[00:00:02]
GOOD EVENING.TODAY IS TUESDAY, DECEMBER THE 12TH, AND THE TIME IS 6:30 PM AND I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ORDER.
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? DELO HERE.
[3. Minutes]
THREE MINUTES.ITEM THREE, A, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.
MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18TH, 2023.
NOVEMBER 15TH, 2023, REGULAR MEETING.
WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES WITH A MOTION.
YES, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM THREE A, THE AGENDA OR THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18TH, NOVEMBER 15TH AND NOVEMBER 28TH, 2023.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER JAMES AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER SIEGEL TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CITIZEN COMMENTS.
ITEM FOUR, A CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WELCOMES COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS EARLY IN THE AGENDA OF OUR REGULAR MEETINGS.
SPEAKERS ARE PROVIDED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK DURING THIS TIME ON ANY AGENDA ITEM OR ANY OTHER MATTER CONCERNING CITY BUSINESS, AND THEY MUST OBSERVE THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT.
AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN CITIZEN COMMENTS.
OKAY, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THOSE.
[A.
A public hearing for the purpose of receiving testimony, comments, and written evidence from the public to adopt the City of Kyle 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
- Public Hearing (First of Two)
THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
SEEING NONE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:32 PM ITEM NUMBER
[6. Consent]
SIX, CONSENT ITEM SIX A FOR THE 700 BUTTON, PHASE ONE, A DASH ONE AND SIX B FOR RE SUBDIVISION OF BURLESON ACRES.WE REQUIRE MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS WITH A MOTION.
UH, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEM OR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I DON'T KNOW WHO SAID THAT FIRST.
UH, SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER JAMES AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER SERATO TO APPROVE ITEM SIX A AND SIX B.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? NOPE.
SO WE HAVE, UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
[A. Consider a request to construct an approximately 2,200-square-foot restaurant building located at 2266 Kohlers Crossing within the I-35 Overlay District. HTeaO - Conditional Use Permit (CUP-23-0094)]
CONSIDER IMPOSSIBLE.ACTION ITEM SEVEN A CONSIDER REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 2,200 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT BUILDING LOCATED AT 2 2 6 6 KOHLER'S CROSSING WITHIN THE I 35 OVERLAY DISTRICT, HTO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CUP DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 0 9 0.
DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM? YES, I DO.
KAYLA SHARP CITY PLANNER FOR THE RECORD.
UM, SO WE HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR, UM, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.
UM, THIS SITE IS WITHIN THE I 35 OVERLAY.
UM, HERE'S KIND OF A GENERAL LOCATION MAP.
UM, THE BUILDING WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 2200 SQUARE FEET.
UM, AND THE MATERIALS CONSIST PRIMARILY OF BRICK AND STONE AND THEY HAVE APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES TO ACCENT THE BUILDING.
UM, SO IT IS PRIMARILY ANYTHING THAT'S LIKE THE LIGHT GRAY, WHITE COLOR IS, UM, BRICK.
AND THEN THE REST IS, IT'S LIKE A, UM, FIBER CEMENT BOARD TYPE MATERIAL THAT KIND OF HAS A WOOD LOOK TO IT.
AND THEN HERE'S THE OTHER SIDE, THEN THE SITE PLAN.
AND THIS ONE DOES HAVE AN APPROVED SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLAN.
AND THEN, SO ON THIS ONE, THE BUILDING MATERIALS CONSIST OF 84% MASONRY, SO IT DOESN'T QUITE MEET THAT 90% THRESHOLD, UM, IN THE I 35 OVERLAY.
ALSO, JUST WANNA NOTE THAT, UM, WE DID NOT RECEIVE THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS, BUT
[00:05:01]
STAFF WILL CONFIRM WITH THE APPLICANT THAT THEY ARE COMPLIANT.UM, USUALLY IT'S GONNA BE LIKE A SPLIT FACE CMU PRODUCT OR, UM, STONE OR BRICK, SOMETHING THAT COMPLIMENTS THE DESIGN AND THAT THAT'S, UM, ALSO A REQUIREMENT OF THE OVERLAY.
