[1. CALL TO ORDER ]
[00:00:03]
I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
IT'S JULY 3RD, 2024, REGULAR SESSION OF THE CHURCH'S PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION.
ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE AGENDA WAS CALLED TO ORDER.
[2. SEAT ALTERNATE TO ACT IF REQUIRED ]
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS DE SEAT ALTERNATE TO ACTIVE REQUIRED.WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER CRAIG SEATED THIS EVENING HEARING OF RESIDENCE.
WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE SIGNED UP TONIGHT AND THEY ALL WANNA TALK ABOUT WHAT ARE GONNA TURN OUT TO BE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
UM, SO YOU HAVE AN OP, YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE OPTIONS HERE.
YOU CAN SPEAK NOW AND AGAIN DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, OR YOU CAN WAIT AND SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AFTER YOU'VE HEARD THE, THE PRESENTATIONS.
THE CHOICE IS ENTIRELY UP TO YOU.
[3. HEARING OF RESIDENTS]
ANY CASE, HEARING OF RESIDENTS THIS TIME IS SET ASIDE FOR ANY PERSON WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.EACH PERSON SHOULD FILL OUT THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
PRESENTATION SHOULD BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN THREE MINUTES.
DISCUSSION BY THE COMMISSION OF ANY ITEM.
NOT ON THE AGENDA SHALL BE LIMITED TO STATEMENTS OF SPECIFIC FACTUAL INFORMATION GIVEN IN RESPONSE TO ANY INQUIRY, A RECITATION OF EXISTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY AND OR A PROPOSAL TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER DURING THE HEARING OF RESIDENCE PORTION OF THE AGENDA WILL CALL ON THOSE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN THE ORDER THEY HAVE REGISTERED ADAM SHARP.
WE DO BOTH, CORRECT? YES, YOU CAN.
PLEASE NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
ADAM SERGEANT 22 3 ON HILL, UH, ON A PRIVATE ROAD NEXT TO THE REZONING.
UM, I'VE GOT A LITTLE PACKET HERE.
MR. HAAS WAS, WAS KIND ENOUGH TO GIVE YOU ONE OF THE SHEETS THAT I PRESENTED.
CAN I GIVE YOU THIS? SO, IN, IN THAT PACKET I GAVE YOU, UH, LIKE I SAID, THE SECOND SHEET MR. HAAS PROVIDED, UM, SHEET ONE I I BELIEVE AS PART OF THE UDC CODE.
UH, WHEN THE APPLICATION WENT BY, WENT THROUGH TO, UH, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UM, MR. DENSBERGER SUBMITTED THAT HE OWNED THE ROAD.
NOW, THIS IS A CLEARLY BASED ON SHEET TWO, THAT THAT ROAD KIND OF MIGRATES BETWEEN BOTH PROPERTIES.
AND SO THAT'S ONE OF, ONE OF OUR BIG, UH, PUSHBACKS IS MY HOUSE IS PLOTTED AS A SUBDIVISION WITH THE CITY OF SHIRKS.
SO MY SOLE SINGLE ACRE IS PLANTED AS A SUBDIVISION, AND THAT'S MY ONLY MEANS OF ACCESS EGRESS.
AND I WAS GIVEN A VARIANCE FOR THAT, UM, IN 2018.
SO I, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT AND FOR Y'ALL TO LOOK AT THAT AND KINDA SEE, SEE WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH AS FAR AS ACCESS EGRESS, UM, FOR A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO 35.
IS THIS, UH, SANDRA OTT AND MARK ICK? GOOD EVENING, SIR.
I LIVE ON 1 8 9 40 OLD WHEATER STEIN ROAD.
UH, THIS PROJECT, THIS WHOLE REZONING PROJECT IS BASICALLY A REHASH OF A PROJECT THAT WAS ATTEMPTED AND FAILED EARLIER.
AND, UH, IT REPRESENTS NO NEED OR IT, IT REPRESENTS AS FILLING NO NEED OF THE COMMUNITY AND IT HAS NO SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND I AM HERE TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THIS CURRENT PLAN FOR REZONING.
DID WE HAVE ANY EMAILS OR TEXTS OR ANYTHING? NO.
[4. CONSENT AGENDA]
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS OUR CONSENT AGENDA.WE HAVE A SINGLE ITEM, THE MINUTES FOR THE JUNE 5TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING COMMISSIONERS.
DO, UH, DOES THIS ITEM NEED TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION? IF NOT, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE?
[00:05:04]
MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? SECOND.I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA FROM COMMISSIONER BRO AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER GOLD.
NO DISCUSSION ON CONSENT AGENDA.
WOULD YOU PUBLISH THAT, PLEASE? ALL RIGHT.
SIX AYES, NONE OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES.
[5. PUBLIC HEARING]
ITEM NUMBER FIVE, PUBLIC HEARINGS.WE HAVE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WILL HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING RELATED TO ZONE CHANGE REQUESTS, SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUESTS, AND UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS.
WITHIN THIS AGENDA, THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE OPEN TO RECEIVE A REPORT FROM STAFF, THE APPLICANT, THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, AND ANY OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS UPON COMPLETION.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED.
THE COMMISSION WILL DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE APPLICATION AND MAY REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF OR THE APPLICANT IF REQUIRED.
AFTER DELIBERATION, THE COMMISSION IS ASKED TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL IF NECESSARY.
SO THE PROCEDURE FOR EACH ONE OF THESE IS WE'LL START WITH A PRESENTATION BY STAFF.
IF THE APPLICANT AT THAT TIME CHOOSES TO MAKE A PRESENTATION, WE'LL HEAR FROM THEM.
AFTER THAT'S DONE, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC INPUT.
ANYONE THAT WANTS TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE IS WELCOME TO, UM, STEP UP TO THE, THE PODIUM.
UH, NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE IN THREE MINUTES.
AND THEN AFTER WE HEAR FROM YOU FOLKS, I WILL CLOSE THAT AND THE, THE COMMISSION WILL THEN DISCUSS THE ISSUE.
SO WE START OFF WITH, UH, ITEM NUMBER A-P-L-Z-C 2024.
MANY NUMBERS HERE, 0 1 4 1, HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON A REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 38.8 ACRES OF LAND FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SLASH AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO APARTMENT SLASH MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT KNOWN AS GUADALUPE COUNTY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 6 8 2 9 4 6 8 2 9 5 6 8 2 9 6 6 8 3 0 2 6 8 3 0 3 6 8, 3 1 5 AND 6 8 3 1 6.
GENERALLY LOCATED 1,100 FEET TO THE WEST OF THE FM 2252 AND IH 35 INTERSECTION, CITY OF SCHURZ, GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS, SAM, THERE WE GO.
PLZC 2 0 2 4 0 1 4 1 ZONE CHANGE FROM GENERAL BUSINESS AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL RA TO APARTMENT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R FOUR SAMUEL HAAS SENIOR PLANNER.
TO GET OUR BEARINGS HERE, UH, THE PROPERTY IS OUTLINED IN GREEN.
YOU'LL SEE TO THE NORTH HERE IS IH 35.
DOWN HERE TO THE SOUTH IS OLD STEIN AND WE HAVE FREEWAY MANOR OVER HERE TO THE EAST.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 38 ACRES.
IT'S THE EXISTING USE CURRENTLY IS RESIDENTIAL AND UNDEVELOPED.
ON JUNE 21ST, A TOTAL OF 21 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT OUT.
UH, THERE HAS BEEN 13 OPPOSITIONS RECEIVED AND EIGHT IN FAVOR.
TWO SIGNS WERE ALSO POSTED ON THE PROPERTY.
ONE ALONG IH 35 HERE, AND ONE ALONG OLD STEIN AS WELL.
SO THE, AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THE EXISTING ZONING IS GENERAL BUSINESS.
THERE'S A SLIVER OF GENERAL BUSINESS RIGHT HERE, AND THEN THE REST IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RA AND THE PROPOSED ZONING IS APARTMENT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL R FOUR.
LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS, THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED ZONE CHANGE ON THE SAME PROPERTY.
THAT PREVIOUS REQUEST WAS AROUND 18 ACRES.
UH, THE, THIS CURRENT ONE IS 38.
THEY'VE ADDED 20 ACRES TO THAT.
ON SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2023, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A SEVEN TO ZERO VOTE.
THE REQUEST WAS DENIED ON OCTOBER 10TH, 2023 AT CITY COUNCIL WITH A FIVE TO TWO VOTE DUE TO THE SUPER MAJORITY OF THE REQUIREMENT.
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 2154 C FIVE STATES THAT AFTER A CITY COUNCIL DENIAL, THE APPLICANT MUST
[00:10:01]
WAIT SIX MONTHS BEFORE COMING BACK IN WITH THE SAME REQUEST.AND JUST TO CLARIFY HERE, THE PREVIOUS REQUEST DID NOT.
BASICALLY THIS WHOLE SECTION RIGHT HERE WHERE MY CURSOR IS, WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PREVIOUS ONE.
IT WAS JUST THESE PROPERTIES HERE AND THEN ALSO THIS PROPERTY AS WELL.
SO THEY HAVE ADDED THIS SECTION HERE TO THIS REQUEST.
SO FOR ZONING CHANGES, WE LOOK AT UDC SECTION 2154 D FOR THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.
AND I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THESE ONE BY ONE.
SO NUMBER ONE, WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE OR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT IMPLEMENTS THE POLICIES OF THE ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE LAND PLAN, INCLUDING THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
SO THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND PLAN DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS A MIXED USE CENTER.
UH, IT IS INTENDED TO INTEGRATE DENSER RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND OFTEN ENTERTAINMENT SPACES NEARBY, TYPICALLY ALONG A SIGNIFICANT TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS.
THIS APARTMENT MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT WOULD CONFORM TO THE LAND USE DESIGNATION IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS IT SPECIFICALLY CALLS FOR THE DENSER RESIDENTIAL AND THE PROPERTY ABUTS TO THE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS.
AND THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
YOU'LL SEE THE PROPERTY OUTLINED IN YELLOW, AND IT IS WITHIN THIS MIXED USE CENTER DESIGNATION.
NUMBER TWO, WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE OR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PROMOTES THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY AND THE SAFE, ORDERLY, EFFICIENT, AND HEALTHFUL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
SO IN ORDER TO ENSURE SAFE AND ORDERLY AND EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT AND THE EXPANSION OF THE CITY APARTMENT, MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS SHOULD NOT BE LOCATED IN AREAS WHERE, UH, THEY WOULD INCREASE TRAFFIC THROUGH SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AND SHOULD BE LOCATED ADJACENT TO ARTERIAL STREETS WITH SUFFICIENT CA CAPACITY TO CARRY THE INCREASED TRAFFIC.
THE PROPERTY IS NOT ADJACENT TO ANY LARGE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND AS MENTIONED BEFORE, IT IS ADJACENT TO IH 35 AND OLD WIER SIGN TO THE SOUTH, WHICH OLD WIER SIGN IS, UH, CLASSIFIED AS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
I'LL SPEAK MORE ON THAT LATER.
WHETHER THE USE IS PERMITTED BY THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE IN THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND THE STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO SUCH USES WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA OF THE LAND TO BE RECLASSIFIED.
SO THE AREA RIGHT NOW IS DEFINED BY UNDEVELOPED LAND, RURAL LIKE RESIDENCES, COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES, AND A LARGE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT INCLUDES MULTIFAMILY CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION JUST TO THE WEST.
THE USES PERMITTED WITHIN THIS ZONING DISTRICT WOULD ALIGN WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE WIDER AREA.
ADDITIONALLY, ARTICLE NINE OF THE UDC IS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON THE RESIDENCES IN THE AREA ARE MITIGATED.
NUMBER FOUR, WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGES IN ACCORD WITH ANY EXISTING OR PROPOSED PLANS FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS, STREETS, WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY SEWER, OR OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES TO THE AREA.
SO AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY ABUTS THE IH 35 3 FREEWAY OLD WAITER SIGNED TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
AND ALSO IN THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, THERE IS A FUTURE EAST WEST CONNECTOR CLASSIFIED AS A RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR THAT'S, UH, RUNNING THROUGH PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS A FUTURE NORTH SOUTH CONNECTOR THAT'S CLASSIFIED AS A SECONDARY ARTERIAL.
YOU'LL SEE THIS IS A SNIPPET FROM THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN.
THE PROPERTY IS OUTLINED IN GREEN AND THIS IS THAT EAST WEST RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR THAT RUNS THROUGH PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THIS IS THAT FUTURE NORTH SOUTH ARTERIAL THAT'S RUNNING THROUGH PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, AND THERE'S OLD LEADER SIGN AND THE FREEWAY AS WELL.
CONTINUING WITH NUMBER FOUR, UH, FOR THE WATER UTILITIES IN THE AREA, THERE'S A 12 INCH WATER LINE THAT RUNS ALONG IH 35.
THERE'S ALSO A 16 INCH WATER LINES THAT RUNS THROUGH PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
CURRENTLY, THERE'S AN EIGHT INCH FOR SEWER.
THERE'S AN EIGHT INCH LINE, APPROXIMATELY 900 FEET TO THE WEST IN THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
THERE'S ALSO A 24 INCH SEWER LINE THAT RUNS ALONG DEAN ROAD 200 FOOT, THAT'S APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO CONNECT TO ADEQUATE UTILITY FACILITIES PER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
ARTICLE 15 AND A MORE DETAILED ENGINEERING REVIEW WILL RECUR AT THE TIME OF THE PLATTING PROCESS.
A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE WAS MAILED TO S-C-U-C-I-S-D TO NOTIFY OF THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE SHIRTS.
