[00:00:03]
TODAY IS TUESDAY, JANUARY 10TH.
I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING TO ORDER.
CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? DELORY HERE.
UH, NEXT ITEM, NUMBER THREE, CITIZEN COMMENTS.
AT THIS TIME, IF THERE'S ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, WE INVITE YOU UP.
NOW WE ASK THAT YOU DO FILL OUT A CITIZEN COMMENTS FORM THAT YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND THAT YOU LIMIT YOUR TIME TO THREE MINUTES.
YOU MAY COME UP NOW IF YOU'D LIKE.
CITIZEN COMMENTS, CITIZEN COMMENTS IS NOW CLOSED.
[4. Consent]
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CONSENT.WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON CONSENT AGENDA TODAY.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR OUR CONSENT AGENDA WITH A MOTION? YES, SIR.
UH, I MOVE THAT WE MOVE, THAT WE APPROVE.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER JAMES.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND MINUTE.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER JAMES, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MATA.
IS THERE ANY, UH, DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[A.
Consider a request to construct a daycare and preschool consisting of 11,314 sq. ft. building for property located at 1190 Veterans Drive, at the corner of Veterans Drive and Fender Drive. (Children's Lighthouse - Conditional Use Permit - CUP-22-0074)
]ITEM NUMBER FIVE, CONSIDER IMPOSSIBLE ACTION FIVE A CONSIDER REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A DAYCARE AND PRESCHOOL CONSISTING OF 11,314 SQUARE FEET BUILDING FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1190 VETERANS DRIVE AT THE CORNER OF VETERANS DRIVE AND FENDER DRIVE.CHILDREN'S LIGHTHOUSE DASH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT C U P DASH 22 DASH 0 74.
UH, MS. SHARP, KAYLA SHARP, CITY PLANNER FOR THE RECORD.
IT FALLS IN THE VETERANS DRIVE OVERLAY, UM, WHICH DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR MATERIALS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, BUT AS IT IS WITHIN THE OVERLAY, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED.
UM, AND SO THIS BUILDING IS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF STUCCO AND STONE, UM, WITH SOME APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILINGS.
AND THEN ON THE LAST PAGE WE HAVE THE, UM, SITE PLAN AND LANDSCAPE SHEET.
SO, UM, WE HAVE FOUND THIS COMPLIANT WITH THE OVERLAY AND ASK THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVE THIS ITEM.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
WOULD ANYONE WANNA MAKE A MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION? YES, SIR.
UH, THAT WE, UH, APPROVE THE PLAN AS FORWARD.
IT'S BEEN MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER DELORE THAT WILL APPROVE ITEM FIVE A SECOND.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JAMES.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ALL OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES.
[B.
Consider a request to construct a Valvoline Instant Oil Change consisting of 3,763 sq ft. building for property located at 5100 S. FM 1626, at the southwest corner of FM 1626 and Marketplace Ave. (Valvoline Instant Oil (Lot 3) - Conditional Use Permit - CUP-22-0073)
]UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE B, CONSIDER REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL CHANGE, UH, UM, CONSISTING OF 3,763 SQUARE FEET BUILDING FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT FIVE 100 SOUTH FM 1626 AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FM 1626 AND MARKETPLACE AVENUE, VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL LOT THREE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, C U P DASH 22 DASH 0 73.ALL RIGHT, KAYLA SHARP, CITY PLANNER FOR THE RECORD.
UM, SO THIS ONE IS, UM, PRETTY MUCH ADJACENT TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS AT, UM, 1626 AND MARKETPLACE AVENUE.
UM, THIS ONE IS, UM, THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THIS, UM, PROJECT THAT REQUIRES THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UM, JUST TO ENSURE THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THE, UM, STANDARDS OUTLINED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
AND STAFF HAS FOUND THAT IT DOES COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE AGREEMENT.
AND WE ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THIS ITEM.
ANY QUESTIONS? OH, BEFORE THAT
UM, MATERIALS ARE PRIMARILY ETHOS AND, UM, BRICK.
I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE FIRST THING YOU SAID? THEY WERE THE EFIS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STEPH? WHAT IS EFIS? SORRY, I'M NEW HERE.
IT'S, AND I DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS.
UM, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A STUCCO ALMOST.
UM, BUT IT'S, UM, IT'S A KIND OF, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DESCRIBE IT, SO I APOLOGIZE.
[00:05:01]
UM, I KNOW WHAT IT IS, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DESCRIBE IT, BUT IT, IT'S KIND OF SIMILAR TO STUCCO, UM MM-HMM.I'M SORRY, IS THIS IN THE I 35 OVERLAY? IT IS NOT THERE.