SO WE'LL MAKE SURE WE GET THAT CONFIRMED BEFORE, UM, THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
BUT JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN HERE AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, UM, BUT WE JUST DID NOT CATCH IT.
UM, SO WITH THE 84% MASONRY IN THIS CASE, WE WOULD ASK THAT THE COMMISSION MAKE THE FINAL DETERMINATION AND EITHER APPROVE AS PRESENTED OR REQUEST REVISIONS BE MADE TO THE MATERIALS TO BRING IT FULLY INTO COMPLIANCE.
SO ANY QUESTIONS QUESTION? UM, 84%.
YOU COULD LOOK AT THIS A COUPLE OF WAYS, BUT I, I WOULDN'T PRESUME TO KNOW WHY IT FELL SHORT BY 6%.
SO IT'S PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THIS, UM, AND I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT OF COURSE, BUT JUST WITH THE WAY THEY DESIGNED THE BUILDING WITH THE WOOD LOOK, FIBER CEMENT BOARDS, UM, THAT'S PROBABLY KIND OF WHERE THEY LOST THAT 6% THAT DIDN'T QUITE MAKE IT TO THE 90% REQUIREMENT.
UM, IF YOU ARE LOOKING CLOSELY AT THE CHART, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT IT HAS, UM, AN 11% ON THERE TOO.
THAT'S SEPARATE CALCULATION FOR THE LIKE WINDOW AND GLAZING REQUIREMENTS THAT'S NOT COUNTED.
UM, THEY'RE JUST SHOWING THAT THEY MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL.
SO IT'S THE 84% MASONRY AND THE 16% OTHER.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS, UH, WOOD-LIKE PRODUCT IS NOT CEMENTITIOUS THOUGH.
IT, IT'S, IT'S A WOOD FIBER AND POLYPROPYLENE, I BELIEVE.
UM, SO IT WOULD PROBABLY, IT'S GOT A 25 YEAR GUARANTEE.
IT'S ONLY BEEN ON THE MARKET FOR 15 YEARS.
UM, SO WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S GONNA PERFORM OVER TIME BETTER THAN WOOD.
I WOULD SUPPOSE THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE THOUGH, AS A RESULT, IS THAT REALLY MORE DURABLE THAN BRICK STONE OR STUCCO? AND THAT'S A RHETORICAL QUESTION, BUT NEVERTHELESS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR CONSIDERATION OF SOMETHING IN THE I 35 OVERLAY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE CREATED THAT KIND OF EXCEPTION, UM, AROUND THAT PERCENTAGE OVER THE USE OF THESE KIND OF, WITH THE USE OF THESE KIND OF MATERIALS.
UM, I WILL SAY IT HAS BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST, WHETHER IT WAS INTENTIONAL OR NOT.
I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN CASES IN THE PAST THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED WITH THIS KIND OF, UH, SLIGHT VARIATION THAT'S NOT TOO FAR OFF FROM CODE COMPLIANT, BUT IT IS A LITTLE BIT BELOW WHAT WE WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE.
UM, I MEAN USUALLY YOU ALL KIND OF WOULD POINT, I MEAN, I GUESS I'M GUESSING DE DEFINITELY WOULD'VE POINTED THAT OUT BEFORE WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS POINT.
IS THERE A SPECIFIC REASON WHY THEY'VE DECIDED TO GO THIS ROUTE? LIKE YOU'VE ALL HAD CONVERSATIONS THAT THIS DOESN'T MEET, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE THIS EXTRA STEP ON THE PROCESS.
LIKE IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC REASON? IS IT LIKE BRANDING? IS IT WHAT THEIR, THEIR BUILDINGS USUALLY ARE? LIKE, KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH THE THOUGHT PROCESS.