FIRE EMS AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS WERE NOTIFIED OF THE ZONE CHANGE AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED NO OBJECTIONS.
NUMBER FIVE, WHETHER THERE HAVE BEEN ENVIRONMENTAL OR ECONOMICAL CHANGES WHICH WARRANT THE REQUESTED CHANGE, UH, NO, THERE HAVE NOT.
NUMBER SIX, WHETHER THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ORIGINAL ZONING, THERE WAS NO ERROR IN THE ORIGINAL ZONING.
NUMBER SEVEN, WHETHER ALL APPLICANT'S BACK TAXES ARE OWED, THIS DOES NOT IMPACT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL AT THIS TIME AND WHETHER OTHER CRITERIA ARE MET, WHICH AT THE DISCRETION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL ARE DEEMED RELEVANT AND IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION OF THIS AMENDMENT.
[00:15:01]
ALL UDC REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET FOR THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE, AND AT THIS TIME HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR FROM CITY COUNCIL.SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST DOES CONFORM WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE UDC.
UH, IT ALIGNS WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE WIDER AREA AND IT ADHERES TO THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.
THEREFORE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLZC 2 0 2 4 0 1 4 1.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE, THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.
HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
ASHLEY FAIRMONT WITH KILLING GRIFFIN AND FAIRMONT 1 0 1 0 1 REUNION PLACE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
AND, AND THANK YOU SAM, FOR THE REPORT AND, AND A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON THIS PROPERTY.
UM, NOT ALL OF YOU MAY HAVE BEEN HERE LAST FALL, BUT I THINK MOST OF YOU WERE, UM, WHEN THE COMMISSION CONSIDERED THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST, UH, FOR JUST THE, THE 20 ACRES OR SO IN THE CENTER OF THIS PIECE.
UM, AND SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE ADDED ADDITIONAL PROPERTY ABOUT 18 ACRES OR SO FRONTING ON OLD STEIN.
UH, AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS BEEN UPDATED.
SO THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CHANGES THAT I'LL, I'LL WALK THROUGH.
UH, JUST A, A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION.
I'M, I'M SURE YOU ALL ARE AWARE, BUT JUST A, YOU KNOW, A QUICK SUMMARY OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE AREA.
SO, UH, FROM 3 0 0 9 UP TO THIS PROPERTY, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S SOME, UH, SLO CROSSING IN THE CITY OF SLO SHIRT STATION IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
UM, THAT IS A, A LARGE MIXED USE PROJECT, PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL, BUT ALSO HAS A HOUSING COMPONENT, A MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING COMPONENT, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RENTALS, OBVIOUSLY EVO, UM, THE FRONTAGE OF BUSINESS USES ALONG I 35.
AND SOME OF THOSE WILL BE CHANGING.
I KNOW YOU ALL CONSIDERED A ZONING CHANGE THAT FAILED FOR EXISTING BUSINESS ON, UM, 35.
SO THAT PROPERTY WILL BE CHANGING AND THERE SHOULD BE NEW INVESTMENT COMING IN THAT AREA.
UM, THE STAR HERE IS OBVIOUSLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR THE CHANGE OF ZONING AND ADJACENT TO THAT IS THE LARGE, UM, SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY.
SO HERE'S THE CURRENT ZONING MAP AS SAM SHOWED YOU.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, JUST SOME OF THAT SURROUNDING ZONING.
THE GB ON THE FRONTAGE OF 35 AND ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, UH, WHERE YOU SEE THOSE, THOSE PAPER LOTS THERE, THERE'S NO HOMES.
UH, AND THEN THE PDD FOR SHIRT STATION, IT, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE ON HERE TOO, BUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY IS ZONED, UM, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR INDUSTRIAL, UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO I'M SURE YOU ALL ARE VERY FAMILIAR.
YOU KNOW, YOU CONSIDERED IT AND OBVIOUSLY ADOPTED IT.
UM, BUT THIS WHOLE AREA HAS THE MIXED USE CORRIDOR DESIGNATION AND THAT IS A CHANGE THAT HAPPENED SINCE THE LAST TIME YOU CONSIDERED THIS.
UM, AND JUST TO WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE GOALS OF THAT PLAN TO ENCOURAGE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO CREATE VIBRANT, WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL AREAS WITH ACCESS TO AMENITIES WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
UH, SO WE THINK THE ADDITION OF HOUSING HERE WOULD BE WALKABLE, DRIVABLE ON A DAY LIKE TODAY, MORE REALISTIC, UH, BUT VERY CLOSE TO THOSE NEW AMENITIES THAT ARE COMING AT SHIRT STATION.
ALSO, UM, EXPANDING HOUSING OPTIONS AT DIFFERENT PRICE RANGES FOR ALL.
UH, SO THIS IS 38 ACRES OF, OF OUR FOUR ZONING.
UM, AND THE IDEA HERE IS TO PROVIDE A COUPLE DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES OPTIONS.
UM, PRIMARILY MORE THAN LIKELY RENTALS, UH, BUT, UH, LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT PRICE RANGES AND CATERING TO DIFFERENT SALARIES AND DIFFERENT AREA MEDIA AND INCOME.
UH, WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT PARTNERING WITH THE HOUSING TRUST ON A PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY TO PROVIDE SOME WORKFORCE HOUSING IN THIS SIDE OF TOWN.
UM, ALSO OBVIOUSLY ACCOMMODATING POPULATION GROWTH, WHICH I KNOW YOU HEAR ALL THE TIME, BUT PEOPLE ARE MOVING TO SHIRTS, MOVING TO THE AREA, UH, AND WE THINK THIS IS A GOOD LOCATION WITH ACCESS TO 35 AND OLD WINTERSTEIN.
UM, AGAIN, MIXED USE CENTER, THE COMBINATION OF THE HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING TYPES, LIVE, WORK PLAY AS YOU HEAR.
UH, AND THEN THE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS.
UH, THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, UH, SAM MENTIONED THERE ARE TWO MAJOR ROADS THAT WILL BE BUILT, UM, ARE ON THE WAY.
SO RIPS CHRYSLER IS BEING EXTENDED FROM CILO, UM, FROM CILO VALLEY THROUGH SHIRT STATION.
AND THEN, UM, THE, THE ALIGNMENT OF THIS IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, BUT THIS IS THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN IN, IN REALITY IT'S BEING SHIFTED SLIGHTLY, BUT THEN RIPS CHRYSLER WOULD COME UP TO THIS PROPERTY PROVIDING ONE ACCESS POINT, UM, ANOTHER ACCESS POINT AND WHY ALSO THE PROPERTY TO, UM, ON OLD WHEELER SIGN, THE JSC TRACK WAS ADDED.
THOSE 18 ACRES WAS ALSO TO ALLOW FOR THE NORTH SOUTH CONNECTOR AT LEAST PORTION OF IT TO BE BUILT.
UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW, ROADS GET BUILT WITH DEVELOPMENT, UH, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS PROJECT WOULD BE DOING WOULD BE BUILDING ROADS FOR ACCESS TO THIS SITE.
AND THEN HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, FURTHER CONNECTIVITY, UM, UP TO 35.
SO HERE'S, UH, ANOTHER EXHIBIT JUST SHOWING THE ROADWAY CONNECTION.
[00:20:01]
I INCLUDED THIS SO YOU COULD SEE WHAT THE EXTENSION OF RIPS CHRYSLER WOULD LIKELY LOOK LIKE.IT'S PROBABLY GONNA CURVE SLIGHTLY INTO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY.
UM, IT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA RUN RIGHT ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE, BUT THAT'S WHERE THAT CONNECTION WOULD BE.
AND HERE'S AN IDEA OF A SITE PLAN.
SO, UH, WE HAVE THE, THE 20 ACRES OR SO, UH, WITH THAT FIRST CONNECTION FROM RIPS CHRYSLER ON THE TOP.
SO THAT WOULD BE PRIMARY ACCESS POINT FOR THAT PIECE WITH THE SECONDARY ACCESS OF THAT PIECE COMING FROM OLD STEIN.
AND THEN YOU SEE THE PROPERTY, THE 18 ACRES OR SO WITH THAT SITE PLAN, WITH THE PRIMARY ACCESS BEING FROM OLD WEER STEIN.
AND THESE ARE ROADS THAT WOULD BE BUILT ALONG WITH THE PROJECT.
UM, I DID WANNA INCLUDE THIS 'CAUSE I, AS YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD, AND I THINK YOU'RE GONNA HEAR TONIGHT, UM, COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, DEN OT, WHICH IS A PRIVATE ROADWAY THAT EXTENDS FROM I 35 TO THIS PROPERTY.
UH, THIS IS A SURVEY THAT EXISTS, UM, SHOWING BOTH TRACKS AND SHOWING THE OWNERSHIP OF A 30 FOOT STRIP TO 35.
UM, AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE A, A THIRD ACCESS POINT TO THE PROPERTY.
AND, AND I KNOW ROADS AND DISPUTES OVER MAYBE OWNERSHIP OR ACCESS ARE NOT NECESSARILY WHAT YOU ALL WILL CONSIDER, UH, WHEN DISCUSSING AND REVIEWING A ZONING CHANGE.
BUT I DID, UH, WANNA BRING IT UP BECAUSE IT WILL BE COMING UP TONIGHT.
UH, HERE IS, UH, SINCE THE LAST TIME WE HAVE HAD A SURVEY REPORT PREPARED, UH, AND JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THIS.
THIS IS JUST REGARDING AND CONFIRMING ACCESS, UH, AN OWNERSHIP OF THAT STRIP.
UM, SO WHAT I'VE HIGHLIGHTED HERE IS THAT JUST SAYS DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY, WE FOUND THAT THE 0.982 ACRE TRACT, UH, BEING A PORTION OF THE 19 MOY EIGHT ACRES, THAT'S THE BIG CHUNK IN THE MIDDLE, HAD A 30 FOOT DIRECT FRONTAGE TO I 35.
UH, AND THEN THE CONCLUSION OF THIS JUST SAYS THAT HAVING FOUND THAT THERE IS ACTUAL FEE OWNERSHIP INTEREST AND EASEMENT ESTATE INTEREST WOULD GIVE ACCESS TO I 35.
UM, I HAVE DETERMINED THAT THIS TRACT OF LAND IS NOT LANDLOCKED AND HAS DIRECT ACCESS TO I 35.
SO THAT STRIP, THERE'S 30 FEET THERE, THERE IS AN ADJACENT PROPERTY TO OWNED BY OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS, UM, BUT THERE IS A DRIVEWAY THERE AND THERE'S NO INTENT TO CUT ANYONE OFF FROM USING THAT DRIVEWAY.
UH, IF THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH HOW THAT EASEMENT IS USED, UH, THERE IS A 30 FOOT STRIP THAT IS OWNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER REQUESTING ZONING TONIGHT BY MR. DENSBERGER.
AND SO THAT 30 FOOT STRIP, A NEW, NEW PAVEMENT COULD BE PUT THERE, UM, AND HAVE A SEPARATE DRIVEWAY.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE COMMENTS ABOUT THAT DRIVE, BUT WE HAVE ALSO SHOWED YOU AND DEMONSTRATED THERE'LL BE TWO OTHER ACCESS POINTS TO THIS PROPERTY.
AND AGAIN, HERE'S THE SITE PLAN, UM, SHOWING CONCEPTUALLY WHAT, WHAT THE LAYOUT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND THE CONNECTIONS OF THOSE ROADWAYS.
AGAIN, JUST AGAIN, I KNOW THIS IS NOT A PDD REQUEST, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, UM, I KNOW THOSE COME UP OFTEN HERE, UM, OR MAYBE YOU WANT THEM TO COME UP LESS OFTEN.
SO JUST SO YOU KNOW, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE EXPLORED FOR THIS PROPERTY, THE IDEA OF NOT ASKING FOR VARIANCES FOR THE PROJECT, BUT ADDING ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS TO THE PROJECT.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN WORKING WITH STAFF AND THE MESSAGING FROM THIS COMMISSION AND FROM COUNCIL IS THAT KINDA MOVING FORWARD.
THE IDEA OF PDS PDDS WOULD BE FOR KIND OF VERY UNIQUE PROJECTS.
UH, AND THIS IS IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD HOUSING.
SO THAT, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, THAT IS AN OPTION THAT WE DID LOOK AT TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL BUFFERING GUARANTEES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, BUT ULTIMATELY IT WAS DETERMINED THAT R FOUR WAS THE BEST ROUTE TO GO.
SO THAT'S ONE SITE AND HERE'S THE SECOND SITE, UM, TRADITIONAL HOUSING AND THEN SOME, UH, TOWN HOME TYPE PRODUCT FRONTING ON OLD WIER SIGNS OF THE DENSITY.
AND IT TAPERS OFF JUST SOME IDEAS OF, OF HOW IT COULD LOOK.
AND THIS IS THE SAME, UM, RENDERING THAT YOU ALL SAW BEFORE.
SO I HAVE, I HAVE LOTS OF RENDERINGS.
I KNOW, AGAIN, THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING, SO I, I WON'T GO THROUGH THEM ALL, BUT HAPPY TO DISCUSS MORE, UM, ABOUT THE PROJECT AND JUST REQUEST, UM, THAT YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL TONIGHT.
AND IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM AND PROVIDE COMMENT AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU MS. FARMAN.
ALL RIGHT, IT IS, UH, 6:25 PM AND AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC INPUT.
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS TOPIC IS WELCOME.
TO STEP FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND TRY TO KEEP YOUR REMARKS TO THREE MINUTES SERVICE.
