Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

All right, it is 6 o'clock. I'll go ahead and call the November 5th meeting of the shirts uh planning and zoning commission to order. Tonight we have Miss Judy Goolick joining us as an alternate member. Uh we will go ahead and move into the hearing of residents. Do we have folks signed up to speak? Yeah. Okay, get the list. Uh just a quick to everyone, you'll have three minutes when you come up if you'll please state your name and address. You'll also, if you didn't sign up now, you'll have an opportunity opportunity to speak during the public hearing um here in a moment. Um we'll go ahead and start with Mike Kirby. You're going to wait. Okay, perfect. Uh Robert Weold,

I'm sorry. Got it now. Everybody knows that.

Oh yeah. My name is Robert Wagle. They've been here since 1972. My wife and I, my wife birthe it right back there. And when we moved in initially, a house was a duplex. I'm at 302 Rand, the corner exchange. And my house was a duplex. And I was told you cannot have a duplex anymore because it's zoned for single family. Now that was in 72. Now we're in 25 and uh I'm all for expansion in business, but not so close to my house. And next door in that vacant lot was well really u Jim Brown was the uh shop teacher at Samuel Clemens. That's where he they lived. And [snorts] I would look at his house and my goodness, you have no room. It's deep, but it's narrow. So, it only made sense. It was for sale at the time for $5,000. And I said, "I'll take it." Well, he had first dibs on it, which made sense. I couldn't complain about that because what were I going to do with that depth? I only needed 100. Like, my house is 100 by 125. So he I don't know how wide his house is, but it's it's narrow, but it was deep, but he had no place to park. So to me, the only one that benefits from it is either 302 Randolph 304 or 306 or uh next to me, behind me, where Jim Brown used to live at 604 or 606. I don't know what the address is, but it's sitting right behind us, the lot next next to the empty lot. And uh that only made sense to me that either one and four people would benefit. Now if someone was to go in and do something

else to it was 65 ft of width. I don't know what you could do with 65 ft of width uh business-wise and have parking. I don't I don't understand what you could do with that. So didn't make any sense to me. But that's basically the reason I'm here. I don't I don't really understand what's going on and or the why a business because it says Main Street, but I know Main Street's a block away, but I couldn't have a duplex. And now I'm hearing somebody wants to do a duplex or triplex. I don't know. Where's the parking? Where's the people? What are they going to do? What kind of what kind of problem we're going to have with multifamilies and in the 65 ft width? I I don't understand that. But basically that's what I wanted to just talk about that and as you present what's going to happen then I'll say something a little later on. But thank you.

Thank you sir. Uh Mr. Rios Francisco Rios come on up sir if you'll please state your name and address. You have three minutes. My name is Francisco Rios 304 Randolph here in shirts and uh I owned that house since 1977 and it's always been a residential area and I'm to I totally um I I totally don't want something like that around that area where my children everybody grew up there at my home there. And um I never knew they would they had a small piece of property of 38 uh acres on there, whatever they call it, but I'm totally against that really. And uh I really don't think it's a very good idea to do something like that, you know. And uh I live there and my kids live there and and it's going to really cause a lot of you know if you if anybody puts it I heard that they're going to have a duplex or a housing built back there and it's really going to cause a lot of problems like that there that area there. But I'm totally against it and that's all I got to say. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir. All right. Um, Harold, I'm sorry. Oh, good. Glory. Okay.

Hi, my name is Harold Gloria. I live at 605 Exchange. So, I'm I'm new to the community. Um, I've already joined the Love Where You Live, you know, your neighbors. Uh, I feel like putting a business right next to me is like y'all not loving me as a neighbor. You know, I came to this city, you know, uh, uh, to to start over to to bring my kids here. And, uh, it's not an empty lot. It's it's gated around my property as well. So, it's it's it feels like one with my property. It's not just some empty lot that's, you know, wasn't taken care of. May have been before, but I I did give it a facelift, you know, uh, on me, of course, uh, for the kids. We have five kids, you know, that run around and um I feel like it it wouldn't be a right thing to, you know, you got to keep Main Street business on Main Street business. This is exchange. I understand across the street is and that's far enough, you know. Um but yeah, I I fairly new here and I feel like it wouldn't be right to turn it commercial, you know? It wouldn't be right for me to want to sell my home because I have a business next to me when I just got here, you know? So, thank you all for y'all's time. You have a good one.

Thank you, sir. Um, I'm sorry I can't read your name. Uh, the person from 1111 North Walnut potentially. Did you want to speak after?

Okay, perfect. Thank you, sir. Uh, Stephen Berdett. Good evening. Stephen Berdette, 608 Exchange Avenue. I just want to reiterate what most everybody else has already said. I don't see any reasoning behind us needing a commercial. I don't even know exactly what it is the property is is that they're trying to do with it. I have heard that it was they wanted done for commercial, but basically for multifamily. Is that is that what I'm hearing correctly? Uh we will get into it more when the item is heard. I'm I'm not sure what the request is either.

So the the staff is going to present the item here in a minute after the hearing. Might have been better for us to hear what that is before we spoke. You'll get another opportunity to speak here in a minute. Well, then I guess I'm done for now until I hear exactly what the plans are. Thank you, sir. But but I'm against it at this point. Okay. That was everyone signed up for the hearing of residents. Like I said, there will be another opportunity to speak after staff's presentation here in a moment. All right, we will go ahead and move on to the consent agenda. Commissioners, we're considering the minutes for the October 1st meeting. Any comments, questions, motions. I told nothing. You read it.

Make a motion to approve the consent agenda.

