[00:00:05]
WE ARE LIVE, UM, FOR EVERYONE WATCHING ONLINE, WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY.
WE HAD A TECHNICAL ISSUE THAT WE HAD TO RESOLVE AND WE ARE NOW READY TO BEGIN.
UM, YOU COULD GIVE US THE CALL TO ORDER.
JEFFREY? YES, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR FRIDAY, JUNE 19TH, 2020.
[Roll Call]
WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.UH, BEFORE WE BEGIN, WE DO HAVE A QUICK, UH, RELATION SERVICES.
[Chairman's Statement]
CAN WE GET THE CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT? THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN VICE CHAIR SCOTT CARPENTER.
IT IS A FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER IN ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN, IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY, IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY AND FOR DEMOLITIONS.
AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION WILL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL.
AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH THIS MEETING THROUGH LIVESTREAM.
THEY CAN ALSO LISTEN TO THE MEETING THROUGH AUDIO ONLY BY CALLING 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3.
THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED IN SPANISH.
FOR THOSE APPLICANTS OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT THAT REQUIRE TRANSLATION SERVICES, THE INTERPRETER WILL TRANSLATE OVER THE PHONE AS NECESSARY.
APPLICANTS WILL NEED TO SUMMARIZE THEIR STATEMENTS AND BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE.
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION HAVE A MAXIMUM OF TWO MINUTES FOR ALL THEIR COMMENTS.
APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMIT.
PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ALL WORK.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR WORK APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS.
NO WORK OF ANY TYPE IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS.
AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, I'LL ASK O H P STAFF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING.
YEAH, THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE FOR BEING EARLY.
[20-3826 Address/Description: 335 TRAIL HDRC Case No.: 2020-201 Historic District Name: River Road RIO District: RIO-1 Request: Consideration and action of an application for a multi-unit residential development: A. Waiver of the one-year waiting period of subsequent application for multi-unit residential development as provided for by Section 35-451(f) of the Unified Development Code, and if approved; B. Consideration of a request of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Construction City Council Dist.: 1]
HAVE A ONE CASE TODAY.LAUREN, CAN YOU PULL UP THE SCREEN AND WE'LL BEGIN SHORTLY WITH STAFF INTRODUCING THE CASE INTO THE RECORD AND READING OUR RECOMMENDATION.
UM, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE ON THE LINE WHO WILL THEN HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT.
WE'LL GIVE A ONE MINUTE WARNING TO THEM, UM, TO WRAP UP THEIR COMMENTS.
UM, WE WILL THEN PROVIDE ALL OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WE RECEIVED FOR THIS ITEM ON YOUR SCREEN.
SHE CAN SEE THAT WE HAVE 15 SUBMISSIONS THAT'LL BE READ BY STAFF.
UM, I'LL START BY READING THOSE FIRST.
UM, THEN WE HAVE FOUR VOICEMAIL MESSAGES TO PLAY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
UM, AFTER THAT THERE ARE AN ADDITIONAL FOUR LETTERS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED IN YOUR REVIEW FOLDERS THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT AT ANY MOMENT OF THE HEARING.
UM, AND THEN A, A HARD COPY OF ALL THE COMMENTS THAT'LL BE READ ARE ALSO PROVIDED IN FOLDER.
UM, ONCE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING, UM, THE APPLICANT RECEIVE ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.
UM, THEN WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION.
UH, FINALLY A REMINDER THAT THERE ARE TWO ACTION ITEMS REQUIRED FOR THE ITEM TODAY.
UM, THE U D C SAYS THAT THE FIRST ITEM, WHICH IS CONSIDERATION OF THE WAIVER, UM, CAN BE PASSED WITH A MAJORITY OF THE FULL H C R C MEMBERSHIP, WHICH IS SIX.
UM, A MOTION FOR THE SECOND ITEM, WHICH IS THE ACTUARY REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PROJECT CAN BE PASSED WITH A SIMPLE MAJORITY OF THOSE PRESENT TODAY.
UM, SO JUST DEPENDING ON HOW MANY COMMISSIONERS WE HAVE PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE MOTION, THAT'LL BE A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
WITH THAT, UM, EDWARD, YOU CAN READ THE CASE INTO THE RECORD.
[00:05:01]
R C CASE NUMBER 2020 2 MILLION 1 335 TRAIL ITEM A, THE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF A WAIVER PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 35 4 51 F TO ACCEPT AND REVIEW THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE REQUEST DESCRIBED BELOW.ITEM B, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
23 UNITS ON THE VACANT LOT LOCATED AT 3 35 TRAIL.
THE PROPERTY FEATURES LOTS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY ONLY, AS WELL AS THOSE THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN BOTH THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY AND THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES TO FEATURE TWO AND THREE STORIES AND HEIGHT.
ACCESS TO THE SITE WILL BE PROVIDED FROM TRAIL STREET AND WESTSIDE STREET.
FOR ITEM A STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A WAIVER TO ACCEPT AND TO ACCEPT AND REVIEW THE APPLICATION BASED ON FINDING B ITEM B.
IF A WAIVER IS APPROVED, THEN STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE PARKING CONFIGURATION ON TRAIL STREET BE REVISED RESERVE FRONT LAWN OR GARDEN SPACE WITHIN THE FRONT YARD.
SETBACK OF EACH UNIT IN FRONT OF EACH PRIMARY ENTRANCE S FACING TRAIL.
NO MORE THAN 50% OF THE STREET FRONTAGE ALONG TRAIL MAY CONSIST OF SURFACE PARKING SPACES AND ALL PARKING AREAS MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO A COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE AND BUFFER PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE U D C.
ANY ADDITIONAL OFF STREET PARKING SPACES IF REQUIRED BY ZONING, MUST BE RELOCATED TO THE INTERIOR OF THE SITE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE U D C TWO, THAT FRONT SETBACKS ALONG ATCH BE ACCURATELY REPRESENTED AND THAT ALL PORTIONS OF BUILDING ONE OR TWO MEET OR EXCEED THE FRONT SETBACK ESTABLISHED BY THE PRIMARY WALL PLANES OF THE EXISTING HOMES ON RESEARCH PER FINDING.
E THREE THAT ALL WINDOWS FOLLOW STAFF STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS AND CONSTRUCTION IS NOTED IN FINDING N OR THAT ALL GANG WINDOWS BE SEPARATED BY A MILLION OF AT LEAST SIX INCHES IN WIDTH.
AS NOTED IN FI IN THE FINDINGS FIVE, THAT THE PROPOSED STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFS FEATURE PANELS THAT ARE 18 TO 21 INCHES WIDE SEAS THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCHES IN HEIGHT, A CRIMP RIDGE SEAM OR A LOW PROFILE RIDGE CAP AND A STANDARD GAL BALLOON FINISH.
IF A LOW PROFILE RIDGE CAP IS USED, IT MUST BE SUBMITTED TO O H P STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
ADDITIONALLY, ALL OTHER MATERIALS ARE TO ADHERE TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OUTLINED IN FINDING IN SIX THAT THE APPLICANT USE A FOUNDATION HEIGHT THAT IS WITHIN ONE FOOT.
OF THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY ON TRAIL IS NOTED IN FINDING L SEVEN THAT ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT BE SCREENED FROM VIEW AT THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IS NOTED IN FINDING O EIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLY WITH ALL TRANSPORTATION AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS REGARDING EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS, AUTOMOBILE ACCESS, STORM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND PARKING NINE, THAT THE PROPOSED FENCING AND TRELLIS ELEMENTS BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
ONCE FURTHER DEVELOPED IS NOTED IN FINDING V AND 10, THE ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SHALL COMPILE WITH ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING ARCHEOLOGY.
THE UPPER LABORA SEIA SHALL BE PRESERVED AND SHALL NOT BE IMPACTED BY NEW CONSTRUCTION.
STAFF HAS GENERAL CONCERN ABOUT THE SENSITIVITY, SENSITIVITY OF THE SITE AND THE IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION TO THE ASAKIA DETAILED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN SHOULD BE DEVELOPED AND PROVIDED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL.
THAT INCLUDES THE LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION AND PROXIMITY TO THE HISTORIC YET AND MEASURES TAKEN TO MITIGATE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION.
THE U D C SECTION 3 5 672 DOES NOT ALLOW DRAINAGE INTO THE ASAKIA.
MOREOVER, THE FORMAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN SHOULD IDENTIFY NO SUBSURFACE WORK UTILITIES OR GRADING WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE XIA.
INFILL PROTECTION OF THE ASAKIA SHOULD INCLUDE ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING, TILT FENCING, AND T FENCING AT A BUFFER DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET FROM THE FEATURE.
NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES WILL OCCUR WITHIN THE BUFFER AREA.
THIS, THIS FENCING SHOULD BE PRESENT ON ONSITE UNTIL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED.
AS STATED PREVIOUSLY, THE ASAKIA SHALL NOT BE USED FOR STORMWATER DRAINAGE.
FURTHERMORE, THE ASAKIA SHALL NOT BE USED FOR STORAGE EQUIPMENT CLEANING OR ANY OTHER USE DURING DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD IMPACT THE FEATURE THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED THAT THEY WILL COMPLY WITH THE STIPULATION.
UM, IF THE APPLICANT'S THERE, UM, YOU CAN BEGIN YOUR PRESENTATION AND WE'LL START THE CLOCK.
UH, GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS.
[00:10:01]
I SAID JAMES MCKNIGHT, BRIAN ORTIZ, 1 1 2 EAST PECAN AND I'M GONNA BE SHARING WITH MY TIME WITH DAVID, THE APPLICANT WHO'LL SPEAK NEXT.UM, FIRST OF ALL, I DO WANNA THANK EVERYBODY FOR BEING HERE EARLY ON A FRIDAY MORNING.
I THINK IT'S, UM, FOR THIS PROJECT, I THINK IT'S, IT FEELS A LITTLE SURREAL THAT WE'RE BACK AGAIN TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT, BUT, UH, ULTIMATELY I DO THINK IT'S FOR THE BETTER.
UH, AS MUCH AS I DISAGREE WITH HOW THE PROCESS HAS UNFOLDED, IT HAS RESULTED IN THE BEST MULTIFAMILY PROJECT FOR THIS SITE.
THE PROJECT HAS RESPONDED TO EVERY STAKEHOLDER GROUP, INCLUDING THE COMMISSIONER'S, O H P, STAFF, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND EVEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
SO, BUT BEFORE I GO INTO DETAIL, I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GIVE BIG PICTURE CONTEXT.
AS YOU KNOW, THE DECISION TO APPROVE THE PROJECT DESIGN DECEMBER WAS CHALLENGED AS CORY WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE WAIVER AND THE WAIVER THAT WE'RE REQUESTING.
AND THE APPROVAL THAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS BASED ON NEW SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF CHANGES TO THE PROJECT.
THE CHANGES ARE NOT ONLY SUBSTANTIAL, BUT THEY'RE POSITIVE AS INDICATED BY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH AN ASSIST FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, COMMENTS BY SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS.
UM, YOU KNOW, BRIEFLY THE, THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE DONE HERE, WE'VE ELIMINATED AN ENTIRE UNIT ON TRAIL STREET RECONFIGURED, TRAIL STREET LAYOUT TO MOVE THE HAMMERHEAD LOCATION.
WE LOWERED ALL OF THE HEIGHTS ALONG TRAIL STREET TO TWO STORIES, UM, ELIMINATED FRONT FACING GARAGES, REDUCED OUR LOT COVERAGE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND OVERALL RESERVED THE HERITAGE OAK AND CREATED A COURTYARD AROUND IT IMPROVED THE OVERALL ARCHITECTURE OF CHARACTER TO REFLECT HISTORIC ELEMENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING FRONT, FRONT PORCH AND COLUMN DETAILS AND FRONT WALKWAYS CONNECTING TRAIL STREET TO THE UNITS.
SO AS I THINK WE'VE MADE CLEAR, WE HAVE MADE INCREDIBLE CHANGES AND ALL OF THEM ARE FOR THE BETTER.
