[00:00:02]
OKAY, CHAIR, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND START.
STAFF READY? COMMISSIONER'S READY.
[Call to Order]
AND MEETING TO OVER.I START BY KNOCKING OVER MY PHONE.
I'M CHRISTOPHER GARCIA, CHAIRMAN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND I CALL TODAY'S MEETING TO ORDER.
UH, THIS REGULARLY NOTICED MEETING OF THE SAN ANTONIO PLANNING COMMISSION IS ON SESSION.
CAN WE HAVE THE INTERPRETERS READ THE INTERPRETATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THIS MEETING? STAFF, CAN YOU CONDUCT A ROLL CALL? ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON PRESENT, COMMISSIONER RIO PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER PROPHET PRESENT COMMISSIONER WAR EGRIN PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER PECK PRESENT, COMMISSIONER EZ PRESENT AND CHAIR GARCIA PRESENT, UH, CHAIR.
ALSO PRESENT IN THE MEETING, UH, FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ARE THOMAS
UH, PRIOR TO STARTING WITH OUR ITEMS, I WOULD LIKE OUR STAFF TO REVIEW OUR MEETING FORMAT.
SO TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PUBLIC AND LIMIT THE POTENTIAL SPREAD OF COVID 19.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS HOLDING MEETINGS 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 ANTONIO.GOV/DSV OR BY CALLING IN FOR, UH, FOR AUDIO ONLY AT 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3.
TO INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENT, 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 THEN 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 COMMENT AND SPANISH INTERPRETERS ARE ON STANDBY AS NEEDED.
THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT ALONG WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION.
OH, UH, STAFF IF YOU COULD REVIEW THE LIST OF
[Consent Agenda]
CONSENT INDIVIDUAL AND ANY POSTPONED WITHDRAWN ITEMS AND ITEMS FOR RECUSAL.UH, CURRENTLY WE HAVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 AS WELL AS 14, 15, 16 AND 18.
ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, ITEM NUMBER, UH, 17, 19 AND 20 HAVE BEEN PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
AND AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX, THIS BEING PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR REFUSAL BUT CAN STILL BE CONSIDERED AS A CONSENT ITEM WITH THAT REFUSAL.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO? INDIVIDUAL.
COMMISSIONER, LIKE TO ADD ANY CONSENT ITEMS TO INDIVIDUAL ITEMS? NO CHAIR.
[00:05:01]
NO CHAIR? NO.I WILL READ IN THE CONSENT ITEMS INTO THE RECORD FOR ONE MOTION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER 6, 17, 19 AND 20.
THE BALANCE OF TODAY'S AGENDA WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER ONE MOTION.
WASN'T THERE, UH, SOME INFORMATION WE HAD TO HEAR ON ITEM 11 BEFORE BEING READ INTO THE RECORD? YES.
WE CAN START READING NUMBER 11 NOW.
UM, THAT'S JUST, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND THEN WE'LL READ THE ITEMS. WE'LL UH, PLAY THE VOICEMAILS, READ THE LETTERS, AND THEN UH, HAVE THE LIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IF WE'RE READY, WE CAN START WITH THE LETTERS.
I WILL READ THE LETTER AND THEN WE'LL DO THE VOICEMAILS.
THIS IS A MAY 11TH LETTER ADDRESSED TO JOYCE PALMER PLANNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
DEAR MS. PALMER, ON BEHALF OF THE WEST SIDE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE, I WRITE TO SHARE OUR CONCERN THAT THE PLAN FOR THE AL AMAZON LOSS ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED COMMUNITY PLAN.
AND DESPITE REPEATED CLAIMS OF THE DEVELOPER WOULD WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO FIND THE SOLUTION.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE PLANS HAVE BEEN MODIFIED TO MEET THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE COMMUNITY PLAN.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DESIGN PLANS MODIFIED TO COMPLY WITH COMMUNITY PLAN BEFORE THE PLANNING IS APPROVED.
SINCERELY, SARAH Z IDA GOULD, WEST SIDE PRESERVATION LINE.
MY ADDRESS IS TWO BAY ONE HA STREET SAN 7 2 0 7.
UM, I'LL JUST TALK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS AS RESIDENT OF THE WEBSITE AND COMMUNITY EXPERTS CREATED THE ONE, THE WEBSITE COMMUNITY PLAN NUMEROUS YEARS AGO AND NUMEROUS MEETING ON THE, ON THE, THEY ALL CAME UP PLANS THAT WOULD HAVE A BEAUTIFUL WESTSIDE HISTORY AND ALSO CAUGHT CHARACTER AGREEMENTS MEET REQUIREMENTS WITH CHARACTER AREA CASE COMPOSED TRUCTURE FOR THE OTHER WE SO LAND TION OF AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE WEBSITE, SEVERAL I WE OFFER TO THE AND ITS RESIDENTS ARE ARE THOSE PROPOSED LUXURY DEVELOPMENTS MAXIMIZE PROFITS FOR FOR PROFIT MULTIMILLION DOLLAR BY AUTHORIZING TO DISCRE FREE INPUT.
AND FOR OUR INTEND TO SERVE THE WORKING COMMITTEE OF SAN ANTONIO, I OF COURSE DO NOW HIGH THE LACK OF ECONOMIC INVESTMENT IN THE WEBSITE NEWS FOR AND EXCHANGE CASH WAIVER POWER A COMMUNITY THAT LIVES HERE.
TO EXAMINE THE COMPLETE D COMMITTEE VOICES, WE REQUEST THAT DIRECTOR AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS GO BACK TO DRAWING BOARD AND HISTORY, THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ONE OF THE WEST SIDE PLAN PROCESS.
ALL RIGHT, I'M GONNA PLAY THE SECOND.
ITEM 11, UH, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, ON BEHALF OF MANY OF OUR WEST SIDE RESIDENTS CREATED THE WATERVILLE WEST SIDE COMMUNITY PLAN.
THEY CAME TOGETHER AT NUMEROUS MEETINGS ESTABLISHING CONSENT ON WHAT THE FUTURE OF WEST SIDE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD ADHERE TO.
THEY PRESENTED PLANS THAT THE BEAUTIFUL HISTORY OF THE WEST SIDE AND WOULD ALSO UNIQUE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, OUR COMMUNITY AGREED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WE HAD COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER IN THE AREA, IN THE STAGE BEHIND THE TWO STORIES.
[00:10:01]
DISREGARD OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL AS THE ONE WHO BY COMMUNITY PLAN.THEREFORE WE SIGNING COMMISSION TO DENY DEFEND ANTONIO HOUSING AUTHORITY TO REQUEST TO SUB IN PREPARATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE AUTO LAW AND SHOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BY COMMUNITY CRIME ARE INTEGRATED
QUESTIONS LIKE WHAT FUTURE WILL THESE LAWS TO OFFER TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE PROPOSED BUDGET ONLY INTENDED TO MAXIMIZE PROFIT FOR PROFIT MULTI MILLION DOLLAR BY ALLOWING THEM COMMUNITY INPUT OR NEW DEVELOPMENT INTENDED TO SERVE WORKING COMMUNITY SAN ANTONIO.
MANY OF OUR LEADERS ARE TO HIGHLIGHT THE OF ECONOMIC INVESTMENT.
THE WEBSITE HAS ADDRESS FOR GRANTINGS AND ZONING MANIPULATION IN EXCHANGE FOR TAX ALONG AND IMPACT STUDY WAIVER.
HOWEVER, AS THE COMMUNITY THAT LIVES HERE, WE CHALLENGE WITH ANTONIO HOUSING AUTHORITY TO EXAMINE YOUR COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR OUR WEBSITE COMMUNITY VOICES, WE REQUEST THAT
ALRIGHT, AND I'M GONNA PLAY THE LAST ONE.
MY NAME IS, MY ADDRESS IS 30 11 BY TWO DRIVE.
I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO THE
I'M A MEMBER OF A HISTORIC UNIFIED RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION PROPOSED ALL LAWS OBJECT IS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF OUR I HERE TO INFORM YOU THAT THE IN INSURED WESTSIDE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION DOES NOT SUPPORT THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE SAN ANTONIO HOUSING.
OUR PROJECT DOES NOT ALIGN WITH MON LUTHER WESTSIDE COMMUNITY PLAN.
MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS ALONG SUMMER CITY PLANNERS SPENT HUNDREDS HOURS TO DEVELOP THIS ADDITIONAL LUTHERAN WEST SIDE COMMUNITY PLAN, WHICH SPECIFICALLY PRESERVES HISTORIC FABRIC OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
OUR GOAL IS TO ENSURE THAT OUR RESIDENTS LIVE IN SAFE AND NEIGHBORHOODS.
LAST YEAR IN 2019, WE BLOCK WALKED AND COLLECTED OVER 300 SIGNATURES FROM RESIDENTS WHO SUPPORT NEW HOMES AND BUILDING NO ONE STORIES FOR LOW DENSITY PURPOSES.
THESE THREE GOOD SIGNATURES WERE SUBMITTED TO THE ZONING COMMISSION IN 2019 WHO IN TURN DISREGARDED OUR NEIGHBORS AND REQUEST.
WE COME TODAY BEFORE YOU TO ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN NINE REQUEST AND DO NOT ALIGN WITH THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME CONSIDERATION OF OUR REQUEST.
ALL THOSE ARE THE THREE VOICEMAILS.
WE DO HAVE ONE CALLER AS WELL.
I HAVE SANCHEZ ON THE LINE AS A REMINDER TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHICH IS IN HERE TODAY, I, WHICH APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL AND PART OF THE CITY'S MASTERCLASS AREA IN WHICH THIS IS BEING REQUESTED.
I ALSO CURRENT CURRENT PLAN FOR TWO YEARS UNDER THE OVERSIGHT PLANNING STAFF MEMBER, CHRIS, NOT TO BE PART OF THE, THAT HAVE ALWAYS SERVED AS A SINGLE.
I WOULD REFER YOU TO THE 1885 C5 SUBDIVISION OF ORIGINAL WATCH NUMBER 1 31 RECORDED IN THE CITY'S ENGINEERS OFFICE AS P1 SECTION NUMBER 22 TO SHOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN DESIGNATED FOR RESIDENTIALS FOR AT LEAST HUNDRED 35 YEARS.
I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PUT UP THE IMAGE OF THE, THAT WE'RE ABOUT THE, YOUR PARCEL MAPPING INCONSISTENT IN EVERY WAY TO THE EXISTING LAND USE.
IN ORDER TO INCLUDE THE PLANTING, YOU HAVE TO FIND THAT THE
[00:15:01]
RE INCONSISTENT WITH QUESTION USE FOR LOW DENSITY MAKES USE AS COMMISSION.YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO TOTALLY DISREGARD THE OVERWHELMING VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT HAS FOLLOWED ALL THE RULES ADOPTED A FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOODS, THE DEVELOPERS AT THE SIMPLY DISREGARD THE WEBSITE.
AND CHAIR, LEMME JUST TELL YOU AMY, KATHLEEN ALSO SEND IN FOR CALLING AND SO THAT SHE'S GOING TO HAND OFF HER, UH, THE REST OF HER COMMENTS AND THEN MAYBE WE'LL TAKE THE NEXT TWO MINUTES AND YES, THE MASKING WAS THE PUBLIC FIRST.
THE PRIMARY METHOD FOR PUBLIC INPUT IS THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY'S MASTER PLAN.
AND THE, SO ANY PUBLIC MEETING CANNOT OVERTURN THOSE MASTER PLANS IN IT'S SIMPLY NOT THAT THE DEVELOPER HEALTH CALLS, PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT THEY CLAIM I ATTENDED AL THEY WILL REFERENCE IN 2017 AND 2018 AND THOSE MEETINGS FELT WITH THE FAILED CHOICE GRANT, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO ATTENDANCE THE SIMPLY THAT THE PROJECT HAS BEEN AND THE PUBLIC INPUT OF THE OVERALL PROJECT WAS INAPPROPRIATE.
ALL THEY WANTED WITH THE COMMON CHOICE AND THOSE TREAT THE NAME OF
THE MAPPING IS OBVIOUSLY AN ABERRATION, NO RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE IN THE AREA OF APPROACH.
THE HEIGHT AND PROPOSED FOR THE WHERE IS THE PROTECTION FOR OUR PROMISE.
BUT GOVERNMENT, IF THIS LINING WAS PROPOSED FOR AN AFFLUENT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, IT WOULD NEVER BE APPROVED.
THE TIME FOR TREATING THE WEBSITE OF THE DUMPING GROUND FOR RY, BUT POLITICALLY CONNECTED DEVELOPERS IS LONG PATH.
IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DENY THIS UNREASONABLE REQUEST.
SHE DIDN'T STAY ON THE LINE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
SORRY, I WAS GONNA GO DOWN QUESTIONS, BUT THE, THE CALLER HUNG UP.
UH, QUICK, QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF.
HOW DOES THE PLA PROCESS WITH THE COMMUNITY PLANS? UH, THE PLA THEY REQUIRED TO MEET STATE AND CITY CODE.
ONCE THEY DO, UM, THEN THEY, UM, ARE, SHOULD BE AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED.
UH, SO THEY WENT THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS ALREADY, UH, AND CITY COUNCIL DID, UH, APPROVE THEIR REZONING LAST YEAR FOR THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
SO STEP TWO IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS TO GO THROUGH THE PLA.
AND THIS DOES MEET ALL STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS? YES, IT DOES.
UM, IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS, THEN WE'LL HAVE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
JUST, JUST ONE MORE TIME CLARIFICATION FOR THE RECORD FOR, UH, THE VIEWERS.
SO, UM, CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THAT ONE MORE TIME ABOUT THE, THE, THE PLATTING? UH, I MEAN WHEN IT, WHEN IT MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE
[00:20:01]
TO, UH, EXPLAIN THE APPROVAL AND, UH, DENIAL PROCESS.SO IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, IF A PLATT IS SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS STATE AND LOCAL LAW, THAT PLATT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO BE APPROVED.
UH, IF IT WERE NOT TO BE APPROVED, IT WOULD ACTUALLY AUTOMATICALLY BE APPROVED ON THE 30TH DAY FOLLOWING WHEN THE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY DEEMED IT READY FOR APPROVAL.
SO, UH, WHENEVER THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING CLASS, THEY'RE ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE WE HAVE CERTIFIED THAT THEY MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS TO BE APPROVED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MCGEE FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THEN WE'LL HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONER PROFIT, MOVE FOR APPROVAL.
WE HAVE A MOTION FOR COMMISSIONER PROFIT FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PECK.
STAFF, CAN YOU DO THE ROLL CALL VOTE.
I HAVE A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE THE ITEMS ON CONSENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 17, 19 AND 20 MADE BY COMMISSIONER PROFIT WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PECK.
UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON? YES.
COMMISSIONER FA OWEN, I'M SORRY, ITEM NUMBER SIX AS WELL.
MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE BY VOTE OF EIGHT ZERO.
AND NEXT ON THE AGENDA WILL BE AN
[6. 20-2831 19-11800237: Request by William Jones, 281/Overlook Partners LP., for approval to subdivide a tract of land to establish Overlook Town Center Unit 2 Subdivision, generally located at the intersection of U.S. Highway 281 North and Overlook Parkway. Staff recommends Approval. (Nicole Salinas, Planner, (210) 207-8264, Nicole.Salinas@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department).]
ITEM FOR FLAG, WHICH IS BEING, UH, CONSIDERED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION FOR PURPOSES OF RECUSAL.SO AT THIS TIME WE'LL JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT COMMISSIONER PADILLA WILL BE TO, UH, PUT HERSELF ON MUTE AND TURN OFF HER VIDEO CAMERA AND THEN WE CAN, UM, ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX.
LET'S, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER 2 29.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER P I, UH, MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, COMMISSIONER PROPHET.
CAN WE HAVE THE VOTE APPROVE PECK AND A SECOND COMMISSIONER PROPHET I, ITEM NUMBER SIX, CAN STAFF DO THE ROLL CALL VOTE? COMMISSIONER JACKSON? YES.
COMMISSIONER S A REFUSAL COMMISSIONER PROFIT? YES.
I DON'T SEE HER THING ON THE SCREEN ANYMORE.
I THINK SHE CONNECTION MIGHT HAVE GONE DOWN.
THERE WAS A BIG EXCLAMATION POINT BEFORE.
BEFORE I CALL THE CHAIR, LEMME SEE IF I CAN GET, UH, COMMISSIONER ROYAL EGRIN.
WILL NOT AS ABSENCE IN THE VOTE AND COMM, UH, CHAIR GARCIA? YES, AND UH, I BELIEVE YES.
OKAY, SO I CALLED UH, OFFICIO.
I HEARD EVERYTHING, BUT I COULDN'T SEE YOU.
ALL RIGHT, SO, UM, MOTION PASSED THE SEVEN TO ZERO.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE'LL NOTE THAT UH, COMMISSIONER CARIO CAN COME BACK IN.
ALRIGHT, UM, WE'VE GOT THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START WITH ITEM NUMBER 17.
[17. 20-3125 PLAN AMENDMENT CASE PA-2019-11600094 (Council District 10): A request by Killen, Griffin, & Farrimond, PLLC, Representative, for approval of a resolution to amend the San Antonio International Airport Vicinity Land Use Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Master Plan of the City, by changing the future land use from “Parks/Open Space” and “Low Density Residential" to “Low Density Residential" and "Medium Density Residential" on 21.6 acres out of NCB 17194, located at 16650 Jones Maltsberger Road. Staff recommends Approval. (Associated Zoning Case Z-2019-10700322 ERZD) (Michael Pepe, Planner, (210) 207-8208, Michael.Pepe@sanantonio.gov, Development Services)]
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSION.THIS IS CHRISTIE BLOOD PLANNING MANAGER.
ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A REQUEST TO AMEND THE SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT VICINITY LAND USE PLAN BY CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE AND
[00:25:01]
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AT 1 6 6 5 0 JONES MALTSBERGER ROAD.THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO MEDIUM DENSITY TO REZONE THROUGH MF 18 LIMITED DENSITY, MULTIFAMILY AND R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ALLOWS SLIGHTLY MORE HOUSING DENSITY ALONG MAJOR THOROUGHFARE JONES BERGER ROAD.
THE PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE PROVIDES A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND RETAIL SERVICES.
THE ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERS A REQUEST ON MAY 5TH AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 11 ZERO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THERE WERE 65 NOTICES MAILED, ONE WAS RECEIVED IN FAVOR, THREE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, AND NO RESPONSE FROM REDLAND OAKS OR SCATTERED OAKS NEIGHBORHOODS ASSOCIATION.
MR. CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO READ THE TWO LETTERS RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION INTO THE RECORD.
I RECENTLY RECEIVED A NOTICE OF A PLANNING.
I RECENTLY RECEIVED A NOTICE OF A PLANNING COMMISSION, PUBLIC HEARING, PA 2 0 1 9 1 1 6 0 9 4 AS THE CURRENT RESIDENT THAT OWNS PROPERTY SHARING A FENCE WITH THE AREA OF PROPOSED CHANGE.
I'M DEEPLY CONCERNED AS ARE THE OTHER RESIDENTS OF STALLION CROSS REDLAND RANCH ESTATE AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES ABOUT THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
FIRSTLY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY REGULARLY EXPERIENCES SEVERE FLOODING.
MY WIFE AND I LIVED HERE FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS.
THIS AREA HAS FLOODED BOTH YEARS WITH WATER REACHING THE FENCE ON THE REAR OF OUR PROPERTY.
OTHER RE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE SINCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS CONSTRUCTED INDICATE THAT SIMILAR EVENTS ARE EXTREMELY COMMON.
GIVEN THAT STALLION CROSS IS ON THE BOTTOM OF A TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE, ALL THE WATER FROM THE SURROUNDING ROADS FUNNELS DOWN INTO THE CURRENT EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE DISTRICT OR PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
WITH STRUCTURE IN PLACE OF THE CURRENT CLAIM, THE WATER WILL BE DISPLACED INTO SURROUNDING AREAS INTRODUCING A HIGH RISK OF FLOODING TO EXISTING.
ACCORDING TO THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, THE ENTIRE AREA BEING EVALUATED FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT IS IN THE RECHARGE ZONE FOR THE EDWARDS AQUIFER.
WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT NATURAL WATER ENTERED THE AQUIFER BY A POR UNCONSOLIDATED OR FRACTURED MATERIALS THAT LIE OVER THE AQUIFER ON A GRAND SCALE.
GIVEN THE PROPOSITION AMENDING THE USE OF THIS PROPERTY WOULD INTRODUCE MORE STRUCTURES EFFECTIVELY REMOVING ITS ABILITY TO RECHARGE THE AQUIFER, GIVEN THERE WOULD BE HOME STREETS AND OTHER STRUCTURES, ECT OVER THE AREA.
FINALLY, SOMETHING YOUR TEAM MAY FIND INTERESTING IS THAT THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER HAS ALREADY BEGUN CONSTRUCTION.
PRIOR TO ENGAGING WITH PROPER CITY PLANNING OFFICIALS, APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS AGO THERE WAS A TEAM OF INDIVIDUALS MOVING EARTH, CUTTING DOWN COAL AND FLAGGING TREES TO FILL IN PREPARATION FOR CONSTRUCTION.
THE SECOND LETTER IS FROM JOSE AND NANCY EZ AT 1 6 6 3 8 STALLION CROSS.
DEAR MICHAEL, WE OPPOSE CHANGING THIS ZONING FOR THIS PROJECT.
WE WANT TO BUILD ON THE GROUP.
THEY WANT TO BUILD ON A GREEN BELT.
MIXING AND MEDIUM DENSITY IS THE WORST IDEA.
YOU WILL CREATE FLOODING FOR EXISTING HOMES, INCREASE TAXES TO OLDER HOMES.
HOW DID THIS PROJECT GET THIS FAR? WE ALSO, UH, HAVE A PHONE CALL TO PUT IN A VOICEMAIL, EXCUSE ME TO READ, TO PLAY INTO THE RECORD.
HI, THIS IS WASHINGTON CALLING ON CASE NUMBER P AS IN PAUL, A AS IN ADAM, 2 0 1 9 1 1 6 0 0 0 9 4.
I'M STATE OPPOSITION OF COUNTY OF THE GREEN BELT BEHIND MY HOME, EDWARD A IN THIS AREA.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT WITH THE ROADS UPGRADES THAT OCCURRED AND DEAL THE FULL EFFECT OF THAT, OF THAT.
I KNOW IN THE PAST, SINCE LIVING HERE FOR 14 YEARS, THAT AREA ROUTINELY FLOOD TO THE POINT WHERE I STOOD IN MY BACKYARD AND I'VE HEARD IT SOUND LIKE A RUSHING STREAM.
SO I REALLY HOPE THAT PEOPLE TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THEIR TIME AND REALLY EVALUATE THE SITUATION.
[00:30:01]
IT IS OVER TO AQUIFER'S RECHARGE ZONE AND THE FLOODING SITUATION, IT GETS REALLY BAD.UM, I KNOW THAT UPGRADES GROUND FROM JONES OH FOUR, ALL OF THAT DRAINAGE COMES DOWN THROUGH JONES TO THIS AREA.
WHERE IS ALL THIS WATER GONNA GO ONCE IT GETS DEVELOPED? WE REALLY NEED TO BE DILIGENT IN HOW WE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE AND
SO PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, UM, TAKE TIME TO COME OUT, EVALUATE, SERIOUSLY, EVALUATE, LOOK AT.
I'VE SENT PLENTY OF VIDEOS TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SHOWING WHAT I'VE THOUGHT.
THERE'S PLENTY TIMES I VIDEOTAPE, BUT IT IT'S VERY CONCERNING.
AGAIN, I'M THE TOTAL OPPOSITION OF THIS, OF THIS PROPERTY CHAIR.
WE DO HAVE ONE UH, PERSON THAT WANTS TO PROVIDE LIVE PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE CAN EITHER DO THAT ONE FIRST OR WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT.
UH, WE TYPICALLY WOULD HAVE THE APPLICANT DO A PRESENTATION FIRST BEFORE WE HAD THE UH, SUPPORTER OPPOSITION, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU.
WE CAN DO THE APPLICANT LAST IF YOU'D LIKE.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT IS THE A FOR THE LIVE COLLAR.
WILL THE APPLICANT GET A CHANCE TO DO ANY REBUTTAL? OKAY.
UH, A EMILY, ARE YOU THERE? GO AHEAD.
HI, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
EMILY WEISLER WITH K GRIFFIN AND FAIRMAN 100 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10 SEAT SIX 50.
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER WHO IS ALSO THE APPLICANT AND DEVELOPER OF THIS PROPERTY, WE ARE VERY EXCITED TO BE BEFORE YOU TODAY AND GRATEFUL THAT WE ARE BACK IN THE SWING OF THINGS EVEN IF IT IS REMOTELY.
BEFORE I DIVE INTO THE SITE AND PLAN AMENDMENT ITSELF, A BRIEF RECAP OF OUR TIMELINE THUS FAR, THIS CASE WAS FILED ON NOVEMBER 27TH.
PRIOR TO THANKSGIVING THE PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT AND MYSELF FIRST MET WITH REGINA LORENA STATE BOARD MEMBERSHIP ON DECEMBER 16TH AND THEN AGAIN AT A LARGER OPEN COMMUNITY MEETING ON DECEMBER, ON JANUARY 21ST, EXCUSE ME.
SINCE THEN, WE HAVE REMAINED IN CONSTANT COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE COUNCIL OFFICE ON FEBRUARY 26TH.
THE REPORT WAS SIGNED AND RECEIVED ALMOST THREE FULL MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF SUBMITTAL OF OUR APPLICATION.
IT WAS AN EXTENSIVE REVIEW PROCESS AND WE ARE GRATEFUL TO HAVE SAS SUPPORT ON THIS PROJECT ALONG WITH CITY STAFF AND A UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM ZONING COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL.
IRONICALLY ENOUGH, HAD WE BEEN ABLE TO PROCEED WITH OUR PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE AS ORIGINALLY PLANNED, THIS CASE WOULD'VE PRESUMABLY BEEN BEFORE CITY COUNCIL LAST WEEK.
IT HAS BEEN A LONG FIVE AND A HALF MONTHS THAT WORKING ON THIS EFFORT AND A LOT OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE THUS FAR, EVEN IN THE LAST WEEK SINCE ZONING COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION LAST TUESDAY.
I WILL DO MY BEST TO KEEP MY PRESENTATION AS CONCISE AND RELEVANT TO YOUR PURVIEW AS POSSIBLE, BUT GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY AND SOME OF THE COMMENT YOU ALREADY HEARD, I WILL TOUCH ON A FEW MORE PROJECT SPECIFICS THAN WE WOULD NORMALLY DISCUSS.
I HOPE BY THE END TO HAVE RESPECTFULLY GARNERED YOUR SUPPORT.
SO A PLAN AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY.
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ITSELF.
JUST TO ACCLIMATE EVERYONE, THIS IS A 21.6 ACRE SITE LOCATED IN THE 16,000 BLOCK OF JONES MOSSBERG, WHICH SOUTH OF REDLAND ROAD IN DISTRICT 10.
UH, TYPICALLY TRAFFIC SLOWS SOUTH DOWN ALL THE WAY TOWARDS SOUTH AND OAK AND ALSO NORTH TOWARDS REDLAND ROAD IN 1604.
THIS IS IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF THE CITY.
WE ARE ADJACENT TO REDLAND BRANCH OF STATE, UH, BUT THERE IS NO VEHICULAR CONNECTION BETWEEN OUR TWO DEVELOPMENTS, MEANING THAT WE WILL NOT BE INCREASING ANY TRAFFIC WITHIN THEIR EXISTING SUBDIVISION FOR SURROUNDING LAND USES, THIS IS A HIGHLY SOUGHT AFTER COMMUNITY WITH A LOT OF WONDERFUL AMENITIES AND GREAT MARKET INTEREST.
FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE, WE ARE SURROUNDED BY MIXED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES INCLUDING LOW AND MEDIAN DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS SUBURBAN HERE, WHICH ALLOWS FOR A VARIETY OF RESIDENTIAL USES AND DENSITIES.
WE ARE ALSO IN THE VISITING OF A CHURCH, VARIED INTENSITY, COMMERCIAL USES AND THREE SCHOOLS, TWO OF WHICH ARE LESS THAN HALF A MILE AWAY AND ONE BEING JUST UNDER A MILE AWAY.
THIS SITE ITSELF IS INCREDIBLY BEAUTIFUL WITH A LOT OF NATURAL VEGETATION AND ALMOST 22 ACRES INSIDE.
UM, AND A LOT OF THAT NATURAL VEGETATION
[00:35:01]
IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN UNDEVELOPED FOR SO LONG.HOWEVER, THERE IT HAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UNIQUE FEATURES THAT MAKE DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY AS IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT.
WE HAVE WORKED HARD BEFORE AND SINCE FINDING THIS APPLICATION TO DESIGN PROJECTS THAT EMBRACES THOSE UNIQUE FEATURES AND RESULTS IN A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT DELICATELY AND PURPOSELY FITS IN WITH THE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
SOME OF THOSE FEATURES JUST FOR REFERENCE, INCLUDE BEING OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE ENTIRELY, WHICH ALBEIT THE REST OF THIS ENTIRE COMMUNITY, EVEN THE DEVELOPED SUBDIVISIONS ARE WE HAVE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN THAT
THIS VEGETATION CREATING THE OVERALL NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE DRAINAGE FLOW IN THIS AREA AND AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, THIS IS KIND OF A ODD SHAPED PROPERTY.
THIS IS JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF OUR REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE AND ITS COMPATIBLE CORRELATION TO OUR REQUESTED PLAN AMENDMENT.
THIS PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY IN 1994 AND REZONE TO RA IN 1996.
RA WAS A RESIDENCE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE AS THIS PROPERTY HAD BEEN HISTORICALLY USED AS A HORSE FARM WITH A HOMESTEAD AND MANY STABLES THAT USED HAS BEEN COME AND GONE AND IT HAS REMAINED VACANT AND UNDEVELOPED FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.
THE CURRENT MP 10 WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE 2001 D D C CONVERSION OF THE OLD RA.
THE CURRENT MP 10 WAS NOT DONE SPECIFICALLY AS MEANS A BETTER CONSERVING LAND OF THE RECHARGE ZONE.
UM, AND ACTUALLY PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, EACH PIECE OF LAND AROUND US IS ALSO OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, UM, AND NOT ZONED NT TENDER.
THE CURRENT ZONING WAS A CONVERSION FROM A ZONING DISTRICT THAT NO LONGER EXISTS AND IS UH, NO LONGER APPROPRIATE BASED ON THE EXTENSIVE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THIS COMMUNITY, WE PROPOSED THE ZONING COMMISSION LAST WEEK AND HAVE REQUESTED A DUAL DISTRICT THREE ZONING, WHICH IS THE TRIGGERING COMPONENT OF OUR REQUESTED PLAN AMENDMENT.
THE MAJORITY OF THIS SITE, 16 POINT ALMOST THREE ACRES BE OUR SIX AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
GIVEN THE PATTERN FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THIS AREA, WE BELIEVE THIS REQUEST TO BE UNDENIABLY MORE CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITY AS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED AND WITH THE PRIMARY DEVELOPMENT BEING A MINIMUM OF 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, WE ARE AT A MUCH LOWER DENSITY THAN WHAT IS DEVELOPED RIGHT NEXT DOOR IN REDLAND BRANCH ESTATE.
THE OTHER 5.3 ACRES IS BEING PROPOSED AS MS 18 AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE COMMUNITY BROUGHT OUR DISCUSSIONS OVER THE LAST FIVE MONTHS HAS MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT WANT TRADITIONAL APARTMENTS AND WE COMMITTED TO THEM AS WELL AS JUST THE COUNCIL OFFICE NOT TO BUILD ANY APARTMENTS IN THIS AREA.
INSTEAD, WE ARE PROPOSING A HANDFUL OF DETACHED SMALL LOT TOWN HOMES THAT ARE TRANSACTIONALLY DIFFERENT THAN THE TRADITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING MEANING A CONDO REGIME TYPE OF TRANSACTION OF WHICH IS ACTUALLY VERY CONSISTENT WITH THE USES RECOMMENDED WITHIN THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION.
MEDIAN DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA SERVES AS A BUFFER BETWEEN JONES MOSSBERG, THE LARGE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OF THIS AREA AND BOTH THE PROPOSED AND EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY THAT IS SET FURTHER BACK INTO THE OVERALL PROPERTY ALIGNING WITH THAT EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
WE BELIEVE THIS PATTERN BEING LARGE MAJOR OF THOROUGH CARE FOLLOWED BY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOLLOWED BY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS AN IDEAL SCENARIO AND ALIGNS WITH TEXTBOOK PLANNING PRINCIPLES.
THE R SIX LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA IS NOT ONLY CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS BUT ALMOST EXACTLY WHAT IS IN THE PLAN NOW.
AND I'LL SHOW THAT IN JUST ONE SECOND.
UM, IT'S JUST WITHOUT VERY CLEAR DEFINITION OF THE BOUNDARY.
THE M F 18 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PIECE ACHIEVED THAT PLANNING PRINCIPLE GOAL OF STAIRS STEPPING DENSITY FROM THE MAJOR THOROUGH AFFAIRS TO EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT AS I MENTIONED, WE ARE ONLY PROPOSING A HANDFUL OF TOWN HOMES AS THE COMMUNITY DOES NOT WANT APARTMENT.
THEREFORE, THIS REQUEST BY AND LARGE IS NOT DESIGNED TO GOUGE DENSITY BUT TO BALANCE OUT BOTH THE PRESERVATION OF THE EXISTING NATURAL FEATURES WORK WITHIN THE RESTRAINTS OF OUR 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATIONS TO THE ENTIRE SITE AND CREATE A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT FITS LIKE A GLOVE WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE PATTERN IN THIS AREA.
[00:40:01]
AND I WILL MENTION THAT AFTER A THOROUGH ALMOST THREE HOUR DISCUSSION, THE ZONING SESSION LAST WEEK, THEY DID VOTE UNANIMOUSLY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF OUR REBELLING REQUEST.THIS IS OBVIOUSLY WHAT WE ARE REALLY HERE FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT.
BEFORE I ELABORATE MORE ON THE JUSTIFICATIONS OF OUR REQUEST, I DO WANNA PREFACE THAT YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD SOME AND MAY HURT MAKE HERE IN THE NEXT CALL.
UM, SOME CONCERNS ABOUT DRAINAGE AND STORM WATER OR SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS.
OUR ENGINEER IS ALSO ON THE LINE WITH MYSELF AND WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS, BUT THE GUIDING LIGHT OF THE GOVERNING PLAN IS COMPATIBILITY AND FUNCTIONALITY OF DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO A SPECIFICITY TO THE SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WITH FOCUS ON NOISE, CONTOURS, HEIGHT AND USES THAT ENCOURAGE CONTINUED GROWTH AND OPERATIONS OF THE AIRPORT.
THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT CONSISTENT RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE SMALLER COMMUNITY OF THIS AREA IS NOT CRITICAL.
IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL AND THE MAIN DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE DESIGN OF OUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
BUT FOR THE PURPOSES OF TODAY'S DISCUSSION AND THE PLAN AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY, I WANT TO FOCUS ON HOW AND WHY THIS IS ALIGNED WITH THE GOVERNING LAND USE PLAN AS WELL AS THE SECTOR PLAN JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM US.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FACILITY LAND USE PLAN AND JOE MOBERG SERVES AS THE MAJOR BOUNDARY OF THAT PLAN, SEPARATING IT JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN, THE AIRPORT PLAN AND THIS STATES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PLANNING AREA OCCURRED PRIMARILY BETWEEN 1951 AND 1990.
THE PLANNING AREA AS OUTLINED IN THE PLAN IS CHARACTERISTIC OF AMERICA'S FIRST AND SECOND TIER SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE FULLY BUILT OUT AND HAVE HOUSING STOCKS THAT IS AT LEAST 30 YEARS OLD AND BEGINNING TO AGE.
THESE AREAS ALSO ACCORDING TO THE PLAN, GENERALLY ENJOY HIGHER RATES OF OWNERSHIP AND EDUCATION ATTAINMENT LEVEL, BUT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING AN INCREASE IN THE OUTDOOR POPULATION, A DECREASE IN HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND A DIVERSIFICATION OF ETHNICITY ULTIMATELY MEANING THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A BALANCE OF BOTH NEW AND DIVERSE HOUSING, WHICH IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.
MOREOVER, THE AIRPORT PLAN ITSELF SUBDIVIDES LARGE AREAS THAT COVERS INTO SMALLER DISTRICTS.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FALLS WITHIN THE NORTHEAST DISTRICT.
THIS DISTRICT OUTLINED THAT THE PLAN IS PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES LOCATED ON THE CORRIDORS.
OUR REQUESTED PLAN AMENDMENT ALIGNS EXACTLY WITH THAT ANALYSIS OF BLAMED USE PATTERN AS WE ARE PROPOSING PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED ALONG THE JONES MULT OVER CORRIDOR AGAIN PROVIDING A LAND USE SOFTWARE BETWEEN THE THOROUGHFARE AND THE ESTABLISHED STABLE FAMILY, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
CURRENTLY THE PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED AS BOTH LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND PARK OPEN SPACE.
THE CLASSIFICATION BOUNDARIES ARE A LITTLE MESSY AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE MAP AND SO WE'RE REALLY PROPOSING TO DO TWO THINGS.
THE FIRST IS TO CLEARLY DEFINE WHERE THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS AND TWO, AMEND THE AREA PRIMARILY DESIGNATED AS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS MAP, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ALREADY EXISTS JUST TO OUR NORTH ALONG ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT THOROUGHFARE REDLAND ROAD.
AS I MENTIONED, THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN IS JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF JONES BERGER FROM US.
IF THE SECTOR PLAN HAD BEEN COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, EVERYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN WOULD'VE BEEN SUBURBAN HERE, WHICH IS THE PREVAILING LAND USE IN THIS AREA FOR THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN.
SUBURBAN HERE ACTUALLY PERMITS BOTH OF OUR REQUESTED ZONING DISTRICTS, EVERYTHING FROM MP 15 TO ALL RM AND SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS AS WELL AS M S 18 OFFICE AND UP TO C TWO USES.
ULTIMATELY, WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THIS PROJECT ITSELF HAD IT BEEN IN THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN WITHOUT A PLAN AMENDMENT AND WHILE WE SHOULD FOCUS ON THE GOVERNING PLAN, I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT OUR REQUEST IS ALSO IN LINE WITH THE LAND USE PATTERNS OF BOTH SIDES OF JONES WA BURGER EVEN THOUGH THAT ROAD WORKS.
THE PLAN FURTHER, JUST AS YOU CAN SEE TO THE SOUTHWEST IS GENERAL URBAN HERE ALONG JONES WA BURGER, WHICH PROVIDES FOR EVEN GREATER INTENSITY AND DENSITY OF USES CALLBACK TO SAY REALLY IS THAT MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ALONG THIS PRIMARY MAJOR LARGE THOROUGHFARE IS A
[00:45:01]
WELL-ESTABLISHED LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.OBJECTIVE 1.1 OF THE AIRPORT PLAN IS TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND PREVENT EXCESSIVE NOISE SOLUTION IN OTHER AIRPORT HAZARDS.
THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY DOES JUST THAT, SPECIFICALLY THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING PATTERNS IN PLACE ALONG CORRIDORS LIKE JONES FALLSBURG AND REDLAND ROAD AND WITHOUT GAINING HEIGHT FOR APARTMENT DENSITY POSES, NO THREATS TO THE AIRPORT.
OUR PROPOSED LOW DENSITY RE RESIDENTIAL IS VERY MUCH ALREADY IN PLACE, BUT AGAIN THE DEFINITIVE BOUNDARIES ARE A BIT MESSY AND WE ARE PROPOSING TO CLEAN THEM UP TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE EXISTING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON THE INTERIOR LOT ALONG THIS CORRIDOR.
THERE IS A LOT OF PROPERTY IN THIS AREA THAT SHOULD THE PLAN AMENDMENT BE APPROVED WOULD REMAIN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.
HOWEVER, A PORTION OF THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN DOES ECT, THE 5.3 ACRES WE REQUESTING TO BE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
FURTHER SAWS HAS REQUIRED A ARIAN BUFFER FOR THAT FLOODPLAIN.
AS YOU'LL SEE UM, IN OUR LAND PLAN SHORTLY.
THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE THAT WILL BE PRESERVED OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL FLOOD PLAIN, WHICH OF COURSE WOULD BE UNDEVELOPABLE AND TREATED WITH THE UTMOST CARE RESPECT.
SO WHILE OUR PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS OF COURSE NECESSARY AND CONSISTENT BUT WILL STILL BE PLENTY OF PRESERVED SPACE WITHIN THIS 5.3 ACRES, UH, A WIN-WIN IF YOU WILL FOR ALL SLIDE SIZE PLEASE, THIS IS A SCREENSHOT OF THE DELAY THESE CLASSIFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDED ZONING DISTRICTS FOR BOTH LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THE AIRPORT PLAN FOR OUR 16.29 ACRE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS APPROPRIATE, MOSTLY EXISTING AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE PLAN IN THIS AREA.
WE ARE PROPOSING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON SINGLE BLOCKS AT A MINIMUM OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
WE ARE ALSO LESS THAN HALF A MILE FROM REDLAND RANCH AND DRISCOLL MIDDLE SCHOOL AND LESS THAN A MILE FROM GREAT HEART NORTHERN OAK ACHIEVING THAT IDEAL DISTANCE TO SCHOOL.
THIS CLASSIFICATION DOES PERMIT HIGHER DENSITY AND SMALLER LOT SIZES THAN WHAT WE HAVE REQUESTED AS PART OF OUR ZONING, BUT WE HAVE CHOSEN THE R SIX VERY SPECIFICALLY TO FIT WELL WITHIN THE UNIQUE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY AND TO ALIGN WITH THE ADJACENT R FIVE SUBDIVISION FOR OUR 5.3 ACRE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS APPROPRIATE AND COMPATIBLE GIVEN ITS LOCATION ALONG A MAJOR CORRIDOR AND PROVIDES NECESSARY BUFFERING TO THE EXISTING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE ADJACENT RANGE OF ESTATES H O A THAT WE HAVE BEEN PRIMARILY WORKING WITH AS THEY ARE ALONG OUR NORTHEASTERN BOUNDARY HAS REQUESTED, AS I MENTIONED, THAT WE NOT BUILD TRADITIONAL APARTMENTS AND WE HAVE AGREED TO THAT.
THE USES IN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS SHOWN HERE INCLUDE TOWN HOMES, WHICH IS ULTIMATELY WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE DIRECTLY ALIGNED WITH A SPECIFIC TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL USES IN BOTH THE MEDIUM AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORIES AND WITHIN THE LIST OF RECOMMENDED ZONING DISTRICTS BY REQUESTING THE R SIX AND M 18.
WITH RESPECT TO THE GOVERNING AIRPORT VICINITY LAND USE PLAN, WE BELIEVE WE HAVE MET AND EXCEEDED THE TWO PRIMARY GOALS OF THIS PLAN.
FIRST, TO PROTECT THE QUALITY OF LIFE RESIDENTS, WE ARE PROPOSING A CONSISTENT COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT WITH A PLAN THAT IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF STATE AND REALISTICALLY ALIGNS WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE PATTERNS OF THIS PLAN AND THE COMMUNITY ALONG WITH THE ADJACENT NORTH SECTOR PLAN.
FURTHER AS WE'LL TOUCH ON IN JUST A MINUTE, WE ARE PROVIDING SIGNIFICANT DRAINAGE AND STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS TO BETTER CHANNELIZE THE WATER THAT FLOWS FROM THE NORTH DOWNSTREAM ACROSS PART OF OUR PROPERTY IN THE MUD CREEK.
SEVERAL WHOLE RESIDENTS, UM, RIGHT AROUND US HAS SHOWN US WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE AREA AFTER A BIG RAIN AND EVEN AS RECENTLY AS A FEW WEEKS AGO WHEN THERE WAS TESTING OF THE AQUA VISTA STATION AS PART OF DOG VISTA RIDGE PROJECT, THE WATER CURRENTLY RUNS RAPIDLY THROUGH THIS UNDEVELOPED OVERGROWN LAND AND NOT IN A SAFE AND CONTROLLED MANNER.
LEGALLY SPEAKING, THE DRAINAGE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT WE CANNOT INCREASE RUNOFF BY DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY AND WE ARE GOING TO DO EXACTLY JUST THAT AND ALSO PLAN TO PROVIDE EXTENSIVE NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE TO HELP IMPROVE THE OVERALL FLOW OF WATER.
THIS AREA RESULTING IN NO NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE ADJACENT RESIDENTS AND PRESUMABLY
[00:50:01]
BETTER FLOW OF WATER TO RESIDENTS.SECONDLY, TO ENCOURAGE ECONOMIC GROWTH THAT ENHANCES AIRPORT OPERATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT.
OF COURSE IN EVERYDAY LIFE, DEVELOPING LAND FOR THE FULL BENEFIT OF THE AIRPORT IS NOT ALWAYS A PRIMARY FOCUS, BUT GIVEN THAT THIS PLAN IS DESIGNED AROUND PROPERTY VICINITY TO THE AIRPORT, IT IS A CONSIDERATION AND FACTOR IN THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THIS PLAN.
WHILE HEIGHT AND NOISE ARE NOT FACTORS IN THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY PLACING NO IMPACT IN THE FLIGHT PATH OR OTHER AIRPORT OPERATIONS, FREEING IN APPROXIMATELY A TOTAL OF 80 MORE ROOFTOPS ACROSS THIS WHOLE 22 ACRES, IT IS AN ECONOMIC BOOST THAT COULD SUPPORT AIRPORT OPERATIONS.
MORE HOMES EVEN JUST 80 TOTAL IS I PEOPLE, IS MORE PEOPLE TO IDEALLY TRAVEL BY WAY OF OUR AIRPORT, WHETHER IT IS RESIDENTS TRAVELING ELSEWHERE FOR BUSINESS OF FOOD OR FOLKS TRAVELING TO SAN ANTONIO TO VISIT FAMILY AND FRIENDS.
FURTHERMORE, THIS IS A CONSISTENT COMPATIBLE AND RESPONSIBLE USE OF THIS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND UNDERUTILIZED PIECE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.
LASTLY, WHILE WE ARE WITHIN THE AIRPORT PLAN BOUNDARY, WE DO WANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE LARGER GOALS OF THE SA TOMORROW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SPECIFICALLY IN THIS CASE GOAL TWO, WHICH STRIVES FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AT A VARIETY OF PRICE LEVELS.
APOLOGY ON THE TYPO YOU ARE READING RIGHT NOW, BUT AS PROPOSED, THE LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION ALLOWS US THE OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A COHESIVE MIXED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT OFFERS DIFFERENT PHYSICAL HOME PRODUCTS AT DIFFERENT PRICE POINTS.
SAN ANTONIO, AS YOU ALL KNOW, HAS A VERY DIVERSE MARKET, UM, AND EVEN WITH THIS MORE ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY, THERE'S A DESIRE TO BE A RESIDENT HERE AND A KIND OF HOME THAT FITS THE BUYERS IDEAL INDIVIDUAL LIFESTYLE AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING OPTIONS FOR ALL KINDS OF BUYERS IN A WAY THAT FITS WELL AND CONSISTENTLY WITH THE LAME PLAN AND THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
WHILE I KNOW SITE SPECIFICS SUCH AS LOOKING AT THIS LAYOUT ARE TYPICALLY OUTSIDE OF THE COMMISSION'S PURVIEW, I DID WANT TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN OUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ITSELF AND HOW IT ALIGNS WITH THE PLAN AMENDMENT AS REQUESTED.
THIS IS PRIMARILY OUR SINGLE FAMILY LOT LAYOUT, WHICH WE HAVE SHOWN UH, CIVILIAN COMMISSION AND THE COMMUNITY FOR SEVERAL MONTHS NOW AND THIS SHOWS A TOTAL OF 68 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
67 OF THOSE LOTS WILL BE FOR SALE THE LARGER LOT AT THE NORTHERN END AT THE TOP OF THE MAP IS WHERE THE PROPERTY OWNER SLASH DEVELOPER SLASH APPLICANT LIVES.
HE RESTORED THE ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD AND IS MADE HIS HOME HERE ON SITE.
THIS IS A REALLY BIG PLUS FOR THE COMMUNITY, HAVING THE PERSON THAT OWNS THE PROPERTY AND ALSO DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THEM.
IT'S BEEN VERY ACCESSIBLE AND RESPONSIVE OVER THE LAST OVER FIVE MONTHS AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE THERE ON SITE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.
TRUTHFULLY, IF THIS PROJECT WAS ABOUT DENSITY LEAVING IN AS MANY HOMES AS POSSIBLE, UM, WE COULD HAVE SQUEEZED IN A LOT MORE HOMES IN THAT EXISTING HOMESTEAD BLOCK, UM, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER PROBABLY WOULDN'T LIVE THERE.
BUT NOT ONLY A HE AND I PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS PROJECT RESPECT AND LOVE THIS SITE AND THAT'S WHY HE'S CHOSEN TO LIVE THERE AS WELL AS HELP OTHERS LIVE HERE TOO.
THIS VIEW OF THE SITE OF THE SITE PLAN SHOWS THE PRIMARY VEHICULAR ACCESS OF THE SITE WITH PLENTY OF ROOM TO QUEUE CARS WITHOUT CREATING A TRAFFIC ISSUE ON JONES MOSSBERG.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE HOW THE INTERNAL LOSS AS PROPOSED ARE COMPARABLE TO THE INTERNAL LOSS OF THE ADJACENT ESTABLISHED BUILT COMMUNITY OF REDLAND RANCH.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE VARIATION OF LEFT SIZES.
SOME COME CLOSER TO THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM, BUT SOME ARE ALSO MUCH LARGER ALL WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE.
JUST FOR REFERENCE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THERE'S A LARGE CORNER LOT THAT WILL NOT BE RESIDENTIALLY DEVELOPED, BUT THAT IS OUR ONSITE DETENTION TO MITIGATE ANY AND ALL RUNOFF SPECIFICALLY FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWING WIDE WILL SHOW THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA IN A MUCH BETTER VIEW.
BUT AS YOU CAN SEE IN A LAYUP NOW, WE ARE PROPOSING A PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT WITH LOTS OF OPEN SPACE FACTOR IN AS WELL AS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SITUATED ALONG THE JONES BERGER CORRIDOR.
JUST AS OUTLINED IN THE AIRPORT VICINITY PLAN DOCUMENT FROM A BIRD'S EYE VIEW OF DENSITY WITHIN THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA, WE ARE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY
[00:55:01]
FOUR UNITS AN ACRE.THIS IS BY DEFINITION LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERNS.
IN FACT, IT IS OVERALL LESS DENSE THAN THE ADJACENT USES GIVEN THE UNIQUE SHAPE OF THE SITE AND PHYSICAL FEATURES IN PLAY.
CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAYOUT WAS NECESSARY TO MAKE THE BEST AND MOST RESPONSIBLE USE OF THIS LAND AND WE HAVE ACHIEVED A VERY LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY LAYOUT THAT IS EXACTLY IN LINE WITH THE INTENTION OF THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HEALTH CLASSIFICATION.
THIS IS A ZOOMED IN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED TO BE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THE ENTIRE AREA AS INDICATED BY THE BLUE OUTLINE.
AS I MENTIONED, THE COMMUNITY HAS MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT WANT APARTMENTS SO WE WILL NOT DO APARTMENTS AND INSTEAD WE ARE FOCUSED ON GARDEN STYLE TOWN HOMES TO STILL ACHIEVE A DESIRE TO PROVIDE A MIXED PRODUCT ON A COST COHESIVE DEVELOPMENT THAT DOESN'T BRING UNWANTED DENSITY.
WE ARE ANTICIPATING APPROXIMATELY FOUR TO EIGHT TOWN HOMES IN THIS AREA, VERY MINIMAL AND MUCH LESS DENSITY THAN WE COULD ACHIEVE WITH APARTMENTS.
IN REALITY, THE DISSOLVEMENT OF TOWN HOMES WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE DEFINITION OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AS OUTLINED IN THE PLAN IS EVEN MORE CONSISTENT THAN APARTMENT.
SO AS PROPOSED TO YOU ALL TODAY WITH OUR IDEAL PRODUCT BEING LOCATED ALONG A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, THE REQUESTED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ACHIEVE THE GOALS AND INTENTIONS OF THE LAND USE PLAN, WE'LL ALSO PROVIDING A LANEY BUFFER BETWEEN THAT BIG THOROUGHFARE AND THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA, THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 3.1 ACRES OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN WITHIN THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WHICH REDUCES THE OVERALL DEVELOPABILITY OF THIS LAND.
THAT IS WHAT THE DASH LINE IS BY DISSECTING THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S WHERE THE FLOOD PLAIN GOES.
SINCE WE HAVE CHOSEN TO GO THROUGH A HANDFUL OF TOWN HOMES IN THIS AREA AND NOT MAXIMIZE DENSITY WHICH COULD BE UPWARDS OF 55 UNITS, THIS AREA WILL BE DEVELOPED.
ADDING MUCH LOWER DENSITY THAN ALLOWED ALLOWS FACTORING IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND YET INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY ON THIS SITE.
THE DIAGONAL LINES ON THIS MAP REPRESENT A CONDENSED DEVELOPABLE AREA IN WHICH WE ARE PROPOSING TO LOCATE THE TOWNHOUSE.
THIS ALLOWS FOR A SIGNIFICANT PRESERVED OPEN SPACE AS I MENTIONED EARLIER AND FURTHER BUFFERS THE ADJACENT RED RANCH ESTATE SUBDIVISION.
FROM THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL PLANS IN OUR CITY OUTSIDE OF THOSE WOULD BE ADOPTED LAND.
THESE CATEGORIES AS PART OF THE ESSAY TOMORROW INITIATIVE HAVE SLIGHT VARIATIONS AS TO WHAT IS APPROPRIATE WITHIN EACH CLASSIFICATION.
AS I MENTIONED ACROSS JONES BERGER IN THE SUBURBAN TIER OF THE NORTH SECTOR PLAN, THERE'S A WIDE VARIETY OF RELATED ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITHIN THE TIER AND CONSISTENT WITH OUR REQUEST AS IT STANDS NOW, GENERAL URBAN TIER, WHICH IS JUST FOR OUR SOUTHWEST, IS EVEN MORE DENSE AND MORE INTENSE, BUT SPECIFICALLY WITH RESPECT TO THE AIRPORT PLAN, OUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHTED HERE IS EXTREMELY CONSISTENT WITH THE DEFINITION OF MEDIUM DENSITY CLASSIFICATION IN THE PLAN AND OF COURSE IS PREVIOUSLY SHOWN.
THE SAME APPLIES TO THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA.
SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND, WHICH I KNOW YOU ALL KNOW, A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FROM YOUR BODY TODAY DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN WE CAN JUST START WORK.
THIS SITE IS EXTREMELY INVOLVED AND UNIQUE, ESPECIALLY BEING OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE WITH FLOODPLAIN BY
WE NOT ONLY HAVE CITY AND SAS APPROVALS TO ACCOUNT FOR AND ABIDE BY, BUT WE HAVE PT, C Q, AND FEMA INVOLVED.
WE ARE ALSO REQUIRED NOT BY AMENDING THE PLAN OR EVEN THE REZONING, BUT BY LOCAL AND STATE REGULATIONS FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE TO SUBMIT AND HAVE A WT A P APPROVED.
WE HAVE FOUR MAJOR AGENCIES TO REVIEW AND BE APPROVED BY AS WELL AS COLLABORATING WITH THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY.
AND IF AT ANY STAGE WE DON'T MAKE THE REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE TO START OVER.
THIS IS A VERY LENGTHY AND TIME CONSUMING PROCESS, MUCH OF WHICH HAS BEEN COMPOUNDED BY THE LAST FIVE AND A HALF MONTHS FROM APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY, ALTHOUGH THE ORDER OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WAS OUT OF NORMAL ORDER DUE TO THE C OVID 19 CRISIS, I JUST LET YOU REITERATE THAT THIS IS IN GENERAL PART OF THE INITIAL STEP IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE GOVERNING LANEY PLAN FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, THE LOW AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS THE FOCUS TODAY
[01:00:01]
AND GIVEN BOTH THE OVERARCHING COMPATIBILITY AND CONSISTENCY OF THOSE DESIGNATIONS AS PROPOSED ALONG WITH THE SPECIFICS OF THE PROJECT ITSELF, WE BELIEVE THIS MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.SLIDE NINE PLEASE, AND THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE, I PROMISE TO RECAP.
WE ARE PROPOSING A COHESIVE COMPATIBLE MIXED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT TAKES ALL FACTORS INTO SERIOUS CONSIDERATION AND HAS RESULTED IN A DELIBERATE CREATIVE RESPONSIBLE PROJECT PLAN.
AMENDMENTS ARE OF COURSE TRIGGERED BY REZONING REQUESTS AND OURS IS NO DIFFERENT IN THAT REGARD.
ASIDE FROM ONE CRITICAL POINT THAT OUR CURRENT ZONING IS NO LONGER APPROPRIATE OR CONSISTENT.
HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF OUR GOVERNING LAND USE PLAN AS WELL AS THE ADJACENT LAND PLAN.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS.
IT ALIGNS WITH TEXTBOOK PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND ITS MOST EFFECTIVE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AGAIN, ALTHOUGH WE ARE REQUESTING TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION FROM PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AS YOU JUST SAW, THERE IS SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE BEING PRESERVED AND WE WILL MEET AND EXCEED THAT GOAL OF PROTECTING THE QUALITY OF LIFE WITH OUR PROPOSED DRAINAGE STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT AND DELICATE ATTENTION PLACE, THE FLOODPLAIN AND THE RECHARGE ZONE.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT WE ARE RESTRICTED BY SAW TO AN OVERALL 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
THE COMMUNITY NEXT DOOR AS STATED BY SAW LAST WEEK WAS DEVELOPED AT A HIGHER 39% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO IN ADDITION TO BEING OVERALL LESS DENSE, WE ARE ALSO RESTRICTED TO A LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER PERCENTAGE.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS ENTIRE AREA, NOT JUST OUR SITE, IS OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE INCLUDING ALL OF THE DEVELOPED SUBDIVISIONS.
WE JUST HAPPENED TO BE A LITTLE BIT LATER ON THE PROPERTIES TO BE FULLY DEVELOPED, WHEREAS THE RESIDENTS NEXT DOOR HAVE LIVED IN THEIR DEVELOPED SUBDIVISION, SOME OF WHICH HAVE BEEN THERE FOR WELL OVER 20 YEARS AND THAT IS ALSO OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE.
AND WHILE IT IS DISAPPOINTING AND WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS MANY TIMES WITH THE COMMUNITY INVOLVED THAT THEY WERE SOLD THEIR HOMES UNDER THE GUISE OF THE PROPERTY BEING A GREEN BELT, IT IS IN FACT PRIVATE DEVELOPABLE LENGTH.
WE HAVE NEGOTIATED AN OVERALL LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATIONS PROPOSED, AN OVERALL LESS DENSE DEVELOPMENT AND OF COURSE WE'LL BE ABIDING BY ALL REGULATIONS OF THE LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES INVOLVED.
FURTHERMORE, LAST WEEK A BILLING COMMISSION WE HEARD FROM NEIGHBORS ABOUT GREENAGE CONCERNS BUT ALSO FROM A GROUP WE DON'T TYPICALLY HEAR FROM AT THIS STAGE IN THE PROCESS.
AND THAT IS THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY.
SINCE THEN, WE HAVE HAD VERY PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH SARAH ON THEIR OVERALL SUGGESTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ANALYZE AND ENGINEER TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY WITH RESPECT TO THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE FLOODPLAIN AND WATERWAY, NOT JUST ON OUR SITE, BUT THE OVERALL WATERWAY IMPACTS.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE ON THE SAME PATH WITH SARAH MOVING FORWARD AS THEY WILL BE AN AGENCY INVOLVED IN FURROW STAGES OF THIS PROJECT.
WE ALSO REACHED OUT TO THE GREATER EDWARDS AQUIFER ALLIANCE WHO SPOKE LAST WEEK TO DISCUSSED THIS PROJECT WITH THEM.
UNFORTUNATELY, THEY HAVE NOT CALLED ME BACK, BUT IN THE MEANTIME WE HAVE CONTINUED DISCUSSIONS AND MADE REALLY GOOD PROGRESS WITH OUR REDLAND RANCH ESTATE NEIGHBORS WHILE DRAINAGE AND STORM WATER IS NOT NECESSARILY PART OF THIS COMMISSION'S PURVIEW.
I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT OUR EFFORTS AND BRIEFLY ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS, SOME OF WHICH YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY TODAY.
WE HAVE BOTH SUPPORT FROM SAS AND CITY STAFF ALONG WITH A UNANIMOUS RECOGNITION OF SUPPORT FROM ZONING MISSION.
FOLLOWING THEIR VERY THOROUGH DELIBERATION LAST WEEK.
I WOULD ASK RESPECTFULLY PLEASE FOR JUST A FEW BRIEF MOMENTS OF REBUTTAL FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY AND WILL DEBRIEF AND OF COURSE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR OUR PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL VICINITY WING PLAN AS PROPOSED, GIVEN THAT WE ARE IN DIRECT ALIGNMENT, CONSISTENCY, AND COMPATIBILITY WITH THE FUNDAMENTALS, GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND INTENTIONS OF THIS LAND USE PLAN.
THANK YOU TO THE APPLICANT'S STAFF.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE ONE PERSON WHO WANTED TO CALL IN, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
I HAVE PAUL PRIEST ON THE LINE.
AS A REMINDER, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND HE HAS TWO MINUTES PLEASE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION
[01:05:01]
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, GIVE MY COMMENTS AND THANK YOU EMILY FOR SUCH GREAT PRESENTATION AND I WAS ABLE TO LOOK ON THE SLIDE, UNFORTUNATELY ON YOUR PRESENTATION THERE'S A FEW, UH, FIRST MANY AND THE 10 ZONES AVAILABLE NEXT TO THE, YOU TRY TO REZONE THAT ACTUALLY ALREADY HAS BEEN PROPOSED TO REZONE.ALSO, THERE'S A, UM, A AREA WHERE YOU GUYS CONCERN ABOUT THE FLOOD GENERALIZED AND COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORS HAS NOT BEEN HAPPENING AS WELL AS YOU'VE STATED.
UH, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT BEEN, UH, RECEIVING ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT I HAVE MY ENGINEERS WELL TO TOUCH YOU BECAUSE OF, UH, THE DEVELOPER ASKED ME TO, UH, SELL 25 FEET FROM MY PROPERTY TO HIM THAT HE PLANNED TO DO CHANNEL AND ASKED MY ENGINEER TO REACH OUT TO HIM.
ALSO, WE ONLY HAVE THE REPORT FROM S REGARDING THAT AND NO OTHER, THE INSTITUTION AND COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
UH, WELL THE GOAL IS TO KEEP PUBLIC SAFE AND UM, YOU KNOW, AND TO HAVE THEM NOT EXPERIENCE ANY DISTURBANCES WITH THE FLOOD, WITH THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, WITH THE SCHOOL AND CLASS SIZES.
AND, UM, AS YOU NOTICE, 64 PEOPLE MAIL THE NOTICING OPPOSITE TO THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO I THINK IT SHOULD SAY SOMETHING TO THE, UH, PEOPLE WHO ARE, UH, DOING, UM, WHO ARE ASSIGNED TO DO THE PLANNING TODAY.
AND ONCE AGAIN, THANK VERY MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
I LIVE RIGHT THERE ON THE PROPERTY, MY MP 10 AREA THERE AND THERE IS ONGOING CONSTRUCTION.
ALSO, THEY CHANGED THE MP 20, WHICH ALSO VERY USABLE AND VERY USEFUL THINGS TO USE THERE, UM, PROPERTY.
UH, WHILE THE CALLER'S ON THE LINE, WE'LL SEE IF THERE, IF THERE ARE ANY COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS.
WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER JACKSON, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CALLER? DON'T FORGET TO UNMUTE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GUILLO, UH, NO QUESTIONS FOR THE CALLER.
I JUST WANNA THANK HIM FOR TAKING THE TIME TO CALL IN.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PROFIT.
AGAIN, UH, FOR, FOR CALLING IN CITY.
UH, THE CALLER MENTIONED 65 NOTICES IN OPPOSITION.
CAN STAFF PLEASE CLARIFY THAT OR HOW MUCH, HOW MANY HAVE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION? RIGHT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION IT WAS 64 NOTICES MAILED OUT, UH, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND THREE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER ROY.
UM, THAT I WAS GONNA ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THAT, THOSE NOTICES.
SO THE CALLER SAID THEY WERE 64 IN OPPOSITION.
CAN HE EXPLAIN THAT MORE? IT'S DIFFERENT FOR THE QUESTION, UM, TO MIKE TOWN AND THAT'S WHAT I HEARD.
THAT WAS, UH, I DO KNOW THAT YOU GUYS MAIL 60 FOR THAT FOR THE STATED ON THE PAPER AND I DON'T HAVE ACCESS HOW MANY YOU GOT IN POSITION? HOW MANY IN THE PAPER? BUT THAT'S WHAT I HEARD WHEN YOU GUYS PRESENTING THE CASE.
AND MY NEXT QUESTION IS, YOU'RE WELCOME.
THE DOMINANT CONCERN, THE INCREASE IN DENSITY OR THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WHERE THEY WANNA DO THE MIXED, UM, THE, THE HIGHER DENSITY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, IS IT THAT THAT IS, UH, REALLY NOT GREAT LAND FOR DEVELOPING BECAUSE OF THE FLOOD FLOODING IN THE AREA OR IS IT JUST A GENERAL OPPOSITION TO DENSITY? NO, UM, I DO BELIEVE THE CD TO DEVELOP THE CD THE LAND TO BE USED, UH, THIS SHOULD BE USED APPROPRIATELY.
THIS PARTICULAR AREA IS VERY COMPLEX AND NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF THE FLOODING AND BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS THERE IS AROUND, UM, FOUR OH TREES IN THAT AREA.
AS WELL AS THAT THERE IS AN ONGOING DEVELOPING SOUTH FROM THAT PROPERTY, WHICH THEY CHANGED THAT FROM THAT, UM, THE RESULTING TO MP 20, WHICH IS ALSO GOES ALONG WITH THE PLAN,
[01:10:01]
YOU KNOW, AND THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BE LESS BURDEN FOR THE TRAFFIC FOR THE SCHOOL, FOR PEOPLE SURROUNDING, I DON'T HAVE ANY OPPOSITION FOR DEVELOPING.IT NEEDS TO BE APPROPRIATELY PLANNED.
IT NEEDS TO BE MADE USABLE FOR NOT ONLY FOR RESIDENTS BUT IT FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
SO THAT'S WHY I TRIED TO BRING YOU UP GUYS, THAT, UM, THIS IS, UH, YOU KNOW, PROPOSAL OF, UH, CHANGES MAYBE NOT THE GREAT IDEA BECAUSE OF HOW THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED AND, AND THAT
SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS, SO A PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY, THEY'RE PROPOSING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THEN THE OTHER PORTION IS PROPOSED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UM, RESIDENTIAL, ARE YOU IN SUPPORT OF THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND WOULD YOU BE IN SUPPORT OF THE WHOLE THING IF IT WAS ALL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL? SO THE, IF I AGREE TO CHANGE THE LAND TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, YEAH, THAT'S A PART OF THE PLAN.
I HAVE NO PROBLEMS. I'M NOT SURE THAT, UM, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS A GREAT IDEA.
ALSO, IF YOU LOOK ON THE PROPOSAL PLAN, AS YOU UNDERSTAND THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER, UH, LIVE THERE AND I DIDN'T SEE HIS HOUSE PLACED ON THAT PROPOSAL.
I DON'T SEE WHERE HIS HOUSE IS LOCATED.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS A CORRECT PLAN BECAUSE I KNOW WHERE, HOW IT IS LOCATED BECAUSE I I CLOSE NEIGHBORS TO THE PROPERTY.
UH, COMMISSIONER MCKEE, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONER MCKEE, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CALLER? DON'T FORGET TO UNMUTE.
UH, COMMISSIONER PECK, NO QUESTIONS FOR THE CALLER.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.
UH, I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CALLER.
UH, JUST THANK YOU FOR CALLING IN AND SHARING YOUR CONCERNS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF YOUR COMMUNITY.
THE REST OF AND THANK YOU STAFF.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER, UH, IS THERE ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENT, CARL? NO, THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT UH, LEFT TO REBUT SOME OF THE COMMENTS STATED I, UH, IS THE APPLICANT AVAILABLE STILL? UH, SHE'S EMILY, YOU WANNA UNMUTE? THERE YOU GO.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE HEAR.
UM, A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
UM, YES, THERE IS ESTABLISHED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THIS AREA.
IT'S LOCATED ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OF REDLAND ROAD.
UM, THE, WE ARE PROPOSING A SECTION OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON THE OTHER MAJOR THOROUGHFARE JONES BERGER.
UM, JUST TO REITERATE AGAIN, AS ALIGNED WITH THE SUBURBAN HERE THAT IS ACROSS THE STREET, UM, OUR REQUEST WOULD NOT TRIGGER A PLAN AMENDMENT FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE.
UM, BUT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND THAT IS A UNDEVELOPABLE AND B BEING ACTIVELY PRESERVED AS OPEN SPACE ON THIS SITE.
UM, AS I SHOWED YOU GUYS IN THE SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS A COUPLE SLIDES BACK IN MY PRESENTATION, THERE IS A VERY CONDENSED AREA OF DEVELOPMENT HERE.
UH, LAST WEEK AT ZONING COMMISSION WE COMMITTED TO DOING RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WITH THE COMMUNITY, UM, TO PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF APARTMENTS, UM, AND FOR THE TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT.
SO THIS IS VERY, VERY SIGNIFICANTLY LESS DENSE THAN PERMITTED.
UM, AND LESS DENSE THAN, UM, WHAT WE WERE INTENDING TO DO.
BUT THAT IS WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE COMMUNITY IS VOICE, AND SO WE ARE HAPPY TO DO THAT FOR THEM.
PRIEST MENTIONED ENGINEERING PLANS.
UM, THAT IS STILL VERY MUCH UNDERWAY.
THIS IS, AS I MENTIONED, THE VERY INITIAL STAGE OF THE ENTITLEMENT PROCESS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
[01:15:01]
UM, AND SO WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING ON THAT, UM, VERY, VERY DILIGENTLY.UM, BUT TO PRESENT FULL ENGINEERING PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY ANY OF THE AGENCIES, UM, IT'S JUST NOT FEASIBLE RIGHT NOW.
HOWEVER, AS YOU CAN SEE, BASED ON OUR SITE PLAN, UM, WE HAVE TAKEN VERY SPECIAL CONSIDERATION IN CAREFULLY DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY, UM, IN A WAY THAT NATURALLY FITS IN WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THIS OVERALL COMMUNITY.
SO WE HAVE MADE A VERY BIG EFFORT OF CAREFULLY PLANNING THAT OUT AND PRESERVING NOT ONLY JUST THE FLOOD PLAIN AREA, BUT SOME EXTRA OPEN SPACE IN THIS COMMUNITY AS A WELL.
UM, BUT ONCE AGAIN, THERE IS ESTABLISHED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HERE, WHICH IS TRIGGERED BY OUR M MS 18.
SO AGAIN, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO DO APARTMENTS OR QUITE FRANKLY, ANYTHING SIGNIFICANTLY DENSE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOUR TO EIGHT TOWN HOMES ON THE OVERALL PROPERTY.
UM, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL OF 80 UNITS ACROSS THE ENTIRE 22 ACRES, TOWN HOMES AND SINGLE FAMILY INCLUDED, WHICH IS REALLY JUST ABOUT FOUR UNITS AN ACRES.
SO FROM A MAP PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS MUCH LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, BUT AS I MENTIONED, THE PLAN DICTATES THAT M 18 IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND AS DEFINED.
WE ARE VERY CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THAT DESIGNATION, BUT ALSO VERY CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE PLANNING PRINCIPLE OF HAVING A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE FOLLOWED BY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, FOLLOWED BY THE ESTABLISHED AND PROPOSE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
IN ADDITION, WITH OUR FLOODPLAIN BEING ING THE PROPERTY THAT SERVES AS AN ADDITIONAL BUFFER TO THE COMMUNITY.
SO THERE'S A VERY CONDENSED AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE LAND THAT WAS ABOUT TO PUT TOWN HOMES IN, UM, MEANING THAT OVERALL THIS IS A MUCH LESS DENSE PROJECT.
BUT AGAIN, I WILL JUST REITERATE THAT THIS PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT IS BY AND LARGE, CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE ESTABLISHED LANE PATTERNS ON BOTH SIDES OF JONES BURGER AND A THIS ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY CORRIDOR BETWEEN BERG AND REDLAND ROAD.
UM, OUR ENGINEERS ALSO ON THE LINE, SO IF THERE ARE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, I KNOW THAT'S A BIT OUTSIDE OF YOUR PURVIEW, BUT, UM, WANTED TO BE PREPARED AS THIS IS A MUCH MORE COMPLEX SITE THAN NORMAL.
UM, BUT WE ARE BOTH HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED.
WE'LL MOVE ON WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS.
WE'LL START WITH THE COMMISSIONER.
MCKEE, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMISSION ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, YES, I, I HAVE, UM, QUESTIONS I THINK BOTH FOR, UH, STAFF AND THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
SO, UM, UH, MY FIRST QUESTION, UH, WOULD JUST GO TO STAFF PLEASE FOR, UH, CLARIFICATION, UM, AND BENEFIT OF THE VIEWERS.
SO AS FAR AS, UM, UH, FLOODING AND DRAINAGE IS CONCERNED, UM, WOULD YOU PLEASE, UM, LET US KNOW WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ANY DEVELOPER IS FOR THEIR PROPERTIES IN RESPO IN, UH, RESPONSIBILITY TO OTHER NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS FAR AS, UH, DRAINAGE AND FLOODING? UM, MEANING LIKE THAT THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY NOT TO INCREASE? UH, YES.
SO THE NEXT STAGE OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS THE FLAT PROCESS.
AND, UH, DURING THE REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION PLAT, UH, IT HAS TO MEET, UH, STATE AND, UH, LOCAL, UH, ORDINANCES, AND IT WILL BE REVIEWED, ESPECIALLY A DRAINAGE PLAN, TRAFFIC PLAN.
ALL OF THOSE, UH, ITEMS WILL BE REVIEWED, UH, AS PART OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW.
AND ONCE IT MEETS CODE, THEN IT IS ELIGIBLE FOR A CONSIDERATION BY PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, SO AGAIN, ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE LOOKED AT, IT CANNOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT, CAN PUT MORE, UH, FLOODING ONTO, UH, SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY, UM, AND, UM, AND, AND PO AND WHAT THEY'LL HAVE TO DO, DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS, IS THAT EITHER, YOU KNOW, EITHER IT'S A DETENTION POND OR RETENTION POND, BUT, UM, IT'S SUPPOSED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT TAKES CARE OF THE FLOODING AND EITHER RETAIN IT, UH, SO IT DISTRIBUTES IT OUT SLOWLY OR, UH, DETAIN IT SO IT DISTRIBUTED IT OUT SLOWLY.
UH, BUT AGAIN, THEY'LL HAVE TO MEET STATE AND, UH, CITY, UH, CODES IN ORDER TO, UH, BE APPROVED FOR THE PLA THANK YOU.
SO, MEANING THAT THEY CAN'T MAKE IT, UH, WORSE THAN IT IS, BUT, UH, MS. UH, MS. UH, EMILY, UM, SO CAN YOU TELL ME, UM, YOUR, UH, AGAIN, SO JUST, UH, LAYMAN'S TERMS
[01:20:01]
WHAT, UH, YOUR PROJECT WILL DO FOR THE FLOODING THAT IS CURRENTLY, UM, EXISTING? YES, SO I WILL, UM, KIND OF GIVE YOU MY LAYMAN'S TERMS. UM, BUT UM, I WILL ALSO ALLOW OUR ENGINEER TO PIPE IN.UM, SO I DON'T BUTCHER ANYTHING.
UM, BUT REALLY THERE'S KIND OF A COUPLE DIFFERENT FACTORS IN PLACE HERE.
AS I SHOWED 'EM THE SITE PLAN, WE DO HAVE ON ONSITE DETENTION, UM, A LOT IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER, WHICH KIND OF FLOWS, WHERE WATER FLOWS, UM, THAT WILL, UH, CAPTURE AND TREAT THE WATER ON THIS SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICALLY.
IN ADDITION, WE ALSO HAVE THE FLOOD PLANE THAT BISECTS THE PROPERTY.
SO WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING SOME CHANNELIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, A COMPLETELY, UH, AN EARTHEN DRAINAGE CHANNEL, UM, TO HELP FACILITATE THE WATER.
RIGHT NOW, THE PROPERTY IS VERY OVERGROWN, LOOSE AND DEVELOPED, UM, AND WATER RUNS WHEREVER WATER RUNS.
UM, I'M SURE YOU'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN WITH THE BLOCKS OF SPILLED MILK.
UM, IF THERE'S NOTHING STAYING IN THE WAY OF WATER, OR EVEN IF THERE IS THINGS JUST HAPPEN, THEY JUST RUN WHEREVER THE WATER WANTS TO RUN.
UM, IT'S A VERY POWERFUL SOURCE.
SO WE WANT TO NOT ONLY MITIGATE THE DRAINAGE RUNOFF, UM, FROM DEVELOPING THIS SITE WITHIN THE REGULATIONS AND RULES OF THE LAW, UM, STATE, LOCAL AND FEDERAL, BUT ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IMPROVING THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, ON THIS SITE TO BETTER FIX THE ISSUE OF, UH, DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT IS IMPACTING THE COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW.
WATER IS PUSHED ALL THE WAY UP TO THEM, UM, AND SO WE WANNA CHANNEL THAT WATER BACK TO WHERE IT SHOULD BE AND FLOWING AND TREATING IT CORRECTLY INTO MUD CREEK.
UM, BLAINE, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, PLEASE FEEL FREE.
COMMISSIONERS, WE'VE BEEN LISTENING YOU IN THE BACKGROUND.
UH, VIRTUAL MEETINGS DEFINITELY ARE SOMETHING NEW, SO, UM, APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S SUN.
SO EMILY, YOU DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF EXPLAINING IT.
UM, WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW WITH THE PROPERTY IS THERE'S REALLY NO DEFINED PATH FOR THAT WATER TO FOLLOW.
SO IT JUST KIND OF, UH, GOES OVER A LARGE AREA AND SOME OF THAT PROBLEMS THAT ARE HAPPENING AS WELL AS WATER, ACTUALLY A BACKWATER EFFECT THAT'S HAPPENING THAT'S, THAT'S CAUSING THAT WATER TO RISE UP CLOSE TO THOSE PEOPLE'S FENCE THERE ON PATH.
SO PART OF WHAT
AND AS PART OF THAT, UM, UH, REPORT AND STUDY THAT WE DO FOR FEMA, WE LOOK AT FIRST EVALUATING WHAT'S HAPPENING TODAY.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE FEMA FLOODPLAIN TODAY, IT SHOWS THE VERY, UH, NET FLOOD POINT FEMA FLOODPLAINS GONE THROUGH THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS INCORRECT, UH, BASED ON OUR INITIAL STUDIES ON IT.
THE FLOOD PLAIN IS MUCH WIDER.
UH, THERE'S A LOT MORE GOING ON THERE, UM, THAN WHAT'S INDICATED.
AND EVEN THOUGH THAT FLOOD PLAIN WAS JUST STUDIED BACK IN 2010, UH, WE, WE DO THINK THERE'S THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS HAVE, HAVE CAUSED OTHER CHANGES BEYOND IT JUST BEING MAP WRONG, UH, IN THE BEGINNING.
SO PART OF IT'S GONNA BE FIRST CORRECTING THE EFFECTIVE FLOOD POINT AND FINDING OUT EXACTLY HOW IT'S BEHAVING TODAY, AND THEN WHATEVER IMPROVEMENT THAT WE'RE DOING, UM, TO THAT FLOOD POINT FOR THE CROSSING, THERE WILL BE SOME CHANNELIZATION AS, UH, EMILY MENTIONED, WHERE WE'RE GONNA BE PUTTING IN AN URBAN CHANNEL TO HELP CONTAIN THAT WATER AND HELP IT ACTUALLY PASS THROUGH THE PROPERTY.
UM, BUT WHATEVER WE DO THERE IS GONNA NEED TO HAVE THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S APPROVAL AND THE TEAM OF APPROVAL, UM, FOR US TO BE ABLE TO PUT, FOR US TO DO THAT IMPROVEMENT.
SO WE CAN'T DO CONSTRUCTION UNTIL WE HAVE THOSE APPROVALS IN PLACE.
UM, THE SECOND THING AS PART OF THAT IS WHATEVER WE'RE DOING IS AN IMPROVEMENT.
WE CANNOT RISE THE WATER SURFACE ELEVATION ON ANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS.
THAT'S NOT WITHIN A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
SO IF SOMEBODY DOES NOT HAVE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THEIR PROPERTY, AND WE CANNOT RISE THAT WATER, UH, EVEN IF THEY DO HAVE A DRAIN EASEMENT, THAT RISE HAS TO BE CONTAINED WITHIN THAT EASEMENT.
SO THOSE ARE THE RULES THAT WE PLAY IN AND THAT, AND THAT'S THE RULES THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FOLLOW, UH, GOING FORWARD.
SO AS THEN WE MENTIONED WE'RE AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS, UM, TO, TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE DRAINAGE, UM, AND START TO UNDERSTAND HOW OUR, OUR, OUR, OUR, UH, DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA IMPACT IT.
BUT IT IS JUST THE SAME AS ANY OTHER REGULATION THAT WE HAVE.
AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, AS WE GO THROUGH WITH, WITH SAW WITH TT Q ON THE EDWARDS AQUIFER REGULATIONS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF WATER TREATMENT.
UH, WE HAVE TO DO AN ASSESSMENT OF IF THERE'S ANY, UH, SIGNIFICANT GEOLOGIC FEATURES ON SITE, UH, TO DETERMINE IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF RECHARGE, UH, PROTECTION THAT WE NEED TO DO.
SO THERE'S STILL A LONG PROCESS, UH, THAT MOST OF Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH, UH, THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH BEFORE WE CAN, WE CAN GET TO THE POINT THAT WE CAN, WE CAN DO ANY CONSTRUCTION.
[01:25:01]
PART OF IT IS, IS MAKING SURE FIRST WE HAVE THE ENTITLEMENT TO DO WHAT WE WANT.YOU KNOW, CAN WE GET THE, THE ZONING IN PLACE AND CAN WE GET THE LAND USE IN PLACE TO ACTUALLY EXECUTE, UH, WHAT WE WANT TO DO? SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE HERE AT BEGINNING FOR, IS TO MAKE SURE THE FIRST PART IS THAT ARE WE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING USES? AND IF WE ARE NOW WE MOVE FORWARD AND FIGURE OUT, UH, HOW WE FOLLOW WITHIN AND THE REST OF THE REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT.
TWO, TWO MORE, UH, TWO MORE QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, UH, STAFF, JUST TO CONFIRM, SO, UM, THIS, UH, REQUEST IS IN, UH, COMPATIBLE WITH THE SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL, UM, REGIONAL AIRPORT VICINITY PLAN AND, AND THE ADJACENT, UH, NORTH SECTOR PLAN.
YES, IT IS, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE GOLDEN OBJECTIVES AT THAT TIME.
AND THEN, UM, THIS MIGHT BE A HYBRID QUESTION, UH, BETWEEN, UH, STAFF AND MS. EMILY.
SO THE CURRENT CAPACITY FOR THE AREA MARKED FOR PROPOSED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, SO AS IT IS, UM, NOW, UM, I, IN COMPARED TO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING, SO, UM, WHAT, WHAT KIND, WHAT KIND OF CAPACITY COULD THEY PUT IN THERE RIGHT NOW AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING? I THINK I'M, I'M HOPING THAT'S NOT LIKE A ZONING QUESTION BECAUSE I'M REALLY TALKING ABOUT NUMBER OF UNITS, SO, SO SORRY IF I'M CROSSING OVER
EMILY, YOU WANNA GO AHEAD? YEAH, YEAH.
UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER MCGEE, UM, THAT IS A LITTLE CLOSE TO ZONING.
I'M SORRY, MEMBER OF UNIT MM-HMM.
UH, SO YES, WE ARE KIND OF LEADING INTO THAT ZONING MISSION, WHICH, UM, YOU ALL CONSIDER LAST WEEK, UM, AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR, UM, BUT UM, RIGHT NOW IT IS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE AND, UH, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, BUT, AND WHILE I DO BELIEVE, AND CA CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, UM, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE DOES PERMIT, UM, MOST RESIDENTIAL, UM, GIVEN THAT MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED AREA FOR THIS PLAN, AS WELL AS CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLAN THAT'S JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM US.
UM, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FROM A PLANNING PRINCIPAL PERSPECTIVE, UM, IS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE.
WE ARE ALONG A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, I DUNNO HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE DRIVEN ALONG TO SALTZ BURGER, BUT IT'S A PRETTY BIG GROWTH, UM, AND CARRIES A LOT OF TRAFFIC.
SO, UM, STAIRS STEPPING DENSITY, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT GOUGING DENSITY BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION, THIS IS A SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER DENSITY PROJECT ULTIMATELY FROM A LADY'S PERSPECTIVE.
UM, WE ARE STAIRS STEPPING THAT PATTERN, UM, THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN ANY OTHER PLAN.
UM, SO THAT IS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UH, FROM THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE INTO THE ESTABLISHED FLOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS WHAT IS, UM, CURRENTLY THERE AND KIND WHAT'S ADJACENT TO US.
UM, BUT AS YOU SAW IN THE STATE PLAN, UM, THERE IS ADDITIONAL EXTRA BUFFERING FROM THAT BACK SIDE OF REDLAND RANGE OF STATES FROM WHERE WE ARE CONVINCING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THE FLOOD PLAIN AND THE PRESERVE OPEN SPACE THAT WE'D LIKE TO LEAVE INTACT.
THAT HELP ANSWER THE QUESTION? IT DOES.
COMMISSIONER MCKEE, UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER THE, UH, APPLICANT.
UM, I HAVE SEVERAL, UM, I HAVE SEVERAL COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO I, I TAKE ISSUE WITH THIS PLAN, THIS PROPOSED, UM, AMENDMENT, I GUESS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS, I WAS AQUIFER PROTECTION PLAN IN PLACE AND IS SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO, UM, TO PROTECT THE EDWARDS OFF OF HER RECHARGE ZONE.
AND, UH, LOOKING AT YOUR DRAWINGS, YOUR PLAN, UH, DIRECTLY, YES, IT'S ENTIRELY COMPASS BY RECHARGE ZONE, BUT IT ALSO, UM, DIRECTLY PAYS OVER MUD CREEK.
AND SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR ENGINEERING WAS, YOUR ENGINEER WAS SAYING ABOUT THE, UM, THE, THE FLOOD PLAIN NEEDING TO BE REMAPPED.
UM, AND SO IT LOOKED, YOU KNOW, UPON SLIDE THREE OF YOUR PRESENTATION, IT SHOWS THE CREEK RIGHT DOWN ON THE
[01:30:01]
CENTER OF YOUR PLAN WHERE YOUR STREETS ARE GONNA BE.UM, SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, ME GETTING TO BE REDRAWN OR BRINGING THAT, BUT I REALLY HAVE ISSUE WITH PAVING OVER THE CREEK.
UM, I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT AREA AND THERE'S A REASON IN MY OPINION THAT THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY HAS BEEN, HAS REMAINED UNDEVELOPED FOR SO LONG.
IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE MUD CREEK STARTS, I MEAN, IT GOES WAY UP HEADING NORTHWEST INTO, IN FACT, THERE'S A FLOOD CONTROL STRUCTURE JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF JONES BERGER, WHICH IS ACTUALLY DEPICTED IN SLIDE TWO OF YOUR PRESENTATION.
SO, YOU KNOW, DID YOUR, DID THE PROPERTY OWNER, DID YOUR, UM, YOUR, UM, DID YOUR PROPERTY OWNER ACQUIRE THIS LAND WANTING A CREEK IN HIS BACKYARD AND NOW IS TRYING TO REDEVELOP THAT LAND AND SELL IT SO HE CAN MAKE A PROFIT? I UNDERSTAND HE'S STILL GONNA LIVE THERE, BUT THAT LAND IS UNDEVELOPED, EXTENDING, LIKE I SAID, NORTHWEST SONO AND IT CONTINUES DOWN FURTHER STOP.
UM, ANOTHER COMMENT IS, SO YOU MENTIONED THE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UH, IN SLIDE FOUR OF YOUR PLAN, THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING, BUT ANYBODY WHO KNOWS THAT AREA, THAT'S ACTUALLY A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT IS, IT MIGHT BE MIAMI'S DESIGNATION FOR MULTI DENSITY, SORRY, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, BUT IT ACTUALLY IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDE.
IT'S A TWO ACRE PLUS PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT THAT'S NOT MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL AS FAR AS AS IT HAS DEVELOPED OUT.
UM, SORRY, ICHECKING ALL MY NOTES HERE.
I DON'T, I JUST, THAT'S, I GUESS I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, MORE JUST, JUST AND STUFF FOR THE COMMISSION TO THE PONDER AND TO THINK ABOUT WHEN WE START TO, UH, CONSIDER APPROVING THIS ITEM.
I UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION DID APPROVE IT 11 ZERO, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S PRUDENT PLANNING ON OUR PART TO APPROVE THIS CLIMATE CHANGE.
COMMISSIONER CARDILLO, UH, COMMISSIONER T DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? UH, THANKS, EMILY.
THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THOROUGH PRESENTATION.
IS THERE ON ONE OF THOSE SLIDES, WAS THERE A MAP OF THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD CLAIM AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS? I MISSED, UM, YES, THE FLOOD PLANE HAS KIND OF SHOWN, IT WAS ON SLIDE EIGHT, UM, AS THIS KIND OF DASH LINE THAT SHOWS WHERE BI, UM, THE THE MEDIAN DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA, THAT 5.3 ACRES AND KIND OF SLOWS DOWN TOWARDS OUR SOUTH, UM, THAT KIND OF SHOWN OUTLINED IN THOSE DASHED AREAS ON THAT LAST SLIDE, SECOND TO BLACK SLIDE, EXCUSE ME.
SO THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION THAT, THAT MAY BE ADJUSTED THAT WOULD OBVIOUSLY IMPACT PRIMARILY THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA IF THAT FLOODPLAIN EXTENDS MORE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOUTH OR TOWARDS, OR JONES BURG YOU YES, IT WOULD IMPACT, UM, AS A EC THIS MULTI-FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDE RESIDENTIAL PIECE.
UM, ANY, ANY CHANGES FROM WHAT OUR PRELIMINARY PLANS SHOW WHERE THE, THE FLOOD PLAIN SHOULD BE, UM, WHERE THE FLOOD PLAIN RUNS, UM, ANY CHANGES TO THAT EXPANSION, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AS WE GO THROUGH THE FEMA PROCESS, WE'LL HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.
UM, BUT OF COURSE IT WOULD IMPACT THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPABLE LAND WITHIN THAT MEDIUM DENSITY PIECE.
AND THAT IS MUD CREEK ITSELF THAT COMMISSIONER RIO IS TALKING ABOUT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE FLOOD PLAIN.
YEAH, THAT'S MY CREEK TO, THAT'S CLOSEST TO JONES FALLSBURG.
AND YOU'RE NOT, ARE YOU MAKING ANY PLANS TO DIVE, DIVERGE OR DIVERT THE NATURAL FLOW OF THAT CREEK? WILL IT BE ANY DOWNSTREAM IMPACT? SO THERE WON'T BE ANY DIVERSION OF IT.
WHAT THERE'S GONNA BE IS THERE'S GONNA BE SOME CHANNELIZATION OF IT, SO THERE WILL BE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CREEK ITSELF, UH, TO HELP THE, THE FLOW OF WATER THROUGH THAT AREA.
BUT AGAIN, DOWNSTREAM WE'VE GOT THE OBLIGATION, THIS IS FEMA AND CITY REGULATIONS, WE HAVE THE OBLIGATIONS THAT WE CANNOT HAVE ANY DOWNSTREAM IMPACT, UH, FROM OUR PROPERTY.
SO WHATEVER IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE DO, UM, HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO TIE BACK INTO WHERE EXISTING WATER SURFACE IS AND THE EXISTING WATER SURFACE WILL BE BASED UPON THE STUDY THAT WE DO.
UH, UH, WHAT EXISTING CONDITIONS ARE THERE TODAY? SO IT WON'T BE BASED
[01:35:01]
UPON THIS MAP.AND I, I DON'T HAVE THE SLIDES IN FRONT OF ME, SO I APOLOGIZE.
I'M NOT, I CAN'T SEE WHAT SLIDE EIGHT SHOWS, BUT THE EXISTING FEMA FLOODPLAIN IS A VERY NARROW, UH, FINGER THAT REALLY GOES THROUGH THE PROPERTY, WHICH ISN'T REAL.
I MEAN, IT IT'S MUCH WIDER THAN THAT AND WE, AND WE KNOW THAT.
UM, BUT IN ORDER FOR US TO ACTUALLY GET THIS WATER TO GO THROUGH THE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S JUST PACKING UP, UM, INSIDE OF THERE AND ONTO NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, IS THERE IS GONNA BE SOME GENERALIZATION THAT'S GONNA BE TO HAPPEN, BUT IT WILL BE IN LINE, UH, WITH EXISTING CHANNEL THAT'S THERE.
AND I GUESS KINDA, I THAT'S UPSTREAM OR DOWNSTREAM, BUT GOING WHERE IT COMES FROM JONES MALBURG, THAT'S A FAIRLY DEVELOPED AREA, CORRECT? THAT'S A BUNCH OF SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WHERE MUD CREEK IS, IS RUNNING THROUGH CURRENTLY.
UH, SO WHERE MUD CREEK IS GOING THROUGH, I'M GONNA SAY GOING, UM, AS YOU GO DOWN OR UP JONES MAL BERGER, THERE'S, THERE'S
AND THEN OF COURSE YOU HAVE THE, THE BIG CENTER DAM, UH, THAT'S ON THE, UM, NORTHWEST SIDE OF, OF JONES MALTSBERGER.
AND WE DO HAVE TO TAKE THAT DAM INTO ACCOUNT AS WELL AS FAR THE, THE CALCULATIONS, UH, AND WHAT WE DO IN THE MODELING OF THIS FLOOD POINT AND WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT DAM DURING DIFFERENT STORM EVENTS.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY OPEN.
WELL, C TWO I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ACTUALLY IF THAT'S OPEN SPACE OR NOT.
THE CREEK RUNS SUCH QUICK ON TOP OF YEAH, THAT C TWO PIECES ACTUALLY, IF I MADE THE LIN BRANCH, UH, REDLAND OAK COMMUNITY CHURCH, UM, OKAY, SO THAT'S KIND OF RIGHT, KIND OF ACROSS THE STREET IS WHERE THE CHURCH IS.
AND THEN FURTHER UP REDLAND ON THE KIND OF OTHER SIDE OF THE DAM, SARAH'S PROPERTY IS, UM, BOTH A FOOD SERVICE TESTING LAB AS WELL AS A OUTDOOR BATTERY DISPLAY.
SO, UM, AND A LAW OFFICE AND SEVERAL OTHER KIND OF MIXED INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES.
AND PRINCIPLE I SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS, YOU KNOW, MIXED USE OF IN SOMEWHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PRINCIPLE, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, THAT AREA.
BUT AGAIN, I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ON IMPACTS, UH, THE, TO THE WATERSHED FLOODING, BUT OF COURSE THAT WILL BE, UH, UH, FURTHER IN THE PROCESS.
IF, IF YOU GUYS CAN'T MEET THOSE STANDARDS, THEN THE PROJECT WOULDN'T BE APPROVED.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
WELL, I APPRECIATE, I HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENTS.
UH, COMMISSIONER AURORA
SORRY, I HAD TO SWITCH COMPUTERS.
MY OTHER COMPUTER KEPT CRASHING.
UM, I, IF I DIDN'T HEAR EVERYTHING, UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
MY CONCERNS WERE THE SAME AS COMMISSIONER CARRILLO MENTIONED.
UM, SO, UH, SHE ADDRESSED EVERYTHING THAT I WAS THINKING OF, SO THANK YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONER PECK, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE A GENERAL, UH, COMMENT I SUPPOSE.
UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AND CONSIDERING THIS TODAY, THAT OUR PURVIEW TODAY, THE THING WE'RE VOTING ON IS NOT WHETHER THE PROJECT DRAINS OR WHETHER THERE'S TREES OR WHETHER THERE'S
OUR PURVIEW TODAY IS THE CHANGE IN CARTEL AND SPACE AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND MEDIUM DENSITY, THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT.
THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE, UH, UM, THAT EVERYBODY'S BRINGING UP THAT I KNOW A LOT OF THE, UH, ADJACENT LANDOWNERS HAVE, THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE BROUGHT UP WILL GET RESOLVED AS THE PROJECT MOVES THROUGH THE PROCESS AND IT WON'T GET OUT OF THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROCESS WITHOUT HAVING ALL THOSE I'S DOTTED IN THE THESE PROCESS.
I'M JUST REMINDING EVERYBODY OUR PURVIEW IS VERY SIMPLE TODAY IS, DOES, DOES IT LOOK LIKE LOW DENSITY, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL? UH, WHEN YOU LOOK AT, UH, THE SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ALL THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AROUND IT, REALLY THE ONLY THING THAT MAKES SENSE.
COMMISSIONER PECK, UH, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UH, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CUDI AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PROPHET FOR ASKING, UM, SO MANY, UM, DETAILED QUESTIONS.
I APPRECIATE YOUR EXPERTISE, UM, ON THIS TOPIC.
UM, ONE QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER CARILLO.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO REQUEST, UM, AN UPDATE, UM, AS THIS PROJECT PROGRESSES, UM, FOR STAFF TO UPDATE US ON, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIMELINE WOULD LOOK LIKE, UM, BUT IS THAT SOMETHING, IS
[01:40:01]
THAT WITHIN, UM, I GUESS WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO GET TO, TO GET PROJECT UPDATES? YEAH, I THINK STAFF CLARIFY, BUT I THINK WE'RE ALWAYS ALLOWED TO, UM, REQUEST ANY SORT OF UPDATE ON PROJECTS.AND SO IF THIS IS SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF A LOT OF YOUR QUESTIONS BEING FURTHER DOWN THE LINE, UM, THAT YOU'D LIKE TO BE UPDATED ON, BUT STAFF PLEASE PROVIDE CLARIFICATION.
UM, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT YOU CAN ASK THAT WE CAN PROVIDE BRIEFINGS ON DURING WORK SESSION.
WELL, I GUESS ASSUMING, WELL, I'M ASSUMING, I THINK IF THIS PLAN DOES GET, UH, APPROVED OUT OF PLANNING COMMISSION AND OUT OF COUNCIL, THEN YES, I WOULD LIKE, UH, THIS PROJECT
AND THEN, UH, NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
AGAIN, THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER PECK FOR PROVIDING THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION, LOOKING AT THE LOCATION, UM, AS FAR AS WHAT'S ALREADY DEVELOPED IN THE AREA, AND THEN OF COURSE WITH IT BEING, UM, RIGHT OFF OF THAT MAIN CORRIDOR OF
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
UH, COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
UM, SOME OF THE AREA HAD THE LAND USAGE CATEGORY OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, BUT THAT'S ALL PRIVATE PROPERTY, CORRECT? IT'S NOT CITY OWNED PROPERTY OR ANY PUBLIC PROPERTY THAT WILL ACTUALLY BECOME A PARK.
IT'S ALL PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED IN AT SOME POINT IN TIME.
IT CAN BE DEVELOPED BASED ON ITS CURRENT ZONING.
UH, JUST TO LET THE COMMISSIONERS KNOW THAT, UH, PREVIOUSLY THE OLDER PLANS WERE ADOPTED, UH, FOLLOWING MAYBE FLOODPLAIN OR, OR, OR CREEKS OR ANY OF THOSE, UM, TRIBUTARIES THAT WERE ALREADY ON THE GROUND.
AND, AND, UM, UM, CLASSIFYING PROPERTIES, PRIVATE PROPERTIES IS PARKS AND OPEN SPACE, UH, BECAUSE IT DOES, UH, LIMIT THE PROPERTY.
SO WE ONLY, UH, SHOULD BE DESIGNATING PUBLIC, UH, OWNED, LIKE GOVERNMENT OWNED PROPERTIES, AS CALLED PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.
UM, AS STATED EARLIER, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ASK, UH, QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MAJOR CONCERNS THAT I HAD REGARDING THE RECHARGE ZONE AND THE FLOODING SITUATION.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE, UH, SOUNDS LIKE THE RIVER AUTHORITY AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL BE TRYING TO REMEDY THOSE SITUATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, AND IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, THEN WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER PR MOVED FOR APPROVAL.
SECOND, WE HAVE A PROMOTION, UH, MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM COMMISSIONER PROFIT AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER PECK STAFF, CAN YOU DO THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER JACKSON? YES.
COMMISSIONER ROHR ALLEG GREENY? NO.
MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE BY VOTE OF SIX TO TWO.
[19. 20-3176 PLAN AMENDMENT CASE PA-2020-11600016 (Council District 7): A request by Hector Perez, representative, for approval of a resolution to amend the Northwest Community Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Master Plan of the City, by changing the future land use from "Low Density Residential" to "Community Commercial" on Lot 24 and Lot 25, Block 4, NCB 18655, located at 7239 Still Brook Drive. Staff recommends Denial, with an Alternate Recommendation. (Associated Zoning Case Z2020-10700067) (Mercedes Rivas, Senior Planner, (210) 207-0215, mercedes.rivas2@sanantonio.gov, Development Services Department)]
AND HERE.NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER 1919.
AGAIN, THIS IS 50 PLANNING MANAGER.
IT IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE, THE NORTHWEST COMMUNITY PLAN BY CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE FROM LOW DEAD CITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 72 39 SILVERBROOK DRIVE.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PLAN AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO REZONE FROM R SIX RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO C ONE LIGHT COMMERCIAL.
THE PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT WITH A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD GROCERY STORE IN 1979 AND HAS MAINTAINED COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY UNTIL RECENTLY TO ALLOW CONTINUED COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.
STAFF RECOMMEND THE ALTERNATIVE OF NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
IT IS LESS INTENSE AND MORE APPROPRIATE AS LAND USE DESIGNATION.
THE C ONE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT IS ALSO CLASSIFIED AS A PERMITTED DISTRICT IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USE CATEGORY.
THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY WILL BE AMENDING THE REQUEST TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL STAFF, THEREFORE RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WITH AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
THERE WERE 38 NOTICES MAILED, NONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND NO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
[01:45:01]
MS. VICTORIA EZ.OH, VICTORIA GARZA, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOUR PHONE MS. GARZA? CAN YOU HEAR ME? HELLO? HELLO? HELLO? HELLO? OKAY.
HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO MUTE YOUR MY FEED SO THAT YOU CAN SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION.
HELLO? HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY, THERE YOU GO.
UH, I WASN'T OPPOSED TO THE, THE AMENDMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, YOU DID JUST SAY DO YOU WANNA TELL THE COMMISSION ABOUT YOUR PROJECT A LITTLE BIT.
SO WHAT, WHAT THE GOAL IS WHEN WE DO THE REZONING IS TO, I I, I MEAN AS LONG AS NC ACCOMMODATES RESTAURANTS, I MEAN, I, I'M FINE WITH THAT, THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE ISSUE WITH HAVING THE, THE ZONING WHEN IT'S CLEARLY A, A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY FROM HAVING, I MEAN, HAVING A OWN RESIDENTIAL, I'M, I'M SO LIMITED TO WHAT I MEAN I CAN CONVERT OR WHAT, WHAT I CAN HAVE ALLOWED OUT OF THERE IF I WANTED TO DO SOMETHING SIMPLE AS A STORE.
I MEAN, I'M VERY, I'M VERY LIMITED TO USE.
SO I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE GOING THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS GIVES ME, GIVES ME MORE, I MORE OPTIONS OF, I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT I'M GONNA DO WITH THE PROPERTY.
SO, UH, THE APPLICANT DID REQUEST THAT A CHANGE FROM INSTEAD OF A COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, CORRECT? YES.
THEN WE'LL GO TO, UH, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONER MCGEE, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR OUR STAFF OF THE APPLICANT? I DO NOT.
UH, THIS JUST A QUESTION OF STAFF.
THIS WAS RE OWNED AS RESIDENTIAL? YES.
THERE, IT'S, AND THE COMMERCIAL USE HAS BEEN PERMITTED UP TO THIS POINT, OR IT'S NOT PRESENT BEING, IT WAS A NONCONFORMING USE AND THEN IT SEEMS TO BE AN OPERATION AND SO NOW THEY WANNA PUT A NEW BUSINESS IN THERE, BUT IN ORDER TO DO SO, THEY'VE GOTTA GET THE PROPER LAND USE IN ZONING.
COMMISSIONER AURORA EGRIN? NO QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER BECK? NO QUESTIONS.
UH, SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, WE'LL HAVE A MOTION.
WE MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, UM, WITH THE ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER ROYAL GREENY.
WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER GONZALES AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER ROYAL GREENY.
UH, STAFF WE CAN DO THE ROLL CALL MOTION IS TO APPROVE AS AMENDED BY THE APPLICANT'S NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON? YES.
MOTION PASSES TO APPROVE BY VOTE OF EIGHT TO ZERO.
AND NEXT ON THE AGENDA WILL BE ITEM NUMBER
[20. 20-2489 PLAN AMENDMENT CASE PA-2020-11600017 (Council District 7): A request by Marylinda Rios, applicant, for approval of a Resolution to amend the Near Northwest Community Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Master Plan of the City, by changing the future land use from “Neighborhood Commercial” to “Community Commercial” on Lot 1, Block 1, NCB 6692, save and except 0.0002 acres out of NCB 6692, located at 1901 Fredericksburg Road. Staff recommends Denial. (Victoria Castro, Planner, (210) 207-2736, Victoria.Castro@Sanantonio.gov, Development Services).]
20.ITEM NUMBER 20 IS A REQUEST TO AMEND THE NEAR NORTHWEST COMMUNITY
[01:50:01]
PLAN BY CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 1901 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.THE APPLICANT CEASE THE PLAN AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO REONE FROM C TWO NA COMMERCIAL NON-ALCOHOLIC SALES DISTRICT TO C TWO COMMERCIAL DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDS MAINTAINING CONSISTENCY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
HOWEVER, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USE ONLY ALLOWS C ONE LIGHT COMMERCIAL ZONING.
THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THAT THEY WILL BE EXPANDING OR RESTORING THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING AND WILL BE EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM SIZE OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET ALLOWED IN C ONE.
THUS, THEY SEEK TO KEEP THE CURRENT BASE ZONING OF C TWO.
AND THIS REQUIRES THE PLAN AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ON MAY 5TH.
THE ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF C TWO BY A VOTE OF 11 TO ZERO STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
THAT DOES CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION.
UH, THERE WERE 23 NOTICES MAILED, ONE RECEIVED IN FAVOR, NONE IN OPPOSITION, AND THE JEFFERSON WOODLAWN LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS OR WORK.
AND KEITH, DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT? YES, MA'AM.
ARE YOU THERE? YOU'LL HAVE TO UNMUTE YOUR PHONE, MA'AM.
MA'AM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? THERE? THERE YOU GO.
UH, YOU ARE, UH, BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
UH, MY NAME IS MARY LINDA RIOS AND I LIVE AT 2 0 3 NORTH DRIVE AND I, UM, OWN THE BUILDING AT 1901 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD.
AND WE ARE REALLY ANXIOUS TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT AND BRING BACK THE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING.
UM, AND I BELIEVE YOU ALL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT, AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY OF THE QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
YOU HEAR? YES, WE WE CAN HEAR.
UM, STAFF, WAS THERE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ONE? NO, SIR.
UH, IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS.
UH, STARTING WITH COMMISSIONER MCKEE, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UM, LET'S SEE.
SO, UM, CAN YOU TALK A JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HISTORY? SO YOU, UM, TELL US AGAIN, UM, YOU'RE WANTING TO, UH, TAKE IT BACK TO ITS HISTORY.
SO, UM, WHAT DO YOU HAVE NOW AND WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO, UH, DO? OKAY.
UM, THE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING BEGAN IN 19, UH, 19 AND THEY FINISHED, UH, THE, THE BUILDING IN 1925.
I HAVE THE NEWSPAPER CLIPPING, UH, WELL A COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER CLIPPING.
AND I ALSO OWN THE BUILDING AT 1909 FREDERICKSBURG ROAD, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE THE JEWEL OF ART DANCE STUDIO.
SO I DECIDED WHEN THE GENTLEMAN LEFT NEXT DOOR, WHEN HE LEFT, I SAID, THIS IS JUST PERFECT AND THIS IS GREAT.
I'M HOPING THAT ONE DAY SOMEBODY CAN SEE WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO AND PUT BACK THE BUILDING THAT THAT IS MISSING.
UM, THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW AT 1909 FREDERICKSBURG IS A COPY OF THE SAME BUILDING THAT WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
IT WAS LIKE, UH, SEPARATE IN HALF AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL ALLOW ME, BUT IF THEY DO, I WOULD LIKE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO BRING BACK THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING AND, AND RESTORE IT TO ITS NATURAL STATE, WHICH WAS IN, UH, 1925.
AND IT, IT'S A VERY BEAUTIFUL BUILDING.
AND UM, SO ONCE THAT BUILDING, IF I'M ALLOWED TO ATTACH IT TO THE OTHER BUILDING, IT WOULD EXCEED THE, THE 500 SQUARE FEET.
AND SO THAT'S THE REASON I WANTED TO LEAVE IT AT THE C TWO.
AND I KNOW CITY COUNCILMAN, UH,
[01:55:01]
DISTRICT SEVEN, THEY'RE BEHIND ME.THE, UH, THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THE, THE BOARD, UH, OF ADMINISTRATION FROM THE, THE MONTICELLO, I'VE BEEN TO THEIR MEETINGS, THEY'RE EXCITED.
I KNOW THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS EXCITED.
THEY WANNA KNOW WHAT I'M GOING TO SERVE.
AND WE'RE, WE ALSO WANT, UM, UH, TO HAVE SOME FORM OF MEETINGS OR SEE WHAT WE COULD DO ABOUT RAISING MONEY, UH, TO BEAUTIFY AND TO BRING BACK, UH, THE, THE, THE LOVELY NATURE OF, UH, THE, THE MONTICELLO AND ALSO THE DECO.
AND I, I WOULD LOVE TO BE PART OF, YOU KNOW, RECREATING, UH, THE HISTORY OF, UH, OF THE BUILDING THAT WAS THERE ONCE BEFORE.
I I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS? UH, WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO, UH, WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE COMMISSIONERS INDIVIDUAL IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAR? YES.
YOUR, YOU WANTED TO RESTORE THE BUILDING TO ITS 1925 STATUS.
DO YOU HAVE A, A, UH, BUSINESS USE IN MIND? UH, WHAT YOU HAVE OR FOR WHAT IS YOUR STORE DOING? UH, YES.
WE WANT TO MAKE IT A, UH, FAMILY RESTAURANT.
AND WE'RE PLANNING ON, UH, SINCE MY DAUGHTER IS IN CHOREOGRAPHY, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME PERFORMANCES THERE FROM TIME TO TIME, NOT AN ON AN EVERYDAY BASIS.
AND WE WERE THINKING OF MAYBE HAVING SOME SOFT PIANO MUSIC, UH, SOME DAYS.
BUT WE DO WANNA HAVE IT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, WE DEFINITELY ARE, ARE WE HAVE OUR MINDSET ON A RESTAURANT.
CAN YOU REMIND ME WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THIS? YES.
UM, STAFF, WHEN WE ARE REVIEWING THIS, WE, WE LOOKED AT THE CORRIDOR AND OVERALL THE CORRIDOR IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
AND SO IT, IT, UH, THE APPROPRIATE
OF COURSE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THINGS CHANGED ALONG THE WAY AND WE CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND MRS. UH, RIO'S DESIRE TO HAVE A, A BIG, A BIGGER BUILDING FOOTPRINT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
UM, AND WHEN, OR IS THIS, IS THIS COMMUNITY SECTOR PLAN, UH, SLATED TO BE HE DESIGNED UNTIL SOON? MICHELLE, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS ONE IS IN THE CYCLE FOR UPDATING WHAT IT MAY BE LIKE PHASE THREE.
SO, UH, I'M NOT REAL SURE ON THAT, BUT, UH, THIS IS DEFINITELY A PLAN THAT IS WHAT, 18 YEARS OLD.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT SHE'S PROPOSING WOULD, UM, FIT WITHIN THE, UM, YOU KNOW, ALREADY SURROUNDING IN THE COMMUNITY KNOW MINUS THE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING BUILDING IT SOUNDS LIKE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PROPHET.
UH, YEAH, I'M A LITTLE KIND OF VAGUE ON HOW THIS WOULD BE INCONGRUENT.
I UNDERSTAND, UH, PLAN IS PRETTY OLD, BUT THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE OUTTA LINE FOR WHAT'S IN THE COMMUNITY AND PERHAPS ENHANCE THE COMMUNITY.
IS THERE ANY, HIS HISTORICAL CONSIDERATION, IF SHE'S RESTORING THIS BUILDING, IS THIS GONNA BE SUBJECT TO ANY HISTORIC DISTRICTS APPROVAL? IT ISN'T A HISTORIC DISTRICT, SO IT'LL HAVE A HISTORIC PURVIEW.
SO ANY IMPROVEMENTS SHE PROPOSES WILL BE APPROVED? YES.
UH, NO FURTHER FURTHER COMMENTS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ROHR GREEN.
UM, I, I THINK MY QUESTION'S BEEN ANSWERED.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING.
SO THE BANK ZONING IS CURRENTLY C TWO, UM, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO A PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW C TWO PLUS ALCOHOL SALES.
IS THAT THE QUESTION? THE, THE MAIN ISSUE,
[02:00:01]
YES.AND THERE'S JUST, UH, MOST OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW THIS AREA THERE, THERE'S A PIZZERIA ON THE NEXT CORNER DOWN WHICH SELLS ALCOHOL AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS AROUND THERE THAT SELL ALCOHOL.
SO THAT USE DOESN'T SEEM INCONGRUENT WITH WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS IS REALLY JUST A, A FORMALITY, UM, TO ALLOW THE USE THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA.
IS THAT CORRECT? AM I MISSING SOMETHING? NO, THAT THAT SOUNDS CORRECT.
I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK TO THE NORTH ON THE MAP, THERE IS MIXED USE UP THERE.
THIS COULD BE ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PLAN CAME THROUGH, BUT THE UPDATED ZONING NEVER FOLLOWED, UH, BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER REASON, STAFFING OR THAT THERE WERE OTHER PRIORITIES AT THE TIME.
SO IT DOES SIT ON ITS OWN ISLAND.
THERE IS MERIT IN, UH, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
UM, WE WERE JUST LOOKING TO TRY TO MAINTAIN THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE EXISTING PLAN.
COMMISSIONER PECK, I DO NOT HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY ANSWERED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.
UH, QUICK QUESTION FOR STEP, DO THE EXISTING ADJACENT USES MATCH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL OR COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL? I PULL UP THIS, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE ZONING MAP IN MY, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME THAT ARE CONSISTENT AND SOME THAT ARE NOT.
THEY MAY JUST BE EXISTING NONCONFORMING BUSINESS CASES.
YEAH, BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS A THEATER CLOSE BY, LIKE ACROSS THE STREET.
MAYBE THERE IS A THEATER ACROSS THE STREET.
THIS IS RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE WOODLAWN THEATER.
UM, THERE'S A RESTAURANT DOWN THE WAY.
THERE'S A LETTA PLACE ACROSS THE STREET.
WE'RE GONNA PULL UP THE ZONING MAP FOR YOU.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT JUST DIDN'T EVER BENEFIT FROM A DOWN ZONING IN THIS AREA.
THE EXISTING ZONING IS T THREE AND C TWO ACROSS THE STREET, AND THEN NEXT DOOR IS ALSO B2 AND A.
UM, I BELIEVE I MIGHT HAVE ASKED THIS DURING WORK SECTION, BUT IT WAS, WAS THERE ANOTHER WAY THEY COULD TRY TO GET TO WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THE EXCEPTIONS OR LIMITING USES OR ANY, ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE? NOT WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO EXPAND THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
AND SO, OKAY, UH, IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, THEN WE CAN HAVE A MOTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
SORRY, I DON'T HAVE LIKE A MOTION IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FROM COMMISSIONER AURORA REY.
UH, DO WE HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONER PROFIT? SECOND.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND FOR COMMISSIONER PROFIT.
THE STAFF CAN DO THE ROLL CALL.
I HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
COMMISSIONER WAR ALLEG GREENY.
[21. 20-2787 Consideration and Action on the Minutes from March 11, 2020.]
NEXT ITEM, THE AGENDA IS A MEETING MINUTES.ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE MEETING MINUTES? THERE BEING NONE.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE PAST MEETING.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ AND CARILLO ON THE MEETING MINUTES VOTE.
COMMISSIONER ROYAL LAG GREENY? YES.
I WAS AT A COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.
[02:05:02]
YES.SEVEN TO ZERO WITH ONE ABSTAINED.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER STAFF COMMENTS? NOTIFICATIONS? THAT'S IT.
THAT BEING SAID, IT IS FOUR 12 AND MEETING ADJOURNED.