Second. That is a motion by Commissioner Hector to recommend approve or to approve the minutes of the October 1st uh meeting. Second by Commissioner Carbone. If there's no other comments, please record your vote. I have seven votes. Can we publish that, please? That motion carries. All right, we'll move on to the public hearing portion of our agenda. Item A, PLZC 20250232. to hold a public hearing and make a recommendation on a request to reszone approximately 0.37 acres of land from single family residential district R2 to Main Street Mixed Use District MSMU located at 603 Exchange Avenue approximately 200 feet 200 feet east of the intersection of Rolph Avenue and Exchange Avenue more specifically known as Guadalupe County parcel identification number 67458 city shirts Guadalupe County Texas William

Good evening commission plc 2025 is 0232 a reszone request for 0.37 acres of land to Main Street Mixed Use District MSMU William Willingham Planner. For your orientation, this is the subject property's aerial view. You can see it highlighted in yellow. The property is 37 acres of unplatted land. It is surrounded by residential uses zoned R2 and it is fronting Exchange Avenue right here. notification for the property. 29 public notices were sent out on October 21st, 2025. As of today, one was received in favor and as of just now, I received nine in opposition. A public hearing notice is to be published in the San Antonio Express prior to the city council hearing. SCUISTD was notified of the zone change request and a notification sign was placed on the property by the applicant. So here just another look of the zone change request. You can see here this area is either R2 or MSMU already located around the area. For some background on the zoning and land use, zoning is outlined in UDC section 2155 and specifically here for Main Street mixeduse district in purpose and intent of residential districts. The Main Street mixeduse district is intended for the area along Main Street and it allows for single family, multif family residential uses and low inensity commercial uses. And so I've shown this picture here just to show some of the properties that are already zoned MSMU located on Exchange Avenue. So you can see this structure here, this home here, this apartment building here, and this business associated with the psychology clinic here. The main street mixeduse land use

designation is was a was adopted with the comprehensive land plan in 2024. So it's specific to the historic main street corridor. So you can see here outlined in purple. This is the historic main street designation per the comprehensive land plan. It is intended for commercial, residential, cultural and entertainment spaces to create a dynamic urban core and to improve that pedestrian experience. And the intent of this designation is to be utilized as a concept to expand beyond the historic main street area. So just once again, this is the area outlined in purple. And you can see here, this is the current zoning map and this is the subject property located here. You can see all these properties that are currently zoned MSMU here. And then everything that is kind of in this brighter area is within the main street designation. You can also see the property located here just for context. And just as a reference once again, this was adopted in April 2024. So the site in context, you can see here once again, this is a zone change request. The MSMU and R2 districts located around this area. You can see in this aerial view that this property is currently vacant. It is surrounded by residential uses. Once again, here's another view from the street view. And then here's what it looks like across the street from the property. So permitted uses and dimensional requirements. The existing zone is currently R2 single family residential and the proposed zone is Main Street mixed use MSMU. So I won't get too into the permitted uses here because I'll get into it on the next slide. Um but just to see here that you can see that single family residential is primarily restricted to just single family residential whereas there are some more uses in the MSMU district. Uh the dimen dimensional requirements are also a little different here. You can see that the R2 zoning district requires an area of 8,400 square ft whereas over here in the MSMU it's 5,000. So a bit smaller

for the lot areas. Same with the width and depth requirements. So in an R2 zone the property must be 70 ftx 120 ft whereas in the MSMU district it is 50x 100. You can also see this reflected in the setbacks of the properties as the properties in MSMU are specific for smaller lots. So you can see the front setbacks, side setbacks, and rear setbacks all decrease from R2 to MSMU. However, to do keep in mind that the height restrictions are the same within both both districts. So you can have a building up to 35 ft in R2 and you can have a building up to 35 ft in MSMU. [snorts] And as a reflection of the smaller lots, you can see that the impervious coverage requirements do change. So the minimum or the maximum, excuse me, for R2 is 50% whereas for MSMU it is 80%. So getting into the permitted uses here, I'll kind of run through these a little quickly, but I'll also pause and definitely come back to this slide as needed. Um, you can see highlighted or excuse me, bolded and italicized within the within both permitted use tables. You can see which ones are the same and which ones differ. So the same ones being an accessory building, residential, municipal offices, family dwelling, one family dwelling, a park or playground or a school. So these are the ones that overlap in MSMU. What can be added into this uh permitted use would be for example a beauty salon or barber, a bookstore, a dance hall, a daycare center, a micro brewery, a print shop, a two family dwelling. And so once again, just to highlight what Exchange Avenue looks like at this time, specifically in regards to MSMU, you can see highlighted here, this is 204 Randolph. This is currently the site of a psychology clinic, and you can see that it actually fronts onto Exchange Avenue at the corner of Randolph Avenue.

This is 219 Main Street located here. This building specifically is located in the rear, which is fronting Exchange Avenue and Williams Avenue. Um, as far as I'm aware, it is doing business as some kind of gymnastics dance studio. This is 704 Exchange. This is a property that exists as residential, but it is zoned MSMU. And then this is 805 Maine, which I believe used to be a historic hospital. It is now existing as a multif family dwelling. So, UDC section 2154D outlines criteria appro for approval. So the first being whether the proposed zoning district implements the policies of the adopted adopted comprehensive land plan or any other applicable plans. So as I mentioned before the main street designation is intended for commercial residential and entertainment spaces to create a dynamic urban core and promote a pedest pedestrian experience. And just as a reminder once again this designation was updated in April of 2024. The main street mixeduse district is a base zoning district which is intended to be used along main street area to allow for single family, multif family or low inensity commercial uses. The comprehensive land plan is a guiding document for the longrange vision of shirts and the requested zone change does implement the policies of the adopted comprehensive land plan. Two, whether the proposed zoning change promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the city. As part of promoting health, safety, and welfare, the city should encourage development compatible with surrounding uses utilizing standards and transitional uses to alleviate negative impacts. So, the main street mixed use the main street land use designation is characterized by a variety of land uses and the MSMU district is reserved for exclusive use within this designation. So, you wouldn't find it anywhere else in the city. And this also supports the development for complete communities which are

walkable and diverse with h with diverse housing types and land uses which is a goal that is established in the comprehensive land plan. And so once again you can see here these are some of the properties on exchange avenue. Three, whether the uses permitted by the proposed change will be consistent and appropriate with the existing air uses in the immediate area. So once again, this is here is the zone change request. What is currently existing out here versus what would what it'll look like if the zone is approved. And these are just a handful of the permitted uses. So the subject property and surrounding area is characterized by residential or low inensity commercial businesses. And the subject property is undeveloped and adjacent to residential uses on small lots. Four, whether other factors are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of the request. So all UDC requirements have been met for the proposed zone change. SCUCISTD has been notified of the request. The shirts fire, EMS, and police departments have been notified of the zone change request and have not provided any specific concerns related to the request. Shirts engineering has also conducted a review of the zone change and has determined that the traffic impact of the zone change would be negligible to the city's transportation system. So recommendation our staff recommendation due to the variety of land uses in the area the expansion of the permitted uses to match the character of the area and the implementation of the goals outlined in the comprehensive land plan which was adopted in 2024. Staff is recommending approval of PLZC 2025232 and the applicant is here. I believe you would like to speak. This is my translator. I'm deaf so [laughter] I can hear most of it but not everything. Um, thank you commissioners for giving

us the opportunity to speak on it. Just a little background to be brief. I'm Lee Edwards, 1111 North Walnut Avenue in the Bron Falls, Texas, and I'm a former member of planning and zoning in uh the Bron Falls. So, I'm familiar with your processes. Um we put this property on the market for sale. I had recommended that we get a zoning. He the owner, Mr. Kirby, uh we originally were looking at um a duplex um style of zoning. After talking to the planning department, they recommended because of the comprehensive plan to go to MU. Uh we agreed with that. We usually find that if we follow the guidance of your comprehensive plan and the planning staff that we will uh be able to do something well. We anticipate from our research that we're either going to get somebody that would build small multif family within the confines of the setbacks and the requirements or a small local office. Uh based upon the businesses we saw down there, we would see that that would one of those two would probably be most appropriate. they fit with inside your comprehensive plan and that's why we presented in the manner which we have and we thank you for your consideration.

All right. Thank you sir. So this is a public hearing so we'll go ahead and open it up to public comment. Um again you'll have three minutes. Uh we cannot answer questions so please don't phrase things as a question. Um if you do ask questions we'll write them down and try to get answers after the fact but we can't respond to comments. So, um, just kind of one at a time. If you want to talk, now is your opportunity. It is 6:20 and we will open it up for public comment. Yeah. Come on up. And if you'll just state your name and address for the record, please.

I'm Bertha Wold and I live at 302 Randolph Avenue. It's on the corner of Randolph and Exchange. Okay. Okay. Um, I saw something out there of safety and traffic and general welfare. We went through this when Main Street bar, all the bars that are on the next corner, kind of corner from us. So, we're on a corner and then the house across the street became a business with counseling. All of the part all those people park right in front of our house on the side on exchange. We have people from the bar coming and they're either walking across our yard or coming in the car and the we have a new neighbor with children. Our children are gone. But that is our retirement home. We've been here 50ome years. Is this good for us or is it just only good for the city? We've been there. The whole side of that street and behind us is all residential. Why are we changing it now when it affects us as we're older now? Why is that? So that's not I'm sorry that's the question, but I didn't mean it to be a question.

Yeah, that that's okay. But I I just want you to understand, I don't think anybody would like no matter whether one of those businesses would come in, if if y'all would take a drive down the street all the way down where it meets shirts, there's apartments there and there's a house that usually is rented. Sometimes you can't even drive through both cars because there's so many cars parked on there. And that's what happens when you have a business. They don't there's not just one car. There's several cars and they're going to park right in along the streets or part or get in the way of the the traffic. That's not a very wide street. We we have a several years ago when y'all put the the um the walkways the handicap walkways and they used our corner to put the dirt and come back and forth with their truck. So some of our curbing on both sides of the street, not just there on ours, on both needs has been needed to be done forever and that hasn't been addressed. But now we're wanting to build something over here that's going to create more problems in that street as far as we're concerned. Thank you.

And and I'm Bob Wagle again. As my wife says, she brought up about the the curbing. We did have a curb put in some years back because one of the gentlemen used to sign checks for y'all. Mr. Janak, he he talked to somebody. They come over and they they fixed the curb. Well, as she says, when they did the the improvement for the handicap ramps that that was great and I have a little bit wider when I walk in the morning, I have a wider I like that especially on what you did on Curtis, the wide sidewalks. That's great. And I had to be on out in the street. And uh as she also mentioned the parking now, we do have I was always told that businesses are supposed to have parking, ample parking, not necessarily on the on the street or at least for their employees. They should be able to do that. And that's the problem with the to me it appears that's the problem with the business across the street, the uh counseling. And they have a big parking lot, but even the people that come there can't park there just for it's just there for the employees is my understanding is what I was told. Anyway, that that is it's always been an issue. And uh Oh, there was some Oh, I've noticed on the setback he's talking about. He said it was 70 ft. I've measured it twice. I get 65, but I'm not I'm not terrible with measurement. I'm getting old, but I can still measure. But if it's 60 or if it's 70s, I'll say it's 70 to 70. It's still if it's a business that's 5T on both sides from what my understanding, if it's not a business that's 10 ft. So there still limits putting something there that's 60 feet wide and so many feet deep. I don't care how deep it

goes, but still it will still be a problem parking to me. And then the noise I I didn't mind business come in. I've never liked the bar coming in cuz I tell there goes that boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom. I get tired of that. I've called the I've never had a problem with the police department. Anytime I call and I've called them a couple times, just a couple times and it stops immediately within five minutes. I don't hear I don't hear the noise. I can go to sleep. The other problem is during the day at that corner there's no parking on the whole length of Avenue. No parking. Y'all go over there sometime and see how many cars park at the corner on. And a friend of mine wants to call all the time. I don't do that. I I won't do that. I won't call for the parking. But it is a problem. It's not a problem on random because there's there's room on random but it's a bicycle lane on both sides and yet there's cars parked there daily except maybe the weekend or probably worse than the weekend. I'm not a bar hopper anymore. Quit doing that. Anyway, thanks for your consideration. I'm interested.

Anybody else want? Yep. Come on up. is the opportunity.

I think that putting that complex or whatever they're going to put put back there is going to cause a lot of problems and uh the traffic and all that as it is right now. There's a lot of traffic there with these uh uh bars that are there and created something that they park all over that place there. And with putting something like this, a business like that, it's really going to be bad for all these people around that area there where we live at 304 and and uh and I feel that way about it. And uh um I just I think this this happened before, you know, that they wanted to zone it at some other time. But but it is going to cause a lot of problems because they do park down Randolph and then having that there with all these people there and I feel that it's really not no good to put a complex there at a residential area.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anybody else? And just to confirm, your name is uh Francisco Rios, correct? Sorry. All right. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else, once, twice? It is 6:28. We'll close the public comment portion. Commissioners, questions, comments, buddy?

Go for it. I think it's important anytime we talk about growth in our city that we we discuss the numbers and we discuss the reality of where we live. Certz is going to increase by I believe 15,000 people in the next 5 years. Just put that in perspective. When they're done with that double-decker 35 expansion by the end of 27, people are going to come in drones. They're coming already and the chaos of 35 is unbearable. And if you think things are bad now, wait until that's done. Um, expansion is happening and growth is happening everywhere. And they're going to try to put houses and businesses wherever there's an open lot. And that's just the reality. And that's the truth. And if anyone's telling you otherwise, they're lying to you. Um, but we have to grow responsibly and I know that's the first thing that's coming to your mind. Um, but property owners have a lot of say on what happens to their property just like you have what got say with your property and so as long as they're doing things that meet the criteria of the unified development code that they're meeting the the criteria that we set out for the city and the growth responsibly. It's hard for us to tell a property owner you can't do something with their property. Um, and then parking on the street is just that parking on the street. It's not anybody's, it's all of ours. And when I visit a business or I visit a friend or someone comes to see me, they park on the street next to my house or across from and that's just a friendly thing to do. And we share our community. It's not ours. And so although we hear everything you guys are saying,

sometimes the hard truth is we can't get in the way of progress if it meets the vast majority of the objective that we put out as a city. I say my piece. Anybody else? No. I So I'll I got a couple questions. So the um the main street make Can you go back to the you screen, William? I'm sorry. Yeah. So I I think my biggest hangup on this is the Nope. Go one back.

Yeah. Nope. Yeah. Nope. Yes, that's it. Um is the allowance of bars. I know it's listed as tavern. Um, I I think that's my biggest hang-up on this request is I don't think it's a per it would I I understand what what the applicant is saying and this is what you know we think would happen. Um, but I I don't think that looking through this whole list, I could probably agree with everything else but that. Um, the the duplex, you know, is it's probably an appropriate place, but the the bar is definitely my biggest hang-up. We we can't limit uses like we can't say we recommend approval for everything for mat treat mix use with the limitation. No, it's all Yep. Yeah. So

I'm sorry. So just as some background, the actual addition of Tavern is relatively recent in the last twoish years. Yeah. Um with the thought of being Main Street as a whole, Main Street, the corridor, correct? Um the whole purpose behind it is to have that mix of retail, residential, commercial, and that entertainment, night life. I mean, we have um you know, Hidden Grove. I mean, I know there's a couple already there. There already ones there.

I I think my biggest uh hangup is I I don't want people living there to now find themselves in a continuous expanding like bar scene. Um and I I yeah, I think it's going to be my biggest hang-up on it is it's like I understand the intention and especially along Main Street, you could probably make the argument of it's along Main Street proper. Um, you know, I I I think I could probably get more behind it, but when you're starting to get more into the residential aspect,

um, it's that specific use that I think is my biggest hang-up. Um, everything else where you close at 6 and you're not really I mean, I don't think there was anything else on I mean, a restaurant maybe might carry on into the night a little bit, but I mean, restaurant hours realistically aren't going to carry on. I'm not sure what time Bar House is open till every night, but I'm sure it's past midnight on weekends. So, um, you know, I I think that's going to be my biggest hold up in in in approving like this. I mean, everything else is a business that would have 9 to5 type hours. Um, you know, I I don't see an antique shop keeping people up at night, but

could they could I you prove me wrong, but yeah. Um, I think that's going to be Oh, people. Okay, Miss Miss Goldick on the end. Well, I know that the city they're talking about the walkability of the area and it's our hopes that at some point that expansion does happen so that people can go and go maybe from a shop to an ery to a coffee shop and so on. Um but the applicant mentioned a duplex or a small office but if is can we put a contingency on an approval or is it as um Mr. Rocker said it's one or Wallace rather all or nothing.

Yeah. So with the straight zoning it's everything. So, like on other cases, we typically try to remind the planning and zoning commission, the applicant may say this, but you're approving all of the land uses that you see here. So, we can't do like a it's MSMU, but you can't have this and this, right? It it's all of the land uses you see. Okay. And then it being 37 acres, is there's requirements parking per square footage? I know on Main Street is that with all MSMU. So like what are the required parking spaces for [laughter] this size lot? It all depends on the square footage of the building. Correct.

So in the MSMU district, it's only going to have the two required off- streetet parking spaces. So with this specific zoning district with any of the properties, we're only going to require that they have two. After that, it's up to them to decide if they want to add more parking if that's what their business entails. Um, but we're only requiring two per the city requirement. And where would they add the additional parking if you have a five- foot setback or on either? Is it five feet on the sides and 10 back? So, the bu it's the building setback. So, I mean, as long as they have the space, right? And so, we'll evaluate that with the site plan to make sure that they're meeting the requirements there. Okay. So, at this point, it's two spaces off off the street.

Off the street. Correct. Commissioner Hector,

thank [clears throat] you. Uh, I guess trying to uh uh wrap my brain around what the the vision for Main Street mixed use was in the beginning. I I am struggling with businesses comingling with residences that are already there. And I So when I look at, you know, all the purple, that's the main street mixeduse, right? And it goes two blocks off of Main Street where right now the majority of them are residential homes. And I guess we're saying that we want to put businesses right next door to residences and that's acceptable. And then the parking on the street, I don't know who looked at it and said that it wasn't a safety concern or a traffic concern. I I guess I I'm not really understanding that.

So I can speak on the comp plan piece, right? In 2024 when we all met and the planning and zoning commission made the recommendation and city council ultimately adopted the updated comp plan. This was a part of it expanding that Main Street designation from just Main Street where it was previously and expanding it up to Curtis. The thought process being it being a more walkable expanding that corridor really having a destination the idea of a future destination for shirts in this area. However, after some time, if the planning and zoning commission feels like we maybe went too far with the adoption in 2024, we can put a pause and we can take a look at this piece of the comp plan again. Maybe we extended the main street designation too far to Curtis. Maybe it should be brought back down to exchange. We're happy to um if the planning zoning commission would like us to do that research and bring a workshop forward, we can take another look at just this piece of the comp plan to make sure that we're getting it right.

Yeah. No, I appreciate that so much. Uh and I certainly don't want to rain on the parade of any business owner or land owner uh that wants to take advantage of capitalism in this country. Uh, but I do think that part of the challenge is the residents that already live there. If I lived in any one of those homes there on exchange, I would have a problem with it. You know, my own neighborhood, if you wanted to put a business uh across the street from where I live currently, I would have a problem with it. You know, I think the challenge is that uh the the plan or the vision may look fine when we discuss it, but when we go to execute and now we're impacting real people with real lives with real concerns, especially regarding safety and traffic and parking on the street, that becomes a challenge And I've driven up exchange uh from time to time and you're right, if if a car is parked on each side of the street uh it can be problematic. So, uh, for me that's a safety concern and, uh, and I actually would welcome and support, uh, having an, you know, a workshop with an open discussion about what the true vision [clears throat] is for Main Street mixed use because we are impacting citizens of shirts whether we live there or not, right? There are a lot of people that live on Exchange uh on Curtis. Uh I've seen the parking on Randolph

Avenue which I didn't even think that was legal but they don't have anywhere else to park. So those are the types of conversations I think we need to have quite honestly just to be open and transparent about it and then talk to the residents that live around. I mean, people who live in all those homes, uh, I think they should be invited to the table, too, to have a conversation about what the plan is, uh, or the vision for the, uh, for the city is, you know, and what better time to do it than now. I mean, we just had voting yesterday with a lot of different visions and uh and I think everyone should be able to uh have their say because this I understand from the business owners, you know, Main Street mixeduse was a big deal. I get it. Uh the problem is that all the homes behind it are impacted by that. You know, I shouldn't have to call the cops because the music is too loud from a bar that's been zoned to be next door or across the street or adjacent from me. I don't that doesn't make sense to me that, you know, so and I would have trouble uh approving this. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Hughes.

There we go. Looking at the size of the plot, I'm not seeing a much of a bar being there. Plus, also too, we can consider that even if they decide to put a bar there, we're still looking at a CFO and we're looking at um restrictions from the state and federal guidelines where they could basically shut down any bar because of its proximity to a home. This area is fairly small. Traffic concerns. If you drive anywhere on a side street in this town, it's all a one-way street. I mean, coming over here, I've got to wait five minutes for three cars to pass and somebody wants to stop and think about it. So, traffic is a problem. Roads are a problem. They're always going to be that way on these side streets. But if we're looking at something where the con the concept is something what they've done in Cibilo and something what they've done in green, we're going to have that mixed use and it's beneficial to control it now. But the size of the lot, I'm looking more probably a small office. Even a duplex will not really work there as far as height's concerned because they're not going to be able to either put it where they need to or it's going to be twotory, which may or may not be able to meet their needs. So, I understand the growth pattern. It looks like it's plausible, but the CFO is going to make the final determination. And any kind of bar or any kind of business like that that's going to impact people that are sli that are living there is going to be highly highly reviewed and going to be determined. it's probably going to be canceled out. The bars on Main Street, I can see them being there. Yeah, they're problematic. um noise is an issue, but um I just don't see the issue with having this right now as a mixed use considering if it was a small office space that would als the the area on exchange that would also probably increase the um property values which would help everybody in the area and we're able to u maximize their their investment while we're still looking at a small reasonable probably 8 to 5 Monday through ready location.

Commissioner McMaster. Okay. Looking at this, the property size doesn't meet the requirements for either zoning, the zoning it is now or the zoning they're requesting. Correct. So I believe the frontage is 75 ft. Is that correct? On this property per the survey is 75 ft. So in let me take you to the dimensional requirements and the depth you had the survey was 209. So 75 by 209. So this specific lot was meeting the dimensional requirements for okay

R2. Was it someone that said that it was negligent? Was it the fire department? Was it the police department? The traffic the traffic analysis you're asking? I I believe so. Here, let me go there.