IT'S JUST OUTSIDE OF IT, BUT THE, UH, IT'S THE CSSW PROJECT AND THERE IS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THAT THAT OUTLINES, UM, BUILDING MATERIALS AND SITE STANDARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER MATA.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MATA, SECONDED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER STEGEL.
UM, COMMISSIONER DUREE, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THE SIGNAGE IS ILLUMINATED.
DO YOU KNOW? THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED FOR SIGN PERMITS YET, SO THOSE WILL BE SEPARATE PERMITS AND WILL BE REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE.
SO THE ELEVATION WE SEE IS JUST A REPRESENTATIVE YES.
THAT'LL BE REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH OUR SIGN CODE AND THEN THE DA FURTHER OUTLINES SOME ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[A.
Consider and make recommendation to City Council regarding a request by Sergio Lozano-Sanchez, P.E. (Z-21-0080) to rezone approximately .99 acres of land from 'A' (Agriculture) to 'NC' (Neighborhood Commercial) for property located at 7755 Camino Real in Hays County, Texas.
- Public Hearing
- Recommendation to City Council
ITEM NUMBER SIX, ZONING SIX A CONSIDERED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST BY SERGIO LASANO SANCHEZ, PE Z DASH 21 DASH 0 0 8 0 TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.99 ACRES OF LAND FROM A AGRICULTURE TO NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 77 55 CAMINO RAL IN HAYES COUNTY, TEXAS.
THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM.
IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, YOU MAY COME UP NOW.
WE ALSO, AGAIN, ASK THAT YOU FILE A COMMENTS FORM THAT YOU LIMIT YOUR TIME TO THREE MINUTES AND THAT YOU STATE YOUR NAME.
SEEING NONE, I WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
KAYLA SHARPE, CITY PLANNER FOR THE RECORD.
UM, SO THIS IS JUST TO THE WEST OF THE CORNER OF FM ONE 50 AND STATE HIGHWAY, UM, 21.
SO IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURE.
IT HAS BEEN, UM, REVIEWED TO, UM, ENSURE, WELL, LET'S BACKTRACK A LITTLE BIT.
UM, SO THE, WE'VE DECIDED THAT STAFF BELIEVES THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS, UM, THE MOST APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS SITE, UM, AS THERE'S SOME PRETTY ROBUST STANDARDS FOR, UM, WHAT PER, WHAT USES ARE PERMITTED AND THEN, UM, GIVEN SURROUNDING, UM, RESIDENTIAL OR AGRICULTURE ZONING.
UM, AND THERE'S A LOT OF PROPERTIES, UM, SURROUNDING IT THAT ARE ALSO NOT WITHIN CITY LIMITS.
UM, SO KEEPING ALL OF THAT IN MIND, WE WANTED TO BE CAUTIOUS OF WHAT ZONING WE WOULD RECOMMEND, AND WE FOUND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WAS THE BEST FIT FOR THIS SITE.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S ALL SORTS OF SITE STANDARDS FOR THAT.
UM, AS FAR AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS A, UM, CONDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS AREA.
UM, SO IT IS COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL.
UM, AND THEN, SO PART OF THIS PROPERTY IS, UM, WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN.
SO THE PORTION THAT'S BEING REZONED IS WITHOUT, IS OUTSIDE OF THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN.
UM, AND THAT, AND IT WILL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 21.
UM, AND THE APPLICANT IS WELL AWARE OF THE CITY OF CAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPING, UM, IN OR NEAR FLOODPLAIN.
UM, SO THEY WILL BE SERVED BY COUNTY LINE WATER AND THEY'LL HAVE A SEPTIC SYSTEM, AND THEN P C WILL BE THE ELECTRIC PROVIDER.
UM, AND WE WOULD ASK THAT P NZ RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, SIR.
SO PART OF THE LOGIC YOU JUST SAID IS THAT, UM, IT'S NEAR TO THE END OF THE CITY'S JURISDICTION MM-HMM.
DO WE KNOW WHAT THE, WHAT IT IS ZONED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT LINE? WELL, IT, IT'S SAN MARCUS'S ET T J, RIGHT? UH, YEAH, I MEAN, I DON'T THINK IT'S, YEAH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ETJ WHERE, YOU KNOW, LIKE, WELL, I GUESS WATERSTONE OR I'M NOT SURE WHAT, YEAH, IT'S IN THAT GENERAL VICINITY.
PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING THAT'S NOT WITHIN CITY LIMITS OUT THERE IS GONNA BE E T J, WHETHER IT'S R A T J OR SAN MARCOS MM-HMM.
[00:10:01]
DIRECTLY TO SAN MARCOS.THAT, THAT SPECIFIC AREA? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
UM, SO THIS AREA, THIS IS NEAR THE ONE 50 INTERSECTION, CORRECT? IT WASN'T DIRECTLY AT THE INTERSECTION, BUT IT WAS PRETTY CLOSE TO IT? CORRECT.
AND THIS AREA IS NOT OF A NODE.
IT'S, IS THAT CORRECT? WE, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A WHILE BACK, WE, WE TRIED TO TELL THE COUNCIL THIS SHOULD BE A NODE AND I'M, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, THEY REJECTED THAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO.
I, I CAN SPEAK UP FOR THAT RIGHT NOW.
UM, THANK YOU FOR BEING PATIENT WITH ME, UM, WORKING AT HOME AND WAS SICK FOR LAST WEEK AND I'M STILL KIND OF AT HOME FOR THE SAME REASON.
SO, UM, WE, WE TRIED TO DO A REGIONAL NODE DOWN HERE WITHIN THE LAST YEAR AND TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE REST OF THIS INTERSECTION, WE HAVE THE NORTH SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION THAT'S IN A REGIONAL NODE AND IT'S SURROUNDED BY A NEW SETTLEMENT.
AND THEN WE TRY TO GET THE REST OF IT ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION TO KIND OF MIRROR THAT ALONG WITH THE, UM, THE, THE WAREHOUSE AND THE UH, UM, CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURING ZONING BEHIND THAT, GOING NORTHWEST FROM THERE.
AND COUNSEL ULTIMATELY REJECTED THAT.
AND SO THAT'S WHY IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ONLY WHAT WOULD NORMALLY HAVE A FULL HALF MOON OF A REGIONAL NODE THERE.
THAT'S WHY IT EXISTS IN THE, IN THE MANNER THAT IT DOES RIGHT NOW.
AND BECAUSE WE ARE DOING, WE'RE ALREADY WORKING ON THE FULL REWRITE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO TRY TO ACCOUNT FOR THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR GOALS.
SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO THROUGH A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT RIGHT NOW SINCE WE'RE ALREADY DOING IT ANYWAY.
SO RIGHT NOW THIS IS IN THE FARM LANDSCAPE AND IT'S RECOMMENDED EITHER AGRICULTURE OR CONDITIONAL R ONE ONE OR N OR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL BECAUSE IT WAS NOT MADE A NOTE.
BASICALLY, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS THE, I DUNNO, UM, HIGHEST LEVEL THAT IS RECOMMENDED THERE.
E EVEN THOUGH ACROSS THE STREET IT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED SOMETHING FAR MORE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, UH, RETAIL SERVICES OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT HAS MORE ALLOWABLE USES BECAUSE IT'S HERE.
WE DIDN'T MAKE IT A NODE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS WHAT WE THINK IS THE CORRECT THING TO PUT AT THIS INTERSECTION ACTION.
THE, WE DIDN'T WANT TO, IT PRIMARILY WAS BASED ON WE DIDN'T WANT TO PURSUE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR FULL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REWRITE.
AND WE WERE, WE TALKED WITH THE APPLICANT AND WHILE WE CAN'T ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT WHAT SPECIFIC USES THEY WERE PLANNING ON USING THERE, RIGHT.
UH, IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT THE USES THAT ARE OUT A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO, THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH YOUR GOALS WITH THAT AND ALSO WITH ALL THE, UM, SITE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL.
SO WE ARE ABLE TO, UH, BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE WITHOUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.
I'LL, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL TALK MORE DURING DISCUSSION, BUT, UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE? THANK YOU.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER MATA TO APPROVE ITEM SIX A.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION? I'LL SECOND THANK YOU.
MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER MATA, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DELORE.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? OKAY.
UH, SO I'M GONNA JUST SAY FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, UM, WELL ONE, I I, I, ULTIMATELY, I AM IN FAVOR OF THIS.
I, I, I THINK NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS A BETTER ZONING FOR THIS LAND THAN AGRICULTURE.
I THINK IT'S A STEP IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A STEP FAR ENOUGH.