UM, SO AGAIN, CAN'T NECESSARILY SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT GENERALLY I WILL SAY WHAT THEY SUBMITTED THE FIRST ROUND OF REVIEW, THERE WAS NO STONE WHATSOEVER.
IT WAS ALL EITHER EFIS OR STUCCO.
UM, SO THAT IS WHAT THEIR, THEIR BRAND GENERALLY USES FOR THEIR DESIGN.
UM, AND SO IT'S USUALLY A COMBINATION OF THAT EFIS OR STUCCO AND THEN THE WOOD, UH, FIBER CEMENT PANELS.
UM, AND SO THIS WAS THEM TRYING TO, TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE I 35 OVERLAY AND BEFORE BRINGING THIS, UM, TO THE COMMISSION, WE TOLD THEM, YOU KNOW, 84%, IT'S CLOSE, IT'S NOT QUITE, UM, IF YOU WANT US TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE IT FORWARD, WE WILL AND SEE WHAT THE COMMISSION HAS TO SAY.
I GUESS THE FOLLOW UP TO THAT THEN IS LIKE, Y'ALL FEEL LIKE THIS WAS, THIS WAS IN GOOD FAITH, WHICH ATTEMPTING TO GET TO THIS POINT.
I THINK THIS WAS, YEAH, THEM TRYING TO, UH, BE AS CLOSE TO COMPLIANCE WHILE STILL MAINTAINING THEIR BRANDING.
DO WE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
UM, SO FOR THIS ITEM, WE WOULD NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND TO TAKE ACTION WITH A MOTION.
UH, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE ITEM SEVEN A, UH, AS PRESENTED.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? I SECOND.
[00:10:01]
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM SEVEN A AS PRESENTED FROM COMMISSIONER JAMES AND A SECOND BY VICE-CHAIR DELORE.UH, IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION BEFORE WE VOTE? YES.
SINCE I MADE THE MOTION, I GUESS WHAT I, THE REASON I'M, UH, IN FAVOR OF THIS IS IF THEY FIRST CAME WITH SOMETHING COMPLETELY, UH, OUT OF OUR STANDARDS AND MADE A A, A GOOD FAITH ATTEMPT AND, AND 84% IS PRETTY CLOSE, I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD SOME THAT HAVE STRAIGHT, EVEN A LITTLE FARTHER THAN THIS.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THIS IS THAT FAR OUT OF THE REALM OF NORMAL.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, WHEN YOU THINK BACK TO THE THINGS THAT WE'VE APPROVED NEXT TO IT, THIS DOESN'T LOOK OUT OF PLACE.
AND SO I DEFINITELY DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS WORTH US LIKE REALLY HAGGLING OVER, LIKE, I THINK IF THEY'VE BEEN IN GOOD FAITH TRYING TO, TO COME TO OUR STANDARDS, THEN WE, THEY HAVE DONE THE JOB WE'VE EXPECTED THEM TO DO AND WE SHOULD WELCOME THEM INTO THE CITY OF KYLE.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE, UH, COMMENT, COMMISSIONER JAMES.
UM, WHAT, UH, GOT ME THOUGH IS IN MY RESEARCH, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE, UH, MULTIPLE PHOTOS ONLINE, UH, OF THEIR OTHER OPERATIONS, THEY WERE EXACTLY THE SAME AS FAR AS ONE CAN TELL ON THE IMAGES.
SO I'M, WHAT IT WAS OF CONCERNED IS I COULD NOT DETECT ANY ACCOMMODATION IT HAD BEEN MADE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I WOULD BRING THIS TO THE, TO THE BODY'S ATTENTION.
NOW, THAT'S THE BEST YOU CAN FIND ONLINE, BUT I DID LOOK AT MULTIPLE PICTURES THAT, UM, REALLY WERE SHOT FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES.
SO THAT'S WHAT WAS OF CONCERN.
UH, YOU KNOW, NOSE UNDER THE CAMEL, UH, CAMPBELL'S NOSE UNDER THE TENT WALL, YOU KNOW, KIND OF THING.