UH, NICOLE SHARP, UH, 2233 DEN KNOT HILL, UM, ON THE, OKAY, IN NUMBER, UM, EIGHT OF THE AGENDA STAFF IS INSURED.
[00:25:01]
BEEN MET FOR THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE PER THE UDC CODE, SECTION 20 ONEE FOR MULTIFAMILY R FOUR, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH THE ADEQUACY OF AVAILABLE ACCESS.THIS IS A SMALL SHIP OF LAND, AS YOU SAW ON THE PAPER DAWSON SURVEY THAT IS AT ITS WIDEST 31.88 FEET AND THE NARROWEST SECTION 20.95 FEET.
THIS WOULD NOT MEET ANY ROAD REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY, WHICH THEREFORE THERE IS NOT CY OF AVAILABLE ACCESS 21.55 E.
ALSO, STATES SHOULD BE LOCATED ADJACENT TO ARTERIAL STREETS WITH SUFFICIENT CAPACITY TO CARRY THE INCREASED TRAFFIC GENERATED WITHOUT ACCESS TO THE ARTERIAL ROAD, WHICH IS CLEAR ON THE SURVEYS IN THE GUADALUPE APPRAISAL MAPS.
THIS, AS YOU GUYS HAVE THIS REQUEST SHOULD BE DENIED.
YOU CAN CLAIM THAT ACCESS IS NOT IMPORTANT UNTIL PLATING, BUT THE UDC CODE AND THE CITY COUNCIL SAID OTHERWISE WE ASK THAT YOU DO NOT GO AGAINST YOUR OWN UDC CODE.
AND THE CITY COUNCIL'S PRIOR DECISION FOR ONE DEVELOPER.
ALSO, THE, SOME OF THE PROPOSED ROADS THAT, THAT THEY WERE SHOWING LITERALLY RUN THROUGH OUR HOUSE.
LIKE, I MEAN, I KNOW THEY'RE PROPOSED, BUT I MEAN, YOU'RE BASING A LOT OF THIS ON PROPOSED ROADS THAT WERE MAYBE GONNA HAPPEN AND THAT WILL POSSIBLY HAPPEN.
AND PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROADS, THAT ARTERIAL ROAD IS NOT ACCESSIBLE.
I LIVE AT 2 3 0 5 DUN OTT HILL.
UM, THIS IS THE SECOND TIME IN NINE MONTHS THAT MY NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE HAD TO COME BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD TO FIGHT THE SAME REZONING REQUEST.
NINE MONTHS AGO, YOU ALL VOTED TO NOT REZONE THE LAND IN QUESTION FOR, FOR SEVERAL LEGITIMATE REASONS.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE FACT THAT DEN OTT HILL IS A PRIVATE ROAD.
THE LAND SELLERS TELL YOU THEY OWN THE ROAD, BUT WE HAVE PROVIDED THE DEED AND A PRIVATE ROAD AGREEMENT TO PROVE THEY IN FACT DO NOT OWN THE ROAD.
AND AS SUCH, HAVE NO RIGHT TO CONVEY OWNERSHIP.
MY NEIGHBORS AND I RELY ON THIS SMALL NARROW, PRIVATE ROAD AS THE ONLY ACCESS TO OUR PROPERTY.
WE DID NOT DESIRE TO SELL OUR ROAD NINE MONTHS AGO, AND WE ARE NOT SELLING IT TODAY.
WE REMAIN CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS THAT MAY EXIST ON THE PROPERTY.
WE KNOW THE LAND HAS BEEN USED AS A DUMP IN THE PAST, AND WE WORRY THE DEVELOPER MAY UNCOVER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OR EVEN UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS.
WE, AGAIN, IMPLORE THE BROKER CURRENT LANDOWNER AND OUR DEVELOPER TO ENSURE US.
THEY HAVE HIRED A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER TO PERFORM AN INSPECTION AND PRODUCE A PHASE ONE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT.
ANY POTENTIAL LEADER OR INVESTOR WOULD LIKELY REQUIRE THIS AS A CONDITION OF INVESTMENT IN ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THIS LAND.
SO IT'S NOT UNREASONABLE FOR US TO ASK THIS.
FURTHERMORE, THE ONLY THE ONLY COMMUNICATION WE HAVE HAD REGARDING THE REZONING REQUEST AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS FROM THE CITY.
IF APARTMENTS WERE GONNA BE BUILT IN YOUR FRONT YARD AT A MINIMUM, YOU'D WANNA BE ASSURED YOUR PRIVATE ROAD WILL NOT BE TAKEN OR USED.
THERE WILL BE NO ENVIRONMENTAL RISK TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY AS A RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND THE DEVELOPER WILL BUILD HIS HIGH DENSITY AND COMMUNITY IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T RUIN YOUR FAMILY'S ENJOYMENT OF YOUR RURAL SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY.
YOU'D WANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
WILL THERE BE TALL BUILDINGS UP AGAINST MY FRONT YARD LIMITING MY PRIVACY? WILL LIGHTS BE SHINING IN MY YARD? WHAT WILL BE DONE TO PREVENT INCREASED VANDALISM OR CRIME? WILL THE DEVELOPMENT CAUSE CHANGES TO DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND FLOOD MY PROPERTY? ARE THERE PLANS FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS STREETS, WATER SUPPLY, SEWERS, OR OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES TO THE AREA? WE HAVE BEEN KEPT IN THE DARK AND CAN ONLY WONDER WHAT THE PLANS ARE MADE THAT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR DAILY LIVES AND OUR PROPERTY VALUES.
WE UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S ONLY SOURCE OF REVENUE IS TAXES AND REZONING.
HISTORICALLY, AG EXEMPT LAND TO MULTIFAMILY WOULD GENERATE SIGNIFICANT REVENUE FOR THE CITY, BUT IS VERY SHORTSIGHTED TO ASSUME ALL MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPERS ARE EQUAL.
THE DEVELOPER WHO HAS A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE AND DEVELOP THE LAND IS INEXPERIENCED AND UNPROVEN.
HE DIDN'T SHOW UP AT THE LAST REZONING HEARING AND HE LIKELY WON'T SHOW UP TO THIS REZONING HEARING.
SO YOU CAN'T ASK HIM ABOUT HIS TRACK RECORD OR EVEN HIS PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY.
WHAT LITTLE I'VE FOUND OUT ABOUT HIM IS THAT HE IS A RECENT COLLEGE GRADUATE FROM LONG ISLAND.
CAN I FINISH FROM LONG ISLAND WITH ZERO APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE? HE APPEARS TO REMODEL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH HIS FATHER.
AFTER YEARS OF BEING MARKETED FOR SALE BY ONE OF THE LA BEST LAND BROKERS IN SOUTH TEXAS, WE MUST ASK OURSELVES, WHY IS THIS ONLY BUYER INTERESTED IN THIS LAND? IF THIS WAS SUCH A SLAM DUNK SITE FOR APARTMENTS, WHY AREN'T LOCAL DEVELOPERS LIKE EMBRY DEVELOPMENT OR DARREN CASEY MAKING OFFERS THE CONDITION THAT CAUSED YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THE REQUEST NINE
[00:30:01]
MONTHS AGO? REMAINS UNCHANGED.THIS HEARING IS A RETREAD OF THE SAME REQUEST MY NEIGHBORS.
AND I ASK YOU AGAIN TO DECLINE THE REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
UM, I FEEL THE NEED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING REAL REALLY QUICK.
NO, NO, THIS IS JUST IN GENERAL.
UM, THIS ISSUE GOES TO TWO PLANNING ZONING TONIGHT.
UM, NOW I WAS NOT HERE, BUT THE, THE, THE COMMISSION AS A WHOLE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT BACK IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR.
IT WAS CITY COUNCIL THAT DENIED IT AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT.
MY NAME IS GLORIA OT DENSBERGER.
I AM ONE FOURTH OWNER OF A PROPERTY THAT INCLUDES A PORTION OF OTT HILL.
I'M OPPOSED TO THE REZONING AND WILL NOT ALLOW ANY PART OF MY LAND TO BE USED FOR THE APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT.
I'M AT 2217 OTT HILL, AND I AM ALSO ONE QUARTER OWNER OF THE OT PROPERTY THAT INCLUDES A PORTION OF THE OD HILL.
I AM OPPOSED TO THE REZONING AND WILL NOT ALLOW ANY PART OF MY LAND TO BE USED FOR THE APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT.
HI HAROLD JAMES DENSBERGER 2229 OD HILL, SAME NAME THAT'S ON THE APPLICATION.
SO OCTOBER, 2023, PLANNING AND ZONING, Y'ALL VOTED ON THE 20 ACRES, SEVEN TO ZERO SENATE TO CITY.
THE CITY DENIED APPLICATION BASED ON THE DEVELOPER HAD NO MEANS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS.
THEY CLAIMED THAT THEY HAD A RIGHT TO USE THE D KNOT HILL.
THEY DON'T, AS IT WAS POINTED OUT, THERE'S AREAS WHERE THEY LIVE OWN LESS THAN 20 FEET.
SO HOW THEY'RE GONNA GET THAT THROUGH, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT THE CITY COUNCIL DENIED IT SAYING YOU CAN'T HELICOPTER IN THERE SO THAT YOU HAVE NO MEANS TO INGRESS AND EGRESS UNLESS THEY USE THOSE OTHER TWO MEANS THAT SHE SPOKE ABOUT.
UM, AS, UH, AS THE, AS THE OTS STATED, THEY OWN, THEY OWN, UH, PART OF THE ROAD, SOME AREAS MAJORITY, SOME AREAS LESS.
SO WHY ARE WE HERE AGAIN, REHASHING THIS? UH, THEY DON'T MEET YOUR UDC CODE FOR INGRESS.
THE, UH, AGAIN, THE, THE OTS THE DENSBERGER DON'T OWN.
HE DOES NOT, UH, THE REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT OWN, UH, ALL OF THE ROAD, PARTIAL, PARTIAL OF THE ROAD.
AND THERE'S A PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT FILED WITH GUADALUPE COUNTY IN 1949, VOLUME 2 36 PAGES TWO 30 AND 2 34.
AND IN THAT EASEMENT STATES IN THE EASEMENT AGREEMENT, IT IS PERMANENT AND PERPETUAL.
AND THERE'S OTHER AGREEMENTS THAT CAN BE PROVIDED TO CITY COUNCIL, WHOEVER THEY NEED THEM.
THAT SAYS THAT THE ROAD CANNOT BE MODIFIED, CHANGED IN GRADE OR ANYTHING ELSE WITHOUT ALL LANDOWNERS, UH, AGREEING TO IT.
SO THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE COUNTY.
UM, WE CAN PROVIDE THEM IF THEY'RE NEEDED.
SO WE BUILT OUR HOUSES UP THERE.
MY HOUSE BETTER THAN 35 YEARS AGO.
UH, MY, WE BOUGHT THE LAND FROM MY FATHER-IN-LAW, MR. OT.
WE BUILT OUR HOUSE AND WE PLAN ON DINING IN THAT HOUSE, BUT WE, WHEN WE BOUGHT IT, WE HAD THE EXPECTATION THAT WE HAVE A MEANS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE REST OF OUR LIFE.
AND IF YOU, IF YOU ALLOW 'EM TO TAKE OUR ROAD, WE HAVE NO INGRESS EGRESS AND, AND IT, AND IT DESTROYS WHERE WE LIVE IF YOU TURN IT INTO A PUBLIC ROAD, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO.
UH, SO JUST TO KIND OF REITERATE, OH, SORRY, 2233 DOWN HILL, ADAM SHARP.
UM, SO, UM, JUST AS MISS FREMONT SHOWED YOU, THE WIDTH OF THE ROAD IS 30 FEET, RIGHT? I DO DEVELOPMENT,
[00:35:01]
I'M BUILDING THE SADDLEBROOK PROJECT OUT THERE, AND THERE'S, WE DON'T HAVE A ROAD THAT'S 30 FOOT WIDE NOWHERE'S ON THERE.AND THESE ROADS ARE PROPOSED, THEY'RE FUTURE ROADS AND THEY'RE NOT SAYING THAT THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THE ROADS OR THEY'RE GONNA PUT FUNDS IN TO A WIDEN OLD WEEDER STEIN ROAD, OR THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THAT RIP KUSHNER ROAD.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA PROVIDE ANY FUNDS FOR THAT.
SO WHY WOULD THEY BE ALLOWED TO REZONE THIS? IT DOESN'T MEET THE UDC CODES AND THEY'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING TO HELP EXPAND THE PROPERTY, UH, NORTH OR SOUTH AS FAR AS THE ROAD GOES.
UM, AGAIN, 30 FEET'S NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO BUILD ANY ROAD IN THE CITY OF SHIRTS.
SO I HOPE YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND DENY THIS, THIS REZO.
HOW WE DOING TONIGHT? I'M GONNA BREAK UP THE, UH, THE, THE, UH, TRAIN ON ONE SIDE TO GIVE YOU A DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT TAKE ON IT.
EXCUSE ME, SIR, I NEED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.
YEAH, MY NAME'S JOHN JASICK AND I AM A LONG-TERM RESIDENT AND PROPERTY OWNER OF 1 9 0 1 8 OLD STEIN ROAD, WHICH IS ONE OF THE PROPERTIES IN QUESTION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
I HAVE BEEN IN THIS AREA FOR OVER 55 YEAR, 55 YEARS, AND I'VE SEEN THE DRAMATIC CHANGE, UH, THIS HAPPENED IN THE I 35 CORRIDOR, UH, IN THE LAST FIVE DECADES.
NOTHING SHORT OF INCREDIBLE, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA STATE THAT I TRULY DO EMPATHIZE WITH EVERYONE WHO STOOD UP HERE TO PROTEST THIS PROPERTY.