I THINK THIS LAND, I I, AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT WE SAW COMING WHEN WE ASKED, COULD THIS PLEASE BE A REGIONAL NODE? THIS IS, WE HAVE VERY LITTLE CITY OWNED LAND IN, I MEAN, IS THE CITY LIMIT LAND IN THIS, IN THIS REGION, IN THIS AREA? AND I THINK THE ZONING SHOULD BE SOMETHING FURTHER ADVANCED THAN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
BUT IT, BUT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS A BETTER OPTION THAN AGRICULTURE.
THAT IS MY PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE ON THIS.
[00:15:01]
UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE ASKED FOR THIS TO BE, FOR THIS TO BE CHANGED, NOT FARM LANDSCAPE, BUT, UM, THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS LEFT.AND GIVEN WHAT WE HAVE NOW, UH, THAT IS THE BEST ZONING I CAN SEE THAT IS CONDITIONAL RECOMMENDED.
I HEAR ALL OF YOUR CONCERNS AND I AGREE WITH THE, THE CONCERNS OF IT BEING NOT ADVANCED ENOUGH.
UM, STATE HIGHWAY 21 COULD EASILY BECOME A, A CORRIDOR IN THE FUTURE.
LIKE, NOT EVEN JUST EASILY I COULD, IT'S, I THINK IT'S, IT'S HAPPENING AS WE SPEAK.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE PUTTING HOUSES ALONG ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT E D J, UM, LINEUP.
AND I WORRY THAT WE PUT OURSELVES IN A BIT OF A SITUATION TO WHICH WE ARE NOT READY AND WE LOCK OURSELVES INTO THAT ZONING UNTIL IT GETS A CHANCE TO BE REZONED.
LIKE THEY COULD COME BACK AND OPTIONALLY DO IT, BUT I DON'T SEE A TIME WHEN PEOPLE HAVE COME BACK TO THIS BOARD AND OPTIONALLY UP ZONED THEMSELVES.
UM, AND THEN YOU COME BACK AND SELL THAT LAND IF YOU, IF THAT USE DOESN'T EXACTLY FIT THAT CORNER, WHAT'S THAT? THAT NODE CHANGES? ARE WE GOING TO GET THE THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN THAT PARCEL OF PROPERTY? AND I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK WE ARE, IF WE GO AHEAD AND GIVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, LIKE I THINK WE'RE SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE FOOT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT CASE.
UM, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU, BUT, UM, I, THIS IS THE DECISION THE COUNCIL MADE AND, AND IT'S NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER'S FAULT.
YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ASKED THAT IT GOT LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS DONE.
IT SHOULD, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT WHEN WE BROUGHT IT TO THEM, THEY LOOKED AT IT AND THEY SAID, NO, LEAVE IT AS IS.
AND THIS IS THE COST OF THAT IN, IN MY VIEW.
UM, AND SO THIS IS THE CHOICE THEY MADE A YEAR AGO AND NOW IT'S COMING TO FRUITION.
THAT IS MY PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE AS TO WHY I STILL SUPPORT IT, EVEN THOUGH I AGREE WITH YOU, I WISH, I WISH THIS WAS SOMETHING DENSER, SOMETHING, UH, WITH MORE ALLOWABLE USES THAN WE'RE CURRENTLY SEEING TODAY.
UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? OKAY.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[B.
Consider and make recommendation to City Council regarding a request by Jackson Walker, LLP. (Z-22-0111) to rezone approximately 54.2 Acres of land from ‘RS’ (Retail Services, 24- Acres), “R-1-T” (Townhomes, 10.57-Acres), “R-1-2” (Single Family Residential 2, 15.83 acres), “TU” (Transportation Utilities, 4.35-Acres) to ‘PUD’ (Planned Unit Development, “RS” 17.17 Acres, “R-1-T” 14.56 Acres, “R-1-2” 22.49 Acres) for property located 1500 E RR 150 in Hays County, Texas.
- Public Hearing
- Recommendation to City Council
CONSIDER AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING REQUEST BY JACKSON WALKER.
L L P Z DASH 22 DASH ONE 11 TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 54.2 ACRES OF LAND FROM RS RETAIL SERVICES, 24 ACRES R ONE T TOWNHOMES, 10.57 ACRES, R ONE TWO, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, TWO 15.83 ACRES, T U TRANSPORTATION UTILITIES 4.35 ACRES TO PUT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RS 17 POINT 17 ACRES.
R ONE T 14.56 ACRES, R 1 2 22 0.49 ACRES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1 50 0 EAST, UH, RANCH ROAD ONE 50 IN HAYES COUNTY, TEXAS.
THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM.
IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, YOU MAY COME UP NOW.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR TIME TO THREE MINUTES.
STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND FILL OUT A CITIZEN COMMENTS FORM.
SEEING NONE, I WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, MS. SHARP, ARE YOU, UH, WILL, UH, UH, MR. ATKINSON, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
UH, WILL ATKINSON, UH, DIRECTOR FOR PLANNING FOR THE RECORD.
UM, BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE, UM, THE REQUEST TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY TO A PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
AND I APPRECIATE, UH, MR. GARY READING OFF THE ACREAGE ON THERE.
IT WAS QUITE A BIT, BUT WE TRIED TO BE AS SPECIFIC AS WE POSSIBLY COULD.
UM, THIS, THIS PROJECT IN SHORT CAME BEFORE Y'ALL, AT THE BEGINNING OF 2022, UH, MAYBE FE THE FEBRUARY TIMEFRAME, IF I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE CORRECTLY, UM, WITH, UH, IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST PROJECTS OUTTA THE SHOOT WITH THE VIBE TRAIL DESIGN IN MIND.
AND IT WENT THROUGH Y'ALL, Y'ALL HAD SOME CONCERNS.
WE WORKED TO ADDRESS THOSE AND THEN IT WENT TO CITY COUNCIL AND, UM, ULTIMATELY THEY SAID NO TO IT.
UM, BUT AFTER HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH CITY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT AND PLANNING AND ALL TOGETHER, UH, OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS, CITY COUNCIL ULTIMATELY IN DECEMBER VOTED TO BRING BACK, UM, TO, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO REZONE THE PROPERTY AGAIN PRIOR TO THE 12 MONTH WAITING
[00:20:01]
PERIOD THAT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED OTHERWISE.THIS, THIS, UH, PLAN AND THE PL THE PLANE UNIT DEVELOPMENT REFLECT, UM, CONVERSATIONS WITH CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF AND EVERYTHING HAS BEEN MELTED TOGETHER.
UM, INSTEAD OF A LINEAR, UM, UM, NORTHWEST TO SOUTHEAST, UH, CORRIDOR THROUGH THE PROPERTY, IT'S NOW SPLITING INTO TWO.
THERE'S A FEW MORE FRONT LOADED, UM, PROJECTS FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SIDE, AND THEY ALSO HAVE SOME, UH, MORE RETAIL SERVICES UP NEAR FM ONE 50.
SO THOSE ARE THE BIGGEST THINGS ABOUT IT.
UH, THEY ACTUALLY, AND THEY ALSO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE PARKLAND IN THE MIDDLE FOR LIKE A PLAYGROUND AREA.
AND, UM, STAFF IS STILL PRETTY HAPPY WITH THIS PROJECT AND THIS IS WHAT COUNCIL WANTS TO SEE AS WELL.
UH, THERE ARE A COUPLE THINGS THOUGH THAT ARE IN THE, UM, THAT ARE IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, AND LET ME PULL THAT UP REAL QUICK, THAT NEED TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR.
UH, WE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT, UM, WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING AT IT AS WELL THAT THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ACCOUNTING FOR APPROPRIATELY, SO.
ALL RIGHT, LET ME PULL THIS UP REAL QUICK.
ALL RIGHT, SO, UM, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT ON PAGE NINE OF 16 OF THE PDF FOR THE ORDINANCE UNDER COMMERCIAL SPACE REQUIREMENT, UM, ONE THING THAT WE FORGOT TO REMOVE WAS, UM, AND THIS, THIS FROM WORK, FROM CONVERSATIONS IN TWO A TWO, UM, WE, THEY ARE REQUESTING TO PUBLICLY TO STRIKE THE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE RESTROOMS AS REQUIRED OVER BY THE LAKE.
UH, THEY WILL BE ALLOWING THE PUBLIC TO USE THE RESTROOMS UP BY EAST F AND ONE 50 IN THEIR AMENITY CENTER.
AND THEN THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL THAT'S GONNA BE AROUND THE SPRING-FED POND THERE, UH, WE'LL HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO GO USE THAT POTENTIALLY FR AS, UM, AS PEOPLE VISITING THOSE COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS.
UM, ALSO ON TWO A 23, UM, THEY WERE, THEY'RE REQUESTING TO STRIKE, UH, UNDER GREEN SPACE AMENITIES.
UM, THE AREA DESIGNATED FOR THE TEMPORARY EVENT OR SMALL LIVE PERFORMANCES FOR THE STAGE EQUIPPED WITH ACCESS TO POWER, UM, THEY'RE MOVING THAT SPECIFIC ITEM OVER TO THE AMENITY CENTER.
UM, THAT'LL HAVE AN INDOOR COMPONENT TO IT.