Yes. So, it's the engineering department. So, what they do is they take a look at what the current zoning is, meaning it was R2. And then they take a look at all the possible uses that are allowed in the MSNU district. And so they basically just calculate what's the difference between the change that's going to be happening there. And so part of that recommendation you could read this is actual recommendation right there in that photo so I can read it for everyone. The proposed zone change to MSMU would increase the peak hour trips that could be created beyond what the current R2 zoning would create. However, due to the development restrictions of MSMU allowing for limited multif family and low impact commercial, the increased peak hour trips would be relatively small and far below the threshold to require a traffic impact analysis. Therefore, the impact of the proposed zone change to the city's transportation system would be negligible. So, we do have a requirement for uh traffic impact studies, traffic impact analysis. So basically when they meet 100 peak hour trips that's when we're required to do an entire study um for developers to take a look at how it's been impacting traffic. And so essentially what the engineer is saying here this one doesn't reach 100 peak hour trips. And so it's not going to trigger any kind of TIA or I suppose as they would say a negligible change to the traffic infrastructure.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. This is um I think I have one more question for the applicant. Um [sighs] I maybe it's for staff. There's nothing that they need to do bufferwise, fence wise, like between commercial and like how we have commercial and residential separation. They have to do the certain fences and stuff. They're just going to have to meet our normal landscaping requirements. So that' be the five feet if it was a residential

and Main Street mix does have um flexibility and lowers the landscape requirements than what a standard like general business would be required to do. Okay. All right. Anybody else? Uh Commissioner Hector, so you said lowers the requirement. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. Which would make it easier for them to to meet whatever that requirement is. Right. That's correct. Which is the purpose of MSMU and having those lower um design requirements so it's easier for property owners to potentially flip a residential home to be a commercial business or back and forth. Uh that's the whole purpose of that MSMU. So

to allow that greater flexibility. Okay. And if I could just add to that because I know somebody I'm sorry who forgot to ask the dimensional standards. So this lot is a pretty large lot considering the adjacent properties. And so I know we're we're talking about this one that that one is R2 and it's meeting the dimensional requirements for R2 um for this zoning district for the rest of you know the historic neighborhood designation as we would say. The rest of those properties are more [clears throat] likely than not not meeting the dimensional requirements. So they would have to make a zone change.

Yeah. I uh am just still struggling with the fact that there are two residential properties right next to them, right? And those are the ones that are going to be impacted whether it's a duplex that goes in there or a small business which uh I am not certain that there's anything that uh that dictates or controls the hours of operation as well. So, uh, again, I think for the conversation, it's it's easy for us to say that we don't believe that there's going to be impact to residents that are already there based on what we believe we understand about what's proposed. But once it's reszoned and once they decide what they want to do, uh, the only ones are impacted at that point are the residents. And so I guess for me just to understand does uh mixed use or or MSMU uh is it really feasible to have residential properties in there? I mean I get the whole walkability thing. Uh I just it just doesn't seem to be well thought out, I guess, is my point. But but thank you,

Miss Caldic.

I just want to comment on that, Mr. Hector. Um if you've been down Main Street, you will find um almost every other not every other lot, but there's business residential business residential. It doesn't seem to pose too much of an issue um there. and getting to the parking and things. Again, the streets are public parking. There is no I mean, this has come back and forth uh to PNZ many times uh on Main Street. And what we can do to help minimize that or um you know, the street parking, but in the end, it's public. You can park on the street and you'll always be able to park on the street. Nobody owns that. The city owns it or it's public property. So, there's always going to be an issue with that sort of thing. Um, and I agree in terms of this does not seem like it would be a space for a bar, but more so for a small business or a duplex, something of that nature. Um, and so I don't really see an issue with that uh causing more traffic and things like that if it is a small business or if it is a duplex. If it's a duplex, that's two families. How many cars would that be? Two to four possibly. Um, but anyway, that's just my two cents.

Uh, Commissioner Carbone,

I believe earlier we were talking about impacts to um the residents and sometimes we we say the word impact and has a negative connotation. I believe some of the positive connotations that we need to think about sometimes when businesses and individuals invest money in an area is that your property values go up. Um at the same time they may look at their properties and say you know what I may want to flip this house or I want to take home home equity loan out and fix it up or I want to rent this out or I may want to find the developer who made the house next door into a business and say you know what how much you offered them for mine. At the end of the day, everything we own in this life is fungeible. We can't take anything with us. Okay? And so, um, there comes a time where we sell everything. I I've probably said six times that I'm never selling this car. And then, you know what I did? I sold the car. And so I I know it's tough sometimes to let go of things that you have a a a financial and an emotional connection to. But when sometimes the cell the the the signs are saying you know what this area is changing the the the process of that changing is starting to to infect not infect uh affect my area and maybe this is a good time for me to look into what are my options as an owner. And you know, just like we said earlier, a capitalist society, everybody does what's best for them financially. And I would highly recommend that if you live in this area that you look into what is the best thing for you and your family going forward because let's be honest, I wouldn't want a bar down the street for me either. So, I would probably looking into a realtor and go, you know what? What could I get for the home that I've been living in since 1972 for 53 years? Um, I understand sometimes we don't want to move, but that choice sometimes is taken out of your um hands by the individuals that own the properties adjacent to you. We you don't own that property, and so

they do. And at the end of the day, property owners have rights just just like you do for yours. And so, um, I think that's it. Um, so the last time I drove down Main Street, which is today, I think I recognized maybe a couple of residences that hadn't yet been converted to businesses, right? That I re I I remember seeing two uh and and I would I would probably bet good money on that. Uh the other part is really about and I think we've had this conversation in the past. You know, who do we want to be as a city? Right? I'm I'm all for people profiting, benefiting from assets that they own, but to what expense to our neighbors. And the point I guess I want to make is that if the zoning for MSMU is what it is and it's going to remain that, I don't see what the uh the challenge is with bringing together all the residences, our neighbors that live within that district and have a real conversation about what the future might look like, you know, because I cannot sit here and say that it's okay for if it was my mother who lived there and had been living there for 53 years to tell her, "Well, sell your home and go move somewhere else." That's just not reasonable. And so I think that if we had an open a

transparent conversation about it, you know, we wouldn't have to presuppose what people should do with property that they own as well. So, uh, again, I highly recommend that we have a workshop to have this conversation because I know how important MSMU is to the city and to business owners that have uh, businesses uh, within that area. And I don't see anything wrong with having conversations with the residences uh, that also uh, live in that area as well. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? I have one other. When we did the comp plan in 24, what did the community engagement look like? Do you remember? I know it's been a year.

So, we sent out surveys and was published in the magazine that we were um asking for feedback. We had multiple public hearings. Yeah. Okay. There was engagement and we you know, we we went out. Well, I mean, maybe not here, but overall there was engagement with the community when we did the the comp plan. So, I think we we provided the opportunity for residents to provide feedback. Yeah. Um Okay. You know, whether we got as much feedback as we would hope. Okay. All right. Oh, yeah. Let's go.

I've also attended two open presentations about what is going to happen along Main Street and things um over the years at least twice that were open to the public that I've attended myself.

Okay. Thank you. Um if there's no other comments, questions, I'll entertain a motion. And just as a reminder, this is a recommendation to city council who will have the final vote at a future date. I'd like to make a recom um motion that we recommend disapproval of PLZC2025232 to city council. Second. That is a motion. Come on.

That is a motion to recommend denial by Commissioner McMaster, a second by Commissioner Hector. Uh just a reminder for voting, an I vote is in agreement to recommend denial. A no vote is to not recommend denial. Please vote. I have seven votes. Can we publish that? That motion fails. Is there another motion? I make a recommendation to approve PLZC2025 0232 as written. Second.

That is a motion to recommend approval by Commissioner Carbone, second by Commissioner Goldick. There's no other comments. Please vote. That is seven votes. Can we publish that? Oh, that motion carries. So, this will move forward to city council with a recommendation for approval. Do we have a date on the item? So, the item is not scheduled yet, but it should be on the December 3rd council meeting. I believe it's December 2nd council meeting. So, for everyone who's in attendance here, um our council meetings are the first Tuesday of every month. So, you are welcome to come back and absolutely have your voices be heard once again at our council meeting. It happens in the same fashion that this public forum also does. So, December 2nd in our council chambers here.

Thank you, William. All right, we will move forward into the items for individual consideration. Does anyone need a break real quick? We good? No. All right. Item 6A, PLFP20250241, waiver. Consider an act upon a request for a waiver in relation to on-site sewer facilities for the final plat of the bunny stop number 9 subdivision approximately 7.8 8 acres of land located approximately 55 ft southwest of the intersection of FM2252 and IH35 North Access Road, also known as KL County property identification number 119021 in Guadalupe County property identification number 114083, city assurance county in Guadalupe County, Texas.

Good evening.

Good evening, commissioners. Mr. Wallace PLFP 2025241 waiver a septic waiver request on approximately 7.8 acres of land. Daisy Marquez, senior planner. Here's a subject property outlined in green. It is um approximately west of the intersection of FM2252 and IH35 North. Um it is currently undeveloped and they are requesting a septic waiver. Um you can see the out the property outlined here in yellow and the closest sewer is approximately 3,690 ft away uh south along Old Weiderstein and as you can see from engineering memos here uh they are recommending approval of the septic waiver under two conditions that an escrow is provided to co to cover the cost of extending that public sewer main and then um once the sewer main is close enough that they connect and um we did discuss this with the applicant. They are proposing that the septic they do install is built in a fashion so that when that sewer main comes to their property, they can easily connect it and cease operation of the on-site septic. And then here's the proposed plat that we will discuss in the next agenda item. And again, engineering does recommend approval of this waiver with the conditions that they've provided. And staff recommends approval of the proposed waiver to install an on-site sewer facility with the conditions provided by engineering listed below. Again, to provide an escrow amount to cover the cost of extending that public sewer main across the rear subdivision boundary and then once sewer is um extended in the future that they connect to it. That's all.

All right. This is not a public hearing, so we'll move right into commissioner questions. Any questions, comments? Make a ready to make go motion. Go for it. Like to make a motion that we recommend approval of PLFP2025241 waiver. Mr. McMaster, just to be clear, with the conditions as provided by staff. Yes, with the conditions as provided by staff. Thank you. Second.

That is a motion by Commissioner McMaster for approval with conditions as provided by staff, seconded by Commissioner Goldick. There's no other comments. Please vote. Seven votes. Can we publish that? That motion carries. All right. Moving on. PLFP 20250241. Consider an act upon a request for the approval of a final plot of the bunny stop number nine subdivision and approximately 7.8 tract of land known approx or located approximately 55 ft southwest of the intersection of FM2252 and IH35 North Access Road also known as Koma County property identification number 119021 in Guadalupe County property identification number 114083. City assures KL and Guadalupe County, Texas. Daisy,

good afternoon once again. PLFP 20250241 uh proposed 7.8 acre final plat of the Bunny Stop subdivision. Daisy Marquez, senior planner. Again, here's the subject property outlined in green. It's undeveloped. It's located west of the intersection of I35 and FM2252. Here is the proposed plat. It is one buildable lot. They're going to show they're showing the crossaw access easement across the front as required per UDC um adjacent to all GBZ zone properties and then an east west connector um does um cross this property along the southoutheastern portion and kind of just to zoom in. You can see that rightway dedication that they're going to be providing us and then um there is an awkward triangle lot that is going to be a 900 non-buildable lot due to that rightaway dedication. So the proposed final plat is generally consistent with the applicable requirements for the property ordinances and regulations. The plot was reviewed with no objections by engineering fire and planning and staff recommends approval of PLFP 2025 0241.

All right. Thank you, Daisy. Any questions, comments, motions? I make a motion to to approve as written PLFP20250241. I'll second that.

That is a motion to recommend approval uh by Commissioner Carbone, second by Commissioner McMaster. If there's no other comments, please vote. There are seven votes. Can we publish that? That motion carries. All right. PL PPP20250218 waiver consider an act upon a request in relation to on-site sewer facilities for the preliminary plat of the MMD subdivision approximately 5 acres of land located approximately 3,100 ft northeast of the intersection of FM2252 and FM 482 more specifically known as Komal County prior identification number 43645 city assures Komal County Texas. William.

Good evening, Commission. PLPP20250218, a septic waiver request for 5 acres of land. Willie Mullingham Planner. So, this is the MMD preliminary plat waiver request. Uh, the property is 4.825 acres. It is currently zoned as a manufacturing district light and it has direct access onto FM482. It is already existing as a plumbing service business. It is located within the shirt sewer CCN and the CCMA CCN. This is the subdivision plat. You can see here that the property has, you know, structures already located on it. And so the staff analysis, it is 1,800 ft away from the nearest connection to sewer. The site is currently already using an on-site septic facility. Uh the applicant is requesting a waiver request to not extend and connect those to those facilities and they're not connected to the services nor intend to extend utilities and the engineering department has reviewed this and supports approval of the waiver request. Staff recommendation. The subject site is served by OSSF already. The nearest sewer connection is approximately 1,800 ft away and the applicant will be required to connect to sanitary sewer once the public infrastructure has been extended to serve the area. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the waiver request as presented.

All right. Thank you, William. Questions, comments, concerns, motions? I'd like to make a motion to to recommend approval of PL PP2025218 waiver. Second.

There's a motion by Commissioner McMaster to recommend approval. Uh seconded by Commissioner Carbone. Uh if there's no other comments, please vote. That's seven votes. Can we publish that? That motion carries. All right. PLPP205218. Consider and act upon a request for approval of a preliminary plot of the MMD subdivision approximately 5 acres of land located approximately 3,100 ft northeast of the intersection of FM2252 and FM482 more specifically known as Kell County parcel identification number 43645 city Kell County Texas. William

Good evening commission plpp 20250218 a 5acre preliminary plat of the MMD subdivision once again you can see here the property's acreage 4.8258 825 acres zoned as M1 district manufacturing light with direct access onto FM482. It is going to be one buildable lot. So you can see here this is a preliminary plat and staff recommendation. The proposed preliminary plat is generally consistent with the applicable requirements for the property ordinances and regulations. The plat has been reviewed with no objections by engineering, fire and planning departments. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat as presented.

All right. Thank you, William. Commissioners, anything? Motions? Make a motion to recommend approval of PLP 20250218.

Second. That is a motion to recommend approval of PLP20250218 by Commissioner Masters, second by Commissioner Goldick. There's no other comments. Please vote. We publish that, please. That motion carries. All right. PLPP20250255 waiver consider an act upon a request in relation to on-site sewer facilities for the preliminary plot of the Heim subdivision approximately 10 acres of land located approximately 2,300 ft west of the intersection of FM 1518 in I 10 more specifically known as Bear County parcel identification number 339370 city shirts Bear County Texas William

Good evening commission plppp 2025 022 0255 5 septic waiver request for 10 acres of land. This is the heim subdivision preliminary plat waiver. The property is currently acreage of 9.99 acres. It is currently zoned as GB district and residential agricultural district RA. It has direct access onto I 10. It is currently served by the shirt sewer or located within the shirt sewer CCN and the CCMA CCN. And the site is undeveloped at this time and there are no connections to water or wastewater at this time. This is the plat staff analysis. The applicant is requesting to install an on-site septic system, OSSF. Um, per the applicant's letter of intent, there are no specific developments or plans for this site at this time. They will not be required to connect to services or or they will they will not extend they will not connect to services nor extend the utilities. The engineering department has reviewed the waiver request and has determined they support approval of the waiver request. Staff recommendation. The nearest sewer connection is approximately 3,300 ft away and the applicant will be required to connect to sanitary sewer once the public infrastructure has been extended to serve the area. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the waiver request as presented.

All right. Thank you, William. Commissioners, anything motions? I'll let Patrick do them all. I'll make a motion to recommend approval of PLP 20225 0255 waiver. That's as presented. Correct. Yes. Thank you. Second.

That is a motion to recommend approval as presented by Commissioner McMaster, seconded by Commissioner Goolick. There's no other comments. Please vote. Can we publish that, please? Seven votes. That motion carries. All right. PLPP20250255. Consider an act upon a request for approval of preliminary plat of the Heim subdivision approximately 10 acres of land located approximately 2,300 ft west of the intersection of FM 1518 in IH10, more specifically known as Bear County parcel identification number 339370. City Shirts Bear County, Texas. William,

good evening. Commission PLPP205255, a 10acre preliminary plat. Once again, this is the Heim subdivision preliminary plat. Its acreage is 9.99 acres. It is zoned as general business district or residential agricultural RA. It has direct access onto IH10. It is approximately 2,300 ft west of the intersection of FM1518 and IH10. Is currently undeveloped at this time. This is the plat and our recommendation. The proposed preliminary plat is generally consistent with the applicable requirements for the property ordinances and regulations. The plot has been reviewed with no objections by the engineering, fire, and planning departments. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat as presented.

All right. Thank you, William. Quick question. Do you always make people put the zoning on the plat or is that just in the past? Requirement on the preliminary plat. Oh, okay. Interesting. All right, commissioners. Anything? Make a motion to recommend approval of PLP P20250255. Second.

As a motion to recommend approval of PLP2025255 by Commissioner McMaster, seconded by Commissioner Carbone. Please vote. Uh, can we publish that? All right, that motion carries. All right, moving into item seven. Commissioners, any requests to place items on a future planning and zoning agenda? I know we had discussed the workshop. Can you add potentially making tavern a specific use to the zoning district? Anything else? Anybody else?

Yeah. Could we also add the uh brew pub as a specific use? Alcohol establishments. All right. Any announcements by commissioners, announcements by staff? All right. Uh all of the there's additional information available in the packet online. Uh we are it is 7:14 and we are adjourned.