I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO KEEP THEIR ROAD, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT IN A BIT, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, TO KEEP THEIR AREA ISOLATED AND SECLUDED FROM DEVELOPMENT THAT IS THEIR OWN PIECE OF HEAVEN.
AND, AND THEY DO NOT WANT IT DEVELOP.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT I TOO YEARNED FOR THE DAYS WHEN I GREW UP HERE WHERE THIS AREA WAS TRULY RURAL AND SURPRISINGLY, RELATIVELY REMOTE.
IT TOOK US 20 MINUTES TO GO TO THE GROCERY STORE BACK IN THE DAY, THE NEAREST BUILDING ON ANY CORNER OF I 35 AND AND 3009 WAS COUNTRY CORNER.
THERE WAS ONE BUILDING THERE AT THAT TIME PERIOD.
MY GRANDPARENTS LIVE RIGHT THERE AT I 35 AND FM 3009, AND NOW WE HAVE STARBUCKS THERE, RIGHT? SO, YOU KNOW, MY POINT OF SAYING THIS IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE FARMED IN RANCH, THIS AREA OFF, OFF DEAN ROAD WHERE ALL THESE HOUSES ARE, WHETHER IT'S WILLOW POINT, WHETHER IT'S TANA, OR WHETHER IT'S, WHETHER IT'S ALL THESE DEVELOPERS HAVE GONE IN THE TIME TO TRY TO KEEP OUR AREA RURAL AND COUNTRY THAT TIME PASSED US BY.
WE SHOULD HAVE STOPPED THAT A LONG TIME AGO, 30 YEARS AGO WHEN NORTH CLIFF FIRST WAS PROPOSED FOR THOSE THAT KNOW NORTH CLIFF, OR WHEN WE SOLD WHERE THE JONAS PROPERTY SOLD AND BECAME BELMONT PARK.
OR WHEN WILLOW POINT CAME IN THERE OR THE VO THE VO PROPERTY SOLD AND BECAME MONTANA DEVELOPMENT.
LIKE RIGHT NOW, THE AREA'S NOT RURAL ANYMORE, BUT WE ARE SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF A MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT? CITIES BUILD HOUSES, CITIES BUILD STARBUCKS, TICOS MOVIE THEATER RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD.
THE WILLY'S ICE HOUSE IS RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD.
HECK, WE EVEN GOT A DUNKING DONUTS RIGHT THERE NOW.
AND, YOU KNOW, AND LASTLY, CITIES ALSO DEVELOPED APARTMENTS AND THEY DEVELOP TOWN HOMES.
IT'S WHAT CITIES DO, IT'S JUST, IT ALL GOES TOGETHER.
SO LET ME JUST CLOSE THIS, THIS LAST THOUGHT.
THIS IS A NATURALLY BEAUTIFUL AREA WITH GOOD SCHOOLS, GOOD CLIMATE, GOOD INFRASTRUCTURE, AND RELATIVELY LOW STANDARD OF STANDARD, UH, RELATIVELY LOW COST OF LIVING AND ALL THE CONVENIENCES THAT ANYBODY COULD EVER WANT.
THE AREA SHOULD NOT BE RESTRICTED FOR THE PRIVILEGED FEW LANDOWNERS TO MONOPOLIZE, BUT OPENED UP FOR EVERYONE TO ENJOY, ENJOY, AND LIVE IN FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE.
THEREFORE, I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS REZONING APPLICATION.
AND IT IS CORRECT FOR WHERE THIS GENERAL AREA IS IN ITS URBAN LIFECYCLE.
AND AS WITH RESPECT TO THE ROAD THAT WE KEEP GOING ON BACK AND FORTH, I WISH WE COULD RESOLVE IT, BUT APPARENTLY WE CAN'T.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS TALKING TO THE DEVELOPER THAT THAT'S TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER THAT HE HAS COMMITTED TO RIPS, CHRIST RIPS CHRYSLER EXTENSION.
NOW MAY OR MAY NOT BE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS HE'S DEVELOPED, HE'S COMMITTED TO PUTTING THE RICH CHRYSLER EXTENSION IN, WHICH GIVES HIM THE ACCESS.
HE NOW HAS ACCESS TO THE OLD WIND SHINE ROAD.
SO HE'S GOT INGRESS AND EGRESS, THE WHOLE 30 FOOT, 20 FOOT, 10 FOOT.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT INVOLVED IN THIS, BUT I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO IT NOW FOR A YEAR.
I, AND THAT, THAT TO ME SEEMS TO BE A LEGAL ISSUE THAT'LL BE RESOLVED THROUGH TIME, BUT IT BECOMES A RED HERRING FOR ALL OF US BECAUSE WE KEEP ON GETTING TIED UP ON IT.
THEY HAVE INGRESS AND EGRESS FROM TWO DIFFERENT WAYS THAT ARE MAJOR THOROUGHFARES.
SO TO ME, I, I KEEP HEARING THIS.
I FEEL LIKE I'M IN A TIME WARP WHERE DEJAVU, WE KEEP HEARING THE SAME THING AGAIN, BUT THEY HAVE AN INGRESS AND EGRESS POINT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS 20 FOOT ROAD OR 10 FOOT OR 30 FOOT.
AND FRANKLY, THAT BECOMES A LEGAL ISSUE THAT I'M SURE OUR, OUR, OUR COURTS WILL LOVE TO SORT OUT AT SOME POINT IN TIME.
BUT IT'S A RED HERRING FOR US.
AT LEAST THAT'S MY RELATIVELY UNINFORMED,
[00:40:01]
UH, THIRD PARTY VIEW OF THE WHOLE THING.I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS LISTENING TO ME AND, UH, I STRONGLY SUPPORT IT.
GOOD EVENING TO THE COMMISSIONERS AND TO EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE TONIGHT.
UM, I LIVE IN AUSTIN, BUT I AM BROTHER TO JOHN.
SO I GREW UP ON THE PROPERTY AT, AT 19 0 18 OH STEIN ROAD.
UM, AND I WOULD, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A FEW THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
UM, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I ALSO FULLY SUPPORT THE REZONING APPLICATION AND AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS MADE BY MY BROTHER.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND IT, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY IN, YOU KNOW, KIND OF KEEPING IN WITH HIS THEME IS THAT YEAH, IT'S TRUE.
YOU KNOW, MY FAMILY WISHES THAT OUR PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY, UM, YOU KNOW, WAS UNCHANGED FROM OUR CHILDHOOD DAYS.
I WISH IT STILL WAS THE WAY IT WAS, BUT YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S NOT REALISTIC AND IT'S NOT CURRENT REALITY AND IT NEVER WILL BE THAT WAY AGAIN.
VERY FEW THINGS EVER REMAIN THE SAME AND THIS IS NO DIFFERENT.
UM, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW THAT ASSUMING THAT A WELL-PLANNED, WELL CONSTRUCTED MULTI-FAMILY COMMUNITY WILL AUTOMATICALLY NEGATIVELY AFFECT, UM, YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND BE A BAD NEIGHBOR.
AND SOMEHOW A NEGATIVE THING, UM, IS A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, UNFOUNDED AND A LITTLE BIT UNFAIR.
UM, AND I WOULD JUST ASK AND HOPE THAT INSTEAD, UH, THE CURRENT AREA NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD FIND A WAY TO BE MILK TO BE WELCOMING TO THEIR NEW NEIGHBORS AND THE NEW DEVELOPMENT JUST AS WE WERE WHEN MANY OF THEM ARRIVED IN, IN THE AREA BACK IN THE DAY WHEN IT WAS JUST US AND TWO OTHER PEOPLE ON STEIN ROAD.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR CONSIDERATION.
MY NAME IS BRENDA OTT AND I LIVE AT 2217 DAN DASH OT HILL.
I HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT MAYBE YOU CAN'T ANSWER, BUT WHEN WE HAD THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THE DEVELOPER TOOK THAT LITTLE STRIPPER ROAD THAT WE ARE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH.
THEY TOOK THAT OFF OF THE REQUEST FOR REZONING AND NOBODY EVER EXPLAINED WHY THEY DID THAT.
IT WAS TURNED DOWN, BUT NOBODY SAID DEVELOPER, WHY DID YOU TAKE THAT LITTLE STRIP THAT WE ARE ALL HAVING PROBLEMS WITH? THAT ROAD WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE MULTI-USE WITH 300 UNITS AND PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN IT.
IT IS, IF YOU, HAS ANYONE HERE BEEN UP THAT ROAD AND SEEING HOW NARROW IT IS, THEY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH SPACE TO MAKE A ROAD, MUCH LESS FOR US TO GET IN AND OUT.
WE HAVE ISSUES ALREADY AND I SAW UP THERE, BUT SAM SAID, YOU KNOW, EMERGENCY SERVICES POLICE DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE HAVE EMERGENCIES UP THERE IN THE PAST AND THEY DO HAVE ISSUES COMING UP THAT ROAD JUST WITH THE TRAFFIC THAT WE HAVE FROM 35 AND THE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA.
SOMETIMES I CAN'T EVEN GET OUTTA MY ROAD.
I HAVE TO BACKTRACK AND SAY, OH, I NEED TO WAIT A COUPLE HOURS IF I DON'T WANNA SPEND 30 MINUTES TO GET TO HEB.
SO I WOULD ASK THAT PLANNING AND ZONING MEMBERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN UP THAT ROAD THAT YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S NOT MEANT FOR MULTIFAMILY.
AND I PERSONALLY WANTED TO BE NEUTRAL.
YOU KNOW, EVERYONE HAS A NEED FOR HOUSING, FOR APARTMENTS AND I REALLY DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT, BUT I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH EVERYBODY USING THE PRIVATE ROB THAT WE OWN PORTIONS TO.
AND THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY.
ANYONE ELSE GOING ONCE, TWICE? NOBODY.
IT IS, UH, 6:44 PM AND THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION IS CLOSED.
COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I GOT ONE.
I WANT TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE NORTH SOUTH CONNECTOR AND THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR.
AGAIN, COULD YOU REHASH THAT ONCE AGAIN AS FAR AS IT'S PART OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT
[00:45:01]
THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE.AND I DUNNO IF MS. FAIRMONT CAN, CAN KIND OF GO OVER THAT AGAIN.
I JUST, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT IN DETAIL.
Y YEAH, SO THE, I CAN SPEAK A LITTLE TO THE CITY SIDE OF THINGS.
UM, IF YOUR PROPERTY HAS A PLANNED FUTURE ROUTE ON IT, UH, IS ACCORDING TO THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO DEDICATE RIGHT AWAY AND OFTENTIMES DEVELOP THAT ROUTE.
SO, UM, YEAH, SO IT BASICALLY HOW THAT ALL LAYS OUT IS DONE LATER IN THE PROCESS, RIGHT? I MEAN WE'RE, WE'RE HERE DECIDING REALLY, YOU KNOW, THE APPROPRIATENESS OF AN R FOUR DISTRICT AT THIS, AT THIS TIME, RIGHT? BUT, UM, I WILL SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, ENGINEERING PUBLIC WORKS, THEY ALL REVIEW THIS AND IF THERE IS MASTER THOROUGH FA THOROUGHFARE PLAN ROUTES ON THE PROPERTY, THEN TYPICALLY THOSE GET DEVELOPED WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
ANYTHING YOU WANNA ADD OR I CAN, SORRY.
CAN I EXIT OUT HERE? YOU WANNA GO SEE PRESENTATION? YEAH.
UM, SO, SO THIS IS THE CITY'S MAP ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN CONNECTIONS.
UM, WHAT WE'VE WORKED ON WITH THEM IS EXACTLY WHERE THOSE ROAD CONNECTIONS WILL BE.
UH, 'CAUSE THAT MAP IS AN IDEA, RIGHT? SO THEY'VE SHIFTED A LITTLE BIT FROM THE PREVIOUS EXHIBIT, BUT, WELL, SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS THE CONNECTION FROM OLD METER STEIN, THAT'S A SECONDARY ARTERIAL I BELIEVE.
SO WHAT THIS IS 90 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THEY'RE REQUIRED WHEN THEY COME INTO PLAT TO DEDICATE A PORTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND WHAT IT SHIFTED IS TO WHERE IT'S ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE AND IN LINE WITH 2252.
UM, SO THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DEDICATE AND THEN REQUIRED TO BUILD.
AND I KNOW THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT NOT HAVING TO PAY FOR THAT, BUT THE CITY HAS ROADWAY IMPACT FEES AND THEN, OR THEY CAN REQUIRE YOU TO DEDICATE AND CONSTRUCT RIGHT OF WAY.
AND SO THIS WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY IN WORKING WITH THE CITY BE A DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY AND A CONSTRUCTION OF RIGHT OF WAY, UM, THAT COME WITH IT.
AND THEN THE, THE RIPS CHRYSLER IS A SLIGHTLY SMALLER ROAD, BUT THAT WOULD BE A, I BELIEVE IT'S A 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY AND THAT EXTENSION WOULD COME THROUGH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY DOES.
UH, HOW DOES IT IMPACT THE PRIVATE ROAD AND WHAT'S THE NAME OF THAT ROAD? DEN OT IS THE NAME OF THE PRIVATE ROAD.
OKAY, SO HOW DOES IT IMPACT DEN OT? SO, SO DEN OT AND THAT'S WHERE IT GETS OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE COMPLICATED AND I THINK THERE'S A, A DIFFERENCE OF, UM, OPINIONS ON WHO OWNS THAT RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THERE IS, THERE'S TWO STRIPS OF RIGHT OF WAY AND THEY'RE OWNED BY DIFFERENT OWNERS, BUT THERE IS AN ACCESS AGREEMENT ON USING THAT RIGHT OF WAY.
SO, UM, SO OD IS THERE, THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THERE NOW.
UH, AND THE IDEA WOULD BE POSSIBLY TO USE THE 30 FEET THAT ARE OWNED BY THE PERSON, BY MR. DENSBERGER REQUESTING THE ZONING.
I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF SIMILAR NAMES.
SO THERE IS A 30 FOOT STRIP THAT IS OWNED, UH, BUT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT ON ACCESS IN AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES.
SO ACCESS CAN'T BE DENIED TO THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE AREA.
SO, BUT AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE A THIRD ACCESS POINT.
YOU, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONFUSION QUESTIONS AND ONGOING AND THERE PROBABLY, I, I'M SURE THERE WILL BE AFTER TONIGHT AFTER COUNSEL ON HOW THAT ROADWAY IS USED, UM, AND WHO CAN DO WHAT.
UM, BUT WE WOULDN'T BE REQUESTING ZONING OF THAT PIECE IF IT WASN'T OWNED BY MR. DENSBERGER.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE INCLUDED IT.
THERE WAS ALSO QUESTIONS ABOUT WHY IT WASN'T INCLUDED BEFORE.
WE DIDN'T INCLUDE IT BEFORE FOR SAKE OF CONFUSION, BUT THERE'S CONFUSION IN THAT WAY.
UM, SO THERE'S A LOT OF OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT PIECE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE WORKED WITH THE JSIC TRACT IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THERE WERE TWO OTHER ACCESS POINTS TO THIS PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED BY CODE IS THE TWO ACCESS POINTS PROBABLY.
I, I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD TO THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S AN EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY, THERE'S ESSENTIALLY A HOLD ON THAT PROPERTY, RIGHT? REGARDLESS OF THE ZONING.
SO IF THERE IS A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT ON THIS PROPERTY, WHICH THERE IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IS THEN WHETHER IT'S ZONED WHICH WAY OR THE OTHER DOESN'T MATTER, THAT'S STILL GOING TO BE A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT.
SO JUST THOUGHT I'D THROW THAT IN THERE.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE CURRENT ROAD, THE CURRENT PRIVATE
[00:50:01]
ROAD THAT'S THERE IS GONNA REMAIN, IT'S GONNA REMAIN A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT NO MATTER WHAT THE ZONING IS ON THAT PROPERTY.AM I UNDERSTANDING CORRECT AS WELL THAT BECAUSE THE APPLICANT OWNS A PORTION OF THAT, IT'S INCLUDED IN THE ZONE REQUEST CHANGE, CORRECT.
SO JUST TO PUT IT SIMPLY, THERE IS JOINT OWNERSHIP OF SEVERAL PROPERTIES, UM, AND THERE IS AN EXECUTOR OF AN ESTATE AND THAT EXECUTOR IS THE ONE THAT IS ASKING FOR THE REZONING.
WELL, I I'D SUGGEST WE STOP CALLING IT A ROAD AND CALL IT A DRIVEWAY.
SO IS, IS THAT PORTION OF, OF, UH, DEN ODD, IS THAT INCLUDED IN THE, IN THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN? IT IS NOT, NO.
BUT THEN THE 2252 EXTENSION IS THE YES.
COULD YOU, COULD YOU PUT THE REZONE RE THE OUTLINE OF THE ACTUAL PROPERTY UP AGAIN? I'M SORRY, I'M GETTING A LITTLE CONFUSED BY ALL THE SQUIGGLY LINES AND WHAT GOES WHERE AND WHO DOES WHAT TO WHO.
WE'RE, UM, IF YOU HAD IT, I MISSED IT.
THE, UM, THE PUBLIC NOTICE MAP, I ALSO INCLUDED THE, THE SUBDIVISION JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THAT.
THAT'S THE, THAT WAS ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT WERE MAILED A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE.
I'VE GOT A BIT OF A LIST HERE.
UH, I TAKE NOTES AS, AS YOU FOLKS SPEAK AND AS WE GET, AND, UH, SAM, YOU'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, ALTHOUGH MY QUESTION WAS THE IMPACT OF THE RECENT LEGISLATION FROM LAST YEAR.
SO WE CAN STILL, IT'S BEEN FIGURED OUT, WE CAN STILL REQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY WE CAN REQUIRE DEDICATION.
I THINK THERE ARE CASES WHERE THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION IS STILL MURKY.
UM, BUT, BUT WE, AT THE VERY MINUTE, AT THE VERY LEAST, WE CAN REQUIRE THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, IF, YEAH, IF IT'S, IF IT'S ON A FUNDED, THE WAY THAT THE, THE LAW IS WRITTEN IS LIKE IF IT'S FUNDED ON A, UM, YOU KNOW, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT.
SEE, BECAUSE IT TALKS ABOUT FUNDED AND NONE, NONE OF THESE ARE FUNDED.
THEY'RE ON OUR MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, BUT THERE'S BEEN NO FUNDING.
SO, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING HEARD ANY UPDATES LATELY, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TOTALLY THROWN UNDER THE BUS OR AT LEAST WE STILL HAD SOME ACCESS TO, TO BUILD STREETS, WHETHER WE PAY FOR 'EM AS LONG AS WE CAN GET THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, I HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEM SAYING THIS PROPERTY ABUTS 35 WHEN ALL IT IS IS A 30 FOOT DRIVEWAY THAT GOES 35, THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY DOESN'T ABUT 35.
UM, AND, AND SAM, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ZONING AND NOT A PROJECT, BUT HERE, HERE, AND, AND I'LL BE VERY HONEST WITH YOU, MY REAL CONCERN IS EVERYTHING FROM EVERYTHING PAST ZONING, PLATING, MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ALL THAT STUFF'S BEEN DELEGATED TO STAFF.
SO ONCE WE LET GO OF THIS, WE'VE LOST ANY, ANY CONTROL WE MAY HAVE OVER WHETHER OR NOT WE THINK IT'S RIGHT TO USE A 30 FOOT DRIVEWAY.
AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHY SOME OF US WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT TONIGHT.
UM, AND THEN, THEN MY CONCERN IS, AS YOU SAID, THIS WILL REMAIN A PRIVATE DRIVE, NOT A, AND YET WE'RE GONNA, ALL OF A SUDDEN, INSTEAD OF BEING AVAILABLE TO,
[00:55:01]
I DON'T KNOW, HALF A DOZEN OR A DOZEN PEOPLE, WE'RE GONNA MAKE THIS PRIVATE ROAD, UH, ACCESSIBLE TO FOUR OR FIVE, 600 PEOPLE.UM, YOU KNOW, I CAN GO ON DOWN MY LIST HERE, BUT YOU KNOW, THE REAL CRUX OF WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THESE PEOPLE IS, IS I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY ARGUE AGAINST THE R FOUR.
THEY'RE ALL ARGUING ABOUT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THAT 30 FOOT RIGHT OF AWAY.
AND, AND ASHLEY, HONESTLY, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE THE SIMPLEST THING TO DO HERE IS TAKE THAT OUT AND PROVIDE YOUR ACCESS FROM STEIN AND, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GONNA DO RITZ CHRYSLER 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT YOUR PROPERTY, BUT, UM, WELL, IF I MAY, EVEN IF THIS WASN'T PART OF THE ZONING REQUEST, THAT ACCESS EASEMENT WOULD STILL BE THERE.
THE WHAT, EVEN IF THIS WASN'T PART OF THE CURRENT ZONING REQUEST, THAT LITTLE SLIVER OF LAND HERE RIGHT? IT WOULD STILL BE AN ACCESS EASEMENT THAT THESE PROPERTIES WOULD STILL YEAH, BUT THE APARTMENT COMPLEX WOULDN'T HAVE TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO IT.
SAY, UM, THE OTHER THING THAT, THAT CONCERNED ME A LITTLE BIT IS WE TALK ABOUT THESE FOLKS CONTINUING TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR HOMES.
AND YET ASHLEY, ONE OF THE DIAGRAMS YOU PUT UP THERE, I SAW THAT PRIVATE DRIVE COME UP AND, AND GO INTO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH NO WAY AT ALL WHERE THAT CROSSROAD IS NOW THAT ALLOWS THESE, THESE TWO OR THREE HOMES THAT ARE ACROSS THE TOP OF THE HILL, I DIDN'T SEE ANY ACCESS TO THOSE.
SO, UM, BUT AGAIN, THE THE BOTTOM LINE, WHO OWNS IT, WHO DOESN'T OWNS IT, WHO CONTROLS IT, THAT'S NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, UH, UH, AND, AND THE ONE GENTLEMAN IN THE BACK THERE, IT, IT'S, IT'S AN ISSUE FOR THE COURTS TO RESOLVE.
UH, AND THE ONLY REASON ACCESS IS EVEN BEING DISCUSSED TONIGHT IS BECAUSE ONE OF YOUR SLIDES SHOWED THAT THE UDC REQUIRES THAT R FOUR HAVE ACCESS.
UM, AND HONESTLY, WHEN I, WHEN I FIRST LOOKED AT THIS, I WASN'T REAL THRILLED ABOUT R FOUR ON OLD STEIN BECAUSE IT, MOST, MOST OF IT, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING TO THE EAST OR THE NORTHEAST OR WHATEVER DIRECTION YOU WANT TO CALL THAT IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT TRYING TO PROVIDE ACCESS FOR, I DON'T KNOW HOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY UNITS, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THERE.
UH, IT, IT, IT, IT, IT KIND OF MAKES SENSE NOW TO HAVE SOMETHING, UH, ON STEIN.
UM, ALTHOUGH THE LAST TIME I WAS ON THAT ROAD, IT'S LIKE SO MUCH OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, IT WASN'T BUILT TO, TO ACCOMMODATE, UM, BELMONT AND, AND FAIR LAWN AND APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
YOU KNOW, IT'S, UM, ALTHOUGH THERE'S ONE SECTION, I DON'T REMEMBER WHETHER, I THINK IT'S, IT MAY BE BEHIND BELMONT, IT'S ONE OF THOSE SUBDIVISIONS WHERE THE ROAD WAS ACTUALLY WIDENED AND IMPROVED.
UH, BUT NOW OUR LEGISLATURE STRIPPED US OF THAT AUTHORITY.
SO WE CONTINUE TO, TO, TO BUILD THESE COMPLEXES ON BASICALLY WHAT I USED TO CALL COW TRAILS.
YOU'VE HEARD PEOPLE COME IN, THEY'RE BUYING HOMES UP THERE.
UM, WHAT'S THE ONE OFF OF? UM, AND ANYWAY, THE FAR NORTHEAST UP THERE, THAT LITTLE, THAT LITTLE TWO-LANE COW RAIL GOES BACK IN THERE AND WE'RE BUILDING, I DON'T KNOW, FIVE, 600 HOMES BACK IN THERE.
NOW, HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHY SOMEBODY BUYS A HOUSE.
THEY GOTTA DRIVE ON THAT ROAD TO GET TO THE MODEL HOMES.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE BUYING THE THING WITH THEIR EYES CLOSED.
SO AGAIN, I GET OFF MY SOAPBOX.
I THINK THE REAL ISSUE HERE, UM, FOR THE FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE, WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CONSIDERING TONIGHT IS WHETHER OR NOT OUR FOUR ZONING IS APPROPRIATE.
WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE TALKING ABOUT THEIR PROJECT.
OKAY? WHAT HAPPENS IS, IF THIS WERE TO BE REZONED R FOUR, THEN THE NEXT STEP IS THEY HAVE TO COME IN AND THEY HAVE TO PLOT THE PROPERTY, THEN THEY HAVE TO MASTER PLAN THE PROPERTY.
AND, UH, AT, AT, AT THOSE STAGES, THAT'S WHEN TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES GET DONE.
AND, UM, AS SAM SAID, WHERE WE LOOK AT RIGHT OF WAY FOR, UM, PROPOSED THOROUGHFARES, ALL OF THAT TAKES PLACE AFTER, UM, OR OUTSIDE OF THE ZONING PROCESS
[01:00:09]
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, HONESTLY, I'M NOT SURE R FOUR IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE UP THERE ABOUT THEIR LITTLE DRIVEWAY.AND, AND I, I'M SORRY, IT JUST, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE FIRE DEPARTMENT EVER SIGNED OFF ON ACCESS TO THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT ON A 30 FOOT DRIVEWAY.
I JUST, I CAN'T, YOU KNOW, LOOK WHAT, LOOK WHAT YOU DID.
BRIAN, THE, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TALK, TALK TO ME ABOUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVALS FOR THIS PROJECT YEAH.
ANYWAY, SO, SO HELP, HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT THEN I, I THINK A STAFF, I'M NOT CLEAR ON YOUR, YOUR STATEMENT.
MY CONCERN IS TRYING TO ACCESS MULTIFAMILY HOUSING, RIGHT.
WITH A, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IS, HOW LONG IS DE KNOTT HILL? A THOUSAND FEET, 2000 FEET? SURE.
TRYING TO ACCESS THAT, THAT, THAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT ON A 30 FOOT DRIVEWAY.
AND, AND SO, SO JUST, JUST IF I MAY THEN, SO AS SAM INDICATED, WHEN THE PROPERTY COMES INTO PLAT, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, ALONG WITH CITY STAFF WILL LOOK AT THE CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT GENERALLY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED, AND THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS PASSED AND CODIFIED.
SO THE RULES THAT THIS COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDED, AND THE CITY COUNCIL HAS SAID, STAFF, YOU CAN ENFORCE THESE RULES AND YOU HAVE TO ENFORCE THESE RULES.
THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LOOK AT WITH PLATTING, RIGHT? BY THE SAME TOKEN, WHEN THE PROPERTY COMES INTO, INTO DEVELOP, WHEN WE GET A SITE PLAN, WHEN WE GET BUILDING PERMITS, CITY STAFF, INCLUDING THE FIRE MARSHAL, THE FIRE CHIEF WOULD AGAIN LOOK TO THOSE CODES AND ORDINANCES THAT THIS COMMITTEE HAS RECOMMENDED AND THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS PASSED, AND THAT THEY'VE SAID, YOU CAN AND YOU SHALL ENFORCE THESE ORDINANCES.
AND WHERE IN COUNSEL'S WISDOM, THEY HAVE GRANTED DISCRETION TO THE FIRE MARSHAL TO, TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON THAT.
WE WOULD, THEY WOULD THEN REVIEW IT AND MAKE DECISIONS.
SO TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS NOT MADE A DECISION IN REFERENCE TO ACCESSING AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THROUGH DEN KNOT HILL.
THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO THEM.
THE, THE WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED IS AGAIN, THIS, THIS QUESTION OF LAND USE.
AND AS YOU, I THINK NOTED EARLIER, WHAT WE LOOK AT ARE THE VARIOUS PLANS TO ACCOMMODATE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PROPOSED ZONING AND PROPOSED LAND USE, AND WHETHER THAT WILL BE SUFFICIENT.
THE TIMING OF THOSE IS A SEPARATE QUESTION THAT WE ALSO LOOK AT WITH REGARD TO DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY.
AND SO, AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL POINT OUT, WE REGULARLY, AND YOU MAY RECALL THIS, HAVE PEOPLE COME INTO THE CITY WANTING TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THE ZONING IS IN PLACE FOR IT.
AND WE SAY THE ZONING ALLOWS THAT USE, BUT HERE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND THEY END UP WALKING AWAY BECAUSE THEY CANNOT MEET THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT ACCESS.
AND SO, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS NOT APPROVED THAT ACCESS.
THEY WOULD LOOK AT THAT WHEN IT COME IN.
MY ASSUMPTION IS THE FIRE MARSHAL'S GONNA SAY, YOU NEED TWO POINTS OF ACCESS.
AND THE FIRE MARSHAL IS GOING TO LOOK TO THOSE CODES THAT HE'S BEEN EMPOWERED TO ENFORCE WITH REGARD TO FIRE ACCESS DRIVES, I THINK HAS DETERMINED THE FIRE CODE.
IS THAT RIGHT? AND, AND THE FIRE CODE THAT HE'S EMPOWERED TO ENFORCE HAS PARTICULAR STANDARDS FOR THOSE DRIVES, FOR FIRE HYDRANTS, FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.
NOW AGAIN, THE, YOU KNOW, WE WORK AS A TEAM AT THE CITY AND SO THE CITY ENGINEER IS GONNA LOOK AT THAT, TIA, LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT THOSE ROADS CAN ACCOMMODATE THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC TO MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE AT THAT TIME.
AND SO AGAIN, I, I THINK THE CAUTION I WOULD HAVE TO, TO BOTH FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE AND, AND YOU KNOW, ON P AND Z IS WHILE THE APPLICANT MAY HAVE KIND OF TALKED AROUND HOW THEY PROVIDE ACCESS,
[01:05:04]
THEY CAN PROVIDE ACCESS IN WHATEVER MANNER THEY HAVE THE ABILITY, THE LEGAL RIGHT TO, TO MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS, RIGHT? SO IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVE TO TAKE ACCESS FROM DEN KNOT HILL, IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY NECESSARILY HAVE TO TAKE ACCESS FROM, FROM THE 2252 EXTENSION.THEY COULD COME UP OLD STEIN ROAD IN THEORY, THEY COULD BUY, UH, SOME OF THE LOTS ADJACENT, UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND TRY TO TAKE ACCESS FROM SOME OTHER POINT, YOU KNOW, INCLUDING THE, THE FREEWAY MANNER DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? I MEAN, THEY'RE AN, WELL, NOT QUITE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS THEY COULD DO IT.
THERE ARE QUITE A FEW WAYS THEY COULD DO IT.
SO THE ONLY CAUTION I WOULD HAVE IS EVEN IF THE APPLICANT AT THIS POINT WERE TO STATE, WELL, WE'RE NOT GONNA COME UP THIS WAY.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT NECESSARILY THEY CAN'T COME UP THAT WAY IN THE FUTURE.
AND BY THE SAME TOKEN, THEY, THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF OPTIONS TO PROVIDE ACCESS.
AND SO REALLY THE QUESTION I THINK THAT, THAT YOU STATED TOWARD THE END OF YOUR COMMENTS IS IT'S WHETHER THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE LAND USE.
AND ONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS IS WHEN WE LOOK TO THOSE PLANS, WHETHER OR NOT, AND AGAIN, THIS IS OFTEN THE STICKING POINT, THOSE PLANS FOR THE ULTIMATE ROAD CAN ACCOMMODATE THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND AGAIN, WE'VE GOT MULTIPLE THOROUGHFARE ROADS NEARBY THAT CAN, THERE MAY BE OTHER POINTS OF ACCESS TO GET THERE.
AND SO FROM A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AT LEAST WE FEEL LIKE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, WATER, SEWER, ROADS, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE SUFFICIENT FOR THIS PARTICULAR LAND USE.
HOWEVER IT WERE TO LAY OUT UNDERSTAND I GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF.
IT'S, UM, IF, IF YOU HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS, THE STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE AFTER THE MEETING, BUT, BUT I'M AFRAID THE, THE PUBLIC INPUT, UH, IS CLOSED FOR THE TIME BEING.
SO, I MEAN, I EVEN SAID IT MYSELF, BRIAN, I SAT RIGHT HERE AND SAID IT'S ABOUT R FOUR, NOT ABOUT THE PROJECT.
SO I ALSO SAID JUST ONCE I WISH SOMEBODY COULD BRING US SOMETHING THAT HALF THE TOWN WASN'T AGAINST AND MAKE MY LIFE SO MUCH EASIER.
ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YES SIR.
SAM, FROM, UH, THE DIAGRAM THAT'S UP THERE NOW, UH, WOULD I BE CORRECT IN ASSUMING THAT FROM THAT TRAFFIC CIRCLE ON RIPS CRESSLER, THAT THAT LITTLE EXTENSION BELONGS TO WHOEVER'S DEVELOPING RIPS CRESSLER AT THE MOMENT? WELL, RIPS CHRYSLER IS BEING DEDICATED AS A PUBLIC STREET.
BUT WHO IS CONSTRUCTING THAT IS YES.
THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT HERE, BUT THAT, THAT LITTLE, THAT LITTLE TINY EXTENSION PAT THAT, YEAH.
TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAS THE DEVELOPER TALKED TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ABOUT PURCHASING ANOTHER LITTLE SLIVER TO UH, YES.
SO, SO STAFF HAS BEEN APPROACHED AND THERE HAVE BEEN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ABOUT THE RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION? YES.
ANYONE ELSE? UH, YEAH, MOSTLY JUST A QUESTION AND I THINK THE ROADS ARE IMPORTANT.
'CAUSE IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THAT'S WHY IT WAS DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL LAST TIME, IF, AM I CORRECT? I THINK ACCESS WAS AN ISSUE, BUT, WELL, I'M NOT GONNA, I'M NOT GONNA LIKE GET INTO THAT THOUGH.
SO IF I MAY JUST SET THE RIGHT, I DON'T BELIEVE THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL VOTED TO DENY THE APPLICATION.
I THINK THE APPLICATION FAILED TO ACHIEVE THE SUPER MAJORITY.
SO JUST TECHNICALLY TO BE CLEAR, THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL DID NOT VOTE TO DENY THE APPLICATION.
IT FAILED TO ACHIEVE THE SUPER MAJORITY TO BE APPROVED.
UM, AND, AND, AND AGAIN, I I WOULD SUGGEST YOU WATCH THE COUNCIL VIDEO.
I WAS THERE FOR THE STATEMENTS BY THE COUNCIL PEOPLE AS TO WHY THEY CHOSE TO VOTE THE WAY THEY DID
I ALWAYS HATE TO GET THERE, BUT YEAH.
UM, WELL THAT ACTUALLY BRINGS ME TO MY QUESTION THOUGH, WHICH WAS CAN I, CAN YOU SHOW ME HOW IT'S CHANGED? I KNOW THERE'S MORE LAND NOW BEING BOUGHT, SO I WAS CURIOUS IF IT DID EXTEND TO STEIN.
IS THAT WHAT I WAS SEEING OR THAT THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
OKAY, SO YOU SEE WHERE MY CURSOR IS RIGHT HERE? YEAH.
SO EVERYTHING DOWN HERE WAS ADDED TO THIS APPLICATION.
SO IT HAS ACCESS TO OLD LEADER'S TIME.
I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE APPROVE PLZC 2 0 2 4 0 1 4 1 AS WRITTEN.
[01:10:03]
THAT, DANIELLE.WE HAVE A, UM, A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLZC 20 24 0 1 4 1 TO CITY COUNCIL.
UH, JUST AS THE LAST COMMENT AGAIN, UM, THE REAL CONSIDERATION HERE IS THE WHETHER OR NOT R FOUR IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE AREA, EVEN ALL THE OTHER LITTLE THINGS WE GOT OFF ON.
SO ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? ALRIGHT, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES.
WOULD YOU PUBLISH THAT PLEASE? I HAVE SIX IN FAVOR.
NONE OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES.
DO WE KNOW WHEN THIS IS GONNA BE ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA YET? SAM? THE TENTATIVELY FOR THE FIRST TUESDAY OF AUGUST.
THAT IS THE FIRST TUESDAY OF AUGUST.
SO TENTATIVELY THAT'S AUGUST 6TH.
WHEN IT WILL BE ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA.
UH, AGAIN, ALL WE DO IS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FINAL DECISION.
UH, I INVITE YOU ALL TO ATTEND THAT CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND, UH, RESTATE YOUR CONCERNS.
UH, MOST OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL WATCH THIS VIDEO AND THE A VIDEO OF THIS MEETING AND WILL HAVE HEARD WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.
UM, BUT YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO SHOW UP AND TALK TO THEM AND SPEAK AT THEM AND HOPEFULLY SOMEBODY WILL RESOLVE THAT DEN HILL ISSUE.
ITEM, UM, FIVE B-P-L-Z-C 2 2 4 0 1 33.
HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON A REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 3.3 ACRES OF LAND FROM MANUFACTURING LIGHT DISTRICT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT KNOWN AS KAMAU COUNTY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 7 5 3 0 7 AND A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ALSO KNOWN AS 7 44 FM 4 82.
CITY OF SHEZ, KAMAU COUNTY, TEXAS.
COMMISSIONERS P LZ C 2 0 2 4 0 1 33, ZONE CHANGE FROM MANUFACTURING LIGHT DISTRICT AND ONE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, R SIX SAMUEL HAAS SENIOR PLANNER.
SO TO GET OUR BEARINGS HERE, THE PROPERTY IS OUTLINED IN GREEN.
UH, IT IS A PORTION OF THE TOTAL PROPERTY HERE IS 4.25 ACRES.
AND WHAT THE REZONE REQUEST IS, IS FOR A PORTION OF IT, THE 3.3.
NOW WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY IS IT'S ZONED FOR M1 MANUFACTURING LIGHT.
THEY'RE NOT TOUCHING, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO NOT TOUCH THIS TRACK TWO HERE.
WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REZONE IS TRACK ONE AND TRACK THREE.
JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE SO WE CAN FOLLOW ALONG HERE.
SO ON JUNE 21ST, 2024, TOTAL SIX PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT OUT.
WE HAVE RECEIVED NO RESPONSES SO FAR.
UH, ONE SIGN WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY.
SO HERE IS THAT ZONING EXHIBIT THAT I WANTED TO SHOW YOU.
UM, AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY IS M1 MANUFACTURING LIGHT.
AND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS LEAVE A SLIVER OF THE M1 AND THEY WANT TO, UH, TO REZONE A PORTION OF R SIX FOR EITHER SIDE OF THIS.
A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS PROPERTY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS A PERMITTED BUSINESS THAT OPERATES ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S ALSO A NON-CONFORMING RESIDENTIAL USE.
AND SO BOTH OF WHICH THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER OWNS AND OPERATES, THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT DOES NOT PERMIT RESIDENTIAL USES ANY APPLICANT'S INTENT IS TO BUILD A LARGER HOME.
UH, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO OWN JUST PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO ALLOW THEIR EXISTING BUSINESS THAT THEY OPERATE TO EXIST TO CONTINUE THERE, AS WELL AS BUILD A BIGGER HOME.
SO AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE THINGS, WE, UH, GO TO UDC SECTION 2154 D AND I'LL READ THESE OFF AGAIN, ONE AT A TIME.
WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE OR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT IMPLEMENTS THE POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND PLAN, INCLUDING THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS MIXED USE CENTER, WHICH IS INTENDED TO INTEGRATE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL AFTER ENTERTAINMENT SPACES, TYPICALLY ALONG CERTIFICATE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS.
AND JUST TO GO BACK TO, IF YOU RECALL, WHEN WE WERE HAVING OUR
[01:15:01]
COMP PLAN DISCUSSIONS, THE AREA THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE FOR THIS MIXED USE IS A CONTINUANCE OF THIS QUOTE NEWTOWN CENTER THAT WE WERE LOOKING TO DO IN THE PREVIOUS COMP PLAN.THE IDEA WAS THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME THERE'S GOING TO BE RAIL ACTIVITY, PASSENGER RAIL ACTIVITY.
WE WANT TO REALLY ENSURE THAT WE HAVE STUFF IN OUR COMP PLAN TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN CAPITALIZE THEM.
SO PREVIOUSLY THAT AREA HAD WAS REALLY, IT'S DEVELOPING NOW AS INDUSTRIAL, IT'S JUST, THAT'S JUST WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT AREA.
SO WHAT WE DECIDED TO DO WAS TO SHIFT THAT NEW TOWN CENTER CONCEPT OVER TO THIS SORT OF SECTION OF THE CITY.
AND SO THE GOAL IS TO CREATE A MIXED USE CENTER THAT SHOULD BE TO ENCOURAGE DENSE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND COMPLIMENTARY BUSINESSES.
SO THE APPLICANT IS INCREMENTALLY CREATING RESIDENTIAL DENSITY BY AND CONFORMING WITH THE TENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND PLAN.
NUMBER TWO, WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE OR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PROMOTES THE HEALTH, SAFETY, GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY AND SAFE, ORDERLY, EFFICIENT, DEVELOP, UH, AND HEALTHFUL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
SO THE CITY SHOULD ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT WITH COMPATIBLE AND SURROUNDING USES.
THE SURROUNDING AREA CONSISTS OF OPEN SPACE RESIDENCES, DANVILLE MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND A PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS ACTUALLY ZONED FOR APARTMENT MULTIFAMILY R FOUR DISTRICT.
SO WHILE THIS AREA IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR INDUSTRIAL USES, IT IS EVOLVING MORE TO FUNCTION AS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE SAFE, ORDERLY AND EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT, THE EXPANSION OF THE CITY SHOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH A COMPREHENSIVE LAND PLAN AND THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE BETTER ALIGNS THE PROPERTY THAN THE EXISTING ZONING THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THERE.
NUMBER THREE, WHETHER THE USE IS PERMITTED BY THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE AND PROPOSED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION AND THE STANDARDS APPLIED TO, TO SUCH USE WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA OF THE ATLANTA BE RECLASSIFIED.
AS I JUST MENTIONED, THE IMMEDIATE AREA IS THERE'S A SCHOOL, THERE'S RESIDENCES, THERE'S OPEN SPACE, THERE'S EVEN AN R FOUR ZONING DISTRICT, JUST JUST TO THE WEST.
AND THE PROPOSED USES THAT ARE IN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R SIX DO ALIGN WITH WHAT'S IN THE VICINITY.
NUMBER FOUR, WHETHER PROPOSED ZONE CHANGES IN ACCORD WITH ANY EXISTING OR PROPOSED PLANS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, STREETS, WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY SEWER, OR OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES TO THE AREA, THE PROPERTY BUTTS FM 4 82, WHICH IS DESIGNATED AS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL INDICATING THAT THIS ROAD WILL ACCOMMODATE DENSE DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE.
UH, THE PROPERTY DOES HAVE ACCESS TO WATER.
IT'S A 12 INCH LINE AND A SEWER, AN EIGHT INCH LINE THAT RUNS ALONG FM UH, 4 82.
A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE WAS MAILED TO AL ISD TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE ZONE CHANGE AND SHIRTS.
FIRE EMS AND POLICE DEPARTMENT WERE NOTIFIED OF THE ZONE CHANGE AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED NO OBJECTIONS.
NUMBER FIVE, WHETHER THERE'S BEEN AN ENVIRONMENTAL OR ECONOMIC CHANGE THAT WARRANTED THE REQUESTED CHANGE, THERE HAVE BEEN NO ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC CHANGES.
UH, NUMBER SIX, WHETHER THERE'S AN ERROR IN THE ORIGINAL ZONING, THERE WAS NO ERROR.
AND WHERE THERE ARE ALL THE APPLICANT'S BACKED TAXES TO THE CITY HAVE BEEN PAID IN FULL.
THIS HAS NOT IMPACTED THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMM COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL AT THIS TIME.
NUMBER EIGHT, WHERE THERE ARE OTHER CRITERIA MET, WHICH ARE THE DISCRETION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL ARE DEEMED RELEVANT AND IMPORTANT IN THE CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENT.
STAFF HAS ENSURED THAT ALL UDC REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET FOR THIS PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE AND AT THIS TIME HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL.
SO STAFF, UH, THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE TO SINGLE FAMILY R SIX IS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH COMP PLAN AND THE DIRECTION THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE FOR THE AREA.
UH, THE, IT IS APPROPRIATE WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AS WELL, GIVEN THE, YOU KNOW, THE R FOUR THAT'S IN THE ADDITION IN THE AREA AS WELL AS THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, UH, THAT BRINGS THE PROPERTY INTO CONFORMANCE AND THE FACT THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO BUILD A BIGGER HOME.
SO THERE'S, THEY NEED A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO DO THAT AS WELL AS CONTINUE THEIR EXISTING BUSINESS THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY.
SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLZC 2 0 2 4 0 1 3 3 AND I BELIEVE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS HERE IF THEY'D LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING.
MAYBE PULL THAT BIKE DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
AND JUST AS SAM STATED, WE'VE BEEN ON THE PROPERTY MAYBE SEVEN YEARS AND BEEN LIVING IN A SMALLER MANUFACTURED HOME.
WOULD LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A, YOU KNOW, JUST A LITTLE BIGGER HOUSE FOR THE FAMILY.
CONTINUE THE BUSINESS SECTION OFF, I GUESS THE, THE SOUTH SIDE, YOU KNOW, ALSO RESIDENTIAL IN CASE WE WANNA MOVE A KIT OVER ON THERE OR SELL IT SEPARATELY.
JUST, YOU KNOW, UTILIZE THE PROPERTY MORE FOR WHAT WE CAN DO WITH IT, WHAT THE COMMUNITIES ARE DOING AROUND US.
AND THAT'S BASICALLY ABOUT IT.
THIS IS ON THE AGENDA AS A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT IS, UH, 7:19 PM AND AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
[01:20:01]
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS TOPIC? MORE THAN WELCOME TO STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE.IT IS STILL 7:19 PM AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS CLOSED.
COMMISSIONERS, NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA.
UH, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.
WE CAN APPROVE, DENY, WE CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL, DENIAL, OR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PLZC 2 0 2 4 0 1 3 3 SECOND.
THAT'S WRITTEN ALL COMMISSIONER CARONE.
ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLZC 20 24 0 1 3 3.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE.
NONE OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES.
AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS WILL GO TO CITY COUNCIL, I'M ASSUMING PROBABLY ON THE, THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
YOU ALMOST CAUGHT ME ON THAT ONE.
ALL THE PUBLIC HEARING TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY ON APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE OF LAND KNOWN AS GUADALUPE COUNTY PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 4 7 0 8 3, MORE SPECIFICALLY KNOWN AS 1 2 0 WINDY MEADOWS DRIVE, CITY OF CHURCH, GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS.
WINDY MEADOW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.
WE HAVE FM 1518 OVER HERE TO THE WEST.
WINDY MEADOWS IS JUST TO THE NORTH.
THERE'S CURRENTLY A COMMERCIAL, UH, BUSINESS ON THE PROPERTY AND IT IS OWNED GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TWO.
UH, JUST TO SORT OF SEE WHAT'S IN THE AREA HERE TO THE NORTH, AS I SAID, IT WAS, UH, WINNIE MEADOWS DRIVE RIGHT AWAY, UH, TO THE SOUTHEAST AND WEST IS ALL GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TWO, EITHER BY AS COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES OR BY THE CITY OF SHIRTS.
JUNE 21ST, UH, 2024, A TOTAL OF 10 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES WERE SENT OUT.
WE'VE ONLY RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE AND THAT WAS IN A NEUTRAL RESPONSE.
ONE SIGN WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A 120 FOOT MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY AT THE REAR OF THE PROP OF THE APPROXIMATE ONE ACRE OF LAND PER THE UDC ARTICLE EIGHT, SECTION 21 8 6 G PLACEMENT OF ANTENNA FACILITIES.
UH, ONE 20 WINDY MEADOWS IS CATEGORIZED AS A FULL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY PROPERTIES.
FULL COMMERCIAL IS PROPERTIES WITHIN UM, O OP AND S GB, GB TWO, M1 AND M TWO OR NON-RESIDENTIAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE DISTRICTS.
SO, AND YOU'LL SEE THIS IS FROM THE UDC AS WELL.
AND THEN IF THEY WANTED TO DO A MONOPOLE, UP TO 120 FEET REQUIRES AN SUP.
THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A SITE PLAN, A A TENTATIVE SITE PLAN HERE, AND, UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE EXISTING BUILDING IS HERE AND DOWN HERE WHERE MY CURSOR IS, IS WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PLACE THE MONOPOLE.
APPLICANT HAS ALSO, UH, PROVIDED SOME ELEVATIONS AS WELL.
AND YOU'LL SEE RIGHT HERE TO THE RIGHT, UH, THESE, THIS IS THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS FOR THE MONOPOLE AS WELL.
SO UDC SECTION 21 5 11 D IS WHERE WE GET THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.
UH, NUMBER ONE, THE PROPOSED USE OF THE SPECIFIED LOCATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICIES EMBODIED IN THE ADOPTED COMP PLAN.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES ITS PROPERTY AS INDUSTRIAL HUB AND THE PRIMARY USE OF THE PROPERTY IS NOT CHANGING.
THE PROPOSAL TO ADD A TELECOM COMMUNICATION TOWER IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE INDUSTRIAL HUB LAND USE DESIGNATION.
[01:25:03]
NUMBER TWO, THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE APPLICABLE ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS.GENERAL BUSI, GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TWO IS INTENDED TO FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES GENERALLY ORIENTED TOWARDS SERVING THE OVERALL NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
THE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER WOULD HELP MEET THE NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT'S IN THE AREA, THUS MEETING THE INTENT OF THE ZONING DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED USE IS COMPATIBLE WITH AND PRESERVES THE CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY OF THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS AND NEIGHBORHOODS, AND INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS EITHER ON SITE OR WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO MITIGATE DEVELOPMENT RELATED ADVERSE IMPACTS SUCH AS SAFETY, TRAFFIC, NOISE, ODORS, VISUAL NUISANCES, DRAINAGE, OR OTHER SIMILAR ADVERSE EFFECTS TO ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
UC 2186 J TWO REQUIRES THAT PLANNING AND ZONING CONSIDER BOTH THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE LOCATION AND DESIGN OF THE ANTENNA FACILITY AND THE AESTHETICS.
SINCE THE SURROUNDING AREA IS PRIMARILY HIGHER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL AND WITH SOME LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY, UH, THIS IS COMPATIBLE AND DOES NOT IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS.
THE PROPOSED USE DOES NOT GENERATE PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, WHICH WILL BE HAZARDOUS OR CONFLICT WITH EXISTING ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC.
THE PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATION CHANNEL WILL NOT GENERATE TRAFFIC.
UH, THE PROPOSED USE INCORPORATES ROADWAY ADJUSTMENTS AND TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES OR MECHANISMS AND ACCESS RESTRICTIONS TO CONTROL TRAFFIC.
DIVERT TRAFFIC AS MAY BE NEEDED TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE DEVELOPMENT GEN GENERATE A TRAFFIC OR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, THE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER WILL NOT BE REQUIRED TO INCORPORATE TRAFFIC MITIGATION METHODS.
THE PROPOSED USE INCORPORATES FEATURES TO MINIMIZE ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING VISUAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED USE ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
THE PROPOSED TOWER WILL HAVE TO MEET ALL SITE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE NINE.
ARTICLE NINE IS IN PLACE TO ENSURE ADVERSE EFFECTS WERE MINIMIZED AND MITIGATED AND THE PROPOSED USE MEETS THE STANDARD FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT OR EXTENT.
THE VARIATIONS FROM SUCH STANDARDS HAVE BEEN REQUESTED THAT SUCH VARIATIONS ARE NECESSARY TO RENDER THE USE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJOINING DEVELOPMENTS IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE TO MEET ALL DIMENSIONAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS IN GENERAL BUSINESS TWO.
AS STIPULATED IN UDC 2157, NO VARIATIONS HAVE BEEN NO VARIATIONS TO THE REQUIREMENT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED.
NUMBER EIGHT, THE PROPOSED USE PROMOTES HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY AND SAFE, ORALLY EFFICIENT AND HEALTHFUL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
SO UDC SECTION 2186 A STATES THAT TELECOMMUNICATION ATTENDANCE SHALL ENCOURAGE OPERATORS OF ANTENNA FACILITIES AND ATTENDANCE TO LOCATE THEM IN AREAS WHERE THE ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY IS MINIMAL.
LOCATING THIS FACILITY IN AN AREA THAT IS SURROUNDED BY THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY ENSURES THAT THE COMMUNITY IMPACT IS MINIMAL, THUS PROMOTING EFFICIENT AND HEALTHFUL DEVELOPMENT.
ADDITIONALLY, EXPANDING THE CAPACITY OF A RELIABLE COMMUNICATION SERVICE HELPS PROMOTES THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY.
UH, NUMBER NINE, NO APPLICATIONS MADE UNDER THIS POSITION WILL RECEIVE ANY FINANCIAL APPROVAL TO ALL BACK TAXES ARE OWED.
THIS DOES NOT IMPACT THE, UH, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THE RECOMMENDATION CITY COUNCIL NUMBER 10.
OTHER CRITERIA WHICH AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL ARE DEEMED RELEVANT AND IMPORTANT TO ANY CONSIDERATION.
THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT STAFF HAS ENSURED THAT ALL UDC REQUIREMENTS FROM THE MET, THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING OR CITY COUNCIL STAFF HAS REACHED OUT TO THE CITY'S CONSULTANT WHO ADVISES SHIRTS REGARDING TELECOMMUNICATION ANTENNAS AND THEY HAVE FOUND NO ISSUES WITH THIS PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF THE FACILITY.
ADDITIONALLY, THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AND JOINT BASED SAN ANTONIO HAS REVIEWED THIS PROPOSAL AND SUBMITTED A LETTER OF NO OBJECTION TO STAFF.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF P-L-S-P-U 2 0 2 4 0 1 2.
THE THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONDITIONED UPON THE FOLLOWING, A BUILDING PERMIT A BUILDING PERMIT IS APPROVED WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THE ADOPTION OF THE SUP ORDINANCE.
AND ALSO I HAVE A, THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE TO BE WITH US TODAY.
THEY HAVE SUBMITTED A LETTER THAT THEY REQUESTED I READ SO YOU ALL GET TO HEAR ME TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE.
GOOD EVENING AS MYSELF AND MY TEAM ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND.
DUE TO THE HOLIDAYS, WHICH HAS MADE PLANNING TRAVEL ON SHORT NOTICE DIFFICULT, I, ARIEL STOUTER OF FULLERTON ENGINEERING ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS PREPARED A STATEMENT FOR OUR APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY TO ADDRESS CONCERNS RAISED ABOUT THE PROPOSED TOWER.
WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT A NEIGHBOR HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS AND WE THOUGHT OF GIVING SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THEIR BENEFIT.
FIRSTLY, THE TOWER WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPACT ON PROPERTY VALUES NOR WILL THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY BE CHANGING.
AS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ALL ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USES WITH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AS WELL.
THE INSTALLATION OF A TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PROPERTY VALUES.
THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER WAS ALSO RAISED AS A CONCERN.
TOWER HEIGHT IS APPROXIMATELY TO THE COVERAGE OF THE CARRIER.
THE TALLER THE TOWER, THE FURTHER THE CARRIER COVERAGE WILL EXTEND
[01:30:01]
THIS HEIGHT WILL ALSO PROVIDE OTHER CARRIERS WITH OPPORTUNITIES TO INSTALL THEIR EQUIPMENT ON THIS TOWER, WHICH WOULD DECREASE THE ADDITIONAL NEED FOR ADDITIONAL TOWERS IN THE AREA.PLEASE NOTE THAT THE TOWER WILL REQUIRE LIGHTING.
TO REQUIRE LIGHTING THAT A TOWER WILL HAVE TO BE OVER 199 FEET PER, OH, I'M SORRY.
PLEASE KNOW THE TOWER WILL NOT REQUIRE LIGHTING TO REQUIRE THE LIGHTING.
THE TOWER WOULD'VE TO BE OVER 199 FEET PER FAA REGULATIONS.
ALL ANTENNA EQUIPMENT WILL BE INSTALLED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAWS AND REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED UNDER THE FCC.
THE RANDOLPH AIR BASE HAS GIVEN THEIR COMMENTS AND SIGNED OFF ON THE TOWER.
WE WOULD CONSTRUCT THE TOWER PER THE DRAWINGS PROVIDED AND WITH ANY, WITH ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING STAFF.
LASTLY, AS THE STAFF REPORT MENTIONS, THIS DEVELOPMENT MEETS THE GUIDE GUIDELINES OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AS A COMPATIBLE USE FOR THE ZONING DESIGNATION.
THE TOWER WILL EXPAND VERIZON WIRELESS'S COVERAGE IN THE AREA AND OFFERS THE SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL CARRIERS TO CO-LOCATE ON THE TOWER.
THE TOWER WILL DECREASE THE NEED FOR ANY NEW TOWERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AIR IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE.
THANK YOU FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF OUR APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED TOWER.
UH, THIS IS ON THE AGENDA AS A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT IS 7:30 PM I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS ISSUE? PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
GIVE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND TRY TO KEEP IT TO THREE MINUTES.
RICHARD REX 9 9 1 5 MARINE MEADOW GARDEN RIDGE.
UM, I OWN STONE CARE OF TEXAS 1 1 6 WHITNEY MEADOWS.
I'M THE GUY RIGHT NEXT DOOR WHO'S GOT THE PRETTY BIG OBJECTION TO THIS.
UM, WHEN I GOT THIS NOTIFICATION, I WENT OVER TO MY NEIGHBOR, PAUL RICHMOND, WHO OWNS, UM, RICHMOND PAPER.
I SAID, HEY, WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING 110 FOOT TOWER RIGHT IN THE BACK OF HIS BUILDING, WHICH IS DIRECTLY NEXT TO MINE.
AND WHERE HE'S PROPOSING TO PUT IT IS DIRECTLY UP AGAINST MY FENCE.
NOW IT SAYS IN HERE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN ACRE OF LAND, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT ON THE BACK OF HIS LAND, HE'S GOT A LITTLE CARPORT AND THEN HE'S GOT A BUNCH OF, UM, UH, METAL, LARGE METAL STORAGE UNITS THERE.
HE SAID THAT HE HAD JUST SOLD HIS BUSINESS.
SO, UM, HE WASN'T VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IT.
AND LISTEN GUYS, I OWN A BUSINESS.
THAT BUILDING IS PART OF, YOU KNOW, UH, AN INVESTMENT FOR ME AND EVERYBODY AROUND THERE.
AND THE REASON THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS IS THE LETTER WENT OUT TO 200 FEET FROM WHERE THE SITE'S GONNA BE.
I TALKED TO A COUPLE OF MY NEIGHBORS, NOBODY EVEN KNEW ABOUT THIS.
UM, OKAY, SO JUST A COUPLE REAL QUICK CONCERNS.
UM, HOW RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE SIGNED OFF ON THIS IS BLOWING MY MIND.
THIS THING'S GONNA BE 120 FEET TALL.
IF YOU GO TO MY PROPERTY AND HIS PROPERTY THREE TIMES AN HOUR, THOSE PLANES COME DIRECTLY OVER THE, I MEAN DIRECTLY OVER THE BUILDINGS, THE
IT'S JUST THAT I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
UM, I'VE DONE MORE RESEARCH ON RF WAVES THAN I EVER WANTED TO IN MONOPOLE TOWERS.
UM, THERE'S NOBODY IN THIS ROOM, UM, OR THAT WORKS FOR VERIZON THAT CAN SAY 10 YEARS FROM RIGHT NOW IF THIS, THESE WAVES ARE GONNA AFFECT ANYBODY THERE.
I GOT 19 EMPLOYEES IN THAT BUILDING.
PAUL RICHMAN, WHO JUST SOLD HIS BUSINESS, HAS ALL HIS EMPLOYEES IN THAT BUILDING.
THERE'S FIVE SHIRTS, BUILDINGS WITHIN 150 YARDS OF THIS TOWER THAT YOUR GUYS' PEOPLE WORK IN.
NOBODY SEEMS TOO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
BUT PUTTING 110 FOOT TOWER IN THAT SMALL OF A SPACE RIGHT THERE, I JUST, I DON'T GET THAT.
UM, THE CONSTRUCTION ALONE ON THIS, HOW ARE THEY GONNA GET THAT TOWER UP WITHOUT SWINGING THAT SUCKER ACROSS, OVER TOP EITHER ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS? IT'S A BIG DEAL PUTTING SOMETHING LIKE THAT UP.
IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF US.
WELL, WHY AREN'T THEY PUTTING IT THERE? THIS GUY'S PUTTING IT ON HIS PROPERTY.
'CAUSE BASICALLY HE WANTS TO GET ABOUT 2,500 BUCKS A MONTH.
AND WHERE VERIZON SAYS IT'S NOT GONNA IMPACT THE VALUES OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
ANYBODY HERE? IF YOU OWNED A BUILDING AND SOMEBODY'S PUTTING 110 FOOT TOWER RIGHT BEHIND IT, IT'S GONNA AFFECT IT AND IT'S REALLY GONNA AFFECT IT AND IT'S GONNA GONNA AFFECT MY PEOPLE IF SOMETHING DOES GO WRONG WITH MAKING
[01:35:01]
SOMEBODY SICK.THIS HAS BEEN REALLY COOL, BY THE WAY, THIS IS MY FIRST ONE OF YOU.
IT IS, UH, 7 34 AND PUBLIC INPUT IS CLOSED.
SAM, YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? YOU GOT A LOT OF PAPER IN YOUR HAND THERE.
I I HAVE COPIES OF THE RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASED DETERMINATION AS WELL AS THE F-A-A-F-A-A.
I'LL TELL YOU, I'M A LITTLE SURPRISED TOO.
IF YOU WANNA PROVIDE SOME IM, UH, UM, SUVS ALSO GO TO COUNCIL.
RIGHT? SO THEY'LL, THIS'LL BE ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA.
I RIDE MY BIKE DOWN IN YOUR NECK OF THE WOODS QUITE OFTEN.
AND YES, THOSE T 30 EIGHTS SEEM AWFULLY LOW TO ME, BUT IT'S ALL ABOUT, UM, GLIDE SLOPE OR GLIDE PATH.
UM, I CAN'T TELL YOU REALLY HOW HIGH THEY ARE WHEN THEY COME OVER YOUR BUILDING.
UM, YOU THINK SO RICHARD? 500 FEET OVER 500.
COMMISSIONER BROAD'S AN EX-AIR FORCE INSTRUCTOR.
UM, BUT, UM, THEY ALWAYS LOOK A LOT LOWER THAN THEY ARE.
UH, BUT UH, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IF IF WE'VE GOT SIGN OFF FROM RANDOLPH AND THE FA, UH, FAA AS WELL, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THE TWO, UM, THAT REALLY CONTROL THAT.
WE HAD A, THERE WAS AN ISSUE IN NEW BRAUNFELS TO, TO SIDETRACK A LITTLE BIT.
UH, TOPGOLF WANTS TO BUILD UP THERE, RIGHT ON THAT FINAL APPROACH TO, UH, RUNWAY, UH, ONE THREE.
AND, UM, TURNS OUT THAT THE FAA APPROVED, UH, EVERYBODY'S THINKING IOS, WHICH I THINK IS THREE DEGREES.
WELL, THE, THE, THE, THE AIRPORT IS LAID OUT AS FIVE DEGREES.
SO THE HEIGHT WASN'T AN ISSUE EVEN THOUGH EVERYBODY THOUGHT IT WAS.
SO COMMISSIONERS, ANYBODY GOT ANYTHING? BECAUSE AGAIN, THE FIRST THING THAT POPPED INTO MY MIND WAS RANDOLPH.
BUT, UM, THEY FLY, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE A LOT MORE PROVISION THAN I AM.
UM, AGAIN, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL AND, UM, WE CAN APPROVE, DENY, OR RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, WHICH I THINK IS APPROPRIATE.
STAFF HAS INCLUDED THE STANDARD, UH, BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN TWO YEARS.
AND SO IF, UH, THAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE, UH, MOTION IF YOU WANT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO RECOMMEND IT WITH, UH, CONTINUE WITH, UH, CONDITIONS.
SO IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
OKAY, I RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF P-L-S-P-U-T 2 0 2 4 0 1 1 2.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO INCLUDE THE CONDITION IN THAT? IN THAT MOTION? YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
CAN I JUST SAY WITH CONDITIONS?
I MEAN, 'CAUSE COUNSEL'S GONNA DO THEIR OWN MOTIONS WHEN, WHEN, WHEN THEY HEAR IT.
SO, DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER GOLDIE? THAT WAS WITH THE CONDITION, CORRECT? IS THAT CORRECT, DANIEL? WITH YES.
ALRIGHT, SO THE MOTION, THE MOTION AND THE SECOND IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF P-L-Z-P-L-S-P-U 20 24 0 102 WITH THE CONDITION THAT A BUILDING PERMIT BE ISSUED WITHIN TWO YEARS OF APPROVAL OF THE SUP.
CORRECT? SAM, DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE.
I HAVE SIX VOTES IF YOU'D PUBLISH THAT.
THAT'S SIX AYES, NONE OPPOSED THAT MOTION PASSES.
AND AGAIN, THIS WILL GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND I'M ASSUMING PROBABLY ON THAT FIRST TUESDAY IN AUGUST, YOU'LL HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY AT THAT TIME TO EXPRESS YOUR CONCERNS TO THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE THE FINAL DECISION.
[01:40:01]
OKAY.[6. REQUESTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]
NUMBER SIX, REQUEST AN ANNOUNCEMENT.A REQUEST BY COMMISSIONERS TO PLACE ITEMS ON A FUTURE PLAINTIFF'S ZONING AGENDA.
ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING? SIX B ANNOUNCEMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO, I'LL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE CONFU CONFUSION ABOUT THE REAPPOINTMENTS.
I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE GIVEN IT AN EXTRA DAY AND WAITED TILL TUESDAY BEFORE I CALLED ANYBODY, BUT, UM, UM, AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
NICE MONTHS BY CITY STAFF, ANYTHING.
WHAT HAVE YOU GUYS BEEN DOING ALL MONTH? HUH? PREPARING FOR THE JULY 4TH.
[7. INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PACKETS- NO DISCUSSION TO OCCUR]
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE PNZ COMMISSION PACKETS.THAT'S WHERE THE STAFF, UH, SHOWS US OUR CURRENT, UH, PROJECTS, WHAT THE, THAT ARE AT, UM, CITY COUNCIL AND THEIR, THEIR CURRENT STATUS.
IT IS NOW, UH, 7:40 PM AND THIS MEETING'S ADJOURNED.