SO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL, IT WON'T BE AS BIG OF AN ISSUE FROM A SOUND PERSPECTIVE POTENTIALLY.
AND THEN WHERE IT SAYS MULTIPLE SHADED SEATING AREAS, UM, THEY'RE JUST, THEY'RE WANTING TO HAVE THE, THE SHADED SECTION PULLED OUT.
THE IDEA IS THAT THERE'S GONNA BE SOME BENCHES AROUND THE POND AND THERE'S LARGE CYPRESS TREES OVERHANGING IT, SO THE, THE TREES THAT WILL PROVIDE ENOUGH SHADE FOR IT AS WELL.
UM, AND THEN THE LAST THING IS, UM, I SENT YOU ON AN EMAIL TODAY, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR IT.
UH, BUT WE GOT THE UPDATED SURVEY THAT BETTER REFLECTS THE ZONING, UH, DIVISIONS AND, UM, WE PUT IT ON THE AGENDA AS WELL.
WE NEED TO INCLUDE THAT SPECIFIC SURVEY IN THE, UM, FOR THE ORDINANCE, FOR, FOR THE SERVE.
UM, THIS PROJECT'S, UH, A VERY NICE PROJECT.
WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT IT AND, UM, WE'RE EXCITED TO SEE IT MOVE FORWARD AND WE ASK THAT Y'ALL ALSO, UH, RECOMMEND MOVING IT FORWARD AS WELL.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS THIS, UH, ABOUT 70 TOWN HOMES AND 128 HOMES? IS THAT APPROXIMATELY WHAT'S, UH, PLANNED? OH, LET ME PULL IT UP REAL QUICK.
WE HAVE 108 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND 96 TOWN HOMES.
THAT'S ABOUT ON 26 AND A HALF ACRES.
LET ME PULL IT BACK UP REAL QUICK.
SO WE HAVE ON R ONE TWO, WE HAVE, UM, ABOUT 22 AND A HALF ACRES, APPROXIMATELY TOWN HOMES ARE ABOUT 14 AND A HALF ACRES TOTAL.
AND THEN, UM, RETAIL SERVICES IS APPROXIMATELY 17.17 AT THE BOTTOM 14.
THE SURVEY BEING THE MOST ACCURATE PORTION OF THAT.
[00:25:01]
THANK YOU.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
UM, CAN WE PULL THAT MAP BACK UP, UH, UH, THE MAP OF THE, UM, OF, OF, OF, OF WHAT THE LAYOUT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE? YEAH.
AND, UM, JUST, I, I MEAN THE CONCERN I HAD LAST TIME, IT STILL SEEMS TO BE TRUE, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S, UH, UM, IT'S STILL TRUE THAT THE ACTUAL ROADS ARE THE MAIN KIND OF ARTERIES THAT GO THROUGH IT.
THE ONES IN BETWEEN HOMES ARE ALLEYS, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THEN STREET PARKING WILL BE ON THOSE ROADS, NOT ON THOSE ALLEYS, CORRECT? THE YES, CORRECT.
SO THE, THE ROAD, THE PUBLIC ROADS WILL HAVE STREET PARKING AS ALL AS IF THEY'RE WIDE ENOUGH, THEY CAN HAVE STREET PARKING JUST LIKE WE HAVE IN ANY SUBDIVISION.
THEY WILL ALSO HAVE ENOUGH PARKING FOR ON, ON THE ACTUAL INDIVIDUAL PADS FOR THEIR BASED ON PARKING RATIOS.
UM, I DO BELIEVE THESE ALLEYS ARE ALSO WIDER THAN YOU WOULD NORMALLY SEE.
SO IF PER FIRE CODE, IF THEY MEET THOSE MINIMUM WIDTHS, UM, TO THAT YOU CAN PARK ON THE ALLEY FROM A, FROM A STREET PERSPECTIVE, THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
BUT THERE'S, FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA WORK VERY WELL IN SOME CASES, LIKE IN THE TOWN HOMES AREAS.
I AGREE, THOSE ARE ALL ALLEY LOADED AND THE TOWN HOMES ARE PUT TOGETHER, SO THERE WON'T BE ANY OPPORTUNITY REALLY TO PARK ON THEM.
AND SO MY MAIN CONCERN PREVIOUSLY, AND STILL NOW IN CASE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE WATCHING, IS THAT YES, IF I AS A NOT RESIDENT OF THIS PLACE GO AND VISIT A FRIEND THAT LIVES HERE, THERE IS SEVERELY LACKING A PLACE FOR ME TO PARK MY VEHICLE UNLESS I PARK IN THEIR DRIVEWAY.
UH, I'M, I KNOW COUNSEL WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF HOMES, HOW'S GONNA AFFECT ONE 50.
BUT I JUST THINK THAT LOOKING AT THE PICTURE ITSELF, IT'S A BIT DECEPTIVE AS TO THERE REALLY ISN'T MANY PLACES TO PARK UNLESS YOU ARE PARKING IN SOMEONE'S DRIVEWAY, UM, THERE AT THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ALL AWARE OF BEFORE WE JUST MADE OUR DECISIONS.
THAT'S ONE REASON I BROUGHT UP THE ACREAGE BECAUSE IT LOOKED VERY DENSE, VERY COMPACT, WHICH DENSITY PER SE IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR ME, BUT LOOKING AT THE LIMITATIONS IN TERMS OF THE STREETS, I AGREE WITH THAT, THAT'S A PROBLEM.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION, YES, SIR.
THAT WE, UH, APPROVE THE PLAN AS PRESENTED.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER DELORE TO APPROVE ITEM SIX B.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR HIS MOTION? I'LL SECOND THAT.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MATA.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? YES, SIR.
UH, UH, JAMES, UM, ONE THING I WOULD ALSO MENTION, LOOKING AT THE, THE PAR WHERE THE PARKING WOULD BE, THERE'S REALLY NO DIRECT PATH FROM THAT LIKE, PARKING LOT AREA TO GO TO ANY OF THOSE TOWN HOMES.
LIKE YOU'D BE WALKING ESSENTIALLY THROUGH EITHER THAT LIKE GREEN SPACE, UM, OR ESSENTIALLY ALMOST THROUGH SOMEONE'S LIKE, PERSONAL SPACE AND, OR YOU'RE HAVING TO WALK ESSENTIALLY A QUARTER MILE AROUND THIS PLACE TO GET TO YOUR TOWN HOME THAT YOU'RE, IF YOUR FRIEND IS THERE, LIKE IF YOU'RE AT THAT TOP RIGHT CORNER WHERE B IS, YOU'D HAVE TO WALK ALL THE WAY DOWN PAST THAT, LIKE LAITY CENTER UP THEN BACK.
RIGHT? AGAIN, THAT'S A LONG WAY FOR SOMEONE TO WALK.
WELL, AND THAT'S ALSO A LONG WAY FOR SOMEONE TO WALK IF IT'S A LITTLE DARKER IN THE DAY.
[00:30:01]
IF YOU'RE VISITING SOMEONE AT FIVE O'CLOCK, SIX O'CLOCK, YOU MIGHT NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WALKING THAT FAR.LIKE I JUST DON'T SEE THAT BEING WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
THIS IS, I I I, WELL THIS IS PART OF THE VIBE TRAIL THOUGH, CORRECT? I I I I I ASSUME WALKING THE PROPERTY MIGHT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, SO IT'S WHERE THAT RED LINE IS, IS THAT CORRECT? ON THE, ON THE MAP? YES.
AND, AND, AND SO I DO AGREE WITH YOU, THERE IS A DISTANCE THERE, BUT IN THEORY IT IS WALKABLE, BUT IT'S STILL, I, I MEAN, THE NUMBER OF HOMES VERSUS THE NUMBER OF PLACES TO PARK DOESN'T ADD UP IN MY MIND.
AND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S NECESSARILY A REASON TO SAY NO TO THIS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF, SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL SHOULD BE AWARE OF WHEN THEY MAKE THEIR DECISION.
SO THE, THE PARKING RATIOS, THEY EXCEED PARKING RATIOS, UM, THE TOWNHOMES, UM MM-HMM.
AND THE DRIVEWAYS BY THE WAY, THEY HAVE TO MEET THE MINIMUM, UH, PARKING STALL DEPTHS, WHICH ARE MM-HMM.
UH, AND IT'S THE SAME THING FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY.
LIKE THEY MEET ALL THEIR ONSITE PARKING RATIOS, SO EVERYTHING THAT IS STREET PARKING IS EXTRA PARKING ON TOP OF THAT.
AND IT'S THE SAME THING LIKE WHEN WE'RE REVIEWING SUBDIVISION PLANS AS WELL.
I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE PROPERTIES THEMSELVES HAVE, HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING, JUST, UH, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE STREET PARKING.
UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? UH, SO AGAIN, FOR MYSELF, I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THIS IS A REASON TO DENY IT, BUT I DO THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE WELL AWARE OF WHEN WE ARE SAYING YES.
UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE REALIZES THAT AND HOPEFULLY COUNCIL IS WATCHING AND THEY DO AS WELL.
UH, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE? DELORE? AYE.
UH, THE MOTION PASSES FIVE TO ONE.
[A. Discussion only regarding Planning and Zoning Commission request for future agenda items.
]
UH, SEVEN, A DISCUSSION ONLY REGARDING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. DOES ANY, ARE, DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ITEMS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE ON FUTURE AGENDAS? UM, OKAY.
I STILL HAVE MINE THAT I WANNA SEE ABOUT, UM, MINIMUM LOT SIZES, BUT, UH, WE WILL GET TO THAT I'M SURE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
UH, IT'S ONE I'VE ALREADY BROUGHT UP AND WE WILL HOPEFULLY HAVE THAT DISCUSSION SOON.
[A. Staff Report by William Atkinson, Director of Planning.]
WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.STAFF REPORT BY WILLIAM ATKINSON, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.
UH, WILL ATKINSON, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING FOR THE RECORD.
UM, SO FIRST THING'S FIRST, AND, UH, WE FORGOT I DIDN'T ASK THEM TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA AND I HAD FORGOTTEN ABOUT IT COMPLETELY, SO I APOLOGIZE JASON TO YOU SPECIFICALLY.
UH, BUT, UH, WE HAVE JASON LUTZ, HE'S OUR NEW SENIOR PLANNER.
HE'S STARTED ON, UH, TWO OR YESTERDAY ON MONDAY.
UH, HE'S, UH, SITTING BACK BEHIND KAYLA, I BELIEVE, IF I SAW THE CAMERA CORRECTLY.
HE'S BEEN, HE'S BEEN AMAZING SO FAR AND HE IS ONLY BEEN WORKING TWO DAYS AND WE THINK HE'S A PRETTY GOOD FIT.
SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT HAVING HIM STARTING WORKING WITH US.
UM, OVER THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS, WE'RE GONNA BE GEARING UP TO DO A REVISION TO THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN DRAFT.
UH, OUR PUBLIC OUTREACH EVENT IS GOING TO BE ON FEBRUARY, OH, LET'S SEE, FEBRUARY 23RD, WHICH IS A THURSDAY EVENING FROM FIVE TO 8:00 PM RIGHT HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
UH, IT'LL BE SPECIFICALLY TARGETED TO, UH, THE DOWNTOWN FOLK, UH, WITHIN THE AREA OF THE, LARGELY THE 1880 PLAT, BOTH, AND ALSO ANOTHER COUPLE, FEW MORE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THERE.
UM, AND WE'RE GONNA BE DOING A LOT OF TARGETED OUTREACH FOR THEM, UM, WITH SOME PUBLIC HEARING SIGNS.
THERE'S GOING TO BE, UM, PROBABLY SOME MAILERS THAT WE'RE SENDING, SENDING OUT TO THEM, A LOT OF SOCIAL MEDIA AS WELL.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THEIR SPECIFIC INPUT IN MIND AS WELL FOR THAT.
AND, UH, IN THE MEANTIME, UM, STAFF IS GONNA BE WORKING TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING ALL THOSE DOCUMENTS TOGETHER AND, AND OUT AND ALSO COORDINATING WITH, UH, B G K, WHO'S WORKING ON THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN AS WELL.
[00:35:01]
ON THE FEBRUARY THE 13TH THROUGH THE 15TH, UH, VER DUTY'S GONNA BE IN TOWN FOR OUR CITYWIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.UH, THEY'RE GONNA BE HERE FOR THOSE THREE DAYS, AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE A FOCUS ON THAT FROM THE, UH, FROM THE PLANNING ZONE COMMISSION SIDE OF THINGS AT THE MEETING AS WELL.
AND I THINK THAT'S PRIMARILY IT.
SO DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? UH, WE DO PLAN TO HAVE A SECOND MEETING THIS MONTH, CORRECT? AS FAR AS YOU KNOW.
AND IT IS, UH, IT'S THE GOAL, IT'S MY GOAL, UM, TO HAVE A, A, AN ACTION PLAN RELATED TO THE DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN ON THAT MEETING SO THAT Y'ALL ARE AWARE OF WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
AND THEN, UM, WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT ACTION PLAN TO THE WEEK FOLLOWING, OR THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IN THE FIRST ONE IN FEBRUARY, SO THEY'RE AWARE ALSO.
UM, ITEM NUMBER NINE, ADJOURNMENT.
SECONDED BY, UM, COMMISSIONER STEGEL.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.