Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

I think it's okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. lose. Woo! Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat.

Woo! Heat. Heat.

You do.

Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. If that was the case, it'd be coming

compensation and all that. Good. Well, that's Is green on or red? Thank you. Yeah.

Notice of a public meeting of the planning and zoning. Commission of the city of Brownsville. Pursuant to chapter 551, Title 5 of the Texas Government Code, the Texas Open Meetings Act, notice is hereby given that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Brownsville, Texas, has scheduled a regular meeting Thursday, May 7th, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. in the Commission Chambers on the second floor of the Brownsville City Hall, Old Federal Building located at 101 East Elizabeth Street, Brownsville, Cameron County, Texas 78520. Pledge of Allegiance. like to do roll call. Daniel Elen,

Amalia Benson, Eliza Vasquez, Ida Rodriguez, Cesar Rodriguez, Bob Torres. This would be approval of the minutes for the regular meeting on April 2nd, 2026. Do I have a motion to approve minutes? Motion to approve the minutes. Second. We have a first and second motion. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. Motion carries. Next will be updates and comments.

Good evening. Uh commissioners, members of the public. I just have one update to share concerning uh the housing plan that we've been working for or with our consultants HRA. Uh on the week of May uh 25th, we're actually going to be having a technical committee meeting pretty soon. We're setting out some invitation to invite some local experts uh to participate. So that that's going to be the first official meeting with some of those experts to discuss ideas, solutions, uh some of the initial planning uh goals for that housing master plan. So, we're pretty excited as the planning department to be able to initiate that. On the first week of June, uh we're going to be giving uh city council a briefing and also going to be having the first official public kickoff event. Uh there are going to be more details to come. Uh but that's the only update we have concerning that housing plan. This board will also be briefed on those details that will be shared. Yes. I know there are several members of Leadership Brownsville in attendance and we'd like to welcome you and thank you for participating today.

Good evening, commissioners. And an additional item that I would like to point out the July meeting for this commission falls on the first Thursday of the month, which is July 2nd. There was a concern brought up by one of our consultants working on the downtown master plan where the final draft is going to be presented or uh revealed after this meeting date. So uh the question was if you were willing to vote to move the meeting one week further so that the date of the release is be falls before the meeting. So the release would be on the 7th. Your meeting would be on July 9th. July

9th. Yes. Okay. So, we can vote on it now. Yes, you can go ahead and vote. Um, we have a proposition on the floor to move the July meeting from se from the 2nd to the 9th. All those in favor? I I. Any opposed? Motion carries. We'll go ahead and change the July meeting to the 9th.

Thank you. Items for individual consideration. Consideration and action to grant a subdivision waiver for EDAS subdivision located in the extr territorial jurisdiction of the city of Brownsville from the municipal platting process and solely proceeding with Cameron County jurisdiction.

Thank you. As mentioned, uh this is an a subdivision by the name subdivision uh located in our extr territorial jurisdiction. Uh the proposed use will be for a single family development with an agricultural component to it. Uh the property owner is requesting to move uh to proceed with that planning process with the county and we as a planning staff are recommending approval of that. Uh this is a map showing the proposed area or the sorry the the area there at Vasquez Road uh adjacent to a rural collector with 100 ft of rideway. As you can see most of what surrounds this property is either undeveloped land or scattered commercial or single family developments.

How large is that track? It's about 9.2 acres. And it's only going to be one lot. It's going to be Yes. For now, it's one lot proposed for a single family residence with some agricultural structures. So, he wants to mix in the single family with agricultural use. Any other questions? I need a motion to approve and grant the subdivision waiver. Second.

We have a first and a second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion carries.

Public hearings. Public hearing and action on ordinance number 235-2026-008. to reszone from residential single family R1 to residential transition R3 to allow a multif family duplex development for a 0501 acre tract of land comprised of tracks one and two each being a 0.167 acre of land out of a 650 acre tract out of a 15acre tract and track 3 being a 0.167 acre of land out of a 1acre tract all out of block 4 Elhardin subdivision Cameron County Texas located at 4464 Waco code, Brownsville, Texas 78521.

Thank you. As mentioned, uh the original request for this property for this reszone was to change the property zoning from its current R1 single family designation to a residential transition R3 for a multifamily duplex uh development. The property is currently fronting a local street by the name of Waco Road, which has 50 ft of rideway. uh public notice was sent to the area to let the uh neighbors, adjacent property owners know uh about this public hearing and also the first uh hearing at city council. Next slide. This is a physical uh notice that we put on the property. This is a 200 foot uh buffer map uh showing the radius where we sent those legal notices for this invite. A total of 21 mailouts was sent. uh we received zero uh in opposition mailed back to us. This is the zoning map showing the property uh zoned as R1 single family district. South of this property is a TNC that's traditional neighborhood corridor which is a form uh base district that would allow a mix of commercial and residential districts. in their north uh east. We can also see a sliver of R3 uh district in the vicinity. This is a map showing what's existing out there. We see Waco Road north of this property with that 50ft ride ofway. Uh most of what surrounds it is either an R1 single family construction north and south is an RV park uh which is a legal non-conforming use at this time. Uh so though it is zone TNC, uh this uh use was in existence prior to the UDC's adoption. So as of today, uh that development south is considered a

grandfathered use. Again, this is another uh map showing Waco Road and east of it is Central Avenue. uh staff has some few concerns when we're doing the analysis that this uh proposal, this request uh would constitute a spot zone, meaning that it would be the only zone of its kind. I think this board is kind of familiar of what a spot zone case kind of looks like. Uh this would change the character of the neighborhood. Uh it's mostly single family uh with some multifamily uh structures left or south of this property, but again uh the development there is grandfathered. So we can't take that into account when making a recommendation of approval to an R3. We also found that the comprehensive plan and future land use plan uh do not support uh this request to an R3. So it's inconsistent uh with what we have available. So since the request is uh found to be not consistent with the comp plan and the future land use plan, staff is moving to recommend denial uh to reszone from residential R1 to residential transition R3. However, uh in meeting with the property owner, uh we did discuss and we met him, we're trying to meet him at the middle, if we can put it that way. So staff is recommending alternatively to change the property from R1 uh to R2 suburban to maintain the residential character of the neighborhood. Uh uses that would be permitted by right within the R2 district would generally be more compatible with what surrounds it. Uh residential adjacency requirements would also uh not not be at odds with with what with with what is already existing.

the applicant has agreed to take this recommendation. So an R2 district would be something agreeable with him as well. In an R2, how many duplexes can they legally have on the in one lot? Uh you could have legally one R2 or one duplex construction and an ADU as well. So it depends on how you would subdivide the property. But if it's a one lot subdivision, it would be one duplex. One duplex meaning two units, two family units.

