[00:00:01]
COMMISSION IS CALLED[Call to Order]
TO ORDER.UM, TO DETERMINE THAT WE HAVE OUR QUORUM OF 11, I'LL CALL THE ROLE THE CHAIR IS PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER ABRAHAM IS NOT PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER CLARK IS NOT PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER HINES WILL BE ABSENT.
COMMISSIONER JONES? PRESENT IS PRESENT.
UH, COMMISSIONER NELSON WILL BE ABSENT.
COMMISSIONER POROUS PURL PRESENT VIRTUALLY IS PRESENT VIRTUALLY.
COMMISSIONER ROBBINS PRESENT IS PRESENT.
WE DON'T HAVE COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ ANYMORE.
COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG IS NOT PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER SIGLER PRESENT IS PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER TAHIR, I THINK HE WILL BE PRESENT VIRTUALLY LATER, BUT HE'S NOT PRESENT RIGHT NOW.
COMMISSIONER KANE NOT PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER DALTON NOT PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER SMITH PRESENT IS PRESENT VIRTUALLY.
UM, AND FILLING IN FOR DIRECTOR MARGARET WALLACE BROWN IS JENNIFER OSLAND PRESENT.
13 MEMBERS HAVE RESPONDED TO ROLL CALL.
UM, FOR THE RECORD, OUR MEETING FORMAT ALLOWS THE SOME PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS TO PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY ON MICROSOFT TEAMS, BUT TO COMPLY WITH OPEN MEETINGS LAW, THAT'S TEXAS STATE LAW.
THE CHAIR OR ACTING CHAIR MUST BE PHYSICALLY PRESENT.
ALL COMMISSIONERS PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY MOST MUST BE BOTH VISIBLE AND AUDIBLE.
AND OF COURSE, COLLECTIVELY WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN OUR QUORUM.
SO IF YOU'RE WITH US VIRTUALLY, REMEMBER TO KEEP YOUR CAMERA ON AND YOUR MIC ON WHEN YOU'RE SPEAKING TO EVERYONE ELSE WHO'S JOINING US TODAY.
UM, IF YOU'RE HERE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON A SPECIFIC ITEM, YOU CAN CHECK THE FINAL AGENDA WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE.
ALL ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED BY NOON WEDNESDAY ARE IN OUR PACKET.
WE HAVE THEM, AND I THINK WE DO HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS THIS WEEK.
UM, WE ASK THAT THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE CONNECTED BY PHONE OR COMPUTER TO PLEASE KEEP YOUR DEVICE MUTED UNTIL YOU ARE CALLED ON TO SPEAK.
AND OUR VIDEO QUALITY IS ALSO BETTER IF YOU KEEP YOUR CAMERA OFF UNTIL IT'S YOUR TURN TO SPEAK.
UH, ONE ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA TODAY UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS.
ITEM ONE 30, ROSEWOOD ESTATES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED AND THERE WILL BE NO OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON IT.
[Director’s Report]
ORDER OF BUSINESS IS THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
UH, I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, ACTING SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
I'M FILLING IN FOR DIRECTOR WALLACE BROWN, WHO'LL BE JOINING LATE TODAY.
UH, AS, UM, COMMISSION CHAIR STATED, DETAILS FOR JOINING IN PERSON ARE VIRTUALLY ARE ALWAYS ON THE POSTED AGENDA AND ON OUR WEBPAGE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
I'D LIKE TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVED TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 42 A FEW WEEKS AGO WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS FRIDAY, JUNE 10TH, WHICH IS TOMORROW.
OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM HAS A SUMMARY AND DETAILS OF THESE ORDINANCE, UH, AMENDMENTS.
NOTABLE CHANGES ARE NOTICE FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARING VARIANCES AND SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IS NOW REQUIRES A 300 FOOT RADIUS FROM THE PROJECT SITE.
UM, NOT 200 PER STATE LAW AND NOT 250 AS WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED, BUT IT'S NOW 300 FEET.
ALSO, UM, WE WILL BE PROVIDING 20 DAYS OF ADVANCE NOTICE, UH, FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND VARIANCES.
SO THAT'S AN INCREASE, UM, ESPECIALLY FOR THE VARIANCES.
SO ANY PROJECTS REQUESTING A VARIANCE SUBMITTED THIS WEEKEND WILL NOT APPEAR ON THE NEXT AGENDA, BUT ON THE AGENDA AFTER.
UM, ALSO OUR PUBLIC HEARING AND VARIANCE USER GUIDES HAVE BEEN UPDATED WITH THIS INFORMATION AND THEY ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE.
SO WE ENCOURAGE, UM, ALL APPLICANTS AND THE PUBLIC TO, TO FIND OUT THE DETAILS THERE.
THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND FREEWAY PLAN 2022 OPEN HOUSE IS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15TH FROM FIVE 30 TO 7:30 PM THIS OPEN HOUSE WILL BE HELD VIRTUALLY ONLY.
[00:05:01]
THERE WILL NOT BE A PHYSICAL MEETING.UH, FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT HOUSTON TX.GOV/PLANNING/TRANSPORTATION.
THIS IS A CHANCE FOR, UM, COMMISSION AND PUBLIC MS. AUSTIN PUBLIC.
SORRY, AUDIBLE ON TEAMS. OKAY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? STILL CANNOT BE HEARD.
HT V THERE MAY BE A TECHNICAL ISSUE.
HOW ABOUT THAT ONE? HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I HEAR YOU NOW.
UM, SO, UH, I'LL JUST REPEAT THIS JUST IN CASE.
UH, THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND FREEWAY PLAN.
OPEN HOUSE IS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15TH FROM FIVE 30 TO 7:30 PM IT'S A VIRTUAL MEETING, SO IT IT'LL BE ON TEAMS ONLY.
UM, FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT THE HOUSTON UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT WEBSITE, HOUSTON TX.GOV/PLANNING/TRANSPORTATION.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND COMMISSIONERS TO, UH, LEARN MORE ABOUT EACH PROJECT.
THERE WILL BE SEPARATE BREAKOUT ROOMS FOR, UM, SO YOU CAN GO AND TO JUST HEAR ABOUT THE PROJECT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN TO A VERY LONG PRESENTATION.
AND THE, UM, APPLICANTS FOR EACH PROJECT WILL BE IN THOSE ROOMS AND ABLE TO ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY UM, RELATED ITEMS, CALL US AT (832) 393-6600.
YOU CAN ALSO CALL THE PLANNER OF THE DAY AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 6 2 4 OR VISIT HOUSTON PLANNING.COM.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UM, I SEE THAT WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY COMMISSIONER TAHI, VIRTUALLY.
COMMISSIONER TAHI, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I'M PRESENT.
MADAM CHAIR, UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE JOINED, UM, SINCE ROLL CALL? OKAY, IF NOT, UH, THE NEXT ORDER OF
[Approval of the May 26, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes]
BUSINESS IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 26TH, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? MAR IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES ROMAN
[Platting Activities A & B]
NUMERAL ONE PLATTING ACTIVITY.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SECTIONS A AND B ARE PRESENTED AS ONE GROUP, WHICH INCLUDES CONSENT AND REPL.
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
SECTIONS A AND B ARE ITEMS ONE THROUGH ONE 16 SECTION A.
CONSENT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS ONE THROUGH 63 AND SECTION B REPL ITEMS ARE NUMBERS 64 THROUGH ONE 16.
NO ITEMS NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSENT AND REPLANT ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON ANYTHING IN SECTION A OR B.
UM, IS THERE, DO WE, MR. CALVERT, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE CHAT? NO.
THEN, UM, COMMISSIONERS WILL, I'LL ASK IF THERE ARE ANY ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER SEPARATELY.
ITEMS 9, 10 11 17 THROUGH 1951 THROUGH 54.
UH, ITEMS 2, 3, 6, 17, 18 AND 1932.
ANYONE ELSE WHO NEEDS TO TAKE SOMETHING SEPARATELY? OKAY.
UM, THEN WE WILL, UH, PROCEED WITH VOTING ON SECTIONS A AND B.
WE'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON ALL ITEMS IN THOSE TWO SECTIONS.
SAVE AND CAN YOU HEAR ME SIR? HELLO.
UM, SAVE AND ACCEPT FOR ITEMS 2 3 6 9 THROUGH 1117 THROUGH 19 32, 40, 48, 51 THROUGH 54 AND 77.
IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THOSE ITEMS? MOTION GARZA ON THE ITEMS. ACCEPT THOSE, SORRY.
ONE THROUGH ONE THROUGH ONE 15.
SAVE AND ACCEPT THOSE YOU JUST MENTIONED.
OKAY, I GOT JONES FIRST, BUT, OKAY, SO THAT WAS GAR, GARZA AND JONES.
[00:10:01]
CARRIES.AND NOW ON THE REMAINDER, WHICH WILL BE ITEMS 2 3 6 9 THROUGH 1117 THROUGH 1932.
IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION? P CORIS.
IS THERE A SECOND MA? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES WITH COMMISSIONERS AND SIGLER ABSTAINING ON THOSE ITEMS. UH, AND THAT WILL TAKE
[c. Replats requiring Public Hearings with Notification (Dorianne Powe-Phlegm and Devin Crittle)]
US TO SECTION C PUBLIC HEARINGS.MADAM CHAIR, BRIEFLY, UH, WELL FOR THE RECORD, I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER DALTON ALSO ABSTAINED FROM THOSE.
AND I WAS DISTRACTED FOR A MOMENT.
DID WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONERS WHO JOINED US? I CAN'T.
I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU.
I MAY HAVE MISSED, BUT DID WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONERS WHO JOINED REMOTELY? WE DID.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM ONE 17 IS ALLENDALE TOWN SITE SECTION A PARTIAL RELA NUMBER EIGHT.
THE SIGN IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF ALLEN GENOA ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 2 25 AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE ONE COMMERCIAL RESERVE.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS PLAT.
THIS PLAT WAS DEFERRED AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION.
PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, THE APPLICANT DID NOT MEET THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
PER LEGAL REVIEW, THIS PLAT WILL VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE PLAT STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM ONE 17 ALLENDALE TOWN SITE IS CONTINUED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE 17 HEARING NO RESPONSE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE AND FOR CLARIFICATION BASED ON BOTH THE FACT THAT IT VIOLATES DEED RESTRICTIONS AND NOTICE AND NOTICE YES AS AN EXTRA JUST TOPPING.
UH, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DISAPPROVE
OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES AND THE ITEM IS DISAPPROVED.
ITEM ONE 18 IS AMENDED GOLF COURT GOLF CREST EDITION PARTIAL REPL.
NUMBER FOUR, THE SITE LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MARA AND GAT STREETS AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS THAT NO VARIANCE REQUESTED.
WITH THIS ITEM, THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
WE ARE WAITING FOR LEGAL REVIEW.
STAFF'S COMMEND RECOMMENDS TO DEFER THE PLAT FOR A LEGAL DEED RESTRICTION REVIEW.
PENDING STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM ONE 18 AMENDED GOLF CREST EDITION IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED UP IN ADVANCE TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE OR LISTENING WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE 18? HEARING NO RESPONSE? UM, WE'LL SEE IF THERE IS A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND? ALLMAN ALLMAN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM ONE 18 IS DEFERRED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ITEM ONE 19 IS BRADBURY FOREST, SECTION NINE PARTIAL REPLAT NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG HORSE TOOTH DRIVE NORTH OF BRADBURY FOREST AND NORTHWEST OF VERNON WOOD DRIVE IN HOUSTON'S EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS.
THE REASON FOR RELIGHT IS TO CREATE ONE LOT AND REDUCE THE BUILDING LINE FROM 20 FEET TO 18 FEET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A DUAL BUILDING LINE VARIANCE TO ALLOW A PORTION OF THE PROPOSED LOT TO HAVE A REDUCED BUILDING LINE OF 18 FEET INSTEAD OF 20 FEET DUE TO AN ENCROACHMENT FOR THE LIFE OF THE STRUCTURE.
WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE PROPOSED LOT WAS CREATED WITH THE BRADBURY FOREST, OUR SECTION NINE SUBDIVISION IN 2021 WITH A 20 FOOT FRONT BUILDING LINE IN JANUARY OF 2022.
[00:15:01]
AND PER THE SURVEY ACCIDENTALLY BUILT OVER A SMALL TRIANGULAR PORTION OF THE 20 FEET BUILDING LINE, THE GARAGE OF THE NEW HOUSE IS BUILT APPROXIMATELY 1.3 FEET INTO THE 20 FOOT BUILDING LINE AT THE CORNER OF THE GARAGE.THE REMAINDER OF THE HOUSE AND GARAGE SITS BACK 20 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
THE DUAL BUILDING LINE WOULD ALLOW FOR THE REDUCED SETBACK FOR THE LIFE OF THE STRUCTURE IF THE HOUSE IS EVER DEMOLISHED, THAT ANY REPLACEMENT STRUCTURES SHALL ADHERE TO THE BUILDING LINE.
THE PROPOSED LIGHT IS CONDUCIVE TO THE BUILD.
THE THE PROPOSED LIGHT IS CONDUCIVE TO THE RESIDENTIAL PATTERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE SMALL PORTION OF THE ENCROACHMENT WILL NOT CAUSE CAUSE TO IMPEDE PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL ON THE SIDEWALK.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS IF A LETTER IS RECEIVED FROM THE BRADBURY FOREST ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVING THE BUILDING LINE REDUCTION.
THE LETTER WAS RECEIVED FROM THE BRADBURY FOREST ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVING THE REQUEST REVIEW BY LEGAL NOW INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS FILED SEPARATELY.
HARRIS COUNTY HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THIS REQUEST.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM ONE 19 BRADBURY FOREST IS CONTINUED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE 19? IF NOT, I WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS ON YOUR SCREEN.
UM, IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION SMITH.
IS THERE A SECOND? JONES JONES.
OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM ONE 20.
ITEM ONE 20 IS BRICKMAN PLACE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED EAST ALONG BRICKMAN STREET, NORTH OF THORNTON STREET, WEST OF NORTH.
SHE DRIVE IN HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANTS REQUESTED WITH THIS PLAT.
I MEAN FOUR FOUR RE FOUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANTS REQUESTED WITH THIS PLAT.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
THE PLAT WAS DEFERRED AS THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION PENDING LEGAL REVIEW.
LEGAL HAS REVIEWED THE PLAT AND HAS FOUND THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO PROVE THE PLAT PER THE CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ONE 20 BRINKMAN PLACE IS CONTINUED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE 20? IF NOT, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MODEST.
IS THERE A SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 21 IS CASTLEWOOD EDITION SECTION THREE PARTIAL RE PLAT NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF GREEN RANCH AND LAUDER STREETS IN HOUSTON.
EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION IN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS.
THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS PLAT.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DEFER THE PLAT FOR, UH, LEGAL DE RESTRICTIONS REVIEW.
PENDING STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 21 CASTLEWOOD EDITION IS OPEN.
I HAVE ONE SPEAKER, UM, WHO I THINK IS GONNA BE WITH US VIRTUALLY.
RON MADISON DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE PRESENT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 21? MATT? HERE.
AH, ARE YOU RON MADISON? YES, I AM.
[00:20:01]
THANK YOU.UM, MADAM CHAIR, UH, I LIVE DOWN IN THIS AREA.
THIS AREA IS A SMALL COMMUNITY AREA AND TO, UH, GRANT, UH, COMMERCIALIZATION TO THIS AREA.
IT'S ONLY LIKE A TWO LANE STREET.
IT WOULD CAUSE, UH, GREAT, UM, HARM, I THINK TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC AND, UH, OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE IN THIS AREA.