SO IN THAT WAY, THE PROCESS HAS ACTUALLY WORKED.
UM, DO YOU KNOW, THIS IS A REALLY TRULY UNIQUE AND TRANSITIONAL SITE AND I WANT EVERYBODY TO KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN WE'RE VIEWING THIS DESIGN.
I THINK TOO OFTEN WE'VE HEARD COMMENTS COMPARING OUR DESIGN TO HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOW THE GUIDELINES ARE ENFORCED.
I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS, BUT IT BEARS EMPHASIZING THIS IS NOT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
WE'RE DIFFERENT AND WE SHOULD BE EVALUATED IN THAT CONTEXT.
THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN ZONED FOR APARTMENT AND MULTIFAMILY USE SINCE 1938.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN DIFFERENT FROM THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HAVING SAID THAT, WE STILL MEET ALL THE GUIDELINES.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR VARIANCES OR SPECIAL TREATMENTS, LOOSE INTERPRETATION OF THE GUIDELINES GUIDE.
WE'RE ONLY ASKING THAT YOU KEEP IN MIND WHERE THE SITE IS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HOW IT SERVES AS A TRANSITION BETWEEN SINGLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTH AND LARGER MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH.
ALL OF IT WHILE FOLLOWING AND MEETING THE GUIDELINES FOR HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE CHALLENGE HAS BEEN GREAT.
HOW DO YOU DESIGN A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT IN A HISTORIC SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD? WELL, THIS IS HOW WE'VE RESPONDED TO EVERYTHING WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN ASKED OF US, AND THE RESULT IS THE BEST PROJECT FOR THE SITE AND ONE THAT IS TRULY DESERVING OF FINAL APPROVAL TODAY.
SO, UH, I WOULD LIKE, I LIKE TO ASK FOR SOME REBUTTAL TIME AT THE END.
I THINK, UH, COREY MENTIONED THAT, BUT FROM HERE I WILL GIVE IT TO DAVID.
YEAH, WELL THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING.
UM, WE HAVE A LONG PRESENTATION WITH A LOT OF VISUALS, BUT DUE TO OUR, OUR TIME CONSTRAINTS AND TIME SENSITIVITY, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THESE VERY QUICKLY.
UM, SO THE DIVIDED INTO THREE SECTIONS, THE FIRST SECTION DEALS WITH THE UNIQUE CONTEXT OF THE SITE, THE SECOND DEALS WITH OUR NEW DESIGN AND HOW WE THINK WE'RE GONNA BRING NEW LIFE AND REALLY ENHANCE THE AREA AROUND TRAIL STREET.
AND THE THIRD SECTION IS HOW WE LISTEN TO THE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS.
SO WE, WE'VE LISTENED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'VE LISTENED TO H D R C COMMISSIONERS AND WE'VE LISTENED TO O H P STAFF.
SO EDWARD, IF YOU COULD GO TO, UM, QUICKLY KIND OF SCROLL THROUGH SLIDES 27 THROUGH 36.
SO OUR SITE IS IN THE NORTHERNMOST SECTION OF THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT STRADDLES BETWEEN RIO ONE AND RIVER ROAD, AND IT'S ALSO A TRANSITION ZONE BETWEEN A VERY HIGH DENSITY COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR TO THE NORTH AND THE RESIDENTIAL HISTORIC RIVER ROAD AREA TO THE SOUTH.
THE SITE'S BEEN ZONE MULTIFAMILY SINCE 1938.
AND THEN EDWARD, IF YOU COULD PLEASE GO TO SLIDE, UH, 39 AND THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY ECLECTIC.
IT HAS A, IT HAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL STYLES.
UM, IT'S A UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH SLIDES 39 THROUGH 45 REALLY QUICKLY JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF THE DIFFERENT
[00:15:01]
ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THAT ARE PRESENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.EDWARD, IF YOU COULD GO TO SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE 54, RIVER ROAD IS NOT A UNIFORM NEIGHBORHOOD AS, AS EVIDENCED BY THE DIVERSITY OF ARCHITECTURE, BUT ALSO, UM, IN THE FOLLOWING IMAGES, UH, FROM SLIDES 54 TO 60 THAT WE'RE GONNA QUICKLY GO THROUGH, YOU'RE GONNA SEE GARAGES, UM, CARPORTS, PERGOLAS CRUSH, GRANITE DRIVEWAYS, ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT SITE ELEMENTS.
EDWARD, IF YOU COULD PLEASE SKIP AHEAD TO PAGE 68 AND WE'RE GONNA QUICKLY GO DOWN ATCH, AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, DIFFERENT IMAGES OF ATCH AS WE GO FROM WEST TO EAST ONE ALL THE WAY TO 71 PAGE, SLIDE 71, EDWARD.
AND THEN IF YOU COULD GO AND SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE 73, WE'RE GONNA SHOW YOU KIND OF THE UNIQUE CONTEXT OF TRAIL STREET AND WE'RE GONNA GO DOWN TRAIL STREET FROM EAST TO WEST AND GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SLIDE 77.
SO THE ELEMENTS VISIBLE ON TRAIL STREET, UM, IT DIFFERS FROM WHAT'S VISIBLE IN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, TRAIL STREET HAS ZERO SETBACK, PRIVACY FENCES, ZERO SETBACK CHAIN LINK FENCES, A CAR WASH BUILDING, ABORTED UP HOME, NUMEROUS COMMERCIAL USES, INCLUDING A PARKING LOT.
UM, AND LIKE WE SAID, THAT CAR WASH EDWARD EDWARD, IF YOU COULD SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE 92 AND WHAT WE'RE GONNA SHOW IN THESE SLIDES IS WHAT A TYPICAL RIVER ROAD STREET LOOKS LIKE AND COMPARED TO TRAIL STREET.
SO ON SLIDE 92, WE HAVE EAST MAGNOLIA DRIVE AND WE'RE GONNA SCROLL THROUGH ALL THE WAY TO SLIDE 97 AS COMPARED TO TRAIL STREET, MAGNOLIA DRIVE, TRAIL STREET AND ARMOR PLACE AND TRAIL STREET.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, TRAIL'S JUST NOT YOUR TYPICAL RIVER ROAD STREET.
EDWARD, PLEASE SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE 1 0 6 AND SCROLL THROUGH TO 1 0 8.
TRAIL STREET HAS AN INTERESTING HISTORY.
UH, WHEN 2 81 CAME THROUGH THE STREET WAS BIFURCATED INTO TWO PARTS.
THE SECTION OF TRAIL STREET THAT'S EXISTING THAT'S WEST OF 2 81 ESSENTIALLY FUNCTIONS AS AN ALLEYWAY.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENT IMAGES OF TRAIL STREET WEST OF 2 81 AND REALLY TRAIL STREET EAST OF 2 81 ESSENTIALLY FUNCTIONS AS A SECONDARY STREET OR ALLEYWAY AS WELL THE PRIMARY USE OF TRAIL STREET BEING A BACK BACKYARD SPACE OR PARKING LOTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL USES.
PLEASE SKIP AHEAD, SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE ONE 10.
THIS WILL SHOW YOU THE SITE CON, THE DIFFERENT USES AND THE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS.
UM, IN MAP FORMAT ON TRAIL STREET AND ONE 11, YOU CAN SEE HOW WE'RE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE CAR WASH AND PARKING LOT.
SO PLEASE, UH, SKIP AHEAD NOW, EDWARD TO SLIDE 1 27.
THIS IS OUR SECTION ON, UH, THE NEW LIFE.
GIVEN THE CONDITIONS OF TRAIL STREET, GIVEN HOW UNIQUE AND DIFFERENT IT IS THAN THE REST OF RIVER ROAD AND, AND SOME OF THE CONDITIONS WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH, INCLUDING FACING AN EIGHT FOOT PRIVACY FENCE, OUR NEW DESIGN HOPES TO BRING NEW LIFE TO THE AREA.
AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE SCROLL FROM 1 27 THROUGH TO SLIDE 1 36.
IT'S DELAYED THOSE WAY WE CAN'T SEE EXACTLY.
OKAY, SO THE TRAIL, SO I HOPE YOU'VE SEEN IMAGES OF TRAIL STREET AND SATCH IN OUR NEW DESIGN, UM, ABOUT US.
WE, WE ARE, YOU KNOW, I I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN SAN ANTONIO.
WE, WE HAVE ROOTS IN THIS COMMUNITY.
UH, I STARTED THE FIRST KAYAK RENTAL BUSINESS.
MY, MY GRANDFATHER WAS A, WAS A CIVIC LEADER PART OF CITY COUNCIL.
UM, MY BUSINESS PARTNER FRANK, HE SERVES IN THE NATIONAL GUARD AND HE'S CURRENTLY IN SAN
[00:20:01]
ANTONIO FOR THE C OVID 19 RESPONSE MISSION.IF YOU COULD PLEASE SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE ONE 40 RIVER ROAD'S A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE RESIDENTS LOVE LIVING HERE, AND WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO DO IS, UH, PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE RESIDENTS TO LIVE IN THIS REALLY GREAT AREA.
PLEASE SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE 1 44.
UH, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WE'RE SOLVING IS PARK ACCESSIBILITY IS, UH, IS SAN ANTONIO IS RANKED VERY LOW FOR PARK ACCESSIBILITY.
WE THINK ADDING NEW HOMES TO THE AREA WILL, UH, INCREASE THAT ACCESSIBILITY.
AND THEN IF YOU COULD PLEASE SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE 1 51.
WE'RE GONNA DIVE INTO THE WE LISTENED SECTION OF THE PRESENTATION WHERE WE, WE TOOK IN NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDBACK, WE TOOK IN FEEDBACK FROM THE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS TO DESIGN OUR PROJECT.
WE'RE GONNA QUICKLY GO THROUGH THIS.
UM, IN TERMS OF SITE ELEMENTS, WE HAVE
WE HAVE A PERMEABLE PAVER DRIVEWAY.
THIS IS INSPIRED BY, UH, THE COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL AND RIVER ROAD.
WE'RE ADDING A COMMUNITY GARDEN, WHICH IS INSPIRED BY THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY GARDEN.
WE'VE GOT A COMMUNITY POCKET PARK AND PICNIC AREA, WHICH IS INSPIRED BY BRACKENRIDGE PARK.
WE HAVE RAINWATER CISTERNS INSPIRED BY HARDBERGER PARK.
WE'RE DOING A PERMEABLE PARKING OPTION WITH SCREENS ON TRAIL STREET, ALSO INSPIRED BY HARDBERGER PARK AND SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE SEEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
OUR SWIMMING POOL IS INSPIRED BY THE LAMONT HOTEL.
WE HAVE A HERITAGE OAK COURTYARD AND WE'RE CREATING AN ORCHARD PATH, UM, THAT WILL LEAD FROM TRAIL STREET ALL THE WAY TO THE COMMUNITY GARDEN.
ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS THAT WE'VE ADDED, WE HAVE INVITING FRONT PORCHES, GABLE ROOFS, PORCH AND BALCONY RAILS.
INSPIRED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD FENCING INSPIRED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, A VARIETY OF ROOF TYPES INSPIRED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, DIFFERENT UNIT TYPES AND DIFFERENT BUILDINGS, FIVE DIFFERENT CONNECTS, UH, PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS AND PATHWAYS, COLUMNS THAT ENCAPSULED PORCHES SHED DORMERS, METAL OVERHANGS AND MATERIALS THAT ARE INSPIRED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, THIS SITE IS, HAS A LOW BUILDING LOT COVERAGE.
THE, UH, RECOMMENDED LOT COVERAGE IN THE GUIDELINES SHOULD BE LESS THAN 50%.
UM, BEFORE WE REDUCED OUR DENSITY, WE HAD LESS THAN 47% LOT COVERAGE IN THE HISTORIC AREA AND LESS THAN 44% LOT COVERAGE OVERALL.
SO OUR BUILDING LOT COVERAGE IS, IS REALLY GREAT.
IF YOU COULD SKIP AHEAD PLEASE TO SLIDE ONE 90.
