, I, I SHARE SOME OF COMMISSIONER GIBBONS CONCERNS ON THIS AS WELL. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UH, COMMISSIONER KAMATH. I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR, UH, THE POINTS, UH, MADE BY COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE . BUT HOWEVER, I THINK, UH, IN THIS CASE, I THINK THE, UH, HISTORICAL PRESERVATION, UH, GROUP IS, IS A LITTLE BIT OVER REACHED. IT'S DEFINITELY NOT A CLEAN ANY TYPE OF HOME, SO IT'S GONNA BE, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY HARD FOR ME TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AS A HISTORICAL NORM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. UH, COMMISSIONER ROMERO. UM, I'LL MAKE THIS SHORT. I THINK THERE'S THE SAME THING I SAID LAST TIME WHEN WE WERE HERE. UM, IT, IT, IT'S JUST SO, IT'S SO HARD TO DEAL WITH THIS BECAUSE WE'RE THE ZONING COMMISSION. WE'RE NOT THE H D R C, AND IT'S SO STRANGE THAT, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE THINGS THAT FRANKLY, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST, MAYBE WE HAVE THE EXPERTISE IN IT. I DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE IN IT. UM, BUT, BUT WE'RE NOT WITHIN THE SYSTEM. UM, YOU KNOW, EACH, EACH COMMITTEE HAS ITS OWN SYSTEM, AND H D R C HAS THAT SET OF RULES. THEY HAVE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY USE OVER AND OVER AGAIN. AND I GUESS, UH, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A STRAY POINT HERE. UH, I, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GREY HOUSE ON THIS, BUT, UM, OTHER CITIES DON'T NECESSARILY USE ZONING FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK. THEY WOULD USE IT FOR DISTRICTS, BUT, UM, NOT NECESSARILY FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK. AND I JUST HOPE IN THE FUTURE, OUR CITY MIGHT CONSIDER THAT WE MOVE THIS AWAY FROM BEING A ZONING DESIGNATION. UM, AND, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UM, THE TRUST FOR HIS OR, YEAH, THE TRUST FOR HISTORIC LAND THAT, UH, THEY, THEY POINT THIS OUT. SO I JUST THINK WE'RE ALWAYS IN AN AWKWARD POSITION HERE BECAUSE WE'RE WEDGED INTO A SITUATION THAT, THAT OUR COMMISSION ISN'T REALLY STRUCTURED FOR. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. AND, UM, I JUST WONDER IF THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER UNDER, UH, U THE CURRENT U D C, UM, CONSIDERATIONS WE HAVE NOW. OKAY. I BELIEVE, UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. UM, I THINK THAT WE MOST CERTAINLY DO CONSIDER WHEN AN APPLICANT IS UNDER HARDSHIP, IF THE DECISION WILL CREATE A HARDSHIP THAT IS ALWAYS CONSIDERED. HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE A CORPORATION COME IN AND THEY WANNA BUILD A LARGE BUILDING, THEY ASK FOR A TAX INCENTIVE, IT LESSENS THE HARDSHIP ON THEM. AND IN THIS CASE, WHEN A GOVERNMENT ENTITY LIKE H D R C COMES IN TO A PRIVATE PROPERTY AND WANTS TO DISPLAY IT FOR PUBLIC USE WITHOUT COMPENSATING, AND THAT'S THE KEY THERE, THERE IS NO COMPENSATION TO THIS MAN FROM H D R C. THEY ARE NOT GIVING HIM ANY MONEY TO SAY, HERE IS HOW MUCH MONEY WOULD YOU REPAIR THE HOUSE? SO IT LOOKS LIKE THAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED, AND THAT'S NOT HAPPENING. THAT'S, THAT IS AFFORDED TO EVERY ONE OF US UNDER THE FIFTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION. AND WE HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT TYPE OF RIGHT TO OUR PROPERTY THAT GOVERNMENTS CAN'T COME IN AND JUST DECLARE THIS OR TAKE IT FOR THAT UNLESS THEY COMPENSATE. AND THERE IS NO COMPENSATION TO THIS INDIVIDUAL FOR THAT. AND WE DO CONSIDER HARDSHIPS ON THEM. AND THIS MAN, [03:25:01] I THINK IS SAYING TO TELL ME TO COME AND MAKE THIS LOOK LIKE WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE IT TO LOOK LIKE WHEN IT DOES NOT MEET THOSE THREE CRITERIA. NUMBER EIGHT TAKES IT OFF THE BOARD. AND FRANKLY, AGAIN, H D R C NEEDS TO DO BETTER THAN THIS. THIS IS NOT AS STELLAR LOOKING HOUSE IN THAT REGARD. BUT BACK TO THE PROPERTY RIGHTS, WHERE'S THE COMPENSATION? THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ALL RIGHT. IF, UH, THERE'S NO OTHER, OH, I'M SORRY. OKAY. THIS WILL BE THE LAST ROUND , BUT COMMENTS. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER GRAY HOUSE, . SORRY. I KNOW THAT THIS IS RUNNING LONGER THAN WE HAD HOPED, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS. UM, WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY TAKINGS, UM, THIS IS NOT A TAKING, AND, AND WE DON'T, WE DON'T GRANT TAX INCENTIVES TO LARGE CORPORATIONS. UM, AND, AND TAX EXEMPTIONS. THAT'S NOT THE PURVIEW OF THE ZONING COMMISSION. SO WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT FOR ANYONE ELSE. HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT, UM, AS O H P STATED, UH, WE DO HAVE, IN THIS CASE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR HISTORIC TAX CREDITS. SO THERE IS A TOOL THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER GAINS BY GETTING A HISTORIC DESIGNATION. IN FACT, MANY PROPERTY OWNERS DO THAT AS A, AS A MEANS TO FUND AND TO FINANCE THEIR REHABS. SO THERE IS, UH, A COMPENSATION AVAILABLE FOR THIS PROPERTY OWNER. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO, UH, WE HAVE A, A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE WITH A SECOND BY, UH, COMMISSIONER ROMERO. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. MAKE SURE TO UNMUTE. YES. COMMISSIONER JONES. IT'S SAME. COMMISSIONER KAMATH? NO. COMMISSIONER LOUIS? NO. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? NO. COMMISSIONER WHITE? NO. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. I THINK COMMISSIONER S IS NOT ON THE CALL RIGHT NOW. UH, COMMISSIONER GU? AYE. CHAIR MCGEE? YES. ALRIGHT. I HAVE MOTION FAIL. I HAVE UH, FIVE YESES, FOUR NOS, ONE ABSTAIN. SO, AND JUST TO REMIND YOU GUYS WHAT THE, UH, PROCEDURES ARE, IF WE ARE GONNA HAVE A NEW MOTION, WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER BY SOMEONE WHO VOTED AGAINST THE PREVIOUS MOTION. UM, IF THERE IS NO MOTION TO RECONSIDER, THIS DOES AUTOMATICALLY COME BACK, UH, IN TWO WEEKS FOR UH, CONSIDERATION AGAIN. OKAY. UM, IF THERE'S NO, I HEAR HEARING NONE, THEN IT COMES BACK THEN. OKAY. I'LL COME BACK IN TWO WEEKS. WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE GO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ARE WE READY FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX? YES, PLEASE. [6. (Continued from 02/18/2020) ZONING CASE Z-2019-10700348 (Council District 5): A request for a change in zoning from "R-4 AHOD" Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District to "RM-4 AHOD" Residential Mixed Airport Hazard Overlay District on Lot 7, Block 5, NCB 2357, located at 2402 Monterey Street. Staff recommends Denial, with an Alternate Recommendation. (Mercedes Rivas, Senior Planner, (210) 207-0215, Mercedes.Rivas2@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] ALRIGHT. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R FOUR A H O D TO R M FOUR A H O D AT 24 0 2 MONTEREY STREET. THERE WERE 28 RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION AND THE WEST SIDE RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. THE APPLICANT HAS SPOKEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND IS AMENDING THEIR REQUEST TO OUR FOR CD. THE BASE R FOUR THAT THEY'RE AMENDING TO IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE AND LIMITS THE DENSITY OF THE PROPERTY TO TWO UNITS. WHEREAS THE ORIGINAL REQUESTED R M FOUR WOULD ALLOW UP TO FOUR UNITS STAFFORDS APPROVAL OF THE R FOUR CD FOR TWO UNITS WITH SUBMITTED SITE PLAN. AND WE DO HAVE A COPY OF THAT SITE PLAN IN THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT. THIS DOES CONCLUDE STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND WE ARE GETTING THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE. THANK YOU. [03:30:45] WE ARE STILL ON STANDBY. OKAY. MR. BETA, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I AM. OKAY, VERY GOOD. SIR, YOU ARE ADDRESSING THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. GO AHEAD. HI, THIS IS, UH, EN RIVERA. I'M HERE WITH MY FATHER ROBERT VETO. UH, HE CURRENTLY LIVES, UH, ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE, UH, LOCATION IN QUESTION TODAY AT 24 0 7 MONTEREY, THAT A HOUSE WAS BUILT, I BELIEVE IN 1935. SO HIM AND MY MOTHER ARE SEVEN ONE YEARS OLD. AND, UH, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, UH, BUILD SOMETHING IN THAT LOT THAT CAN, UH, ACCOMMODATE THEM, UH, WITH THEIR AGE. AND MY MOM'S CONFINED TO A, UH, WALKER RIGHT NOW, AND THE HOUSE WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW IS REALLY NOT, UH, USER , USER-FRIENDLY. SO THE IDEA IS TO, UH, BUILD THEM A, UH, UP-TO-DATE, UH, HOME. AND IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, IT'S, UH, A D A APPROVED, UH, SO THAT MY MOM CAN MOVE AROUND, UH, WITHOUT ANY, UH, WITHOUT ANY PROBLEMS. AND THEN THE BACK HOUSE WOULD BE, UH, FOR THEM TO HAVE, I GUESS, THE RENT AND LEASE HOUSE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT, UH, OF INCOME COMING IN AS MY DAD'S THE ONLY ONE THAT WORKS RIGHT NOW, ONLY WORKS PART-TIME. UH, SO AFTER SPEAKING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE DECIDED TO GO WITH, UH, WITH JUST THE TWO DWELLINGS, TWO UNITS, UH, JUST TO RESPECT THEIR WISHES AND, UM, WHAT THEY, UH, WHAT THEY WERE GONNA WANNA ALLOW US TO, UH, GO WITH. SO THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN IS VERY PRELIMINARY. THE, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE? IT IS, IT'S PROBABLY MORE LIKELY GONNA BE JUST SLIGHTLY LESS. I WAS JUST TOLD THAT IF, UH, IF WE PUT LESS AND WE WANT, WE WANTED MORE, WE'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS AGAIN. SO, UH, THE SITE PLAN, IF IT CHANGES, IT'LL PROBABLY BE JUST, IT'LL BE LESS, NOT MORE. THANK, THANK YOU, SIR. UM, MM-HMM. , UM, IF YOU'LL JUST STAY ON THE LINE BECAUSE WE'LL LIKELY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. UM, OKAY. I'M, YOU WANT ME TO HIT MUTE NOW? OKAY. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I THINK I'M SUPPOSED TO MUTE, RIGHT? YES. YES. OKAY. GO AHEAD. I DO HAVE A QUESTION OF STEP, UH, WHERE DO WE HAVE THE, THE, UM, SITE PLAN THAT WE CAN HAVE ON THE SCREEN, UM, WHILE WE GO TO THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN, UH, OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BUSTAMONTE. ALRIGHT. AND I ACTUALLY ONLY HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE, THE APPLICANT, AND I JUST WANT THIS TO BE CLEAR ON THE RECORD. UM, YOU ARE SEEKING AMENDMENT OF YOUR REQUEST TO R FOUR WITH CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO BELONGING UNITS, CORRECT? MR. VETA? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR. WE, WE CAB SCRAP THE, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, FROM THE R FOUR, I BELIEVE, TO JUST THE R FOUR WITH THE , WITH A CONDITIONAL USE OF TWO DWELLINGS. AND I WAS TOLD WHETHER THAT BE ONE UNIT, UH, BEING A DUPLEX OR TWO SEPARATE UNITS. SO YES, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THANK YOU AND MADAM CHAIR. UM, NOT TRYING TO SHORT CIRCUIT A DISCUSSION, BUT I AM PREPARED TO MOVE, UH, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS AMENDED ON THIS ITEM. THAT'S, THAT'S FINE. I, I CAN OPEN FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS AT THE SAME TIME. IF, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO. YES, MA'AM. CHAIR. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE. SECOND POLL. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED, UM, DESIGNATION WITH A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN BY A [03:35:01] SHOW OF HANDS TO COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENT. OKAY. UH, C NONE. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. RIGHT. MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED MADE BY COMMISSIONER WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GRAU. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? YES. COMMISSIONER LOUIS? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. I AM NOT SURE MR. COMMISSIONER SIPES IS BACK ON YET? I DON'T THINK HE IS. ALL RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE? AYE. AT CHAIRMAN, HE, YES. AND I BELIEVE, UH, COMMISSIONER, UM, SAID THAT AT FOUR O'CLOCK HE WOULD HAVE TO, UM, DROP. SO I DON'T THINK WE ARE GONNA EXPECT HIM BACK IF I, I I DON'T RECALL HIM SAYING THAT AT LEAST. UM, I, HE, HE SAID THAT HE'S GONNA TRY TO COME BACK FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE. OH, HE IS GONNA COME BACK. OKAY. THAT'S, YES. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. I HAVE, I HAVE A MO A MOTION PASSES, UH, FOR APPROVAL BY VOTE OF 10 TO ZERO. OKAY? OKAY. WE'RE READY FOR THE NEXT ONE. THE NEXT [8. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700023 CD (Council District 1): A request for a change in zoning from "R-4 AHOD" Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District to "R-4 CD AHOD" Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District with Conditional Use for a Professional Office on Lot 9 and Lot 10, Block 7, NCB 2800, located at 116 Annie Street. Staff recommends Approval. (Justin Malone, Planner (210) 207-0157, justin.malone@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department).] ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. RIGHT. OKAY. UM, CAN WE SHOW THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER SYS IS BACK NOW? YES, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THAT. OKAY, PERFECT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R FOUR A H O D TO R FOUR C D A H O D WITH CONDITIONAL USE FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE LOCATED AT 1 1 16 ANNIE STREET. THERE WERE 16 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM MONTE VISTA HARRIS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THE EXISTING R FOUR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY BASE ZONING IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE REQUESTED OUR FOUR CD MAINTAINS THE BASE DISTRICT AND THE PROPOSED CD CONDITIONAL USE ALLOWS CONSIDERATION OF A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IN ADDITION TO THE USE OF A HOME OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. AT THIS TIME. WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, MR. REYES, ON THE LINE. OKAY, MR. REYES, ARE YOU WITH US? I AM, YES. GO AHEAD, SIR. OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, THE COMMISSION FOR ALLOWING US THIS OPPORTUNITY HERE. MY NAME IS RUSSELL REYES. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF SEPULVEDA REYES. AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, UH, MY PARENTS REYES FAMILY. MM-HMM. . UM, THE PROPERTY HERE IS ONE 16 ANNIE STREET. AND, UH, THE PROPERTY IS ADJACENT, UM, TO A, UH, 1 22 ANNIE STREET AND A PARKING LOT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF US. AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET IS A PARKING LOT AS WELL. THE REASON, THE PURPOSE FOR THE REQUEST FOR THE REZONING IS, UH, WE ARE CURRENTLY OFFICE AT 41 18 MCCULLOUGH AVENUE, AND WE ARE, UM, DOWNSIZING. UM, AND WE ARE, WE ARE, UH, LOOKING FOR A SMALLER SPOT WHERE, UM, WE WOULD'VE TO PAY THE RENT THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY PAYING, UM, IN THE, UH, 41 18, UH, ADDRESS. AND, UH, SO WE, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING TO, TO MOVE INTO THE ONE 16 ANNIE STREET, CURRENTLY, THE ANNIE HOUSE, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, ADDRESS YOUR HOME THERE IS 14, IT'S 1,461 SQUARE FEET WE'RE REQUESTING IS TO USE 876 SQUARE FEET FOR OFFICE SPACE AND LEAVE REMAINING FOR STORAGE SPACE. UM, THE, UH, THE, UH, THE OFFICE SPACE AGAIN, WOULD BE USED JUST FOR OUR, OUR THREE CORPORATE EMPLOYEES. THERE WOULD BE, UM, THE PURPOSE OF, OF THE, UH, OFFICE, UM, WOULD BE TO, UH, MANAGE A, UH, A RESTAURANT, WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET ON ANNIE, WHICH IS CALLED CHEETOS. AND, UM, WITH THE NATURE OF THE, OF THE BUSINESS, THERE WILL BE NO DELIVERIES, NO GOOD TRUCKS, [03:40:01] UM, NO CLIENTS OR CUSTOMERS THAT WOULD COME INTO, INTO THE OFFICE SPACE. UH, IT'S JUST NOT WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE NORM FOR THE INDUSTRY, UM, OTHER THAN THE EMPLOYEE THAT WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH THE, UH, THE INDIVIDUALS WHO WOULD BE OCCUPYING OR BE ING OUT OF THE, OUT OF THE, UH, LOCATION. UM, WE SPOKE WITH THE, UH, MONTE VISTA ASSOCIATION WE WENT TO AND HAD A MEETING BACK ON MARCH 6TH, MARCH 10TH, AND THAT IT WAS A REPRESENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF, UH, THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ROBERT TREVINO'S OFFICE, WHO WAS PRESENT. AND, UM, THE CONSENSUS SEEMED TO BE THAT, UH, AT FIRST THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT, THAT WE WERE PLANNING ON, ON DOING SOMETHING BIG THERE. AND THE REALITY IS, UM, THAT WASN'T THE CASE. IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST, UM, IT'S JUST, UH, WANTING TO BRING THREE OFFICE STAFF MEMBERS. AND IT SEEMED AFTER THE, AT THE END OF THE MEETING THAT THE CONSENSUS WAS PRETTY, PRETTY, UM, PRETTY, PRETTY, UM, POSITIVE ABOUT EV ABOUT, UH, ABOUT WHAT OUR INTENT WAS. SO, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. THANK YOU, SIR. IF YOU'LL STAY ON THE LINE JUST IN CASE WE HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, IS THERE ANYONE, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? UH, YEAH, COMMISSIONER GREY HOUSE. HI. THANKS. YEAH, I JUST HAVE, UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT. FIRST, UM, IS THERE ANYONE CURRENTLY LIVING ON THIS PROPERTY? WHAT IS ITS CURRENT USE? NO, NO ONE'S CURRENTLY IN THE PROPERTY. IT'S CURRENTLY MACHINE USED FOR STORAGE. OKAY. FOR THE RESTAURANT? CORRECT. OKAY. UM, AND THEN A, A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. UM, GIVEN THE SIZE OF THIS BUILDING, WHAT ARE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS? UH, SO THE, THE, THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IS ONE SPACE FOR 300 SQUARE FEET. UH, SO WE WOULD, UH, NEED TO KNOW, UM, BASED ON WHEN THEY APPLY FOR THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, HOW MUCH OF THAT, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE WILL BE FOR THE OFFICE SPACE. SO IF IT'S ABOUT 800, UH, SQUARE FEET THAT WOULD BE USED FOR THE OFFICE, IT WOULD END UP BEING ABOUT THREE SPACES. AND HOW DO WE COME UP WITH 800 SQUARE FEET IF THE, I BELIEVE THE PROPERTY WAS, THE BUILDING WAS 1400 SQUARE FEET, IS THAT CORRECT? THIS, THAT CLAIM INDICATES THAT 876 SQUARE FEET IS WHERE USED BY THE OFFICE AND THE OTHER 600, IT LOOKS TO BE A STORAGE SPACE. OKAY. SO, AND, AND REMIND ME AGAIN, DID, COULD YOU PULL THE SITE PLAN BACKUP? SO, COMMISSIONER GROFF, THIS IS CHRISTIE , JUST TO CHIME IN. UM, EVEN IF THEY USED THE ENTIRE SQUARE FOOTAGE, 1461, THEY WOULD ONLY NEED ABOUT FIVE SPACES. AND, UH, THEY OWN A MAJORITY OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, SO THEY COULD TECHNICALLY GET A COOPERATIVE PARKING AGREEMENT WITH THEMSELVES IF THEY COULDN'T GET FIVE SPACES. BUT, UM, THEY ALREADY SHOWED THREE SPACES ON, ON THE ACTUAL SITE, AND THAT'S BASED ON THE OFFICE USED ITSELF. OKAY. OKAY. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY, UM, QUESTIONS? UM, BY SHOW OF HANDS, COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. UM, MADAM CHAIR, I DO HAVE TO INTERJECT ONE MORE TIME. UH, I JUST GOT AN EMAIL, UH, PATRICIA RESOS NO LONGER WITH US, AND IT, SHE HAS RECEIVED AN EMAIL, UM, THAT I JUST GOT IN MY INBOX. UH, IT IS FROM THE, UH, MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, SO I'M GONNA READ THAT INTO THE RECORD FOR YOU RIGHT NOW. OKAY. I'M WRITING TO YOU ON BEHALF OF THE MONTE VISTA TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO VOICE OUR OPPOSITION TO THE ABOVE REFERENCE REZONING REQUEST. WE FEEL THAT THE AREA OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ALREADY BEEN FULLY AND SEVERELY ENCROACHED BY COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE REZONING. WHAT IS LEFT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND REMAINING SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY OWNERS IS VERY, IS A VERY FRAGILE COMMUNITY. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASKING FOR THIS REZONING HAVE PLENTY OF OTHER CHOICES TO RUN AN OFFICE WITHOUT OFFICE OUT OF, WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE [03:45:01] PROPERTY THAT ARE CURRENTLY ZONED. AS SUCH, THEY ALSO, IN FACT, OWN PROPERTY ACROSS MCCULLOUGH, DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE PROPERTY. THEY ARE ASKING TO REZONE THAT COULD HOUSE AN OFFICE, AS WELL AS NO REZONING NEEDED GIVEN THE FACT THEY, THEY ALSO, IN FACT, OWN PROPERTY ACROSS MCCULLOUGH. I'M SORRY, GIVEN THE FACT THAT SAN ANTONIO IS INCORRECT IN A CRISIS AS FAR AS HOUSING NEEDS, THIS PROPERTY SHOULD REMAIN FULL ON OUR FLOOR AND BE RENTED OR SOLD. AS SUCH, WE NEED THE HOME RESPECTFULLY. MARY JOHNSON. THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL OF HANDS? OKAY. UH, NO QUESTION. SO, COMMISSIONER UH, GREATHOUSE? YES. UM, I WILL BE, UH, MAKING A MOTION FOR DENIAL FOR THIS PROPERTY. UM, I, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE STAFF'S MEMO. UM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE, UH, FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION FOR THIS PROPERTY IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. UM, THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I TEND TO DISAGREE WITH, UM, STAFF ON, ON A SOMEWHAT REGULAR BASIS. UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT DOING A CONDITIONAL USE GETS US AROUND THAT. I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE, EVEN THOUGH THE BASE ZONING IS STILL THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WE'RE, I THINK THIS IS A LOOPHOLE. UM, AND IN MY OPINION, UM, SO WE'RE, WE'RE PUTTING A COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE MID-BLOCK ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR TO IT IS AN R FOUR ON, ACTUALLY ON EITHER SIDE OF IT IS AN R FOUR. UM, SO I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS, UH, IS IN, UM, CONFORMANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION, UM, STAFF INCLUDED AS ONE OF THE SUPPORTING, UM, REASONS FOR THIS AS A ESTABLISHING NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY BUSINESSES ALONG CORRIDORS. UM, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD CONSIDER ANNIE STREET, UM, TO BE A CORRIDOR. AND WE'RE TALKING FOUR LOTS OFF OF MCCOMB. UM, SO I THINK THAT IT'S A BIT OF A STRETCH TO SAY THAT, UM, PUTTING E E EVEN AN OFFICE, UM, THERE IS, IS IN LINE WITH, WITH THAT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A CORRIDOR. I DON'T THINK WE CAN START CONSIDERING OUR RESIDENTIAL STREETS AS CORRIDORS. UM, IT COULD BE A, A SLIPPERY SLOPE, UH, GIVEN THIS AREA. UM, ALSO PUBLIC POLICY, HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE. WERE TAKING AWAY A POTENTIAL NEIGHBOR FOR THESE PROPERTY OWNERS AROUND IT. UM, WERE ALSO IN AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS, AND AS COMMISSIONER GIBBONS POINTED OUT EARLIER AS CERTAINLY AN IN UNPRECEDENTED TIMES, SO TAKING AWAY HOUSING STOCK, UM, FROM THIS AREA, I BELIEVE ONLY FURTHERS THAT CRISIS. UM, AND FINALLY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS. SO, UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, UH, FOR DENIAL. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A, UM, MOTION FOR DENIAL WITH A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. UM, ANY DISCUSSION? UH, SHOW OF HANDS, UH, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? UM, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT MY, UH, COLLEAGUE JUST CITED. I, UH, AM RARELY A PROPONENT OF BRINGING A BUSINESS INTO A RESIDENTIAL HOME, A MID-BLOCK. AND, UH, FOR THOSE REASONS, I WILL, UH, NOT BE SUPPORTING, UM, THE REQUEST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ALRIGHT. UM, OKAY. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. UH, THANK YOU CHAIR. I, I MEAN, I ONLY SEE TWO HOUSES IN THIS WHOLE CORRIDOR. I SEE BUSINESS LAND, A BUSINESS PARKING LOT IN THE SIDE OF A HOUSE. THEN THERE'S THESE TWO HOUSES THERE. THE HOUSE ISN'T CHANGING, IT'S STILL A HOUSE. IT CAN BE A HOUSE ANYTIME IT WANTS TO BE A HOUSE. HE'S JUST GONNA BE OPERATING PART OF HIS BUSINESS OUT OF THAT HOUSE. AND ONE OF THE UNPRECEDENTED TIMES THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW ARE PEOPLE AND THEIR BUSINESSES. AND TO DENY ANYBODY THE ABILITY [03:50:01] TO RUN A BUSINESS IN THIS VERY UNPRECEDENTED, DESPERATE TIMES, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A PLACE THAT WE SHOULD GO RIGHT NOW. I DON'T SEE THAT THIS IS INFLICTING ANY HARDSHIP DIFFERENCE, CHANGE OF SCENERY ON THIS SMALL BORDER STREET AS IT BACKS, AS IT ENDS AT WHATEVER THAT CORNER STREET IS. I THINK IT'S STILL A HOUSE. IT LOOKS LIKE A HOUSE. IT STILL OPERATES AS A HOUSE, BUT TO DENY HIM THE ABILITY TO RUN HIS BUSINESS AND PUT MORE HARDSHIP ON HIM, AGAIN, I WOULD CAUTION COMMISSIONERS THAT WE HAVE TO RECONSIDER WHERE THE TIMES THAT WE'RE IN AS TO WHETHER THAT'S THE RIGHT ROUTE WE SHOULD GO ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE. THAT'S MY THOUGHT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? UH, COMMISSIONER HOEY, IF I'VE HEARD CORRECTLY, THE GENTLEMAN IS ALREADY RUNNING HIS BUSINESS OUT IN THE HOUSE CURRENTLY. HE'S USING IT FOR SPORTS, RIGHT? SO, YOU KNOW, TO, TO ADD IN, YOU KNOW, UH, AN OFFICE IN THERE FOR THREE PEOPLE. I DON'T SEE HOW MUCH THAT CHANGES THE CURRENT SITUATION OR THE CURRENT OUTLOOK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS? UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE? UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS A CLOSED CASE, UH, FOR ME GIVEN SORT OF THE AREA SURROUNDING THIS HOUSE. UH, WITH THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S OPPOSITION AND, UH, THE COMMISSIONER'S MOTION, I'M GOING TO A THIRD TO THE COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER, UH, I I HAVE A QUESTION. UM, SO IT'S, IT'S ZONED AS A HOUSE. I DON'T, UM, CAN YOU USE A HOUSE FOR OFFICE, UM, OR BUSINESS STORAGE? IS THAT IN COMPLIANCE? THAT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF. NO, IT IS NOT. UH, THE PROPERTY IS ONLY ZONED FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, AND IT CAN ONLY BE USED AS SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. IF THERE'S NO, UM, OH, COMMISSIONER WHITE. UM, I, I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. THIS IS A, THIS IS A REALLY CLOSE CASE, UM, IN MY EYES. UM, IT, IT BOTHERS ME THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, IS AGAINST IT. UM, AND SO I'M, I'M I, I'M A LITTLE UN UNSURE ON, ON THIS ONE, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. UH, BUT I THINK IT MAY BE ONE OF THOSE WHERE, AGAIN, THE COMMISSIONER FROM THIS DISTRICT, COMMISSIONER GRAY HOUSE, UM, IS ALWAYS VERY THOROUGH IN, IN, IN LOOKING AT THESE THINGS. AND SO I'M JUST DEFER TO HER ON THIS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. OKAY. UM, NO OTHER, UH, COMMENTS. UH, ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY MADE BY COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE WITH A SECOND MADE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES. UH, AGREED TO DENY? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMUS? YES. COMMISSIONER, WE? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? NO. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. UH, CHAIR MCGEE? YES. UH, MOTION PASSES TO DENY BY VOTE OF 11 NINTENDO ONE. WE'RE READY FOR THE NEXT. OKAY. SO ITEM, UM, MADAM CHAIR, ITEM NUMBER NINE. UM, WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO SKIP OVER THAT. THE APPLICANT IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS MOMENT. UM, SO IT, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, WE'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10. YES. THANK YOU, . SORRY, COMMISSIONER. ALL RIGHT. [03:55:01] ALL RIGHT. HERE WE GO. ITEM NUMBER [10. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700027 (Council District 2): A request for a change in zoning from "R-4 MLOD-3 MLR-2" Residential Single-Family Martindale Army Airfield Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 District to "MF-33 MLOD-3 MLR-2" Multi-Family Martindale Army Airfield Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 District on Lot 1, Block 23, NCB 10298, located at 1004 Hampton Street. Staff recommends Denial, with an Alternate Recommendation. (Victoria Castro, Planner, (210) 207-2736, Victoria.Castro@Sanantonio.gov, Development Services).] 10 IS A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM R FOUR TO MS 33 WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1 0 0 4 HAMPTON, THERE WERE 29 NOTICES MAILED. EXCUSE ME. THERE WERE 28 NOTICES MAILED. NONE WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. STAFF FINDS EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS. IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. THE REQUESTED DENSITY OF MF 33 WOULD ALLOW UP TO NINE UNITS. THIS IS TWO INTENTS FOR THE ESTABLISHED AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS MF 18, WHICH WOULD ALLOW FIVE UNITS. THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF MS 18. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION, AND WE WILL GET THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE FOR YOU SHORTLY. THANK YOU, MR. . UH, YES, I'M HERE. OKAY. GO AHEAD, SIR. YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. YES. HI, UH, MY NAME IS JOSE . UH, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. UH, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY PEERS. UH, OUR CONCEPT IS TO PLACE EIGHT SMALL UNITS, UH, UTILIZING THE DEPTH OF 2 35 FEET ON K STREET. UH, IT'S A CORNER LOCATION AND THE PROPERTY IS OPPOSITE. NEWLY BUILT, UH, MOTEL AT THE BEST WESTERN PLUS. IT'S ALSO OPPOSITE THE, THE COMMERCIAL, UH, UH, LOT. UH, AND, UH, WE FEEL THAT THERE'S ALSO PRECEDENCE OF MS 33 IN THE BLOCK, LIKE, UH, 6 0 3 4 ON C STREET. UM, IN THAT BLOCK IS MF 33. ALSO IN THE NEXT BLOCK, THERE'S 1 6 1 1 6 AVENUE, THAT'S ALSO MF 33. BOTH THESE LAWS ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET, BUT WE FEEL THAT OUR LOCATION, UH, 1 0 0 4 HAMPTON STREET, UH, WOULD BE A BETTER, UH, YOU KNOW, A LOT FOR ZONING OF MF 33. UH, ALSO MF, UM, AND THE, AS A HIGH DENSITY FUTURE LINE USE, WE, WE WANNA BUILD FOR EIGHT UNITS, SMALL UNITS, UH, TWO STORY HIGH, WHICH WON'T BE GOING TO THE REST OF IT OR WILL BE IN, IN LINE WITH THE, THE, THE, THE REST OF THE, THE STREETSCAPE. UM, EVEN THOUGH THE, THE, THE CITY STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED MS 18, I FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THERE IS A WAY FOR US TO ACHIEVE, UH, IN THE DESIGN WISE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP, UH, PUT EIGHT UNITS, UH, IN THAT BLOCK. UH, SO THAT'S WHY WE, WE PUSHING FOR, UH, MS 33. THANK YOU, SIR. IF YOU'LL, UH, STAY ON THE LINE. SO IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE. SURE. AND YOU WANT ME TO PUT IT ON MUTE, THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. OKAY. UH, DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, MA'AM. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER JONES, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. UM, ANY OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, QUESTIONS BY SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE? UH, COMMISSIONER GIBBS, PLEASE. UH, I JUST WANTED THE DENIAL. I GUESS THEIR STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATIVE. COULD THEY KIND OF REVIEW THAT FORWARD? YES. UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN MS 33, AND WE ARE, UH, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE M MF 33 AND RECOMMENDING AN ALTERNATE OF MF 18. AND WHY DO YOU WANT MF 18 OVER MF 33 IN A PRETTY VACANT AREA? BASED ON THE, UM, BASED ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY, IT'S OWN R FOUR. AND SO IF IT'S DEVELOPED AS SUCH, THE MOST ANY UNITS COULD BE DEVELOPED ON THOSE PROPERTY IF THE PROPERTIES UNDER OCCUPIED IS TWO, UH, HOMES PER LOT. SO, UM, AS A PLANNING PRINCIPLE TO TRY TO ADD SOME DENSITY, ESPECIALLY ON CORNERS AND INTERSECTIONS, UH, WE WERE LOOKING AT A IN BETWEEN DENSITY OF PERHAPS FIVE UNITS, WHICH MF 18 WOULD GIVE THEM INSTEAD OF NINE UNITS, WHICH MF 33 WOULD GIVE THEM. [04:00:01] UH, THIS IS STAFF. SO WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS ZONE B? IS IT WAS THAT RESIDENTIAL? WHEN WAS ZONE B? RIGHT WHEN IT WAS ZONE B? IT IS A RESIDENTIAL YES. AND UP TO TWO UP TO TWO UNITS. YES, MA'AM. AND THEN IT'S, AND NOW IT'S WAS, NOW IT'S R FOUR. RIGHT. SO THE B TWO R FOUR CONVERSION ALLOWS 'EM TO DO TWO A DUPLEX BY RIDE. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS BY SHOW OF HANDS? COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE? YEAH, JUST A QUESTION FOR OUR STAFF. UM, I, AS THE APPLICANT STATED, UM, THE ITIES CLASSIFICATION IS HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE. UM, COULD YOU TELL ME WHAT, UM, WHAT ZONING, UM, CLASSIFICATIONS WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE FOR HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE IN THE EASTERN TRIANGLE PLAN? IT IS DESIGNATED AS HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE FOR THE LAND USE OF THIS PROPERTY, AND IT WOULD ALLOW THE UP TO MX 33. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, JONES? SO, UH, YEAH, THIS WOULD BE THE TIME THAT YOU WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, AS THE, THIS IS A DISTRICT TWO CASE, SO YOU WOULD, UM, UH, MAKE YOUR MOTION AT THIS TIME. OH, I SEE. OKAY. YES. UH, I MOVE TO, UH, TO AGREE WITH THE STAFF IN THE DENIAL. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. ? UH, WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, FOR, UH, APPROVAL WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. UH, WHO WAS THAT? MR. MCDANIEL. OKAY. THANK YOU. SORRY, THIS IS, UH, STAFF. JUST ONE CLARIFICATION. IS THAT A RE THE RECOMMENDATION JUST TO DENY OR DENIAL WITH THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF M F 18 DENY, OR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO, TO THE 18? YES. THANK YOU MA'AM. MM-HMM. . OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION, UM, AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR THAT WE'RE, UM, OPENING UP FOR DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS. IF YOU'VE HAD ANY DISCUSSION AT THIS TIME, SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. SO I'M NOT SURE IF I AGREE WITH THE M OF NOT ALLOWING EMMA 33 WHEN WE'RE RIGHT ACROSS FROM IT. WE HAVE A HOTEL, WHICH PROBABLY HAS MORE THAN 33 UNITS TO IT. I THINK THAT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SITES THAT HAS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO GET DEVELOPED FOR A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE HOUSING IN THIS DISTRICT. UM, IT'S, IT'S A, I DON'T THINK THAT, UM, GOING M F 18, I GET THAT YOU WANNA FIT IT INTO MAYBE THE COOKIE CUTTER, UM, MODEM, THE CRITERIA OR RECIPE THAT YOU HAVE WHEN IT COMES TO THESE TYPE OF THINGS. BUT YOU HAVE A HOTEL RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. YOU ALREADY ALREADY GAVE IT THAT LAND A LOT OF SPACE AND A LOT OF UNITS. I DON'T SEE THAT THE UNITS OF MF 33 IS, IS, UH, WELL KNOW. I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY A BIG BENEFIT. UM, MAYBE COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT TWO WOULD CHANGE YOUR OR, UH, MOTION TO GO WITH 33 AND LET'S GET THAT PLACE BOOMING OVER THERE. DOESN'T WE HAVE JOBS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET? RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER GREY HOUSE? YEAH. UM, I, I TEND TO AGREE WITH, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER GIBBONS ON THIS ONE. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I, I GET WHERE STAFF IS COMING FROM, AND I, AND I DEFINITELY RESPECT THE RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE IT IS R FOUR FAIRLY UNIFORM, AT LEAST ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET. UM, BUT ACROSS THE STREET WE HAVE C THREE. UM, AND THEN THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, UM, ALLOWS FOR THE MF 33. SO I'M, I'M JUST NOT, UM, SURE THAT I CAN AGREE WITH THE LIMITATION HERE. WE'RE AT A CORNER. IT'S A LARGE TRACT, EVEN THOUGH IT IS OUR CORE, A LOT OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE VACANT, AT LEAST ACCORDING TO GOOGLE MAPS, YOU ALL KNOW IN GOOGLE. SO, UM, I, I TEND TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GIBBONS ON THIS ONE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. [04:05:01] ANY OTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS BY A SHOW OF HANDS? UM, OKAY. I'LL JUST SAY THE ALSO, UH, LEANING TOWARDS THE WISHES OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN IS WHERE I WOULD BE, UH, LEANING AS WELL. OKAY. IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. SO I JUST NEED TO CLARIFY WHO MADE THE SECOND, WAS THAT COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE A MOTION TO DENY, UH, WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION FOR MF 18, UH, MADE BY COMMISSIONER JONES WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. COMMISSIONER GREY HOUSE? NO. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? NO. COMMISSIONER LOUIS? NO. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? NO. WHAT? THAT WAS A NO. CORRECT. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER WHITE? NO. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKES? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIRMAN MCGEE, DO MOTION FAILS. UH, ONLY FIVE, UH, VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. UH, SO WE EITHER GET A MOTION TO RECONSIDER MADE BY ONE OF THOSE WHO VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION, OR THIS CASE COMES BACK, UM, IN TWO THE, I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER IT FOR THE EMMA 33 SECOND. SO, ACTUALLY, LET ME JUST CLARIFY. IT'S JUST A MOTION TO RECONSIDER TO REOPEN THE MOTION TO REOPEN THE VOTE AGAIN. THAT'S RIGHT. I NEED THE MOTION TO REOPEN THE VOTE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND WE HAD A SECOND MADE BY THANK MARK COMMISSIONER DISTRICT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ON THE FLOOR WITH A SECOND ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. RIGHT. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMUS? YES. COMMISSIONER GUI? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? NO. COMMISSIONER SYKE? YES. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN, SIR? YES. UNMUTE YOUR, UNMUTE YOURSELF, SIR. THERE YOU GO. YES, GO AHEAD. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. CHAIR MCGEE? YES. MOTION PASSES. 10 TO ONE. AND NOW WE NEED A NEW MOTION AND CHAIR. I MAKE A MOTION TO CONSIDER THE MF 33 IS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT ON SEPTEMBER 10TH. SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, UM, FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE, UM, MF 33 AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. AND A SECOND, UM, ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS, BY SHOW OF HANDS, COMMISSIONER ROMERO, UM, I SUPPORTED THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION. UM, I THOUGHT STAFF'S ARGUMENT WAS SOUND, UM, THAT THIS WAS A GOOD, UH, IN-BETWEEN OF THE R FOUR AND EVERYTHING THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONER, OR HAVE COMMISSIONER JONES, UM, TELL US, UH, WHAT SHE WAS THINKING ABOUT IT. 'CAUSE I THINK, UH, I, I APPRECIATE HER BEING A WOMAN OF FEW WORDS AND WE'RE ALL BEING KILLED, BUT SPEECHIFYING TODAY, . AND, UM, BUT MAYBE SHE COULD EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE ARGUMENT BEHIND IT. NO, I WAS, SINCE I'M NEW TO THE COMMISSION, I WAS JUST GOING WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. UH, COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL. I AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION. AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE PLAN MAY ALLOW UP TO MF 33, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT PARTICULAR SITE IS THE BEST LOCATION FOR MF 33, NOR [04:10:01] ANY OF THE OTHER R FOUR LOTS DOWN ON THAT STREET. AND I THINK WE'RE ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE WHEN WE OPEN IT UP AND JUST START SAYING, SURE. YOU CAN HAVE MF 33 ON ANY OUR FOUR LOGICS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE PLAN ALLOWS. I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE STAFF SOME SUPPORT AND, AND RESPECT THEIR VIEWS ON THIS, WHICH IS WHAT I'M DOING IN THIS CASE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY. YEAH, NO OTHER DISCUSSION. SO, ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. ALRIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST OF MF 33, MADE BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS OF THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITE. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? YES. COMMISSIONER LOUIS? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? NO. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? NO. COMMISSIONER SIP? NO. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCGEE. I MEAN, CHAIR MCGEE? YES. MOTION PASSES BY VOTE. EIGHT TO THREE. OKAY. UM, AND WE'RE READY FOR THE NEXT CASE, BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO ITEM NUMBER 11. SO WE DIDN'T GET THE, UM, THE ONE FROM, UM, THE APPLICANT FROM NUMBER NINE ON YET? NO, NOT YET. OKAY. OF INFORMATION. YES, MA'AM. HOW MANY MORE CASES DO WE HAVE AFTER THIS ONE? FOUR. WELL, WITH THIS ONE, FOUR. UH, ANY, ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR A BREAK BETWEEN NOW AND, UH, WELL, NOW IT'S A GOOD TIME SINCE WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE. SO, UM, SO I GUESS WE CAN TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. IT'S CURRENTLY, LET'S SAY FIVE TO 18. SO LET'S SAY, UH, 5 23. IF WE COULD RETURN, PLEASE. SO WE'LL, UH, PAUSE YOUR CAMERAS, UH, MUTE YOUR PHONE, MUTE YOUR LINES, PLEASE. AND WE'LL, UH, PAUSE THE LIVE STREAM. OKAY. SLIDE, I THINK. OKAY. THAT LOOKS GOOD. UM, YES, LET'S GO AHEAD AND START, PLEASE. THANK YOU MR. . UH, UH, SEAN, ARE WE LIVE? OKAY, WE'RE GOOD TO GO. LET'S GO. ALL [11. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700028 (Council District 3): A request for a change in zoning from "I-1 MLOD-2 MLR-2 AHOD" General Industrial Lackland Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District to "C-2 MLOD-2 MLR-2 AHOD" Commercial Lackland Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 2 Airport Hazard Overlay District on Lot 37, NCB 9483, located at 2712 Pleasanton Road. Staff recommends Approval. (Victoria Castro, Planner, (210) 207-2736, Victoria.Castro@Sanantonio.gov, Development Services).] THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 11. THE REQUEST IS TO RESUME FROM I ONE TO C TWO, LOCATED AT 27 12 PLEASANTON ROAD. ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. THERE WERE 13 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THE STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LANDS IN RELATION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST. THE REQUEST CONSTITUTES A DOWN ZONING FROM THE INTENSE I ONE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. THE C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW RETAIL SERVICE USES AND WOULD HAVE LESS POTENTIAL FOR HEAVY TRUCK VEHICLE TRAFFIC. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE THE APPLICANT. MS. CHU ON THE LINE. HELLO? YES, THIS IS PATRICIA OU. HI, MS. OU, THIS IS CHRISTIE EZ. YOU ARE ADDRESSING THE ZONING COMMISSION ON YOUR ITEM LOCATED AT 27 12 PLEASANTON ROAD. HELLO. THANK YOU. UM, GO RIGHT AHEAD. THE, OKAY. SO I WAS IN HERE ABOUT A YEAR AGO. THE PROPERTY ITSELF WAS ALREADY AN ESTABLISHED RETAIL MEDICAL SUPPLY UNIFORM STORE. UM, IN BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL OWNER AND MYSELF, SOMETIME BEFORE WE MOVED IN, THE PROPERTY WAS CHANGED OVER INTO A COMMERCIAL ZONING. AND NOW THAT I'VE TAKEN OVER HERE, I JUST WANTED TO CHANGE IT BACK SO THAT, UH, AS I WANNA PURCHASE THE PROPERTY, I WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S ON PROPERTY SO I CAN CONTINUE TO STAY HERE AND DO THE SAME THING AND HAVE A RETAIL STORE HERE. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL I I'M ASKING FOR. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO, UM, THANK YOU. YOU'LL HOLD THE LINE BECAUSE, UH, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, MA'AM. [04:15:01] OKAY, GREAT. SO THIS IS A DISTRICT THREE CASE. SO MS. CANTU, THANK YOU SO MUCH, UM, FOR BEING, UM, HERE TO, UH, PRESENT WITH US TODAY VIRTUALLY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN OUR COMMUNITY AS A BUSINESS OWNER. UM, SO THE ONLY CONCERN HERE WOULD BE THE PROXIMITY OF THE SCHOOL RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. SO, UM, WE'RE HOPING FOR AN, UH, AMENDMENT OF AN NA, UH, TO YOUR REQUEST. WOULD YOU BE AVAILABLE TO THAT? THAT'S FINE. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. OKAY. SO STAFF, DOES SHE HAVE TO OFFICIALLY SAY THAT, DORA, WAS THAT GOOD ENOUGH? NO, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH. I MEAN, YOUR MOTION CAN BE, UM, TO A APPROVE WITH D N A. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. SO OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS. SO IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO HAVE, UH, QUESTIONS, SHOW OF HANDS, UH, BY SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. UH, COMMISSIONER GIBBONS, IS THAT A SCHOOL RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET? WHAT KIND SCHOOL? I BELIEVE THAT'S AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, ACCORDING TO MY NOTES, IT'S, IT'S AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. YEAH. AND SO, I MEAN, YOU COULD PUT AN A ON IT. THERE'S NOT ANY WAY SHE'S, ANYONE WOULD BE ABLE TO SELL OR HAVE ALCOHOL ON SITE ANYWAYS DUE TO THE PROXIMITY TO THE SCHOOL. AND SO THERE IS A PROCESS, UM, IS THAT IF THE PROPERTY LINE IS WITHIN 300 FEET, AND IN THIS CASE IT, IT IS, UH, TO A SCHOOL, THERE'S A VARIANCE PROCESS IN ORDER TO, UH, RECEIVE THE C A B C LICENSING, UH, TO SELL ALCOHOL ON THE PROPERTY. AND THAT IS A COUNCIL, UH, PROCESS IN ORDER TO WAIVE THE MINIMUM 300 FOOT DISTANCE LIMITATION. BUT A BUT A ZONING OF THE, UH, OVERLAY FOR NA NON ALCOHOLIC SALES MEANS THAT THEY CAN'T GET THAT VARIANCE AT ALL. YEAH. OKAY. THAT'S, YOU JUST WANT THAT SURETY THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UM, ITEM NUMBER 11 WITH THE AMENDMENT OF NA ADDED TO IT. SHALL DANIEL? I'M SORRY, MR. GIVEN A SECOND. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE AMENDMENT TO C TWO AND A AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. ANY DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY. UH, WITH NO DISCUSSION, UH, ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS C TWO AND A MADE BY COMMISSIONER. CHAIRMAN DEAN WITH A SECOND MADE BY COMMISSIONER GIBBONS. COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE. YES. COMMISSIONER JONES. YES. COMMISSIONER KAMATH. COMMISSIONER KATH. WILL YOU ACTUALLY, UH, UNMUTE. ALRIGHT, WE'LL COME BACK TO HIM. UH, COMMISSIONER EY? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE. I DON'T SEE HIM ON THE SCREEN, BUT I WANNA GIVE HIM YES. OKAY. YOU THERE? ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SITES? YES. AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER KAMAN THAT IT SAID YES. WHEN YOU WERE THINKING MARK WHITE WAS THERE. I, I SEE HIM. I SEE HIM NOW. THANK YOU. I'LL COME BACK TO HIM JUST TO MAKE SURE IT GETS, UH, ON THE RECORD. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE, UH, CHAIR MCGEE? YES. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER? YES. I BELIEVE CHAIR DELAY. OKAY. AND LET ME JUST CHECK ONE MORE TIME WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER WHITE. I DON'T SEE HIM ON THE SCREEN, SO I'M GONNA RECORD HIM AS AN ABSENT FROM THIS VOTE. SO MOTION PASSES 10 TO ZERO. OKAY. ALRIGHT, I THINK WE'RE GOING ON TO THE NEXT CASE. YES, MA'AM. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER [14. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700033 (Council District 1): A request for a change in zoning from “R-4 CD AHOD” Residential Single-Family Airport Hazard Overlay District with a Conditional Use for a Professional Office to “IDZ-1 AHOD” Infill Development Zone Airport Hazard Overlay District with uses permitted for three (3) dwelling units and a Professional Office on Lot F, Block 1, NCB 216, located at 814 West Euclid Avenue. Staff recommends Approval. (Lorianne Thennes, Planner (210) 207-7945, lorianne.thennes@sanantonio.gov; Development Services Department)] 14 TO REZONING FROM R FOUR CD WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE TO I D D A H O D WITH USE OF PERMITTED FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS AND A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. IT'S LOCATED AT EIGHT 14 WEST EUCLID AVENUE. THERE WERE 26 NOTICES MAILED TWO WERE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE IN OPPOSITION. [04:20:01] AND THE FIVE POINT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. THE CURRENT R FOUR C D A H O D RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE IS APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND THE AREA. THE PROPOSED I D D IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND USES IN THE AREA. STAFF DOES NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF LIKELY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON NEIGHBORING LAND IN RELATION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THANK YOU. AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE REPRESENTATIVE, MR. ANI, MR. MAGONE. IT WILL BE JUST ONE MOMENT. MR. ALANI, HAVE YOU JOINED US? OKAY, MR. MABO. OKAY, GREAT. YES, I, HERE YOU ARE ADDRESSING THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. GO AHEAD, SIR. OKAY, SO MY NAME'S VARGO MAGONE. I AM THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE OWNER, GEORGE SARA. I LIVE ON BROADWAY, 79 26 BROADWAY, UNIT TEN SIX. UM, THIS PROPERTY IS, UM, ONE LOT FROM THE CORNER OF, UM, EUCLID AND SOUTH, UH, UH, FLORIDA, NORTH FLORIDA, SORRY, UH, ACROSS, ALMOST ACROSS FROM THE SALVATION ARMY. WE GIVE A LOCATION IN THE FIVE POINTS. IT'S, UM, VERY, UM, USED NEIGHBORHOOD. THE HOUSE THAT, THE SECTION YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT THERE WITH THE YELLOW. UM, WE ARE NOT, UH, LOOKING TO NECESSARILY USE IT AS AN OFFICE. THE PRIMARY USE IS RESIDENTIAL. THOSE THREE STRUCTURES ARE CURRENTLY, UH, EXISTING. THERE'S NOTHING YOU BEING ADDED. UM, ONE SECOND. I'M BEING CALLED AGAIN. ARE YOU HEARING ME? YES, GO AHEAD. KEEP GOING. OKAY. MY APOLOGIES. UM, THE, THE HOUSE IS ALREADY SUBDIVIDED AS SHOWN IN THAT, THAT OTHER GRAPH WITH THE YELLOW AND THE, UH, THE SECTION, THE BELONG SECTION IN THE BACK. SO IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, OR OFFICE USE SINCE 2007 HAS BEEN A LAW OFFICE. OKAY. SO THAT WHOLE YELLOW AREA HAS HAD BEEN SET UP AS A LAW OFFICE. UM, WHAT WE WANTED TO DO IS MAKE IT THROUGH RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, UM, AND KEEP THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING A RESIDENCE MOVE IN THE BACK AND HAVE THEIR OFFICE IN THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY THE ZONING, IT'S JUST TO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY. THE, THE CORNER LOT RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE IS THE FRONT OFFICE, IT IS WRITTEN, UH, RIGHT THERE TOWARDS THE FLOOR. THERE'S A TWO STORY OFFICE. UM, AND THIS WOULD PRETTY TO RESIDENTIAL MAINLY, BUT WE WOULD HAVE THAT LITTLE FLEXIBILITY IF WE HAD A, UH, THE BOTH UNITS OPEN AND IF SOMEBODY CAME UP TO US AND ASKED FOR IT, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON FOR ASKING FOR THAT OFFICE. THE MAIN USE WILL BE, UH, THREE RESIDENTIAL, UH, THREE RESIDENTIAL USE, UH, UNITS. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. IF YOU'LL, UH, JUST STAY ON THE LINE, WE'LL LIKELY HAVE QUESTIONS. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. SURE. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO, MA'AM. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. THANK YOU. UM, YEAH, JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. UM, MM-HMM. FOR STAFF. UM, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THREE UNITS AND AN OFFICE THAT THAT'S WHAT THE ZONING, UM, APPLICATION IS FOR. BUT WHAT HE HAS MARKED ON THE SITE PLAN IS WHERE THE OFFICE WOULD BE. SO THEN IT WOULD BE IF THE OFFICE WAS TO BE OCCUPIED AS AN OFFICE, THEN HE WOULD REALLY JUST [04:25:01] HAVE THE TWO UNITS THERE. SO I GUESS I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT QUESTION I'M TRYING TO ASK. ACTUALLY. I, I GUESS I'M CONCERNED ABOUT CHANGING IT AND HAVING THREE UNITS AND AN OFFICE. WOULD THAT BE POSSIBLE BASED ON THE SITE PLAN THAT'S HERE AND BASED ON HOW THAT WORKS WITH I D Z, IT'S ALL GONNA DEPEND ON HIM MEETING, BUILDING, UH, CODE REQUIREMENTS. THE ZONING JUST GIVES HIM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE FOR THE USES. UM, AND HE DOESN'T HAVE TO USE 'EM ALL TOGETHER, BUT HE COULD SO LONG IF HE MEETS A BUILDING AND FIRE CODE STANDARDS. SO IT'S JUST GONNA DEPEND ON, UH, UH, HIS, WHAT, YOU KNOW, SHOWING A MAXIMUM ALLOWED FOR, UH, OFFICE PLACE. THAT'S THE MOST THAT HE'LL GET IF HE ENDS UP USING LESS THAN THAT AND USING IT FOR A DWELLING UNIT. AGAIN, HE JUST HAS TO BE BUILDING AND FIRE CODE STANDARD. WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS COULD YOU, COULD YOU FURTHER SUBDIVIDE THAT, LIKE THE YELLOW SPACE? COULD YOU FURTHER SUBDIVIDE THAT AND HAVE LET'S SAY A SMALL OFFICE AND ANOTHER DWELLING IN THAT SPACE? SO YES, BECAUSE THE BASE, OH, ACTUALLY NO, BECAUSE THIS IS FOR I D Z. SO I D Z IS FOR THREE DWELLING UNITS PLUS AN OFFICE. BUT THE SITE PLAN WILL INDICATE, UH, HOW MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD BE ALLOWED AT A MAXIMUM FOR THE OFFICE. AND HE COULD FIT UP TO THREE DWELLING UNITS AGAIN, SO LONG AS HE NEEDS FILLED IN THE FIRE CODE AGAIN. SO BASED ON YOUR EXPLANATION, THEN HE WOULD BE ABLE TO FURTHER SUBDIVIDE THAT, AND THEN YOU WOULD ESSENTIALLY HAVE KIND OF FOUR SEPARATE, UM, UNITS ON THE PROPERTY, THREE OF WHICH WOULD BE RESIDENCES AND ONE OF WHICH WOULD BE AN OFFICE. YES. RIGHT NOW WHAT HE SHOWS IN THAT YELLOW GRAPHIC IS A FRONT UNIT AND OFFICE, WHICH TO ME SHOWS THAT THE COMBINED UNIT WAS OFFICE, UH, WHICH MEANS IT COULD BE MIXED, BUT THEN IT WOULD BE ONLY A, UH, FOR THE REST OF THE SPACE WOULD BE, UH, THE OTHER TWO UNITS. BUT IF THE APPLICANT WAS PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION, HE CAN'T, I'M SORRY, CAN I, CAN I ADDRESS SOMETHING HERE? YEAH. IF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, UH, JUST CLARIFYING WHAT THE, WHAT THE FRONT UNIT SLASH OFFICE MEANS. YEAH, EXACTLY. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THAT LITTLE CIRCLE NEXT TO, OR THE PA DRIVEWAY, THAT'S THE SINGLE BATHROOM IN THAT UNIT. THIS, THIS OFFICE SPACE. UM, IF YOU LOOK TO THE, TO THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PAGE, THERE'S ANOTHER LITTLE CIRCLE HALFWAY THROUGH, THERE'S A SOLID WALL THERE. WE WOULD HAVE TO CREATE ANOTHER BATHROOM AREA, ANOTHER KITCHEN AREA. IF WE WERE TO SUB DIVIDE THAT FRONT UNIT, THE FRONT UNIT SLASH OFFICE IS EITHER GONNA BE A RESIDENCE OR IF SOMEBODY WANTED AN OFFICE, THEY COULD HAVE, UH, LIKE I SAID, UM, THE IDEA WAS THAT THEY WANTED TO LIVE IN THE BACK AND HAVE A FRONT AS AN OFFICE WHERE THAT MAKES KIND OF NEEDS. THAT'S KIND OF, UH, GETTING MORE POPULAR NOWADAYS. RIGHT? UH, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. UM, BUT THE, THE INTENT IS NOT, UH, IT, IT ACTUALLY WOULDN'T BE THAT EASY EITHER TO SUBDIVIDE THAT INTO A FOUR UNIT. UM, AND THE, IT IS JUST THE THREE, THERE'S THREE BATHROOMS, RIGHT? THERE'S GONNA BE A BATHROOM IN, IN THE BACK UNIT. THAT'S THE, AND ALL THIS IS AN EXISTING BUILDING AND IT HAS BUILT OR NOT AS IT HAS, AS IT EXISTS NOW AS WE, AS WE OBTAINED IT, RIGHT. WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT ANYTHING NEW. WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE. BUT THERE'S ONE BATHROOM IN THE FRONT OVER THERE TO THE, THE RIGHT. THERE'S ONE BATHROOM IN THE MIDDLE THAT GOES TO THAT LONG UNIT IN THE BACK OF THAT FRONT HOUSE. AND THEN THE BACK HOUSE HAS THIS BATHROOM WAS ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO THAT'S IT. WE WOULD HAVE TO PULL PERMITS AND GET A HOLD OF HER DEAL GOING TO INCLUDE, BUILD OUT A WHOLE NEW BATHROOM AND ALL THAT. AND THAT'S NOT, NOT ABOUT THE INTENT. IT WOULD BE VERY SMO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M NOT, I I'M NOT OVERLY CONCERNED WITH NECESSARILY WHAT YOU WANNA DO, BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS WITH RESPECT TO YEAH. THE FUTURE AND WHAT SOMEONE ELSE COULD COME IN AND, AND DO. AND THAT'S JUST, I'M TRYING TO DISCERN FROM THE ZONING CODE AND THIS SITE PLAN, IF SOMEONE ELSE CAME IN HERE, WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY HAPPEN TO THE PROPERTY? SO THAT, THAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT. UH, QUESTION TO STAFF. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE FOR STAFF IS, IS WITH RESPECT TO PARKING, WHICH I UNDERSTAND WE'RE AN I D Z, SO PARKING REQUIREMENTS REMIND ME, PARKING REQUIREMENTS UNDER I D Z ONE ARE COMPLETELY WAIVED. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO IF IT WAS NOT I D Z AND WE WERE LOOKING AT PARKING FOR THIS TYPE OF A STRUCTURE WITH POTENTIALLY THREE DWELLING UNITS [04:30:01] AND AN OFFICE OR TWO DWELLING UNITS IN AN OFFICE, WHAT WOULD WE BE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY AS FAR AS PARKING SPACES? UH, SO EACH DWELLING UNIT ONLY REQUIRES ONE SPACE. SO IF YOU WERE TO DEVELOP IT AT THE MAX OF THREE, IT WOULD BE THREE SPACES. AND THEN THE TOP IS SQUARE FOOTAGE. UH, AGAIN, DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE MAX OFFICE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS, IT'S UH, UH, A RATIO 300 SQUARE FEET PER ROW FLOOR AREA. AND HOW BIG IS THE FRONT DWELLING UNIT, APPROXIMATELY? DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA? I DON'T SEE IT ON THE SITE. PLAN SEVEN BIG. IT'S A 700 SQUARE FEET. 700. OKAY. SO ISH. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. I'M GOOD. THANKS. I, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY, UH, NO QUESTIONS. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE. OKAY. UM, MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 14. UM, THE REASON I HAD PULLED THIS WAS THAT I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO DISCUSS THE PARKING SITUATION AND THINK THAT THROUGH, UM, THE, I I DROVE BY THIS PROPERTY THE OTHER DAY. UM, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S IN AN AREA THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IS, IS UP AND COMING AND THERE'S SOME DEVELOPMENT GOING ON AROUND IT. SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, UM, A GREAT STEP FORWARD FOR THAT AREA. UM, I KNOW THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT. UM, THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN, UH, ABIDED AND, AND THERE'S BEEN SOME CRIME IN THE AREA. SO, UM, GETTING SOME, SOME NEW RESIDENTS THERE AND POTENTIALLY BUSINESS IS, UH, IS IN THEIR MIND, IS A, IS A BENEFIT FOR THE COMMUNITY. IT SEEMS TO BE A PLAN WITH THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. UM, URBAN LOW DENSITY, WHICH IS ANYWHERE FROM ONE TO FOUR UNITS AND SMALL SCALE RETAIL AS WELL AS SERVICES TO SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL USES. SO, UM, WITH THAT SAID, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING THE MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS. WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND. THIS IS COMMISSIONER ROMERO. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS, BY SHOW OF HANDS, COMMISSIONER ROMERO. SORRY, JUST A BRIEF INDULGENCE. I WANTED TO SAY HELLO TO EDUARDO WHO USED TO BE MY STUDENT A LONG TIME AGO. YEAH. ONE OF MY FAVORITE PROFESSORS. THANK YOU, . WELL, THANK YOU . THANK YOU ALL FOR STICKING THIS OUT. I'VE BEEN WATCHING THE ENTIRE DAY. OH, THANK YOU. Y'ALL ARE GREAT SERVICE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BY COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HAND? OKAY. WITH NO, UH, OTHER DISCUSSION. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY COMMISSIONER GRAU WITH A SECOND MADE BY COMMISSIONER ROMERO. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? YES. COMMISSIONER EY? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SY? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. UH, AYE. UH, CHAIR MCGEE? YES. YOUR MOTION PASSES, UH, TO APPROVE 11 TO ONE. I MEAN 11 TO ZERO. SORRY. THANK YOU'ALL VERY, VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UM, JUST TAKING A LITTLE BRIEF, LIKE A TEN SECOND FLIP MY PAGE TO GET TO ITEM NUMBER 20. AND I BELIEVE WE'RE GETTING THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE RIGHT NOW. YES. HELLO, THIS IS RICHARD GALLEGOS. I'M THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT. ALRIGHT. OKAY, RICHARD, WE'RE GONNA PRESENT AND THEN UH, THE COMMISSION WILL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS. SO JUST LET'S MOVE ALONG. OKAY. THIS IS ITEM [20. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700044 (Council District 5): A request for a change in zoning from "MF-33 MLOD-2 MLR-1 AHOD" Multi-Family Lackland Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 1 Airport Hazard Overlay District to "R-3 MLOD-2 MLR-1 AHOD" Single-Family Residential Lackland Military Lighting Overlay Military Lighting Region 1 Airport Hazard Overlay District on Lot 62 and the south 70 feet of Lot 19A, Block 32, NCB 3692, located at 1138 Ceralvo Street. Staff recommends Approval. (Mercedes Rivas, Senior Planner, (210) 207-0215, Mercedes.Rivas2@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)] NUMBER 20. IT'S A REQUEST TO REZONE FROM MS 33 TO R THREE WITH ALL OVERLAYS REMAINING THE SAME. LOCATED AT 1138 ALVO STREET, THERE WERE 28 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, ONE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM WESTWOOD SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THE CURRENT MS 33 IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE [04:35:01] PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED R THREE IS ALSO A SUITABLE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY AND WOULD ENABLE THE APPLICANT TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO 15 LOTS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. MADAM CHAIR. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, MAY WE, UH, HAVE THE, WHAT'S MR. RICHARD? WHAT WAS HIS NAME? I'M SO SORRY. UM, THE . MR. MR. GALLEGOS. GO AHEAD. GALL. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT. I'M HERE. ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD. AND THAT THE SURE. UM, I WAS JUST CURIOUS, UH, WE WERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WERE PULLED, BUT WE HAD MET WITH CITY STAFF SOME TIME AGO. I WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL ENGINEER FOR THIS PROJECT. UM, KEEPING THE MF 33, FROM WHAT I REMEMBER, THE ROAD WAS GONNA HAVE TO BE, UH, FOR WHAT WE WANTED, SMALLER HOME TYPE SUBDIVISION. UM, WE WANTED, THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO MAINTAIN A CITY OWNED ROAD WITH GARBAGE PICKUP FOR THESE ENTRY LEVEL HOMES SINCE THIS IS AN INFILL. UM, SO WHEN WE MET WITH CITY STAFF, THEY HAD RECOMMENDED THAT WE CHANGE THE ZONING AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT STARTED THE PROCESS. UH, THE OWNERS DID NOT WANT AN H O A, THEY WANTED CITY OWNED STREETS. AND SO WE MODIFIED TO AN R THREE WHICH FIT. WE, UH, ACTUALLY GAINED A LOT FROM THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT. THE ONLY OTHER, UM, ITEM THAT WAS A CONCERN WAS THE ACCESS OFFICER ALVO. THE WIDTH OF THE STREET WAS GONNA BE NOT MEET CITY CODE, BUT WE APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE AND WERE APPROVED FOR THE THINNER THROAT, UM, APPROACH TO THE SUBDIVISION. AND THEN IT MODIFIED TO THE CURRENT STANDARDS FOR A CITY ROAD AS SOON AS WE COULD AND STAFF WAS OKAY WITH IT. SO WE DO HAVE THE APPROVAL FOR THAT. WE ARE JUST WAITING ON THE ZONING, UM, AT THIS POINT TO HOPEFULLY BE APPROVED. AND CHAIR, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, THE REASON WHY, UH, WE PULLED IT OFF IS BECAUSE WE HAVE A VOICEMAIL AND OPPOSITION TO PLAY FOR THE RECORD. OKAY? OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. UM, SO MR. GALLEGOS, IF YOU'LL JUST, UM, UM, HOLD ON 'CAUSE WE MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. OKAY. AND WE'RE READY FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT NOW. OKAY. I'M IT UP JUST ONE MOMENT. 6 3 9 6 6. AND I'M CALLING REGARDING CASE AS IN 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 4. I'M CALLING BECAUSE, AND IS ALLOWED TO BUILD AND IT WOULD CAUSE DIFFERENT PROBLEMS FOR ME AS A NEIGHBOR AND FOR NEED MORE TRAFFIC, LESS PRIVACY, AND HUGE MASS ON CONSTRUCTION CHARGES. IT WOULD ALSO RAISE PROPERTY TAXES, WHICH ARE ALREADY TRIED. THANK YOU FOR, UM, LISTENING TO MY, UH, THANK YOU RECEIVE TODAY AT, AND HER NAME IS AMANDA . THANK YOU. IS ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? THAT WAS THE ONLY ONE, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. A FEW QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT REAL QUICKLY. UM, SO WHAT EXACTLY IS THE PLAN HERE? HOW MANY UNITS ARE YOU CONSIDERING MR. GALLEGOS? SO HOW CAN I MUTE YOURSELF SIR? I, I, OH, SORRY. THERE I UNMUTED. I I DON'T KNOW IF IT JUST WENT. UM, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES. YES SIR. YES. OKAY. UM, IT IS A 1.6 ACRE TRACK THAT'S CONSIDERED INFILL. EVERYTHING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA HAS BEEN DEVELOPED. UM, WE ARE ADDING 15 LOTS, UM, THAT MEET THE R THREE ZONING. THESE ARE GONNA BE SMALLER, 1100 SQUARE FOOT HOMES, ENTRY LEVEL TYPE. OKAY. UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF, YOU KNOW, BY MY MATH RIGHT NOW UNDER MF 33 WITH [04:40:01] A 1.6375 ACRE LOT, THAT WOULD BE 54 UNITS, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WOULD BE PRETTY ACCURATE, YES. ALRIGHT. UM, NOW ANOTHER QUE AND UNDER AN R THREE, I'M COMING OUT AT ABOUT 23, 24 UNITS. IS THAT RIGHT? AS A MAXIMUM? I'M DOING THE MATH NOW. WELL, I'M BRAIN DEAD, SO I JUST WANT SOMEONE CHECK ON THAT. UH, POSSIBLY FOUR FOOTAGE. I'M SORRY, MRGO, IF YOU COULD JUST HOLD YOUR COMMENTS UNTIL THE COMMISSION ASKS. UM, YES, MR. BUSANTE, IT'S ABOUT 24 UNITS. OKAY. AND THEY'RE ONLY SEEKING 15. WELL, QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, AND AGAIN, BY MY MATH, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN GET THE SAME THING THEY WANT WITH AN R FOUR OR NO, THEY CAN'T BECAUSE OF OVERAGE. ALRIGHT. I THINK THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THIS POINT. I OKAY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ANTE. UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? SHOW OF HANDS PLEASE. OKAY. IF THERE ARE NO, UH, QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. UM, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS RAISED BY MS. MONTALVO AND HER VOICEMAIL, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, UM, AT A MAXIMUM THIS PROPERTY COULD BE DEVELOPED TO 54 UNITS, WE'RE REDUCING THAT BY NEARLY HALF BY GOING TO R THREE. AND IF THEY GO THROUGH WITH THE PLAN WITH 15 LOTS BY, YOU KNOW, 70%, UH, AS A RESULT, UM, I'M GOING TO MOVE, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 20. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. IS THERE A SECOND? THIS IS COMMISSIONER GREATHOUSE SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? UH, COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS. OKAY, COMMISSIONER BUSANTE ONE REALLY QUICKLY, MR. D***S. UM, THIS IS MORE A SUGGESTION SO THAN ANYTHING ELSE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING SOME FEEDBACK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS SORT OF FELT LEFT OUT AND SO I STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU COORDINATE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE COUNCIL PERSON STAFF. WE'LL, WE'LL DO THAT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER GR HOUSE. UM, I, I DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THIS IS A COMMENT OR A QUESTION, BUT JUST LOOKING AT THIS AREA, UM, I JUST KIND OF FIND IT, I DON'T KNOW, I FIND IT STRANGE THAT THAT IT, THERE'S SO MUCH MS 33 HERE AND THEN WHEN I LOOK AT THE SATELLITE IMAGES AND THEN THE GOOGLE STREET VIEW, IT SEEMS LIKE THESE ARE SMALLER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UM, ON FAIRLY LARGE LOTS. I'M JUST, I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION. THIS IS MORPHING INTO A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IS THERE A LARGE AREA REZONING THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS AREA? I JUST, IT JUST SEEMS KIND OF STRANGE. THE ZONING AND THE ACTUAL USE DON'T SEEM TO FIT EACH OTHER RIGHT, BECAUSE THIS IS A RESULT OF THE OLD CODE CONVERSION. UH, IT WAS DON'T SEE, AND THEN IT WENT TO R THREE AND R THREE, CONVERTED TO MS 33. UH, THOSE DISTRICTS WOULD ALLOW, UH, SINGLE FAMILY USES OF CUMULATIVE ZONING. UH, SO YEAH, I MEAN, IF, IF IT IS DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY OUT THERE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LOOKED AT DURING A LARGE AREA. OKAY. WELL OBVIOUSLY IT IS NOT MY DISTRICT AND COMMISSIONER ANTE ALWAYS DOES A FABULOUS JOB AND IS VERY THOROUGH. SO I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. IT JUST, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT BECAUSE IT DOES, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE G I S, IT'S VERY MUCH MF 33. AND THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A DOWN ZONING FROM THAT, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE USES, UM, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY, UM, COMPLY WITH THAT. UM, AND I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF THAT IN OUR DISTRICT TOO. SO JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP. JUST A FRIENDLY COMMENT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. WITH NO OTHER DISCUSSION. ROLL CALL, VOTE PLEASE. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE MADE BY COMMISSIONER MR. MONTE WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GRAU. COMMISSIONER GREYHOUND? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? YES. COMMISSIONER WE? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKE? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. [04:45:01] UH, CHAIR MCGEE? YES. MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE 11 ZERO. ALRIGHT. IN OUR FINAL CASE, AND WE DIDN'T, WE WERE ABLE TO GET HER ON THE LINE. SHE GIVES HER APOLOGIES. SHE WAS AT ATTENDING A, A FUNERAL. SO ITEM [9. ZONING CASE Z-2020-10700026 (Council District 7): A request for a change in zoning from "C-2 NA H UC-3 AHOD" Commercial Nonalcoholic Sales Historic Fredericksburg Road Urban Corridor Airport Hazard Overlay District to "C-2 H UC-3 AHOD" Commercial Historic Fredericksburg Road Urban Corridor Airport Hazard Overlay District on 0.41 acres out of NCB 6692, located on 1901 Fredericksburg Road. Staff recommends Denial, with an Alternate Recommendation. (Associated Plan Amendment PA 2020-11600017) (Victoria Castro, Planner, (210) 207-2736, Victoria.Castro@Sanantonio.gov, Development Services).] NUMBER NINE IS A REQUEST TO REONE FROM C TWO N A A C THREE A H O D TO C TWO H U C THREE A H O. LOCATED AT 1901 FREDERICK SPREAD ROAD. THERE WERE 23 NOTICES MAILED. TWO RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION. JEFFERSON WOODLAWN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT AND THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM KEYSTONE OR MONTICELLO PARK. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH SOME OF THE ESTABLISHED C TWO COMMERCIAL ZONING IN THE AREA, BUT NOT WITH THE CURRENT LAND USE ALONG THE CORRIDOR, WHICH IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. IT IS LIKELY THAT AFTER THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED, THE NEEDED REZONING ALONG THE CO CORRIDOR DID NOT OCCUR. STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL WITH AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF C ONE. THIS ALLOWS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED USE AND YET STILL ALIGNS WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE IN THE FREDERICKSBURG ROAD CORRIDOR. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE FROM C TWO NA TO C TWO TO OPEN A RESTAURANT THAT SERVES ALCOHOL. A RESTAURANT WITH ALCOHOL SALES CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED IN C ONE WITH PROPER PERMITTING. THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY PREFER TO KEEP THE C TWO BASE. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE. MS. RIOS, ARE YOU THERE? ARE YOU RIOS? THANK YOU MS. RIOS. YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOUR PRESENTATION MA'AM. OKAY. UH, AGAIN, MY NAME IS MARY RIOS. I LIVE AT 2 0 3 NORTH DRIVE. I LIVE IN THE MONTICELLO NEIGHBORHOOD AND I BOUGHT, UH, THE PROPERTY AT 1901 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD. I ALSO OWN THE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS THE JEWEL OF ART AT 1909 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD. AND I DECIDED THAT I NEEDED TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BEAUTIFY, MAKE SOMETHING LOVELY, SOMETHING REALLY NICE. UH, FAMILY RESTAURANT, UH, A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN GATHER AND HAVE FUN. A FEW WINE AND BEER DRINKS AND, UM, SERVE FOOD. WE PLAN TO HAVE MAYBE SOME PIANO MUSIC IF POSSIBLE. UH, BUT WE REALLY BASICALLY WANT TO DO SOMETHING TO BEAUTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE WANNA REALLY MAKE A NICE PLACE THERE, UH, FOR PEOPLE TO BE, UH, PROUD OF IT. UM, AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO. WE WANNA HAVE FUNDRAISERS THERE. MY DAUGHTER'S A CHOREOGRAPHER AND WE WANNA RAISE MONEY TO PUT CAMERAS ALL OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD, CLEAN IT UP. WE HAVE ALL SORTS OF IDEAS. WE REALLY, REALLY, UH, ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT. AND, UM, I JUST HOPE EVERYTHING WORKS OUT. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, BUT THAT'S BASICALLY, UM, I AM AT A FUNERAL RIGHT NOW, UNFORTUNATELY, BUT I WANTED THE LAST TIME THIS ONE WAS CANCELED BECAUSE OF THE COVID. UH, SO, UM, IT IS WHAT IT IS. THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW, INSIDE OF A LITTLE CONFERENCE ROOM MYSELF, BY MYSELF. AND SO, UM, I DIDN'T GET ANY OBJECTIONS FROM ANYONE. I'VE SPOKEN TO THE NEIGHBORS. I'VE SPOKEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, TO THE BOARD OF ASSOCIATION. I'VE SPOKE TO THE CITY COUNCILMAN, UH, TO, UM, VAL AND TO EVERYONE, AND NO ONE'S OBJECTED. PEOPLE ARE JUST ASKING ME, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA SERVE? AND EVERYONE'S EXCITED. THEY GAVE ME THUMBS UP AND I HOPE EVERYONE ELSE WILL TOO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. MS. S IF YOU'LL JUST, UM, HOLD JUST A MOMENT. WE'LL, UH, VERY LIKELY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, WAS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT STAFF? YES, WE HAVE ONE. OKAY. UH, MR. HUSAIN ON THE LINE AS A REMINDER, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. WE HAVE TWO MINUTES. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. I'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS, SO, OKAY. THAT'S A, IF WE JUST HAVE A, [04:50:02] IT IS THE WRONG ITEM NUMBER. THAT'S OKAY. IT WAS ON THE, THE SAME SHEET AS ITEM 26, BUT MR. HUSSEIN WAS THE LAST, UH, ONE OF THE OTHER, UM, CASES. SO WE'LL TELL HIM. WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU A CALL BACK. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SORRY ABOUT THAT. NO, THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UM, MS. COMMISSIONER SIPES, PLEASE. YES. UH, UM, SO MS. RIOS, I KNOW WE HAD, WE HAD, UH, SPOKEN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MONTHS AGO ABOUT THIS PROJECT. UM, OH, YES. I, I HAD A QUESTION. YES. UM, AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR, FOR, UH, THE OUTREACH TO THE, TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS. UM, I DO KNOW THAT, UM, MONTICELLO PARK WAS, DID VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT, UM, ALTHOUGH THEY DID NOT SEND A LETTER. UM, BUT I HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU. AND THAT'S IN REGARDS TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE C ONE VERSUS THE C TWO. CAN YOU PERHAPS EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHY, UH, UH, THE C WHY YOU NEED THE C TWO VERSUS THE THE C ONE DESIGNATION? SURE. UM, THE REASON WHY, AND IT, I, I DON'T MIND HAVING THE C ONE. THE ONLY THING THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT HOPEFULLY, AND I DON'T KNOW THIS WILL BE IN THE FUTURE TO GET AN ANSWER FOR IT, BUT MY DREAM WAS TO, UH, ON THE NEXT STEP TO TRY TO ASK, UH, THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE, THE DEVELOPERS OR WHOEVER I HAVE TO GO TO NEXT TO ASK THEM FOR PERMISSION, IF I COULD BRING BACK THE HISTORY OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. THE ORIGINAL BUILDING, UH, IS EXACTLY LIKE THE JEWEL OF ART. AND SO THAT WAS, UM, IT WAS DEMOLISHED IN THE 1980S. UH, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS BUILT IN, UH, IT, UH, STARTED IN 1919 AND IT FINISHED THE PROJECT IN 1925. AND MY MOTHER USED TO GO THERE AND IT WAS A WHOLE BUILDING. AND SO SHE SAID SHE'D TO GET HER HAIR DONE. SHE WAS A LITTLE GIRL. UM, SHE WAS BORN IN 1925, A MONTH AFTER THIS PLACE OPENED UP. AND SO IT'S, IT'S VERY CLOSE TO MY HEART. AND SO I'M NOT SAYING THEY MIGHT GIVE YOU PERMISSION, BUT I DID WANNA PUT THAT THE OTHER PART. AND IF THE OTHER PART COMES IN, THEN IT WOULD BE VIEWED AS MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE. AND THE C ONE HAS LIMITED SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON TO, UH, THAT I WAS ASKING, UH, IF WE COULD LEAVE IT AT THE C TWO. AND, UH, IF IT'S OKAY WITH ME, IF THEY HAVE ANY KIND OF PROVISIONS THAT, UH, THEY DON'T WANT ME TO DO, SELL LIQUOR, UH, OR A LIQUOR SHOP, I, I'M AWARE OF ALL THAT. I I'M AGAINST THAT AS WELL. SO IF THEY HAVE TO PUT ANY PROVISIONS, I'M OKAY WITH THAT. BUT THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THAT. UH, UH, SO THAT IF, IF WE PUT BACK THE OTHER, IF THEY GIVE ME PERMISSION TO BRING BACK ITS HISTORY, THEN THAT WOULD DOUBLE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND I WOULD BE LIMITED WITH THAT. AND THAT WOULD THE ONLY REASON. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT I HEARD, UM, FROM THE, THE COUNCIL WOMAN'S OFFICE AS WELL, IS THAT IT, IT WASN'T THAT, UH, IT WAS ABOUT THE AGGREGATE, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE. IF YOU ADDED, UH, IF YOU WENT BACK AND, AND DUPLICATED WHAT HAD BEEN THERE YEARS AGO, UM, I HAD HEARD, AND, AND I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO CONFIRM THAT, UM, YOU WERE OPEN TO DISCUSSING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD SOME, UM, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS. AND I, I REALIZE THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE THAT. UM, BUT THAT MIGHT BE A, UM, AVENUE FOR YOU TO TAKE IN ORDER TO, UH, PRESERVE THE, THE DESIRES OF WHAT COULD GO THERE IN THE FUTURE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO? SURE, SURE. I'M OPEN TO ANYTHING. UH, JUST MY DREAM IS TO KIND OF BRING BACK ITS HISTORY. IF, IF I'M NOT ALLOWED TO ATTACH THE BUILDING BACK, THEN I'M OPEN UP TO ANYTHING. UM, I'M JUST REALLY EXCITED TO GET THE PROJECT GOING. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, AND THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTION? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? SHOW OF HANDS. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS, UH, WHILE THE C ONE DOES GIVE HER OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE ALCOHOL, IT DOES LIMIT [04:55:02] THE AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL FROM A C TWO, IS THAT CORRECT STAFF? NO, IT'S ONLY, IT HAS TO DO WITH BUILDING SIZE. IT WOULD, IT LIMITS THE BUILDING SIZE. THE AMOUNT OF BUILDING SIZE IS HOW MUCH LICORICE YOU COULD SELL. NO, NO, NO. THE AMOUNT OF THE LIQUOR SALES IS NOT CONTINGENT ON THE C ONE OR THE C TWO. THE PERCENTAGE OF ALCOHOL SALES IS ALWAYS THE SAME. IT CAN'T, YOU HAVE TO, UH, SEE 25%, UH, OR THAT, UH, FOR A FOOD SALE. SO IT, IT HAS, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ZONE. WHAT THE ZONE DOES IS IT LIMITS THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. SO IN C ONE, YOU CAN HAVE UP TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET OR AN AGGREGATE AGGREGATE OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET. C TWO, UH, DOESN'T HAVE A LIMIT ON THE, ON THE BUILDING SIDE. OKAY. WERE YOU AWARE OF HER CONCERN OF THE BUILDING SIZE BECAUSE YOU'RE RECOMMENDING A C ONE? UH, I DON'T BELIEVE WE WERE. UH, SHE WAS WORKING WITH A NEW CASE MANAGER, SO THE CASE MANAGER MAY KNOW, BUT THE CASE MANAGER'S NOT HERE, SO. OKAY. SO DO YOU STILL GO BY YOUR, YOUR, UH, RECOMMENDATION OF A C ONE NOW THAT YOU KNOW HER INTENTIONS ON THE BUILDING, OR WOULD YOU RECOMMEND A C TWO? WELL, WE WERE ALSO KEEPING IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE, UM, THE PLAN, WHICH SAYS THAT IT IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, AND SO THAT'S WHY THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE C ONE, BUT SHE DOES HAVE A PLAN IN THE CYCLE TO CHANGE THAT TO NEXT YEAR. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. OKAY. UM, IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONER SIPES. OKAY. AND WHILE I ALWAYS RESPECT, UH, STAFF'S INPUT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FOR THIS CASE, I'M GOING TO, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF C TWO. UM, AND ONE OF THE, I'LL, I'LL TELL YOU A COUPLE REASONS WHY. UM, THIS IS LITERALLY A COUPLE BLOCKS AWAY FROM MY HOUSE. UM, AND THIS BUILDING, UH, 1909, WHICH THIS, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO, TO THIS LOT, UM, IT IS AS THE, THE APPLICANT STATED ORIGINALLY IT WAS KIND OF A TWIN. THERE IS, I DON'T WANNA SAY LIKE A DUPLEX, BUT IT WAS BASICALLY MIRRORED. UM, AND YEARS AGO WHEN I WAS ON THE BOARD OF THE MONTICELLO PARTNER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THERE WAS A PROPOSAL TO, TO DEMOLISH THIS, THIS STRUCTURE. AND WE WERE INVOLVED IN, IN FIGHTING TO SAVE THE STRUCTURE. AND MS. RIOS CAME IN REHAB THE BUILDING. IT'S, IT'S, IT IS BEAUTIFUL NOW. AND SO RECOGNIZING THE, THE WORK THAT SHE'S ALREADY SHOWN, WHERE THIS BUILDING AND RECOGNIZING THE INHERENT DIFFICULTIES IT IS THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED WITH A C ONE. UM, I AM RECOMMENDING FOR APPROVAL OF C TWO OR THAT IS MY MOTION. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. SO WE HAVE A THANK YOU COMMISSIONER COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. COMMISSIONER ROMERO. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH A SECOND ON THE FLOOR. ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS BY SHOW OF HANDS? OKAY. WITH, UH, NO DISCUSSION ON CALL, VOTE PLEASE. RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT FOR P TWO, MADE BY COMMISSIONER SYS, THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROMERO. COMMISSIONER GREYHOUND? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER PAYMENT. OH, YOU DROPPED. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER LOUY? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER GIDEN? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SYKE? YES. COMMISSIONER BUSANTE. AYE. I'M GONNA TRY, UH, COMMISSIONER KAMI ONE MORE TIME. HEAR HIM. ASK FOR THIS CHAIR. MCGEE? YES. MOTION PASSES. [05:00:01] UH, WITH, UH, MOTION TO APPROVE PASSES WITH A VOTE OF 10 TO ZERO. OH, THERE'S MR. KAMUS. I SEE HIM. DO WE WANNA RECORD HIS VOTE? MR. KAMUS? YES. YES. OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES 11 TO ZERO. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONERS. AND I'M GOING TO MAKE YOU ALL PROUD OF THIS BUILDING, I PROMISE YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH, HEATHER. HAVE A WONDERFUL EVENING. OKAY. I HANG UP NOW. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO THAT WAS THE LAST ITEM, RIGHT? YES, MA'AM. ITEM. OKAY. WONDERFUL. OKAY. UM, I'LL DO MORE. CAN EVERYBODY [23. Consideration and Action on the Minutes from March 3, 2020.] RECEIVE THE MINUTES? IS THERE, ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS? THIS IS COMMISSIONER ROMERO, ITEM 17. ITEM 17. IT HAS YOUR NAME. UM, MADAM CHAIR INSTEAD OF COMMISSIONER SIPES. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER CORRECTIONS? OKAY. SO, UM, I GUESS WE, WE HAVE TO DO, UM, SINCE WE CAN'T DO ACCLIMATION BECAUSE OF, UH, THE VIDEO, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL VOTE. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO IS THERE A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES AS THEY STAND CORRECTED? MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT. THIS IS COMMISSIONER WHITE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHITE. IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER BUSTOS. SECOND. OKAY, THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, ROLL CALL WITH THE, UH, MINUTES. UM, AS CORRECTED RULE CALL VOTE PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER GRAU? YES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. COMMISSIONER KAMAN? YES. COMMISSIONER ROMERO? YES. COMMISSIONER LOUIS? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBONS? YES. COMMISSIONER WHITE? YES. COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL? YES. COMMISSIONER SY? UH, LOOKS, THINK HE MIGHT HAVE DROPPED OFF? I'LL PUT A COMMISSIONER. ANTE. AYE, COMMISSIONER? OH, ACTUALLY IT GAVE ALL COMMISSIONER SY. YES. OKAY. AND CHAIR MCGEE? YES. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES. 11 ZERO. OKAY. YES. [Additional Item] I, I HAVE A QUESTION ON FORMAT, PLEASE. SO, UM, SO THE, THE, THE FIRST THING IS, IS THAT LIKE, I THINK WE HAD LIKE TRIPLICATE SOMETIMES DUPLICATE IN THAT FIRST CASE. SO, UM, UH, I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY TO KIND OF CONSOLIDATE THOSE. SO NUMBER ONE, UM, I DON'T KNOW, UM, HOW THAT VOICEMAIL SYSTEM IS SET UP, BUT IF WE COULD DO THE SOUND CLIPS AND MAYBE HAVE 'EM ALREADY ORGANIZED IN THE FOLDER SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE VOICEMAIL IS SET UP, BUT IF IT IS, IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE THE SOUND CLIPS ALREADY, UH, FOLDERED. BUT ALSO IF THERE'S A WAY, UM, I ALSO DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS POSSIBLE WITH YOUR SYSTEM, THAT WE COULD, UM, RESTRICT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO LEAVE A MESSAGE. SO THE VOICEMAIL COULD SAY SOMETHING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, RESTRICTION OF TWO MINUTES AND IT CUTS OFF, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU, AS OPPOSED TO US SITTING, LISTENING TO A FIVE MINUTE, UH, VOICEMAIL, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S A DUPLICATE OF A LETTER OR PERHAPS, UH, OR SOMEBODY WHO'S ALREADY BEEN ON THE LINE. SO I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE COULD KIND OF REFINE OUR SYSTEM A LITTLE BIT. UM, SO THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD SUGGEST, RIGHT? SO, UM, WE CAN PLACE THEM IN THE FOLDER. THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT, UH, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PLAY THEM. WE HAVE TO PLAY THEM FROM A PHONE. UH, SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO PLAY THEM IN ORDER BASED ON THE PHONE. HOWEVER, UM, WITH THE, WE CAN'T RESTRICT, UH, WE CAN'T CUT 'EM OFF IN LEAVING THE MESSAGE. HOWEVER WE CAN, WE CAN STOP PLAYING THE MESSAGE AT TWO MINUTES. UH, BUT WE WOULD JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE, UH, THAT THE CHAIR AND COMMISSION IS OKAY WITH THAT. IF YOU WANT US TO CUT IT OFF, UH, WE CAN DO THAT. UM, WE, UH, WE COMMITTED. WE COMMITTED, YES. AND WE DID NOTIFY THAT THEM AND THE GUYS AS WELL TO LEAVE TWO MINUTES. SO WE, WE CAN CUT THEM OFF AT TWO MINUTES. UH, WE JUST, WE COMMITTED, UH, TO THE, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WE WOULD PLAY THEIR VOICEMAIL. UH, WE WOULD READ THEIR LETTERS IN OPPOSITION BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BE HERE IN PERSON. UH, BECAUSE NORMALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THEY SUBMIT THEIR LETTERS IN OPPOSITION OR THEY EMAIL THEM TO YOU, YOU READ THEM AND SOMETIMES THEY EVEN SHOW UP AND EXERCISE THEIR, THEIR RIGHT TO SPEAK BY SIGNING UP. SO ESSENTIALLY THE LIVE CALL IN PLUS A LEGAL MESSAGE KIND OF, UH, MEETS THE SAME, UH, PURPOSE AS THEY WOULD AS AN IN-PERSON MEETING. BUT AGAIN, WE CAN CUT OFF THE, UH, VOICEMAILS AT TWO MINUTES AND WE ARE DOING OUR BEST TO SUMMARIZE THE STATEMENTS [05:05:01] AND CUT 'EM OFF AT TWO MINUTES AS WELL. BUT WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO SHOW THEM ON THE SCREEN, SO IF YOU WANTED TO READ ALONG, YOU COULD. UM, BUT YEAH, WE, WE CAN IMPLEMENT IT THE CUTOFF TIME AT THE TWO MINUTES IF YOU'RE GOOD WITH THAT. OKAY. SO, UM, SO I, I, I DON'T KNOW WHICH SYSTEM YOU ALL ARE USING, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S AN IT THING SO THAT I COULD, I COULD LIKE PULL THE CLIPS FOR YOU AS AN IT PERSON AND PUT THEM SEPARATE AND I COULD ALSO SET IT UP. I DON'T KNOW WHICH SYSTEM Y'ALL ARE USING IF IT'S NOW POSSIBLE, BUT MAYBE YOU CAN JUST MAKE AN INQUIRY WITH IT JUST IN CASE THAT IS A POSSIBILITY TO SAY IT AHEAD OF TIME BEFORE THEY MAKE THE MESSAGE AND CUT IT AND THAT IT LETS THEM KNOW THAT IT'S GONNA BE LIMITED TO THAT. AND THEN ALSO THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT FOR YOU BEFORE EACH MEETING FOLDERING. BUT I, BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S A IT THING. I DON'T WANNA BELABOR OUR MEETING 'CAUSE EVERYBODY LOOKS SO TIRED. , YOU WAS THERE AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT? NO, THERE ISN'T. THERE'S NO DIRECTOR'S REPORT. OKAY. WELL Y'ALL ARE TROOPERS. I WISH YOU AND YOUR FAMILY'S, UH, GOOD HEALTH, UH, GOOD SUCCESS, BLESSINGS, CHEER, AND PEACE. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE IS YOU OF MAY. HAPPY DEAR. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. HAPPY SINGLE DAY MAYO. THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED. , THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, BYE-BYE. BYE BYE. * 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.