If you go back to um go back a few slides, right? Go back another slide. Okay, that one that 4318 is already a duplex. All right. Yes, it is a duplex. 4318 is a duplex.

So then how did how did that get passed? That one has been in existence long before the UDC. So again, it's similar to the to the mobile home park to the south. It's grandfathered. It's legally non-conforming. The current zoning designation for it is R1. The intent uh behind zoning it to R1 when the UDC was adopted was to basically make the zoning designation in the entire area consistent with what's on the ground. uh just because there's one duplex on the ground, we weren't just going to assign uh an R2 zoning uh here. Uh based on the nature of the area and also the configuration of this particular parcel, which by the way is not platted, they would have to go through the platting process to be able to establish the use that they're proposing. Um the the most viable route would be the the residential suburban to at least provide an option to the developer uh or the applicant uh a way to build something on their property.

Tell me again how large that that property is

an acreage uh 0501. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If there's anyone in the audience that would like to address this topic, if they would come forward, please. Oh, in Spanish. Motion to close public hearing. All right. Do we have a motion to close public hearing? We have a first and a second motion. All those in favor? I I All those opposed? Motion carries. Commissioners, do you have any other questions?

Not. I'll entertain a motion. Okay. So then the approval is to change to R2 or R3. Staff is making a recommend an alternative recommendation to approve it for from R1 single family district to R2 residential suburban. Yes. Okay. So it's not Okay. Not to R3. Okay. Is this is this property for sale or is it the from what we were informed the property owners wanting to reszone it to then sell it.

Given the uh varied character of the neighborhood, I was concerned about a flatout denial. So, I'm I'm really happy to hear that we were able to kind of meet at that R2 level. Um, so unless anyone else has any other comments, I think I would definitely be willing to motion to approve a reszone to the R2 as agreed with the the applicant. I have a first motion. Do I have a second? I'll second that motion. We have a first and a second motion to approve a reszoning to R2. All those in favor?

All those opposed? Motion carries. Public hearing and action on ordinance number 2026-235.127 to amend the city of Brownsville Unified Development Code Article 3 subdivision regulations section 3.4 subdivision design standards article 4 zoning regulations section 4.2 zoning procedures section 4.3 zoning districts section 4.4 four, land uses. Section 4.5, building types. Article 6, definitions, to establish state regulations adopted at the 89th legislative session for the purpose of creating housing diversity and dealing with related matters.

And uh just to point out, we do have our consultant online from Freezen Nichols, Mr. Chance Sparks, who will be presenting the next three items.

All right. Thank you, Martin. Uh Chance Sparks with Freezen Nichols. Happy to be chatting with y'all this evening to walk you'all through these uh these handful of amendments. Do apologize these are a dry topic uh due to them being mainly related to state law. So each of these is going to follow a similar format. I'm going to walk you through what the bill does, the policy direction received and then what does the amendment itself do. So, uh, I'll start with Senate Bill 15, uh, which is kind of, uh, which we refer to as the lot size preeemption bill. Uh, this was a bracketed bill. It only affects certain cities of a certain size in counties of a certain size in terms of population. Um it apply and what this does is it establishes uh some some uh m I guess it sounds like maximum minimums of the the most restrictive regulations that a city can apply for single family lot size and lot standards. Um so uh the city of Brownsville is the only city in the Rio Grand Valley that was affected by this bill. Uh McAllen had a near miss on this. Uh I think they missed it by about 10,000 population give or take. So uh you are the only one like this uh in the Rio Grand Valley. Uh so uh establishes some uh single family lot size minimums and a few exemptions uh for when this does or does not apply. Um and uh and maintain certain other city authorities just for clarity's sake. uh the direction we got uh because we had some different options uh for how to approach this with Brownsville's development code. Uh one of them being we looked at whether to consolidate a couple of zoning districts. Uh we' opted not to do that at this time. Um that was something we considered just for simplification

purposes but no material effect. Um we also looked at uh the uh uh how you approach regulating certain things. Now, most of your residential uh building types uh were already set at one parking space per unit. So, this adjusted the rest of them to match that based on the state law. Uh we updated some of your setbacks uh to align with state law uh rather than creating a unique set of setbacks. That was another option that would have added complexity. Uh throughout this whole approach, we tried to turn towards the simplest answer being the right one. uh that would cause the lease confusion. Uh we also introduced some parking garage setbacks. When you have a closed front setback, that introduces the potential for you not to be able to fit any parking in the front if that's where the parking is located or for people to park in a way that blocks a sidewalk or something like that. So, we added some setbacks specific to parking garage setbacks to help with that. uh we uh updated building height definitions uh to account for the state law definition. Uh the state law uh uh actually defined use of the term stories which adds some confusion to things. So we made that adjustment. Uh we increased your lot coverage again to align with state law. Uh and then for the small lot provisions uh where you can do the smaller lots, we did add a uh set of alternative standards that ties to the 5 acre uh development size and already unplatted under state law uh that preserves some predictability uh for for this uh approach. Uh the second bill that's involved, Senate Bill 840, uh is uh essentially allows for multif family in a non-residential zone. The interesting thing about this bill in the context of Brownsville is your

development code was already written with this in mind. So what this uh ordinance amendment does is it's really doing some small refinements in order to match the state law exactly where it was close but not quite. Uh so again, this is bracketed the same way the other bill was uh to the population of both the city and county. Um essentially what it does is it's enabling mixed use in your non-residential zoning districts and supports u minimum density levels that should be allowed uh minimum heights uh that should be allowed and uh and uh standards such as the number of parking spaces required per dwelling unit. uh and expressly allowing for the conversion of uh what's contemplated here is older office buildings that are obsolete. Um that's an aspect of the bill that we don't think is likely to emerge heavily in Brownsville. Brownville does not have a large inventory of of obsolete large office buildings, office towers, um like other cities like a Houston or a Dallas or a Fort Worth that do have significant numbers of buildings like this. Um has some provisions for uh whether you can uh address impact fees, some things like that. So uh for this we kind of did a comprehensive assessment uh to build the amendment. So, uh, walking you through the amendment kind of step by step here. Uh, within this amendment summary, uh, we made some adjustments to the street design standards. Uh, adjusting your rideway and pavement widths to, uh, better support on street parking while preserving, uh, emergency vehicle access. Uh, through that, um, we added some prescriptive traffic calming requirements uh, to go with it. Again, we're trying to if we're increasing density, we want to ensure that the

traffic patterns are compatible with what would be an increased uh density of pedestrians, things like that. Uh it's affected only a couple of the types of streets. It affected your uh uh regular street, your neighborhood queuing street, and neighborhood street limited parking types. Uh there was also an adjustment to the traffic impact analysis language uh to recognize that that can't that cannot be required uh for the conversion of non-residential buildings to multif family or mixed use. Again, this wasn't likely to come up anyway. And your TIA threshold standard for when this analysis is required was also unlikely to be triggered, but again, we want to demonstrate compliance with the state law. Uh if you hop into section 4.2.11, uh there's some administrative adjustments for the small lot residential. Creates this new provision uh to allow for the small lot residential uh lot type. Establishes the standards, brings them over straight from state law. Uh it affects only three of your districts. It affects your RE district, your R1, and R2 districts. The rest of your districts already comply. Um, and it's only for projects that have not been previously platted. So, you're not going to see somebody come into an existing neighborhood that's zoned R1 and replplat something to create this. Um, it would have it would end up being a a green field development of some type. Uh, within section 4.3.1, we've eliminated the density calculations and instead regulate entirely by what we call dimension and bulk standards. Basically, it focuses entirely on lot size, lot width, and things like that. Uh that overall simplifies your code, makes it a little bit easier to administer, easier to understand for applicants. Uh while also complying with state law, also

represents a best practice to regulate either density or these lot standards, one or the other, not both. Uh we've added cross references to storm water management compliance for lot coverage. Uh this is just to reiterate that you cannot adversely affect your adjacent properties. Uh an allowance for three stories uh as is established in the state law and some front setback reductions um to again reflect this change in state law. Uh we also made an adjustment for a 10-ft setback on secondary streets. Uh this is for a corner lot sort of situation. Uh that's actually to reflect something that was in your engineering design manual that we wanted to bring into this. Uh section 4.3.2 we eliminate the density calculations uh and regulate entirely by the dimension and bulk standards. This is for your non-residential districts. And then uh section 4.3.3 this is your traditional neighborhood and form districts. We again eliminated that density calculation and adjusted a few of the height thresholds uh to uh use the 45 foot uh that was the maximum that was available in other districts. Uh you have to be able to enable multif family to be treated essentially the same kind of across the city. Uh 4.4.3b we looked at the permitted use chart. Uh we've reduced those parking ratios to one uh dwelling one per dwelling unit uh for those that weren't already set that way. Um and then we adjust the building heights for your building types to reference the state law. Uh added a few uh eligible building materials as well. That was actually a housekeeping task uh that was easy to address while we were in this. Uh then we also uh made an adjustment to

the uh definitions. This is where we added the building height definition and uh we duplicated some of the definitions for the from the housing land use definitions for clarity because they are referenced elsewhere in your code. Um and this is again just taking definitions you already had and bringing them straight into the definition section. So that's your overview of this first amendment. Um, happy to answer any questions. Uh, or turn this back over to Martin.

Any questions?

You want to go ahead and um have a motion for each one individually? Well, this was just a presentation for the first one. We still need uh two more. So, right now, you can make uh a motion for uh ordinance uh 2026-235.127.

Okay. Move to approve. I'll second. We have a first and a second motion. All those in favor I I motion carries.

Public hearing and action on ordinance number 2026-235.128 to amend the city of Brownsville Unified Development Code, article 4, zoning regulations, section 4.2, zoning procedures to establish state regulations adopted at the 89th legislative session for the purpose of updating protest petition thresholds and dealing with related matters. All right, this is the uh the the second uh bill series uh that the the state legislature was active in this last session. Uh House Bill 24 focuses primarily on procedures. Uh so this increased the protest petition threshold uh for adjacent property owners from 20% to 60% for any reasonzoning that results in more residential units and only require and only requires a simple majority if it is protested. um if it's a text amendment like something like what we're doing tonight um that uh that uh results in more residential units uh or sorry uh a text amendment or something like that that uh results in more residential units that doesn't require notification. So um so that's a way you treat a text amendment differently from a map amendment. Uh it does add a notice posting for city website requirement for all resonings. adds a signposting requirement with specifications uh for all resonings. But the idea behind this is that the uh legislature was looking to reduce some barriers to discretionary approvals in order to support increasing housing supply. So that's the purpose behind this. Uh so uh the direction we got on this, we wanted to update the posting and website uh requirements consistent with state law and then look at and update the procedures under your code. So a quick

walkthrough of this uh you'll see in section uh 2.1.7 summary of approval authorities this adds a signposting requirement and website posting requirement um to the uh zoning text and map amendment application types. Uh in section 2.4.2 uh you'll find updated mailed notice uh requirements. In this case, we use we cross reference to the Texas local government code content um that relates to the creation of nonconformities, things like that. We had a 15-day website notice here consistent with state law and the signposted notice. One of the things that we've also done with this is we have standardized everything to a 15-day notice. Um usually your mail notices can be done in less with less time. uh 10-day notice. We have been recommending to cities to use 15-day for everything for a couple of reasons. Uh one being that the the people that are most affected are adjacent. Uh it stands to reason that they should have as much advanced notice as possible with the second and arguably most important reason is it reduces the likelihood of a notification error. Uh what I mean by that is it means that for your city staff purposes, they know 15 days out from a public hearing. They need to make sure that they have done everything in terms of notification. They like to remember one date that way. It also helps you out because if you mail that notice and you get a return to sender back, you have a realistic opportunity to potentially uh send a notice to a a revised address or a revised recipient. Um it's not required by state law that that you have to do that but it is a best practice uh in order to to respect your your residence on that.

Uh we also added the signposting notice. This again is very specific 24 in x 48 in um things like that with some minimum content. Uh we also updated the uh public notice requirements for development applications adding cross references to these requirements uh both there and in the noticing hearing and action requirements as well. Uh uh lastly what we have here is uh some updates to the zoning text and map amendments portion. Uh this is where you get to see what happens when the state legislature creates two alternative processes for the same type of action. Creates a very confusing flowchart. So uh what we've added here is we have updated the flowchart to show the different types of circumstances and scenarios and what the process looks like for that. Again, it's a little bit messy. Um and uh we wish that maybe next time the legislature would talk to a few of us before doing this, but that's okay. Uh we added some director ability to propose uh changes uh to uh to and amendments to your development code. That's a housekeeping measure. We've updated these flowcharts. Um we've added comprehensive zoning change and non-comprehensive zoning change uh with their definition. That's using language from local government code. No city was using this language before the state wrote this. So every city is in this space now. Uh and added the presumption of validity language from Texas local government code as well. Uh we also updated the notification uh process and uh procedures for this uh to also address the graphics. What was once a very simple graphic uh with a simple explanation uh there is now two graphics that are more complex with a much longer

explanation for the second because of the different the the differential treatment of whether it's increasing the number of uh the potential number of residential units. So that's your your quick summary of this. It is a messy uh amendment uh as they go uh but ultimately designed to address some procedural standards based on state law.

Any questions? Move to approve. We have a first and a second motion to approve the ordinance. All those in favor? I

I. All those opposed? Motion carries. Public hearing and action on ordinance number 2026-235.128 to amend the city of Brownsville Unified Development Code Article 4 zoning regulations. Oh, uh, apologies. On ordinance number 2026 to-235.129 to amend the city of Brownsville Unified Development Code Article 4 zoning regulations subsection 4.3.4 special overlay districts subsection 4.4.3 4.3 permitted use chart subsection 4.4.4 additional use standards subsection 4.6.3 landscaping and article six definitions to create the Jefferson medical overlay district and dealing with related matters.

All right, Martin, were you having me uh present this one or were you presenting it?

Yes. Uh I I can go ahead and proceed with this one to provide some context. So, uh, if you recall, uh, this particular item or the creation of the original medical district in the north part of Bronzo was established on June 3rd of 2025. And so, that ordinance created a framework uh, for a medical district overlay when it was adopted. And again, it created the boundary to the north side of Brownsville to protect any vacant land or to promote the use of medical, uh, facilities within the area of Valley Regional Hospital and the Doctor Hospital at Renaissance. And so uh this uh ordinance uh again it created a boundary but it also created the framework for uh that medical overly district but any other medical overly district that would appear in the city of Brownsville. And at that time when uh that particular overlay was adopted uh there was interest to create one also for uh the area of Jefferson Street corridor along with uh the location of Valley Baptist. And so this ensures development near Brownsville's uh healthc care and biosciences facilities is compatible with uh such uses. Again, it's to promote the availability of new uh medical treatment, uh support the healthcare and biosciences industry within the city of Brownsville, and increase the economic impact of areas containing a high concentration of healthcare and biosciences facilities. And this is just an overview of uh what occurred with the original ordinance. Again, all of these provisions that were originally established will also apply

to this uh particular um medical district along Jefferson and the Valley Baptist Medical Center. And uh all we're doing with the ordinance that we're presenting today is to establish the boundary for uh that area. Again, the provisions are already existing. And back when the original ordinance was adopted, it did uh create changes to the permitted use chart for instance to basically um identify complimentary uses such as housing, apartments, restaurants, assisted living, nursing homes, etc. Medical facilities usually create jobs and sometimes these uh jobs are um filled by outside workers from workers that come from uh other parts of the state maybe even out of state and therefore they require um some housing. Therefore, uh the change to the permitted use chart was again looking uh proactively at that influx of workers and uh accommodating them with um with housing options. Uh it also added or revised use categories such as uh hospital uh surgery centers, freestanding emergency rooms, uh clinics, labs, pharmaceutical and medical equipment laboratories and electric vehicle charging stations. It also did uh or created some changes uh related to uh landscaping. Uh it does

uh the intent of the ordinance is also to promote uh green space within within this district and uh create the walkable areas for uh people who work within the medical district but are also perhaps uh users patients of uh the medical facilities. And uh finally there were uh definition updates uh to um create uh an actual definition for uh electrical vehicles and electrical vehicle charging stations because those have become uh prevalent throughout the city with uh new uh technologies again implemented into uh transportation uh services. This is the original boundary. Again, just to provide some context, it's the original boundary that was created in North Brownsville. And with this ordinance, the 2026-235.129, it's all we're doing again is creating the boundary for the new medical district, which uh extends all the way from Washington Park to the intersection of Central Boulevard and it encompasses uh the location or the site where Valley Baptist Medical Center is and the surrounding vacant land that um uh lies surrounding this particular medical facility. And again, the intent of the uh overlay is to protect this land again to promote the the the development of medical facilities.

And so this uh ordinance uh staff is recommending the approval for the implementation of this overlay. The previous one, there we go. So the school that's on the northeast side of the hospital now that's going to change to medical use only.

Well, it's not medical use only. Uh that's something we want to clarify. The changes to the zoning or the creation of the overlay. It's not meant to just be mandatory or exclusive to medical facilities. It's also any supporting um industries for the medical uh industry. So the housing and the clean, it could be housing, it could be personal service outlets, neighborhood services, um a variety of uses, even financial facilities, or uh even uh perhaps pharmaceutical related uh uses.

So go back to the slide that showed the permitted uses. There you go. And these are again, these are just what is listed on this slide is aren't the only uses that are permitted in uh in this particular district. Um in the binders that were sent to you, um there's the the entire permitted use chart uh of the uses that are that are permitted.

Okay. Okay. And then electric vehicle charging stations. What are you going to do with that? So now that use is allowed in in this new overlay or are we

No, it's not just exclusive to this overlay. It's it's actually a use that's permitted uh anywhere in the city, but uh definitions were created for this particular use because they weren't uh part of the code and just to provide clarification to the public as to what the expectation is when placing these particular uh facilities. um basically pointing out that they cannot be let's say along the rideway perhaps they have to be within a parking lot where uh it's accessible to electric vehicles to connect uh the it that sort of definition or language was what was included.

So are we going to have criteria just for EV charging stations? No. or or can you rephrase your question as to what what your I'm I'm just wondering if we're going to get to that point where we have criteria for EV charging stations that they can only be in a certain area or they can only be on a lot that's a certain size.

Well, we we do have provisions already in the code that are included. For example, like I said, there's not going to be um let's say permissibility on the rightway. Our jurisdiction is limited to private property. So, because uh there wasn't uh clear language to avoid any confusion, we reinforced the language to uh make it more understandable to the public. Commissioners, do you have any questions? So, do we let all these people in this area know that that zone that this overlay is not coming? Mailouts were sent to 362 properties. Any further questions?

Sorry. Do we need to open up for public hearing? Yes. Yes, ma'am. If there's anyone in the audience that would like to address this topic, have any questions, if you'll come forward. speak English very well. I understand 213 is Jefferson and I I think it's too far for the ma'am. Can you can you can you state your name for the record, please?

Oh, sorry. Alejandra Green. Okay. Is Alejandra Greenerson supplies paramed. Mytorich. Medical Hospital. for clinicist. Houston,

Houston, Industrich. Fore! Foreign! Foreign! complimentious personal Pamosantes.

Sand conductor. Fore! Foreign! Foreign! No. See, exist. Thank you.

What's that for the Well, we're prepare preparing for the future. We're being proactive. But when we established the original overlay, it the hospital expressed an immediate interest to request uh the creation of the medical

and Martin if I may through the chair. So this also comes from it's a one idea that was expressed in the context of the downtown renaissance plan. So it was part of the boundaries and the idea is to make Jefferson a complete street. So with you know uh making it easier for bikers and pedestrians and that is why it connects from a downtown park to a hospital and allowing those extra uses. So it's like an action item coming from the downtown renaissance plan. Okay.

The downtown hasn't been adopted yet the plan but we were working in parallel the long range planning team with the son. If you'll state your name, sir.

Sure. Good afternoon. My name is Julio Gavia and I've lived on uh West Server for over 20 years. Um, I'm not exactly completely comfortable with this because it looks um it is quite a a massive stretch of land. Um, seven more blocks and you might as well just call the way to international. Top of that, you can also do three or four more blocks down and hit most of that as well. I mean, it depends on your zoning. As for the reason why West Jefferson, traffic there already is pretty fast. Um, making it into this medical zone thing. Let's not pretend that the county assessor isn't salivating for another reason to increase our taxes. I don't know how it's going to affect it, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to be uh bringing it down. As for making residences for the people that are going to be working in the medical center, um all that area that's not red under it is housing. A good section of it is at least on the contrary in the red section most of Jefferson at least from what I know from Palm Boulevard this ways there's maybe three facilities by the time it reaches the Jefferson Apartments. One of them is a little medical plaza and I think they

sell windows. Um there's an mobile imaging. there is some sort of adult daycare office because it doesn't look like there's much going on there. Um, on the 5th of West Jefferson, there used to be a dentist, but I can say maybe I think on Via Maria there is some sort of tiny medical plaza. What's there, I have no idea. So, I don't see the vast level of uh medical businesses that everyone's saying is going on. However, up central, you actually have the large medical plaza next to the hospital and available land across it with the Rasaka where the hotel the motel used to be. Why not stretch it that way too? And on the subject of the EVs, those are more of a passing well, in my opinion, a passing fencing. They could be in the long term sustainable, but the charging stations, that's like putting a gas station, a gas pump every other block. they would be a bit unsightly aside from the infrastructure needed to power them because it's not exactly like a car battery. Um, the only place I've ever really seen EVs is on the way to the the beach and on the way out of town. If the hospital wanted to put their own charging stations, by all means, it's their property.

Um, but let's let's consider it a little bit more thoroughly on the effects of the people that have been there for much longer than the people that everyone's trying to bring in because we're a big town. trying to force all the future medical workers into this section. Commuting is not that bad. It's not like having to go from here to the island, which I've done every day. I think this is a little bit too rushed and honestly I would recommend a little bit more consideration into the effects that the current residents and owners in the area would have to face. everything from increased costs, uh, increased traffic, um, decreased availability of services, um, already enough as it is, I've had a stray dog attack my dog on a walk, and the police told me they don't do that and to call the animal control. This was the day before Thanksgiving. So they told me, "Oh, you can't do that because it's the holidays." So imagine doubling the number of people, the population density in that area. I already have to walk around with a stick, but by all means,

I have a bike trail and some charging stations. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Davila. Uh just to make a point, um city commission um the planning is only we certainly don't have any jurisdiction over taxes or assessments. That's that's um with the county. So, we have no control over that. And I think as a as a city, they're just trying to plan for what's going to come. As we have as our population grows, the need for medical is also going to grow.

Oh, yes. I completely agree, ma'am. I I completely agree. Um but let's let's not uh let's not think that there won't be consequences to some of these decisions. Um, I remember before LED bulbs came in and all the fancy stuff, we still had the old ones and our utilities were $200 $300. Then CFLs came in with the H hallogen lights. So, we did that and um we tried to drop our energy uses and then LEDs came in and they did help, but uh the cost still went up. So, yes, there will be consequences. And yes, I understand that um the county is a different story, but that's still not saying they're not going to do it.

Just as a a matter of transparency on on the taxes issue, because what the chairwoman said, absolutely technically correct. But I do want to say for the record, the purpose of these overlays is to draw investment and economic impact, which has an impact on property values, which has an impact on appraisals, which increases the tax dollar amount that people pay or could, right? That is an impact. Indirect, I want to make sure clear indirect, but make sure that we understand that when we're doing actions like these that those are some downstream effects. Again, city has no official connection to any of that. Um, but this decision can have that downstream effect.

Oh, no. Yes. And I'm speaking from experience because the property value used to be 40 about 20 years ago. It's now 150. We're all feeling that. Yes. So, thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to address this topic? Yes, ma'am. If you'll state your name. Um,

my name is Ilana Guzman. I'm a business owner and I'm part of Leadership Bronzo. Um, so this just to understand and clarification. So that's a proposed zone for a medical district or a second medical district. Is that what it is? No. No. This is a proposal of a boundary. This is not again to reiterate, it's not a zoning change. It's an overlay. And overly just basically creates um some sort of protection uh for an area to let's say attract certain development in this case tailored to the medical

the medical. Okay. So my mom visits a doctor that's not in that's really close to the zone that you have and it's a clinic and I don't see it highlighted. Sora and Bokhica. So my question is why is your your medical district not covering that zone and it's covering the cultural district?

Well, this area around the hospital and right at the location at the hospital that's basically the node where the medical facilities exist. Um I understand that perhaps there are other clinics uh or medical facilities that may be let's say an outlier to this particular section. Um I mean unfortunately if we would take into account every single clinic the there wouldn't be a particular limit for the overlay.

Well I mean it does it really doesn't matter if it's it's I'm not asking because of a personal reason. I'm just it doesn't make sense to me why the zone will cover after Palm Boulevard like towards the downtown area and not the area where there's already existing clinics that's closer to the hospital than Jefferson and six to me just doesn't make sense and that's that's just my opinion. Well be and just to answer your question um again the purpose of the overlay is to attract these new industries and with new industries come an influx of workers. The the vision of the overlay is to create an overall package not just the medical facilities. We have to also uh see ways to retain that workforce and to retain that workforce or attract workforce we have to provide some sort of entertainment. This corridor leads to the downtown area where the entertainment hub of the city exists. So, it's uh as our director mentioned, this is part of the exercise exercise of all the plans that we're updating, the housing plan, the comprehensive plan, the downtown master plan. uh because in the end these plans identified nodes throughout the city where in these nodes you want to create let's say um a focused community of its own to where all the services all the entertainment are there to where residents don't have to travel elsewhere and create traffic flow. Right now, there's already been comments about a lot of about there being a lot of traffic on Jefferson, a lot of traffic

on Central. uh these nodes would create or to a certain extent alleviate uh the problem with traffic congestion because there wouldn't need be a need to commute elsewhere by having these um uh nodes uh or service centers and and have people uh take advantage of the proximity uh to to their to their residences. Uh, also because Jefferson again is a corridor to downtown and with uh updated uh uh plans or or plans to update the cross-section of Jefferson to uh widen it in the future and create a larger cross-section with uh let's say bigger sidewalks that also creates a pedestrian connectivity to the downtown the downtown area.

Okay. So that then but doesn't then that fall into a cultural district on the Jefferson closer to Jefferson and six and not a medical district if that's what you're trying to focus if you're trying to because I see you reference um the people that are coming in to live and the living the the making it easier for them to to transport themselves throughout the city then you're really not talking about a focusing on a medical need. You're focusing on a tourist need. That's the way I'm seeing what you're doing because to me a medical district would expand farther to where Bokachica's at rather than the downtown area just because there's it's just so clustered in the downtown area. And the majority of the families that live there, there's a lot of people that are older and yes, they are there's a lot of older homes there. So I'm thinking what your plan is is to sell those homes and create town homes for tourists.

That's uh never had we haven't mentioned um anywhere close to that. Well, because you're referencing people coming in like the influx of people coming in to live in the city, right? But the intent of this ordinance is not to, let's say, take the property from, okay, our residence and modify the the area to something completely different. We're trying to build on what is already existing.

Yeah, it just doesn't make sense to me that you're doing a medical district on a cultural district. My this is just my opinion. My common sense would say to expand the medical district farther to where the central and bok chica areas where Korea is because there's already clinics and doctors in that area like the lovano street there's there's optical there's eye doctors there's there's right the only difference between this area and that area is that this area still has vacant land surrounding the property for possible expansion and new facilities to come in. in the Bokeh Chica area. There is

there's there's a lot of property on central and towards Bokh Chica. There's a huge property for sale built to suit on Bokhica right after Central Boulevard going like when it turns into military. So there is a lot of property there for sale. There's a lot to expand in that area, but that's just I'm sorry, my opinion. Thank you. Thank you for your comments, Miss Guzman.

Is there anyone else in the audience that wants to address this topic? You want to close public hearing and then move to close public hearing. We have a first and second motion to move uh to close public hearing. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion carries. We have questions.

Yeah, I think I think it'd be helpful if you I mean I get the strip going up to Palm Boulevard, but the East Jefferson side. So, if you could explain the logic of why we need to go all the way up to Washington Park, I think it would be helpful. Oh, well, like I mentioned, it's it's an overall package. We're trying to create connectivity to the downtown area because that's the entertainment hub. Yes, there's another district in the east part of, let's say, downtown, but we have to look at uh the overlay as um as a service opportunity, but also provide uh or proactively provide services to to whoever uh to whatever workforce comes in into the into that area. Any other questions, commissioners? If not, I'll entertain a motion. staff is recommendating this.

Yes,

we have three options here to approve, deny or I guess table for further discussion. And just uh sorry just to clarify once again. Yes sir.

This is not resoning the properties. Nothing is changing on on the ground. Okay. This is adding uses adding medical uses to the existing residential. So whatever if somebody has a property with residential use and they can keep it forever as such even if they sell even if they demolished. uh it just adds the possibility of bringing health uses to this particular area and small clinics basically the size of the properties what it will attract is a small clinics right it's just adding to what is already there but it's not going to change if the property owners don't want any change yeah it doesn't it just adds those compatible uses where uh these type of clinics are not compatible for example in single uh family residential. That's the difference between a a purely single family clinic. You can you cannot put a clinic there, but you could put a clinic here because of the proximity to the hospital. And that was the idea. The idea actually came from a conversation with the director of public health here with the city of Bransville. He envisioned this because we were asking them to have like bold ideas and the idea was to have a quote pacio de la salude like a prominade of health uh meaning health supporting services. So uh you know from small clinics to insurance health insurance services diagnostics on top of the residential uses that are already there. short-term rentals for those rotate rotating nurses, etc.

In the future, the downtown Renaissance plan calls for a complete street on Jefferson, meaning a slightly narrow narrower uh drive lanes and wider sidewalks with with a designated bike lane. Yes. And that that was the idea that you know people could have easier access to the hospital that is already there. Why here and not in Bokh Chica? Because there's not a hospital in Bkachica. Basically we only have two big hospitals. So both will have a medical district. That was the idea.

Correct. Is approval final here or are these ordinance going to city commissioners? They go to city commission.

I'll make a motion to table. Second. We have a first and second motion to table. All those in favor? I I. All those opposed? Motion carries. We'd like to have more discussion on this topic, please.

Public hearing and action on ordinance number 2026-235.130 to amend the city of Brownsville Unified Development Code UDC article 4 zoning regulations section 4.6 zoning development standards subsection 4.6.3 6.3 L landscaping article 5 supplemental regulations section 5.1 Tree Preservation subsection 5.1.2 applicability and exemptions subsection 5.1.3 categories of preserved trees subsection 5.1.4 tree mitigation subsection 5.1.8 Eight, removal of a protected tree without a tree removal permit to adopt updated landscaping and tree preservation regulations and dealing with related matters. So this uh particular text amendment is an internal one to update landscape and tree preservation requirements. Uh again uh the intent is to uh establish an exemption threshold for professionally designed landscape and irrigation plans. uh that would be part of the landscape plan requirements. Uh it would modernize landscape standards and update the approved plant list to facilitate the way the code is administered. Uh it would also provide uh promotion of native and droughtresistant plants and it would increase plant options suited for Brownville's climate and local environment. It would increase shade and canopy coverage and align with parking lot tree standards with heat reduction and public comfort goals. And finally, strengthen tree preservation provisions that clarify uh preserve tree categories, mitigation permits, and construction protection. So the the first amendment is uh one that uh has been a hot topic around among the development community. Uh the core

requirement that the code has is the landscape plan has to be prepared by a registered uh landscape architect and the irrigation plan also has to uh be prepared by a l licensed irrigator irrigator. Um what this causes is a finan financial burden uh especially when it's a small uh development and it really perhaps doesn't merit for something so elaborate. So an exemption has been established through this amendment to uh basically exempt developments under one acre applicable to single family residential, duplex, multif family, mixed use and commercial development. So if it falls under one acre, a designer can move forward and create the the plans for the applicant. And so the effect of this amendment would be it results in maintaining professional review for larger higher impact projects while reducing design burden for smaller development. Uh also uh plant approved plant materials were uh updated. There are four tables in the landscape section of the code. A lot of the tables within the section had um species that were not native to uh the city of Brownsville. And so some of them were removed. These tables were tweaked to tailor uh the species that are more closely uh related or that would better survive in the Brownsville climate. So for trees and shrub minimums uh trees uh require a minimum caliber size of three inches

measured at a distance of 6 in above ground. For single family residential developments the minimum caliber size requirement has been reduced to 2 in uh measured at a distance of of 6 in above ground. For plant diversity, no single plant may exceed 50% of the total required plants within its category. Basically meaning you cannot have uh for one same type of tree for the entire uh development. Uh alternative plants, the city forester uh does have the authority to approve alternative plant types on a case-byase basis. Alternatives are capped at 20% of the total plants in the same category. And finally, turf uh replacement. Existing turf may be restored. Uh damage or replacement over 50% of lawn area must be replaced with an approved species or variety from table 4.67 approved ground covers. And so these are just the the tables that were updated. Again, there they were much longer. Uh some species were removed and some species were added to again tailor to Brownzil's climate. Next slide. So for parking lot shade standards, the existing language in the code said that it had to be a spacing of 80 ft. This uh change uh provides a clear uh tree placement standard uh aimed at canopy coverage. It'll provide more shade

within parking uh areas. Uh the new standard states that uh parking spaces must be within 35 ft of a tree. Uh planning implication uh tree placement is measured by proximity to every parking space, not only by total tree count. This uh again encourages a more even shade distribution across parking areas. And just as a design note, and this note is actually part of the tables that were um presented a couple of slides ago, uh certain oak species do require landscaping around the trunk, at least 100 square ft, and it would be something resembling what the picture shows of small islands of landscaping uh as trunk protection. So for tree preservation framework again this was another amendment done to this particular section. Uh the amendment to species exempt from the tree preservation provisions. Uh and it updates measurement methodology outlines tree species that require mitigation from the tree preservation exemption list. two two very common species that exist here in Brownsville were removed. Even though they are prevalent within the city of Brownsville and the valley overall, hagber berries and mosquets still provide um value to the ecosystem. So they were removed from the list of trees that are exempt from tree preservation. So, uh, the existing list as you can see is to the left. Those two

items were removed and the the list has been updated to omit those two species. Basically, it now creates uh the ordinance now creates provisions to where hagberries and mosquets will also be protected when they exceed a certain uh size or uh uh calipiber diameter. So, the measurement methodology uh through this amendment, it was standardized. uh it's now going to be based on what we call DBH or diameter at breast height uh standardizing the measurement method in accordance with best professional practice based on national standards established by the American forest and the USDA forest service. Uh the protected tree there's there's two main categories that uh are uh prevalent here in the city. the protected tree anywhere anywhere from 12 to 24 in of diameter at breast height or a heritage tree which is much larger and much older it's uh 24 in or greater. Uh again the inclusion of hackberry and mosqu tree species into the um requirements of mitigation uh has been updated. Hagberries and mosqu trees will be included in the preserved tree categories. For mitigation purposes, any hackberry or mosqu tree classified as a protected tree must be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio. Uh this means that one replacement tree is required for each tree that is removed. Any hagberry or mosqu tree classified as a heritage tree must be mitigated at a one to three ratio meaning three replacement trees are required for each one that is removed

uh for illegal removal of protected trees. Again, this standardize standardizes as per best practice how the city would address the removal the illegal removal of a tree without the consent of the city or the proper approval from city commission. Though the definition of a protected tree as per UDC section 5.1, there's actually three types. Two, we have already mentioned the protected tree, the heritage tree, but there's also signature tree. uh illegal removal of any of these types of of trees uh would result in a penalty of $75 per DBH inch. Uh basically uh again the the applicant or whoever does the removal would be cited and be given uh this uh fee uh and they would have to pay to to be able to uh fulfill the requirement. Uh this also applies to trees that are damaged or removed without a permit including construction damaged within two years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. And so what changed or the overall message of the amendment is uh the changes to plant material design thresholds, parking lot shade, preserve tree categories, mitigation, permits and enforcement. And the goal remains to have attractive development that protects public health, safety, welfare, and Brownsville's natural landscape. and staff does recommend the approval of this ordinance. Any questions? Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. So, if there's anyone that

would like to address this topic, if you'll come forward. We're all tree huggers here. Unfortunately, we don't have a list because we cannot um even though it's not promotion of a particular firm or architect sometimes a perception or it's misunderstood that we're promoting someone. So, we've unfortunately have have had to move away from uh providing a list. Um, however, it is public information as to the landscape architects that submit. We can provide a list in that sense and basically a list of everyone who submits so that you can um reference or contact them to to request a service.

I we need a closed public hearing. Move to close uh public hearing. Second. We have a first and a second motion to close public hearing. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Ocean carries, you had a question. Uh, what mechanism do we have put in place once something's put in that they maintain it? Is there anything that the see so something goes in brand new, it looks fabulous and a year later it looks like the desert. Is there any mechanism in the city to go back and go to an entity that put something in?

Yes. Good evening. Um, my name is Alex Aguilar, uh, engineering public works manager. When you see those changes in the past, we had nothing to go back and say, you know what, you just did it for permit purposes and then you remove the tree. Um, I recall an incident a few years ago with one of the banks that was well, I can't name them right, but they were here that they removed all their oak trees. Unfortunately, we couldn't get them to plant something else um that would mitigate that. But if you look at the changes that we're doing, we're recommending up to two years that if we go back there at before two years pass and they already removed them, we have the authority to get them to plan back or we're going to start finding them. It's it's in there in the change.

Perfect. Thank you. So, is it mainly citizens that can come forward to uh report these incidents or is there staff that's driving around town?

We do have um ordinance officers that are doing that. We currently the forestry department does not exist. We do it out of engineering and public works. We get our funds from there. Um but we are driving around. We are looking at sites. um the incident that happened a few years back with that bank. There was a citizen that came forward and they they made um we have a a uh government line that said 546 help and then you can leave your your uh questions there. So we called the citizen, she told us what's going on and we move forward with trying to get them to plant something else. They did plant something else but it was not comparable to what was there. I think they planted those those short palms there instead of the oak trees that were there. So, we tried to mitigate as much as we could with what we had in our ordinance, but now we want to enforce a little bit more and give it up to two years for us to be protecting those trees. Yes.

Thank you. Uh we need to open up public hearing. Motion to open public comment. I have question. All those in favor? I. Yes, ma'am. Um, have you taken into consideration uh when an insurance company requires you to remove a tree that's now damaging the home and they don't cover insuranceances?

Mr. Gilad, do you want to answer that one? Well, if I'm trying to get coverage from my home for insuranceances, then I can't take the tree down. But then I I have to take it down to get insurance on my home. So, what do I do? a general question that it can come up if I have a tree in my home and then that tree grows to be like in in and a diameter that's damaging my home and my insurance is saying I can't insure your home because your tree is in the way or it's going to damage the home then you need to remove the tree. So then I'm not allowed to remove the tree by the city, but then I can't get insurance if I don't remove the tree. So in our residential areas, we have no jurisdiction. We cannot get into private areas. We are not ordinance officers. Um in in businesses and um city areas, that's why we require that you have your right trees in the right place. We have perimeter trees, we're call buffer trees, and we have parking lot trees, which are ornamental. They're not as big and they don't grow as big. That all that is in UDC, and it explains the size of trees, uh what you can plant where to avoid these these things. In the past, it hadn't been, but now it is.

And to clarify, all of this is for new trees. So, when a development comes in, h we want for new trees to be planted and survived for two years. That's the idea. You cannot let them die or dry. Okay. So, if I have in my business, I I have a business and there's a tree but it doesn't affect it. If it's a business that's already in place, that's a tree that's already there, I can cut it out. I can chop it off. If my insurance doesn't cover it because of the tree is in the way.

Yes. So, if the tree is in your place of business, it is a a public place. People can go in there, right? If for any reason the property was bought and that giant oak was already there, that was supposed to be mitigated a very long time ago. The business was supposed to actually start their trimming to what it wouldn't affect the the the establishment. We as um um city employees, all the buildings that belong to the city, we have a trimming um schedule. We trim them ourselves. So if you go into a business and you're trying to remove a tree that is already a protected tree or a heritage tree, a public place, yes, there will be a fine because it is a public place.

So then if I can't get insurance, then I I I won't be able to get insurance to cover my business or my building. I think based on what Mr. Republic tree I think

or my business like I have a property where I have a business and it's on military highway it's an old building if I have a tree there that grows to be too big to where it's interfering with the structure of my building and I want to get insurance property insurance or any type of event fire whatever or damage to the building and my insurance tells me you need to cut that tree, but I can cover your building. What do I do there?

When we get to that point, um, that's why we have our commissioners to decide on whether that heritage tree will be removed or won't be removed. with our in our experience with proper trimming and just giving the tree enough to be growing and the proper trimming not to hit the building. The tree is going to grow fine. It's going to be there for years and as long as it's being controlled, the tree will live out its years. Um whenever a tree is too big and it needs to be removed and it becomes a heritage tree, it needs to be brought to commissions. They decide if it gets uh taken out or not. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to discuss this topic?

Close public hearing. The motion to close public hearing. Seconded. We have a first and second motion to close public hearing. All those in favor? I.

All those opposed. Motion carries. Commission have any further questions? This is the only masking. But they quoted me for that and that was like seven grand just for the SEU. So that's my question. If that's such a small area of landscaping still have to go and get a landscaping art and pay seven grand to get save

based on what the ordinance is. Yes. Do we have any further discussions? Discussion or questions. What is the wish of the commission?

Um motion to approve. I second. We have a first and a second motion to approve. All those in favor? I I. All those opposed? Motion carries. Is there any further business? Motion to adjurnn. Second. We have a first and a second motion to adjurnn. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. 707. Meeting adjourned. Thank you, Leadership Brownsville, for being with us tonight.