WE HAVE A SCHOOL DOWN THE STREET FROM IT AND IT'S LIKE A TWO LANE STREET, ONE WAY GOING ONE WAY AND THE OTHER LANE GOING THE OTHER WAY.
IF ANY ACCIDENTS OR ANYTHING HAPPENS, IT'S KIND OF A VIRTUAL TIE UP, YOU'RE GONNA BE STUCK.
UH, YOUR EMERGENCY VEHICLES CAN'T GET THROUGH.
UM, YOUR SCHOOLS CAN'T GET THROUGH.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? COMMISSIONERS? UM, THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.
I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT, UH, WE NEED TO DEFER THIS ITEM BECAUSE THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS STILL LOOKING AT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT MIGHT APPLY.
SO, UM, IF, IF THE COMMISSION DEFERS IT, IT'LL BE BACK ON OUR AGENDA IN TWO WEEKS AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME BACK AND SPEAK TO US AGAIN AT THAT TIME.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 21 CASTLEWOOD EDITION? THIS, THIS IS CONNIE ESPARZA AND I'M THE, UM, PRESIDENT OF CASTLEWOOD SUBDIVISION.
COULD YOU, MS. ESPARZA, COULD YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD? SURE.
S IN IN SAM, P AS IN PAUL, A RZA.
I'M THE PRESIDENT AND I'M ALSO AN AL I ALDEN ISD BOARD TRUSTEE.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, I LIVE ON WOODGATE, WHICH IS THE NEXT, IT'S UH, THE STREET THAT RUNS PARALLEL.
WE ARE VERY CONCERNED AS WE SPEAK.
WE HAVE A 16 'CAUSE I WAS, UH, I WAS, UH, WORKING WITH COMMISSIONER, UH, ADRIAN GARCIA ON THIS PROJECT.
WE HAVE A MITIGATION PROJECT GOING ON IN THE SOUTH SIDE OF CASTLEWOOD.
UH, $16.2 MILLION TO BE EXACT, UH, MITIGATION PROJECT.
IT'S, IT SHOULD BE A 14 MONTH, UH, COMPLETION RATE.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR PRO, UH, AREA, IT'S AT THE CORNER AS IT SAYS.
AND I'M LOOKING AT THE PHOTO AT GREEN RANCH AND LAUDER AND IT IS VACANT.
HAS BEEN VACANT FOR AS LONG AS I'VE LIVED HERE AND I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 42 YEARS.
UH, WE ARE VERY CONCERNED, UH, AS TO WHAT DEVELOPMENTS AND WHAT OTHER COMMERCIALS, UH, PROPERTIES OR, UH, WE HAVE, AS A MATTER OF FACT, ACROSS, UM, A LITTLE BIT OVER ADJACENT CATTYCORNER TO THIS PARTICULAR, WE HAD A, UM, UH, CALLED EL CAO, WHICH WAS A BEER JOINT AT NIGHT.
AND I'M TELLING YOU WE HAD 18 WHEELERS, ALL KINDS OF TRAFFIC.
AND THE GENTLEMAN, MR. MADISON IS CORRECT.
UH, WE, IT'S ONLY A TWO LANE, UH, STRAIGHT GOING AND COMING.
SENOR ALDEN, ISD BOARD TRUSTEE.
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT ACROSS THE BIO, WHICH IS MAYBE A QUARTER OF A MILE, UH, WE EAST OF THIS LOCATION, UH, WOULD PRESENT A PROBLEM TO OUR SCHOOL IN TERMS OF, UH, ACCESS BUSES AND THAT SORT OF THING.
SO, UH, TRANSPORTATION AND GETTING TO, TO THE DIFFERENT AREAS.
EVEN GETTING TO, UH, THE SUBDIVISION ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
'CAUSE CASTLEWOOD IS DIVIDED BY LAUDER, NORTH AND SOUTH.
AND THE MITIGATION PROJECT IS, IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
CAN YOU TELL US, TELL ME WHAT IS BEING BUILT? OKAY, THANK YOU.
I WAS JUST GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU AND SAY THAT YOUR TIME HAD EXPIRED AND UM, I WILL ASK IF, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE INTENTION IS? NO, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA BE BUILT, BUT CAN WE GET CONTACT INFORMATION TO MS. ESPARZA OF THE DEVELOPER? YES.
SO, UM, MS. ESPARZA, IF YOU COULD SEND, UM, YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION INTO THE DEPARTMENT, UM, YOU CAN DO THAT BY JUST CALLING THE MAIN NUMBER OR, UM, GOING ONLINE.
AND IF YOU CAN GET YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION TO, UH, MS. POPE PHLEGM, SHE CAN GET YOU THE CONTACT INFORMATION OF THE PERSON WHO'S DEVELOPING THE PROJECT AND YOU CAN TALK TO THEM DIRECTLY ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO DO.
CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME A STARTING NUMBER? UH, 8 3 2 3 9 360 600? YEAH.
UM, YEAH, THAT'S THE MAIN NUMBER OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
AND JUST ASK FOR, DO I REFER TO, DO I REFER TO ONE PARTICULAR PLA NUMBER? I THINK YOU GAVE IT AND I DID NOT TAKE IT
[00:25:01]
DOWN.I, I THINK IF YOU ASK FOR, UH, DORIAN POE PHLEGM, THEY WILL HOOK YOU UP WITH HER AND SHE'LL THANK YOU.
IT'S CASTLEWOOD IS THE NAME OF IT.
WELL, THAT'S YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO YOU KNOW THAT CASTLEWOOD EDITION? YES.
UM, AS I SAID, UM, WE ARE REVIEWING THIS TO SEE IF IT MEETS ALL, UM, ALL THE RECOMMEND OR ALL THE CONDITIONS AND REGULATIONS.
IF IT DOESN'T, THEN WE WON'T APPROVE IT, BUT IF IT DOES, WE WILL, YOU KNOW, WE WILL BE, UM, WE'LL HAVE TO APPROVE IT.
SO, UH, I THINK OUR RECOMMENDATION TODAY IS GONNA BE TO DEFER.
SO STANDBY, IT'LL BE BACK ON THE AGENDA IN TWO WEEKS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKERS? UH, MADAM CHAIR, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 21? MADAM CHAIR? IT'S COMMISSIONER SMITH.
UH, I, I WANTED TO LET MS. ESPARZA KNOW I'M GONNA PUT MY CONTACT INFORMATION IN THE, UH, IN THE CHAT.
UH, MA'AM, I'M, I'M, UH, THE HARRIS COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT DURING THE, UH, COUNTY'S REVIEW OF THIS PLAT LEADING UP TO TODAY'S MEETING, UH, WE DID, UH, SOLICIT COMMENTS FROM OUR TEAM THAT'S WORKING ON THE DRAINAGE PROJECT YOU MENTIONED AND NO, MM-HMM
NO PARTICULAR CONFLICTS WERE IDENTIFIED.
UH, BUT I'M GONNA GIVE YOU SOME CONTACT INFORMATION SO YOU CAN REACH OUT AND I CAN, UH, TALK WITH YOU OFFLINE ABOUT THE COUNTY'S ROLE HERE AT THE COMMISSION AND, AND ADDITIONAL STEPS THAT OUR REVIEW OF THE APPLICANT'S, UH, FUTURE BUILDING PERMITS MIGHT HAVE.
I, I THINK MS. ESPARZA MIGHT BE ON A, ARE YOU ON THE PHONE OR ON A COMPUTER? MR. ESPARZA STAR SIX TO UNMUTE BY PHONE, PLEASE.
WELL THEN, UH, IF YOU CAN CLICK ON THE CHAT, I'LL PUT MY INFORMATION.
I'M TRYING TO FIND A CHAT AND I CAN'T SEEM TO FIND IT.
IT LOOKS LIKE A LITTLE, UM, YOU KNOW, A, A TALK BUBBLE LIKE YOU SEE IN A CARTOON, RIGHT? YEAH, IT'S AT THE BOTTOM.
IF YOU CAN GET YOUR INFORMATION IN AND THEN WE'LL GET THAT TO, UH, YOU CAN GET MR. SMITH'S CONTACT INFORMATION AND GET IN TOUCH WITH HIM.
ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 21 HEARING NO RESPONSE? I'LL TURN TO THE COMMISSION AND SEE IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION.
IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER THIS ITEM AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION? BALDWIN BALDWIN.
IS THERE A SECOND? ALL ALLMAN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 22 IS SET GARDENS REPL NUMBER ONE, THE SIZE LOCATED ALONG SETI STREET NORTH OF AARON, AARON STREET AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR REPL IS TO CREATE SIX LOTS IN THE PARKING RESERVE.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS PLA.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL IS, UH, PENDING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO FURTHER PLAT FOR FURTHER, UM, LEGAL DEED RESTRICTION REVIEW.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
MADAM CHAIR, IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 22 STEADY GARDENS IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 22? UH, HEARING NO RESPONSE? UM, I WILL OBJECT SPEAKING.
ASK IT'S WHITE ME AND SAY DON'T WANNA SPEAK.
SO, UH, I'VE LOST MY TRAIN THOUGHT HERE.
SO WE, UH, IS THERE ANY, THERE'S NO ONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 22.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE ITEM.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER THE ITEM AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTIONS? SEGLER SECOND.
VICTOR, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
PLACE THE SIZE LOCATED ALONG BRAGG STREET, BETWEEN CHAPMAN AND TERRY STREETS IN HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR REPLAY IS TO CREATE 11 LOTS.
THE APPLICANT FAILED TO MEET THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 42.
RECOMMENDATION IS DISAPPROVED.
THE PLOT STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM MATTER.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 23.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 23? HEARING NO RESPONSE? I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[00:30:01]
UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE PLAT DUE TO NOTICE.UM, IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION JONES MA ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 23 IS DISAPPROVED ITEM 1 24.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 1 24 IS GULF VIEW MANOR PARTIAL RELA NUMBER ONE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF SO WAYSIDE DRIVE AND CHERRY HILL STREET.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS RELA IS TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED DEED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRING THE PLAT FOR TWO WEEKS PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
PUBLIC NOTICE HAS BEEN MET WITH THIS ITEM.
AND MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 24 GULF VIEW MANOR IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 24? UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION? HELLO? HELLO? YES.
DID YOU WANNA SPEAK ON GULF VIEW MANOR? I DON'T THINK SO.
UM, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION? GARZA GARZA.
AND ITEM 1 24 IS DEFERRED ITEM 1 25.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE ITEM 1 25 IS LEVITT GREEN, SECTION THREE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS NORTH ALONG HOLCOMB BOULEVARD AND WEST ALONG STATE HIGHWAY 2 88.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE TWO UNRESTRICTED RESERVES.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 25 LEVITT GREEN IS CONTINUED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 25? HEARING NO RESPONSE? I'LL ASK THE COMMISSION IF THERE'S ANY DISCU.
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK THE COMMISSION IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION.
IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? BALDWIN? IS THERE A SECOND? ALLMAN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANYONE OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM 1 26 IS MANNERS AT WOODLAND HEIGHTS PARTIAL RELA NUMBER ONE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS WEST ALONG MORRISON STREET, SOUTH OF PICO STREET AND WEST OF HOUSTON AVENUE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPLAY IS TO CREATE ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW OF THE SEPARATELY FILED DEED RESTRICTIONS.
PUBLIC NOTICE HAS BEEN MET WITH THIS ITEM, MADAM CHAIR.
AND IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 1 26 MANNERS AT WOODLAND HEIGHTS IS OPENED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK THIS WEEK ON 1 26? UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE ITEM IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING? BALDWIN? IS THERE A SECOND? MODEST? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[00:35:09]
WHO IS GONNA PRESENT ON 1 27? MY APOLOGIES THOUGH.ITEM 1 27 IS NANTUCKET RESIDENCES.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS EAST ALONG NANTUCKET DRIVE WEST OF FOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE AND SOUTH OF SAN FELIPPE STREET.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ALONG A SHARED DRIVEWAY.
THERE ARE NO BRANCHES REQUEST FOR THIS ITEM.
THE APPLICANT HAS NOT MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLA OF THOSE FILED SEPARATELY, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE PLAT FOR FAILURE TO MEET NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
MADAM CHAIR FOR PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM.
AT THIS TIME, THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 27 NANTUCKET RESIDENCES IS CONTINUED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WITH US WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 27 HEARING NO RESPONSE? UM, I WILL CALL, UM,
ARE DO YOU, ARE YOU TRYING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 27? I BELIEVE THAT WAS JUST AN ECHO ON A, ON A SPEAKER.
UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE PLAT FOR LACK OF NOTICE.
UM, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION JONES GARZA JONES AND SECOND GARZA.
OH, I GUESS WE JUST ONE AT A TIME.
UM, GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 1 28, PINE 12, SECTION NINE PART TWO.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY NORTH OF WALLACE ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, UM, NO, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A REVISED SUBDIVISION PLA AND IS NOW PROPOSING TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT AND ONE COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE RESERVE.
THE COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE IS REQUIRED TO ALLOW THE LOST SIZES TO BE LESS THAN 5,000 SQUARE FEET FOOTAGE.
NO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT DID NOT SUBMIT THE REVISED DRAWING IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THEREFORE, ADDITIONAL TIME IS NEEDED TO ALLOW LEGAL TO REVIEW THE REVISED SUBDIVISION PLA AND TO FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW SEPARATELY FILED THE RESTRICTION.
THE STEP RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLA FOR A SECOND TIME TO ALLOW LEGAL MORE TIME TO REVIEW, UM, TO REVISED SUBDIVISION PLAN AND TO FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW THE DATE RESTRICTION STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU PLEASE TO THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 1 28, PINE TRAIL SECTION NINE IS OPEN.
UH, I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE.
IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING OR HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 28? HEARING NONE.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER.
UM, IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION? VICTOR? VICTOR, IS THERE A SECOND? JONES JONES.
1 29 PINE TRAIL SECTION NINE PART TWO.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY NORTH OF WALLACE ROAD AND EAST OF NOR MANDY STREET.
THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A REVISED DRAWING AND IS NOW PROPOSING TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOT IN ONE COMPENSATED OPEN SPACE AS REQUIRED TO MEET THE ORDINANCE.
NO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
THE APPLICANT DID NOT SUBMIT THE REVISED DRAWING IN TIME.
[00:40:01]
NEEDED TO ALLOW LEGAL TO REVIEW THE REVISED SUBDIVISION PLA AND TO FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW SEPARATE SEPARATELY FILE DATE RESTRICTION.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE P FOR TO ALLOW MORE TIME FOR LEGAL TO REVIEW REVISED INFORMATION AND TO FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW DATE RESTRICTION STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF THE PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 29 PINE TRAIL SECTION NINE.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 29? HEARING NONE.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION.
GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER BALDWIN.
IT JUST APPEARS LIKE THIS IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING NEW AND WE'RE GONNA GET MORE OF THIS.
WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS RESERVE A HERE, IS THIS A DETENTION BASIN? WHO'S GONNA OWN RESERVE A IF YOU SOLD LOT ONE? THIS IS JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND 'CAUSE IT APPEARS LIKE WE'RE GONNA BE GETTING A LOT MORE OF THESE AND I'LL LET, LET MS. RODRIGUEZ EXPLAIN.
RESERVE A IS GONNA BE COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE AND WE'LL HAVE TO BE MAINTAINED BY LOT ONE AND LOT TWO.
AND UH, THE REASON WHY THEY'RE DOING COMPENSATED OPEN SPACE IS BECAUSE THEY ARE CREATING LOT LESS THAN 5,000.
AND THEY, AND ONE OF THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS TO DO LESS THAN 5,000 IS TO PROVIDE COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE, WHICH CAN BE USED FOR DRAINAGE.
BUT WHAT OTHER PURPOSE CAN IT BE USED FOR? COULD IT BE A PARKING LOT? NO, IT'S JUST, UH, OPEN SPACE.
IT HAS TO BE GREEN SPACE, RIGHT? YES.
AND IT'S GONNA BE MUTUALLY OWNED BY LOTS.
WHAT HAPPENS IF NUMBER TWO DOESN'T WANNA MAINTAIN IT? I'M JUST, BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE OF THESE.
I, MS. MACHO, I MEAN, THERE IS, GO AHEAD.
THERE WILL BE, THERE'S A PLAT RESTRICTION ON THE NOTE THAT, ON THE PLAT THAT WHERE SAY THE COMPENSATED OPEN FEE HAS TO BE MAINTAINED BY LOT ONE AND TWO.
SO IT WILL BE NOTIFIED WHOEVER'S GONNA BUY THE, THE LOT.
I THINK COMMISSIONER, THIS IS IN THE ETJ.
UH, BY COINCIDENCE, I THINK THIS, UH, THIS QUESTION CAME UP IN A, IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY DURING THE, UH, LIVABLE PLACES COMMITTEE TUESDAY, UH, BEFORE, UH, I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO CALL YOU BACK, SIR.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, GARZA AND, AND, UH, UH, CLARK, UH, CHAIRING THAT THERE WAS SOME STAFF ITEMS PRESENTED THAT, THAT RELATE TO COMP COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE.
AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I RAISED THAT THIS IS EVIDENCE OF, UH, IS THAT OUR CHAPTER 42 DEFINITIONS FOR COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE AND A TABLE THAT'S WITHIN CHAPTER 42 CURRENTLY HAVE DIFFERING REQUIREMENTS IN THE ETJ AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
UM, SO THIS PARTICULAR ONE IS A, UH, 35 BY ONE 20 LOT, UH, PROPOSAL THAT, UH, REQUIRES COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE.
BUT INSIDE THE CITY, I'M NOT SURE THE SAME REQUIREMENT WOULD APPLY.
SO, UM, THAT'S GONNA BE A TOPIC FOR CONTINUING DISCUSSION AT THE NEXT LIVABLE PLACES, UH, COMMITTEE MEETING, I BELIEVE.
I JUST WAS CURIOUS HOW THAT WAS GONNA WORK.
UM, OKAY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON, SO FOLLOW UP QUESTION? OH YES, COMMISSIONER MODEST.
LET ME, WHY WOULDN'T THAT RESERVE A KIND OF BE SPLIT TO YOUR POINT ABOUT OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE? LIKE, COULD THERE NOT BE TWO RESERVE A THAT ARE SMALLER AND THAT WAY THEY'RE THE DEFINED 'CAUSE VERSUS LIKE A COMMUNITY HOA WHERE YOU HAVE A, A COMMON OPEN SPACE WHERE THE COMMUNITY HOA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT? AGREE.
SO I, IS IT POSSIBLE TO SPLIT THAT RESERVE A AT ALL? GOOD AFTERNOON MEMBERS OF PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO THE, THE ORDINANCE DOES REQUIRE COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE TO BE OWNED BY THE SUBDIVISION, THE HOMEOWNERS OF THE SUBDIVISION.
IN THIS CASE, SUBDIVISION IS ONE AND TWO LOTS.
SO THEY HAVE TO OWN IT IN COMMON.
THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT TOGETHER.
THE CONCERNS THAT WE SEE ARE THAT THESE WILL BE ULTIMATELY, UM, DIVIDED AND, UH, KEPT INTO ONE OR THE OTHER LOTS AND THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
THIS WE DO NOT SEE VERY OFTEN.
UH, THIS IS A REPL OF AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE SEEING THIS.
[00:45:01]
HAPPEN IN THE CITY AS WELL.ASK THE QUESTION, BUT THE ANSWER TO HER QUESTION, THE ANSWER'S NO, THEN IT CAN'T BE DIVIDED.
YES, IT CANNOT BE DIVIDED INTO LOT ONE AND TWO SEPARATELY BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE OWNED COMMONLY.
IT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOA OF THE SUBDIVISION.
IN THIS CASE, THE SUBDIVISION IS JUST THESE TWO LOTS BY OUR RULES OR BY COUNTY RULES BY CHAPTER 42 RULES.
THIS IS THE SAME TYPE OF COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE THAT WE SEE INSIDE THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
THE DIFFERENCE IS THE SIZE OF THE LOTS.
THAT'S ALL COMMISSIONER GARZA.
I I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, THINK OF IF THE OTHER REST OF THAT WAS DRIVEWAY.
IT'S KIND OF OUR TOWN HOME CONCEPT WITH GREEN SPACE IN BETWEEN THE DRIVES.
I JUST SEE IT BEING HARD TO MANAGE LATER.
I'M GONNA TAKE CARE OF MY YARD.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, IF YOU DON'T WANNA TAKE CARE OF YOURS, I WILL BE CALLING YOU
I AM CURIOUS, WHY DO YOU SEE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE AS OPPOSED TO THE WAY IT IS IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON? BECAUSE I DON'T OFTEN SEE IT WITH JUST TWO HOMEOWNERS.
AND THESE ARE PROBABLY GONNA BE CHEAPER HOUSES, NOT EXPENSIVE HOUSES.
AND I JUST SEE IT BEING, THEY DON'T, I SEE 'EM HAVING A PROBLEM MAINTAINING THE DITCH IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE ALSO.
SO JUST NOW YOU'VE GOT COMMON OWNERSHIP AND WHEN NUMBER LOT ONE DOESN'T WANNA PLAY WELL WITH LOT TWO, IT'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM.
SO MAY I, UH, JUST SO JOHN, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE LARGER SUBDIVISION, THE PREVIOUS SLIDE VERSUS THIS, LIKE WHAT COMMISSIONER MARS WAS SAYING, IF HALF OF IT WAS ON LOT ONE AND HALF OF IT WAS LOT TWO, THEN THEY WOULD CLEARLY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING ON THEIR PROPERTY.
BUT ARE YOU GONNA GET A SEPARATE TAX BILL FOR RESERVE A YES.
SO I THINK, I THINK THAT OUR WITH NO HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION, UH, WELL, AND IT WOULD NECESSITATE HAVING A, A NEIGHBORHOOD, A, A CIVIC ASSOCIATION FOR TWO PEOPLE.
I HAVE, SO I HAVE ONE FOR TWO PEOPLE.
NO, I, I'M JUST GONNA SAY THAT'S A, THAT'S BEEN A COMMON THING.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATIONS FOR, FOR THREE PACKS.
I I LIVE IN ONE THAT'S A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION FOR TWO PEOPLE, BUT THEY'RE DEFENDING THEM ALL THE TIME BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE 'EM.
SO I SEE 'EM WHERE THE UE MAKE 'EM HAVE ONE, BUT THEN THEY NEVER WANT TO PARTICIPATE, SO THEY DISSOLVE THEM AND THEN YOU HAVE A PROBLEM FOUR YEARS LATER.
SO, SO LET ME, LET ME, UH, I THINK IT IS A GOOD DISCUSSION.
BUT ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, MAYBE NOT JUST FOR THIS PROJECT OVERALL, COS IS A GOOD DISCUSSION TO BE HAD.
HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCREEN, THIS WAS AN ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION THAT WAS A LARGER SUBDIVISION THAT INCLUDED, UM, LOTS THAT WERE GREATER THAN 5,000 OR MET THE 5,000 SQUARE FEET RULE.
NOW THE HOMEOWNER OR THE DEVELOPER OF THOSE CERTAIN LOTS TWO IN THIS CASE IS COMING AND WANTING TO DIVIDE IT INTO TWO LOTS.
THIS USED TO NOT HAPPEN NOW IT'S HAPPENING IN CITY IN THE ETJ EVERYWHERE.
SO COS DISCUSSION SHOULD HAPPEN.
HOWEVER, IT IS NOT JUST PARTICULAR TO THIS PROJECT.
IT IS, IT IS A DISCUSSION WE SHOULD HAVE WHERE SHOULD BE THE COS.
BUT COS MAINTENANCE IS ALWAYS ON THE HOA.
RIGHT? SO, SO I MEAN HA HAS TO BE THERE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW PRIVATE STREETS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW, ALLOW ANY PRIVATE PARKS, HOA HAS TO BE THERE.
AND WE ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION IN THE LIVABLE PLACES COMMITTEE.
UM, ON THIS AND OTHER RESERVES, WHICH I KNOW IS OF INTEREST TO ANU.
THIS THIS HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL.
IN, IN THE INTERIM OF WORKING THIS OUT THROUGH OTHER, UM, MEANS, CAN THERE BE A STIPULATION THAT THIS RESERVE BE CONVEYED OVER TO AN EXISTING HOA IF THERE IS ONE? THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, THEY UNDERSTAND THE TERMS, THE, THE NIG NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE SOMEWHAT, IT ANSWERS THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE ASKING OR THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE.
I I I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE, UH, MORE DISCUSSION.
I'M LOOKING TOWARDS OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.
BUT I WOULD TELL YOU IN THIS PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION, IF I WAS LIVING IN THAT SUBDIVISION, I OWNED A 5,000 SQUARE FEET LOT AND THESE ARE PUBLIC STREETS.
I DON'T HAVE AN HOA WHY WOULD I, UH, JOIN AN HOA BETWEEN TWO LOTS THAT ARE SMALLER THAN MY LOT? I CONCUR IF THERE'S NO NO HOA IN EXISTENCE, BUT IF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AN HOA CAN WE, OR IS THERE ANY LEGAL AUTHORITY COUNSELOR, YOU KNOW, TO STIPULATE THAT IT BE CONVEYED TO THAT HOA THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW IT'LL BE MAINTAINED OR WHAT WE, WE REALLY DON'T, BUT AT LEAST WE, THERE'S AN ENTITY OUT THERE THAT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE.
[00:50:02]
MS. NICHOLSON.KIM NICHOLSON WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
UM, I PREFER TO SEE THAT IN OUR ORDINANCE, UM, AS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD THEN IMPOSE, BUT, UM, ABSENT, ABSENT BEING IN THE ORDINANCE, I DON'T THINK SO BY, WE'LL LOOK FURTHER INTO IT.
IF WE CAN WORK IT OUT, WE'LL WORK IT OUT.
CAN LOTS ONE AND TWO FENCE OFF THIS RESERVE A OR DOES LOT FIVE BRING THEIR DOG OVER AND PEE IN THIS OPEN RESERVE? CAN ANYONE USE IT? THE, THE COS IN THIS CASE? SO, SO THE RE THE REASON THE ONUS, THE ONUS IS WRITTEN FOR THAT SUBDIVISION.
SO IN THIS CASE THAT SUBDIVISION IS NOT THE BIGGER ONE, IT'S JUST THE TWO.
SO THE TWO LOTS COMBINELY OWN AND MAINTAIN IT.
SO THEY CAN RESTRICT IT, THEY CAN FENCE IT OFF, THEY CAN FENCE IT OFF WITHIN THERE, BUT IT HAS TO BE BETWEEN COMMON ONE AND TWO.
BUT REALITY IS THEY, THEY WILL PROBABLY FENCE IT OFF INSIDE ALSO.
I'M JUST WORRIED THAT THEY MAKE A PARKING LOT OUT OF IT AND THEN YOU LOST THE OPEN RESERVE PARKING LOT IS UNLIKELY BECAUSE PARKING IS NOT ALLOWED.
SO PERMITTING, UH, AT THE COUNTY, THEY PROBABLY WON'T GIVE THEM A PERMIT TO PAVE IT OVER.
AND I THINK YOU, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER.
SO MAYBE WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT I THINK IT'S, UM, IT'S A MUCH BIGGER ISSUE THAN JUST THIS ITEM.
OBVIOUSLY WE, WE ARE LOOKING AT IT WOULD APPRE, WOULD UH, YOU KNOW, WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 29 FROM THE PUBLIC AS OPPOSED TO A COMMISSIONER? UH, OKAY.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THEN IS TO DEFER.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ITEM 1 29? IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION SMITH SIGLER SECOND SMITH.
ITEM ONE 30 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.
ITEM 1 31 IS SPRING BRANCH ACRES, SECTION ONE, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER THREE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS SOUTH ALONG SPRINGBROOK DRIVE NORTH OF CLAY ROAD AND WEST OF CAMPBELL ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE TWO NARROW FRONT LOADING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTS WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
SEVERAL RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 1 31 SPRING BRANCH ACRES IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 31? HEARING NO RESPONSE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLATS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION FOR PERLE ISH.
ITEM 1 32 IS WILAND PLACE PARTIAL RELA NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS WEST ALONG HAZARD STREET, EAST OF SHEPHERD DRIVE AND NORTH OF VERMONT STREET.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE TWO NARROW FRONT LOADING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL IS STILL ONGOING AND MORE TIME IS REQUIRED TO FULLY REVIEW ALL COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT FOR TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW MORE TIME FOR FURTHER LEGAL REVIEW.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 1 32 WOLF FRAN PLACE IS OPEN.
PLEASE DO NOTE THIS IS A CHANGE IN RECOMMENDATION FROM WHAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA, CORRECT? YES SIR.
SO IS I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED IN ADVANCE ON 1 32.
IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING OR HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 32? HEARING NONE, I'LL ASK THE COMMISSION IF THERE'S A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND? JONES JONES.
[00:55:01]
CONCLUDE.CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS REQUIRING NOTIFICATION SECTION WE MOVE TO SECTION
[d. Subdivision Plats with Variance Requests (Geoff Butler and Aracely Rodriguez)]
D VARIANCES.MADAM CHAIR, I'M GONNA RECUSE FROM I 1 33.
NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER HE WILL BE, UH, RECUSING ON ITEM 1 33.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS COMMISSIONER PORUS PERLE, I NEED TO STEP AWAY FOR A FEW MINUTES OKAY.
AND NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER POROUS PERLE WILL BE LEAVING THE MEETING FOR A LITTLE BIT.
I'LL BE LEAVING THE MEETING FOR PERIOD OF TIME.
NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER, BOTH COMMISSIONER POROUS PERLE AND SMITH ARE LEAVING THE MEETING FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
ITEM 1 33, ITEM 1 33 ALABAMA COURT TRACK.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, CITY LIMIT SOUTH OF WEST ALABAMA STREET AND WEST OF BUFFALO SPEEDWAY.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES TO NOT PROVIDE RIGHT AWAY DEDICATION ALONG WEST ALABAMA COURT AND SECOND TO ALLOW THE PROPOSED RESERVE TO HAVE BUN ON ALABAMA COURT WITH THE RIGHT OF AWAY WIDTH OF LEFT AND 60 FEET.
THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLA FOR TWO WEEKS FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW, BUT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION GO RIGHT AHEAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE
WEST ALABAMA COURT IS A SUB STANDARD STREET ABOUT 20 FEET WIDE AND 925 FEET LONG, PROVIDING ASSETS TO SEVERAL RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
THIS TREE HAS BEEN IN THIS CONFIGURATION AT LEAST FOR 50 YEARS AND NO RIGHT AWAY.
DEDICATION WERE GIVEN BY ADJACENT CHECKS.
THEREFORE REQUESTING RIGHT AWAY DEDICATION ON THIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPROVE THE OVERALL RIGHT OF WAY AND STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
HOWEVER, STAFF IS UNABLE TO FIND ANY RECORD INFORMATION REGARDING TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE STREET.
SO AT THIS TIME, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A SECONDARY FELLOW FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW TO DETERMINE IT WAS ALABAMA COURT IS A PRIVATE OR PUBLISHED STREET.
SO STEP RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW.
STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE AND DID CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION.
UM, SO ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. RODRIGUEZ? WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS LAST WEEK.
COMMISSIONER ROBBINS, UH, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF IT'S A PRIVATE OR PUBLIC STREET? IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, BUT WE WANT TO SHOW, UM, THE ACCURATE INFORMATION ON PAGE OF THE PLAT WHEN IT GET RECORDED.
I THINK WE'VE DONE IT INCORRECT.
WELL, IT DEPENDS WHAT THE ANSWER IS.
WILL THIS COME BACK AS A FINAL AND CAN THAT BE IT WILL NOT.
SO COULD THAT JUST BE A TERM OF RECORDATION ON THE ONE-ON ONE? UM, THE ANSWER IS NO BECAUSE WE DON'T DO FURTHER REACHERS AND REVIEW AT RECOMMENDATION.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE HANDLED AT AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSIONER, IF I MAY, UM,
SO IF IT'S A PRIVATE STREET, UH, THE VARIANCE WOULD BE THAT THE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE WILL TAKE ACCESS FROM A PRIVATE STREET.
IT, THERE WON'T BE A RIGHT OF A WIDENING VARIANCE BECAUSE WHATEVER IS THAT PRIVATE STREET OR AN ACCESS EASEMENT CAN REMAIN IN THAT CONFIGURATION.
SO IT IS A MATTER THAT WHAT KIND OF VARIANCE DO, DOES THE PLAN, DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE WHERE WE WOULD NOT REQUIRE TO
SO IF THEY DON'T NEED IT, YOU DON'T NEED THE VARIANCE.
THERE WILL BE A VARIANCE FOR, UM, THERE ARE TWO VARIANCES CURRENTLY.
THE FIRST VARIANCE IS THE RIGHT OF A WIDTH IS NOT SUFFICIENT AND THE SECOND VARIANCE IS THE RESERVE MUST HAVE THE CORRECT RIGHT OF A TO TAKE ACCESS.
THE RIGHT OF A WIDTH VARIANCE WILL GO AWAY IF IT IS A PRIVATE STREET.
BUT THE RESERVE TAKING ACCESS FROM A PRIVATE STREET WILL BE A NEW VARIANCE THAT WE HAVE TO ADD TO.
SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO GRANT THE RIGHT VARIANCE.
APPLICANT IS OKAY WITH THE DPU.
I I GET THE SENSE THAT AFTER 50 YEARS OF HANDLING THIS SUBSTANDARD STREET IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS, YOU'RE TRYING TO GET THIS RIGHT? YES.
YOU'RE TRYING TO GET THIS CORRECT.
SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE DRO.
I DID, I DROVE, DROVE BY AND NOTICED THAT THERE'S CONSTRUCTION GOING ON, I THINK JUST TO
[01:00:01]
THE NORTH OF IT.SO WE HAD TO HAVE JUST APPROVED THAT PLAT.
AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE PROBABLY DIDN'T KNOW AT THAT TIME IF IT WAS A, OKAY, SO, SO THE PLAT ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE IS A BIG PLAT.
UH, THERE ARALEE IF YOU CAN'T PULL IT UP, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT YES, IT WAS RECORDED BY, UM, UH, IT, IT JUST SAID THAT IT WAS PRIVATE STREET AND IT, WE JUST, WE WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT.
WAS THAT PLAT RECORDED WRONG OR NOT? WE DON'T KNOW.
OR WAS IT RIGHT BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN, I I THINK I ACTUALLY MENTIONED THE PUBLIC UTILITIES UNDERNEATH IT.
YES, THERE'S A PUBLIC STREET SIGN THERE.
UM, HALF OF THE DOCUMENTS SHOW THAT THIS IS PRIVATE STREET AND UH, HALF OF THE, THERE ARE PUBLIC UTILITIES IN IT.
UH, SO WE ARE, WE ARE BASICALLY VERIFYING AND MAKING SURE THAT WHATEVER WE PUT ON THE PLA IS ULTIMATELY CORRECT.
WE HOPE YOU CAN DO IT IN TWO WEEKS,
UM, I WILL ASK IF I DON'T HAVE ANYONE WHO HAS INDICATED THEY WANNA SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BUT IS THERE ANYONE WHO'S HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 33? UM, IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE ITEM FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW.
IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER GARZA? IS THERE A SECOND? MAR ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
MADAM CHAIR, I NEED TO MOVE, MOVE FROM HERE.
UH, FOR 10 MINUTES I NEED TO FIX MY COMPUTER LINK.
NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER TAHIR WILL BE LEAVING THE MEETING FOR A TIME.
I THINK WE'RE, WE'VE 11 FORUM.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER POR PERLE.
UM, MR. BUTLER, GO RIGHT AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE EASTERN PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEMS 1 34 AND 1 35 ARE ESTATES ON STOCK DECK GP IN SECTION ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE WALLER COUNTY ETJ, ALONG STOCK DECK SCHOOL ROAD EAST OF FARM TO MARKET 28 55 AND WEST OF SCHIFF.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES ONE SINGLE FAMILY FLAG LOTT AND A GENERAL PLAN ENCOMPASSING FOUR EXISTING HOMES.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES, ONE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACE AND REQUIREMENTS BY NOT DEDICATING A NORTH, SOUTH, OR EAST WEST STREET TO THE SITE.
AND TWO, TO ALLOW ALL HOMES WITHIN THE GP TO UTILIZE A 30 FOOT EASEMENT FOR ACCESS RATHER THAN A PUBLIC STREET.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF BOTH REQUESTS.
THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG THE WESTERN ETJ FRONTIER WITHIN AN UNRECORDED SUBDIVISION.
THIS COMMUNITY CONSISTS OF SEVERAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT HAVE LONG UTILIZED A 30 FOOT EASEMENT FOR ACCESS THROUGH A 60 FOOT WIDE FLAG FLAG LOT STAFF.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND IS REQUIRED TO PLAT IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THEIR NECESSARY PERMITS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS INTERSECTION SPACING AND LOT ACCESS VARIANCES.
DUE TO THE LOCATION OF THIS HOME WITHIN THE GP.
THE SITE IS SITUATED ON A BLOCK OCCUPIED BY UNDEVELOPED LAND AND HOMES ON LARGE ACREAGE TRACKS.
THIS LOW LEVEL OF DENSITY WOULD NOT WARRANT THE ADDITION OF NEW PUBLIC STREETS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CIRCULATION AND ACCESS.
IN ADDITION, THE ACCESS EASEMENT AND 60 FOOT FLAG LOT STAFF PROVIDE SIMILAR ACCESS AS ENVISIONED TO THE PUBLIC STREET REQUIREMENT.
GRANTING THE VARIANCES WOULD ALLOW FOR SAFE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION.
PROPORTIONAL TO THE ADDITION OF ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING BOTH VARIANCES THE PLAT AND GP PER THE CPC ONE ONE FORM CONDITIONS.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT IN THIS ITEM.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BUTLER? ACTUALLY A QUESTION.
MR. MORRIS, WHO OWNS AND MAINTAINS THE EASEMENT TO THE TWO PROPERTIES? WELL, THE FLAG LOT, THE OWNER OF, OF SECTION ONE WILL OWN THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE FLAG.
THE OTHER PORTION, THE, THE WESTERN 60 FEET WOULD BE OWNED BY THAT PROPERTY OWNER.
SO I DON'T SEE ANY COMMENTS FROM CENTER POINT, BUT I HAD A SITUATION RECENTLY VERY SIMILAR TO THIS, WHERE THE SECOND, UM, LOT BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT UTILITY EASEMENTS, BUT ESSENTIALLY WAS ISOLATED FROM BEING SERVED BY UTILITIES BY THE FIRST PROPERTY IN BETWEEN.
SO I, I DON'T SEE ANY, UM, COMMENTS FROM THEM, BUT IF THERE'S NOT A UTILITY EASEMENT THAT RUNS THROUGH THE ACCESS EASEMENT IN LOT ONE, THEN LOT TWO WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET SERVICE.
SO I, I KNOW THAT'S NOT PART OF CHAPTER 42, BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD THAT IF THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN LOT TWO WILL BE LANDLOCKED
[01:05:01]
FROM A UTILITY PERSPECTIVE WITHOUT EASEMENT.SO MAYBE JUST COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING OR WITH US WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 34 AND 1 35? IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR BOTH ITEMS IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES AND APPROVE THE PLOTS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
OH, WE HAVE A GENERAL PLAN AND SECTION ONE.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON ITEMS 1 34 AND 1 35? GARZA GARZA? IS THERE A SECOND? ROBIN ROBINS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 36 IS EVERTED AT GRAND PARKWAY.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE HARRIS COUNTY ETJ, ALONG KIRKENDAL NORTH OF THE GRAND PARKWAY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THREE RESERVES AND TWO PUBLIC STREETS FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT PROVIDING AN EAST TO WEST STREET.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG AL, ALONG THE PROPOSED COLLECTOR STREET CORRIDORS FOR KLEIN OAK LANE AND LINDSEY ROAD.
PER THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND FREEWAY PLAN, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION SEGMENTS FOR THESE COLLECTOR STREETS.
THESE COLLECTOR STREETS WERE RECENTLY ADDED TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AS A RESULT OF ANALYSIS OF THE FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS DONE BY HARRIS COUNTY.
STRICT INTERPRETATION OF CHAPTER 42 REQUIRES A SECOND EAST TO WEST STREET THROUGH THE SITE.
DUE TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN KIRKENDAL AND FUTURE KLEIN OAKS LANE.
WHEN FULLY DEVELOPED, THIS COLLECTOR STREET SYSTEM WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE CIRCULATION AND ACCESS TO ACCOMPANY DUE DEVELOPMENT.
IN ADDITION, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF FUTURE LINDSEY ROAD WAS GRANTED A SIMILAR VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE NEEDS TO WEST STREET LIMITING THE BENEFIT OF A NEW STREET WITHIN THE SUBJECT SITE.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH SOUND PUBLIC POLICY AS THE COLLECTOR GRID AND LIMITED TRAFFIC CIRCULATION OPPORTUNITIES WOULD MAKE AN ADDITIONAL STREET IMPRACTICAL.
HARRIS COUNTY'S EXPRESSED NO OBJECTION TO THIS REQUEST AND STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVING THE PLAT FOR THE CPC ONE ONE FORM CONDITIONS.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BUTLER? IF NOT, UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 36? IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN.
IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? ROBINS SECOND ALLMAN.
ITEM 1 37 IS HIGHLAND MEADOWS MOBILE HOME PARK GP.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE HARRIS COUNTY ETJ NORTH OF ALDEEN MAIL ROUTE WEST OF JFK AND EAST OF ALDINE WESTFIELD.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE FOR THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT EXTENDING LAND BROOK LANE THROUGH THE SITE AND TO NOT TERMINATE SANDYDALE LANE WITH A CUL-DE-SAC.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED GPS IMPACT ON TRAFFIC ACCESS AND CIRCULATION.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT.
THIS ITEM AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UM, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 37 HIGHLAND MEADOWS MOBILE HOME PARK GP? IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER JONES SECOND AYE ISH.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CITY LIMIT NORTH OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SIX 10, UM, AND EAST OF TT JESTER BOULEVARD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 38 SINGLE FAMILY LOT WITH PRIVATE STREET AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT EXTEND OR TERMINATE OAK FOREST DRIVE WITH A CUL-DE-SAC.
THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER APPLY PER THE APPLICANT REQUEST.
AND WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION AS THIS IS A SECOND DEFERRAL PLEASE.
SO, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH PRIVATE STREET WITH ACCESS TO THE
[01:10:01]
10 PER CHAPTER 42.THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO EXTEND OAK FOREST DRIVE THROUGH THE SIDE, BUT WISHES NOT TO DO SO.
STEP IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST FOR STEP ANALYSIS.
THE APPLICANT CAN TERMINATE OAK FOREST DRIVE WITH A CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH WOULD MEET AND ABLY INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.
A CUL-DE-SAC WILL PROVIDE A SECOND POINT OF ASSET TO THE FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND WOULD ALSO DECREASE TRAVEL TIME TO THE NORTH WITHOUT TRAVELING ALONG TO THE FEED ROAD.
THIS MAP, UH, SHOW THIS MAP IS SHOWN ASSET TO WALTRIP HIGH SCHOOL AND OTHER RETAIL COMMERCIAL TRACK ALONG WEST 34TH STREET.
THE DISTANCE IS ABOUT HALF MILE, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE.
IF THE CULDESAC IS NOT PROVIDED, THEN THE DISTANCE TO ACID ALL THIS FACILITY THERE WILL IS GOING TO BE OVER 1.5 MILES.
AND THAT INCLUDES WALKING ALONG THE FETAL ROAD, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
SO AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A SECONDARY FELLOW TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
BY NOON WEDNESDAY, STAFF RECEIVED MANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN EVENTS WHO SHOWS SUPPORT FOR THE VA REQUEST THE PUBLIC COMMENT MANAGER THAT THEY KNEW THEY DO NOT WANT OAK FOREST DRIVE TO BE EXTENDED OR TERMINATED WITH THE COOLER THEFT.
AND THEY ALSO VOICE A CONCERN ON SAFETY, INCREASED TRAFFIC AND NOISE.
AND THIS CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE, WE HAVE QUITE A FEW PUBLIC SPEAKERS AND I THINK YOU ALL SAW IN THE PACKET WE HAVE A LOT OF, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED PRIOR THAT, UM, DOESN'T OR WHO ARE NOT ASKING TO SPEAK TODAY, BUT WE, WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS, BUT ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT BEFORE I CALL SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER GARZA? SO JUST TO, TO MAKE SURE.
SO, UH, IT SEEMS TO ME CHAPTER 42 REALLY DEMANDS MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS.
HOWEVER, IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WILL BE GATED COMMUNITY BOTH ON THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH SIDE? DO WE KNOW THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, SO ONLY THE RESIDENTS OF THIS SUBDIVISION WILL HAVE ACCESS AND EGRESS ON THE NORTH SIDE, THE SUBDIVISION ON THE NORTH SIDE, NOR PEOPLE GOING ON THE HIGHWAY WILL, THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CUT THROUGH THIS SUBDIVISION TO GET INTO, UH, TO GET ONTO OAK FOREST? MS. RODRIGUEZ? THAT IS CORRECT.
IT WILL BE, UM, I'M NOT SURE IT'S GONNA BE GATED, BUT IT IS PRIVATE.
NORMALLY THEY'RE PRIVATE, GATED COMMUNITIES.
WOULD YOU SEE IF WE CAN FIND THAT OUT FOR THAT IN, IN CASE THIS IS DEFERRED FOR THE NEXT MEETING? I'M SURE THAT SURE.
THE PEOPLE ON THE NORTH SIDE WILL WANT TO KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE A GATED COMMUNITY.
COMMISSIONER ROBS, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR.
THE DEVELOPER IS ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTS THE VARIANCE.
THE STAFF IS AGAINST THE VARIANCE OR RECOMMENDING A VOTE AGAINST THE VARIANCE.
AND MR. RODRIGUEZ, TELL ME AGAIN THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT'LL BE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT.
'CAUSE I, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THAT.
UM, THE NUMBER AT THE CONFIRMING WITH THE APPLICANT, IT IS GONNA BE 38 LOT WITH 38 UNITS, 38 LOTS, 38 UNITS.
I, I WAS JUST COMMENTING TO THE COMMISSIONER'S QUESTION.
TECHNICALLY RIGHT NOW WE'RE ASKING FOR A DEFERRAL.
WE'RE NOT MAKING A RECOMMENDATION BEYOND DEFERRAL.
ANYBODY ELSE? COMMISSIONER ALLMAN.
AND IF, UM, THEY DO HAVE ACCESS TO, IF IT'S A GATED COMMUNITY, THEN WOULD THE STUDENTS GOING TO WALTER, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO, WOULD IT BE GATE FOR THEM? LIKE PEDESTRIAN, PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE ACCESS THROUGH THERE, EVEN THOUGH NOT VEHICULAR FOR THE EXISTING RESIDENTS? FOR WITHOUT THE, FOR THE PROPOSED AND I MEAN, WELL, THE BUT THE PUBLIC WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO IN THERE PRIVATE.
THE, THE PROBLEM IS NO, NO, NO, NO.
BUT THE, BUT THE YES FOR THE RESIDENTS, THE NEW RESIDENTS TO GO TO WALDROP.
MS. RODRIGUEZ, EXPLAIN IF YOU WOULD, THAT YOU CAN'T CONNECT A PUBLIC AND A PRIVATE STREET WITH JUST A CONNE A REGULAR CONNECTION.
SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CUL-DE-SAC IN THAT PLACE.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF ACT, I MEAN OKAY, BUT THEY, THE CUL-DE-SAC WOULD ALLOW ACCESS OF SOME KIND.
BUT THEN THEY ALSO SAID SOMETHING ABOUT HOW IT MIGHT BE GATED IS, DID I MISUNDERSTAND THAT? WE'RE NOT FOR SURE.
[01:15:01]
IN THE DEFERRAL PERIOD, IF IT YES, IF IT WAS, IF THEY FIND OUT IT WAS GATED, COULD, WOULD THERE BE A GATE? SO FOR PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE ACCESS IS WHAT MY QUESTION IS.WE'LL, WE'LL WORK ON THAT IN THE DEFERRAL PERIOD AS CINDY YES.
UH, REMIND ME, CHAPTER 42, IF A STREET, THE DEAD ENDS IS NO LONGER THAN ONE LOT, THERE IS THE APPLICATION WHERE YOU CAN DEAD END THAT STREET.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEN THIS COULD BE APPROVED WITHOUT REQUIRING THE CUL-DE-SAC, WITHOUT THE CONCERNS ABOUT THERE, THERE, THERE ARE FIVE CRITERIA THAT IT MUST MEET IN ORDER TO QUALIFY IT NOT TO BE EXTENDED.
AND ONE OF THOSE IS THAT YOU ARE NOT PROPOSING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT.
SO THIS WOULD NOT MEET ONE OF THE CRITERIA.
WOULD YOU SAY THAT AGAIN, PLEASE? LEMME SURE.
THERE ARE FIVE CRITERIA THAT MUST BE MET IN ORDER TO QUALIFY, UH, FOR THE EXTENSION OF EXTENDING THE STOP.
ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA IS THAT YOU ARE NOT PROPOSING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT BECAUSE THEY WILL, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE A, TO EXTEND THE SUB STREET.
UM, I NEED TO PUT ON MY OTHER HAT.
AND, AND THAT'S FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE.
I HAVE DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOODS WITH PRIVATE STREETS AND A STUBB ROAD, SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS WITH THIS STUBB ROAD COMING INTO ONE BEING UP AT GLENROCK FARMS. AND I WAS NOT REQUIRED TO PUT A CUL-DE-SAC WITHIN MY, UH, PROJECT.
SO I GUESS MAYBE THAT WAS HANDLED THROUGH A VARIANCE PROCESS.
SO GOOD AFTERNOON MEMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION AGAIN.
SO THE RSLE IS STATING THERE ARE FIVE STATEMENT OF FIVE CRITERIA THAT HAVE TO BE ALL MET IN ORDER FOR THAT TO NOT HAVE A CUL-DE-SAC OR NOT BE EXTENDED.
ONE OF, TO GET AN EXCEPTION, TO GET AN EXCEPTION TO NOT EXTEND AND JUST LEAVE IT AS A DEAD END AND JUST BARRICADE IT.
YOU HAVE TO MEET FIVE CRITERIA, FIVE STATEMENT, FIVE CRITERIA, AND THEY HAVE TO MEET ALL FIVE.
IN THIS CASE ACTUALLY DOESN'T MEET TWO OF THEM.
ONE IS THE INTERSECTION SPACING BECAUSE THE STREET HAS TO BE EXTENDED.
AND THE SECOND ONE IS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE WAS TO ALLOW THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS TO BE ABLE TO, UM, HAVE ACCESS INTO THE STOP PORTION OF THE STREETS.
WOULD THE APPLICANT BE ALLOWED TO SUBMIT A VARIANCE TO NOT? THAT IS THE VARIANCE TODAY.
ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD.
WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
UM, I'M GONNA CALL EVERYBODY IN THE, IN THE ORDER THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO ME.
THE FIRST SPEAKER IS PATRICIA WILLIAMS, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
THANK YOU, UH, CHAIR STEIN AND THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HEARING US TODAY.
I AM NOT REALLY GOING TO USE MY TWO MINUTES THIS TIME BECAUSE I'D RATHER HAVE IT IF WE CAN HAVE THIS DEFERRED BECAUSE WE NEED TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT, UH, WHY THE APPLICANT HAS DEFERRED IT.
AND I JUST FOUND OUT THAT RECENTLY, ALONG WITH EVERYBODY ELSE, WE DO, UH, WANT THE VARIANCE.
UH, WE THINK THAT IS BEST FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AS YOU'VE HEARD FROM OUR NEIGHBORS,
I, I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE SHE AURORA CIVIC CLUB, AND I HAVE NOT HEARD ONE PERSON COME TO ME TO SAY, WE DON'T WANT THIS VARIANCE.
SO, UH, UH, YOU HAVE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF, UH, INFORMATION CALLS, LETTERS, ET CETERA, AND I THINK ALL OF YOU HAVE THOSE.
I'M NOT GONNA TAKE ALL MY TWO MINUTES.
LET ME ASK IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? OKAY.
UM, JICA, UM, GARRETT, G-A-R-R-E-T-T-I BELIEVE IS GONNA BE HERE IN PERSON.
MS. GARRETT, UH, I HAD TO MOVE TO, UH, TEAMS. OH, OKAY.
DID I SPELL YOUR NAME RIGHT? OKAY.
YEAH, I, I WOULD ALSO, IF THIS IS GOING TO BE A DEFERRED MATTER, UH, SPEAK IN THE MEETING, THAT, THAT THE INFORMATION IS KNOWN.
AND I'M SORRY, YOUR NAME IS GARRETT JICA.
[01:20:01]
D-E-L-A-N-E-Y.OH, ARE THEY? YOU THERE, MS. DELANEY? YES.
AND, UH, I, I'VE LIVED HERE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS AND THIS WOULD BE A TOTAL DISRUPTION AND WE NEED TO PROTECT AND, UH, PRESERVE OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THERE'S ANOTHER GENTLEMAN HERE, EUGENE, WHO'S LIVED HERE MANY YEARS.
HELLO? UH, MY NAME'S EUGENE HAM.
I'M SORRY, MAY I SPEAK? OKAY, GO AHEAD AND STATE YOUR FULL NAME, PLEASE.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL ON YOU, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE NOT ON MY LIST.
UH, MY, MY COMMENTS ARE, I HAVE LIVED ON THE CORNER OF WILD ROCK AND, UH, OAK FOREST SINCE 1978, AND I HAVE DEALT WITH THE TRAFFIC THAT HAS, UH, INCREASED TREMENDOUSLY.
THAT RUNS ALONG THE SIDE OF MY HOUSE BECAUSE I'M ONE BLOCK OFF OF, UH, BURY.
AND THE TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED, PARTICULARLY DURING DRIVE TIME, YOU KNOW, MORNING AND EVENING.
BUT EVEN DURING THE DAY, THERE IS AT LEAST MODERATE TRAFFIC AND IT, IT'S, AND I CANNOT EVEN IMAGINE ANY, ANY ANYTHING THAT'S ADDED THAT CAN INCREASE THE TRAFFIC ALONG OAK FOREST DRIVE AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON BURY AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ALONG A OAK FOREST.
UP UNTIL THE LIGHT ON WEST 34TH, IT WOULD JUST BE RE IT WOULD JUST BE HUMONGOUS.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO STATE IT, BUT, UH, THAT'S THE, THE, UH, THAT IS MY MAIN, UH, UH, COMMENT ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I THINK I HAVE, UH, UH, A RIGHT TO MAKE A BIG COMMENT FOR DECADES THAT I HAVE LIVED ON THIS, IN THIS AREA.
AND THE TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH A, A, A, UH, AREA OF HOMES IS, IS TREMENDOUS NOW.
AND I JUST OBJECT TO ANY KIND OF OPENING THAT WE HAVE IN THAT, IN THAT, UH, DEAD ENDING OF, UH, OAK FOREST DRIVE RIGHT PAST BURY.
AND THAT'S BASICALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS DENISE BAUER, B-A-T-S-C-H-A-U-E-R, DENISE BAUER.
I THINK IT'S SUPPOSEDLY VIRTUAL.
MS. BAUER DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE PRESENT.
KEITH BUHRMASTER, B-U-R-M-A-S-T-E-R.
MR. BUHRMASTER, MR. BUMA NOT PRESENT.
UM, I'M HIS WIFE AND I'LL BE SPEAKING ON HIS BEHALF.
HE'S GOT, HE'S CAUGHT UP IN A MEETING AT THIS TIME.
WHAT'S YOUR FIRST NAME, PLEASE? WENDY BERMA.
UM, I, I CAN SPEAK, UM, TO THE DEFERRAL OF IT, BUT I, I AM A RESIDENT OF SHEPHERD FOREST AND, UH, I DO SUPPORT THE VARIANCE.
UM, MY HUSBAND, KEITH BREWMASTER, IS AN HPD OFFICER AND HE HAS PATROLLED, UH, THIS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS, UH, THREE B 30 BEAT.
UM, HE HAS EXPRESSED HIS CONCERNS, UM, BEING THAT IF THERE IS EVEN A PEDESTRIAN GATE AT THAT POINT, UH, WITH THESE TOWNHOMES HAVING LIMITED PARKING, UM, A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD PARK ON THE STREET OF OAK FOREST DRIVE AND THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, BE ADDITIONAL TARGETS OF CRIMINAL OPPORTUNITY.
AND WITH THE UNDERSTAFFED HPD STAFF, UM, YOU KNOW, RESPONDING TO THESE, YOU KNOW, CALLS AND, AND SPENDING MORE TIME ON THESE TYPE OF REPORTS, IT KIND OF REDUCES, YOU KNOW, THEIR TIME IN, IN OTHER, IN OTHER AREAS.
UM, ALSO WE DO HAVE YOUNG KIDS.
UM, WE HAVE A TWO AND A 4-YEAR-OLD AND WE, YOU KNOW, WALK AND, YOU KNOW, BIKE AND, YOU KNOW, RUN DOWN BERRY, YOU KNOW, DAILY.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE INCREASED TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC COULD CAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF, OF, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S A FEW OF MY COMMENTS.
[01:25:01]
IS, UH, IS IT BID NUT NUTT.ALRIGHT, WELCOME MADAM CHAIRMAN.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER MY COMMENTS AS YOU'VE RECOMMENDED TO DEFER THE MEETING, UH, THE DECISIONS AS WELL BASED ON SOME OF THE NEW EVIDENCE THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE TODAY.
UM, ANGELICA LOZANO, L-O-Z-A-N-O, MS. LOZANO NOT PRESENT.
UM, THOSE ARE ALL THE SPEAKERS I HAVE SIGNED.
MR. CALVERT, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE CHAT? NO.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING PERHAPS ON A PHONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OH, OKAY.
IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD.
MADAM CHAIR AND COMMISSION, SHARON LAUT, ALMOST 48 YEARS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER UNTIL WE GET BETTER INFORMATION ON THIS.
CAN YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR ME? YES, LOUT.
UM, ANYONE ELSE HERE OR LISTENING WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 38? UM, MADAM CHAIR.
THERE MAY BE ANOTHER ONE IN THE CHAT.
YOU HAVE A SANDY ESPINOZA THAT RAISED THEIR HAND.
UM, MY LAST NAME'S SPELLED E-S-P-I-N-O-S-A.
ALRIGHT, SO I HAVE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I LIVE OFF OF BERRY, ABOUT FOUR BLOCKS FROM, UH, OAK FOREST.
UM, I WOULD LIKE JUST TO GIVE YOU GUYS SOME INPUT ON THE TRAFFIC FLOW THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW.
UM, WE'RE SANDWICHED BETWEEN ELLA AND TC ADJUSTER AND WITH ALL OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN THE SHOPPING ON ELLA AND 34TH, ALONG WITH, UM, THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT IN OAK FOREST, WE HAVE ABOUT FOUR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT TRAVEL THROUGH TO GET TO THEIR SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THAT WOULD BE OAK FOREST, BARDEN OAKS ACRES HOMES AND CANDLELIGHT.
AND THE INCREASE, UM, OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS GETTING THROUGH BE BETWEEN TRAFFIC HAS ABSOLUTELY, UM, INCREASED BY A HUNDRED PERCENT IN THE LAST 20 YEARS WITHOUT A DOUBT.
AND THEY'RE USING OAK FOREST AS, UM, A A THROUGH TRAFFIC TO GET FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER.
SO, UM, BETWEEN THE SHOPPING AND THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE, IT IS JUST ABSOLUTELY THE TRAFFIC IS DANGEROUS AT THIS POINT ON OAK FOREST.
UM, THERE ARE SPEED BUMPS ON BERRY FOR SOME REASON.
I, I DON'T KNOW THE REASON BEHIND IT, BUT WE DO, WE WERE DENIED TO GET SPEED BUMPS AT ONE POINT.
UM, THAT I WOULD JUST LIKE, JUST TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT, UM, THE, THE FAST TRAFFIC THAT COMES THROUGH.
UM, WHETHER IT'S STUDENTS WALKING TO WALTRIP HIGH SCHOOL IN THE MORNINGS OR IN THE AFTERNOONS, UM, THEY DON'T USE THE SIDEWALKS AND THE, THE TRAFFIC AND THE SPEED THAT, UM, THAT WE'RE SEEING.
AND WE SEE PEOPLE DRIVING, UM, PASSING EACH OTHER BECAUSE THEY'RE DRIVING THE SPEED LIMIT AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER CARS ARE IN A RUSH TO GET TO WHERE THEY NEED TO BE.
SO, UM, WE, IT'S, IT'S A TWO LANE ONE GOING IN EACH DIRECTION AND, UM, IT'S JUST NOT SAFE FOR US TO HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, DRIVE THROUGH, UM, TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH JUST FOR, UH, THE ABILITY TO GET ON OAK FOREST.
UM, AND THEN IF WE DO OPEN WHATEVER.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK THIS TIME? UM, THEN I'M GONNA TURN, OH, COME ON.
MY NAME IS JUSTIN LOFTON, THAT'S L-O-F-T-O-N.
I ALSO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S ABOUT FOUR BLOCKS UP AND I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A GOOD AMOUNT OF CONCERNS JUST ABOUT THE INCREASED TRAFFIC, BUT SOMETHING ELSE WE STRUGGLE WITH, ESPECIALLY BEING A FREEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD OR BEING RIGHT OFF OF SIX 10 IS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF SAFETY, SECURITY.
I'VE HAD MY CAR BROKEN INTO ONCE IN MY DRIVEWAY.
I THINK THERE'S PLENTY OF PEOPLE HERE THAT HAVE PROBABLY CAUGHT, YOU KNOW, TRANSIENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MOVING THROUGH, UM, DIGGING THROUGH TRASH, UH, TRYING TO GET INTO HOUSES AT THE CORNER OF ELLEN SIX 10.
WE ALSO HAVE A PRETTY, PRETTY BIG HOMELESS PROBLEM THAT JUST CONGREGATES UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE THERE, UM, WHICH POSES ISSUES AS WELL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WITH THAT OPENED UP TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT THERE, IT MAKES IT EASY FOR PEOPLE TO PULL INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD,
[01:30:01]
COMMIT A CRIME, OR POTENTIALLY SEAL A CATALYTIC CONVERTER JUST LIKE ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY.GET RIGHT BACK ON THE FREEWAY AND GET OUTTA THERE.
SO THAT'S, FOR ME AS A RESIDENT, PROBABLY ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS IS JUST THE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE EASE OF GETTING OUTTA THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN THEY DO DO SOMETHING LIKE BREAK INTO A HOUSE, STEAL YOUR CATALYTIC CONVERTER.
WE'VE BEEN LUCKY TO NOT HAVE THAT BE A BIG RAID ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD JUST YET.
AND I THINK THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S NOT SO EASY TO ACCESS AND IT IS SOMEWHAT LANDLOCKED, BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING TO CON TO CONSIDER FOR FREEWAY NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY WITH APPARENTLY THIS COMPANY NOT MEETING THE VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS.
SO I'M NOT SURE HOW WE PROCEED KNOWING THAT THEY DON'T EVEN MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VARIANCE, WHICH WE ALL SUPPORT.
SO, BUT THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.
I I THERE'S A LITTLE CONFUSION ON THAT.
THEY DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EXCEPTION, WHICH MEANS THEY DON'T NEED A VARIANCE, THEY JUST DON'T HAVE TO DO IT.
THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE AND THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY QUALIFY FOR IT IF THE COMMISSION GRANTS IT.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
ANYBODY ELSE ON 1 38? UM, OKAY, THIS IS THE SECOND DEFERRAL, SO I'M GONNA ASK THE COMMISSION IF THERE IS ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM STAFF OR ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
I ASSUME, UH, MS. RODRIGUEZ, IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT TODAY? UM, I'M NOT SURE.
COMMISSIONER ROBBINS, UH, COMMISSIONER GARZA, YOU ASKED WHETHER IT WAS GATED OR NOT, AND NOBODY KNOWS, BUT TO ME, I JUST WANNA SHARE MY THOUGHTS.
IF IT'S GATED, YOU CAN'T USE IT AS A THROUGHWAY, AND IF IT'S NOT GATED, YOU CAN.
AND BOTH OF THOSE IN MY MIND ARE BAD.
YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO BE INTENTIONALLY DIVERTING TRAFFIC RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF IT OR YOU'RE GOING TO GATE IT OFF AND NO TRAFFIC CAN GET THROUGH AT ALL.
SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IT, I DON'T, UNLESS I'M MISSING SOMETHING, IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
UM, IF I MAY GO AHEAD, NOT TO COUNTER, BUT ONLY MY THINKING IS, UM, CHAPTER 42 DEMANDS THE CONNECTIVITY.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
SO WE ARE, BY CHAPTER 42, THE ORDINANCE SUPPOSED TO PUT THE TH THE, THE THROUGH STREET IN.
SO, UM, UH, I USE THE METAPHOR, UM, OF ALLIGATORS AND MOATS.
E EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE OFF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUILD A MOAT AND FILL IT WITH ALLIGATORS, YOU KNOW, TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.
AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN EXAGGERATION, BUT OUR CHARGE IS TO FOLLOW CHAPTER 42 AND PROVIDE MORE MOBILITY.
SO TO YOUR POINT, THERE'S ALSO THE WHOLE SITUATION OF THE PUBLIC STREET VERSUS THE PRIVATE STREET, AND THEY CANNOT CONNECT.
SO MY QUESTION IS, CAN WE MITIGATE THE PROBLEM, WHICH IS NO ONE WANTS THE THROUGH STREET WITH IT BEING A GATED COMMUNITY, WHICH MEANS WE LITERALLY ANSWER CHAPTER 42, BUT STAY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES AND PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
THAT'S MY THOUGHT, THAT'S MY LINE OF THINKING.
OR WE JUST GRANT A VARIANCE TO CHAPTER 42, WHICH WE DO ALL THE TIME.
UH, DIPTI, WILL YOU RESPOND TO THAT MS MATER? I, I JUST, GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN, DIPTI MATER.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS.
SO THE VARIANCE IS TO NOT EXTEND OR PROVIDE A CUL-DE-SAC.
THE OPTIONS THAT THE COMMISSION WILL HAVE IS TO EITHER REQUIRE A CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH DOESN'T ALLOW FOR A THROUGH TRAFFIC.
SO SOMEONE COMING ON SIX 10 CANNOT JUST COME IN BECAUSE IT'S A CUL-DE-SAC ON THE TOP NORTH SIDE, THE CUL-DE-SAC.
OR IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES TO DENY THE VARIANCE, THEN THEY HAVE TO PUT IT THROUGH THREE THROUGH THROUGH STREET AND THAT WILL BE A THROUGH STREET FOR EVERYONE.
THE MIDDLE GROUND IS TO PROVIDE A CUL-DE-SAC, AND IF THE CUL-DE-SAC IS PROVIDED AND IF IT'S A GATED COMMUNITY OR NOT, THE CUL-DE-SAC WILL HAVE PRIVATE STREETS COMING FROM IT TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE SUBDIVISION THAT IS BEING CREATED TODAY.
THERE STILL WON'T BE A THROUGH STREET BECAUSE IF I AM DRIVING ON SIX 10, I WON'T BE ABLE TO JUST ENTER BECAUSE THIS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WILL GATE IT AT SIX 10 AT LEAST.
SO WE WON'T, I WON'T BE JUST ABLE TO COME IN AND GO THROUGH AND THROUGH, BUT IF I RESIDE IN THIS CURRENT SUBDIVISION, I'LL HAVE ACCESS FROM SIX 10 AND I'LL HAVE ACCESS FROM OAK FOREST IF THE CUL-DE-SAC WAS DONE.
IS IT A FAIR QUESTION TO SAY THAT IF THEY GOT RID OF LOT 13 AND MADE THAT A CUL-DE-SAC, THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION GOES AWAY? IF THIS, IF THEY DID A CULDESAC? I, I WAS JUST TRYING TO VERIFY, I THINK THE STREET IS, UH, STREET IS NEEDED FOR INTERSECTION SPACING, SO THE VARIANCE WILL STILL BE THERE.
BUT THEN I THINK AT THAT POINT, IF THEY DO A CUL-DE-SAC, I THINK THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION NEXT TIME WOULD BE TO SUPPORT THE VARIANCE.
BUT JUST SO I'M CLEAR TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER GARZA, THE, OUR CHARGE OR DOES WHATEVER YOU CALLED IT WAS MOBILITY AND THE CUL-DE-SAC DOES NOT FACILITATE THE MOBILITY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, WHICH IS CONNECTING OAK FOREST THROUGH TO SIX 10.
I THINK THERE ARE MULTIPLE THINGS HERE.
UM, SO THE STATE FIVE STATEMENT OF FACTS FOR THE VARIANCE HAS TO BE FOR
[01:35:01]
ONE, ONE STATES THAT IT'S UNUSUAL PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS.UH, THE OTHER ONE SAYS THERE IS A HARDSHIP.
IT CANNOT BE SOLELY FINANCIAL.
IT, THE CHARGE OF THE COMMISSION AND THE STAFF PLANNING STAFF IS TO READ THESE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERY, EACH AND EVERY VARIANCE MEETS THOSE FIVE STATEMENTS OF CAT.
IT IS, UH, CHAPTER 42 IS NOT JUST ABOUT MOBILITY, BUT IT IS ALSO ACCESS TO THE SUBDIVISION ACCESS AND CONNECTIVITY, NOT JUST VEHICULAR, BUT PEDESTRIAN OR OTHER MODES.
SO ALL OF THAT IS THE DISCUSSION AND, UH, THINGS THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING AT, AT LEAST AT STAFF LEVEL.
AND I, I WOULD, UH, THINK THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD HAVE THE SAME KIND OF DISCUSSION.
I, I HAVE ACTUALLY A QUESTION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT, NOT NOW, BUT IN TIME FOR NEXT WEEK.
AND THAT IS, I, I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FACTUALLY WHETHER THEY INTEND TO GATE IT AT THE, AT THE FEEDER AND, AND OR, OR BOTH AT THE, AT OAK FOREST, BUT ALSO IS THERE CONCERN ON THE DEVELOPER'S PART ABOUT A SUBDIVISION THAT HAS ONE POINT OF ACCESS ON A FREEWAY LIKE THIS? UM, THEY HAVEN'T STATED THAT IN, THEY HAVEN'T STATED THAT, BUT I I BUT THAT, SO THEIR, THEIR POSITION IN ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE IS THAT THAT WILL BE SUFFICIENT.
UM, WHICH IS ANOTHER ISSUE WITH THIS.
COMMISSIONER JONES? YES, THANK YOU.
UH, UNDER CHAPTER 42, WE FOR PUBLIC ROADS WE'RE NOT REQUIRED OR THE, THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T REQUIRE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS UNLESS YOU HAVE 150 LOTS OR MORE, UH, IN THIS CASE, OR 38, UH, POTENTIALLY 37 IF YOU REQUIRE THE CUL-DE-SAC.
BUT AS WELL THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE WITH A PUBLIC ROAD THAT DEAD ENDS NO LONGER THAN ONE LOT IN LENGTH.
THE, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM EXPERIENCE IS THE INTENT WAS THAT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE PUBLIC ROADS, WHICH WOULD BE HANSBURY, THAT A DRIVER WOULD KNOW THAT'S A DEAD END ROAD BECAUSE THE, THE ROAD IS, IS ONLY ONE BLOCK OR ONE LOT IN DEPTH, UH, BEING THAT LENGTH THOUGH THAT, UM, YOU'RE NOT DRIVING DOWN AND THEN RECOGNIZING, OH, I HAVE TO DO, I HAVE TO TURN AROUND.
UM, AND THAT WAS THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT APPLIED TO ME IN A COUPLE OF CASES.
UM, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT THE CUL-DE-SAC IS NOT WARRANTED.
ANYBODY ELSE? ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? UM, OKAY THEN WE WILL, UH, LOOK AT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE ITEM FOR NEXT WEEK.
IF THERE NO OTHER REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION OR OTHER COMMENTS, UM, I'LL ASK IF THERE IS A MOTION TO DEFER.
IS THERE A SECOND? ROBINS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 38 IS DEFERRED FOR TWO WEEKS.
AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE OUR RULES HAVE CHANGED, IF YOU SPOKE, EVEN IF YOU SPOKE THIS TIME, YOU ARE ELIGIBLE TO SPEAK AGAIN AT THE NEXT, THE NEXT TIME IT'S ON THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER SMITH IS BACK AND COMMISSIONER SMITH IS BACK.
ITEM 1 39 SOLAR STREET PLAZA IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CITY LIMIT WEST OF STUDENT WOOD STREET AND SOUTH OF WHITE OAK DRIVE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE THE REQUIRED RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION ALONG WITH RESERVE STREET THAT IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF FIVE AND A HALF STREET AND RESERVE STREET IN THE FREELAND HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RESERVE STREET IS A 25 B WIDE PUBLISHED STREET THAT WAS FLOODED WITH FREE LAND EDITION IN 1923.
THIS IS AN ASSISTING CONDITION THAT WAS NOT CREATED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO DEDICATE 12.5 FEET ALONG RESERVE STREET.
DEDICATION WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE THE OVERALL RIGHT OF WAY AND WOULD NOT IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC ARTICULATION IN THIS AREA.
RESERVE STREET MAINLY FUNCTION AS AN ALLEY PROVIDING ASSETS TO FEW RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
ALSO, THE APPLICANT IS NOT INCREASING THE DENSITY BY COMBINING FOUR LOT INTO TWO LOTS.
THIS PROPOSED LOT WILL HAVE GARAGE ASSETS TO RESERVE STREET, WHICH WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL HOME OF THE FREELAND HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THEREFORE, THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLA SUBSTITUTE.
[01:40:01]
CONDITION STAT DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT IN EVENT AND THEY CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION.ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. RODRIGUEZ? UM, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 39 SOLAR STREET PLAZA? UH, IF NOT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THERE BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MAR? IS THERE A SECOND? BALDWIN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
UM, THAT CONCLUDES THE VARIANCE SECTION OF THE AGENDA.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
[f. Reconsiderations of Requirement (Tamara Fou and Devin Crittle)]
SECTION F RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENTS ITEM ONE 40.ITEM ONE 40 IS GRAND PINES GENERAL PLAN.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, NORTH OF SPRING CREEK, EAST OF MKI ROAD AND, AND WEST OF WALLER CREEK ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENT TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG AN INTERNAL COLLECTOR STREET.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
GRAND PINES IS A, IS AN APPROXIMATE 352 ACRE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.
THE SITE IS BOUNDED ON ALL SIDES BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES OR UNDEVELOPED ACREAGE.
A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN IS WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN WITH SPRING CREEK RUNNING ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.
IN OCTOBER OF 2021, THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTED A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE SOUTHERN, SOUTHEASTERN AND WESTERN BOUNDARY JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANTED.
THE VARIANCE WAS BASED ON THE LOCATION OF SPRING CREEK IN THE LIMITED OPPORTUNITY FOR STREET CONNECTIONS FOR A PORTION OF THE GP.
TODAY THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A RECONSIDERATION TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE COLLECTOR STREET BY NOT EXTENDING A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WITHIN SECTION ONE.
HIGHLIGHTED ON YOUR SCREEN, THE INTERSECTION SPACING DISTANCE FROM THEIR APPROVED STREET IN SECTION TWO ALONG THE COLLECTOR STREET IS ROUGHLY 2000 FEET.
THE DRAINAGE RESERVES IN SECTION ONE AND TWO ARE STRATEGICALLY LOCATED WITHIN THE 100 AND 500 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN.
THE SERIES OF DRAINAGE RESERVES WILL ALLOW WATER TO FLOW FROM NORTH AND SOUTH TO SPRING CREEK ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY.
THIS DECISION TO EXCLUDE THE MAJORITY OF THE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS FROM THE FLOODPLAIN IS CONSISTENT WITH SOUND PUBLIC POLICY.
GRANTED, THIS RECONSIDERATION WOULD ALLOW FOR CONSISTENT UNINTERRUPTED DRAINAGE TO CONNECT TO SPRING CREEK STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OBJECTION TO THIS REQUEST.
THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THIS PLAT, EXCUSE ME, IS TO GRANT THE GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE, EXCUSE ME, GRANT THE REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENT AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CCP ONE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. CRIDDLE? UM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE 40 GRAND PINES GP? IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? SIGLER? IS THERE A SECOND? AYE A ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 41 MADAM CHAIR, I'LL RECUSE MYSELF FROM ITEM 1 41.
NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER HEISS WILL BE RECUSING ON 1 41.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 1 41 IS TRILLIUM, SECTION THREE.
THIS SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN FORT BEND COUNTY IN THE EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION ALONG MADDEN ROAD WEST OF FM 1464 AND EAST OF WESTMORE STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 33.5 ACRE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSING 80 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENT TO EXCEED THE 1400 LOCAL INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG MADDEN ROAD BETWEEN EXISTING FM 1464 AND PROPOSED PERIWINKLE PINES DRIVE WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST TRILLIUM.
SECTION THREE IS LOCATED BETWEEN TWO EXISTING FULLY DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES.
MISSION TRACED TO THE NORTH AND ANA TO THE SOUTH ACROSS MADDEN ROAD.
THE PROPOSED OFFSET SHOULD NOT PRESENT ANY CONFLICTS TO THE EXISTING STREET PATTERN ALONG MADDEN ROAD.
UM, AND THE, UM, THE PROPOSED, UH, UM, INTERSECTION SPACING
[01:45:01]
WOULD BE 1,435 FEET AND WOULD HAVE A 2.5% DEVIATION FROM OUR REQUIREMENTS.UM, IN ADDITION TO THIS, THE PROPOSED, UM, PER PERIWINKLE PINES DRIVE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 410 FEET FROM THE EXISTING BINION LANE, WHICH CONNECTS MADDEN ROAD TO THE OLIANA SUBDIVISION.
STAFF ALSO CONSIDERED THE PROPOSED MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN AMENDMENT ALONG MADDEN ROAD, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO DELETE THE PROPOSED, UH, MAJOR COLLECTOR MADDEN ROAD BETWEEN THE EXISTING SEGMENT TO HARLEM ROAD TO THE WEST, AND ARE ALSO REQUESTING TO REALIGN MADDEN ROAD TO CONNECT TO, UM, WESTMORE DRIVE TO THE WEST.
STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST FOR MADDEN ROAD WILL NOT IMPACT THIS EXISTING TRAFFIC CI CIRCULATION, NOR WOULD IT IMPACT, UM, THIS, UH, RECONSIDERATION REQUEST IN ADDITION TO THIS NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
IN ADDITION TO THIS, THE INTERSECTION SPACING OFFSET WOULD ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO ESTABLISH AN INTERNAL T INTERSECTION, WHICH WOULD SLOW THE TRAFFIC WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION AND CREATE A SAFER INTERSECTION FOR EGRESS INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE SUBDIVISION.
AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE STREET WILL ALSO, UM, KEEP THE REQUIRED DRAINAGE AND DETENTION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UH, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT AND APPROVE THE REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENTS, UM, AS THE 35 FOOT OFFSET FROM THE REQUIREMENTS IS ONLY A 2.5% DEVIATION FROM, UM, OUR INTERSECTION SPACING REQUIREMENTS.
AND, UM, THERE'S NO CHANGES TO THE OVERALL TRAFFIC CIRCULATION AND FORT BEND COUNTY HAS POSED NO OBJECTION TO THEIR REQUEST.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS? UH, IF NOT, UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE 41 TRILLION SECTION THREE? UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MA? IS THERE A SECOND? VICTOR? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[Platting Activities G - I]
G, H AND I.IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SECTIONS GH AND I AS ONE GROUP PLEASE.
SECTION G EXTENSION OF APPROVAL CONSISTS OF ITEMS 142 THROUGH 1 51 SECTION H, NAME CHANGES, HAS NO ITEMS AND SECTION I CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE CONSISTS OF ITEM 1 52.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SECTIONS GH AND I.
ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION? GARZA, GARZA, SECOND JONES.
PLEASE NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER SIGLER ABSTAINS ON ITEM 1 44.
WHAT'S NEXT? I, WE HAVE NO, NOTHING UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE AS USUAL.
[k. Development Plats with Variance Requests (Nick Parker, Ramon Jaime Leon, Jacqueline Brown)]
K DEVELOPMENT PLOTS WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEMS 1 53 TO 1 62 OR 16 0 0 3.
HILLTOP OAKS DRIVE THROUGH 16 1 1 5 HILLTOP HILLTOP OAKS DRIVE.
STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THESE ITEMS TOGETHER AS THEY'RE RELATED.
THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF PARK ROW, WEST OF HIGHWAY SIX AND NORTH OF INTERSTATE 10.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 15 FOOT BUILDING LINE IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG PARK ROW FOR NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE REQUEST.
THE LOT WAS PLOTTED WITHIN THE OAKS OF PARK ROW MENDING PLAT SUBDIVISION WITH A 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG PARK ROW.
THIS PORTION OF PARK ROW IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE WITH SUFFICIENT WIDTH LINED WITH COMMERCIAL LOTS IN AUGUST OF 2020.
THE SUBDIVISION PLAT WAS RECORDED WITHOUT THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE.
SUBSEQUENTLY, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED PLANS TO PERMITTING UTILIZING THE 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE AS THEY WERE UNAWARE.
THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED A 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG PARK ROW MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
THE DISTANCE FROM BACK OF CURB TO THE PROPOSED HOMES IS BETWEEN 25 AND 30 FEET ALONG PARK ROW, WHICH WOULD NOT BE INJURIOUS TO
[01:50:01]
PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE.ADDITIONALLY, ACCESS TO THE LOTS IS BEING TAKEN FROM THE PRIVATE STREET WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCED BUILDING LINE OF 15 FEET IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG PARK ROW WITH THE CONDITION THE APPLICANT PROVIDES ADDITIONAL TREES AND SHRUBS ALONG PARK ROW.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. BROWN? UM, WE DO NOT, I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE HILL TOP OAK DRIVE ITEMS? IF NOT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO MORE TREES AND SHRUBS ON PARK ROW.
UM,
COULD WE GO BACK TO THE PICTURE THAT SHOWED THE, THE EXISTING TREES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY? UH, OKAY.
CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PICTURE OF TREES? ALL RIGHT.
UH, I, I GUESS I'M, I'M QUESTIONING WHERE MORE TREES WOULD BE NEEDED.
THESE SEEM TO BE LIVE OAK TREES THAT SPREAD OUT TO HAVE A CROWN OF ABOUT 50 FEET.
I'M NOT SURE WHERE, WHERE MORE TREES WOULD BE JUSTIFIED.
COULD, COULD YOU EXPLAIN, UH, I DON'T WANNA GET TOO DEEP IN THE WEEDS, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
THIS LOOKS LIKE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL STREET TREES ALREADY IN PLACE.
WELL, IT'S A PRETTY LONG DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK THOSE ARE JUST BY THE ENTRANCE THERE.
SO THERE'S, LOOKS LIKE THERE'S MORE ROOM ALONG THERE ON THE RIGHT AND ALSO ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, THERE'S MORE.
SO Y'ALL DID GIVE IT SITE SPECIFIC CONSIDERATION RATHER THAN THIS JUST BEING A, UH, AN ADD-ON BY HABIT? YES.
IT'S SHRUBS TOO, RIGHT? SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY BE YES, LIVE OAK TREES.
IT JUST SOME OTHER FORMS OF LANDSCAPING.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITION.
UM, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, SAY AYE.
DID SOMEBODY MAKE I DON'T THINK WE MADE A MOTION.
SORRY, YOU DIDN'T MAKE IT AS ADDITION.
I'D LIKE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
WE HAD A COMMENT, UM, FROM SOMEONE IN THE CHAT THAT WANTS TO SPEAK TO THE ADDITION OF NEW TREES AND THEY REPRESENT THE OWNER.
THIS IS, UH, MICHELLE SULLIVAN.
WOULD YOU'D LIKE TO CALL THEM? OKAY.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A QUICKER NOTE ABOUT THE, UM, EXISTING TREES.
THERE'S ACTUALLY BEEN MORE TREES BEEN PLANTED AS A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE SINCE THAT PICTURE HAS BEEN TAKEN.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND PUTTING THOSE TREES AND SHRUBS ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THERE'S ALSO A, UM, LIKE BRICK FENCE THAT FRONT THAT BACKS UP TO THAT RIGHT OF WAY AS WELL AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE, YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THE CONDITION? I GUESS? YES.
THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THE CONDITION OF THE ADDITIONAL TREES AND SHRUBS.
WE CAN ALSO, IF WE CAN GO AND LOOK AT A MORE CURRENT, UM, SITE, BUT WE CAN ALSO ASK FOR A LARGER CALIPER WITHIN THOSE LOTS THAT ARE REQUESTING THE VARIANCE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, AGREES WITH THIS, UM, SINCE WE ARE GRANTING THE VARIANCE THAT, THAT THEY REQUESTED AT 15 FEET.
WE HAD ASKED FOR YOU AGREE VERSUS 25 RIGHT VERSUS 25.
WE HAD ASKED FOR THIS CONSIDERATION.
WE THOUGHT YOU GUYS WERE OKAY WITH IT, BUT IF NOT, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER DEFERRAL ON THIS, DO WE? UH, WHAT CHAIR? HEY, MADAM CHAIR? YES, MADAM CHAIR.
I'M ALSO HERE FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, REPRESENTING THE CASE.
I THINK IF WE LEFT THE LANGUAGE OF THE CONDITION FOR THE STREET TREES A LITTLE BIT OPEN, UH, WE WOULD DEFINITELY BE WILLING TO ABIDE BY A STREET TREE COVERAGE OR NUMBER OF STREET TREES PER LOTS.
I I THINK THAT THE COMMENT ABOUT THE STREET TREE COVERAGE IS A, AN ISSUE TO LOOK AT.
UM, BUT WE COULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT PUTTING SMALLER CALIBER TREES IN MORE SHRUBS.
WE DEFINITELY ARE OKAY WITH PROVIDING A BEEF DUMP LANDSCAPING PLAN KNOWING THAT THAT'S JUST, IT'S A TRADE OFF ESSENTIALLY FOR WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
UM, BUT WE HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR SURE.
SO MS. BROWN, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? UM, YES, I AM THAT STATEMENT.
SO ARE WE IN AGREEMENT THEN, OR DO YOU WANNA SUGGEST SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT YOU WOULD AGREE TO? NO,
[01:55:01]
LET US WRITE IT.I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE ON THIS WHILE WE CAN ACTUALLY.
UM, DID THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS OR DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER POINT? NO, NO, I'M, I'M, OH, SORRY.
MEANT TO THE, TO THE APPLICANT? YES.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, THE STAFF DID A GOOD JOB OF EXPLAINING EVERYTHING, GOING OVER THE CASE, IT'S HISTORY AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
SO I THINK AS LONG AS THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE CONDITION, WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH STAFF AND GET THE CORRECT LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT, THAT MEETS ALL THE CONDITIONS.
AND STAFF HAS STATED THE RECORD THAT THERE IS SOME, THERE IS FLEXIBILITY.
SO I NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE MOTION.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, WOULD LIKE TO SAY THE STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOTE A CORRECTION FOR THE ITEM 1 63.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE ITEM AND NOT APPROVE AS IT IS SHOWN ON THE ONE LINER.
SO ON 1 63 STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE? CORRECT.
OKAY, ITEM 1 63 LOCATED AT, UH, 1602 KIPLING STREET.
UH, THE SITE IS, UH, LOCATED SOUTH OF WESTHEIMER ROAD AND NORTH OF WEST ALABAMA STREET AND ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF MENDEL STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A ONE FOOT BUILDING LINE IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG MANDEL STREET FOR A PERGOLA ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE STAFF IS, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION ON THE SUBJECT SITE.
THE LOT WAS PLOTTED WITHIN THE MANDEL PLACE SUBDIVISION IN 1922 WITH NO BUILDING LINES ALONG MANDEL STREET OR KIPLING STREET.
LEGAL REVIEW HAS INDICATED THAT THE PROPOSED ADDITION WILL BE IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE DEED RESTRICTIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVED THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
SO YOU'RE TELLING US THAT THIS, WE HAVE GOTTEN THE, UH, OUR LEGAL COUNSEL IS ADVISING THAT THIS WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS, PORTION OF THAT? YES.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, COULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE VIOLATION? YES.
WHAT IS IT? BECAUSE THERE'S NO SIDE SETBACKS MENTIONED IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THERE, THERE IS A 10 FOOT SIDE RESTRICTION IN THE, IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR GARAGES OR OTHER STRUCTURES.
UM, A PERGOLA THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE AND OR THAT IS CEMENTED IN PERMANENTLY IS CONSIDERED BY OUR BUILDING APARTMENT, UM, TO BE A STRUCTURE DEPENDING ON ITS SIZE.
IT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE A STRUCTURE AND HAVE TO BE OUTSIDE OF THAT SETBACK SO THEY COULD MODIFY THEIR DEAL TO SOMETHING MUCH SIMPLER, LESS STRUCTURE LIFE.
AND I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE ATTORNEY FOR THE HOMEOWNERS, UM, ABOUT THIS.
THEY HAVE A, THEY DO HAVE A LETTER FROM THE LOCAL CIVIC ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS NOT AN HOA AND DOES NOT DO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, UM, OF STRUCTURES HERE THAT SAY THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH SOME OF THE WALLS AND PLANTERS.
THEY DON'T MENTION THIS, THE PERGOLA.
UM, AND I THINK IT BEARS NO WEIGHT SINCE IT'S NOT AN OFFICIAL HOA.
IN ANY EVENT, IF YOU'LL RECALL, I THINK WE HAD THREE SPEAKERS AT THE LAST MEETING SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
UM, I DID ALSO TALK WITH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND THEY HAVE ADVISED THEY'VE DONE, UM, ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY, UM, WITHIN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY THINK ON THIS ADDRESS BEFORE.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR LEGAL? UM, IF NOT, UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS DANIEL TOY, TOY.
THANK YOU FOR STICKING WITH US THROUGH THE MEETING.
I, I AM A RESIDENT OF THE MANDEL PLACE CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND HAVE ALSO BEEN ACTIVE IN THE DEED RESTRICTION COMMITTEE.
AND IT'S TRUE, WE, WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO APPROVE.
WE CAN JUST SPEAK AS, AS HOMEOWNERS.
AND I WAS PRESENT TO SPEAK, UH, IN OPPOSITION OF IT IN
[02:00:01]
AN ATTEMPT TO, UH, ENFORCE OUR DEED RESTRICTIONS AND TO, UH, GUARD AGAINST WAIVER BECAUSE THE FRONT SETBACK FOR GARAGES AND THE SIDE SETBACK ARE, YOU KNOW, WHAT KEEPS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS IT IS.UM, BUT I ALSO KNOW ENOUGH TO KEEP MY MOUTH SHUT.
I ALREADY GOT WHAT I WANTED, SO THAT WAS IT.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS, UM, SAAB SHAH, MR. S SHAH, SHAH.
AND, UH, IF IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION, I ALSO AM A RESIDENT OF THE MANDEL PLACE CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND AM HERE TO CONCUR WITH STAFF'S LEGAL ANALYSIS ON THIS MATTER.
UM, AND WE ALSO HAVE, UH, CAROL WK, WHO IS A PREVIOUS SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM WITH US VIRTUALLY MS. WLK.
MS. WK DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE PRESENT.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 63? MADAM CHAIR? WE HAVE ONE FROM THE CHAT.
A CASSANDRA MALDONADO REPRESENTING THE BUILDER.
UM, I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM MR. JAIME RAMON STATING THAT WE ARE NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND THEN THEY WERE REQUESTING A VARIANCE, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE P AND NOT BE HIGHER THAN THE EIGHT FEET.
UH, WE EXPLAINED IN LENGTH TO MR. RAMON THAT IF THE PERGOLA IS LEFT, LEFT AT THAT EIGHT FEET, IT THEN VIOLATES THE CITY OF HOUSTON BUILDING CODE.
UM, WE HAVE MADE SEVERAL PHONE CALLS ALONG WITH EMAIL ATTEMPTS, UM, MYSELF, REGARDING THIS REQUEST.
WE WERE ASKING WHERE THAT REQUEST WAS COMING FROM IN REGARDS TO THE VARIANCE.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY FURTHER FEEDBACK, BUT WE DO HAVE EMAIL PROOF SAYING THAT WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM MR. RAMON.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT IS NOW IN VIOLATION OF THOSE RESTRICTIONS.
I I, WE CAN ASK MR. RAMON TO RESPOND.
I, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE ANSWER IS GOING TO BE THAT OUR LEGAL COUNSEL IS THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND THEY'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE TO REVIEW AND SIGN OFF ON WHETHER OR NOT DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE VIOLATED.
SO, YOU KNOW, NO, AND I I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS YES, MA'AM.
THIS IS COMING FROM A CITY OF HOUSTON EMPLOYEE, UH, JAIME RAMON, RIGHT.
WHO ADVISED US HE DOES NOT WORK THAT EVERYTHING IN THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
HE, HE'S NOT, HE DOESN'T WORK IN THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
MR. JAIME R WOULD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND, RAMON? YES.
UH, THE EMAIL SAID IF, IF, IF IT WASN'T IN VIOLATION, WE WERE IN, UH, IN, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVAL.
IF IT WASN'T IN VIOLATION, AND THEN IF IT WASN'T, THEN THERE WERE, WE, WE HAD SOME REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STRUCTURE TO BE LOWER THEN, BUT IT IS PROPOSED TO BE.
SO YOU'RE SAYING IT SAID IF IT DOES NOT VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTION? I DO.
SO WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON THE CHARACTERIZATION, BUT LET ME ASK MS. MICKELSON ONCE AGAIN TO STATE FOR THE RECORD.
I, I, I'D ARGUE THAT SIMPLY STATE THAT THE, UH, YOU KNOW, DETERMINATION OF INTERPRETATION OF, OF DEED RESTRICTIONS ULTIMATELY IS A LEGAL DECISION.
AND AS I'VE MENTIONED, I'VE ALSO DISCUSSED THIS WITH THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL.
SO, UM, IT HAS BEEN WELL LAWYERED
UM, I WILL ALSO REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT WE REALLY HAVE NO WIGGLE ROOM.
UH, WHEN ADVISED THAT AN ITEM, UH, VIOLATES DEED RESTRICTIONS, IT IS, UH, WE, WE ARE BEHOLDEN TO DISAPPROVE IT FOR THAT REASON.
UM, ANYBODY ELSE WANTING TO SPEAK ON 1 63? YES.
UM, THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD IF, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE.
IF THERE IS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.
IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DISAPPROVE MOTION? MOTION ALLMAN GARZA SECOND GARZA.
[02:05:04]
GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.ITEM 1 64 40 12 MEADOW MEADOW LAKE LANE, THE SIZE LOCATED ON MEADOW LAKE LANE ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAN FELIPPE STREET AND WEST OF WILLOW WILLOW LAKE ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT BUILDING LINE IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG SAN FELIPPE STREET IN MAYO FER.
AS STAFF IS IN SUPPORT THE REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE SUBJECT SIDE WAS PLATTED BY THE OAKS STATE SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION IN 1949.
THE RECORDED PLAT HAS A 25 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG MEADOW LAKE LANE AND A TENFOLD UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG SAN FELIPPE STREET.
SAN FELIPPE STREET AT THIS LOCATION IS A 60 FOOT WIDE DESIGNATED MAYO FER THAT REQUIRES RIGHT OF WEIGHTED WHITENING TO MAKE IT A 70 FOOT, UH, RIGHT OF WAY PER PER MAYO FER AND FREEWAY PLANT.
THE APPLICANT WILL PROVIDE THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT DEDICATION TO THE MAYO FER.
THE MAJORITY OF THE HOMES ALONGSIDE FELIPE ROAD ARE 10 FEET FROM THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY LINE, THEREFORE THE PROPOSED FIVE FOOT BUILDING LINE AND THE, AND THE PROPOSED FIVE FOOT RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION WILL CORRESPOND WITH THE PREVAILING SETBACK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IN ADDITION, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL TAKE VEHICLE ACCESS FROM THE LOCAL STREET, MEADOW LAKE LANE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS GRANTED SEVERAL VARIANCES FOR REDUCED SETBACKS IN THIS AREA.
AND THE OAK STATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS VOICED NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCED BUILDING LINE OF FIVE FEET ALONG SAN FELIPPE STREET FOR THE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS, UH, OKAY.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 64, 40 12 MEADOW LAKE LANE? IF NOT, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE BALDWIN? IS THERE A SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ITEM 1 65, ITEM ITEM 1 65 69 0 4 VAN END ROAD.
THE SITE IS LOCATED NORTH OF SPANISH TRAIL AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VAN, UH, EDIN ROAD AND LOCKETT AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE A 28 FOOT PRIVATE STREET FOR A GARDEN STYLE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO, UH, DEFER, TO ALLOW APPLICANT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WHAT DO WE NEED THE WEEK? UM, THE NOTICE WAS NOT POSTED ON TIME.
SO, UM, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 65? 69 0 4 VAN ETTEN STREET? MADAM CHAIR? WE HAVE THREE IN THE CHAT.
COULD YOU GO AHEAD AND STATE NAMES? YES.
THE FIRST ONE IS GOING TO BE A GERARDO GAAN.
UM, I DID SPEAK WITH MR. JOSE MENDOZA EARLIER TODAY BECAUSE, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD RECEIVED NOTICE OF THIS MEETING, UH, COMING UP, UH, YESTERDAY THROUGH MAYO.
AND MOST OF US HAVE JUST SEEN IT TODAY.
UH, THERE WAS NOT A, UH, NOTICE POSTED AT THE PROPERTY, SO IT CAUGHT US BY SURPRISE.
UH, DURING, DURING THE ACQUISITION OF THIS PROPERTY, WE DID SPEAK WITH THE REALTOR AND I THINK THE, THE POTENTIAL OWNER OR NOW BUYER AT THAT TIME, THAT THERE, THERE WAS, UH, A DEED RESTRICTION FOR SINGLE FAMILY NEW CONSTRUCTION.
AND SO, UM, IT LEADS US TO BELIEVE THAT POSSIBLY THEY, THEY WERE TRYING TO MOVE FASTER, UH, TO NOT NECESSARILY ENGAGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN, IN THIS, UH, PROJECT.
AND THAT IS VERY CONCERNING, UH, TO US.
THANK YOU FOR, FOR BEING WITH US TODAY.
STAFF HAD DETERMINED THAT THE NOTICE WASN'T APPROPRIATE AND THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING.
WE DEFER THE ITEM TO OUR NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, WHICH WILL BE IN TWO WEEKS.
AND I GUESS THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO ADDRESS THE NOTICE ISSUE, THE SIGN AND EVERYTHING IN THE MEANTIME.
AND WILL WE HAVE DEED RESTRICTION REVIEW AND OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT WILL BE LOOKING AT THE DEED RESTRICTION QUESTION IN THE, IN THE INTERIM PERIOD,
[02:10:01]
THE TWO WEEK PERIOD.UM, SO STAY TUNED AND COME BACK IN TWO WEEKS.
UM, WHO IS THE NEXT SPEAKER? MADAM CHAIR.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MEGAN RYAN, RYAN.
MS. RYAN MADAM CHAIRWOMAN, I AM HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS.
I AM A RESIDENT AT CENTRAL OF CENTRAL CITY WHERE THIS IS LOCATED.
I AM APPROXIMATELY FOUR, UH, HOMES DOWN THE STREET.
AND THIS, I'M OBJECTING TO THIS BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DWELLING IS A FOURPLEX THAT IS NOT IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THIS SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR REMARKS? YOU, YOU'RE FROZEN ON THE SCREEN.
WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK TO HER IF, UH, WE NEED TO.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS DANIEL GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF CENTRAL CITY CIVIC ASSOCIATION.
THE BOARD AND ALL OWNERS ARE VERY MUCH OPPOSED TO THIS.
I'M GLAD THAT YOU WILL GIVE US TWO MORE WEEKS FOR US AND YOUR TEAM TO LOOK THROUGH, UH, THROUGH THIS REQUEST, BUT IT'S ALSO SURPRISE TO US, US ALL BEING OWNERS OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES IN THIS VERY SMALL AND LOVELY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOODS.
I WAS NOT CONTACTED BY ANY DEVELOPER, ANY OWNER, ANYONE WHATSOEVER ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.
NOBODY SUBMITTED ANY REQUEST TO US.
THIS IS ALL JUST A SURPRISE AND WE ARE VERY MUCH IN A POSITION.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE SIGNED UP IN THE CHAT? MADAM CHAIR? WE HAVE, UH, ONE MORE PERSON, I BELIEVE, UH, JUST LISTED AS ALONZO ALONZO.
MADAM SHERIFF, THIS IS ALONSO AND UH, THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO US.
I'M A NEIGHBOR, I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET AND, UM, WANTED TO POINT OUT A COUPLE THINGS BESIDE THE NOTICES THAT CAME UP ALREADY.
UH, THAT AREA ON THE INTERSECTION OF VAN TON.
THAT AREA, INTERSECTION OF VAN TON.
AND IT, UH, AS YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWINGS AND THE PLANS, IT SHOWS A RIGHT OF WAY OF 60 FEET, WHICH IS REALLY NOT CORRECT BECAUSE IF YOU WERE TO JUST GO TO THAT INTERSECTION AND LOOK THE CITY OF HOUSTON TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MANY YEARS BACK, UH, PROVIDED ONE WAY SIGNS AND TURN LEFT SIGNS AS WELL AS, UH, TRAFFIC, UH, BARRIERS SO THAT, UH, TRAFFIC IS MOVED IN A CERTAIN DIRECTION AND HAVING THIS, UH, PARTICULAR WORK BEING DONE AND CREATING ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.
I THINK IT'S A HAZARD BY WAY OF THE TRAFFIC FLOWS THERE.
AND ALSO FIRE SAFETY HAZARD RELATED TO HOW OUR EMERGENCY VEHICLES GOING TO COME IN THERE.
WE HAVE A LOT OF, UH, UH, ONE-WAY SIGNS THERE.
BARRIERS DO NOT PARK ALL PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WOULD EVEN COME INTO BEING WHEN THE BASIC THING ABOUT THE 60 FOOT IS NOT EVEN CORRECT.
WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT, UM, AND TALK TO PUBLIC WORKS IN THE DEFERRAL PERIOD.
UM, ANYBODY ELSE? NOBODY ELSE.
UM, IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE TO SPEAK, I'M JUST GONNA ASK IF MEGAN RYAN, IF YOU WANTED, WERE YOU FINISHED? MS. RYAN, ARE YOU STILL THERE? I THINK YOU'RE MUTED.
I AM JUST VOICING MY OPPOSITION, BUT WE'LL BE BACK IN TWO WEEKS.
UM, OKAY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS.
UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF IN THE DEFERRAL PERIOD OR REQUESTS OF STAFF? WHAT EXACTLY IS, IS THEIR VARIANCE REQUEST? CAN I GET CLARITY THERE?
IT'S NOT TO PROVIDE A 28 FOOT PRIVATE STREET FOR A GARDEN STYLE APARTMENT AND THE 28 FEET WHERE, I MEAN, I CAN OH, WHERE IT'S NOT LOCATED.
THEY, THEY SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE ONE, BUT UM, THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY OR SOMETHING.
THAT'S, UH, THAT IS WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING VARIANCE BECAUSE IT'S NOT POSSIBLE, IT'S NOT FEASIBLE FOR THE SITE TO PROVIDE A ATTORNEY FOR PRIVACY REQUEST.
ANYTHING ELSE? MADAM CHAIR? YES, COMMISSIONER SMITH.
THIS IS PLATTED AS A LOT AND BLOCK, WHICH UNDER CHAPTER 42 IS A RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION.
UH, I BELIEVE A GARDEN APARTMENT WOULD BE ON A RESERVE
[02:15:01]
THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE PRESENTED TO US AS A REPL.UH, I, IN, WITHOUT GETTING TOO DEEP INTO IT, UH, WHEN IT, WHEN IT COMES BACK, I'D APPRECIATE A LITTLE MORE CLARITY AS TO HOW, UH, A REPL IS NOT UNDER CONSIDERATION AS OPPOSED TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAT.
I'LL NEED SOME EDUCATION ON THAT.
I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE DETAILS OF HOW A DEVELOPMENT PLAT APPLICATION THAT'S SUBMITTED IN ANOTHER UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES.
I THINK JUDGING FROM HER FACIAL EXPRESSIONS, THAT'S WHAT OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS LOOKING INTO.
WELL, AND I'D ALSO ADD THAT IF IT'S RELEVANT, THE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS UNDER CODE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT FROM CHAPTER 42.
A DUPLEX IS ALSO A SINGLE FAMILY, UM, DESIGNATION.
SO THIS, THIS MENTION OF A QUAD BY THE, UH, SPEAKER, UH, A GARDEN APARTMENT, THE POTENTIAL LEGALITY I GUESS OF A, OF A DUPLEX ON A RESIDENTIAL LOT.
ALL THIS IS SWIRLING AROUND IN MY HEAD IN A WAY THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING RIGHT NOW.
WELL, WE'LL HAVE ANSWERS FOR YOU IN TWO WEEKS,
UM, SO THEN I WILL ASK IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER ITEM 1 65, BALDWIN BALDWIN.
IS THERE A SECOND? ROBINS? ROBINS.
ITEM 1 66, ITEM 1 66 800 WALTON STREET.
THE SIZE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF WEST BATON STREET AND WALTON STREET WEST OF I 45.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCED FIVE FOOT BUILDING LINE IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 10 FOOT BUILDING ALONG WEST BATON STREET FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE STAFF IS IN SUPPORT THAT REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THE SUBJECT SITE WAS PLOTTED BY THE BROOK SMITH ADDITIONS IN 1905 WITH NO BUILDING LINES.
WEST PATTEN STREET AT THIS LOCATION IS A 60 FOOT WIDE DESIGNATED MAJOR COLLECTOR AS SUFFICIENT WIDTH WITH WEST PATTEN STREET WAS WHITENED IN 1961 AND THE LOTS ALONG THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY DEDICATED 10 FEET TO THE PUBLIC FOR RIGHT OF WAY PURPOSES.
THE PROPOSED FIVE FOOT BUILDING LINE WILL BE IN LINE WITH THE PREVAILING SETBACK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AS MANY RESIDENCES ALONG WEST BAT STREET ARE WITHIN THE 10 FOOT ORDINANCE BUILDING LINE.
THE DISTANCE FROM BACK OF CURB TO THE PROPOSED RESIDENCE IS APPROXIMATELY 15 FEET ALONG WEST PATTEN STREET, WHICH WILL NOT HINDER ANY SITE VISIBILITY AND WILL NOT UR TO PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY OR WELFARE.
RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCED BUILDING LINE OF FIVE FEET ALONG WEST PATTEN STREET FOR NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
STAFF RECEIVE MULTIPLE ADVANCED COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MENDOZA? UM, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE CHAT WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 66 OR HERE? UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? ALLMAN? IS THERE A SECOND? MAD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
UM, THAT'LL CONCLUDE OUR PLATTING ACTIVITY PORTION OF THE AGENDA.
[II. Establish a public hearing date of July 7, 2022]
TWO IS TO ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF JULY 7TH, 2022 FOR THE FOLLOWING, COTTON OAKS ESTATES REPL NUMBER ONE, DUNVILLE VILLAGE PARTIAL REPL NUMBER ONE GLEN MANOR, SECTION TWO, PARTIAL REPL.NUMBER TWO, MACKENZIE PLACE, SECTION FOUR, PARTIAL REPL.
NUMBER TWO WHAT? MACKENZIE PARK, OH, SORRY, MACKENZIE PARK, SECTION FOUR, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER TWO, MELODY OAKS PARTIAL REPL NUMBER 25 AND EXTENSION, PROVIDENCE RESERVE.
SAVANNAH PRADO, REPL NUMBER ONE, WEST HOUSTON EDITION PARTIAL REPL NUMBER TWO, WEST LANE PLACE, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER FOUR.
AND REN WOOD EDITION PARTIAL REPL NUMBER FIVE.
IS THERE A MOTION TO SET? JULY 7TH, 2022 FOR THE HEARINGS MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND? VICTOR? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ROMAN NUMERAL THREE IS PUBLIC COMMENT.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE CHAT? IS ANYBODY LISTENING? WHO WANTS TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION? IF NOT, THEN A MOTION TO ADJOURN WOULD BE IN ORDER.
[02:20:01]
MOTION GARZA.IS THERE A SECOND? ALLMAN ALLMAN.