IN OUR NEW PLAN, WE REDUCED SQUARE FOOTAGE BY 10%.
THIS WAS, UH, ELIMINATING THE THREE STORY UNITS ON TRAIL STREET AND ALSO REDUCING AN ENTIRE UNIT ON TRAIL STREET.
THIS ALLOWED US TO PRESERVE OUR HERITAGE OAK TREE AND CREATE A HERITAGE OAK COURTYARD.
THIS ALSO ALLOWED US TO, UM, WE'RE GONNA NAME THE COURTYARD AFTER GENERAL ALLISON, A NEIGHBORHOOD PREVIOUS, UH, MEMBER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE INCREASED OUR SETBACKS ON TRAIL STREET.
AND, AND IF YOU COULD QUICKLY GO THROUGH THESE SLIDES, WE DRASTICALLY REDUCED OUR BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
WE HIRED A HISTORIC DESIGNER TO REDESIGN THE PROJECT.
WE ADDED TRADITIONAL FRONT PORCHES.
UM, WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING FEEDBACK FROM COMMISSIONER FETZER AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, TO ALLOW US TO MOVE THE HAMMERHEAD AND REALLY SAVE THE HERITAGE OAK TREE.
SO WE, WE REALLY APPRECIATED THAT FEEDBACK.
UH, WE MET WITH COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, COMMISSIONER GIBBS AND COMMISSIONER GROOVE TO SHOW A NEW PERSPECTIVE OF TRAIL STREET SHOWING, UH, THE PRIVACY FENCE.
AND REALLY WE, UH, MET ALL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CORE REQUIREMENTS AND, UM, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THEY HAD REQUESTED AT THE ZONING BOARD
[00:25:01]
ADJUSTMENT.WE HAVE TWO STORIES ON TRAIL STREET, ADEQUATE PROTECTION OF THE AEC AND A DESIGN ADJUSTMENT TO INCORPORATE TRADITIONAL FRONT PORCHES AND WINDOWS.
THAT'S TIME, DESIRE, REALLY DESIRE.
YEAH, SO WE, WE LISTENED, WE REDUCED OUR UNIT COUNT.
WE ARE TWO STORIES ON TRAIL STREET.
WE CREATED A STORMWATER PLAN THAT RESPECTS THE ATHEA.
WE PRESERVED THE HERITAGE OAK TREE.
WE INCLUDED A HIGH PARKING RATIO.
WE HAD CHANGED DESIGN ORDERED WINDOWS, HAVE TRADITIONAL FRONT PORCHES.
UM, WE'RE GONNA GET TREE WARRANTIES FOR THE HERITAGE TREES WE'RE SAVING AND WE HAVE A REALLY, UH, LOW BUILDING LOT RATIO.
UM, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, I'LL START READING THOSE ONE BY ONE NOW.
UH, FIRST COMES FROM ROY SCHWEERS 1 0 2 ARMOR PLACE.
WHAT IS THE PROPOSAL SITE PLAN? ELEVATIONS AND PERSPECTIVE DON'T RESPECTIVE DOORS ON CENTER WITH WALKS WHILE SITE PLAN WALKS MOVE OFF CENTER FRONT DOORS, MORE GREEN LANDSCAPE SHOWN AROUND WALKS IN PERSPECTIVE THAN SITE PLAN AND NO TRELLIS FALLS IN ELEVATIONS.
FALSE PERSPECTIVE COMPARE BUILDING FIVE PARKING PARKED CARS TO BUILDING SIX CARS THAT SUDDENLY MOVE UP FRONT.
BUMPERS ARE INSIDE HOUSES PERSPECTIVE SHOWING MORE GRASS AROUND WALKS THAN SITE PLAN.
LARGER YARD IN FRONT OF TRELLIS WALLS IN PERSPECTIVE THAN SITE PLAN.
THE PERSPECTIVE MOVES LANDSCAPE, ONE HALF THE LENGTH OF THE TRELLIS WALL TO THE STREET.
DANGEROUS TRELLIS WALLS, TRELLIS WALLS BLOCK, EXIT EXITING CARS VIEW OF THE STREET.
A SERIOUS U D C VIOLATION APPEARS THE TRELLIS WALLS PLACED AN ATTEMPT TO HIDE CARS WITH NO REGARD TO HOW WALLS THREATEN FOLKS WALKING ON TRAIL.
TWO AND A HALF BY NINE INCH WIDE.
CONTINUOUS SLOTS IN FRONT OF BUILDINGS ARE NOT FUNCTIONAL.
PORCHES, RAILINGS ARE THEATRICS NOT NEEDED DISTANCE TO GROUND ONLY ONE FOOT UNINHABITABLE SPACE BEHIND RAILING BECAUSE CIRCULATION PATH BEHIND COLUMNS IS LESS THAN THREE FEET DESIGN OF SO-CALLED PORCHES APPROPRIATE FOR DISNEYLAND, NOT RIVER ROAD.
FOREIGN STYLE RE STYLING IS BY THE NEW ARCHITECT WHO OFFICES IN CONNECTICUT STYLE APPROPRIATE IN NORTHERN CLIMATE WITH STEEP ROOF PITCH TO SHED SNOW UNPROTECTED WINDOWS AND MINIMUM ROOF OVERHANGS TO MAXIMIZE SOLAR HEAT GAIN.
NO CONSIDERATION FOR PORCHES OR WINDOWS SPACING FOUND IN RIVER ROAD HOMES THAT CAPTURE TEXAS SOUTHEAST BREEZES, UH, REGARDING STYLING AS FALSE HISTORICISM.
UM, CONGE CONJECTURAL HISTORY NOT FROM TEXAS, MUCH LESS RIVER ROAD.
THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO PROTECT HISTORIC RIVER ROAD BY DENYING THIS INCONSISTENT AND INAPPROPRIATE PROPOSAL, NOT READY FOR CONSIDERATION.
NEXT IS FROM LARRY CLARK, UM, 1 0 2 ALLISON ROAD FIRST.
SO I'D LIKE TO STRONGLY EMPHASIZE THAT I FEEL THIS HEARING SHOULD BE DELAYED AND NO WAIVER OF THE ONE YEAR DELAY AFTER DENIAL FROM B O A BE GRANTED.
IT IS THE CONSENSUS OF THE NA WE HAVE HEARD FROM THAT WE FEEL THIS PUBLIC PROCESS IS DEEPLY FLAWED.
THIS IS A HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN DEBATED FOR OVER TWO YEARS.
A WEBEX MEETING WHERE CITIZENS' REMARKS ARE LIMITED, CANNOT BEGIN TO, TO PROVIDE A PROPER AND FAIR HEARING.
RC SITE AND GOOGLE FORMS HAVE CONFLICTING REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTAL LINK.
THIS PROJECT HAS NOT CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY FROM THE BO O A SUBMITTAL.
THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS TOO BIG.
THE AMOUNT OF BUILDING AND PARKING IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE SITE PLAN.
THE ENTIRE TRAIL STREET FRONTAGE IS DOMINATED BY PARKING SEVEN A TWO DO NOT ADD OFF STREET PARKING AREAS WITHIN THE FRONT YARD.
MAINTAIN FRONT YARD GARDENS WERE APPROPRIATE.
THE ENTIRE STREET IS NOW CARPORT SET ON A WIDENED STREET SECTION AND WITH SLOPES UNDER THE CARPORT SET AT 9% SET AT UP TO 9% ACCORDING TO THE GRADING PLAN, MOST ALL OF THIS AREA WILL BE SLOPED AT OVER 6% AWKWARD, AWKWARD LOOKING AND AWKWARD FOR THE RESIDENTS TO USE THIS EXCEEDS SLOPE.
UH, COMPLIANT WITH THE A D A VISIBILITY IS AN ISSUE AS WELL.
UM, EARLIER PROMISES FROM THE DEVELOPER WERE FOR CANOPY TREES ALONG TRAIL BUFFERING VIEWS FROM HISTORIC PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET.
THE DECEPTIVE RENDERINGS SHOWED TWO LARGE TREES THAT WILL NOT BE SAVED.
A FEW SMALL TREES AND SHRUBS WILL BE INSUFFICIENT.
BUFFERS PROMISES ROSSA MADE THAT NO ADDITIONAL RUNOFF WOULD BE ADDED TO THE ASA.
UM, ALL OF THIS AREA DRAINS BACK ONTO WIDE AND TRAIL STREET, WHICH ENDS UP AND HISTORIC AS SEIA AGAIN FROM THE U D C ASAKIA SHALL NOT BE USED FOR DRAINAGE.
NEXT IS EMILY FERRY, UM, 3 22 TRAIL STREET.
UM, I OWN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME REFERRED TO BY THE 3 35 TRAIL STREET DEVELOPERS AS AN APARTMENT AT 3 22 TRAIL.
THROUGHOUT ALL 348 PAGES OF THE PROPOSAL FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE NEW BUILDINGS ON TRAIL STREET ARE REPEATEDLY SHOWN OPPOSITE A LARGE GREEN SPACE.
THIS AND THE FACT THAT THE SCALE IS ALWAYS COMPLETELY MISLEADING WOULD SUGGESTS THAT TRAIL STREET IS WIDE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE THE MANY CARS THAT WILL ATTEMPT TO PARK IN THE NARROW LINE DRIVEWAYS.
AND ON THE STREET FRONT, ON THE STREET IN FRONT.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT TRAIL STREET AS A SUBSTANDARD STREET, A GLOSSED A POINT GLOSSED OVER IN THE DECEPTIVE AND AMBIGUOUS SITE PLAN AND RENDERINGS DUE THE MATH.
THIS EXCEEDINGLY NARROW STREET CANNOT SIMPLY CANNOT ACCOMMODATE THE VEHICLES THAT WILL ARRIVE
[00:30:01]
WITH THESE HOUSES.EVEN IF THE STREET IS WIDENED BY RUMORED FOUR FEET.
THE DEVELOPERS ON PAGE ONE 12 STATE THAT THERE'S A REASON TO DRIVE DOWN TRAIL STREET EXCEPT TO ACCESS OUR PROPERTY.
AND THE PHOTOGRAPHIC OF THAT STATEMENT, ONE CAN CLEARLY SEE THE GATED DRIVEWAY THAT LEADS UNDER JOHN HART'S PROPERTY.
THE GATE TO MY CARPORT IS, IS MID TRAIL STREET AS WELL USED DAILY BY MY TENANT, BUT REFERRED TO AS THE PROPOSAL AS A BOARDED UP GARAGE.
THERE IS ALSO AN ENTRANCE TO THE HISTORIC ZAMBRANO PROPERTY ON THAT PART OF TRAIL STREET.
THE GARBAGEMAN CANNOT USE THEIR TRUCKS MORE THAN A FEW YARDS DOWN TRAIL BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BACK OUT THE NARROW DRIVEWAY TO FIX THIS IS INSUFFICIENT.
WHAT ABOUT FIRETRUCKS PARAMEDIC VEHICLES, PLUMBERS, VISITORS? A FRAIL ROADWAY DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS SARGE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE NEXT IS JIM MCKEN 5 0 9 RIVER ROAD.
HISTORIC NEIGHBORS NEIGHBORHOODS ARE A COLLAGE OF HOUSES AND STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT OVER TIME.
STYLES BEFORE RIVER ROAD BECAME A STORE DISTRICT IN 2010 ARE STILL PRESENT.
REGARDLESS WHAT PART OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT YOU ARE IN, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES NEED TO BE FOLLOWED AND NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS ALWAYS OUR GOAL TO KEEP THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THIS IMPORTANT SAN ANTONIO NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE DECEMBER, 2019.
CHANGES ZONE WHICH PROTECT THE INTEGRITY AHEAD DECEMBER, 2019.
CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND CHAPTER 35, THE CHANGE
AND ON MARCH 19TH, 2020, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A LARGE AREA REZONING AROUND THE 3 35 TRAIL SITE, ELIMINATING ALL MF 33 ZONING ATTACHED TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND LOTS AND ALSO REDUCED COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
UM, BOTH CHANGES WERE DONE TO CORRECT THE U D C ZONING CONVERSION OF 20 2001 THAT CAUSED A MISMATCH OF ZONING TYPES DIFFERENT THAN THE LAND USE FOUND IN INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS.
THESE CHANGES WERE SUPPORTED BY THE RIVER RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE 3 35 TRAIL PROJECT IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ON ATCH, ANASTASIA AND TRAIL.
UM, THE APARTMENT BUILDING EIGHT 40 MULBERRY HAS PARKING AND A SWIMMING POOL ON THEIR THREE SITES FACING RESET CHANGES OF THE SURROUNDING PARCELS AND THAT THE BUILDING NEEDS TO STEP AWAY.
NO FAMILY HOMES, HOMES EAST AND WEST OF THE PROJECT.
WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY ASKED THAT THESE ONE STORY HOMES SHOULD NOT ABUT THE THREE STORY BUILDINGS.
THE NEXT IS PATRICIA PRT, 7 33 EAST WOODLAWN FROM THE GET-GO RIVER ROAD NEIGHBOR, NEIGHBORS VOICED OBVIOUS FLAWS AND SUBSTANTIVE REASONS FOR THIS PROJECT.
REASONS THIS PROJECT IS ILL DESIGNED AND UNFITTING FOR THE SETTING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ENDLESS MEETINGS, REDESIGNS AND TIME SPENT BY ALL PARTIES INCLUDING O H P H D R C, MR. MOORE AND A MYRIAD OF NEIGHBORS HAVE ADDED UP GREATLY.
WHEN MR. WARREN CHOSE 3 35 TRAIL FOR DEVELOPMENT, HE DIDN'T DO HIS DUE DILIGENCE.
HE DIDN'T KNOW HE WHAT HE WAS FACING.
HE CLEARLY DIDN'T RESEARCH THE MANY PREVIOUS PROTESTS AND DEFENSIVE ACTIONS TAKEN TO PROTECT HIS TREASURED ENCLAVE.
HE ASKED FOR OUR INPUT AND WE DELIVERED IT ON SCALE.
MASSING, DESIGN, SAFETY, ASAKIA DRAINAGE, STORM WATER, STREETS AND PARKING.
IT WASN'T JUST NEIGHBORS BUT ALSO H C R C AND O H P THAT CONTINUED TO REPEAT STILL EXISTING ISSUES.
HE SAID HE LISTENED, BUT IN FACT IT WASN'T UNTIL THE B O A OVERTURNED THE H C C'S C O A THAT HE STARTED TO ACT ON WHAT HE'D BEEN TOLD ALL ALONG TODAY.
TODAY THE PROJECT IS, IN MY OPINION, BETTER FOR THE CHANGES THAT WE COLLECTIVELY HAVE ACHIEVED, BUT IT'S STILL WAY TOO MUCH BUILDING FOR THE LOT.
AND UNINSPIRED DESIGN AND STORMWATER AND INTEGRITY OF THE SEIA ARE VULNERABIL VULNERABILITIES.
MR. MOORE IS MISGUIDED WHEN HE SHOWS THAT THE PROPERTY IS SO FAR NORTH OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND CLOSER TO TALLER STRUCTURES THAT IT'S LESS IMPORTANT AND DEPICTING TRAIL AS AN ALLEY IS WRONG.
THE PROPERTY WAS HOME TO SEVEN FAMILIES FOR MANY YEARS.
IT'S DEFINITELY ON THE RIVER, ON A RIVER ROAD STREET.
AND NOW IN LINE WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
I HOPE MR. MOORE CAN APPRECIATE HOW FRAGILE AND VULNERABLE WE ARE IN RIVER ROAD.
ANYTHING GOES AWRY LIKE FAILURE TO CONTAIN STORM WATER, PARKING AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND WE HAVE NOWHERE TO GO AND NEITHER WILL THE NEW RESIDENCE DENIED.
UH, THE NEXT IS MIMI QUINTANILLA ONE 50 OSTROM DRIVE THE SCALE AND MASSING IS VIRTUALLY UNCHANGED SINCE THE LAST VERSION JUST COMPARED THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS AND SITE PLANS.
THE PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHTS ARE OVERSIZED FOR THE NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT.
ALL SURROUNDED PARCELS WERE RECENTLY REZONED FROM MF 33 TO R FOUR.
THE THREE STORY BUILDINGS NEED TO STEP DOWN WHERE THEY MEET THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THE RIO AND SHOULD INCLUDE ALL THE UNITS IN THE HISTORIC AREA.
ALL THE UNITS WHICH FRONT ONE STORY HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET, THE UNITS WHICH ABUT ONE STORY HOMES.
THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS STATE THAT THE HEIGHT AND SCALE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD NOT EXCEED THAT OF THE MAJORITY OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS BY MORE THAN ONE STORY.
THIS SHOULD APPLY TO ALL THREE BUILDINGS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
NOT JUST THE ONES, NOT JUST THOSE WHICH FRONT ON TRAIL STREET, THE THREE OTHER BUILDINGS ARE IN THE RIO, WHICH THE U D C STATES NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD REINFORCE ESTABLISHED BUILDING TRADITIONS AND RESPECT THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ADDITIONALLY, ROOF DESIGN IS ALIEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROJECT FEATURES STEEP ROOFS, WHICH ALMOST WITH NO ALMOST NO OVERHANGS.
THE ROOFS USE MANSARDS TO TRY TO CAMOUFLAGE THE THREE STORY MASSING VOLUMES
[00:35:01]
OF RAINWATER WILL RUN OFF THE ROOFS, BUT THE PRESENTATION LACKS A BASIC SYSTEM OF GUTTERS AND DOWN BOUTS WHICH ALTER THE APPEARANCE OF THE BUILDINGS.U D C STATES CONTINUITY OF SCALE AND ORIENTATION SHOULD BE EMPHASIZED.
THE C O A SHOULD BE DENIED FOR NON-CONFORMITY WITH THE U D C, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE RIO PROJECT AS PRESENTED IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE LOCATION.
THE NEXT IS RICHARD REED, 6 1 15 RIVER ROAD.
I ASK THAT THE H C R C I ASK THE H C R C TO REJECT THE APPEAL.
TO CONSIDER THE PLANS FOR 3 35 TRAIL STREET.
I COME BEFORE YOU AS A BOTH AS A PAST RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CHAIR AND AS A 35 PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE BASIS FOR THIS REJECTION IS CLEAR.
THE CURRENT PLAN MAKES NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT WEREN'T FAST TRACKING A DECISION.
AS YOU KNOW, IN FEBRUARY, A B O A, THE B O B O DENSITY OF THE PLAN WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR HISTORIC DISTRICT SUCH AS RIVER ROAD U D C PLACES A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON PROJECTS.
UNLESS THE PLANS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY REVISED, THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE PROPOSED MASSING SCALE AND DENSITY OF THE PLANT.
THE CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINT HAS BEEN REDUCED BY PERCENT AND TWO UNITS HAVE BEEN REDUCED.
ONE STORE AND THE B O A POINTED OUT THAT A THREE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND HAS LINES CURRENT OBSTRUCTION, CONTROVERSIAL, THE VAST MOVE REMAIN OPPOSED.
VOICES REMAIN ADDED TO THE PROPO.
I ASK A DENIED APPEAL THAT YOU REQUIRED THAT THE THERE PROPOSAL AND GOD WILLING WE WILL IN FRONT OF YOU TO MAKE OUR CASE SET.
I'M HAVING A INTERNET CONNECTION ISSUE.
I'M GONNA TURN OFF MY CAMERA AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL
I OWN THREE HOUSES AND OTHER PIECES OF PROPERTY IN THE RIVER ROAD.
NEIGHBORHOOD PRESENTATION REPEATEDLY REFERS TO THE NORTHERN TIP OF THE RIVER ROAD DISTRICT.
THIS PROJECT IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARY THAT EXTENDS UP TO STADIUM DRIVE AND SAWS HEADQUARTERS AND UP ST.
MARY'S NEARLY TO AUGIE'S BARBECUE.
THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY ACTUALLY SLICES THROUGH BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR OF THE PROJECT AND TAKES IN BUILDINGS FIVE AND SIX.
WE CONTINUE TO ASK THE QUESTION, SHOULD NOT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AND PROJECT BE CONSIDERED TO BE PART OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH AN APPROPRIATE REDUCTION IN HEIGHT AND A MAXIMUM OF TWO STORIES, THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD CANNOT IN REALITY BE CHARACTER CHARACTERIZED AS DOMINATED BY A COMBINATION OF FRONT FACING GARAGES, DRIVEWAYS, CARPORTS, AND OFF STREET PARKING.
THAT STATEMENT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.
THE PROPOSAL FOR TRAIL STREET SHOWS A SMALL STREET NOW DOMINATED BY PARKING.
THE PRESENTATION PHOTOS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE DISTORTED REPRESENTATIONS OF THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS.
TRAIL STREET WEST OF 2 81 IS NOT PART OF THIS DISCUSSION.
THE EAST PORTION IS TRAIL DOES NOT FUNCTION AS AN ALLEYWAY.
THE PRESENTATION SAYS THERE IS NO REASON TO DRIVE DOWN TRAIL, NOT ACCURATE.
IT PROVIDES THE ONLY PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE WEB PROPERTY.
THERE IS A GATE AT THE END OF THE STREET IN THE PHOTO AND PROVIDES ACCESS TO THE EGIA.
THE PRESENTATION STATES RIVER ROAD IS HAS AN ECLECTIC, AN ECLECTIC STYLE, AND THERE ARE TWO, THERE ARE MANY TWO STORY HOMES NOT ARE NEARLY AS LARGE AS THIS THREE STORY PROJECT.
THE PHOTOS ARE DECEPTIVE AND INCLUDE MISIDENTIFICATION OF MY HOME AND OTHERS AS TWO STORY HOMES.
FINALLY, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE PLANNED PREVIOUS HARDSCAPE IS NOT PLANTING IN SOFTSCAPE.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE ONE I READ BEFORE THAT WAS HARD TO HEAR, SO I'M GONNA GO THROUGH IT ONE MORE TIME.
UM, I ASKED THE H C R C TO REJECT THE, THIS COMES FROM RICHARD REED.
I ASK THE H C R C TO REJECT THE APPEAL, TO RECONSIDER THE PLANS FOR A 3 35 TRAIL AND COME BEFORE YOU AS A PAST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CHAIR AND A 38, 30 YEAR RESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BASIS FOR THIS REJECTION IS CLEAR.
THE CURRENT PLAN MAKES NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT WEREN'T FAST TRACKING A DECISION.
AS YOU KNOW, THE FEBRUARY, IN FEBRUARY, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULED THAT THE MASSING SCALE AND DENSITY OF THE PLAN WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR A HISTORIC DISTRICT SUCH AS RIPPER ROAD, U D C PLACES A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON PROJECTS.
UNLESS THE PLANS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY REVISED, THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE PROPOSED MASSING SCALE AND DENSITY OF THE PLANS.
THE CONSTRUCTION FOOTPRINT HAS BEEN REDUCED BY LESS THAN 5%, AND TWO UNITS HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY ONLY ONE STORY.
IN ADDITION, THE B O A POINTED OUT THAT THERE, THAT THE THREE STORY BUILDING THREE SITS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND IS NON-COMPLIANT WITH THE HD OR C GUIDELINES.
THE CURRENT PLAN IGNORES BOTH THE B O A CONCERNS AND THOSE HISTORIC GUIDELINES, BUT THERE IS ANOTHER REASON TO REJECT THE DEVELOPERS' REQUEST OF FAST TRACK THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION.
THIS IS A CONTROVERSIAL PROJECT, RIGHT? WHAT ASSOCIATION REMAIN OPPOSED
[00:40:01]
TO THE PLAN? WE HAVE APPEARED 12 TIMES OF VOICE CONCERNS ABOUT THE MASS SCALE INTENSITY OF THE PLANS.OUR ATTITUDE HAS NOT CHANGED AND OUR VOICES REMAIN ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSAL.
ASK YOU TO DENY THE APPEAL AND THAT YOU REQUIRE THE DEVELOPERS TO WAIT THE YEAR TO RESUBMIT THE PROPOSAL SO WE CAN STAND IN FRONT OF YOU AND MAKE OUR CASE IN PERSON.
UM, THIS NEXT ONE COMES FROM ED PINER.
I THINK THERE'S SOME VISUAL AIDS THAT GO WITH US.
UM, NUMBER ONE, TRAIL STREET IS FALSELY DRAWN WIDER IN THE SUBMITTED SITE.
PLAN SCALES AT 24 FEET SCALES AS 24 FEET.
TRAIL STREET EXISTING IS 16 FEET.
WHERE DID THE EXTRA EIGHT FEET COME FROM? HE, I HAS CONFIRMED RIGHT AWAY OF EXISTING TRAIL STREET IS 16 FEET ONLY PLACE THE EIGHT FEET COULD HAVE, COULD BE TAKEN FROM IS A STREET EASEMENT FROM 3 35 TRAIL PROPERTY.
THERE'S NO AN JOGGED ON THE 3 35 TRAIL PROPERTY LINES AND CURB ALIGNED WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE WEST.
IF EIGHT FEET OR EVEN FOUR FEET IS REMOVED FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TO WIDEN THE SITE TRAIL STREET AS REQUIRED BY T C I, THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED IS NOT VIABLE.
THE LOT WILL NOT BE DEEP ENOUGH TO HAVE THREE ROWS OF BUILDINGS.
I'M QUESTIONING WHAT ELSE IS NOT DRAWN TO SCALE ACCURATELY IN THE PROPOSAL.
NUMBER TWO, AS STAFF HAS NOTED, THE PROJECT ON TRAIL HAS WELL OVER 50% OF THE LINEAR LOT LINE AS AS PARKING.
THE U D C SAYS SHALL NOT BE MORE THAN 50%.
THERE IS NO JUDGMENT NEEDED HERE.
THE PROJECT CANNOT BE APPROVED BY H D R C BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL CLEARLY IS VIOLATING A MANDATORY RULE OF RIO ONE THREE.
VEHICLE ACCESS SHOULD BE FROM THE REAR.
I DO NOT THINK TRAIL STREET WITH HOUSES CAN, WITH HOUSING, CAN HAVE DRIVEWAYS OR OFF STREET PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD AREA THAT IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR HISTORIC RIVER ROAD.
PLEASE DENY APPROVAL OF THIS LATEST PROPOSAL.
PLEASE SEE THE ELEMENT, THE PHOTOS ATTACHED.
OKAY, THE NEXT IS BETH WELLS, UH, 1 0 4 L RANCHO WAY UPON REVIEW, THE PLANS MAY OFFER THE FOLLOWING TREE PRESERVATION.
EVERY TREE ON THIS SITE WILL BE REMOVED EXCEPT FOR TWO TREES THAT WILL BE SEVERELY IMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION.
IN NO WAY CAN THE REMAINING TWO TREES BE IDENTIFIED AS PRESERVED UNDER THE SEA.
UH, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ORDINANCES ROOT PROTECTION ZONE IS EXTREMELY INSUFFICIENT.
GRADING AND UTILITIES WILL DAMAGE ROOTS REGARDLESS OF THE OPINION OF A NEW ARBORIST.
THE LARGE LIVE OAK TREE WILL HAVE MOST OF ITS ROOTS REMOVED AND THE REMAINDER COMPROMISE EXCAVATION FOR BUILDING FOOTINGS WILL LIKELY EXTEND AT LEAST FOUR FEET BELOW EXISTING READ GRADE.
UM, EVEN A PURE AND BEAM PAGE 2 0 9, UH, YOU WILL LIKELY EXCAVATE THROUGH THE ROOT SYSTEM ENTIRELY LARGE CYPRESS ON ATCH HAS CONSTRUCTION WITHIN ABOUT EIGHT FEET OF THE TRUNK.
I HAVE BEEN A PARTNER AND OWNER OF A FIRM PROVING PLANNING AND LANDSCAPING ARCHITECTURE IN SAN ANTONIO FOR 30 YEARS.
DESPITE TREE WARRANTIES AND OTHER WAYS AROUND THE TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR PRESERVATION CANNOT BE MET.
WITH THIS OVERLY DENT SITE PLAN.
THE VARIANCE WILL BE REQUIRED AND PLEASED THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS BEGUN TO SEE THE VALUE OF THE LARGE LIVE OAK AS A HUNDRED YEAR OLD AMENITY.
UM, BUT NOT ENOUGH HAS BEEN SHOWN HERE TO BEGIN TO ENSURE CONTINUING TO LIVE AND THRIVE ON THIS SITE.
A A, A DETENTION POND IN THE FRONT YARD ON ATCH STREET.
THIS, OKAY, I'M GONNA START OVER.
AT ATTENTION POND IN THE FRONT YARD ON ATCH STREET WILL REMOVE A BEAUTIFUL LARGE TREE AND IMPACT THOSE ON ADJACENT PART OF THE CLAN, BUT IT'LL BE CALLED A COMMUNITY GARDEN.
IT IS STILL A DETENTION POND IN THE FRONT YARD AND IT IS NOT ACCESSIBLE TO THOSE WITH DISABILITIES AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS, I FIND IT UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS PUBLIC PROCESS IS SO CONSTRAINED.
PLEASE DENY THE PROJECT AND THE WAIVER.
UM, NEXT IS BARBARA WOOD HOWELL 1 0 5 MAGNOLIA DRIVE.
OR THERE'S SOME PHOTOS WITH THIS ONE AS WELL.
UM, RIVER ROAD'S PURPOSE IS TO MAINTAIN, PROTECT, AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ITS RESIDENCE.
RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT IS A VEHICLE FOR EDUCATION.
WE PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER OF BUILDINGS AND STREETS WHILE WELCOMING GROWTH AND INNOVATION WITHIN THOSE SPACES.
WE ARE A LIVING ACTIVE RECORD OF OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR RESIDENTS.
I WELCOME AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONSTRUCTION.
IN ADDITION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE WANT OUR NEW NEIGHBORS TO FEEL INCLUDED IN BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE DEVELOPER HAS RESOLVED MANY OF THE ISSUES WITH ONLY A FEW THAT YOU AS THE COMMISSIONERS IN BOTH WITH BOTH AN INDIVIDUAL AND COMBINED WEALTH OF EXPERIENCE TO DIRECT THE SOLUTIONS.
A MASS AND SCALE ARE INAPPROPRIATE.
B PROTECTION OF THE UPPER LAB BORE.
UPPER LAB BORE SEIA FROM IMAGING DRAINAGE AND AUTOMOBILE RUNOFF.
PARKING ISSUES ON TRAIL STREET WERE VEHICLES, UM, AND LACK OF PARKING FOR RESIDENTS WILL RESULT IN UGLY AND INSUFFICIENT STREET FOR THE NEW RESIDENTS TO ENJOY IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES.
UM, I REQUEST THAT THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WILL BE GRANTED WHEN THESE THREE ISSUES ARE RESOLVED.
NEXT COMES FROM WILLIAM SIBLEY, 5 35 EAST CRAIG PLACE.
AFTER NEARLY TWO YEARS OF CONSISTENT BACK AND FORTH WITH THESE DEVELOPERS FROM AUSTIN, THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD WAS FORCED TO TAKE OUR GRIEVANCES TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND WE WON.
[00:45:01]
NOW THE DEVELOPERS ARE BACK IN LESS THAN FIVE MONTHS TIME WITH MODEST ADJUSTMENTS THAT DO NOT FULLY ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE REPEATEDLY REQUESTED BE TACKLED.IT'S TOO BIG IN MASS IN SCALE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOT DOES NOT STEP DOWN TO THE ADJACENT ONE-STORY HOMES AS MANSARD ROOFS AND NOW BY ELIMINATION OF GARAGES FROM ALL UNITS ON TRAIL, HAS CREATED POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH PARKING AND DRAINAGE INTO THE SAPIA.
WE HAVE NEVER ONCE DENIED ANYONE'S RIGHT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, BUT WE AS RESIDENTS OF RIVER ROAD BE THE ONES ENDING UP LIVING WITH THE BAD CHOICES AND NEGLIGENT OVERSIGHT OF THESE DEVELOPERS.
WE CONTINUE TO IN ADHERENCE TO OUR PLEAS FOR ADJUSTMENT AND COHESION.
THE NEXT COMES FROM MARK CANNON 700 NORTH ST.
THE EARLIER APPROVAL BY H C R C OF THE 3 35 TRAIL DEVELOPMENT WAS APPEALED SUCCESSFULLY TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THE BOARD REVERSED THE ACTION OF THE H D R C, DISAPPROVING THE PROJECT WITH NO CONDITIONS OR RECOMMENDED CHANGES.
THE HD C'S RECONSIDERATION OF THE PROJECT, LESS THAN A HALF A YEAR, VIOLATES LESS THAN HALF A YEAR LATER VIOLATES THE UD C'S REQUIREMENTS.
THERE ARE TWO SITUATIONS IN WHICH A PROJECT CAN BE RECONSIDERED LESS THAN ONE YEAR AFTER BOARD APPROVAL.
FIRST, IF THE BOARD PURSUANT TO 35 4 51 D THREE INDICATES CHANGES IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO MEET CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
AND UNDER THAT SECTION, THE WORK CAN BE RECONSIDERED IF THOSE CHANGES ARE INCORPORATED, INCORPORATED INTO THE NEW APPLICATION.
THAT EXCEPTION CAN APPLY TO 3 35 TRAILS SINCE THE BOARD ACTION WAS STRAIGHT UP DISAPPROVAL WITH NO SUGGESTED CHANGES.
THE SECOND EXCEPTION TO THE ONE YEAR RULE INVOLVES A WAIVER BY THE H D R C UNDER 35,451 F.
SUCH AS SUCH A WAIVER CAN BE CONSIDERED AN IF THE APPLICATION PRESENTS SUBSTANTIAL NEW EVIDENCE.
THE NEW APPLICATION PRESENTS NO NEW EVIDENCE, BUT RATHER A CHANGE IN REVISED PLAN JUST AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HAD MADE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH OF COURSE IT DID NOT.
35 4 51 F IS NOT A MIX AND MATCH PROVISION.
IT IS AN EITHER OR REQUIREMENT.
THERE MUST BE EITHER ONE, CHANGE TO THE PLAN AS RECOMMENDED BY THE BOARD OR TWO THAT THE DISAPPROVAL WAS WRONG, BUT NOT CHANGES IN REVISIONS WRONGLY LABELED NEW EVIDENCE.
ADDITIONALLY, EVEN IF A WAIVER WERE PROPERLY SOUGHT AND THEN GRANTED IT PERMITS, IT PERMITS ONLY THE FILING OF A NEW APPLICATION KICKING IN THE REQUIREMENTS AND TIMETABLES OF U D C 35 4 0 2, WHICH CONTAINS THE MANDATE THAT IS SHALL BE USED TO REVIEW ANY APPLICATION OF A WAIVER, ALLOWS AN APPLICATION, STARTS THE PROCESS, INCLUDING THE HURRY UP OF A WAIVER AND YOU HAVE CONSIDERED
UM, THE NEXT IS BLAKE SULLIVAN, 8 31 EAST MAGNOLIA.
DEAR COMMISSIONERS, I ASK THAT THE H C I ASK THE H C R C TO REJECT THE APPEAL, TO RECONSIDER THE PLANS FOR 3 35 TRAIL STREET.
I'M A 44 YEAR RESIDENCE RESIDENT OF RIVER ROAD.
IT'S WHERE I WAS BORN AND WHERE I'M NOW RAISING MY CHILDREN.
MY FAMILY HAS LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR NEARLY 60 YEARS.
I'M ALSO THE OWNER OF ONE 20 ANASTACIA, ALSO KNOWN AS THE HISTORIC RIVER ROAD SCHOOLHOUSE, WHICH IS JUST A FEW FEET FROM 3 35 TRAIL STREET LATE LAST YEAR.
THE B O A RULED THAT THE 3 35 TRAIL STREET PLAN WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT SUCH AS RIVER ROAD.
AND THERE HAVE BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE PLAN SINCE THAT DECISION WAS MADE.
HE PLACES A ONE-YEAR MORATORIUM ON PROJECTS UNLESS THE PLANS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY REVISED.
THERE HAS BEEN NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO THE PROPOSED PASSING SCALE OR DENSITY OF THE PLANS.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE DEVASTATING TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE SCALE DESIGN AND DENSITY DETERIORATES THE NEIGHBORING HISTORICS AND BRANO PROPERTY IN THE RIVER ROAD SCHOOL, WHICH IS THE, WHICH IS THE VITALLY IMPORTANT, UM, TO NOT JUST OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT TO THE HISTORY OF OUR CITY AND STATE.
MY NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE APPEARED BEFORE THE H C R C AND B O A 12 TIMES VOICE OUR STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS PLAN.
WE ASK THAT YOU DENY THIS APPEAL AND GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU IN PERSON AFTER ONE YEAR.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO, YOU DO TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, THE NEXT IS CHRISTOPHER CASEY COLUM, 8 26 EAST MAGNOLIA.
WE ARE NOT ABLE TO PHYSICALLY GO TO CONTEST THIS DECISION BECAUSE OF COVID 19.
PLEASE HELP US SAVE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
I AM BORN AND RAISED HERE AND OWN A HOUSE AND LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU KINDLY AND STAY SAFE.
THE NEXT IS LUCY WILSON, ONE 30 MAGNOLIA DRIVE, UM, 3 35 TRAIL ITEM 27, WHICH WAS THE OLD POSTING.
UM, I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT THE U D C IS AGREEING TO HEAR THIS REQUEST DURING A TIME WHEN THE RESIDENTS CANNOT ATTEND AND EXPRESS OUR CONCERNS DIRECTLY.
STREET IS CONSIDERED AN ALLEY IN MOST OF, IN MOST OTHER PARTS OF TOWN AND RIVER ROAD.
AND AS IN RIVER ROAD IS A DEAD END.
NO BLOCK IN RIVER ROAD PROVIDES THE DENSITY OF POPULATION AND HOUSING THAT THIS WILL AND REVIEW BY THE B O A.
IT ALSO APPEARED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE IS IN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD, YET WE ARE PROCEEDING WITH THREE STORY BUILDING ON THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY.
WHEN I MOVED TO SAN ANTONIO FROM AUSTIN, I SOON DISCOVERED THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THIS CITY CREATE MORE MUCH OF AN AMBIENCE AND ATTRACTION PEOPLE FIND HERE.
UM, NOW I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPERIENCE THIS AS A RESIDENT.
RIVER ROAD IS AN HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT ONLY IN
[00:50:01]
ITS PHYSICAL STRUCTURES AND DATA OF ORIGIN, BUT ALSO IN ITS ADHERENCE, HISTORICAL WAY OF LIFE.LIFE THAT ALLOWS NEIGHBORS TO KNOW NEIGHBORS TO HELP EACH OTHER AND TO SIT TOGETHER ON PORCHES AND IN FRONT YARDS, EVEN IN A TIME OF PANDEMIC.
THIS DESIGN DOES NOT LEND ITSELF TO THIS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR YOUR SERVICE PROTECTING THE HISTORIC NATURE OF OUR CITY.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY, MIFI MOORE 6 0 3 RIVER ROAD.
THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD IS UNITED AGAINST THIS CUMBERSOME OUT OF CONTEXT DEVELOPMENT.
IN PARTICULAR, THERE WILL BE NO SAFETY OUTLET FOR CARS EXCEPT BY TRAIL ACCESS TO WE LAUREN, CAN YOU START OUR VOICEMAILS? THIS IS JOHN HERTZ, 1 25 ANASTASIO PLACE LIKE LAZARUS, RISEN FROM THE DEAD.
THE PROJECT OF 3 35 TRAIL STREET HAS COME ALIVE AGAIN, BUT THIS IS NOT THROUGH DIVINE INTERVENTION, RATHER BY THE MISINTERPRETATION OF THE UNIFORM DEVELOPING CODE BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
U D C REQUIRES A ONE YEAR MORATORIUM ON PROJECTS DENIED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
AS THIS ONE WAS IN A 10 TO ONE VOTE, U D C REQUIRES THAT NEW SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FOR H D R C TO WAIVE THIS PROVISION.
THIS IS THE ONLY TIME U D C REFERS TO THE WORD EVIDENCE AND IT POINTS TO ERRORS OR OMISSIONS IN THE PART OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WHICH DID NOT OCCUR.
HOWEVER, THE O H P IS MISCONSTRUED THIS TO MEAN EVIDENCE OF REVISIONS TO THE PROJECT ITSELF.
THIS ERROR IS REASON ENOUGH TO DENY THE WAIVER REQUEST, BUT EVEN ACCEPTING O P'S MISREADING OF THE CODE, WHERE IS THE NEW EVIDENCE? THE O H P CITES SEVERAL REVISIONS THAT MERIT CONSIDERATION, BUT THESE REVISIONS DO NOT EQUAL SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
THERE IS NOTHING SUBSTANTIAL ABOUT THE MODIFICATIONS BEING PROPOSED.
THIS IS THE SAME PROJECT WITH STYLISTIC TWEAKS.
THE PROPOSAL ELIMINATES ONE OF THE THREE UNITS ON TRAIL STREET AND REDUCES ANOTHER TO TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT.
IT'S THE SAME SITE PLAN MINUS ONE UNIT AND THE SAME OVERSCALE PROPOSAL.
THERE ARE COSMETIC CHANGES TO THE LOOK OF THE PROJECT, BUT IF YOU WOULD ONLY COMPARE THE PREVIOUS AND CURRENT ELEVATIONS SIDE BY SIDE, YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THE CHANGES HAVE HARDLY RISEN TO THE LEVEL OF SUBSTANTIAL COMMISSIONERS.
YOU MUST REJECT THIS PROPOSAL AND THIS APPEAL OF THE ONE YEAR MORATORIUM AS THERE ARE NO NEW SUBSTANTIAL REVISIONS TO THE DESIGN.
I LIVE AT 8 4 2 EAST MAGNOLIA AVENUE IN THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I'M CALLING REGARDING THE 3 3 5 TRAIL STREET PROJECT.
I AM IN OPPOSITION TO GRANTING CERTIFICATE OF OF APPROPRIATENESS NUMBER ONE, THERE SHOULD BE NO WAIVER OF THE ONE YEAR REQUIREMENT FOR RESUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION.
NUMBER TWO, THERE'S NO REASON TO RUSH THIS SO YOU CANNOT HAVE A FULL PUBLIC HEARING.
AS USUAL, THIS WILL ALL COME BACK IN A VERY FEW MONTHS TO A NORMAL SITUATION WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN PUT IN THEIR CAREFUL COMMENTS.
THERE SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN 18 UNITS.
MOST OF IT, THERE SHOULD BE NO THREE STORY, UH, BUILDINGS SHOULD BE LIMITED TO A NORMAL TWO STORY HEIGHT.
OKAY, I HOPE THAT, UH, IN THIS EXTRAORDINARY MEETING THAT THE APPLICATION, UH, FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS DECLINED.
I'M THE CURRENT CHAIR OF THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I'M HERE TO COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 1 3 3 5 TRAIL STREET.
DEAR CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS CONCERNED THAT 3 3 5 TRAIL STREET PROJECT IS RETURNING TO THE H D R C.
SOME FOUR MONTHS AFTER ITS CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WAS DENIED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
ON REVIEW, THE CURRENT PROJECT DOES EVIDENCE IMPROVEMENT IN AREAS TO INCLUDE THE REDUCTION OF BUILDING HEIGHT ON TRAIL STREET EXTERIOR DESIGN CHANGES AND CREATION OF A GREEN AREA AROUND A HERITAGE OAK TREE.
HOWEVER, CONCERNS REMAIN AS TO THE INAPPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROJECT'S OVERALL SCALE AND MASS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOT PARTICULARLY AS IT WAS LEARNED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BUILDING THREE.
[00:55:01]
STORY STRUCTURE FALLS LARGELY WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.OTHER AREAS OF CONCERN INCLUDE THE MANS ROOF DESIGN, THE LACK OF ANY ARCHITECTURAL STEP DOWNS TO MEDIATE THE TRANSITION FROM PROPOSED THREE STORY STRUCTURES TO ADJACENT ONE STORY HOMES, THE VIABILITY OF THE HERITAGE OAK PRESERVATION PLAN, AND ISSUES WITH PARKING TRAFFIC AND STORMWATER DRAINAGE INTO THE ASAKIA CREATED BY THE ELIMINATION OF GARAGES ON TRAIL.
OVERALL, WE DO NOT BELIEVE THE CURRENT PROJECT, ALTHOUGH REFLECTING IMPROVEMENT IN SOME AREAS, EVIDENCES SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO JUSTIFY ITS REMOVAL FROM THE AUTOMATIC ONE YEAR WAITING PERIOD FOR RECONSIDERATION OR TO WARRANT ISSUING A SECOND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION COMMISSIONERS.
THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL, UM, ATTACHMENTS THAT WERE WITH THE COMMENTS READ BY, UM, ROY SCHWEERS.
UM, THESE ARE A LITTLE HARD TO READ.
UM, WE ARE GONNA SHOW 'EM BRIEFLY ON THE SCREEN, BUT I HAVE JUST DROPPED THEM INTO YOUR REVIEW FOLDER IN THE GOOGLE DRIVE SO YOU DO HAVE ACCESS TO THEM.
AND WITH THAT, UM, WE WILL GIVE THE APPLICANT TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.
I'M GONNA RUN THROUGH THIS AS QUICKLY AS I CAN AS FAR AS A PROPER AND FAIR HEARING THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP.
THIS IS THE SAME FOR ALL OF US.
THIS IS A DIFFICULT TIME AND THIS IS NOT FAST TRACKING.
WE'VE BEEN RUNNING THIS PROJECT FOR TWO YEARS.
ALMOST NOTHING IS FAST TRACKED ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
TWO, WE HAVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT AS WELL.
THEY WERE INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE.
THEY WERE NOT READ ALOUD, BUT WE DO HAVE SUPPORT, ESPECIALLY FROM THE PEOPLE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ATCH.
UM, THE TRAIL TRAIL STREET IS NOT TYPICAL RIVER ROAD STREET.
UH, YES, THERE IS SOME ACCESS THERE, BUT IT IS NOT A THROUGH STREET.
IT IS NOT LIKE A TYPICAL STREET WITH SIDEWALKS.
UM, IT IS, IT, IT'S JUST, I'M SORRY, NOT THE SIDEWALKS PART, BUT IT, IT'S JUST NOT A TYPICAL STREET FOR RIVER ROAD AND IT SHOULDN'T BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS.
UM, BUILDING THREE IS, IS IS PARTIALLY IN THE HISTORIC BUT NOT BUILDING FOUR.
UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THE COMMISSIONERS CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.
WE ARE BELOW THE 50% COVERAGE, WHICH IS ON, IS ONE OF THOSE GUIDELINES, BUT WE'RE BELOW THAT.
UM, PARKING STAFF MENTIONED THE STANDARD FOR RIO, WHICH WE, WE THINK WHICH WE CAN MEET.
WE THINK OUR PARKING THAT WE HAVE IS BETTER, BUT WE CAN ACCEPT STAFF STIPULATIONS FOR THE PARKING AND THEY HAVE ENDORSED THAT STIPULATION SO WE CAN MEET THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND LAST I WANNA SAY THAT WE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THE YEARS.
I MEAN, I HATE TO BE BLUNT ABOUT IT, BUT THEY NEVER HAVE.
THEY DON'T WANT A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT THERE.
THE PROBLEM THEY HAVE WITH IT IS USE.
THEY WANT A SINGLE FAMILY PROJECT.
WE CAN NEVER ACHIEVE THE GOAL THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO GET US TO.
WE'VE BEEN GIVEN FEEDBACK, WE NEED IT, THEN WE RECEIVE NEW FEEDBACK.
WE DO APPRECIATE THEIR CONTINUED FEEDBACK, BUT ALWAYS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IF WE RESPOND AND WE COULD OBTAIN SUPPORT, AN EMAIL FROM JEN MAIA SAYS THAT IF WE DID THESE THINGS, WE COULD GET SUPPORT, BUT WE NEVER DO.
AND AS FAR AS WHAT IS A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE, WE STAFF HAS INTERPRETED THIS CODE.
THIS IS THEIR CODE IN THE U D C TO SAY WHAT IS SUBSTANTIAL CITY STAFF, CITY ATTORNEY HAVE SAID THIS IS IMPORTANT.
UH, IT IS SUBSTANTIAL AND WE'VE MADE THOSE CHANGES.
SO WE BELIEVE WE'VE MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND, AND SHOULD BE APPROVED TODAY.
COMMISSIONERS, WE DID RECEIVE A REPORT THAT THE VOICEMAILS WERE HARD TO HEAR.
I JUST WANT TO, I'M ASKING IF YOU WERE ABLE TO HEAR THEM ALL IN THEIR ENTIRETY.
UM, AND THEN I HAD LOW BANDWIDTH, SO I HAD TO SWITCH OVER TO A DIFFERENT DEVICE.
UM, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE THE SAME ISSUE.
I'M NOT SEEING YOUR VIDEO LOAD.
JUST MAKING SURE YOU'RE THERE.
WE DO NEED YOU ON CAMERA FOR THE QUORUM REQUIREMENT.
UM, SO WITH THAT, UM, I CAN TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONERS FOR DISCUSSION.
CHAIRMAN FETZER, UH, I I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE START DIALOGUE.
UH, I, I, UM, PER PERSONALLY UNDERSTAND, UH, MASSING ISSUES IS TWO, TWO COMPONENTS OF THE VERTICAL AND THE HORIZONTAL.
AND, UM, I I SEE CHANGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED MOST DEFINITELY.
BUT, UM, I MEAN FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I I, I'VE HEARD COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS OVER THE COURSE OF THESE PROJECTS OR, OR THE COURSE OF THE DIFFERENT ITERATIONS.
BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, UM, THE, THE SOLUTIONS
[01:00:01]
THAT HAVE BEEN PUT FORTH, THEY'RE, THEY, THEY DON'T IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF AMASSING.AND FROM THE D R C UH, MEETING THAT WE HAD, I MEAN, I, I CAN EVEN SEE HOW, UH, UH, THE SOLUTIONS THAT ARE PUT FORTH THAT THAT ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE AMASSING IN, IN EFFECT CREATE OTHER PROBLEMS. UM, UH, AND LET ME, CORY, IF YOU COULD, UM, UM, VERIFY WHETHER OR NOT MY VIDEO ON OR MY AUDIO.
THE AUDIO, UH, THE VIDEO'S STILL THERE.
UM, ACTUALLY, NO, I'VE GOT A SPINNING WHEEL.
AND WE'RE BACK, RIGHT? YEAH, WE'RE BACK.
SO I, I, I GRABBED HOLD WITH THE, WITH THE, WITH THE IDEA OF, UM, A SUBSTANTIAL, UM, CHANGE.
BECAUSE MAINLY, MAINLY BECAUSE, I MEAN, I, I CAN ONLY THINK OF AN EXAMPLE THAT, THAT, OR, YOU KNOW, AN OFF EXAMPLE, BUT DESIGN-BASED, RIGHT? IT'S AS IF I WENT TO THE TAILOR AND, AND I HAD A SLEEVE THAT WAS SHORT, AND EVERY TIME I COME BACK TO THE TAILOR, HE'S FIXED SOMETHING ELSE OR HE'S DONE ANOTHER IMPROVEMENT, THAT THAT MAY NOT BE THE MAIN OBJECTIVE, AND IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR ME TO SAY, YEAH, YOU KNOW, I'M GLAD YOU PUT THAT FLOWER THERE, OR, WHOA, THAT'S A NICE STITCH.
BUT EVERY TIME I PUT THAT COAT ON THE SLEEVE IS STILL SHORT.
UH, I THINK THAT'S THE SITUATION THAT'S OCCURRING HERE.
SO IT, IT WOULD BE FALSE TO SAY THAT THE, THAT THE APPLICANT HAS NOT COME BACK WITH CHANGES, CHANGES, AND, BUT I'M NOT, I, I PERSONALLY DON'T FEEL CONFIDENT THAT IT'S ADDRESSED THE PROBLEMS THAT, THAT ARE REALLY THE, THE MAIN, UM, I, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE MAIN COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH HIM, AND IT'S ALMOST AS IF THERE'S A RESISTANCE TO, UM, I, I, I GUESS I CAN SEE THE, THE, THE RESISTANCE TO MAINTAINING THE, THE NEED FOR THIS MANY UNITS OR, OR, OR, OR THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE.
BUT AS IT, AS IT RESOLVES, IT CREATES THE SAME ISSUES, UH, PARTICULARLY I I SAY, UH, THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE, THE REMOVAL OF THE CARPORTS, AND THEN THIS IDEA THAT SOMEHOW THE CARS ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE FOOTAGE OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
UM, AND THEN LOOKING AT THE CONTEXT OF THE PARKING PATTERNS IN THE COMMUNITY THERE, THAT, THAT IS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT WITH THE, WITH THE PATTERN.
NOW, THAT BEING SAID, CHAIRMAN, UH, THE DESIGN CHANGES THAT KEEP COMING BACK, I'M, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE, UH, I DON'T LIKE GETTING INVOLVED IN, IN THE, THE DESIGNER'S, UM, UH, INTENT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, BEAUTY'S IN THE EYE AND THE BEHOLDER IN MY, MY OPINION, AND SURE THERE'S GUIDELINES, UM, UH, THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I, I UNDERSTAND WINDOWS AND DOORS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT, UH, UH, THAT IS WHAT IS BEING USED AS THE NARRATIVE FOR HOW CHANGE HAS OCCURRED.
AND YES, IT MAKES IT A TRUE STATEMENT, BUT IT DOESN'T DEAL WITH THE KIND OF FOUNDATIONAL ASPECTS OF WHAT THIS ISSUE IS THAT ARE, THAT ARE REALLY CRYSTALLIZED BY, BY IGNORING THE MASSING AND WHAT BECOMES EVIDENT IN THE CREATION OF NEW PROBLEMS. SO IN THAT, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S BEEN THAT SIGNIFICANT CHANGE THAT THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED BECAUSE, UH, IF IT'S ONLY CREATING NEW PROBLEMS, THEN SURE, WE COULD SAY THAT, THAT A SOLUTION HAS BEEN PUT FORTH, BUT, UM, IT'S NOT ONE THAT SOLVES THE ISSUE TO BEGIN WITH.
SO IN EFFECT, WE WOULD BE RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE BE, WHERE WE STARTED FROM WITH RESPECT TO THE THING THAT CREATES THE PROBLEM, WHICH I BELIEVE FUNDAMENTALLY IS THE MASSING.
UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ.
UM, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, THIS IS, UM, IN ORDER TO BE, THIS IS A NEW CASE OR DIFFERENT, UH, DESIGN, UM, BUT I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT NEW APPROACH TO DESIGN, ASIDE FROM THE COSMETIC AND DIFFERENT MATERIALS IN, IN, IN, IN THE BUILDINGS.
I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING, UM, UH, HEIGHT.
UM, YOU SAY THAT YOU REDUCE BUILDING FIVE AND SIX TO A TWO STORY, UM, BUT I CAN'T SEE A TOTAL ELEVATION.
IT ONLY SHOWS ELEVATION TO MID ROOF, WHICH IS 25 FEET.
[01:05:01]
CLARIFY WHAT IS A TOTAL HEIGHT OF, UH, BUILDING FIVE AND SIX? AND THEN, UM, I KNOW THAT SEVERAL, UM, COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE RAISED QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING.I SEE THAT YOU'VE REMOVED THE, THE GARAGE GARAGES AND, AND PROVIDED PARKING IN FRONT.
UM, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, IS THE PARKING ISSUE ON TRAIL STREET, I MEAN IN CIRCULATION, WOULD THAT BE, UH, RESOLVED OR REVIEWED BY T C I? UM, AND THAT IS, THAT ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
WELL, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
WE, UH, WE, WE DID MEASURE ROOF HEIGHT, UM, BASED ON THE, BASED ON THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH, WHICH, UM, AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE OUR 25 FEET, UH, ON BUILDING FIVE AND APPROXIMATELY 23 FEET ON BUILDING SIX, I THINK THE, UH, THE HEIGHT OF THE ROOF, ALTHOUGH WE, WE DID NOT, UM, CALCULATE THAT BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE DID NOT STATE THAT CALCULATION.
I THINK THE HEIGHT WOULD BE ULTIMATELY ABOUT THREE TO FOUR FEET TALLER AT THE PEAK, BUT THOSE PEAKS WOULDN'T BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
AND IN REGARDS TO THE PARKING, UM, SO THERE ARE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS PER ZONING.
AND SO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF WILL REVIEW THE PROVIDED OFF STREET PARKING TO MAKE SURE IT CONFIRM CONFIRMS WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT THE, THE PROJECT IS IN.
AND IF I MAY, I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE THING.
I, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT THE, THE REASON, AS DAVID WAS SAYING THAT THE U D C CODIFIES WHAT HEIGHT BUILDING HEIGHT IS, AND WHEN YOU HAVE A GABLED ROOF, IT'S THE AVERAGE HEIGHT BETWEEN THE RIDGE, UM, THE RIDGE LINE AND THE, UH, TOP PLATE.
SO THAT'S WHY THE HEIGHT IS DRAWN THERE AND NOT AT THE RIDGE.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANTS.
UM, YOU MENTIONED, UM, AFTER THE, THE COMMUNITY COMMENTS ARE READ THE LETTERS AND LISTENED TO THE VOICEMAILS.
YOU MENTIONED THAT THE, ALL THE PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION, UH, WERE READ, BUT NOTHING POSITIVE, AND YOU DO HAVE POSITIVE ONES FROM THE COMMUNITY.
SO CAN YOU JUST GIMME A SUMMARY OF, YOU KNOW, THE THINGS THAT YOU FEEL IS A LITTLE POSITIVE FROM THE, THE COMMUNITY VERSUS THE, THE NEGATIVE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HEARD AND TO TODAY? YES, SIR.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A DIFFICULT TIME WITH, WITH C OVID 19.
IT'S, IT'S BEEN TOUGH TO KIND OF GO FROM DOOR TO DOOR, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH, UH, NUMEROUS, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE REALLY CLOSE TO OUR SITE, UM, ON ATCH, UM, AND ON ON MA, MAINLY ON ATCH AND THESE, UH, SUPPORTERS, THEIR SUPPORT LETTERS IN YOUR, UM, APPLICATION, IN OUR APPLICATION PACKAGE AND THE SUPPORT LETTERS.
WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT, UH, THE NEW GROWTH, UM, COMING TO THIS SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THESE, THESE PROPERTY OWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS, UH, WE HAVE A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER THAT HAS A BOUTIQUE STORE.
SHE WAS REALLY EXCITED TO SEE NEW RESIDENTS, UH, COME INTO TOWN.
UM, SHE WAS REALLY EXCITED TO SEE, YOU KNOW, MORE POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS FOR HER STORE, UH, MORE PEOPLE TO GET TO KNOW IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND INCLUDE.
AND, UM, WE ALSO SAW THAT THE, UH, RESIDENT ACROSS THE STREET, UH, WHO OWNS A HOME ON ATCH, HE WAS VERY EXCITED.
HE, HE HAS PLANS TO, UH, RENOVATE HIS HOME, AND HE'S VERY PROUD OF HIS, UH, HOME OWNERSHIP IN THE AREA.
HE'S HAD A SMALL BUSINESS IN THE AREA FOR I THINK, 25 YEARS, AND HE IS REALLY EXCITED TO SEE SOME NEW NEIGHBORS AND SOME NEW THINGS HAPPENING, UH, TO THIS SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY ALL EXPRESSED THAT, UM, THEY FELT LIKE THEIR SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND, UM, THEY WERE REALLY EXCITED TO SEE SOMETHING THAT COULD REALLY KIND OF COME ALONG AND HELP IMPROVE THE AREA AND, AND REALLY, UM, GET PEOPLE VERY EXCITED.
UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I THINK BEFORE WE, UM, DISCUSS THE, THE MERITS AND, AND, UH, MAYBE FLAWS OF THE PROPOSAL THAT'S BEFORE US HERE, I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY HONE IN ON THIS WHOLE, UH, DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THIS, UH, IF THERE'S EVIDENCE OF SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE HERE WITH THIS SCHEME.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE, THE LOGIC GATE THAT I WANNA GET THROUGH.
[01:10:01]
EITHER IT IS OR IT ISN'T.AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS PROJECT FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF HEARINGS BOTH IN PUBLIC AND, AND D R C.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S, IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THE CHANGES, UH, PREVIOUS TO THIS PROPOSAL WERE VERY INCREMENTAL AND SOMEWHAT PAINFUL TO GET THROUGH AND, UH, A BIT RESISTIVE, UH, ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT, UM, TO GET TO, TO, TO A, A POINT THAT IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
AND, UH, THAT THIS COMMISSION, UH, VOTED FOR A, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, UM, PREVIOUSLY, BUT THAT WAS A LONG DRAWN OUT PROCESS, MAINLY BECAUSE THE CHANGES WERE SO INCREMENTAL.
I THINK THE, THE, UH, THE ANALOGY OF GOING TO THE TAILOR AND HAVING THE SLEEVES, YOU KNOW, NOT QUITE THE RIGHT SIZE, UH, WAS, WAS VERY, UH, VERY APPROPRIATE HERE.
BUT I THINK THIS PROPOSAL THAT'S COME TO US HERE DOES REPRESENT SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE.
I THINK IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE ELIMINATION OF A UNIT, THE CREATION OF THE HERITAGE OAK, UH, COURT, THE REDUCTION OF NOT TWO UNITS, BUT ACTUALLY THREE UNITS TO TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT, UM, I'M SURE THAT HAS A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL IMPACT ON THE PROFORMA OF THIS, UH, THIS DEVELOPER'S, UH, PROJECT.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD MERIT, UH, DEEMING THIS AS A, UM, AS A SUB, AS EVIDENCE OF A SUBSTANTIAL, UH, CHANGE.
NOW, I ALSO THINK THAT THOSE CHANGES HAVE IN KIND OF A DOMINO EFFECT PRESENTED THEIR OWN CHALLENGES AND PARTICULARLY, UH, THE ISSUE OF THE PARKING.
THAT'S ONE THAT WE'VE SPENT AT LEAST TWO OR THREE MEETINGS DISCUSSING AT LENGTH.
BUT I WOULD PUT FORTH THAT THIS DOES, THERE IS EVIDENCE OF SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE AND WOULD MOVE FOR, UM, HEARING THIS CASE ON THAT BASIS.
UM, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CARPENTER ON, UM, THE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE.
I WAS ALSO PART OF ONE OF THE D R C MEETINGS AND I, I, I ALSO AGREED THAT I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS WORKED VERY WELL.
UM, I MEAN, THE APPLICANT HAS WORKED LENGTHY WITH US AND ALL THE REQUESTS, AND I THINK ALSO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I THINK TRAIL STREET HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN ISSUE FOR US.
AND THE FRONT STREET PARKING, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GONNA GET AWAY WITH THAT.
WE'RE NOT GONNA GET AWAY FROM THAT.
BUT I THINK THAT EVERY TIME WE SEE THE JUST IMPROVES BETTER.
I MEAN, THE PLANTINGS, THE WHAT, THERE'S A PICTURE SOMEWHERE.
I WAS INTRODUCED TO THAT FIRST TIME AND THE D R C AND I WAS LIKE, I THINK THAT IS EVEN, I MEAN, A LITTLE BIT OF A COVERUP, SO IT DOESN'T LOOK, YOU KNOW, TOO BAD TO HAVE THE CARS AND EVERYTHING ON THE PORCHES.
SO I THINK IT LOOKS VERY NICE.
AND THEN REDUCING THAT BUILDING FIVE TO TWO STORE, WHICH IS, I KNOW SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS ALWAYS WANTED.
UM, SO I, I GENERALLY ACCEPT THIS AS PRESENTED TODAY.
SO THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, I BELIEVE, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER MADE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
UH, CHAIRMAN, THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I, UH, MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER BASED ON FINDINGS B SECOND, UH, JUST FOR STAFF VERIFICATION, ARE WE DOING A MOTION SEPARATE ITEM A AND THEN ITEM B? OKAY.
THIS IS AMAL LASANA WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, JUST TO WANT, WANT TO MAKE WHETHER THE MOTION IS MAKING FINDINGS THAT THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL NEW EVIDENCE PRESENTED.
THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I AM, UH, MOVING, UH, FOR GRANTING OF THE WAIVER BASED UPON EVIDENCE OF SUBSTANTIAL, UH, CHANGES AS, UH, ENUMERATED IN STAFF'S FINDINGS.
OH, THIS CHAIRMAN, FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE.
VELAZQUEZ, NAYYY CARPENTER? AYE.
[01:15:02]
UM, THAT FAILS? UM, SO AT THIS POINT, UM, THE WAIVER'S NOT APPROVED, AND SO CONSIDERATION ON THE SECOND ITEM IS NOT NEEDED AT THIS TIME.SINCE THE WAIVER HAS FAILED, THE ONE YEAR MORATORIUM, UH, GOES, STAYS IN EFFECT AND THE APPLICANT CAN COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION, UH, ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE BO O A DENIAL.
IS THAT CORRECT? CORY? UM, I'LL ASK ALMA TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, SHOULD WE ALSO HAVE A, A MOTION TO DENY RATHER THAN JUST SIMPLY YOU DENIAL? NO, YOU CAN'T CONSIDER ITEM B IF THERE'S NO WAIVER GRANTED, BUT HE'S ASKING SINCE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE WAIVER DIDN'T PASS IS ANOTHER MOTION TO DENY NEEDED.
OH, BUT, BUT THE, THE CODE REQUIRES AN AFFIRMATIVE OF SIX VOTES TO APPROVE THE WAIVER.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE BEING TECHNICALLY CORRECT IN ON HOW WE'RE CONSTRUCTED.
YOU DON'T NEED TO VOTE ON THE SECOND ITEM.
IF THE WAIVER, UH, WAS DENIED.
THE QUESTION IS, DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THE DENIAL OF THE WAIVER? TECHNICALLY, THE WAIVER WAS NOT DENIED.
TECHNICALLY, WE JUST DIDN'T BE APPROVED.
YOU CAN'T, SO, SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO DENY THE WAIVER, OR IF THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO DENY THE WAIVER, THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED.
BUT ON THE QUESTION IS, DO THEY NEED A MOTION TO DENY, OR IS THE FACT THAT IT FAILED TO PASS ENOUGH? THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT HE'S ASKING.
I BELIEVE THE FACT THAT, UH, IT FAILED TO PASS IS ENOUGH.
THE FACT THAT A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION DID NOT APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THE WAIVER IS ENOUGH TO, TO BE CONSIDERED A DENIAL OF THE REQUEST FOR THE WAIVER.
MS. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
CHAIRMAN, FETZER, UH, I, I, I IMAGINE BEFORE WE, UH, ADJOURN, I, I WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT TO STAFF, PARTICULARLY COREY, UH, TO THANK YOU FOR THE, TO THANK, I MEAN, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO, TO THANK HIM FOR, UH, ALL THE HARD WORK THAT I KNOW GOES TO PUTTING THESE WEB BASED, UH, MEETINGS TOGETHER.
UH, I APPRECIATE, I, I ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE AT THIS TIME.
UH, I, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A, A, YOU KNOW, A COMMENT WITH RESPECT TO HOW IMPORTANT IT IS RIGHT NOW.
UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN WE WENT TO THESE TYPE OF MEETINGS AND WHEN THE CITY DECIDED TO SHUT DOWN THE LEVEL OF INFECTION IN SAN ANTONIO WAS ACTUALLY VERY, VERY LOW TODAY, THAT THOSE LEVELS ARE VERY HIGH AND THEY'RE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGH.
AND, AND, UM, EVERY, UM, INDICATION IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT SAN ANTONIO HAS BEEN BEHAVING WITH RESPECT TO ITS SOCIAL DISTANCING PRACTICES, THERE'S GOOD CHANCE THAT THEY'RE GONNA GO EVEN HIGHER.
SO, I, I HOPE THAT THE H D R C AND THAT AND THAT OUR, OUR, OUR STAFF LEADERS CAN, UH, CONTINUE TO HAVE US MEET IN THIS WAY.
AND, UH, I KNOW THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR A COMMUNITY THAT IS COMING TO A PARTICULAR CASE, UH, IT MAY SEEM IMPOSSIBLE, UH, TO HOLD MEETINGS AND TO GET PUBLIC, UH, INPUT THIS WAY.
BUT WE'VE ALREADY HAD A FEW MEETINGS AND I FIND IT ALMOST AN IMPROVEMENT.
UH, BUT, UH, BUT, BUT, BUT MOST DEFINITELY.
AND, UH, I HOPE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO, TO, UH, OBSERVE, UH, WHAT IS THE SAFEST PROTOCOLS FOR THE CITIZENS AND FOR THE COMMISSIONERS.
I, I, I AGREE WITH MR. VELAZQUEZ AND I, I THANK YOU O H P FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK.
UM, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING A PUBLIC, UH, PARTICIPATION PROCESS AS YOU HAVE BEEN FACILITATING THE PUBLIC.
UM, THEY, THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC OR PRESENTLY AS THEY DID BEFORE, BUT ALLOWING SO MANY WAYS FOR THEM TO PARTICIPATE IS IMPORTANT.
UH, WE, WE, THEIR, THEIR INPUT IS IMPORTANT IN OUR, UM, DECISION.
SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALLOWING THAT, UH, TO HAPPEN AND TO PROVIDE A LOT OF, UM, WAYS FOR THEM TO PARTICIPATE.
I WANNA ECHO THOSE COMMENTS FROM THE
[01:20:01]
OTHER COMMISSIONERS, THANKING STAFF AND, AND THE CITY FOR ALLOWING THIS PROCESS TO CONTINUE.UH, I DO WANT TO, UH, THANK MR. MARIN AND MR. MCKNIGHT FOR THEIR EFFORTS.
AND, UH, I THINK COMMENTS THAT THE PROJECT IS, UH, OR HAS IMPROVED OVER THE, OVER THE LIFESPAN OF THE PROJECT.
UM, AND I DO WANNA THANK THE, UH, CITIZENS WHO HAVE, UH, PARTICIPATED IN THIS PROCESS.
AND, AND, UM, AGAIN, LIKE MR. VELASQUEZ SAID, I THINK WE NEED TO DO THIS SAFELY FOR ALL CONCERNED.
UM, AND I THINK THE, UH, O H P STAFF ARE, UM, ACCOMMODATING THAT.
UM, I DO THINK WE STILL HAVE A QUESTION TO ANSWER IT.
I THINK ALMA'S CHIMING IN MR. CHAIR, UM, IN RESPONSE TO YOUR, IN RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION REGARDING, UM, WHEN THE ONE YEAR, UM, ELAPSE OF WHEN THE APPLICANT MAY SUB SUBMIT A ONE YEAR MAY SUBMIT IT A NEW APPLICATION, IT'S ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF DISAPPROVAL.
SO TECHNICALLY THAT WOULD BE ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE THAT THE BO O A MADE A DECISION.
MRS. COMMISSIONER FISH, I MOVE TO ADJOURN.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ.