Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

This is this is a text from someone else that got forwarded to me, but I don't know if that's the person or not.

They got put on here yet or not. water. Everybody.

All right, it is 9:02. So, go ahead and call the meeting to order. And I guess the first item on the agenda is public comment. And we have none.

Okay. So, we'll move on to uh consent agenda. Commission may request for a consent agenda item to be moved to the regular agenda for presentation and public comment. Otherwise, the consent agenda will be considered on one vote. Uh all items on the consent agenda have been recommended for approval by staff with no opposition received to date. Since some items on the consent agenda may require a public hearing, the commission will accept public comment on any item on the consent agenda in one public hearing. We have any comments on the consent agenda or any discussion?

Um staff has one. The agenda is incorrect. It's June 16th minutes. The minutes are correct, but the agenda is incorrect. Okay. So with that correction, I'll entertain a motion. I make a motion to approve with the correction of the agenda stating June 16th. I'll second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? Consent agenda passes. And we will move to the regular agenda. Uh, first item on the agenda is the vice chair election. So, does anybody have uh any nominations or Yeah, chairman, I'd like to uh make a motion uh that we select Britney Davis as our vice chair uh for this committee. Okay, I'll second. Got a motion by Candy and a second by Liz for uh Britney. Is there any further discussion? Yeah.

All right. So, I'll go ahead and uh call for a vote on the motion to elect Britney as vice chair. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed Britney? Congratulations. Thank you.

All right. Next item is subdivision plats. Planning commission has final authority for approval. Appeals may be directed to city council. First item in our subdivision plat is PP2503 and FP2516, the canals at Lake Nazwsworthy. A request to amend the preliminary plat being three 30 acres to create two lots and a final plat one being 28.07 07 acres of the canals at Lake Nazworthy under uh general commercial uh CG zoning district located at 6485 Nickerbacher Road.

Good morning. Ray Linbury, lead planner and we are doing both a preliminary plat and a final plat for this area. Um it is 30 acres. The preliminary plat is 30 acres. Um it is general commercial. It is located at 6485 Nickerbacher Road, SMD1 Tommy Heert in the Nazwsworthy neighborhood. And then the final plat is 28.07 acres. Um, again, general commercial SMD1 Tommy Heert Naz Nazworthy neighborhood. Um, this is the preliminary plat. As you can see, this is lot one, big huge lot. And then lot two is this little lot right here. This is the original preliminary plat. Oh, hold on. Nope. There we go. Um, we are talking about this area right here. So, they are amending this um to make it a whole lot and then a a second lot to encompass the road. And this is the final plat. It is just the big lot and this is the bottom portion of it. This is lot two that will not be platted will not be final platted. So with that staff is recommending approval on the preliminary plat. Um the only thing we ask is you is they revise the plat to dedicate the right of way um on lot two. And then staff is also recommending approval on the final plat with the three conditions that the taxert um they

labeled lot two as a remainder. So, we ask that they label it as lot two and um the there is an easement that they need to show. Is there any questions? You have any questions for Ray? Thank you, Ray. We'll uh open up for public comment on this specific case if we have any. The applicants are here if you have any questions. Okay. Anybody have any questions for the applicants? All right. So, we'll close public comment and um have discussion or a motion. I'll make a motion to approve as presented.

Second. Got a motion by Britney and a second by Candy. Sorry, Linda. Motion. Uh yes, we can do this all in one motion. Correct. Okay. Okay. So motion is to approve the preliminary and final plat uh as presented in the agenda. Uh with that we'll take a vote. All in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? That passes 5. All right. Second subdivision plat is FP 2513 Elsa Gar section one. a request to final plat 49 residential lots over 9.066 acres within Baptist Memorial Retirement Community as to individual individually subdivide each home. A request for approval of a variance for rideway and paving widths on Northstar Drive and North Gate Drive. A request for approval of a variance to not construct curb and gutter along East 18th Street and North Post Street. and a request for paving width along North Post Street. Do we want to go ahead and read the next one? Okay.

And then after you read this one, if you would give the applicant a chance to come up and maybe request a waiver.

Okay. Uh next case that we'll uh discuss at the same time is FP214 Elsag section 2, a request to final plat 136 lots over 47.288 288 acres within the Baptist Memorial Retirement Community as to individually subdivide each home or structure. A request for approval of a variance for incremental half of paving paving on North Main Street and a request for approval of a variance for right ofway and paving WS on all internal local streets. Right.

Mr. Russell, if you want to come up. Do we want to go ahead presentation first? We can present both of them first if you'd like to request the waiver afterwards or you can come up and do it now and we don't have to do the presentation for section two. It's up to you.

Good morning, Russell with SKG. Um, I'd like to ask for maybe an indefinite uh delay postponement for section two and then we'd like to hear and have a discussion on section one. So maybe I'll let kind of go sit back down, let staff do their presentation. If y'all approve the the delay of postponement of section two, then maybe we can have a discussion about section one. Yeah. So, I think uh the statute just allows a 30-day waiver, but I guess in between now and then if you decide to withdraw it, you do that. Sure. Then get then the 30 days and if we have to, we'll we'll withdraw or request it.

Okay. As needed. That's just section two at this point. Yes, sir. Okay. Yes. Okay. Thank you, chairman. I would recommend taking a motion on the waiver request and then we can hear section one. Okay. We have a a motion from anyone on the the uh delay. Make a motion delay 30 days on section two. I'll second. Okay. And a motion and a second to delay section two. Uh any further discussion? I'll go ahead and uh call for a vote. All in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? All right. So, we'll do a 30-day waiver on section two and discuss section one. Austin,

thank you. Austin Reed, senior planner. This was a pair of plats for the Baptist Memorial Retirement Community. Um, it was split up into two. Section two just received a waiver. Section one is the smaller of the two. Um, final plat 449 lots over 9 acres. Comes to you out of district number four, Patrick Keely's district in the Pauland neighborhood. The zoning is a PD district which was instated earlier this year. And then the vision plan here is neighborhood. Here's a look at the plat itself. It's kind of in a loop configuration serviced by Northgate and Northstar Drive. These are currently private roads. They will be dedicated to the city as public local roads. And then this is really just to show you the building outlines. Um some of these lot lines and street lines are out of date, but um it's there for you. So there's a couple variance requests for this. Northstar and Northgate Drive, which like I said are both coming in as new local streets, are currently paved at around 30 ft wide with 40 ft of rideway dedicated. However, with them coming in as new roads, they are required to have the full 40t of paving or 36 feet with sidewalk on one side and 50 ft of rideway. And then I've included there an image of both of those. It also does touch a couple roads to the outside of the subdivision there to the east, including East 18th and North Poe. So, East 18th, which is a local street, is missing its curbing. North Poe, which is also a local street, is also missing its curbing, but it narrows down to about 21 ft where um you see the picture is. So, the curbing is going to be required on all of those. And then the incremental half of paving um to 26 feet is required on North Poe. And that's section two. So, we'll skip past that. Okay.

So, our staff recommendation for section one, we are recommending approval of the final plat um subject to 10 conditions and three notes. But when it comes to the variances, um taking on these roads in a substandard condition would really represent a financial deficit for the city. So, we are recommending denial of the variances for right away and paving on both Northstar and North Gates. Um denial of the variance request for additional paving on North Poe and denial of the variance to not construct curbing on East 18th and North Poe. The conditions are as follows. Number one being for your tax certificate. Two being for your water mains and service connections. Three being for your sewer mains and service connections. Four being for the sidewalks on all road frontages as required by the underlying PD zoning. Um number five being for the improvement of Northstar Northgate with the paving or receive approval of a variance. Number six being for the dedication of rideaway on those streets or receive approval of a variance. Number seven being for the curb and gutter on East 18th and North Poe or the variance. Number eight being for the paving on North Po variance. Number nine being for your drainage study. And then number P number 10 being that they remove the entrance gates on Northstar and Northgate because they're currently gated. And with them being dedicated to the public, they will need to maintain public access. So we have a couple notes as well. Uh the first note is just for fire separation distance and fire rating if they're closer than they need to be. Um number two being for fire hydrants and fire department access. And number three just talks about a potential developer agreement that would need to be negotiated, signed, and recorded. Um, if you guys have any questions, I'd be happy to try and answer them. I think we all also do have a couple staff members who are ready to speak as well.

About to get on that. Sorry, I'm out of breath. Does anybody have any questions for Austin before we um Is the fire chief here? Because I I do want I see him there. We have a representative from fire prevention here. Yes. Do I have any more questions for Austin? Because of the denial um and the 40 ft that's required um for the streets,

how easy is that going to be able to be done with sidewalks? I mean, is that um a detriment to uh this request? So, let me go back to my picture so you can kind of see what they look like there. Well, I I think we also would have public works help us answer that question is they're the ones that maintain and deal with items in the rightway. Obviously, there's not a lot of front yards there, right?

The plan development that was approved prior accommodated for that. Um, but again, I think public works probably would have the best advice for us as far as construction and maintenance. Um, when it comes to th those streetcapes and sidewalks and things like that. And I know they have a representative here to to discuss as well. Well, what we're doing is in this request is we're making the roads to be a normal public road instead of a private. Is is that correct? That is correct. We we look at these as they don't exist today. Right. And so they would be coming in new just like a new subdivision. Okay. Thank you.

Anybody have anything else for Austin? Do we want to have um city staff come up first, I guess, and and make any other comments about the requests or the u suggestions on the improvements? Good morning. Good morning. Excuse me. City engineer Kevin P. I'm representing public works as a department. Public works rises in opposition to the approval of the plat and any variances. Okay.

Would you care to add any color to that? Sure. Not withstanding uh desire to bring it up to current standards, we don't feel we should accept it at this time. Okay. Is that due to access or maintenance or what's the biggest concern I guess on the city side you have?

Both that and other considerations. We're not in principle opposed to considering it at a future date, but at this time the unknowns are too many for us to recommend approval. has the company that's taken over the development and is attempting to change the direction of this have have you guys have they other than sewer mains, fire hydrants and and those items I mean have they allowed you guys to do any more scope as to what the city cost is going to be down the road or I mean like where are you guys in discussion with us with them? We're currently in the process of assessing all the ramifications if we choose to accept this.

Okay. And how long do you think that will take just to get your cost assessment together? Well, it should have been ready by 7:30. A week, two weeks maybe. Okay. So, are you in preference of delaying this for 30 days like we did on section two and have a rediscussion or like you guys are just flat opposed? At this time, we we oppose the approval of any of the platinum variances. We we cannot as staff at my understanding is I can't request you guys delay this sure at all. So, okay. Thank you.

And then public works, executive director of public works is here. Do you have anything you want to add to this?

Shane Kelton, executive director of public works for the city. One of the biggest reasons, I mean, this was, you know, developed as a private development and and doesn't meet any of our standards, our normal standards. And so that's one of the things that we want to ensure as we look at this. I mean, there's a lot of a lot of things that we start looking at maintenance and thinking about maintenance on down the road on this. Not only one are we taking on a lot of streets, we're taking on new new water lines, new streets, all of these things that um we'll have to we'll have to work through and and go through all those processes. But then you also look at the outside of it where all the fences are around because these are it's a gated community. So there's fences in uh in the ordinance the each resident will be responsible for maintenance out to the edge of the pavement. Well, if you have fences and you don't have any gates in the fences, how are they going to get out to to mow? So whole lot of different things that uh we we really excuse me need to look at here. So that's just kind of a again that's our take on that from from this standpoint right now.

Okay.

Thank you. just to give a little clarity to this. Um um the reason that I believe some of this is coming about and I know it's been a gated community for lots of years uh as a uh private uh entity of um Baptist Memorial, but um in taxing that's been the issue is taxation. And um over the years it wound up being or what has found to be um uh with the appraisal district is that uh these are not homesteads um they are um they are uh even though many of the residents believe over the years you know that um they've put their homestead in and and get the tax benefit from that. Um it has come to the appraisal district's attention that um they are really um like uh life estates or rentals if you want to that's a real broad word rental um and and I've said that not um the appraisal district but uh sitting on that board this has been a real issue with um how to make these changes to benefit those that live there and have bought or put their monies down for these properties and that's the reason for some of the need and this is how Baptist Memorial is handling. Village East is do uh doing it another way. Rio Koncho is doing it another way. This is just the way that uh Baptist Memorial is trying to uh rectify that situation as a tax problem. But if you know, I don't know how the rest of them are going to meet uh city standards,

the other properties, but that's a lot. What you're saying, Shane, is you know, you're talking about sewer, you're talking about uh water lines and mains and fences, and um that's just sounds like a a lot to make this decision for the city to take over and maintain some of this. It is and it it and it it's, you know, coming to us fairly quick without us being able to sit down and work through a lot of these options. You know, with Village East, we were able to sit down

with them, you know, and we worked out we worked out an options to where they they kept all they kept all of their utilities, they kept their streets, uh, they kept all of that private even though that they they did divide and and divide the property into into individual lots. And so, um, and we worked out a a developers agreement basically, I think that's kind of the the term that we used for it, uh, to where at any point in time if the if their 501c if it ever, uh, dissolved that they at that point in time or they ever sold anything that they would upgrade everything to city standard

uh, at that time. And so that's that's how village east worked through it. And again, like I said, this has come to us so quick. I mean oper my operations department they just ran a quick number just um it was section one and two but if you just look at just the mowing the street maintenance and all of that you know over the next 20 years and I mean that's no utilities involved in this it's just streets and mowing um additional mowing we're a little over a million dollars in 20 years of expenses to the city um and that's just routine expense that's not any any specialized stuff and that again that doesn't include the utilities it doesn't include a lot of those type things. And again, and again, just a lot of things that we're worried about and concerned about that that we haven't had a chance to vet and work through um how how we're going to do it. Again, the mowing issue, we know that's going to be an issue there. Uh we know um and again, we're taking, you know, 30 foot wide streets and we're trying to put public, you know, all of a sudden it's going to become public. We don't know who's going to own these houses in the future,

right? um you know, how many vehicles are going to be parked there? What's you know, are they going to try to park on the road, not park on the road? Um go in there, we're going to have to make no parking on the roads. I mean, though, there's a lot of different things that as you start looking into this moving into the future that um that haven't been worked out. Shane, out of curiosity, how long has the city been aware of working with the owner developer on this um specific item? 30 uh maybe 60 days. I mean, so really not long for years. Right. Right. But actually like momentum behind it. Yeah. But I've been I've been involved they've brought it to me and I've been involved in this for about 30 days. Okay. So

Okay. Perfect. Thank you. And I I do believe that this is a bit different than the Village East circumstance in that the Baptist Memorial Corporation is looking to outright sell these properties and that the current occupants will be given first right of refusal. Right. But they're going to be sold. And this might be a silly, this is more a question, but in the current grass area here, so your rightway um due to the minimal street width on the interior, are we able to do any I don't want to say alley, but rear parking or is that something that wouldn't be allowed for the city because aren't that large? No,

I mean one the width of this street specifically this street wouldn't wouldn't allow for that uh without without significant widening and then two again with the with the fence there. Sure. Obviously it would be a fence modification but yeah. Okay. And and two I mean we definitely have to make sure who who owns the fence. We've we've gotten into I've gotten into this before on Southwest. Who owns the wall? Mhm. um when the wall needs maintenance, the homeowners don't want to do maintenance on the wall, so they ask the city to do it or if something happens, you know, we they ask us to come do it. And it's we we didn't build the wall, and we don't own it, but they don't own it either, so Right. completely understand. Thank you.

All right. Thank you guys. I think we'll um open up for public comment if we hadn't already. Luke,

just might clarify one thing, too. Um given staff's opposition to the dedication um approval of the plat doesn't necessarily mean that the city has to take over these streets as a publicly dedicated street. But if the plat otherwise meets the platting requirements, which I think is what we're saying it does, you can still approve it. but it's approved with those streets still being private streets. But um until the city actually agrees to accept those, then I I don't think you can enforce uh the city taking that over given the opposition, but I think you can still approve the plat. So,

okay, if that helps. That makes sense to everybody. Well, it makes sense, but why would you do that? Is there a time is there a time frame though on the plat like let's say they don't do anything for two years does the plat approval then become null and void or

well there is a timeline on how long the plat uh can be I guess outstanding um but as far as the dedication I I don't know I mean the way the statute reads as far as uh the city accepting a dedication it's when municipal authorities make an actual appropriation of the dedicated parts by entry, use or improvement. So to me, that's the city coming in doing maintenance, um, allocating funding, things of that nature, not necessarily just signing off on the plat itself. Okay. All right, Russell. Yeah. All right. Yes. Happy Monday.

Russell Gully with SKG. This one is a very complex situation, albeit somewhat different than the other ones. This is somewhat um Baptist Memorials look to get out of this type of business. They're looking to kind of sell these out and kind of stop this facet of their company. They've done this in another city and so now they're looking to try to do this in St. Angelo. Um and and this one seemed section one seemed to be kind of the easiest one. Section two is really a mess from all different perspection perspectives. Um, so I guess if we start out and and look at it, we we we did the zone change and we have the underlying zoning of an RM1 which triggers the the sidewalks. The actual use here is really more of a single family type residential use. So, so the sidewalks, internal streets, and some of these smaller side streets is because of that underlying zoning. I will request a waiver from um I guess staff for that one. But if we look at this, there's there's existing water manes within section one that are in dedicated easements and are maintained currently by the city. And so really if you look at those, the city's going to have that responsibility to continue to main those in perpetuity because they are easements. They are on the city's infrastructure. So, so water and sewer mains are both present. The city will continue to be responsible to maintain those. So, there's really not a change or an impact to the city for water and sewer mains. So, um we don't see that that isn't really a significant impact to the city. Um and maybe I'll start kind of going through the conditions. Section one will satisfy that. Section two, I'm sorry, condition two, there's already existing mains in place.

Condition three, there's existing mains in place. Um number four, we'll request a waiver for that. Um number five, um staff just presented and you just approved a preliminary plat with a 40ft rideway in it. So now we're against 40ft rideways. So, you just approved one, a preliminary plat with a 40ft rideway on it.

Um, to the east of this area, um, they're I guess you have 17th Street, 18th Street, Velcues, and Jones are all 40ft wide rights of way. And so there's about a mile of existing roads to the east that are um 40ft rightway. So, so we didn't feel like that was really a stretch asking for a 40 foot wide rideway. Um, if we need to, we can dedicate easements adjacent to that for sidewalks if if those have to come in to play and for whatever utilities there may be. Uh, we could do a 50-ft rideway. It would just kind of squeeze down, if you will, the the room left. You know, this this one is unique because there's existing homes there and and driveways and it functions. And so, um, if if you want and require 50 ft right ofway and you we would ask for your approval of the that variance request for the 40 ft, um, you just approved one as I indicated and and there's there's a lot of 40 foot rideway in that area to the east. Um, then we would ask for your approval of the variance on the street width. um for the improvements the kind of the city and and we realize this is coming in as a new subdivision. So you have to look at it as that condition and don't really we don't really have the benefit of this being existing um rightway that's dedicated and it is it's a funny nuance there with the existing homes but but we would ask we're over the 26 ft minimum that is typically kind of the standard accepted for existing developed conditions. Um these are very short length roads if you will. they kind of come together at the ends and connect out. On one end, we have a 50ft

ride ofway. Um on the other end where we could bump that out to be 50 ft wide. So that the the segment that that connects over to 14th Street, we that one is a 50ft rideway. And for that short little piece that connects out to to Bradford, we could make that one 50 feet if needed. Um, so it' just be kind of those two internal little eye drop eye shape pieces, if you will, uh, that would that would that are narrow there. And so, um, but for the pavement width, we would ask for your approval of that. I I talked to Reese Albert about that. They remembered constructing that back in the in the 1995 time frame. Um they used and we will confirm this that they used their their type A grade two limestone base on the roadway which is still current city spec. So to rec construct that the drives through there. Uh and we we've talked a little bit with with engineering about this. most likely would do a mill and over overlay to where we would remove the existing asphalt pavement and and come in and put a new asphalt surface over that to provide kind of a minimum 20-year pavement design. So, we feel like from a street perspective that we would provide an equivalent or better street is as if this was a new subdivision. the the curbing gutter. Uh it's it's kind of a lay down or mountable curb there that it's that's when it was installed, we the detail was the city standard at the time. You know, the the width of the of that is grown here recently from 18 to 24 in, but other than that, it's very similar. And so we would even feel like, you know, if there's a concern about the maintenance cost of this, the narrower road over the life cycle is going to be a lower maintenance cost. We we go to these wide

40ft streets and that that constitutes more paving. All of this stuff is is is maintenance by the square foot and that all adds up. So I think from that concern and that perspective that a narrower street because the this is a real somewhat closed not a throw flowth through neighborhood that these streets they all have driveways as you can see by the photos. Austin's does a great job taking photos uh and and working working that for me. So thank you sir. Um so the the street we would ask for your approval of the variance on the street widths. We believe that's well over the 26 ft that the fire marshall generally requires um being close to 30 foot width there. Uh the the variances for the adjacent streets um if we do nothing and this is not approved or not ultimately filed then there's no change to those streets. So no change. So, we would ask for the variance because ultimately we do have the fence along there in and I guess on 14th and 18th and 17th Street. So, we're really not utilizing those where we have driveways coming off of them that would ultimately tend to kind of unravel the edge and have the edge deterioration. And it is it's kind of a mix of who maintains that area, who doesn't, do we put driveways there and create more traffic? now back in that area. And I think even how those residences would function because they're set up for really front entry garages. And so I I don't and I don't know that there's even enough depth between the back of the house to the fence to really create driveways or or secondary parking. So let me kind of

stop there and back up and see this is the beginning of a longer discussion. the the first and best opportunity for Baptist Memorials is to have this become public. the the the homeowners there are generally elderly, fixed income, and so, you know, they've talked about and are looking at could they have a property owners association that would that we keep these streets private and and that they ultimately are responsible for the fencing and and the maintenance of the perimeter of that. And so that that is all something they're looking at. But it's like can let's try if we can get this platted in and at least the streets be publicly dedicated streets. Now all of these homes now start paying paying tax. Currently I think Baptist Memorials is a full-on 501c3. So they're fully exempt from property tax on these residences. So so there is no property tax being paid on these. But as they convey them off to individuals, those individuals will now start paying property tax. So, so as as was pointed out, the city currently provides fire, police, water, sewer, utilities, and and all of that type of stuff for there. There's really no no tax coming in for that for city, county, or school district. So, so these these would start paying into that. So the first look is if this could be publicly dedicated that would ultimately lessen what a property owner association would be responsible for. So and they're talking tossing around the idea of still doing one to do exactly as was mentioned to to maintain these perimeter um mowing if you will around the outside fences because most of those people

probably are not going to be out pushing a lawnmower. they'll just have to to hire someone to to mow that. But but there is code enforcement and they've been out and they've been I've gotten a letter to mow go mow my high weeds. So there is a code enforcement mechanism that will require that to be kept up. So so there is something to to protect the city from that just growing wild if you will. And so if need be that that them setting up a property owners association to contribute to that is is kind of in the back of their mind. So we wanted to come to here today and really test the waters of sorts and and see where we kind of land with this cuz depending on how it goes, we may be appealing to city council or staff may be appealing to city council. So, we're just kind of wanting to go through the process as we learn and figure out because this is so unique. So, so pardon my long windedness on this one, but there's a lot there's a lot to this one.

Can we put this slide back up with the conditions, please? Thank you.

So, we would also ask for your approval of the the variances for the for the curbing gutter and the widening of of Eth Street, 18th Street bypass and and Post Street. Um I guess and that includes incremental half of both of those. Then the drainage study um we're happy to do that. This will be really a no change because we're this is an existing condition so we're not really adding anything there. And then then removing the gates at Northstar North Gate willing to do that as well. Be happy to answer any questions and would ask for this um as presented with the variances as requested. So Russell on um I know the city feels like this has come before them fairly quick at least in this specific one because there are some different challenges. I mean are you I mean obviously it seems like you're obviously trekking forward and on board but do you feel it's premature compared to some of the other ones that we've looked at with the city? Well, you know, and for section two, it is it is so much more complicated. And so that's why it it may sit back or we'll

um this one if we put it off another month and allow staff to continue to look at it. I I think we're okay with that. They're not This is not a rush to get it done. You know, they want to try to keep making progress, but really this was a How does planning commission feel about it? What's their thoughts on this? How do we, you know, whichever way it goes, there there may be one somebody appealing to city council. So, so do we just send it there? So, no pressure on on y'all, but you know, any thoughts, directive, ideas could help us plan and and move forward with it.

How does trash service currently work? Is there I mean, is there service to each individual residence or is it handled by the larger entity? That's a good question. I don't know. I would assume I I haven't seen dumpsters at this, so I would assume they do roll outs there, but I can't see. Austin, do you remember seeing any? No. Yeah. Unless they make them all roll them Maybe they make them all roll them inside and keep them in the garage. And so I But there's I haven't seen a dumpster there either. So,

is it is it even viable uh with the existing structures as they are in the I mean fairly short distance between the street and the yard to to widen the streets? Not really. If we widen the streets and they try to park in their driveways, you're going to have the back end of their cars kind of hanging out a little bit. So, excuse me. We're really talking about five feet each side, right? We're 31 ft back to back and so about 5t each side.

And then the existing water and sewer mains that are there that are being utilized. It's not like villages like each unit has an individual tap or I can't recall. I apologize. We believe based on the drawings we've seen and the information that they all are individually sewer service and meters and if they're not the willing to correct that. Okay. Okay. And then are the sewer mains obviously I know this is kind of a loaded question. Um, do we believe the sewer mains are adequate for like if there are existing sewer mains, we're not having to require like a lift station or anything additional if we're putting more sewer mains in.

For section one, there's 8 in water and sewer main, which is the city minimum. And so that's adequate for this location. Okay. When were most of these houses built? The plat was approved in 95. So I'm thinking 96 coming forward. I thought it was a lot older than that. Yeah, it did too. Section two is, but section one is relatively newer. Okay.

Yeah. I think my biggest concern is the city taking on more liability than the uh addition of these individually platted homes adds to the roles. you know, if you took on a huge uh public works project to have to bring everything up to code because it's so old and and just worn out, um then that's obviously something that we need to take into consideration. But if they're newer and adequate, then I think that alleviates a lot of my concerns about potentially taking on more of an expense than we're adding in additional tax revenue by bringing them onto the tax roles. I would presume since water and sewer mains are existing if something happens to those responsible for those that should be right that should be a revenue neutral thing that I guess the cost of providing water and sewer service is feebased. So yeah,

this might be a question for you, Brandon, but is there when Russell was talking about the establishment of a a POA, I mean, is that a condition that you can in an approval of a plat like this, you know, could, and I know you were talking to this earlier, but I'm just trying to wrap my head around it. I mean, is that can that be a condition as to the the private residence maintaining certain aspects of this? Not that I know of. I mean, I think it would just by law be up to the residents if it is still a private road after the the plat's approved, but

I don't think we can make them create an association or anything to do that as far as I know. Yeah.

And ultimately maybe that's where it winds up. You know I in my perspective is it's it comes down to the road. You know water and sewer should is what it is for section one. Section two different story. So um if we can provide a road that meets the city's requirements then you know we have albeit older homes there but we do have that that tax base. So we we would think that a narrower street if we're talking want to save every penny we can is all to the benefit of of the city and but yet it's still we feel it's a safe street. So thank you for hearing us out. you know where that goes. We just we just want to lay it in front of you. If you want to make a motion with it, that would be great. If we need to postpone it, I don't know from our side what would change over a month. Maybe the city could be more comfortable with this from a from a cost basis. Um but but really maybe we'll just throw ourselves at your mercy and then we'll see if we go to need somebody needs to appeal to city council for some of these variances. That was kind of Sorry, just one more question for you. You said what? Not much is going to change if if it's delayed. I mean, that was that was kind of what was in the back of my mind. What what could be different to get the city more comfortable with the process? And based on the discussion y'all's y'all had,

maybe just some time for them to maybe run some numbers and see, okay, what what is it? What what could be that? or or maybe if there's something I don't know if we could voluntarily agree to do or put on the plat some sort of that a POA is required to maintain the the surrounding segment behind the fence and the street for those that are kind of because we all look internal the this these lots look internal and so to these side streets we're not using them which is kind of more to to our basis for the variance request. So, if there's something we can do, but there's code enforcement out there that that is very active in making sure that the the trees and and grasses do do not stay tall for long.

Do we know how far can that fence actually be? If they are sold to the public and somebody wants to move their fence back, are we are they able to without the sighteline visibility or the rightway? Do you know? From what I can tell from the survey, that fence is right on the property rightway line. So, it really can't move. Got it.

And I did look up the planned development. So, the rear yard in this planned development has a minimum of 10 ft. Now, some of those structures are further than that from the fence, but that's probably where the the closest one is. And the front yard, we have a 15t setback, uh, which I think is more than adequate with most of the of the structures. There may be a few maybe not even in section one maybe in section two that are closer than that but that's what we approved in the plan development which allowed these size of lots

with with the with this change it looks like just going along 18th Street that's that portion butting up to the street is not included in the platted lot. So, how do we how can we enforce requiring the residents to mow that and not have that be the responsibility of the city? Code enforcement.

I would say that that's like every other lot in town that this the property owner that has land adjacent in the rightway, they they maintain those areas just like any any normal subdivision. You probably have five feet of rightway or 10 feet of rideway in your front yard. You still mow that area. Yeah.

This just happens to be against a street that's behind. They still have the responsibility. I think we know logically that that's could be a challenge initially, but again, if these properties go to anyone in the future, maybe that's not an issue in the future. We just don't know when that is. And maybe that's something within the developer agreement working with the corporation as they work through that can be agreed to with the city with public works on how that's managed. Okay. I think Shane got up is Do you have anything? Do you have something else?

I was just going to speak the the mowing portion of it. Yeah. the the mowing is actually outlined in in city ordinance. The responsibilities of each homeowner uh from basically back of curb to center alley if there is an alley. So um is actually required for maintenance per per city ordinance. So just kind of a unique setup here because you got you know your fence that's a pretty good distance at least in the kind of middle of that that curve curve on going up to 18th street. that would be, you know, yeah, pretty good.

And, you know, it's the same way down Maine as well, too. And, you know, with the, you know, section two, of course, you pulled that, but again, there's these issues again all over. And again, the only really other area in town that we have this like this I said was on Southwest. And so, but again, it's one of those that, you know, homeowners are responsible to mow even outside the even outside the brick wall all the way to the edge of Southwest. So, they're responsible for mowing that. So again, but we do have um you know, again, we

but with the again the res with the residences here, if they purchase these homes, again, you know, they they currently don't mow and speak to trash service, they do not have individual trash service here. So they that's an internal thing to Baptist Memorials, they take care of the trash service for the residences as well. So that would be another thing that would have to add to this. each each individual homeowner would have to um again have residential trash service and then they would be issued carts and have to do the carts as well. So,

okay. Well, that kind of raises another question then I guess. Well, it seems like obviously there's fire service to the streets and that at some point was deemed to be adequate for the fort truck to be able to access based on the current width of the roads. Is that going to be an issue for trash service as well to be able to get in and out and use?

That's I mean that the track trash service will be able to go I mean they'll be able to do on the streets. They'll be able to go along the streets and and collect and pick up. Uh the biggest issue is that people are parked on the street and that's that's when it's going to get pretty tight for a trash truck to start maneuvering in and out of um out of the residential area there. So again, it's um but again, it's it's still doable uh from the trash service standpoint, but again, it it parking along the streets is is what's going to be an issue. It may be that um we have to the city would have to if if these become public roads, the city would have to probably go in there and make no parking on one side. Um so at least so. Okay.

All right. Okay. Is there any more public comment, Ray? Okay. Um, I'll go and close public comment and open up for discussion.

I think, um, a lot of it comes to in the long run and not just looking here in the next, you know, two years is the cost versus the benefit. Um, in the first phase, there's 52 lots. Let's say those homes go to market and they bring in a minimum of, let's say, $3,800 a year in taxable revenue. That's just shy of $200,000 a year for that section, which over 20 years is just shy of 4 million. There was a I believe, and don't quote me, but I believe somebody had made um a comment that the city maintenance on mowing and other expenses over a 20-year period would be about a million. So technically, I know there's other expenses that go into it, but technically over a 20-year period, we're on the positive end of it by opening this up to um what the the applicant's suggesting. Um I do think that for a little while it is going to be interesting because you are going to have um you know a 90% ownership of Baptist Memorial and maybe a 10% of public and um until that balances itself out and becomes fully public um the city will have a higher expense on maintenance than um you know it you know as far as until the balance hits. So those were kind of the points that I had made. I don't know if anyone else kind of has thoughts based on that.

Crickets. Okay. I'm thinking there's a lot more going into this. Uh at um Shane only had the last 30 days and um 60 days for the um uh maybe notice about this um and then u we heard for some variances on street width and curving and um there's just a lot to this one even though um I Section two is going to be even harder. Um, but uh we've heard the city ask for u some time uh to do some more um uh delving into cost and um abilities and ensuring and we brought up um trash. So that's another thing that hadn't been thought of. I'm sort of thinking we ought to give this um another 30 days and and give them time to get us some more data before we move forward. That would be my thought. There's just with the um uh making this like a new subdivision uh becoming public. You want the roads and the sewer and the water lines to meet uh city standards. Um and um uh I think in moving this to be more public uh the the difference is uh quite a bit of uh cost and um I'd like to see a little more information.

Okay. Did I did I understand right that the city currently maintains the water and sewer in this section? Is that correct? Section one in this section. Okay. They are they are water and sewer lines are at sea now. So there really be no there yes there' be no change in as far as utilities go in this area just be the maintenance of this of the so of these conditions two and three those those really don't they they're just not sure if each correct if please correct me if I'm incorrect but um if each unit has a tap. They believe it does but not 100% sure. Correct. They would just confirm that those have the individual taps for each structure.

Okay. So, a couple thoughts then just to bounce off Candy and I don't mean to cut you off if you were No, no, I'm through. Um on the trash service, if for instance they decided to create some sort of HOA or some sort of um communal area, um could they not just do bins and have that as trash service so we're not even worried about trash cans? I would probably let public works speak to that as that's kind of their purview. Um I'm not sure how that would look for them, but I I think public trash service would be available to them, right?

Sure. I just in, you know, cuz the trash can thing seems to be an issue. Um so if if that is something that's of concern, I didn't know if it could be like a communal bin potentially. Currently in our contract, our ordinance, we don't have anything set up for that. Not to say that we couldn't amend our current contract to to set up u something for that. We do like an apartment complexes, things like that. We do have have that set up from a commercial business standpoint. Um the problem is once these and we could even do that for Baptist morals but once these become individual privately owned homes who's going to pay how you know it have to be some kind of HOA something that would

actually have that in their name to structure to structure that

definitely I just I think that's a fixable fixable item. Um, one thing I will say, you know, because we have had this conversation. Sorry, Shane, you're I'm good with you. Um, on u, you know, when we've looked at some areas to potentially add sidewalks and, you know, we were looking at how people typically park and the majority of, you know, like a truck, the the bed is over the sidewalk. So, I just feel in my personal opinion having to widen the street is only going to create more issues for potential future current and future homeowners. Um, in the sole fact that, you know, is somebody going to be coming around and saying, "Okay, your bumper's over the sidewalk or over, you know, the com or the public area." Um, and I think that's just putting more things on the city that's unnecessary if the roads functioning currently at the the current width and we have adequate um entry and egress for fire and other services. I just I don't see widening the streets on a cost perspective making any sense in this personally. Well, I think the the on the same note that you know at the time that these were constructed, I believe they were built up to the requirements of the city. And what's interesting too is if you look to the east that in the current public roadways on like East 17th, Belma, Hughes, those are all 40 foot rightway as well. Um, I do I think to your point that widening them while it would bring it up to current city requirements would actually cause a number of other problems too.

Um, because the houses are are where they are and there's a 15t setback from the front yard. So, you can't move the house. Yeah. It doesn't it doesn't really accomplish anything. It it kind of is what it is. Um, so those are kind of my thoughts on the roadway. Anyway, um, like I said, I think the biggest concern that I had was just, you know, the potential potential of the city taking on, uh, huge maintenance liability because there's deferred maintenance or just the age of the development in itself and not knowing exactly what we're getting into. But it sounds like, you know, the city is already maintaining the water manes and sewer maids, so it's not really changing anything,

right? And I mean I completely understand on section two because that is an older area. It is considerably larger area. Um but you know the fact that we have the minimum standard currently on water and sewer. I you know I don't see why we need to postpone this truly. I mean I I'm good with making a vote if I'm going to be the unpopular one today. But

no. The other thing I think just going through the the conditions um you know drainage studies included in there just looking at the pictures on the area behind the the fence going up to uh 14th Street, right? Yeah. Or 18th. It looks like that's kind of a uh graded to be a drainage area, too. So, um it's got a little bit of a slope. Be kind interesting to see. I don't think you could really do a whole lot into that area and not have some drainage considerations. So, kind of my thoughts.

All right. Further discussion motion. Well, could we have um Russell uh come back and talk just one more time about the variance uh that he was speaking of that they're wanting? I think there was a few. I'll uh I'll open it back up for public comment. Oh, okay.

The drainage study just thinking of that I think that area was right on the fringe or maybe in part of some of the area that had very substantial flooding and from what I'm understanding that area did not really have any drainage flooding into any of the homes. So, we somewhat had a real life drainage study test on that one. So the variance request um really comes down to the rideway width, pavement widths, and then even the the installation of curb and gutter along those that segment of of 18th 18th bypass and PO that that um that doesn't have curb and gutter existing. And then there's there's a little bit of to get to the incremental half of Post Street, we would need to add 3 ft. So the that's an existing rideway. So currently it's about 20 feet. It's its narrowest point. So our incremental half would be adding three feet to

And so you're asking for a variance on the three foot. Correct. Correct. Yes. Um and I don't know this might be a Brandon question. Can on the curbon gutter can that be deferred to after the drainage study's completed like on the curbon gutter on uh poe and 18th 18th or whatever the other street is. Well, we would need to do the drainage study up front before we record the plat anyway. So, it would all that that would get done prior to any actual physical work being done.

Sure. But you you're requ uh requesting a variance on curb and gutter along 18th and so I just didn't know if the drainage study said that the current I mean because there isn't anything um is inadequate at that point. Can we readress the curbon gutter if that makes sense or is that just further I mean I know that's further complicating but trying to save right owner money now unless there's truly an issue

and this may be a question of Mr. paid, but I I was think I when I look at drainage studies, it's it's kind of internal to what is being developed. And so really, we're not do touching anything outside of our development or increasing anything on 18th or any. So really, I don't know that we would have an obligation to to change drainage conditions outside of the confines of our plat. Now, there is a portion of that that does function. There's a big covert pipe that comes through there. And so we start widening the street. We might actually Yeah. create be a detriment to some of that by decreasing available capacity in that little ditch along there.

Yep. Sneaky snuck behind me. Typically a drainage study shows uh compliance with our storm water design manual which says that the postdevelopment runoff rate in cubic feet per second cannot exceed the pre-development runoff rate. So in this instance there's all sorts of interpretations one can throw upon that. In this instance we have an existing uh surface. So, so we don't anticipate any change in the reality of the circumstance,

but we do want to have an assessment of what that reality is. Okay. If it does not comply with our storm water design manual, then there are opportunities for mitigation. Okay. I don't anticipate there being a lot, but there are opportunities for that. Perfect. Thank you. Okay. Close public. Oh, yeah. Uh, I'll close public comment and open it back up for discussion or a vote.

Well, I haven't really said much, but I'm kind of on same page as a few of you, and that this is an existing development that seems to be functioning. It's got the water sewer service. um doesn't appear that by dedicating it that it's going to wreak havoc on what's currently going on there. But I also, you know, if the city feels that they need whether it changes anything or not, if they need 30 more days to get comfortable with it, I have, you know, I have no problem with that as well. Um so I

think so on any extension of time the applicant would have have to agree to that. Um we can do it just on our own. So

okay. Okay. I am going to move forward and make a vote. I'm um going to move to approve the plat and in regard to the conditions um since number two and three are already fulfilled we believe um I'm good with those. Um number four um I am going to agree with the applicant to request a waiver on sidewalks due to um the current lot width. Number five, I'm also going to agree with the applicant to request the variance um and keep a 40 foot rightway. And number six, um again, request the variance in the street width to the current street width. I don't believe that it needs to get widened. Um and then again, number seven, the variance on um curb and gutter. Um, I think that I I'm probably using the wrong term, but the rollover the flat curb that's currently there is functioning adequately um on drainage and just in general with a with a thinner or a narrower street, I believe it will allow for easier parking. Um, and then obviously the the drainage study, etc. So, I think I think I hit everything.

Okay. So we have a motion to approve and grant waiverss requested um that are also cited under conditions four, five, six, and seven. Do I have a second? I just want to clarify. I want to make sure that did you mean to include number eight or not? Yes. I'm sorry. I'm hard time reading that. Um, yes. As far as I, um, the applicant did request a variance on, um, the three-foot as well on that. I thought you were leaning that way. I just wanted to make sure that stated. Thank you, Eric.

So, your motion would be to um, and I haven't had a second.

Sorry. So, to recap my motion because that was a lot. um approved the plat um with variances on items 4 through 8. Okay. Do we have a second or discussion? Well, like I said, I I don't have a problem with it, but I I would like to give the city a little bit more time to to get comfortable

without a second. It does. Linda just looked like she was in deep thought. I was It still is. Okay. So, my Yeah, I'm just I'm seeing both sides. I'm I am curious on what 30 days was going to change. Um,

I just feel like I and I understand where the city's coming from, like thinking like wanting more time, but again, all of these are existing without any huge changes or implications on on any of those items. So, again, your entrance and exit are fully accessible. Um, widening the street doesn't really make sense. Again, phase 2 has all sorts of other issues that I completely understand that that's going to take the city a lot longer to wrap their heads around, but I just feel like this is pretty for the most part straightforward since it's functioning currently in my opinion.

And so, so the role of the planning commission under the state law and how our city council has designated you guys as the reviewer of plat, you really have three options. one to approve, one to approve with conditions, which is the current motion, or three to deny. Again, as Brandon said, we don't really have the ability to extend this in any way. The state law says we cannot force the applicant to extend this

without a request from the applicant. without a request from the applicant. Um and so I I would again if this motion fails then you'll have to come up with a different motion um to attempt to move forward. So we have if we don't if we don't act as a planning commission then the the plat is approved by right. So we have to have

I'm going to second the motion so that we can uh uh take a vote. Um, I like the variances uh to state because they work or they're working right now without a lot of other issues. Um, so if we're not able to just put this off for 30 days, then my second is because I agree with 4 through eight.

Okay. So, we have a motion to approve granting variances for conditions that are listed on 4 through 8. Um, and a second. So, I'll uh open it up for a vote now. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Okay. So motion passes and it is approved subject to conditions one two three and nine and 10. Right.

It's going to be crazy. All right. So, um I'm going to go ahead and move on to the next uh plat in our agenda. It is RP25-15 Koncho River Estates. A request for first replplat of 1.533 acres in section in track 7 KO River Estates located at 2991 Crystal Road with variance request for the block length, increasing road width and installation of curb and gutter. Right. Good morning. It is good morning, I believe. Barely.

Ray Linbury, lead planner. And this is the Contra River Estates track 7. Um, so it was originally platted. Use this pointer. Um, as this line all the way over to this one as one lot. So, they are breaking this lot lot out to its own. So, it is a replat of 1.533 acres in a single family residential RS1. It is located at 2991 Crystalville Road, SMD3, Harry Thomas, the Glenmore neighborhood. And this is the plat. And so staff is recommending Oh, they do have a a variance request of actually they have three. Um, so the variance requests the I did not do a picture. The block length, I'm going to from Terrace Drive all the way up to Paint Rock Road is about 5,400 ft. And our block length can only be 2,000 if I remember correctly. Or is it 1,000? One or 2,000. It very much doubles what our block length allows. So there is a request to not create um a street going through through their lot from Christoville back to AES. Um that

that is the number three. Number four, um Crystal Road improvements. Um it is on a CIP plan. While it's not currently funded, um staff does believe that only widening the street in that little 80 foot would would cause a little bit more of a safety issue. And the curbon gutter also along would only be an 80 ft of curbon gutter. Um and then the taxert and sidewalk are the other conditions, but staff is recommending approval of all three variances and the plat.

Okay, thank you. Anybody have any questions for Ray? All right, I'll open up public comment. Russell with SKG would ask for your approval as presented with the variances requested. Happy to answer any questions. Anybody have any questions for Russell? Nope. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. I'll go and close public comment and open it up for discussion or vote. A motion to approve is presented, including the three variances uh stated by Ray. Second. Okay. So, have a motion by Britney, a second by Lyndon. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed?

Thank you. And now moving into rightway and alley abandonments. City council has final authority for approval of abandonments. First case is ROW25-02 47th and Crockett. A request to abandon the alleyway north of the intersection of 47th and Crockett Street and abandon the dedicated portion of Bonum Street between 48th and 47th Street. Austin,

thank you. Austin Reed, senior planner. This one comes to you out of the Lake View neighborhood. It is district number two, Joseph's district. RS1 zoning for this area. Vision plan has it as neighborhood. And as you said, we have a request for approval of the abandonment of an alleyway in portion of street. uh the alleyway being that skinnier portion and then the street going where it extends north on that um side to the west. So we required to send out notice on this. We sent 24. Um as of today we received two in favor from the adjacent property owners. Did not receive any who were opposed. So on to our staff analysis. The total abandoned area measures about6 acres or 26,350 ft and includes that alleyway and a portion of Bonum Street. Um it's important to note that no portion of this abandonment has historically been improved or used for access. Um there are also no city utilities located within the area of the request. So overall we don't think the abandonment would appear to affect traffic patterns, the environment or surrounding owners um right now. With that we are recommending approval subject to three conditions of approval. Um these are pretty standard for abandonments. The first one being that payment shall be remitted for all the abandoned rideway. Second one is that they need to submit, obtain approval of and officially record a plat absorbing the abandonment. Um, as part of this plat, they will need to dedicate to the city a portion of property that currently goes over into East 47th to kind of clean it up. And then number three being um for the quick claim dee afterwards. You guys have any questions? Any questions for Austin?

Thank you, Austin. Thanks. Go ahead. Do we have any public comment? Yes. Okay, I'll go ahead and open up public comment. Erica, if there's any questions and then um David, is it Mric motive? You're good. Okay. Okay. Then I'll go ahead and close public comment and open up for discussion or vote. I make a motion to approve as presented. Second. Okay. Have a motion by Liz and a second by Lyndon. Um all in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? All right, that one passes. All right. Next uh rightway, an alleyway abandonment case is RO2503, 528 Beck Street. a request to abandon the alleyway that goes through the middle of the lot and a portion of the rideway along Beck Street at 528 VE Street. Ray.

Okay. Good morning, Ray Lime, lead planner. Um, this is 528 VE Street. It is in the Pauland neighborhood, District 3, Harry Thomas. It is zoned RS1 single family. Um, the vision plan is transitional and this is a request to abandon the alleyway that goes right through these this lot right here. And then this portion of Ve Street. I have better pictures, but this was kind of just an overhead image. We did mail out 12 notices. Um, we actually received one in favor this morning. It was 6:25 and zero opposed. So, looking at it, um, we have it's about 1333 square ft of alleyway that goes between the lots and then it's about 1397 square ft there in the front of Ve Street. um the portion of the abandonment there is no there is no roadway or improvements through the alleyway. Um in fact I'm going to go back one picture. I don't know if you can see but his fence is actually right here already. So this has already been functioning as part of his yard. Um there are no city services in that alleyway or the street frontage. um it doesn't appear to affect any traffic patterns or environment. So with that, staff is recommending approval um with the idea that they purchase the owner purchases what we abandon and then um provides a quick claim deed and replats it into his property.

That is there any questions? No questions. Thank you, Ray. We have any public comment on this one? Erica, if you have any questions? Okay. Anybody have any questions? Okay. Go ahead and close public comment and open up for discussion for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve as the city presented. Second. Okay. Motion by Lyndon and second by Britney to approve as presented. All in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? All right. Moving on to conditional uses. The planning commission has final authority for approval of conditional uses. Appeals may be directed to the city council. Uh case number one, CU25-12 320 West Avenue O. A request for conditional use to allow household living in a neighborhood commercial CN zoning district. Aaron.

Thank you, Chairman. Aaron Benoy, director of planning development services. This morning, we've got this conditional use to allow household uh living in a neighborhood commercial area. Uh you can see here the two lots uh are zone neighborhood commercial. They're in district 3, Mr. Harry Thomas and in the Rio Vista neighborhood. Uh you can see Avenue in Old Nickerbacher and Ben Fickland there. So is kind of an area that's just starting to begin to the neighborhood to the south, but it is still got some commercial activities uh to the north. Um, but we are looking at this and saying, "All right, well, what would be the appropriate use for is it residential or commercial?" Uh, we did send out the notices. We did have four in favor and three opposed. And I may turn to my colleagues to say, do we know why they were opposed? What did they say?

They just checked the box.

They just checked the box. So, there are there is some opposition. Um, not exactly sure why. Um, but you can see there are significant residences as you come south. I mean, there are residences in through this area. Of course, to the north is the commercial area. I believe that's a commercial structure. I think that's barbecue. Um, and then some other restaurant areas in there. Their proposal is to do uh single family houses. Uh, two of them, one on each lot. You can see the floor plan there. uh a fairly uh modest house but total under roof is 1,700 but actually heated is around 12 uh42 I think. Uh so not not a huge house but still something that works for some families that still may need u a couple of bedrooms and and things like that. Staff recommendation um is to approval of this um request for conditional use for household living. Neighborhood commercial is very compatible with neighborhood living. They are going to conform it with single family residential setbacks. Um we would not have access on um the Ben Fickland Road. They will actually have access on uh West Avenue O and then just obtain the required permits and inspections as they bu construct the house. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Is there a reason why we're doing conditional use and it like do we have the um zoning a picture of the zoning down?

I don't see the zoning up here, but I know that these are just neighborhood commercial I think believe to that lot there and then I want to say the rest is is it RS2 or RS1? RS1 just with the rest of the the map cleanup that we've been working on. I just wasn't sure why. Yeah. And about two years ago, they came in and reszoned this to neighborhood commercial uh away from the residential. And now I think they're they're either have sold it or proposing to sell it to somebody that does want to do housing there.

Um we think it's a good use of the lots to start getting them they are kind of like infill lots to us and getting them used in some way is is better than staying vacant. The reason for the conditional use it's a shorter process than a re full reszoning. they would have to wait the full kind of three months to go through. Um, neighborhood commercial is very compatible with residential and so that's why we believe this will will work and they are going to be they are doing the single family housing there which is very compatible with the rest of it instead of multif family housing. Perfect. Thanks Aaron.

Can you go back to the conditions for a second? Um so we would request the in your motion um condition number one to say single family residential and all not just setbacks. Um one of the ones in opposition are afraid that they'll put a manufactured home there. So if we make that single family residential completely as the condition rather than just setbacks. Okay. Perfect. Okay. Am I going to make a motion? Okay. All right. Do we have to close?

Um, anybody have any more questions for Aaron or staff? Okay. Thank you. And do we have any public comment? Okay. So, we'll go ahead and close public comment and open it up for discussion or a motion. Make a motion to approve as presented by staff. And on item number one, specify that the lots will be used as single family residents. Second.

Okay. So, have a motion and a second to approve as presented with clarification that it'd be subject to uh the requirements of 14 SFR. Uh I'll go ahead and take a vote. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Next conditional use case is uh CU we on 13. Yes.

Yes. CU 2513 218 West 27th Street. Uh request for conditional use to allow household living in a general commercial heavy commercial CGCH zoning district. Karen.

Thank you chairman. Again, this is going to be a conditional use to allow uh residential or household living in a commercial zone. This actually is I would say a renewal, but it but it's really not a renewal. They did receive a conditional use for this in the past. It expired. They were not able to move forward at the time as they had a utility uh some infrastructure to take care of first. Uh now they've come back uh for these three lots there on 27th. It is zoned currently general uh commercial, heavy commercial. You can see some of the properties to the to the north of there. Um, but you also see some residential in those that area as well. This is kind of a mixeduse development area. This is District 4, Mr. Patrick Keelley in the Reagan neighborhood. So, we did send out uh 30 notices. Uh, did receive lots in favor. Um, I know this has been looked at as residential in the past and we believe that's the reason why they're ready for something to move forward there. anytime you add more residences, um it can be a a positive for that little little portion of the neighborhood. Some of the site plan that they're doing, uh you can see the small uh house that they're going to put on each one of the lots uh where they have the sewer easement uh to allow this to move forward. They'd still have the driveway there uh onto the 27th Street. Again, this is uh a conditional use for household living. Um again we recommend approval for that and uh we have uh placed on the on the conditions just to generally follow the single family residential setbacks and the applicant apply for the uh required permits and inspections. With that I'll be happy to answer any questions. Anybody have any questions for Aaron or staff?

Okay. So I'll go and open up public comment. The applicant is here if you have any questions. Okay. Anybody have any questions for the applicant? Okay, we'll go ahead and close public comment then and open it up for discussion or motion. Make a motion to approve as presented by staff. Second. Okay, have a motion by Britney and a second by Candy. Um, all in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. Moving on to CU 2514 68 and 10 East 28th Street request for conditional use to allow household living in general commercial heavy commercial CGCH zoning district. Ray,

good morning. Ray Limeberries, lead planner. Um again, this is a request for residential living in a commercial zone. It is zoned general commercial heavy commercial um district 4, Patrick Keley, Reagan neighborhood. Um, as you notice, this might look a little familiar. We just had a resoning case with these three lots right here to change it to general commercial instead of the CGCH. Um, and now we are talking about these three lots back here. Um, they would like to build houses on them. Um, we did mail out 27 notices. We received one in favor. Um, and I do believe we received one in opposition over the weekend, and I'm trying to remember which one it was. I want to say it was over here. Um, but they did not say why. They just checked the box. So with that, staff is recommending approval um with the conditions that they do um the single family residential setbacks and obtain any building permits within 12 months. Um we did not receive a site plan as of yet. The applicants are still working on what will fit. The there is a possibility that that one lot right here, the closest one might need a variance. Um they're they're looking to see what would fit. It's just a a tiny bit smaller. I think it's like 48 ft instead of 50 ft. So I do not have a floor plan to show you, but they are working on it.

Okay. Anybody have any questions for Ray? All right. Well, the other properties on 27th Street that that was some residences. Yes, there are. It is. There are residences over here. The these are residences. Actually, this one is I want to say this one's a house also. Um and then across the street. Thank you. Okay. Go ahead and open up public comment if there is any. Yes.

Sarah, I'm sorry. Wait a minute. That's the wrong one. Okay. So, we'll close public comment and open it up for discussion or a motion. Make a motion to approve. Have a motion by Liz and second by Candy. All in favor say I. I.

I. All right. Motion passes. Next case is CU 2515 2321 Armstrong Street. a request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow a church to construct a new building for youth services in an area adjacent to their main building located at 2321 Armstrong Street. Austin, thank you. Austin Reed, senior planner. This one comes to you out of the Reagan neighborhood. It is district number four, Patrick Healey's district. The vision plan for this is neighborhood center. It is about.16 acres and as you mentioned, we have a request for conditional use for a church youth building. Um, I will specify the area of the conditional use is just this red box. Some of the maps on the next couple pages are going to show a bigger red box. That's because it's technically one property right now. So, we sent out 15 notices, did not receive any support, received one who was opposed, and I don't think they listed any reasoning. And then here's a look at the zoning map. As you can see, it's pretty much just all RS1. So, on to our staff analysis. This entire block fa block face is actually owned by the church and it more or less functions as part of the church right now. Um they are now looking to expand with the church youth group building um which is it's on their property but it's technically a separately platted lot. So we have to get the land use permitted through this conditional use. Um we don't think that allowing as much would negatively impact the neighboring property because it's not really a large change for the area and it is sort of a lower intensity and there should be no adverse effects on the natural environment either. Here's a look at their concept site plan. Um, as you can see, it's kind of next to what I guess is their parsonage building, and they're they are installing the new parking required for the building. And I think the building's about 2400 square ft. So, with that, we are recommending approval subject to three conditions. First one being for all the necessary building permits. Second one being for

the installation and maintenance of privacy screening where necessary. And then number three being that they um shield downward any exterior lighting. You guys have any questions? Anybody have any questions for staff? All right. Thank you, Austin. Thanks. We'll uh open up public comment. Okay. We'll close public comment and open up for discussion or a motion. Make a motion to approve as presented by staff. Second. Okay. Have a motion by Britney and second by Lyndon. Um all in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes and we'll move to reason.

Before we move that, can I just ask city staff a question? Am I allowed to do that, Brandon?

Okay. Okay. So, uh we've we've seen a lot of conditional use cases today that we're doing household living in I mean I understand commercial neighborhood um but in some of these heavier zoning districts. Again, my question to staff is I understand and I'm not for slowing anyone's progress down by any means. Um, but we've we've been working really hard cleaning up some zoning areas and making them make sense with what's around them. And is there a specific reason why the staff did not other than just it would take 3 months the staff to not require those like that neighborhood to be reszoned? Are we going to look at saying, "Okay, there's on this block we've got 15 residences, a couple vacant lots, and one commercial. Let's as a staff go ahead and reszone this. Um, is there a reason why we're not doing that?

Not specifically, no. We do look at that at each one of our uh applications that come in and what makes sense. Now, a couple of these happen to be within the north tiers district, right? And of course, one of those went through a reasonzoning and and partially downgraded the zoning in some of the area, right? Um, I do think that is something that we should be considering um, of how do we do that, but make it effective and make sure that we're still trying to protect our neighborhoods. What are our real corridors? Because, as many of y'all know, there's in our 2000 zoning ordinance, it really kind of just did some broad stripes around corridors and that didn't always connect the dots correctly with some properties. So, we are evaluating those areas. I would say on these we just have not had enough time to evaluate if we need to come back with a comprehensive area. Um you know the one on Avenue uh O was here's two lots. Does it make sense to come back for a full resoning for these two lots and and those kind of things. I mean I think maybe in the future possibly. Um but I think that may be to a bigger thing that I'll talk about maybe in in the director's report.

Okay. Well, and just on a side note on on some lending guidelines, when you have residential in a heavy commercial zoning, um it can pose some challenges on the lending aspect on an FHA and a VA loan. Um a lot of the time it's if it's an older and existing home, um just in the sole fact that it hasn't been utilized as a commercial entity. though it might not on some of these new builds because you do have um the builder's permit and a certificate of occupancy issued by the city, but that is going to pose potentially some issues down the line in some of these areas that we're allowing those mixed zonings.

Yes. So that's all I have. All right. Um moving on to reszoning and conference of plan amendments. City Council has final authority for approval of resonings and amendments to the comprehensive plan. Uh first case is Z2520 Jackson and Van Beern. A request for approval of a zone change from RS1 single family residential to RM1 lowrise multif family residential for the property located at 611 North Jackson and 610 North Van Beern. Ray,

good morning. Ray Limebury, lead planner. And for the final case, we have a reasonzoning. Um it is 610 North Van Beern and 611 North Jackson. It is 109 acres and 075 acres. Um the request is to reszone from RS1 to RM1. Um RM1 would allow a zero lot line single family home um without a variance request. As you can see, the the lots are a little bit smaller andor at an angle. Um, so it would allow a single family home to go there without any variance requests. Uh, district 4, Patrick Keley in the central neighborhood. Um, this is the vision plan is neighborhood and it is zoned RS1. Um, so changing it to RM1, it'll be right along the frontage road. This is the layout for Van Beern. Um, the home that they have planned. As you notice, like I said, zero lot line um, right along the property there. The driveway will be off of the alley and then it will front Van Beern and then Jackson. Um, again, the driveway will be off of the alleyway. It'll front Jackson and it'll be a zero lot line home. Um, on the lot line closest to the frontage road. We mailed out 16 notices. We did receive one in opposition. Um, they did not want an RM1. Um, they mentioned they wanted a neighborhood, not rental properties. So it will allow for the development of currently vacant lots. Those have been vacant for quite a while. Um the

uh text dot kind of made them a weird shape, weird angle um when they used some of the rideway for the frontage road. So we feel this will meet the development pattern of the residential area and it'll allow them to meet all the setbacks um that are required without any variances. Um so the proposed zoning while normally is multifamily it is using it for the zero lot line single family. So with that staff is recommending approval for both those lots to be reszoned as RM1. What what is the what is allowed um other than the zero lot line? Um I guess as far as elevation in the RM1 zoning,

is it twotory? It is two story and no more. Correct. All of our residential zoning is allows two and a half stories or 35 ft in height. Okay. Anybody have any other questions for staff? Thank you, Ray. We have public comment now. We have Sarah Schulz.

Sounds like it's going to get approved whether I like it or not, but I'll go ahead and Sarah Schulz. I'm a resident on uh 624 North Jackson. The questions that I have, especially with the zero lot line, is there going to be a wall along there or is the house just going to sit up next to the curb? So, there still is a standard setback even though it's a zero lot line. It just allows the the builder in this case to to move the home a little more forward on the lot. So, and then it's going to be on the side. So, if we're looking at Shiloh, the exterior of the residence is going to be on that property line.

They're five foot minimum set back on the side still. With a zero lot line, they can be right on the property line. Um, so it's going to be on this property line over here. There's still I want to say about 8 ft of right away um between the curb and the property line. So, there's not going to be a wall, but there's going to be a house wall. Correct. Okay. So, if I come out of Jackson Street and try to turn on to Shiloh, am I going to be able to see around that house? Yes. You still have a roughly 8 foot sighteline visibility.

Okay. Um my biggest concern is I don't know who's going to own these houses. I know who's building them and um but I don't know what the plan is. I don't know if they're going to be HUD houses or if they're going to be rental houses. I wouldn't be opposed if two families come in and buy those houses. That would fit more with the neighborhood, but we already have so much rental property around there, which really lowers the value of my house. Um which is good for tax purposes, but Um, I would really rather have somebody that is actually going to be a part of the neighborhood, not somebody that's moving in and out all the time. Um, I think you said that it could not be more than two stories,

two and a half, but these are planned to be just a single story, I assume. Yes. Okay. Um, Ray, are you sure because of how narrow that lot is, are you sure it's not um bedrooms on the secondary? I mean, that's not something we can control as part of the zoning anyways. We can't hold them to anything. I just didn't know if he submitted plans with it. Well, I I've got a copy of the plans, but I can't tell if it's true story or not. Yeah, I'm going to say I believe could be wrong but that's pretty narrow. That is narrow. I would imagine that's probably two story as well. Okay.

But he also has 12,200 square foot over off Gfield too. So I mean very well could be a 22. So not here nor there but

will the alleyway be in improved in any way for those driveways? I mean the alley is not very large. That would be something that our public works would advise on they once they apply for their building permits usually. I can't I'm not going to speak for them, but usually they would require improvement of the alleyway and I know the developer is aware of that. Um so I believe that's their plan, but I'm not 100% sure. But that's usually something when the permit comes across they would be required. It's nothing to do with the zoning. We and we could not condition the zoning on anything. Okay. Um, and so any of these development questions staff are happy to answer uh after this if there's further development questions.

Okay. Can uh are they going to be able to go out either end of the alley? Are they going to I would say just like today it would function an alley would function the same way as it is today. Okay. But there's no traffic in it right now. Correct. If somebody comes there, they're going to be able to go out either way. Yeah. We would not be able to put a a regulation on that.

Okay. I'm opposed just mainly because I don't want more rent property and I know that another gentleman is here, but he didn't get a chance to sign up to speak, but he went through the neighborhood and um got people to sign a petition. I don't know how many you got signed. 21 that we're against or for that we're against that we're opposed to this uh new reasoning structure and also we need to you'll have to come up to the front

come up but the chair has to allow that if it's not set up so um go ahead if you would state your name and your address Luke Green um I'm uh operating on behalf of the property owner of 615 North Jackson and on that I don't know how but 611 is encroaching on the 615 property line there on the map itself. Yeah, that's uh it looks like that I guess in the in the overhead view. I mean obviously that's not a survey, but that's something that's going to have to be resolved obviously before they can do anything on that property.

Again, that will be through the building permit process for the site plan review to go through. This is again just a resoning to determine if that's the right zoning for the property. Um, currently they've been vacant for quite a while and this is one option to get them to be have some occupancy on those properties, right? But if you physically go out and check out the properties, you can see where it's just so narrow. I I can only see expanding upwards and evidently if you're locked out at two stories, I don't think uh I don't think it's even a good idea to start building out there. No. Also in opposition to make that clear. So, do you own 615 or you? Uh, my father does. Okay. Okay.

For Bulldog Development in Mojo Verde. Okay. There's also a brand new family. Well, a family who lives at 6:15 who just had a new child. You know, I don't want to have construction literally right next to them. So, are they running? Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you'all for being here. What could I do with my signature? I just You can leave them here. Yeah, that's Thank you. Do we have any other public comment, Ray? No. Okay. So, we're going to close public comment. Does anybody have any more any questions for staff or

I mean, I think just addressing the public and thank you both for for being here. Um, you know, obviously development's a huge part of the city and and taxable revenue. And that's not the only thing that we look at. We definitely look at, you know, the components of a neighborhood and although our decisions up here can be seem quite quick, you know, we do get all this information prior to this, a lot of us drive by the sites, make sure things look right and make sense u before we actually sit down today and make these decisions. Um, with that being said, you know, we, you know, the builder, the developer, um, you know, we can't control after the fact if he decides to sell it to an investor to rent it or if he sells it to a a nice sweet couple. Um, you know, that that unfortunately is out of our control. We can only look at the here and now on um the lot and what the intended purpose is and does that make sense within the neighborhood. And um you know, in general, when bringing in new construction into an existing neighborhood tends to increase property value across the board because once there's new structures, a lot of the time it will have um you know, other people will take more pride in their lawn or paint their exterior. Um and it really does help in general improve a neighborhood. So, with that being said, I am going to um vote on this and uh vote in favor of the staff.

Okay. So, I have a motion to approve as presented. Is there any discussion or u a second? I second. Okay. So, I have a motion by Britney, second by Liz. Um all in favor, please say I. I. I. Any opposed? All right, passes 5-0. All right, so that was our last case for the day and that will move on to planning director's report.

Thank you, chairman. And I'll try to be very brief. I just wanted to mention a couple of things. Uh that we have actually had some promotions within our planning department. Um, as you heard Rey mention, she is our lead planner and so she is uh been promoted to that from senior planner. Uh, Austin Reed has also been promoted from a planner to a senior planner. And then Karen Putnham is no longer a planning tech. She has now been promoted to a full planner. So, we're very excited about them. And of course, we still have Ardan who's eight weeks, nine weeks, something like that. So, we're very excited that Ardan's with us as a a a planning tech. We also will be having a planning intern this fall that will help us with some of these things uh that Miss Davis was talking about about how can we get some things cleaned up and really evaluating some of our mapping and and some things like that. Uh the last thing I want to mention is that it does appear the city council is moving forward with funding for a comprehensive plan update. Um which is very needed. As y'all know, our comprehensive plan is from uh 2003. Has had some minor updates, but I think that's going to give this planning commission as well as our community the opportunity to say, what do we want to be in in 2050? Where do we want our community to grow and how? What type of housing do we need? What type of transportation systems do we need? Do we need all the roadways classified the way they are today, or do we need to change some of those classifications? Uh, how is our land development subdivision ordinance working? Is it working the way that developers need it to keep affordability? Is it still maintaining what the city needs to do for services, for infrastructure, those types of things? So, we're very excited about that. It'll take us about 18 months to get through that process. We will have multiple town halls uh in multiple neighborhoods throughout the city. Uh we

will have planning commissioners involved with that. We will be asking city council to put together a steering committee to work with the consultants that ultimately will help us work through this process. Uh and so I just want to say we're very excited about that as city staff trying to help figure out what is St. Angelo going to be in 25 years is is really important. We got to make sure that we get it right focused on financial accountability, focused on what does our community really want. So we're very excited about that. So with that, I don't have anything else. chairman. All right. Thank you, Aaron. And congratulations to everybody. You guys have all been working very hard. We appreciate you.

Uh the next regular meeting of the planning commission is scheduled to begin on Monday, September 15th at 9 a.m. in this room right here. Um so with that, I think that's all of our business and I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. Make a motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? I I Thank you all. Thank you.