IF WE START GRANTING, YOU KNOW, EXCEPTIONS BASED REALLY ON, UH, WHAT'S ALREADY AN ESTABLISHED BRAND PRODUCT FOR THEM IN TERMS OF THEIR BUILDINGS.
I LIKE, I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST TO ADD SOME INFORMATION TO THIS, SO THEY, THEY DEFINITELY CAME IN, UM, ORIGINALLY WITH STUCCO.
UH, AS PART OF THEIR, THEIR REAL BRANDING FROM OUR CONVERSATIONS IS THE DESIGN OF THE, THE WOOD LOOK THAT YOU SEE ON THE, BASICALLY THAT EXTRA 6% OR WHATEVER THAT THEY CAN'T GET TO.
UM, SO THEY DID SWITCH TO FROM, FROM THE STUCCO TO THE BRICK ALL THE WAY AFTER OUR DISCUSSIONS, BUT THEY WERE VERY ADAMANT THAT THIS IS PART OF THEIR, UH, THEIR LOOK.
UM, I GUESS AN ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE THAT, THAT THAT LOOK COULD BE DONE THE SAME WITH, UH, THAT THERE'S CONCRETE TILES, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF PRODUCTS OUT THERE.
UM, SO WE DIDN'T GET INTO A BIG DETAILED DISCUSSION ON, ON THE PROS VERSUS THE CONS ON WHY THEY CHOSE THAT ONE SIDING.
UM, BUT WE FELT THAT, THAT THEY WERE CLOSE ENOUGH WE WANTED TO BRING IT TO, TO PNZ.
UH, AND AGAIN, THE SECOND ISSUE TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT THE, THE CODE DOES ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY TO WAIVE OFF OF THOSE WITHOUT REQUIRING ANY TYPE OF, UH, HARDSHIP OR VARIANCE.
SO, UM, THAT'S HOW WE KIND OF GOT WHERE WE ARE TONIGHT.
VICE CHAIR DELORE, UH, I HAD A QUESTION AND DOESN'T RELATE TO THE, THE FINISHES.
IS THERE GONNA BE A SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF KOHLER CROSSING ALONG THAT STRETCH? IT'S ALL, ALL OF US GONNA BE DEVELOPED.
DIDN'T IS, I COULDN'T TELL FROM THE OVERLAY IF THERE'S A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE RESTAURANT.
OVERLAY? IS THAT IT THERE? OKAY.
IT, IT'S NOT NEC IT'S NOT LIKE STRAIGHT SHOT BECAUSE OF YEAH.
WHERE THEY HAVE THE PARKING, BUT IT IS THERE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CONNECTED.
I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION REGARDING THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE.
MM-HMM,
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, THAT, THAT WOULD BE FINE.
THE, THE MASONRY DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE CODE, SO, WE'LL, WE'D BE MAKING SURE THAT IT'S COMPLIANT WITH THAT EITHER WAY.
UM, BUT IF YOU WANNA ADD THAT TO THE MOTION THAT, THAT I BELIEVE IS ACCEPTABLE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF, IF WE NEEDED TO FORMALLY DO THAT, WE DID, BUT I, I WON'T PUSH THE MATTER, SO.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? OKAY.
SO AGAIN, THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE ITEM SEVEN A AS PRESENTED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[B.
Consider a request to construct an approximately 11,262 square feet school building located at 870 Veterans Drive within the Veterans Drive Overlay. Conditional Use Permit (CUP-23-0094)
]B, CONSIDER A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 11,262 SQUARE FEET SCHOOL BUILDING LOCATED AT 8 7 0 VETERANS DRIVE WITHIN THE VETERANS DRIVE OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CUP DASH 23 DASH 0 0 9 4.IS THERE A PRESENTATION ON THIS ONE? YES, KAYLA SHARP,
[00:15:01]
CITY PLANNER FOR THE RECORD.UM, SO THIS ONE IS IN THE VETERANS DRIVE OVERLAY AND IT WILL BE, UM, UH, A SCHOOL BUILDING, UH, GODDARD SCHOOL.
UM, SO HERE'S APPROXIMATE LOCATION.
JUST TO GIVE YOU KIND OF A BETTER IDEA.
IT'S BETWEEN, THERE'S LIKE A ANIMAL CLINIC AND THEN THE DOLLAR GENERAL, UM, ON ONE 50 NEAR SILVERADO DRIVE.
UM, AND THE MATERIALS CONSIST PRIMARILY OF STUCCO AND STONE AND THERE ARE APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES TO ACCENT THE BUILDING.
UM, AND JUST AS A REMINDER, WITH THIS VETERANS DRIVE OVERLAY, THERE ARE NOT ANY BUILDING MATERIAL STANDARDS WITHIN THAT OVERLAY, BUT IT DOES REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING MATERIALS.
SO HERE IS THE DESIGN, UM, ALMOST ENTIRELY STUCCO AND, AND IT HAS THE KIND OF STONE DETAILING, UM, THIS IS COMPLIANT WITH THE OVERLAY.
AND THEN HERE IS THE SITE PLAN.
AND JUST TO NOTE, BEFORE, UM, WE GET TOO FAR, THERE IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO BE TWO BUILDINGS ON THIS SITE.
THIS IS THE FIRST ONE, THE SCHOOL, AND THEN LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD, WHEN THAT SECOND ONE IS READY TO BE BUILT, THEY WILL BRING BACK ANOTHER, UH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR YOUR REVIEW AT THAT TIME.
SO THIS ONE'S JUST FOR THE SCHOOL, THEY'RE NOT QUITE READY FOR THAT RETAIL BUILDING YET.
AND THEN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, THEY, UM, DO HAVE INAPPROPRIATE LANDSCAPE BUFFER SINCE THEY ARE, UM, KIND OF BACKING UP TO RESIDENTIAL USE.
AND IT'S A SCHOOL, SO IT SHOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH OF A, UM, NOISE ISSUE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO, UH, STAFF HAS FOUND THAT THE MATERIALS ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE VETERAN DRIVE OVERLAY AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE RETAIL? UM, I KNOW THAT THEY'RE NOT SEEKING, UH, COP NOW, UM, BUT IN JUST LOOKING AT THE PLAN, I'M WONDERING IN DISCUSSION WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S BEEN CONCERN ABOUT HAVING A RETAIL, UM, OUTLET OF ANY KIND NEXT DOOR TO A SCHOOL OF THIS SIZE IN TERMS OF, UH, UH, TRAFFIC SAFETY AND SO FORTH.
SO, UH, FM ONE 50 IS A TXDOT ROAD, SO, UM, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH TDOT FOR ANY SORT OF TRAFFIC STUDIES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S ALSO FAIRLY SMALL BUILDING.
I WANT TO SAY IT'S LIKE 5,000 SQUARE FEET MAYBE.
UM, SO YOU WON'T HAVE ANY MAJOR RETAIL TRAFFIC, GENERALLY SPEAKING.
UM, THEY ALSO WILL LIKELY HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT HOURS OF OPERATION WITH IT BEING, UM, MORE OF LIKE A PRESCHOOL TYPE, UM, SITUATION.
YEAH, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT ONSITE, UH, PARTICULARLY THE, THE ISSUE OUT ON THE ROAD IS, IS IS ANOTHER THING ALTOGETHER.
BUT, UH, YEAH, I WOULD, UH, JUST MAKE THE COMMENT THAT IT WOULD, UH, WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD BE, UH, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
THERE WOULD BE GIVEN, UH, UH, VERY HIGH REGARD.
AND AS THIS PLAN GOES FURTHER, THEY'VE, THEY'VE MET ANY CITY STANDARDS AS FAR AS THAT GOES.
I'M SURE THEY HAVE THEIR OWN, UH, SAFETY STANDARDS FOR PRESCHOOLS THAT THEY FOLLOW.
BUT AS FAR AS CITY STANDARDS GO, THEY'VE, THEY'VE, I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT PETULANT THREE-YEAR-OLDS RUNNING AWAY FROM MOMMY
I, YES, THAT'S DEFINITELY A CONCERN.
MADAM CHAIR WITH THE MOTION? YES.
MOTION THAT WE, UH, APPROVE SEVEN B, THE COP FOR THE GODDARD SCHOOL AS PRESENTED.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM SEVEN B FROM VICE CHAIR DELORE AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STEGEL.
UH, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT BEFORE WE VOTE? ALRIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[C.
Consider a request to remodel an existing building located at 306 Miller Street within the I-35 and Center Street Overlay District. Conditional Use Permit (CUP-23-0095)
]CONSIDER A REQUEST TO REMODEL AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 3 0 6 MILLER STREET WITHIN THE I 35 AND CENTER STREET OVERLAY DISTRICT CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, UP DASH TWO THREE DASH 0 0 9 5.IS THERE PRESENTATION? YES, KAYLA SHARP, CITY PLANNER FOR THE RECORD.
UM, SO THIS ONE IS AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 3 0 6 MILLER STREET.
IT'S JUST RIGHT OFF OF, UH, MARY KYLE HARTSON PARK, UM, THE SQUARE IN DOWNTOWN.
UM, IT, THIS IS, LIKE I SAID, PRE-EXISTING BUILDING.
IT'S CONSTRUCTED OF ENTIRELY OF LIMESTONE.
[00:20:01]
JUST THE VERY OUTER EDGE OF THE I 35 OVERLAY.UM, AND IT'S ALSO IN THE CENTER STREET OVERLAY.
UM, SO AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S PRETTY MUCH, YOU KNOW, REPLACING A DOOR, REPLACING THE ROOF, BUT THE LIMESTONE ITSELF IS EXISTING AND THEN HERE'S KIND OF THAT STREET VIEW SO YOU GET A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY.
UM, OR, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER THIS GOOGLE MAPS PHOTO WAS TAKEN,
UM, BUT IT, I MEAN, IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE SAME CONDITION.
UM, AND THEN HERE IS THE SITE PLAN.
SO THE PARKING WILL BE ON THE SIDE, THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS AND, UM, ALL THAT STUFF.
SO THIS, THIS IS AN APPROVED SITE PLAN AND THEY'VE, THEY'RE COMPLIANT WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS ON THAT END.
AND THEN, UM, SO THIS ONE IS, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS WITHIN THE I 35 OVERLAY, IT IS EXEMPT FROM THE I 35 OVERLAY STANDARDS AS AN AS IT'S AN EXEMPT BUILDING, UM, OR IT'S BEEN AN EXISTING USE.
UM, AND THEN AGAIN, THERE ARE NO STANDARDS IN THE CENTER STREET OVERLAY.
SO WHAT IS PRESENTED IS COMPLIANT AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO, YES.
OKAY, SO IF I AM CORRECT, THIS IS AN HISTORIC BUILDING, CORRECT? I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A HISTORIC BUILDING, MAYBE, UM, BASED ON WHEN IT WAS BUILT, BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ANY OF THAT.
AND SO THE BUILDING ITSELF, WHAT ABOUT THE, UM, THE GARAGE BUILDING NEXT TO IT? ARE THEY GOING TO BE WORKING ON THAT AS WELL, OR JUST THAT THE BUILDING ITSELF? YES, MA'AM.
THAT IS A DIFFERENT OWNER, SO WE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THIS BUILDING.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT I WAS CONFUSING IT WITH IS THE, UH, OTHER BUILDING.
I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I WAS BEING PATIENT WAITING MY TURN.
UM, ON THE SITE PLAN, UM, THE SIDEWALK THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PUT IN BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE PARKING AREA, I NOTICED THAT THERE'S A POWER POLE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SIDEWALK.
UM, NOW IT MIGHT BE COMPLIANT WITH CITY STUFF, BUT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
UM, FOR A DA ISSUES OR PEOPLE PUSHING STROLLERS OR THAT KIND OF THING, HAVE WE TRIED OR HAVE YOU TRIED TO TALK WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE PLACEMENT FOR THEIR SIDEWALK? I'M GONNA LET JASON ANSWER THAT ONE AS HE WAS THE ONE THAT HANDLED THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
WE DID, UH, CALL THAT OUT ON THE ORIGINAL PLAN SET.
UM, SO THEY DID WIDEN THE SIDEWALK TO MEET A DA REQUIREMENTS FOR PASSING.
UM, SO EVEN THOUGH IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S SMALLER, UM, THEY HAVE THE CLEARANCE WIDTH BETWEEN THAT POLE AND EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO, TO SAFELY GET BY.
SO, UM, THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WE LET THAT GO THROUGH.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, NOW WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THAT ITEM WITH A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF ITEM SEVEN C SECOND.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM SEVEN E SEVEN C FROM COMMISSIONER STEGEL AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JAMES.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? OKAY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[A.
Staff Report by Will Atkinson, Director of Planning
- There will not be a regularly scheduled Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on Tuesday, December 26th.
- Comprehensive Plan Adoption Dates. Tuesday, January 9th, 2024 - Planning & Zoning Commission - Public Hearing and Consideration. - Tuesday, January 16th, 2024 - City Council - Public Hearing and Consideration.
ITEM EIGHT, A STAFF REPORT BY WILL ATKINSON, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.
DO YOU HAVE A REPORT FOR US? I DO.
JUST TWO ITEMS. UH, WILL ATKINSON, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, UM, ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS LAST TIME.
JUST AS A REMINDER, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 26TH.
OUR NEXT ONE WILL BE ON JANUARY THE THE NINTH.
UM, THAT'S GONNA BE THE NEXT ONE.
UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTION DATES.
UM, THE NEXT ONE, UH, THAT'LL LOOK AT ME COMING BACK TO Y'ALL WILL BE TUESDAY, JANUARY THE NINTH.
AND THAT'LL BE A, A, UM, PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION ITEM.
SO, UM, THAT, THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO, UH, TAKE THE ITEM, DISCUSS IT, PROVIDE COMMENTS, FEEDBACK, MAKE RECOMMENDATION VOTES, THAT KIND OF STUFF.
UM, AND JUST AS A HEADS UP, IT'LL GO TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE FOLLOWING WEEK ON THE 16TH FOR THEIR PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, CONSIDERATION AS WELL, AND HOPEFULLY ADOPTION.
I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE
[00:25:01]
PLAN.UH, SO CHAPTER ONE, I THINK IT WAS CHAPTER ONE.
I'M NOT CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET RIGHT NOW, SO I CAN'T REOPEN IT.
UH, WHEN I OPENED IT, IT LOOKED LIKE THE COVER PAGE FROM OUR DRAFT.
IT HAD THE DATES FOR, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE DATE IT'S BEEN GIVEN TO US, AND YOU NEED TO PROVIDE COMMENTS BY THIS DATE AT THIS LINK.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE GOT THE RIGHT STUFF IN THERE.
UM, THE, THE MOST UP-TO-DATE DRAFT CAN ALWAYS BE FOUND ON THE KYLE 20 THIRTY.COM.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS, UM, BUT WE'LL MAKE SURE FOR JANUARY 9TH THAT WE GET THE CORRECT ONE UPLOADED.
BUT THERE'S A LINK ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE TO THAT KYLE 2030.
AND THE DRAFT PLAN IS AVAILABLE THERE AS WELL.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS, THAT'S WHERE THE MOST UPTODATE DRAFT IS.
ALL RIGHT, WELL, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, UM, ITEM NUMBER NINE, ADJOURNMENT.
AS WE HAVE COMPLETED ALL THE ITEMS ON THE MEETING'S AGENDA, THERE IS NO FURTHER BUSINESS THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED.