* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [Call to Order ] [00:00:03] IT IS 2 32 ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 2ND, 2023. THIS MEETING OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION IS CALLED TO ORDER. I'M THE CHAIR, MARTY STEIN. UM, TO VERIFY THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM, I'M GONNA CALL THE ROLE THE CHAIR IS PRESENT. VICE CHAIR GARZA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER ALLMAN PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER VIRA BLAND. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CLARK. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER VAR. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER. HE PRESENT. COMMISSIONER HINES WILL BE ABSENT. COMMISSIONER JONES? PRESENT. COMMISSIONER. MODEST PRESENT. COMMISSIONER NELSON. HERE. COMMISSIONER POROUS PERLE IS NOT PRESENT. COMMISSIONER ROBBINS WILL BE ABSENT. COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG. PRESENT IS PRESENT. COMMISSIONER SIGLER PRESENT. COMMISSIONER TAHIR. PRESENT. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER VICTOR PRESENT, UH, COMMISSIONER KANE. COMMISSIONER KANE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE PRESENT. COMMISSIONER DALTON PRESENT VIRTUALLY IS PRESENT VIRTUALLY. COMMISSIONER MANKA IS NOT PRESENT. AND DIRECTOR MARGARET WALLACE BROWN IS NOT PRESENT, BUT SHE IS REPRESENTED BY, UH, JENNIFER OSLING PRESENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. UM, IF YOU ARE HERE TO, UH, SPEAK ON AN ITEM, YOU CAN FIND THE FINAL AGENDA WITH ALL THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ONLINE ON THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE. ALL ADVANCED COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED BY THE DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON WEDNESDAY ARE PART OF OUR PACKET. WE HAVE THOSE. UM, IF YOU'RE WISH, IF YOU'RE HERE WITH US IN CITY HALL, MAKE SURE YOU FILL OUT A SPEAKER FORM. THANK YOU. UM, THOSE OF YOU WHO SIGNED UP IN ADVANCE, WE HAVE YOU ON A LIST AND WE'LL CALL YOU AS THE ITEM IS CALLED. UM, WE ASK IF YOU ARE WITH US VIRTUALLY TO PLEASE KEEP YOUR DEVICE MUTED UNTIL YOU'RE CALLED ON TO SPEAK. AND OUR VIDEO QUALITY'S A LITTLE BETTER IF YOU KEEP YOUR CAMERA OFF AS WELL UNTIL YOU'RE SPEAKING. UH, ONE ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS. ITEM 1 49 CASHMERE GARDENS. THERE WILL BE NO OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THAT. UH, WITH THAT, WE HAVE THE [Director’s Report ] DIRECTOR'S REPORT. MS. OSLAND. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, UM, FILLING IN FOR MARGARET WALLACE BROWN. TODAY I'M THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, UH, ON JANUARY 25TH. CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE RESIDENTIAL BUFFERING AND SIDEWALK ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS. SO WE'RE CONGRATULATIONS TO, UH, ALL THE COMMITTEE'S TIME AND, UH, THE STAFF AND EVERYBODY WHO, WHO WORKED ON THIS. AND FOR ALL OF THE PUBLIC WHO, WHO CHIMED IN AND HELPED US SHAPE THOSE, UM, AMENDMENTS, WE'RE EXCITED TO HAVE THEM, UH, DONE. ALSO, A NEW ORDINANCE, UM, WAS APPROVED THAT ALLOWS PROPERTY OWNERS TO OPT OUT OF BUILDING NEW SIDEWALKS IN SOME CASES, UH, THEY, UH, COUNCIL APPROVED A FEE OPTION, WHICH THE STAFF, UH, PEDESTRIAN REALM TEAM CAN NOW OFFER AS A MODIFICATION TO SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS. UH, MAYOR TURNER SAYS THE OPTION WILL PREVENT WHAT THE CITY CALLS SIDEWALKS TO NOWHERE. SO WE ARE ALSO EXCITED ABOUT THAT. AND ONCE AGAIN, THANKS TO EVERYBODY, UH, STAFF AND THE PUBLIC AND COMMISSIONERS WHO, UH, PROVIDED INPUT ON THAT. AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF DISCUSSION, THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT'S PROPOSALS ARE HEADED TO COUNCIL SOON. THIS PROPOSAL ALLOWS A VARIETY OF NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION OPTIONS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES. WE WELCOME INPUT ON THE DRAFT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE. THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TOOL, INCLUDING A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON CONSERVATION DISTRICT'S FEBRUARY 9TH AT TWO 30. UH, IT'S A SPECIAL HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC COMMISSION MEETING YOU MAY ATTEND. IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY. CONSERVATION DISTRICTS WILL ALSO BE PRESENTED ON FEBRUARY 21ST AT 3:00 PM TO THE LIVABLE PLACES ACTION AT THE LIVABLE PLACES ACTION COMMITTEE MEETING. A VIRTUAL ATTENDANCE LINK IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AND CITY COUNCIL'S PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSAL IS EXPECTED TO BE FEBRUARY 22ND AT 9:00 AM AT CITY COUNCIL OF CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS. IF YOU'RE NOT CURRENTLY SUBSCRIBED TO OUR MONTHLY PLANNER NEWSLETTER, PLEASE BE SURE TO SEE THIS MONTH'S EDITION ONLINE WITH DETAILS ABOUT ALL OF THE ORDINANCE UPDATES, AND ALSO A LINK TO LIVABLE PLACES VIDEO THAT ILLUSTRATES OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLANNING [00:05:01] AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CAN BE REACHED AT (832) 393-6600. OR YOU CAN CALL THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNER OF THE DAY AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 6 2 4. YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONTX.GOV SLASH PLANNING. UM, OR LET'S TALK HOUSTON.ORG FOR MORE, UH, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT INFORMATION. AND THAT CONCLUDES THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE REPORT? UH, WITH THAT, THEN WE'LL [Approval of the January 19, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes ] MOVE TO APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 19TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, WHICH WERE IN YOUR PACKET. IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES, IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? MOTION CLARK CLARK. SECOND, SECOND MAD. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. UM, [I. Semiannual Report of the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee on Drainage Impact Fees (Deidre VanLangen) ] OUR FIRST, UH, THREE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. ROMAN ONE, TWO, AND THREE, UM, FOR THESE ITEMS WILL ASSUME OUR OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND, UH, THE FIRST SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT IS THE, UM, DRAINAGE IMPACT FEES. DEIRDRE VAN LANGEN FROM HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS. WELCOME. GOOD AFTERNOON. HAVE A CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF, SEE, I THINK YOUR MIC MAY BE OFF. THERE YOU GO. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YEP. GOOD? YEP. ALL RIGHT. GOOD DEAL. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS DEIDRE VAN LANGAN FROM HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS, AND I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT THE JANUARY, 2023 SEMI-ANNUAL DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE REPORT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 3 9 5, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES TO ADMINISTER THE CITY'S IMPACT FEES PROGRAMS. APPROVAL OF MOTION 90 DASH 0 6 1 4 BY CITY COUNCIL APPOINTED THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THIS REPORT DOCUMENTS CHANGES THAT OCCUR BY THE, BETWEEN THE PERIOD OF MAY 1ST, 2022 AND OCTOBER 31ST, 2022 OF THE DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE PROGRAM. IN SUMMARY OF THIS SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT, I OFFER THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, A TOTAL OF $591,570 AND 77 CENTS AND DRAINAGE IMPACT FEES WAS PURCHASED BETWEEN MAY 1ST, 2022 AND OCTOBER 31ST, 2022, A TOTAL OF $5,145,809 AND 15 CENTS WAS PURCHASED SINCE PROGRAM INCEPTION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I NOW MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE REPORT? HEARING NONE, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER NELSON? I HAVEN'T REALLY THOUGHT OF ONE. A GOOD ONE. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION BEFORE WE, UH, GO. IF YOU CAN YOU TELL ME, UH, WHETHER THIS IS AN INCREASE OR DECREASE OVER LAST TIME? IT IS AN INCREASE. INCREASE. MM-HMM . OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I WANTED. SURE. AND THESE ARE THE, THIS IS THE REPORT ON THE ACTUAL FEES COLLECTED, RIGHT? THAT WE'RE TRANSFERRING. OKAY. YEAH. FEES COLLECTED. YEP. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY, THEN, SO I MAKE THAT MOTION? YES, YOU SURE COULD. THAT WE ACCEPT THE REPORT AS THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND, AND FORWARD IT FOR CONSIDERATION THE CITY COUNCIL. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REPORT AND FORWARD IT TO CITY COUNCIL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. VICTOR. VICTOR, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THEN ROMAN NUMERAL TWO. SORRY. COMMISSIONER CLARK, JUST A QUICK QUESTION. SO IT'S AN INCREASE. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THE INCREASE IS? UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE THOSE IN MOVES IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I'D BE HAPPY TO EMAIL 'EM TO YOU. GREAT. SURE. [II. Semiannual Report of the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee on Water/Wastewater Impact (Deidre VanLangen) ] OKAY. WE'RE ON TO ROMAN NUMERAL TWO, WHICH IS THE SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT ON WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES. MS. VAN LANGAN. ALL RIGHTY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS DEIDRE VAN LANGAN FROM HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS, AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE JIMMY THE JANUARY, EXCUSE ME, JANUARY, 2023 SEMI-ANNUAL WATER AND WASTEWATER REPORT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 3 9 5, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES TO ADMINISTER THE CITY'S IMPACT FEES PROGRAMS APPROVAL OF MOTION 90 DASH 604 BY CITY COUNCIL APPOINTED THE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE [00:10:01] CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THIS REPORT DOCUMENTS CHANGES THAT OCCUR BETWEEN THE PERIOD OF MAY 1ST, 2022 AND OCTOBER 31ST, 2022 OF THE 20 20 20 30 IMPACT FEE PROGRAM. IN SUMMARY OF THE SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT, I OFFER THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, A TOTAL OF $32,393,815 AND 19 SIX 19 CENTS WAS GENERATED FROM REVENUES AND INTEREST FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES ACCRUED IN THE IMPACT FEES ACCOUNT BETWEEN MAY 1ST, 2022 AND OCTOBER 31ST, 2022, THE FIRST HALF OF THE THIRD YEAR OF THE 20 20, 20 30 IMPACT FEE PROGRAM. THE CURRENT WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE OF $3,320 AND 73 CENTS PER SERVICE UNIT FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER IS A 29.9% OF THE MAXIMUM FEES ALLOWED BY CURRENT LAW. THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES IN EFFECT FOR THIS REPORT, HA HA, FOR THIS REPORTING PERIOD HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE JULY 1ST, 2022. WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2020 AND 20 30 20 20 THROUGH 2030 IMPACT FEE PROGRAM ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL, THE NUMBER OF SERVICE UNITS GENERATED THE $32,393,815 AND 19 CENTS WITH 6,394 SERVICE UNITS FOR WATER AND 13,002 SERVICE UNITS FOR WASTEWATER. A TOTAL OF 781 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS WERE EXEMPT FROM PAYING IMPACT FEES AND WERE GRANTED TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS BELOW THE MEDIAN HOUSING PRICE DURING THIS PERIOD. EXEMPTION EXAMINATION OF THIS DATA REGARDING SERVICE UNIT'S CONSUMPTION FROM MAY 1ST, 2022 THROUGH OCTOBER 31ST, 22, 20 22 INDICATES SIGNIFICANT CAPACITY REMAINS IN THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM TO SUPPORT THE ANTICIPATED DEMANDS THROUGH APRIL 30TH, 2023, THE END OF THE NEXT REPORTING PERIOD. BASED ON THESE FINDINGS, I RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTING AS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AUTHORIZE THE APPROPRIATION TO DEBT RETIREMENT FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF REVENUES AND INTEREST GENERATED FROM WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD IN THE SUM OF THREE $2,000,393 $393,815 AND 19 CENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I NOW MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER NELSON? NO, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO AGAIN, APPLAUD BOTH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, THE BUILDERS, AND THE CITY FOR THIS JOINT COOPERATION. IT'S A LOT OF MONEY COLLECTED OVER THE LAST, SINCE 1990, I GUESS. MM-HMM . A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S GONE TOWARD CONSTRUCTING THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NEEDED FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE ALL THE COOPERATION BY BOTH PARTIES TO DO THAT. HAVING SAID THAT, I'D MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE REPORT AS THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND, UH, FORWARD THE FUNDS TO THEIR PROPER DESTINATION. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. MAD, UH, FURTHER DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER CLARK, THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW, WE GET TO SEE THESE THINGS ONCE A YEAR AND SO, UM, TWICE A YEAR. TWICE, TWICE A YEAR. EXCUSE ME. AND SO WHEN YOU BRING THIS TO US AND I ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DID YOU KNOW THE FEE AND WHAT IS THAT INCREASE? COULD WE GET THAT KIND OF INFORMATION IN ADVANCE SO THAT WE SURE. AS AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, I DON'T FEEL LIKE I'M GIVING WHAT THE ADVICE I NEED TO GIVE IF I'M NOT AWARE OF ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THAT GOES. OKAY. SO JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE INFO I THINK WOULD BE GOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. UH, PLEASE NOTE WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY COMMISSIONER POROUS PERLE AND COMMISSIONER MANKA. [III. Updated CIP and Land Use Assumptions – Drainage Impact Fees Study (David Wurdlow and Samir Solanki) ] OKAY. THAT TAKES US TO ROMAN THREE, WHICH, UM, IS THE BIG REPORT. THIS IS THE UPDATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS FOR, UH, THE BIG DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE STUDY. AND WE WELCOME, UM, I THINK IS SAMIR SOLANKI GONNA START. MR. SOLANKI, WHO IS THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER FOR HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS. WELCOME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS SAMIR SOLANKI, I'M THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS. I WILL ALSO BE JOINED BY OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MY COLLEAGUE DAVID WARDLOW, IN GOING THROUGH AN UPDATE FOR THE DRAINAGE FEE, UM, IMPACT FEE STUDIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND AS ALWAYS, WE'D LIKE TO REMIND BEFORE WE START [00:15:01] ANY PRESENTATION, THE PURPOSE FOR HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS, WHICH IS WE CREATE A STRONG FOUNDATION TOGETHER, WE CREATE A STRONG FOUNDATION FOR HOUSTON TO THRIVE. AND THE WAY WE DO IT IS BY RESPECT, OWNERSHIP, COMMUNICATION, INTEGRITY, AND TEAMWORK. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THESE ARE THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT SERVICE LINES WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION. WE START WITH THE CAPITAL PROJECTS, CUSTOMER ACCOUNT SERVICES, HOUSTON PERMITTING CENTER, HOUSTON WATER AND TRANSPORTATION, AND DRAINAGE OPERATIONS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE GOOD LOOKING PEOPLE IN HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS DOES, AND IF YOU NOTICE HIGHLIGHTED, IT'S, UH, STOCK TALKS ABOUT STORMWATER DRAINAGE, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY, UH, WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. BUT NOTE THAT IT'S NOT JUST THE PIPES, IT'S A LOT MORE THAT'S RELATED TO DRAINAGE THAN JUST THE PIPES. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. OH, THAT'S TOUGH TO READ THERE. OKAY. SO THERE IS A DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE DRAINAGE UTILITY CHARGE, WHICH APPLIES TO ALL BENEFIT OR PROPERTY THAT'S WITHIN THE CITY'S DRAINAGE SERVICE AREA. AND IT'S PAID FOR ON A MONTHLY BASIS. THIS, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS THE DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE, WHICH IS A ONE-TIME FEE PAID ONLY BY NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT RESULTS IN AN INCREASE TO AN AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS, UH, AREA FOR THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT OR EXPANSION, UH, UH, OF AN IMPERVIOUS AREA. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THE QUESTION IS, YOU CAN CLICK ONE MORE TIME. WHY ARE WE UPDATING THE IMPACT FEES WHILE WE DID THIS BACK IN 2013? AND ACCORDING TO THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, IT REQUIRES REGULAR UPDATES, UH, TO THE IMPACT FEES, AND WE ARE AT THAT 10 YEAR MARK. SO THEREFORE WE'RE DOING IT AGAIN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND I'M GONNA KICK OFF THE HARD STUFF TO DAVID BURLOW, WHO WILL BE JOINING ME ON THE PRESENTATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. MR. WELCOME. MR. WARDLOW. THANK YOU, CHAIR STEIN AND THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. AGAIN, IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY GO BACK ONE SLIDE. I THINK WE HAD A LITTLE ISSUE WITH THE, UH, SLIDE THERE. APOLOGIES WE DIDN'T CHECK THESE OUT, HOW THEY RENDER OKAY. ON THE SCREEN. SO IF IT'S A LITTLE TOUGH TO READ, JUST LET ME KNOW AND WE'LL, WE'LL FILL YOU IN. SO, JUST AS A REMINDER, UNDER CHAPTER 3 95, UH, THAT GOVERNS THE CREATION OF IMPACT FEES WE'RE REQUIRED TO BASE THOSE FEES UPON A FORECAST OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND THE CAPITAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH SERVING THEM. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE WATER AND SEWER IMPACT FEE THAT THE CITY CHARGES, UH, WHICH ARE ON A ENTIRE SYSTEM BASIS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY IN THE SAME, SAME SERVICE AREA, UH, FOR THE DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE. WE DO DEFINE IT ON A WATERSHED BASIS THAT, THAT GOVERNS HOW THOSE DRAINAGE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED. UM, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THOSE BOUNDARIES, UM, WITH THIS, UH, STUDY UPDATE OTHER THAN TO MAKE SOME LITTLE ADJUSTMENTS WHERE WE HAVE IMPROVED INFORMATION SINCE THE, UH, THE TROPICAL STORM ALLISON PROJECT PRODUCED, UM, UH, BOUNDARIES, LITTLE TWEAKS HERE AND THERE WHERE WE HAVE NEW INFORMATION AVAILABLE AS WELL AS CONSOLIDATING THE RECEIVING, UH, WATERSHEDS FOR THE RESERVOIRS INTO BUFFALO BAYOU. UH, SO YOU SEE A LITTLE LARGER WATERSHED AREA THERE. UM, BUT JUST A REMINDER, WE DO THIS ON A SERVICE AREA BASIS TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE PROCESS. UH, WE DO START WITH, UH, THE CONSULTANT GENERATING THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE, FOR THE IMPACT FEE. UH, WE DO THIS BASED ON FOR THE DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE BASED ON, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER DATA SET THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY. AND WE FORECAST THOSE FUTURE CONDITIONS USING H G'S, UH, HOUSEHOLD AND, UH, JOBS EMPLOYMENT FORECAST THAT GOES OUT TO 2040 JUST SO YOU KNOW. UM, AND THEN WE, WE ESTIMATE WHAT DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO OCCUR OVER JUST THE NEXT 10 YEARS. AND IT'S JUST THAT PORTION THAT REALLY GOVERNS THE, THE CREATION OF THE FEE. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM SIDE OF THINGS, UH, WE INCLUDE REALLY THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE NEEDED TO SERVICE, UM, FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, WHETHER THEY'RE IN THE CITY'S FIVE YEAR CIP OR NOT. SO JUST TO HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU, THERE IS A WHOLE SERIES OF APPENDIX, UH, INFORMATION THAT SHOWS FOR YOU WHAT PROJECTS ARE INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT. UM, THIS INCLUDES CONSTRUCTED PROJECTS AS WELL AS THE CURRENT ADOPTED CIP AND PLAN PROJECTS. UH, THOSE ARE LAID LABELED ON THE MAP, I BELIEVE AS 2022 CIP PROJECTS. THAT DATASET, IT ALSO INCLUDES UNCONSTRUCTED PORTIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE DRAINAGE PLAN, UH, THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN THE NINETIES AND, AND UPDATED IN 2003, AS WELL AS OTHER AREAS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED AS HAVING INADEQUATE SERVICE, UH, PRIOR TO THIS STUDY. AND WE IDENTIFIED REALLY SOME ADDITIONAL TRUNK LINES THAT ARE NECESSARY. THEY SHOW UP ON YOUR MAP AS THOSE 2022 D-I-F-I-P PROJECTS, UH, ON EACH MAP, UM, AS WELL AS A FEW REGIONAL PROJECTS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY'S DRAINAGE SERVICE AREAS AND FOR WHICH THE CITY IS PLANNING TO FINANCIALLY [00:20:01] PARTICIPATE. OKAY. UH, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. OH, YEAH, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO SEE. UM, SO JUST AS A REMINDER, UM, THE ENGINEER IS REALLY CALCULATING WHAT COSTS ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS ONLY. UM, AND THEN WE DO IT THE STANDARD 50% CREDIT AS PROVIDED FOR IN STATUTE TO REDUCE THAT TO THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE AMOUNT OF FEE. AND THAT'S DIVIDED BY THE SERVICE, UH, THE SERVICE UNITS THAT THEY'VE, THEY'VE DEVELOPED WITH THEIR FORECAST AS WELL. I WILL NOTE THIS, WHAT CITY COUNCIL ACTS TO ADOPT AS THE EFFECTIVE FEE IS A SEPARATE QUESTION, RIGHT? SO THIS STUDY IS REALLY DEVELOPING THE MAXIMUM FEE THAT COULD BE CHARGED AND THEN CITY COUNCIL THROUGH THEIR ACTION WILL ADOPT AN ACTUAL FEE TO BE ASSESSED. OKAY. IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. HOPEFULLY THE TABLE IS A LITTLE MORE LEGIBLE. THAT'S A LITTLE TOUGH TO SEE FOR Y'ALL. HOPEFULLY ON YOUR SCREENS IT'S A LITTLE EASIER. I GUESS I'D REFER YOU BACK TO YOUR REPORTS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR MAIL OUTS. UH, THAT'LL BE A LOT MORE LEGIBLE. UM, AND IT REALLY WALKS THROUGH WHAT I'VE JUST TALKED THROUGH, WHICH IS, UH, THAT PORTION OF THE CAPITAL PLAN THAT IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO FUTURE GROWTH OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, THE CAPITAL COSTS OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, UH, THE 50% CREDIT IS THE NEXT COLUMN THAT'S LABELED MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE FEE PER SERVICE AREA, 50% CREDIT. UH, AND THEN THE DIVISOR THERE IS THE NUMBER OF SERVICE UNITS GETTING US TO THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE IMPACT FEE PER SERVICE UNIT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. ALRIGHT, SO WE DO RECOGNIZE OBVIOUSLY THAT WE HAVE AN EXISTING FEE IN PLACE. UM, AND THAT BEING IN LINE WITH THAT IS PROBABLY PRETTY IMPORTANT. SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED FEE THAT WE'RE PRESENTING TO YOU TODAY. UH, I WOULD HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU THAT IS ONE OF THE CHARGES AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS TO COMMENT ON NOT JUST THE STUDY AND THE ASSUMPTIONS UPDATE THAT WE'VE PRODUCED, BUT ALSO ON THE PROPOSED FEE THAT HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD. UH, RIGHT NOW WE ARE PROPOSING A FLAT $25 PER SERVICE UNIT FEE FOR ALL SERVICE AREAS. SO AGAIN, THAT IS A POTENTIAL FEE TO BE ADOPTED WITHIN EACH SERVICE AREA BELOW THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE, UH, IMPACT FEE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. JUST AS A COMPARISON, THERE AREN'T TOO MANY CITIES, CERTAINLY LARGE CITIES IN TEXAS THAT ASSESS A DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE. REALLY THE MOST NOTABLE, AND AGAIN, IT MAY NOT EVEN BE CHAPTER 3 95, BUT IT'S A SIMILAR FEE FOR A SIMILAR PURPOSE, SIMILAR INFRASTRUCTURE IS SAN ANTONIO AND THEY CHARGE, UH, WHAT IS A DOLLAR $52 50 CENTS PER SQUARE FOOT SO THAT THAT CALCULATES OUT TO THE, AN EQUIVALENT 150 TO $250 PER THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT. SO ON AN EQUIVALENT BASIS TO THE CITY'S CHARGE, UH, IT'S A SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER, UH, CHARGE PER FIRST SERVICE UNIT. OKAY. AND I THINK THAT CONCLUDES OUR GENERAL PREPARED REMARKS AND WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. OKAY, THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, TWO QUESTIONS. WHAT IS THE CURRENT FEE AT THE MOMENT? YOU'RE PROPOSING TO RAISE IT TO 25, RIGHT? WHAT IS IT NOW? CORRECT. IN FACT, UH, COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE? IF THINK? YEAH, IT'S A LITTLE TOUGH TO SEE THERE, ISN'T IT? UM, IT GIVES YOU THE, UM, CURRENT FEE BY WATERSHED THAT IS BEING CHARGED AS OF JULY 1ST, 2022. AND I'LL TELL YOU THAT IT VARIES FROM, UH, DEPENDING ON THE WATERSHED THAT YOU ARE IN, UH, FROM THE LOW OF ASSESSED FEE IN CLEAR CREEK OF 50 CENTS PER SERVICE UNIT TO THE HIGH OF SIMS AND VINCE BAYOU OF $22 AND 59 CENTS PER SERVICE UNIT. AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING TO STANDARDIZE THIS, SO IT'S A LOT EASIER TO ADMINISTER AS WELL. THAT'S A BIG RAISE. UM, SECOND QUESTION. IN THE PROJECTS THAT YOU STUDY TO COME UP WITH THE COST OF DOING ALL THIS, DO YOU COORDINATE THIS WITH COUNTY FLOOD PROJECTS, HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS? 'CAUSE THERE'S MASSIVE FLOOD PROJECTS THAT THEY HAVE AT THE SAME TIME, CORRECT? YEAH. SO A LOT OF OUR CIP PROJECTS ARE ALREADY COORDINATED WITH FLOOD CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS AND WHAT THEIR REQUIREMENTS ARE NEEDING TO BE. AND YOU'LL NOTE, AS I, AS I MENTIONED, THERE ARE SOME REGIONAL PROJECTS INCLUDED HERE WHERE THE IMPROVEMENT MIGHT NOT BE TO CITY INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT WHERE THE CITY IS INVESTING LOCAL FUNDS, LOCAL CITY FUNDS IN THEIR PROJECT. UH, AND SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THIS FEE CALCULATION AS WELL. UM, TO YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE, THE FEE INCREASE ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS, THIS LOOKS MAYBE A LITTLE HIGH DEPENDING ON THE WATERSHED YOU'RE IN. UH, FOR AN AVERAGE DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT A VERY, VERY MODEST CHARGE. AND TALKING ABOUT TAKING IN, I THINK THE REPORTS YOU, YOU HAD OF, UH, PER SIX MONTHS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COLLECTING 400, $500,000, MAYBE INCREASING THAT A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. THERE'S, THERE'S NOT A, A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE AMOUNT OF FEE THAT IS EXPECTED TO BE COLLECTED WITH THIS PROPOSAL. LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD DOUBLE. OKAY. [00:25:01] COMMISSIONER, SAY DOUBLES. COMMISSIONER JONES? YES. THANK YOU. UH, WANT ONE COMMENT? THE REGIONAL PROJECTS ARE IDENTIFIED BY MAP AND 80, EVEN NOT ISOLATED, UH, PER REGION. YOU'VE GOT STARS BY THEM. ARE THESE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED? AND IF THEY ARE, I COULDN'T FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT WHERE THEY WERE NAMED LABELED, BUT IF YOU WOULD AT THESE STARS IDENTIFY THE PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE APPLICABLE, UH, THE, THE, SINCE THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, FUNDS BEING, UH, GENERATED FOR THESE PROJECTS AND THOSE WHO PAY MAY WANT TO KNOW WHERE THEIR DOLLARS ARE GOING ON, ON FOR THESE REGIONAL BASIS ANYWAY. YEAH, UNDERSTOOD. AND, AND THEN I WOULD, I WOULD ASK, UH, FROM THE LAST 10 YEARS OF FEES COLLECTED, UH, HOW HAVE THOSE FEES RELATED TO THE COST OF THOSE PROJECTS? THAT IS, ARE, ARE WE, HAVE WE CREATED A DEFICIT OR SURPLUS? UH, SO, AND I KNOW THAT'S, THAT'S A TOUGH, YOU KNOW, UH, CRYSTAL BALL. I KNOW IT'S VERY BLURRY, BUT JUST TO GET A SENSE OF THE IDEA, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN ORDER OF HOW ARE WE RELATED TO, TO WHAT WE'RE GENERATING? SURE. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE, RIGHT. FOR A DRAINAGE IN STREET IMPROVEMENTS, WE BUDGET IN THE CIP ABOUT $200 MILLION A YEAR OF CITY INVESTMENT. WE'VE COLLECTED SINCE INCEPTION OF THIS FEE, LIKE A LITTLE OVER $8 MILLION. SO IT'S OVER 10 YEARS. YEAH. SO ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS, IT'S NOT A HUGE COMPONENT OF OUR ABILITY TO FINANCE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. AND I JUST WOULD NOTE FOR KEMP'S BENEFIT OF NOBODY ELSE, I'VE BEEN ASKED BY COUNSEL TO REMIND YOU ALL, UM, THAT WE DO NEED, UM, WRITTEN COMMENTS. SO THAT WOULD BE A GREAT WRITTEN COMMENT TO BE RECEIVED AS PART OF THIS PROCESS. UH, NO LATER THAN I THINK FEBRUARY 28TH, I BELIEVE IS PRIOR TO THE FIFTH DAY, PRIOR TO THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE, THAT WE HAVE PROCEDURALLY YEAH, WE'RE, WE'RE TAKING NOTES AND WE WILL INCORPORATE YOUR COMMENTS HERE INTO THIS DOCUMENT. PERFECT. WE'LL GO. SO ALL ON THE RECORD AS ALWAYS. OKAY. WE WAIT. I'LL GET YOU IN A SECOND. COMMISSIONER VICTOR. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. UH, GREAT PRESENTATION, DAVID SAMIR. BUT QUICK QUESTION. SO WHY ARE YOU STANDARDIZING $25? WE JUST SAW THAT THE MAX MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE RATE ARE MUCH HIGHER FOR EACH OF THE SERVICE AREA AND VERY DIFFERENT. UH, SO JUST CURIOUS, WHAT IS THE RATIONALE? A A COUPLE OF REASONS THAT, THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED. ONE IS IT WILL DEFINITELY AID IN ADMINISTRATION, RIGHT? HAVING A SINGLE FEE EVERYWHERE. IT ALSO WILL ENSURE THAT DEPENDING ON WHERE DEVELOPMENT SITES ITSELF, THERE'S NO, NO DISPARITY THERE. OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT COLLECTING A LOT OF REVENUE ANYWAY, BUT THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE THERE. DEPENDING ON THE WATER SUGAR YOU'RE IN, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOUR FEE WOULD BE AND IT'S STILL SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER. SO IS THERE A PLAN TO, IT'S, IT'S ABOUT 5.3% OF THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE. YEAH. , COMPARE THAT ON THE WATER AND SEWER. THE ADOPTED RATES ARE, THEY WERE STARTED AT 25% FOR WATER AND 35% FOR WASTEWATER. SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE WELL BELOW EVEN THAT WHERE WE HAVE A STATED, YOU KNOW, OBJECTIVE OF SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT. SO THIS WILL STAY CONSTANT FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS, OR ARE YOU, IS A PLAN GONNA BE? SO I THINK THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THE PROVISIONS IN CITY STATUTE ALREADY TO INCREMENTALLY INCREASE THOSE BY INFLATION. BUT THEY WILL STAY WITHIN, OBVIOUSLY THEY'D STAY BELOW THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE FEE. OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONER CLARK NEXT, JUST A REQUEST. I, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU GUYS ARE SO MUCH LOWER THAN WHAT YOU COULD BE CHARGING. JUST Y'ALL LOVE IT WHEN I DO THIS. EVERY THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT WE INCREASE THE COST OF A HOUSE, 25,000 PEOPLE IN TEXAS NO LONGER QUALIFIED. YEAH. GOT ALL KINDS OF COSTS GOING UP AND ALL KINDS OF INTEREST RATES GOING UP. JUST ALWAYS KEEP THAT IN MIND. ABSOLUTELY. I THINK WE DID LOOK AT SOME EXAMPLES, OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THIS IS ON A INCREMENTAL IMPERVIOUS COVER BASIS, UH, COMMISSIONER CLARK, IT'S, UM, IT'S TOUGH TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT EACH CIRCUMSTANCE IS GONNA BE FOR YOUR FEE, UH, BUT ROUGHLY APPROXIMATE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A, FOR A SINGLE OCCUPANT HOUSE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SIX TO $45 FEE. SO UNDERSTAND, GENERALLY SPEAKING I UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST LIKE TO REMIND PEOPLE WHEN WE'RE SETTING THESE FEES, JUST WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THE END USER. END USER. OKAY. COMMISSIONER NELSON, I, I WAS GONNA ASK IF I REMEMBERED CORRECTLY THAT WHAT WAS THE 50% OF THE MAX IS WHAT WE WOULD BE LIMITED TO OUR COUNSEL WOULD BE LIMITED TO CHARGE. SO YOU'RE DOWN AT FIVE INSTEAD OF 50, 50%, CORRECT. SO, WELL, YEAH. SO THE ENGINEER CALCULATES HERE'S THE COST OF ALL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY TO SUPPORT THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. RIGHT. AND THEN STATUTE REQUIRES AN ADJUSTMENT TO ACCOUNT FOR A VALOREM TAX OR OTHER CREDITS THAT MIGHT BE USED FOR THOSE SIMILAR IMPROVEMENTS. IT ALSO PROVIDES FOR KIND OF A SAFE HARBOR 50% REDUCTION, WHICH IS WAY MORE THAN WHAT A CALCULATED WOULD BE. RIGHT. UM, SO WE GENERALLY HAVE STUCK TO JUST LIKE ON THE WATER AND THE WASTEWATER, WE'VE STUCK TO [00:30:01] THE 50% CALCULATION. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK COMMISSIONER VICTOR ANN. OH, JUST ONE LAST QUESTION. IS THERE, I'M ASSUMING SAME, UH, EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING WOULD APPLY TO THIS AS WELL? YES, IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME LANGUAGE IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE IS, IS EXACTLY THE SAME FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER. SO IT'S SINGLE OCCUPANT OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. UH, AND IT'S TIED TO A MEDIAN INCOME MEDIUM. YEAH. THANK YOU JONES. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT TIES BACK TO THE FIRM THAT PREPARED THIS, I REALIZE IT'S A GROUP, IT'S WRITTEN HERE ON THE FRONT COVER, BUT HAS THERE BEEN, I'LL CALL IT KIND OF A, UH, THAT PROFESSION, AN INDUSTRY PEER REVIEW OF, OF THIS REPORT BEFORE YOU PRESENTED IT? THAT IN FACT IT'S BACKED SOMEWHAT BY THE INDUSTRY THAT THEY SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL THAT THE REPORT AND THE NUMBERS. I THINK THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT, KNOWING THAT WE'RE THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE GOING TO COUNCIL. YEAH, WE GET THE COUNCIL HAS A FINAL SAY, UH, AND COULD BE SOME, SOME ADJUSTMENTS HERE OR THERE DEPENDING ON PUBLIC INPUT. BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO SUPPORT WHAT THE INDUSTRY ACCEPTS AS BEING APPLICABLE OR REASONABLE. YEAH, TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. UH, COMMISSIONER JONES, I GUESS WHAT I SAID, I APOLOGIZE, I TOTALLY DIDN'T INVITE THOSE OR GUESTS THAT WE HAVE WITH US TODAY. WE HAVE, UH, STEVE GALLOWAY, WHO IS ONE OF THE ENGINEERS THAT DID SIGN AND SEAL THIS REPORT FOR YOU GUYS TODAY, AND KATE PLATNER, THEY'RE BOTH WITH KIMLEY HORN WHO LED THIS EFFORT OF DEVELOPING THIS STUDY FOR YOU AS YOU SEE ON THE COVER, RIGHT. FOR OTHER ENGINEERING FIRMS PARTICIPATED IN DEVELOPING THIS REPORT AND SEVERAL OTHERS ON THE TEAM AS WELL. SO IT IS QUITE A RANGE OF, OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS WERE INVOLVED IN DEVELOPMENT OF THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND THIS REPORT AS WHAT I WOULD SAY. NO, UM, IT'S NOT A STANDARD PRACTICE TO TAKE THIS KIND OF REPORT TO A CEC OR SOME OTHER BODY FOR, FOR A COMMENT LIKE THAT. UH, BUT I, I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE A, A RANGE OF, UH, OPINIONS THAT WERE AIRED DURING DEVELOPMENT OF THE REPORT AND, AND IT IS REFLECTED IN THE FINAL PRODUCT. AND, AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH TWO OF THESE FIRMS VERY WELL, UM, CIVIL TECH AND, AND 5G. BUT, UH, THERE COULD BE NOT LOOKING FOR JUST, YOU KNOW, THE ENTIRE GAMUT, BUT SOMEWHAT OF A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSTON CHAPTER OF A CE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, SOME, UH, IN, IN THAT, THAT DRAINAGE WORLD WHO, YOU KNOW, JUST THEY, THEY LIVE AND BREATHE AND, YOU KNOW, DREAM ABOUT THIS EVERY DAY, MAYBE NOT. BUT ANYWAY, UH, JUST FROM THE SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE INDUSTRY NODS, THEIR HEADS SAYS, YES, THESE ARE FAIR, THESE ARE REASONABLE. I JUST THINK THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE, EVEN IF IT'S A SUBSET, BUT A GROUP THAT'S SOMEWHAT SELECTED BY, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S, I'LL CALL IT KINDA A READ SOME SOMEWHAT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE A CEC CHAPTER. OKAY. SO, WELL, AND THIS IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT ON ITS WAY TO CITY COUNCIL, SO WE HAVE AMPLE TIME FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR PEOPLE TO REVIEW IT. AND I THINK INTERESTED STAKEHOLDERS WILL BE, YOU KNOW, VERY WILLING TO, TO DO THAT AT THIS POINT. C UH, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG'S BEEN WAITING FOR HIS SECOND SHOT. I THOUGHT YOU HAD DECIDED NOT TO, BUT COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, UH, NO, IT'S OKAY. UM, AND I KNOW YOU DON'T DO AS MANY SERVICE UNITS ON BRAISED BY AS YOU DO SAN JACINTO, AND SO IT'S NOT A DIRECT AVERAGE, BUT YOU SAID IT'S JUST A SMALL PERCENT INCREASE, WHICH MAY BE, BUT IT APPEARS ON PAPER WHEN YOU AVERAGE OUT THAT COLUMN, IT'S ACTUALLY DOUBLED. SO YOU MAY CLARIFY THAT IN FUTURE COMMENTS 'CAUSE UM, YOU KNOW, IT DOES APPEAR WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT TO BE A PRETTY BIG, YOU KNOW, INCREASE. THANKS. DO YOU WANNA RESPOND TO THAT OR, AGAIN, I THINK HE'S KIND HIT IT THAT THE, THE, UM, THE SERVICE UNITS IN THOSE AREAS THAT HAD THE LARGER AMOUNT OF FEE CURRENTLY IN THE SCHEDULE KIND OF AVERAGE OUT THE, THE, THE TOTAL EXPECTED COLLECTION ACROSS THE CITY IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO CHANGE AS MUCH. BUT YEAH, THERE ARE CERTAINLY SOME WATERSHEDS WHERE THEY CHARGE VERY LITTLE FEE RIGHT NOW WHO WOULD BE PAYING A LITTLE BIT MORE. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, I WAS JUST GONNA STATE, OH YES, COMMISSIONER, HE, I MEAN, I THINK THE REPORT'S PRETTY CLEAR. I MEAN, THE, THE, THE FEES THAT ARE COLLECTED HAVE TO BE USED WITHIN THAT SPECIFIC WATERSHED, SO CORRECT. I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S, THAT'S WHY YOU WANNA, DO, YOU WANNA STANDARDIZE OR ONE OF THE REASONS WHY YOU WANNA STANDARDIZE, IT'LL MAKE IT EASIER, RIGHT? TO TO, YEAH. I THINK FOR THE COLLECTION PIECE OF IT, ENSURING THAT EVERYBODY DOES THAT ONE BE EASIER, THE USE WOULD STILL BE, OF COURSE RESTRICTED BY WATERSHED. RIGHT. SO, AND, AND I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, THE REPORT DOESN'T GET INTO THIS, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THIS, THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS EITHER, BUT, YOU KNOW, DETERMINE WHETHER THOSE COSTS ARE TRULY ELIGIBLE OR NOT. IT'S KIND OF OUTSIDE OF THIS, OUT OF THIS STUDY, AND THEN WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE USED WITHIN THAT 10 YEAR PERIOD THAT THE, THAT THE REPORT TALKS ABOUT AS WELL. SO THAT'S DETERMINED BY SOMEONE ELSE. SO I GUESS ON THIS REPORT, UM, I'M NOT SURE THE FIRST QUESTION, MAYBE THAT'S A QUESTION FOR COUNSEL TO WEIGH IN ON. UM, CERTAINLY IN YOUR [00:35:01] ROLE ONGOING ON, ON NEWS AS YOU RECEIVE THESE REPORTS, UM, YOU'LL CONTINUE TO SEE INFORMATION ABOUT ADMINISTRATION OF THE FEE. YEAH, I, I THINK THE ONLY, THE ONLY FINAL COMMENT IS, I MEAN, I THINK THERE, IT ON PAPER IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE, THESE ARE SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES, BUT AGAIN, AS WAS NOTED EARLIER, WHEN YOU FACTOR IN, RIGHT? YOU, YOU, YOU DETERMINE WHAT THE TOTAL MAXIMUM COST IS AND THEN YOU REDUCE THAT RIGHT OFF THE TOP BY 50% OR THAT'S THE METHOD THAT, THAT, THAT WAS CHOSEN VERSUS GOING THROUGH THE ADD VALOREM TAX ANALYSIS. AND SO, AND THEN YOU'RE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN THAT, SO, CORRECT. SO THANK YOU. IT WAS, THANKS FOR THE SUMMARY. IT WAS A GOOD REPORT. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY. SO, UH, TELL US PROCESS WISE, UM, IF YOU WOULD SORT OF OUTLINE THE, THE MOTION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR US TO ADOPT TODAY, UM, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND SENDING IT TO CITY COUNCIL. UM, BUT THE OTHER PIECE IS THAT WE DO COMPILE THROUGH NOTE TAKING ALL THESE COMMENTS AND THEN THAT IS COLLECTED INTO A DOCUMENT THAT IS THEN PASSED ALONG TO CITY COUNCIL. SO ALL YOUR COMMENTS WILL BE INCLUDED IN THAT. AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR, YOU KNOW, QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING, I URGE YOU TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW, IF NOT OH YES, GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER VAR. SO I SEE THAT, UM, SAN ANTONIO WAS USED AS A COMPARISON. ARE THERE OTHER CITIES THAT YOU LOOKED AT? ARE THERE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE A STANDARDIZED, UM, APPROACH LIKE THIS? UH, WELL STANDARDIZED MEANING THE FLAT FEE MM-HMM . UM, SO NOT SURE, SO SAN ANTONIO'S EXAMPLE, THE, THE RANGE ISN'T BY WATERSHED, IT'S ACTUALLY BY DEVELOPMENT TYPE. SO THE LOW IS SUPPORTING SINGLE FAMILY. THE HIGH IS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. UM, THERE AGAIN, THERE ARE VERY FEW JURISDICTIONS IN, IN THE STATE THAT IMPOSE A DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE. OKAY. UM, THERE ARE OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT IMPOSE A STREET IMPACT FEE, A TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE THAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE, UNDER THE STATE STATUTE AS WELL. UM, AND THOSE FEES DO RANGE, SOME OF THEM ARE SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE FOR SIMILAR INFRASTRUCTURE. SO AUSTIN JUST LAST YEAR, UH, INSTITUTED A, A STREET IMPACT FEE. IT, IT'S, I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS HANDY, BUT IT IS SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'RE, IT'S A LOT MORE THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, BUT NOT, UH, BUT NOT LIKE A STANDARD, THIS IS A ONE SIZE, IT VARIES QUITE A BIT MORE BY STREET IS ACTUALLY MUCH MORE COMPLICATED IMPACT FEE TO ADMINISTER. YEAH. AND THEN, UM, FOLLOW UP QUESTION. I SAW THAT SAN JACINTO, UM, SERVICE AREA PAYS NOTHING CURRENTLY, BUT THEY'LL BE PAYING $25 AND I'M JUST CORRECT. AND AGAIN, THAT COMPARISON GOES BACK TO THE, THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WERE IN THE FIRST REPORTS. RIGHT. AND THAT REALLY GOES BACK TO THE FIRST REPORT DIDN'T IDENTIFY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS SUPPORTING THE NEXT 10 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THAT REPORT AT ALL. UM, THIS REPORT OBVIOUSLY IS A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPANSIVE IN, IN IDENTIFYING WHAT THOSE NEEDED CAPITAL INVESTMENTS ARE, WHICH ARE I THINK WE, WE CAN AGREE ARE ARE, ARE NEEDED. YEAH. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND IN YOUR UNIT COSTS ANALYSIS, YOU'RE, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT'S INCLUDED IN, IN THE UNIT COST? SURE. UM, SO I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION IN THE REPORT. UH, SECTION FOUR D DESCRIBES THE METHOD OF COMING UP WITH THE COSTS INCLUDED IN THE REPORT. UM, IN APPENDIX B GIVES YOU THE ACTUAL THEN CALCULATION OF WHAT IS THE UNIT COST USED. UM, AND IT IS NOT JUST THE PIPE THAT GOES IN THE GROUND, IT'S REALLY ALL THE COSTS THAT INVOLVE TO, TO IMPLEMENTING THE DRAINAGE PROJECT THEN JUST EXPRESSED AS A, YOU KNOW, A A COST PER UNIT OF, OF SIZE OF PIPE. UM, SO IT'S REALLY THE, A PIPE EQUIVALENT SIZE. SO IT'S NOT PREJUDICING SAYING IT'S GONNA BE A PIPE OR IT'S GONNA BE DITCH OR SOMETHING ELSE. UH, THE ONE THING I WOULD HIGHLIGHT IS IT DOES INCLUDE THE COST OF MITIGATION. SO OFFSITE MITIGATION FOR DETENTION PONDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED, THAT IS INCLUDED. SO IF YOU JUST PICK UP THE SCHEDULE AND APOLOGIES AGAIN IN YOUR, IN YOUR BACKGROUND INFORMATION, THE FIRST PIECE OF INFORMATION YOU SAW ABOUT THIS WAS, WAS THAT APPENDIX OF THE UNIT COSTS. RIGHT. AND IT, IT WOULD LOOK LIKE VERY HIGH COST, UM, BUT IT IS INCLUDING A LOT OF OTHER COMPONENTS OF DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING THAT PROJECT. AND IT WASN'T THAT ADDITIONAL LAYERS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE FIRST REPORT. THE DISTINCTION IS THE, THE, THE MITIGATION, THE, THE DETENTION IS REALLY THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE. YEAH. OKAY. RODNEY COMMISSIONER, HE, IT ALSO INCLUDES A, UH, ATLAS 14 CORRECT. INFLATION. CORRECT. THAT'S, THAT'S FACTOR AS WELL, RIGHT? CORRECT. THE DETENTION IS KIND OF INCLUDED IN THAT ADJUSTMENT FACTOR. YEP. SO ATLAS 14 BEING THE, THE REVISED RAINFALL DATA BASED ON FROM THE RESULTS OF HURRICANE HARVEY. AND SO CORRECT. ANTICIPATED FEMA CHANGES, RIGHT. THAT ARE HAVING BEEN IMPLEMENTED YET, BUT WE EXPECT THAT THEY, THEY WERE WINNING THOSE MAPS ANY DAY. YES. OH, SOON. COMMISSIONER JONES. YEAH, I, I MAY HAVE GOT MY OWN ANSWER HERE, BUT I LOOKING FURTHER, FURTHER DOWN IN, IN YOUR POWERPOINT, THE EXAMPLES AND IT'S, UH, [00:40:01] FOR SINGLE FAMILY NEW 1.8 SU SERVICE UNITS, AND I'M SEEING BELOW THAN THAT, THAT ONE SERVICE UNIT IS 1000 SQUARE FEET OF IMPERVIOUS COVER OF ADDITIONAL COVER. SO INCREMENTAL COVER. YES. OKAY. SO IN ESSENCE, WE'RE LOOKING AT 1800 SQUARE FEET. IS THAT WHAT, WHEN I SAY THE 1.8, CORRECT. 1.8 SQUARE UNITS WOULD BE SERVICE UNITS WOULD BE 1800 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT. PER INCREASED. RIGHT. OKAY. GOT IT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY WITH THAT, DO YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PROCESS GOING FORWARD? OH, I'M SORRY. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER MANKA? UM, I WAS GONNA ASK, UM, IS THERE A TYPICAL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS IN THIS AFTER YES. CORRECT. SO THE, THE PUBLIC, UM, COMMENT PERIOD I THINK HAS BEGUN OFFICIALLY AND Y'ALL ARE PART OF THAT, WHICH IS WHY YOUR COMMENTS ARE DUE BEFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THAT PROCESS AND OUR PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH WILL ALL BE CONSIDERED BY COUNSEL, THEIR ACTION. AND, AND, UH, CHAIR STEIN, I APOLOGIZE. I'M GONNA LOOK AT KIM AND SAY WHAT ACTION WE MIGHT NEED FROM YOU. IT'S ON YOUR ACTION AGENDA. I KNOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE COMMENTS TO BE FILED. I'M NOT SURE IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR ANY KIND OF OTHER ACTION FROM THIS BODY. I THINK IT'S JUST THE COMMENTS. YEAH, I I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. THEY PROMISED ME A WORKING MICROPHONE. I THEY NEVER WANT THE LAWYER TO TALK. YEAH, YEAH. YES, DAVID IS CORRECT. JUST NOTICE THAT WE WILL BE PUTTING TOGETHER THAT MEMORANDUM WITH ALL OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE HERE BY COMMISSIONERS TO FORWARD ONTO COUNSEL BEFORE THE, BEFORE THE END DATE. UM, I THINK IT WORKS OUT TO BE SIX DAYS BEFORE THE TECHNICAL PUBLIC HEARING, BUT YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, SO ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, THEN WE WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. UH, COMMISSIONER NELSON, WE DO THE HONORS. UH, YES. THANK YOU. I, I'D MAKE A MOTION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACCEPT THE DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE STUDY AND FORWARD IT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR GREAT EXPLANATIONS AND APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE TODAY. AND THANK YOU TO THE KIMLEY HORN PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE. THANK YOU. UM, OKAY, SO WITH THAT WE GO [Platting Activities a & b ] TO ROMAN NUMERAL FOUR PLOTTING ACTIVITY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS ARM LEE. SECTIONS A AND B ARE PRESENTED AS ONE GROUP, WHICH CONCLUDES CONSENT AND REPLANT ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION. SECTIONS A AND B ARE ITEMS ONE THROUGH 1 45 SECTION A. CONSENT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS ONE THROUGH 87. SOME OF YOUR PACKETS MIGHT SAY 86, THAT IS INCORRECT. AND SECTION B REPLANT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS 88 THROUGH 1 45. 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. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS ARE THE ITEMS IN SECTIONS A AND B WE NEED TO CONSIDER SEPARATELY? COMMISSIONER DALTON? YES, MADAM CHAIR ITEMS 23 75, 76, 77, 78, AND 79. OKAY. AND UH, HAS ITEM 23 BEEN WITHDRAWN? I, I THINK IT HAS MM-HMM . WE DIDN'T STATE. YEAH, SO WELL AND YEAH, I DON'T USUALLY STATE THE ONES UNDER CONSENT, BUT SO WITH YOUR APPROVAL, COMMISSIONER DALTON, WE'LL JUST SAY 75 THROUGH 79 SINCE WE WON'T BE CONSIDERING 23. OKAY, THAT WORKS. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER SIGLER ITEMS 8 9 13 THROUGH 1680 AND 93. OKAY, AND COMMISSIONER HY? YES, MADAM CHAIR. UH, ITEM 7 8 9 68 THROUGH 71, 80 93 AND 1 0 6. OKAY. UM, I DO NOT HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED IN ADVANCE TO SPEAK ON ANY, UH, SPEAK ON ANYTHING IN THE CONSENT AND RELA SECTIONS. UH, IS THERE, THERE ANYONE LISTENING OR HERE OR IN THE CHAT WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ANYTHING IN A AND B? IF NOT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PROCEED WITH VOTING ON THE ITEMS IN SECTIONS A AND B AND WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON ALL ITEMS. SAVE. AND EXCEPT FOR ITEM SEVEN THROUGH NINE 13 THROUGH 1668 THROUGH 71, 75 THROUGH 79, 80, 93 AND [00:45:01] 1 0 6 MOTION, VICTOR IS THERE A SECOND? JONES? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? AYE. OH, SORRY. OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. AND THEN ON THE REMAINDER ITEM SEVEN THROUGH NINE, 13 THROUGH 1668 THROUGH 71, 75 THROUGH 79, 80, 93 AND 1 0 6 IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION PERLE SECOND MAR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES AND NOTE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONERS HEIS, DALTON AND SIGLER ABSTAINED THAT WILL TAKE [c. Replats requiring Public Hearings with Notification (Dorianne Powe-Phlegm, Arum Lee, Devin Crittle, Aracely Rodriguez, and John Cedillo) ] US TO SECTION C PUBLIC HEARINGS. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JOHN PHILLIPS . ITEM 1 46 IS CRESTVIEW VILLAS. THE SITE IS LOCATED NORTH ALONG CRESTVIEW, EAST OF WAYSIDE ROAD AND DENTON STREET AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS. THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE TWO RESIDENTIAL LOTS BEING A REPL OF LOTS, ONE, TWO, AND THREE AND BLOCK ONE OF SAINTVILLE CREATED IN 2021. REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. NO VARIANCES HAVE BEEN REQUESTED FOR THIS APPLICATION. THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CB 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS AND WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION. MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION. YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. OKAY, THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 1 46, CRESTVIEW VILLAS IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. WE HAVE NO ONE IN THE CHAT. IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1 46 HEARING NO RESPONSE? THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION SIGLER. SECOND. ALL ALLMAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 47, ITEM 1 47 IS FOSTER PLACE PARTIAL RE PLAT NUMBER 34. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF ENGLAND AND WARD STREETS AND THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS. THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. UH, THE REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. THERE ARE NO BRANCHES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS TO APPROVE THE PLA SUCH AS CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS AND STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM. MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 47 PART FOSTER PLACE PARTIAL REPL NUMBER 34 IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE IN THE, WE DO HAVE SOMEONE IN THE CHAT. THERE IS SOMEONE IN THE CHAT, BUT, UM, NO NAME. OKAY, IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON FOSTER PLACE? PARTIAL REPL NUMBER 34, ITEM 1 47. IF YOU DO, PLEASE UNMUTE AND SPEAK UP RIGHT NOW. HEARING NO RESPONSE. IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON 1 47, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. IS THERE A MOTION? BALDWIN SECOND. GARZA GARZA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 48, ITEM 1 48 HOUSTON GATEWAY ACADEMY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CITY ALONG CORAL STREET AND SOUTH OF BOWIE STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE THREE RESERVES. REVIEW BY LEGAL HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST DOES NOT VIOLATE DEED, DEED RESTRICTIONS. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THIS PLAT WAS REVISED TO MEET THE SEPARATELY FILED DEED RESTRICTIONS. THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM. WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THE PLAT STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 48 HOUSTON GATEWAY ACADEMY IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY IN THE CHAT. ANYONE HERE OR LISTENING? WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 48 HOUSTON GATEWAY ACADEMY? HEARING NO RESPONSE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION BE RA BLAND. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. MODEST. MODEST. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. UH, 1 49 CASHMERE ESTATES HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. THE NEXT ITEM IS ONE 50 LYONS COURT. ITEM ONE 50 IS LYONS COURT. THE [00:50:01] SITE IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTH ALONG LYONS AVENUE, EAST OF MISSICK STREET IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS. THE REASON FOR RE PLAT IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS TAKING ACCESS FROM A 16 FOOT WIDE DRIVE, A SHARED DRIVEWAY. THE NO VARIANCES HAVE BEEN REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. SAS RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. UH, WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION. MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. UH, ACTUALLY SHOWS A REVIEW BY LEGAL CASE THAT DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ONE 50 LYONS COURT IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGN. NOBODY IN THE CHAT. IS THERE ANYONE LISTENING OR IN THE ROOM WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON ONE 50 LYONS COURT? HEARING NO RESPONSE. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION CLARK FORS, PERLE AND CLARK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 1 51. ITEM 1 51 IS MISSION GREEN NORTH PARTIAL E PLAT NUMBER THREE AND EXTENSION. THE SUBJECT SITE IS A HALF ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE FORT BEND COUNTY, EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION AT THE EAST INTERSECTION OF PRERA DRIVE AND LORA DRIVE NORTH OF BENU STREET AND EAST OF CLODE ROAD. THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO EXTEND THE SIZE OF THE RESERVE RESTRICTED TO WATERY PLANT USE. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE PLANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. THE INITIAL PROPERTY, UH, SORRY, UH, REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICATION. SITE. RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCP C 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 1 51 MISSION GREEN NORTH IS CONTINUED. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED. WE HAVE SOMEONE IN THE CHAT. THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON MISSION GREEN NORTH? ITEM 1 51. UM, AND DO ARE THE APPLICANTS HERE ONLY FOR QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, OKAY. WITH THAT, I THINK WE ARE READY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS. I ASSUME NOT. UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. IS THERE A MOTION? HA SECOND MAR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 52. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS DEVIN K CRIDDLE. ITEM 1 52 IS PAREE ESTATES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS ALONG PAREE STREET AND WEST OF HIRSCH ROAD. THE PURPOSE OF THE REPLANT IS TO CREATE ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM. REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. AND STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 52 PARTY ESTATES IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED. WE HAVE NO ONE IN THE CHAT. DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON 1 52? YES. OKAY. UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING OR WHEN WE HAVE DISCUSSION BY COUNT? OKAY. UM, ANYONE WHO WISHES TO, DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON 1 52? UH, CARDIA STATES? OKAY. HEARING NO RESPONSE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. WE DO HAVE DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG. JUST, UH, FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION, IS THIS BEING TAKEN FROM ANOTHER LOT LIKE REPL ONE LOT AND SPLITTING IT INTO TWO? YES, SIR. WOULDN'T THAT ALL NEED TO SHOW? LIKE, WHAT IS IT COMING OUT OF THE SO THE LOT THAT'S JUST TO THE, TO THE EAST, THAT WAS, UH, THE ORIGINAL LOT. THE, THE PORTION THAT'S JUST TO THE EAST AT THE, AT THE INTERSECTION. SO THIS WOULD ACTUALLY IS SPLITTING LOTS. SO YOU'RE CREATING TWO LOTS, NOT JUST ONE. I KNOW IT'S A TECHNICALITY. I JUST, YEAH, CORRECT. YOU'RE TAKING THE ONE LOT AND IT'S NOW BEING TWO LOT WITH THIS REPL. OKAY. YEAH. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH. I JUST, WOULDN'T IT NEED TO SHOW THAT IF IT'S A REPL, YOU'RE TAKING IT OUT OF SOMETHING, DON'T YOU NEED TO REPL THE OTHER ONE? [00:55:01] NO, I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. I GUESS NOT. DO WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT? YES. OKAY. OKAY. UM, OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON 1 52 STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? VICTOR SECOND CLARK? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 53. ITEM 1 53 IS STERLING SHIRE ESTATES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG AND SOUTH OF STERLING SHOWER STREET, EAST OF GREENWICH STREET AND NORTH OF TIDWELL ROAD. THE PURPOSE OF THE RELIGHT IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOCKS. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM REVIEWED BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLATTER. THOSE FILED SEPARATELY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. AND STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOTE, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM, BUT WE HAVE BEEN COORDINATING WITH THE APPLICANT TO TRY TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CURB CUTS FOR THIS ITEM. UH, THEY'RE PROPOSING DUPLEXES, UH, THERE'S TWO LOT, EXCUSE ME. THERE'S TWO RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THERE'LL BE A DUPLEX ON EACH ONE. SO WE'RE, UM, IN THE PROCESS OF COMMUNICATING WITH THE APPLICANT TO LET 'EM KNOW THERE'S POSSIBILITIES TO REDUCE THE, THE NUMBER OF CURB CUTS. SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT ON. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, SO THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 1 53 STERLING SHIRE ESTATES IS OPEN. I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK. DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED IN THE CHAT. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON 1 53 STERLING SHIRE ESTATES? HEARING NO RESPONSE. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? YES. COMMISSIONER COLVARD. UM, CAN YOU GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CURB CUTS? YES. SO, UM, AS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY ONE LOT AND NOW IT'S BEING SPLIT INTO TWO. TYPICALLY EACH OF THE LOTS WILL HAVE ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL, UH, DRIVEWAY TO THE PUBLIC STREET. UM, BECAUSE WE'RE AWARE OF THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THEY'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, UM, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THEY CAN RECONFIGURE THE LOTS. MAYBE, UM, THERE'S SOMETHING CALLED A FLAG LOT WHERE TWO LOTS CAN SHARE SORT OF AN ACCESS POINT. SO THERE'S DIFFERENT DESIGNS THAT'S AVAILABLE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS. UH, SINCE THE LOTS AREN'T VERY WIDE, UM, THERE'S TYPICALLY PARKING ISSUES WE HAVE, UH, WITH SITUATIONS LIKE THIS. SO, UM, JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT'S TYPICALLY, UH, A DRIVEWAY FOR EACH LOT AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET THEM TO CONSOLIDATE, UH, THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS. THANK YOU. DIRECTOR WALLACE BROWN. I, I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT THIS REALLY IS IN KEEPING WITH THE LIVABLE PLACES ACTION COMMITTEE THAT, UM, COMMISSIONERS CLARK AND AND, UH, GARZA, GARZA ARE ON. WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS, UM, REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT PEDESTRIANS AND AUTOMOBILES COLLIDE. YES. AND IF WE CAN REDUCE DRIVEWAYS, WE PROVIDE A SAFER ENVIRONMENT FOR PEDESTRIANS. WE ALSO, UM, ARE TYPICALLY BETTER GIVING A BETTER CIRCUMSTANCE TO OUR DRAINAGE PROGRAM AND ALSO ENCOURAGING MORE ON-STREET PARKING. WE, WE ACCOMPLISHED THREE THINGS WITH THAT, BUT MOSTLY IT'S ABOUT REDUCING THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT PEDESTRIANS HAVE TO WALK ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. RIGHT. OR ROLL ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY AS THE CASE MAY BE. AND, AND WE DO APPLAUD STAFF FOR ALWAYS, ALL STAFF TRIES TO WORK ON THIS WITH IT. THEY, THIS IS TWO CURB, TWO DRIVEWAYS IS ALLOWABLE NOW UNDER THE CURRENT CODE. BUT WE WE'RE TRYING VERY HARD A TO CHANGE THAT A LITTLE BIT, BUT B TO CONVINCE UM, DEVELOPERS TO DO IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, OKAY. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. OH, WE, DID WE ALREADY VOTE ON STERLING SHAR? NO. OKAY. WE NO MOTION. ALRIGHT. UH, SO WE NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM 1 53. STERLING SHIRE ESTATES. MOTION. CLARK SECOND JONES. JONES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? OH, THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 1 54, THIS IS COMMISSIONER DALTON. I'LL BE ABSTAINING FROM 1 54. OKAY. NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER DALTON ABSTAINS ON 1 54. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 1 54 IS TIMBER LAKES FIRE STATION. THE SITE IS LOCATED EAST ALONG ROYAL OAKS DRIVE AT THE NORTHWEST INTERSECTION OF ROYAL OAKS DRIVE AND SPREADING [01:00:01] OAKS DRIVE IN HOUSTON'S ETJ OF MONTGOMERY. THE REASON FOR REPLAY IS TO CREATE A RESERVE RESTRICTED TO EMERGENCY SERVICES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 42 DASH 1 93 TO OUR PARKING RESERVE AND LOTS TO BE REPLANTED INTO EMERGENCY SERVICE RESERVE. THIS PLAT WAS DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR FURTHER LEGAL AND DEED RESTRICTION REVIEW. LEGAL HAS REVIEWED THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND DETERMINED THAT THIS PLAT DOES VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT THIS ITEM, EXCUSE ME, THE APPLICANT HAS RE REQUESTED THAT THIS PLAT BE DEFERRED AGAIN TO CONFER WITH LEGAL SINCE THIS IS A SECOND DEFERRAL. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. GO RIGHT AHEAD. THE SITE IS A REPL OF 19 LOTS AND A PARK AND RESERVE CREATED WITH THE TIMBERLAKES SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN 1964. THE SITE IS MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED EXCEPT THERE'S AN EXISTING VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ON THE SITE. THE PLAT WAS DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. TO GIVE LEGAL MORE TIME TO REVIEW THE SEPARATELY FILED DEED RESTRICTIONS, STAFF RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE TIMBER LAKE TIMBER RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION TO GRANT A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE TIMBER LAKES FIRE DEPARTMENT AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY ESD 14 TO BUILD COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES FOR ALL PURPOSES OF SERVING THE EMERGENCY SERVICES AND FIRE DISTRICT. LEGAL HAS REVIEWED THE RESTRICTIONS AND INDICATED THAT THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT THE VARIANCE FROM THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. AND THE LOTS ARE STILL RESTRICTED TO RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES AND THE RESTRICTIONS WOULD HAVE TO BE AMENDED BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS. THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY WATER CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT HAS ALSO PROVIDED A LETTER OF SUPPORT. THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATIONS AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO FURTHER PLAT FOR APPLICANT'S REQUEST. MADAM CHAIR, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE COMMENTS RELATED TO THAT IN YOUR PACKET. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN IS CONTINUED FOR ITEM 1 54 TIMBERLAKES FIRE STATION, AND OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS THE APPLICANT, JENNIFER CURTIS. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JENNIFER CURTIS WITH META PLANNING AND DESIGN. UM, WE UNDERSTAND THE OBJECTIONS THAT LEGAL HAS. UM, OUR COUNSEL THINKS THAT THEY HAVE SOME MORE INFORMATION TO OFFER, SO WE'VE ASKED FOR A DEFERRAL TO WORK ON THAT. IN THE MEANTIME, WHILE THEY DO THEIR WORK, I WANTED TO BRING YOU GUYS AN UPDATE ABOUT THE WORK WE HAD DONE TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS THAT THE RESIDENTS HAD REQUESTED, HAD ASKED AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT. SO, UM, THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT, UM, HELD A TOWN HALL MEETING LAST WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH. UH, ABOUT 45 RESIDENTS SHOWED UP, UH, BOTH IN PERSON AND VIRTUALLY TO THAT MEETING, AND THEY WENT OVER A NUMBER OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED, UM, AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING LAST TIME. AND I'LL JUST BRIEFLY TOUCH ON EACH OF THOSE ITEMS. UM, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP WAS THE RINGING OF THE ALARMS. UM, UNFORTUNATELY THAT IS REQUIRED THAT THOSE ITEMS BE TESTED. UM, THE CHIEF HAS TRIED TO ENCOURAGE THE STAFF TO TRY AND HOLD OFF ON TESTING THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT OR EARLY IN THE MORNING. SOMETIMES THEY DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHEN THEY COME ON SHIFT. UM, SO THEY'RE DOING THE BEST THEY CAN TO MITIGATE THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT THE FIRE STATION HAS EXISTED IN THIS LOCATION SINCE 1970. SO EVERYBODY WHO LIVES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS FULLY AWARE THAT THERE IS A FIRE STATION HERE. UM, THERE, THE TRAILERS THAT ARE PARKED ON SITE WERE BROUGHT UP. UM, WE LEARNED THAT THERE ARE TWO TRAILERS THAT ARE PARKED RELATIVELY PERMANENTLY ON THE SITE AND ONE THAT, UM, COMES AND GOES TEMPORARILY WITH STAFF. THE TWO PERMANENT ONES, ONE IS A TRAINING, UM, SUPPLY TRAILER AND THE OTHER ONE IS A BARBECUE AND EVENT TRAILER. BOTH OF THOSE IN THE NEW STATION WILL BE SCREENED, ONE IN A FENCE AND ONE IN A STRUCTURE, SO THEY WON'T BE VISIBLE ONCE THE NEW BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED. THE DETENTION WAS A MAJOR CONCERN. WE LEARNED THAT WATER FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DRAINS ONTO THIS SITE. CURRENTLY, IT PONDS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE. AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, THEY ALREADY HAVE DETENTION PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY. THEY'RE PUTTING NEW DETENTION FACILITIES ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE WHERE THE WATER PONDS THAT WILL IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE SITUATION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO DOING THE BEST WE CAN TO MAKE THAT SITUATION BETTER. UM, THE, SOMEONE RAISED A CONCERN ABOUT THERE BEING HAZMAT MATERIAL ON THE PROPERTY. THOSE ARE THE DIESEL FUEL CONTAINERS. FOR THE FIRE TRUCKS. THERE IS AN ENCLOSURE THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE BUILT WITH THE NEW FIRE STATION THAT WOULD CONTAIN THOSE CONTAINERS, UM, SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE OUT AND FREE AND VISIBLE. UM, THOSE I THINK WERE ALL [01:05:01] OF THE MAJOR POINTS. UM, SPEAKING TO THE DE RESTRICTIONS AS I MENTIONED, ARE OUR LEGAL COUNSEL THINKS THEY HAVE SOME SOLUTIONS AND WE'RE WORKING ON THAT. SO WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT TIME. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR, FOR MS. CURTIS? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU. IN THE UPDATE, UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MARCELLA COMISKEY. MS. COMISKEY. HELLO. HI, MY NAME IS MARCELLA COMISKEY AND I'M OPPOSED TO THE REPLANTING OF THE LAND TO BE COMMERCIAL. UM, I DID ATTEND THE MEETING THAT THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT DID A HOUSE ON JANUARY 25TH. UM, AND I I AM AWARE THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN THERE SINCE THE SEVENTIES. I MOVED TO THE SUBDIVISION IN 78 WHEN MY PARENTS BOUGHT THEIR HOUSE. UM, I NOW CURRENTLY LIVE THERE FOR 15 YEARS AND MY PROPERTY BACKS DIRECTLY UP TO THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT PLOTS THAT THEY WANT TO CHANGE TO COMMERCIAL. I AM OPPOSED TO IT BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY SMALL SUBDIVISION. I MOVED HERE. THE STREET I LIVE ON IS NOT A MAIN STREET. I LIKE IT QUIET. NOW GRANTED, I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE TO TEST THEIR ALARMS. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO A VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT BEING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I JUST DON'T WANT IT TO GROW LARGER. AND LIKE WHAT THE VOLUNTEER CHIEF COMMISSIONER SAID THAT ONCE THEY GROW OUT OF THIS LAND, THEY'LL SELL IT. AND THEN WHEN IT GETS SOLD, IT'S STILL LISTED AS A COMMERCIAL. SO I DON'T WANNA BE BEHIND A COMMERCIAL, UM, ENTITY IN MY BACKYARD. UM, THERE'S A FEW, SORRY, THERE'S A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT I KNOW. THEY, THEY TALKED ABOUT THE, THE HAZMAT, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. UM, THEY WILL BUILD IT, UM, WITH AN ENCLOSED FENCE WHEN THEY GET THE APPROVAL, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY BEING, YOU KNOW, IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHY THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE ALREADY. UM, THE FLOODING, I'M, I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FLOODING NOW BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL FOCUSED ON THE, UH, ONE END OF THE LAND WHERE I'M DIRECTLY BEHIND. WE ASKED HOW HIGH IS THE BUILDING GONNA BE. UM, THEY DID NOT HAVE THAT ANSWER. I'M JUST, I I I JUST FEEL LIKE, UH, THEY'RE NOT VERY CLEAR ON THEIR INTENTIONS OF THE BUILDING, HOW EVERYTHING'S GONNA BE. UM, I, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF MOST LIKELY SAID IN THE REBUTTAL. UM, AS FAR AS THE PRI PRIVACY FENCE, IT'S A CHAIN LINK. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S PRIVACY AND OR SOUNDPROOF. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AND JUST TO, TO RECAP HERE, THE QUESTION, THE, THE SEMINAL QUESTION HERE IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS DEED RESTRICTED. IF, IF IN THE TWO WEEK DELAY PERIOD, UM, IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT THESE DO, THAT, THIS WOULD VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THIS COMMISSION WOULD HAVE TO DENY THE VARIANCE AND DISAPPROVE THE PLAT THAT WE WOULD HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO APPROVE IT IF IT, IF IT VIOLATES SPEED RESTRICTIONS. IF IT DOESN'T, THEN YOU KNOW, WE'RE BACK. SO YOU NEED TO, I ASSUME WE WILL DEFER THIS THIS WEEK. UM, SO I URGE YOU TO STAY TUNED IN THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS OKAY. TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. SOUNDS GOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UM, SPEAKERS FOR ITEM 1 54 TIMBERLAKES FIRE STATION? ANYONE IN THE CHAT? MADAM CHAIR? TOM? OH YES, TOM, MA'AM. LME, GO AHEAD. YES. IF I COULD SAY JUST A, JUST A FEW WORDS. MADAM CHAIR, CHAIRPERSONS, UH, I GREW UP IN HOUSTON. COULD YOU GO AHEAD AND STATE STARTED YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? STARTED, I'M SORRY. STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME. THOMAS LANGMAN. L-A-N-G-M-E-A-D. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GO AHEAD. GREW, GREW UP IN HOUSTON. MUCH MORE LIKE YOU ALL DID. UH, AREA STARTED FLOODING. WE MOVED OUT UP TO TIMBER LAKE. TIMBER RIDGE. SO FLOODING IS NEAR AND DEAR TO OUR HEART. MY DAUGHTER LIVES RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM WE ALL ARE RIGHT NOW. WHEN IT RAINS, SHE GETS VERY NERVOUS. AND WHEN IT POURS WE'RE VERY GLAD THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS ON HAND AND THAT THE, UH, LIVABLE SPACES IS TRYING TO CREATE MORE GREEN SPACES. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT HERE. WE JUST WANT MORE GREEN SPACES. WE DON'T WANT 'EM TO EXPAND, WE DON'T WANT TO INCREASE FLOODING. IT MAKES US VERY NERVOUS AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE AGAINST IT. BUT WE LOVE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. WE, WERE ALL THERE IN SUPPORT OF JOSH, SO WE'RE NOT AGAINST THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. WE JUST DON'T WANT THEM TO EXPAND. JUST LIKE MARCY, MY NEIGHBOR SAID. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SHARING YOUR COMMENTS WITH US TODAY. UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE LISTED? JOSH KENNEDY IS THE APPLICANT. UM, AND HERE FOR QUESTIONS. I'M SORRY. JOSH KENNEDY? MM-HMM . OKAY. IS JOSH KENNEDY LISTENING? YES, MA'AM. HI, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK? GO RIGHT [01:10:01] AHEAD. UM, YEAH, I JUST, UH, WE KIND OF ALREADY ADDRESSED SOME OF THESE CONCERNS THAT THE RESIDENTS HAD. UM, AS I TOLD THEM, ALL I FOUND OUT ABOUT THESE CONCERNS AT THE LAST MEETING. WE WEREN'T AWARE THAT THESE WERE CONCERNS, SO WE ADDRESSED THEM. UH, I'VE GIVEN 'EM ALL MY CONTACT INFORMATION IF THEY WANNA GET AHOLD OF ME AND TALK TO ABOUT IT EVEN FURTHER, UM, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT. UM, AS WE LOOK AT THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE BETTER SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY AND BY DOING THAT WE HAVE TO EXPAND. OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT, AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY STATED, IT WAS BUILT IN THE SEVENTIES AND WE'VE OUTGROWN IT, UH, TENFOLD. AND, YOU KNOW, THE WAY WE'RE DEVELOPING THIS NEW STATION, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GONNA TAKE INTO ACCOUNT OF THE DRAINAGE. 'CAUSE BY ANY MEANS, WE DO NOT WANT TO INCREASE WATER FLOW TO ANY OTHER PROPERTY. WE'RE HERE TO HELP PEOPLE NOT MAKE THEIR LIVES WORSE. UM, AND WE'RE GONNA DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO MAKE SURE THAT IS DONE. UM, ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE JUST, WE, WE KNOW THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF CONCERNS. WE JUST HOPE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AND ALL THAT WILL SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING HERE TO PROGRESS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FIRE STATION. UM, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. UH, WE'RE GONNA OUTGROW THIS. WE'RE NOT, THE WAY WE'RE DESIGNING IT IS TO WHERE WE CAN GROW INTO IT FOR YEARS AND YEARS TO COME. YOU KNOW, WE'LL PROBABLY ALL OUTLIVE THIS STATION, OR SORRY, THE STATION WILL OUTLIVE US, BUT, UH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, MAKE THAT AWARE. AND IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, JUST PLEASE LET ME KNOW. OKAY, THANK YOU. MR. KENNEDY. AND YOU'RE, I ASSUME YOU ARE RE YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. YES MA'AM. I'M THE FIRE CHIEF. AH, THANK YOU. THE CHIEF KENNEDY? YES. HOLD ON. I THINK WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. COMMISSIONER SIGLER, UH, WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER SIGLER. UM, THIS PRIOR SPEAKER, UM, REFERRED TO IT AS A COMMERCIAL RESERVE. CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT PLEASE? 'CAUSE ON THE PLAT IT SAYS RESTRICTED TO EMERGENCY SERVICES. THAT'S CORRECT. MADAM CHAIR. I MEAN, EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER. UM, NOT YET. SO IF ZEROS, HONEY. WOW. SORRY ABOUT THAT. SORRY ABOUT THAT CONFUSION. UH, SO IF THIS VARIANCE IS GRANTED, UH, AND ONCE IT'S RECORDED, THIS PROPERTY WOULD NEED TO REMAIN IN THE EMERGENCY SERVICE REALM. UH, AND IF IT CHANGES FROM THAT, IT'LL HAVE TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF THIS BODY. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK, THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. MR. KRILL, IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE, YOU MIGHT WANNA, UH, TALK TO, UM, MS. COMISKEY AND JUST CLARIFY THAT 'CAUSE SHE'S UNDER MISS MISINFORMATION THERE. COMMISSIONER MODEST, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF OR PERHAPS LEGAL. SO IF, UM, IT DOES VIOLATE DEEDS AND STAYS RESIDENTIAL, UM, I GUESS THEY, THE FIRE, THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT CAN STAY THERE AS THEY ARE. AND THEN SHOULD THEY EVER NEED TO MOVE BECAUSE IT NO LONGER SUITS THEIR USE, IT COULD BE SOLD FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALLY, CORRECT? IT COULD BE, YEAH. OKAY. LOOK FORWARD TO A RESOLUTION OF THIS QUESTION. UM, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON TIMBERLAKES FIRE STATION 1 54? OKAY. YES, I DO. OKAY. COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME PLEASE? DEBBIE KENNEDY. K-E-N-N-E-D-Y. OKAY, GO RIGHT AHEAD. UM, I'M SPEAKING IN FOUR OF THE, THE FIRE STATION THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1964. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE BEHIND ME IN MY WALLPAPER, I HAVE A GOOGLE MAP OF THE EARTH AND IT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT SECTION OF OUR SUBDIVISION WAS DESIGNED. SO THE WATER OFFICE, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, WCID ONE IS THERE, UM, THEY TAKE UP, YOU KNOW, TWO OF THE CITY BLOCKS WITH THE PARK AND BASEBALL FIELD. THEN WE HAVE TWO, THREE COMMUNITY POOLS, A PARK, THE HOA AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO IT'S CLEAR THAT THAT'S A COMMERCIAL AREA, AREA OF THE SUBDIVISION. UM, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP OUR FIRE STATION TO THE POINT FOR A GOOD ISO RATING THAT THEY HAVE WORKED VERY HARD FOR EACH HOMEOWNER IN THE SUBDIVISION TO RECEIVE. UM, WE WANT TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT THE FIRE STATION CAN CONTINUE TO MEET THE GROWTH OF THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH SAWDUST ROAD AND HOW THAT, THAT AREA IS JUST EXPANDING LEAPS AND BOUNDS. AND SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS AND THEIR DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITY TO ALL OF US TO BE READY TO RESPOND TO ANY EVENT THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NEEDED FOR. UM, SO THAT'S WHY I JUST WANNA ENCOURAGE [01:15:01] EVERYBODY IN THE PETITIONS AND ALL THOSE LETTERS OF SUPPORT TO TAKE ALL IT SERIOUS. AND I THINK IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT HOW THE LAND WAS PLOTTED BACK IN THE SIXTIES, MAYBE WASN'T DONE CORRECTLY, BUT STILL, I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE LEGALITIES TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE IN PLACE, BUT IT IS CLEARLY A COMMERCIAL AREA OF THE SUBDIVISION. FINE. OKAY. THANK YOU MS. KENNEDY. WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. UM, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE TIMBERLAKES FIRE STATION? IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, AS WE SAID IS TO DEFER. UM, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BALDWIN BALDWIN, SECOND MODEST, MODEST, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. IT IS DEFERRED FOR TWO WEEKS. ITEM 1 55, EXCUSE ME. ITEM 1 55 IS WEALTH WEST 12TH STREET MANORS. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF PRINCE STREET AND WEST 12TH STREET, WEST OF NORTH DORM DRIVE, AND NORTH OF WEST 11TH STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE REPLAY IS TO CREATE A SHARED DRIVEWAY DEVELOPMENT WITH FIVE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A DEDICATION OF FIVE FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY. INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 10 FEET ALONG PRINCE STREET STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST, BUT THIS ITEM IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR DEFERRAL AND STAFF WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. PRINCE STREET IS A LOCAL PUBLIC STREET WITH AN EXISTING 40 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY PER SECTION 42 DASH 1 22, A LOCAL STREET 50 FEET IF ADJACENT TO EXCLUSIVELY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS OR A 60 FOOT REQUIREMENT IF ADJACENT TO ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS THE ONLY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON PRINCE STREET AT THE INTERSECTION OF PRINCE AND WEST 12TH STREET. ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ALONG PRINCE STREET ARE RESIDENTIAL LOTS. PRINCE STREET IS ABOUT SIX BLOCKS LONG THAT MAINLY SERVES RES RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. HOWEVER, REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL VIOLATE APPLICABLE DEED RESTRICTIONS FILED SEPARATELY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SECOND DEFERRAL TO CONTINUE COORDINATION WITH LEGAL STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLA PER OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. UH, MADAM CHAIR, WE WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT STA, EXCUSE ME. WE'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT DID MEET ALL OF THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND WE DID, AND WE DID RECEIVE ADVANCED COMMENTS AND OPPOSITION VOICING CONCERNS ABOUT DRAINAGE PARKING, INCREASED DENSITY IN INCREASED TRAFFIC, AND INADEQUATE VEH VEHICULAR ACCESS. MADAM CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 1 55 WEST 12TH STREET MANNERS IS CONTINUED. UH, WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS. I THINK EVERYBODY IS VIRTUAL. UM, LET ME CHECK, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE ROOM WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 55 WEST 12TH STREET? UM, OKAY THEN THE FIRST SPEAKER I HAVE LISTED IS, UM, JASON BINGER, B-E-E-S-I-N-G-E-R. MR. BINGER ARE YOU, PRESS YES. UH, UH YES. HI, I'M HERE ON TELEPHONE. SORRY. IT, IT TAKES A SECOND. A, A PHONE TO, UH, TAKES THE PHONE A SECOND TO UNMUTE. RIGHT. UM, MY NAME IS JASON BINGER. THAT'S B AS IN BOY, E-E-S-I-N-G-E-R. UM, I OPPOSE, UH, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND REPL, UH, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. I THINK MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR THE COMMISSION'S, UH, CONSIDERATION IS ONE, AS THE STAFF MENTIONED, THERE'S A 1941 DEED RESTRICTION IN PLACE REQUIRING THAT, UH, THAT STRUCTURES CAN ONLY BE BUILT ON LOTS, AT LEAST 5,900 SQUARE FEET. UM, THE, THE REPL WOULD CUT A 9,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT INTO FIVE, UH, NEW LOTS WITH THE INTENT OF PUTTING TOWN HOMES ON THEM. UM, SO, WHICH THE DEVELOPER SIMPLY CANNOT DO. UM, SO I THINK AS, AS A MATTER OF, OF FIRST IMPRESSION, UM, RATHER THAN DEFERRING, I THINK THAT THE COMMISSION HAS THE INFORMATION IT NEEDS, UH, TO BE ABLE TO DENY THIS APPLICATION TODAY, UH, RATHER THAN DEFERRING. UH, AND THE SECOND REASON THAT I, I THINK THE, THE COMMISSION SHOULD GO AHEAD AND DENY THIS APPLICATION RATHER THAN DEFERRING, UH, IS ON THE, THE VARIANCE PORTION OF WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TODAY. UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, UH, THAT THE [01:20:01] REQUIRED 10 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY BE TRIMMED TO A FIVE FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. UM, AND THE, THE CODE REQUIRES, UH, DEMONSTRATION, IN FACT SUPPORTING THAT, UH, THAT THE RULES, UH, CREATE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP BY DEPRIVING THE APPLICANT OF THE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND. AND, UH, THE APPLICANT SIMPLY HAS NOT MADE THAT SHOWING, UH, EVEN TAKING ALL THE STATEMENTS IN THE APPLICATION IS TRUE. THERE'S NO STATEMENT THAT THERE'S A HARDSHIP, THERE'S NO STATEMENT THAT THE, THAT THE DEVELOPER CANNOT MAKE PROFITABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. IT'S SIMPLY A MATTER OF, UH, THE APPLICANT WISHING TO BUILD FIVE TOWN HOMES ON A SINGLE LOT AND REQUESTING THIS VARIANCE TO EFFECTUATE THAT END. UM, BUT RESPECTFULLY, THAT DOES NOT A HARDSHIP MAKE. UM, THERE'S, THERE'S NO ALLEGATIONS, UH, IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE 10 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY IMPOSES ANY SORT OF HARDSHIP OR DEPRIVES THE APPLICANT OF, UH, THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. MR. BESSINGER, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. COULD YOU GO AHEAD AND WRAP UP VERY QUICKLY PLEASE? YES, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL, UH, FOR THE PROP DEVELOPER TO, TO SUBDIVIDE. AND BECAUSE THERE'S NO SHOWING OF HARDSHIP, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION DENY THE APPLICATION RATHER THAN DEFERRING. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS DINA, UM, BAZAAR. BAVA. DID I PRONOUNCE THAT RIGHT? BAZAAR BAVA. D HELLO. B-A-Z-A-R-B-A-Y-E-V-A DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE PRESENT. UM, HOW ABOUT GEORGE FRY, FREY, GEORGE FRY? I'M HERE. OH, OKAY. I'M HERE. I, I DEFER, IF THIS IS DEFERRED, I'D LIKE TO DEFER AS WELL. OKAY. I CAN'T GUARANTEE IT'S GONNA BE DEFERRED. SO IT, BUT IT'S UP TO YOU. YOU, YOU WELCOME TO DEFER. YOU CAN SPEAK NOW AND IN TWO WEEKS. OKAY. UH, I SUBMITTED SOME COMMENTS. I DON'T HAVE THEM READILY AVAILABLE, BUT I REPRESENT SUPER NEIGHBORHOOD 14 ON THE SOUTH SIDE. UH, WE'VE GOT DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT SHOW THAT THERE'S A MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIRED HERE FOR SHADY SHADY RIVER. UH, I'D ALSO LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT PRINCE STREET, THE SHADY WOOD SIDE OF GROVE WOOD, UH, WOOD SIDE OF THIS IS QUITE DIFFERENT THAN THE NORTHERN SIDE AND SHOULD NOT BE TREATED THE SAME AS SUCH. SO THE NORTHERN SIDE SIDE DID NOT, THEY SHRUNK DOWN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND IT IS CONSEQUENTLY SIGNIFICANTLY MORE DANGEROUS REQUIRING PEDESTRIANS TO WALK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AS, UH, THE SIDEWALKS ARE CROWDED AND THE STREET ITSELF IS CONTINUOUSLY, UH, FULL OF CARS THAT ARE PARKED. SO, UH, AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, THERE'S LOVE ELEMENTARY IS JUST TO THE RIGHT HERE OUT OF VIEW OF THIS SCREENSHOT. SO THIS IS THE MAIN PATH THAT MOST OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD GOES TO THAT LOVE ELEMENTARY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF SHEPHERD DURHAM. SO FOR ALL THESE REASONS, SUPER NEIGHBORHOOD 14 STRONGLY OPPOSES THE ISSUING OF VARIANCE HERE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. UM, OKAY, I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE. DO WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE CHAT? OKAY. GO AHEAD AND TELL US JENNIFER BRUSH. I'M SORRY. HELLO? OH, GOOD AFTERNOON. GO AHEAD. CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE? YES, MY NAME IS JENNIFER BRUSH. I, MY LAST NAME IS B-R-U-S-H. THANK YOU. JUST LIKE HAIRBRUSH. GREAT. UM, SO I'M THE HOMER HOME NUMBER OF 1212 NASHUA STREET. AND, UM, I'M A PART OF THE SUBDIVISION OF SHADY WOOD FOR WHICH, UM, THIS LOCATION BELONGS. UM, WE ARE AGAINST THE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR WEST 12TH STREET MANNERS. UM, AS STATED WITH THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, THEY WOULD BE VIOLATING THE REQUIREMENT OF 59 50 SQUARE FEET. UM, AND THE LINES 43 AND 47 OF THAT RESTRICTION STATE THAT, UM, THE DEED RESTRICTION IS AUTOMATICALLY EXTENDED FOR SUCCESSIVE PERIODS OF 10 YEARS. UM, WE ARE ALSO AGAINST THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE THAT THEY REQUESTED. UM, THEY HAVE IN THEIR APPLICATION, THEY HAVE STA STATED THAT WE ARE PART OF THE SUBDIVISION TO THE NORTH WITH IS NOT TRUE. PHOTOS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED THAT SHOW THAT NOWHERE IN OUR ENTIRE SUBDIVISION HAS THIS BEEN ALLOWED AND WE WOULD LIKE IT TO CONTINUE TO NOT BE ALLOWED. UM, LASTLY, WITH RESPECT TO ROAD SAFETY, THIS, UM, THIS STREET IS GONNA INCREASE FOOT TRAFFIC FOR, UM, SUCH A SMALL STREET, UM, THAT HAS A LOT OF CHILDREN GOING ON IT. UM, AND JUST RECENTLY LAST, AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, MY FATHER WAS HIT BY A CAR ON A BICYCLE. AND I THINK THAT WE AS LIKE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WE AS MEMBERS OF OUR SUBDIVISION, OWE IT TO OUR CHILDREN AND OUR NEIGHBORS AND OUR ELDERLY TO KEEP THEM AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE, WHICH IS WHY WE AP WE OPPOSE THIS VARIANCE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. APPRECIATE YOU BEING WITH US TODAY. [01:25:01] UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN, IN THE, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT IN THE CHAT? ? I WAS GONNA SAY IN THE STRATOSPHERE TO ANYONE LISTENING WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON WEST 12TH STREET MANNERS, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER, OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT DOES AGREE THAT THIS DOES VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS. GENERALLY, IF THE APPLICANT WANTS SOME TIME TO TALK TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT ABOUT THAT, WE, WE DO THAT. BUT I'LL ASK THE COMMISSION FOR, UH, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION FOR A MOTION OF SOME KIND ON THIS ITEM. MOTION, WHAT YOU MOTION? OKAY. BALDWIN. MOTION TO DEFER CLARK. AND IS THERE A SECOND? CLARK CLARK ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? UM, YES, I, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, MENTION THAT I LIVE, UM, FAIRLY NEAR THE AREA. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA AND THERE ARE A LOT OF SAFETY ISSUES. I CAN, UM, CONCUR WITH WHAT THE SPEAKERS HAVE MENTIONED. I MEAN, IT'S REALLY TIGHT GETTING AROUND THERE, THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE ON BICYCLES THAT GO DOWN PRINCE STREET AND SO FORTH. UM, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I DO HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE IT IS JUST A, A HOU YOU KNOW, THERE'S HOUSES ALL AROUND IT. IT'S NOT LIKE A CONTINUATION OF A STRING OF TOWN HOMES. IT'S NOT LIKE ON THE PERIPHERAL WHERE YOU WOULD SEE, OKAY, YOU KNOW, I COULD SEE WHERE TOWN HOMES ARE COMING IN NOW. BUT ASIDE FROM THE DEED RESTRICTION, I THINK IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE IS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST CONCERN THAT I WOULD HAVE WITH THIS. SO I PERSONALLY WOULD, WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENT MOTION, UM, TO DENY IT. BUT I'LL, WELL, WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THIS . OKAY. THANK YOU. FURTHER DISCUSSION. MODEST. AND ACTUALLY JUST A QUESTION FOR STAFF. HAVE WE TAKEN, UH, THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR OTHER PARCELS ALONG PRINTS? JUST CURIOUS. I DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER, BUT I WOULD BELIEVE SO. JUST LOOKING AT, OKAY. I MEAN, IT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE IT AND Y'ALL ALL KNOW I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR TAKING RIGHT AWAY, BUT I JUST GOING BACK TO THE CONSISTENCY OF IT, IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE. RIGHT. UM, MAY, MAY I ANSWER SOMETHING ABOUT THAT? NO THANKS, MICROPHONE. I'M SORRY WE CAN'T, WE'RE WE'RE DISCUSSING AMONGST OURSELVES RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'RE GONNA GET AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION. MR. CRIDDLE, I DON'T THINK YOUR MIC'S ON SO WE COULDN'T HEAR YOUR ANSWER. I'M SORRY. UM, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT ANSWER, BUT I WOULD BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN SOME RIGHT OF WAY TAKING, UH, AT SOME POINT JUST BY LOOKING AT THE CONFIGURATION OF THE STREET, UH, IT WOULD APPEAR THERE'S BEEN SOME RIGHT OF WAY TAKEN. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT SO THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE DIFFERENT, UM, APPLICATIONS BECOMING FRONT FORTH SO THAT WE DON'T, UM, RESTRICT OURSELVES IN ONE, ONE PART OF THE, THE BLOCK WHEN WE'VE ALREADY TAKEN OTHERS. THANK YOU. WE'RE LOOKING. WE'LL LOOK INTO IT. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DEFER AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? OKAY. WE HAVE, UH, TWO, TWO NO VOTES. MODEST AND COVAD, BUT THE MOTION CARRIES. THE ITEM IS DEFERRED UNTIL, WHEN'S OUR NEXT MEETING? FEBRUARY 16TH. SOMETHING. 16TH, YEAH. 16. 16. THANK YOU. OKAY, ITEM 1 56. ITEM 1 56 IS WEST CLAY GREEN. THE SUBJECT SIDE IS A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS NORTH ALONG WEST CLAY STREET AND WEST OF DUNLEAVY STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE FOUR NARROW FRONT LOADING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE PLAT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY. WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICATION. STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION. YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1 56 WEST CLAY GREEN IS OPEN. WE HAVE A SPEAKER WITH US. MICHELLE BLYTHE, B-L-Y-T-H-E. WELCOME. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIRMAN AND THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS MICHELLE BLYTHE. I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER AT 1931 WEST CLAY. I'M IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AS A REPL FOR FOUR TOWN HOMES. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CONCERNS WITH THIS APPLICATION. I REQUEST THAT IT BE DENIED OR AT A MINIMUM BE DEFERRED UNTIL FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF WHAT THE REDEVELOPMENT WILL BE RIGHT NOW. THIS WAS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, A 1950S HOME. IT EXISTS ON THIS LOT AND 50% OF THAT LOT IS GREEN SPACE, AKA WATER ABSORBING DIRT. AND AS I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY DRAWINGS OF WHAT THE DEVELOPER INTENDS TO BUILD, I ASSUME IT'S GONNA BE FOUR TOWN HOMES ENTIRELY COVERING THAT ENTIRE AREA WITH PAVEMENT. I'VE [01:30:01] SEEN NOTHING TO ADDRESS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE STORM WATER THAT WOULD'VE BEEN ABSORBED BY THE DIRT, NOR HAVE I SEEN ANYTHING TO ADDRESS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, THE REMOVAL OF ALL OF THE STREET PARKING. AND TO ADDRESS A COMMENT EARLIER FOR THE COM, THE COMMISSION, THE FOUR DRIVEWAYS THAT THE PEDESTRIANS WILL HAVE TO CROSS ON WHAT IS A BRAND NEW JUST BEING FINISHED SIDEWALK INSTALLED BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON. UH, SECONDLY, THE OTHER CONCERN IS THAT IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST AT 1920 WEST CLAY, MY NEIGHBOR HAS INSTALLED SOLAR PANELS ON HER ROOF. THOSE SOLAR PANELS WILL BE BLOCKED, WHICH WOULD MOST ASSUREDLY BY WHAT I ASSUME WILL BE A THREE TO FOUR STORY TOWNHOUSE AND NOT JUST ONE, BUT A SERIES OF FOUR TOWN HOMES WITH AN UNKNOWN SETBACK. THE THE OTHER REASON IS THAT, UM, THERE ARE TWO FULL-GROWN TREES ON THIS PROPERTY, ONE OF WHICH I NOTICED THE DEVELOPER WAS ALREADY TAKING DOWN YESTERDAY. I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WAS A PERMIT FOR THAT. AND THE SECOND OF WHICH IS AT LEAST A 30 INCH MAGNOLIA THAT UNDOUBTEDLY WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED IN ORDER FOR FOUR FULL-SIZED TOWN HOMES TO BE CONSTRUCTED. FOR ALL THESE REASONS, I REQUEST THAT THE, UM, EXCUSE ME, THAT THE COMMISSION DENY THIS APPLICATION OR AT A MINIMUM DEFER IT PENDING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THESE CONCERNS. OKAY, THANK YOU MS. BLYTHE FOR YOUR COMMENTS. UM, THIS ITEM IS FOR US A WHAT WE CALL A SHALL APPROVE ITEM BECAUSE IT DOES AT THIS POINT MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE. UH, WE ARE, UH, BEHOLDEN TO STATE LAW AND CITY ORDINANCE TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE PLAT UNLESS THERE'S SOME EVIDENCE THAT IT, THAT IT DOES NOT MEET THE RESTRICTIONS AND OTHER CURRENT, YOU KNOW, CURRENT CODE REGULATIONS. UH, UNDERSTAND YOUR, YOUR OBJECTIONS. THERE'S JUST NOT TOO MUCH THAT WE CAN REALLY DO AT THIS POINT. I UNDERSTAND. UH, I DO RECOMMEND THOUGH, THAT YOU GET THE, UH, INFORMATION ON THE CONTACT INFORMATION IF YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY DONE THIS OF THE DEVELOPER AND TALK TO THEM AND SHARE NOT JUST YOUR CONCERNS AND MAYBE THE NEIGHBOR WITH THE SOLAR PANELS AS WELL. SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CLARK, OR I'M SORRY, GARZA. MS. BLA, HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO STAFF AT ALL ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BUILDING LINE AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND ALL OF THAT? OR DO YOU HAVE THAT IN PLACE ALREADY IN PARTS OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD? ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT? WE HAVE A 20 FOOT SETBACK ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET. ON MY SIDE OF THE STREET WE HAVE A 25 FOOT SETBACK, BUT I'M NOT AWARE THAT THE BUILDER HAS SUBMITTED ANY SORT OF PLANS YET INDICATING WHETHER THEY INTEND TO COMPLY WITH THE ROUTINE AND MINIMAL SETBACKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WELL, PERMITTING WOULD OF COURSE CATCH THAT IF THEY DECIDE TO, TO GO BEYOND THAT. BUT, UM, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU HAVE NO DEED RESTRICTIONS, YOU CAN APPLY FOR A MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND IT CAN BE SIMPLY YOUR ONE BLOCK FACE AS MUCH AS, AS, AS LITTLE AS THAT OR AS MANY AS YOU LIKE. AND THAT CAN BE DONE FAIRLY QUICKLY. IT CAN BE TURNED AROUND ONCE IT'S SUBMITTED TO THE CITY, KIND OF EVERYTHING STOPS. IT WILL NOT STOP THIS AS THEY WERE IN BASICALLY BEFORE YOU MM-HMM BUT THIS COULD HELP MITIGATE, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION OF MORE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE SEEN WHOLE CITY BLOCKS OF BUNGALOWS CHANGE INTO UM, TOWNHOUSES AND THAT'S NOT A BAD THING NECESSARILY, BUT UM, 'CAUSE I BELIEVE IN HAVING A MIXTURE OF HOUSING, UH, IS A GOOD THING FOR ANY NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT IF YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE LIKE, THIS IS ENOUGH, UH, THERE ARE WAYS FOR YOU TO DO THAT. SO IF YOU WOULD GET WITH STAFF THAT CAN GIVE YOU THE INFORMATION AND AS I SAID, THE BEST THING IS FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU CAN TURN THAT AROUND VERY QUICKLY. I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. MY PLEASURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER COMMISSIONER CLARK? NO, JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS. UM, AS FAR AS THE DETENTION THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED, UH, BY HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS AT TIME OF PERMITTING, SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE DO HERE, BUT I THINK MAYBE MR. SMITH IS HERE. YES. UM, SO YOU GUYS MIGHT WANNA HAVE A SIDEBAR AND HE CAN HELP YOU UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS AS THIS MOVES ALONG. RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? COMMISSIONER MODEST. UM, JUST QUESTION FOR STAFF. HAVE WE CHECKED THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT? YES. THERE WAS A, A FORMERLY DEED RESTRICTED SETBACK THAT WAS CREATED FOR THE PROP PROPERTY. HOWEVER, THOSE RESTRICTIONS WERE NULLIFIED WITH SEPARATE DOCUMENTATION. SO THAT WAS A STUDY AND REVIEW BY LEGAL SO THAT THAT'S WHY WE WERE ABLE TO GRANT, UH, OR MENT APPROVAL AS THOSE RESTRICTIONS WERE NULLIFIED. UM, SO, SO MAYBE EDUCATE THE SPEAKER ON THAT AS WELL IF MAYBE IF THEY EXPIRED OR WHATEVER HAPPENED, UM, KIND OF EDUCATE THEM AND FIGURE OUT HOW MOVING FORWARD MAYBE YOU CAN TIGHTEN THOSE UP AGAIN. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER OR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON WEST CLAY? GREEN ITEM 1 56. IF NOT, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS [01:35:01] IS THEIR DISCUSSION. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION? CLARK GARZA. MOTION CLARK SECOND GARZA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. UH, THE NEXT, UH, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC HEARINGS. [d. Subdivision Plats with Variance Requests (John Cedillo, Aracely Rodriguez, Geoff Butler, and Devin Crittle) ] WE MOVE TO SECTION D VARIANCES. ITEM 1 57. ITEM 1 57 IS EXPEDIA TOWING. THE SUBJECT SIDE IS A TWO ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY, EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION NORTH ALONG RICHARDSON STREET, WEST OF HARDY TOLL ROAD AND NORTH OF GRAND PARKWAY 99 AND IS INTENDED TO BE A COMMERCIAL RESERVE SERVING AS A DISPATCH CENTER FOR ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE VEHICLES AND TOW TRUCKS. THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING A VARIANCE, UH, REQUEST TO NOT DEDICATE A 30 FOOT WIDENING AND TO TAKE ACCESS FROM A 30 FOOT WIDE WIDE WAY. HOWEVER, IN THAT, IN THE DEFERRAL PERIOD, THE APPLICANT HAS WITHDRAWN THOSE VARIANCE REQUESTS AND IS MEETINGS, UH, CHAPTER 42 STANDARDS IN COORDINATION WITH HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROVIDING A TEMPORARY ROADWAY EASEMENT TO ALLOW A TURNAROUND UNTIL SUCH TIME AS RICHARDSON STREET CAN BE EXTENDED OR ENDED IN A CUL-DE-SAC. WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION AND THE PLAT DOES MEET ALL CHAPTER 42 STANDARDS. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MA'AM, CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. CILLO? THIS IS A SHALL APPROVE NOW MAAM. WITHOUT MA'AM. ANY VARIANCES, MAAM? OKAY. UM, IS THERE, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGN NOBODY IN THE CHAT IF NO ONE WISHES TO SPEAK ON 1 57 STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION JONES SECOND MAR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 1 58. MADAM CHAIR, THIS COMMISSIONER DALTON, I'LL BE ABSTAINING FROM 1 58. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER DALTON ABSTAINS ON 1 58. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JEFF BUTLER. ITEM 1 58 IS FRANZ ROAD RESIDENTIAL GP. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S ETJ WITHIN WALLER COUNTY NORTH OF I 10 AND EAST OF CARDIFF ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOUR VARIANCES TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT PROVIDING A SUB STREET ON THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY WEST OF SWIFT ROAD TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT PROVIDING A SUBS STREET ON THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY EAST OF SL ROAD TO ALLOW FOR A REDUCED CENTER LINE RADII OF 300 AND 650 FEET ALONG A PROPOSED MAJOR THOROUGHFARE FRANZ ROAD, WHERE APPROACHING A ROUNDABOUT INTERSECTION AT THE SOUTHEASTERN END OF THE GP AND FOURTH TO ALLOW MINIMUM CENTER LINE RADIUS OF 1500 FEET ALONG FRANZ ROAD AS OPPOSED TO THE REQUIRED 2000 STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF ALL REQUESTS. THE SITE CONSISTS OF A THOUSAND ACRE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH ACCESS TO SEVERAL MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS MINIMUM 1400 FOOT INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE SOUTHERN GP BOUNDARY. THEY HAVE ASSERTED THAT THIS WOULD MAKE THE PROJECT INFEASIBLE DUE TO THE REMINGTON TRAIL SUBDIVISION, WHICH WAS PLATTED WITH PRIVATE STREETS IN NO PUBLIC STREET CONNECTION TO THE SOUTHEAST. THERE ARE MULTIPLE PIPELINES IN EXISTING CREEK MAKING THE AREA CHALLENGING TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED NORTH SOUTH PUBLIC STREETS. STAFF FINDS THE LIKELIHOOD TO EXTEND THE REQUIRED PUBLIC STREETS FURTHER SOUTH TO BE VERY LOW CONSIDERING THESE CONDITIONS. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE FRANZ ROAD TO BE DEVELOPED WITH A REDUCED CENTER LINE RADII. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A ROUNDABOUT AT THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE GP, WHICH WILL ALLOW FOR FRANZ ROAD TO BE ROUTED AWAY FROM THE SERIES OF PIPELINES IN DRAINAGE AREA THE WALLER COUNTY ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMENT REVIEWED THIS PROPOSAL IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE REQUESTS. THE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN IS A SAFER ALTERNATIVE AND WOULD STILL MEET THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE BY MAINTAINING GOOD TRAFFIC CIRCULATION IN THIS VICINITY. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE GP SUBJECT TO THE CPC ONE ONE FORM CONDITIONS. WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENT IN THIS ITEM. THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. BUTLER? UM, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP. IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 1 58 FRANZ ROAD? IF NOT, AND COMMISSIONER JONES HAS THE APPLICANT PROVIDED WHAT THE TURNABOUT WOULD LOOK, LOOK LIKE? WE SEE IT ON THIS GENERAL PLAN FORMAT, BUT DO WE KNOW GEOMETRICALLY HOW IT'LL LOOK? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN GREATER DETAIL THAN THE EXHIBIT PROVIDED, BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE IN CASE THEY, THEY MAY YOU. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU COULD ANSWER? OKAY, MS. CURTIS. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. JENNIFER CURTIS META PLANNING. SO WE HAVEN'T DONE A FULL ENGINEERING DESIGN OF THE ROUNDABOUT. WALLER COUNTY DOESN'T HAVE OFFICIAL ROUNDABOUT STANDARDS, BUT UM, FOR OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE'VE WORKED ON WITH WALLER COUNTY, THEY'VE REFERRED VARIOUSLY TO FORT BEND COUNTY OR SUGARLAND STANDARDS FOR ROUNDABOUT [01:40:01] DESIGN, UM, AS A PRETTY GOOD BENCHMARK. UM, AND WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON OTHER PROJECTS OF, OF A SIMILAR NATURE FOR THE DESIGN. SO THAT'S PROBABLY THE DIRECTION THAT WE'LL GO. MM-HMM . THANK YOU MS. CURTIS. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, SO IF THERE'S NO ONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM FROM THE PUBLIC STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE ALL FOUR VARIANCES AND APPROVE THE PLAT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. ALLMAN CLARK. CLARK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES 1 59. EVERYBODY'S VERY QUIET TODAY. ITEM 1 59 IS GAR FROM INDUSTRIES INDUSTRIAL PARK. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S ETJ WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY. THE APPLICANT IS REPLANTING TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, A PORTION OF AN ALLEY AND A PORTION OF A RIGHT OF WAY TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE. THE A, EXCUSE ME, THE, THE APPLICANT IS REPLANTING TWO LOTS, NOT SINGLE FAMILY, A PORTION OF THE ALLEY AND A PORTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THREE VARIANCES, ONE TO EXCEED 2,600 FEET INTERSECTION SPACING REQUIREMENTS ALONG HARDY BETWEEN FIFTH AND STROM. TWO TO REPL A PORTION OF AN ALLEY WITHOUT A VEHICULAR TURNAROUND. THREE TO ALLOW A BUILDING LINE, REDUCED BUILDING LINE ALONG THE REMAINING PORTION OF SIXTH STREET. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE REVISED MATERIALS BY NOON. NEXT WEDNESDAY. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENT. THIS ITEM, AND THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. BUTLER? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WHO SIGNED UP AS ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON GARAM INDUSTRIES INDUSTRIAL PARK? IF NOT, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER IS A QUESTION. I'M SORRY. SURE. MR. MR. BUTLER, IS THERE NOT A REQUIREMENT TO DEDICATE ANYTHING TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT WAY? THE 40 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY RIGHT ADJACENT TO THIS? WELL, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ACTUALLY REQUESTING TO ABSORB THAT. IT'S UNIMPROVED. THEY'RE, THEY'RE SEEKING TO ACQUIRE THAT, UH, TO INCORPORATE IT INTO THEIR PROPERTY. OKAY. WHICH IS TRIGGERING THE REQUIREMENT TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING, ADDRESS INTERSECTION SPACING. I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED JUST HOW SOMEBODY CAN WANNA ABSORB THE RIGHT OF WAY. SO THE, THE AERIAL PROBABLY CAN ILLUSTRATE IT BETTER. IT'S A FACILITY THAT'S BEEN BUILT OVER TIME WITH MULTIPLE BUILDINGS, SOME OF WHICH ENCROACH INTO AN UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY. AND TO CLEAN THAT UP, THEY WANT TO ABANDON THAT RIGHT AWAY AND ACQUIRE IT FOR THEIR PROPERTY. OKAY. SO THAT, IS THAT LIKE A, I DUNNO, IGNORANT QUESTION, IS THAT LIKE A CELL FROM THE CITY TO, TO THE PROPERTY OWNER? IT WOULD BE THE COUNTY IN THIS CASE. OKAY. THE COUNTY. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, JUST FROM WHAT I KNOW ABOUT RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION DOESN'T HAVE TO SPLIT THE MIDDLE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS. SO WOULDN'T THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO BUY HALF, GET THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER TO CONCUR AND THEN TRY TO GET THE OTHER HALF FROM THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FOR HOW IT WORKS IN THE CITY. UH, PART OF THE DEFERRAL IS, IS GOING TO BE, UM, HOW THAT WOULD BE DONE WITH JUST ACQUIRING THE, THE ONE SEGMENT BECAUSE WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS WOULD EFFECT, WOULD LEAVE A PORTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY BEHIND. SO THEY HAVE TO ADDRESS THE REDUCED BUILDING LINE, BUT THAT, THAT WILL BE FIGURED OUT DURING THE DEFERRED PERIOD. OKAY. THANKS. AND THIS IS IN HARRIS COUNTY IN RETJ, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. UM, OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? UM, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER, UM, I DID, DID I ASK IF ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS? MM-HMM . YOU DID? FOR THE RECORD? I MEANT LIKE FROM THE PUBLIC . OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE, UH, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER? I'M SORRY, ONE MORE QUESTION. SURE. BUT THEN I, I WILL DO THE MOTION TO DEFER. UM, CAN WE JUST MAKE SURE, 'CAUSE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ABANDONMENT OF PORTION OF THE ALLEY THAT THE, THE LOTS 1 75, 1 76 DON'T TAKE ANY KIND OF SERVICES OR WHETHER IT'S UTILITY OR ANYTHING ELSE FROM THAT ALLEY THAT THEN IT HAS TO BE, UM, RE RELOCATED FROM ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S OFF OF WEST HARDY OR, OR SOMETHING. UM, MAKE SURE IT'S NOT BEING USED FOR CORRECT. WHICH ANY, ANYTHING. ALL RIGHT. UH, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL, I'LL DO A MOTION TO DEFER. OKAY, GOOD. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO DEFER. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, MAN, I'M SORRY. OH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MAN. MANDUKA, UM, TOO QUIET. WE'RE TOO QUIET TODAY. UM, PAUL ALPHAS HERE SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO DEFER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 59 IS DEFERRED ITEM ONE 60. ITEM ONE 60 IS HIGHLAND HEIGHTS DAVIDSON. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN [01:45:01] HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT AT THE STUBB END OF DAVIDSON STREET NORTH OF TIDWELL AND WEST OF BEALE STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES TO NOT, OR EXTEND OR, OR TERMINATE DAVIDSON WITH A CUL-DE-SAC. AND TO ALLOW THREE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS TO HAVE FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, NOT MEETING THE MINIMUM WIDTH REQUIREMENTS. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO COORDINATE THE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY DESIGN WITH HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENT. THIS ITEM, THIS CONCLUDES PRE STAFF'S PRESENTATION QUESTIONS. MR. COMMISSIONER, BALD, THE WHOLE THING JUST LOOKS WEIRD TO ME. DO THEY , DO THEY OWN THIS ADJACENT TRACK WHERE THIS LITTLE S THING RESERVE D IS? I MEAN, DO, DO THEY OWN THAT? HOW DO WE GET RESERVE D SIR? SO THAT IS A SEPARATELY OWNED PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. THEY DON'T OWN IT. THEY DON'T? NO. THIS IS A VERY ODD INTERSECTION. YEAH. CAN'T WAIT. THE, THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WITH THAT L TURNAROUND WAS APPROVED TO DO SO BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. NOT, NOT THAT LONG AGO. SO WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS FOR A SEPARATE PROPERTY TO USE THAT UNCONVENTIONAL TURNAROUND FOR ACCESS, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT CONNECTS TO IT. THEY, THEY HAVE TO WIDEN IT AND OKAY. PROVIDE ACCESS AND, AND BUILD IT, OF COURSE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THAT'S WHAT DEFERRALS ARE FOR. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE ANYONE LISTENING OR IN THE CHAT WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON HIGHLAND HEIGHTS TO DAVIDSON? IF NOT, UM, AND IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER MOTION BALDWIN BALDWIN. SECOND. DEAR BLAND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES AND ONE 60 IS DEFERRED. 1 61 ITEM 1 61 IS JANICE ROAD DEVELOPMENT. A SIMILAR APPLICATION FOR THIS SITE WAS DEFERRED AT THE DECEMBER 15TH MEETING AND LATER WITHDRAWN. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG JANICE ROAD, EAST OF SHEPHERD AND WEST OF YALE. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE FOR THE PURPOSES OF MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING REQUIREMENTS BY NOT EXTENDING EL CENTRO STREET THROUGH THE SITE. STAFF HAS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST. THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG JAN ON A BLOCK MEASURING APPROXIMATELY 2,400 FEET WIDE. THIS COMMUNITY IS EXPERIENCING RAPID REDEVELOPMENT OF LARGER TRACKS, SUBDIVIDED AT A HIGHER DENSITY BASED ON PLATTING ACTIVITY OVER THE PAST SIX YEARS. STAFF NOTED THE ADDITION OF SEVERAL HUNDRED NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS DEVELOPED IN THE FOUR BLOCK AREA SURROUNDING THE SUBJECT SITE. THE RESULT IS AN INCREASING BURDEN ON THE EXISTING STREET GRID, WHICH CONSISTS MOSTLY OF TWO LANE STREETS WITH EXCESSIVE BLOCK. LANE STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED A NEED FOR A NORTH SOUTH STREET TO PROVIDE NEEDED CIRCULATION AND ACCESS THE SITE OF BUTTS, AN UNIMPROVED SEGMENT OF EL CENTRO STREET AT ITS SOUTHERN BOUNDARY. THIS IS PART OF A LARGER NETWORK OF RIGHTS, RIGHT OF WAY SEGMENTS THAT CAN EFFECTIVELY EVENTUALLY SERVE AS A MID-BLOCK PUBLIC STREET. THIS NETWORK INCLUDES A NEW 50 FOOT WIDE NORTH SOUTH STREET OFF MARVIN STREET AT THE BLOCK SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE. EXTENDING EL CENTRO STREET THROUGH THIS TRACT WOULD ALLOW FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE WHILE PROVIDING NEEDED, NEEDED PUBLIC, UH, STREET CAPACITY FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND THE SURROUNDING AREA STAFF RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVING THE PLAT AND DENYING THE VARIANCE. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, THOUGH THERE ARE SPEAKERS SIGNED TO SPEAK ON IT. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPRESENTATION. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS WITH US. UM, ANY QUESTIONS FIRST FOR MR. BUTLER BEFORE WE CALL SPEAKERS? IF NOT, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS RICK GROTH THE APPLICANT. MADAM CHAIR. IF IT'S OKAY, I'LL REFER TO THE END. I'M SORRY. WAIT TILL THE END REFER. OKAY. HE'LL WAIT TILL THE END THEN. UM, JAMES ELMORE. MR. ELMORE. HELLO, MY NAME IS JAMES ELMORE. I REPRESENT THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER. UH, WITHOUT THIS, WITHOUT THIS VARIANCE, APPROXIMATELY 33% OF THIS TRACK WOULD BE TAKEN FOR THIS USE BETWEEN THE ACTUAL ROAD RIGHT OF AWAY EASEMENT AND THE P THE PIECE OF PROPERTY TO THE EAST THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY STRANDED AND NOT CONTIGUOUS ANY LONGER WITH THE TRACK. UH, THIS IS GONNA DEPRIVE THE OWNER OF REASONABLE USE OF WITH NO BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC IN THAT IT'S GONNA CREATE A, AN EASEMENT STUB THAT'S NOT GONNA GO ANYWHERE AT THIS POINT. AND THERE'S NO, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE'S NO, UM, FUNDS TO ACTUALLY IMPROVE THAT STREET. AND CONSEQUENTLY, WE WE'LL HAVE A STREET STUB. UH, THIS WILL, THIS WILL NOT ASSIST IN FUTURE NORTH SOUTH IN THAT THE, THE EXACT, THE GRAPHIC THAT WE JUST LOOKED AT, MANY OF THOSE PROPERTIES THAT IT, THAT THE [01:50:01] PROPOSED ALIGNMENT WOULD GO THROUGH ARE VERY, VERY NARROW, LONG STRIPS OF PROPERTY. AND THOSE PARTICULAR DEVELOPERS, OR THOSE PARTICULAR OWNERS WILL HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO EVER GO BACK AND REPLAY IF THEY'RE GONNA TAKE HALF THEIR PROPERTY. SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT LIKELY THAT THAT'S EVER GONNA HAPPEN. AND SO CONSEQUENTLY THIS WOULD BE TAKEN AND IT WOULD JUST SIT THERE. UM, THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. THANK YOU. UM, VIRGINIA ELLIS, E-L-L-I-S. HI, I'M A VIRGINIA ELLIS AND I'M A PROPERTY OWNER ON JANICE. AND I'M OPPOSED, I'M, I'M FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST BECAUSE I'M OPPOSED TO THE EL CENTRO GRAB OR WHATEVER IT WOULD BE. UH, BECAUSE OF THE INCONVENIENCE THAT IT PRESENTS. I DON'T SEE WHERE IT WOULD PROVIDE ANY BENEFIT TO THE TRAFFIC ON JANICE WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO COMPLETE IT AND TURN IT INTO A ROAD. AND I SEE THAT NOT BEING AVAILABLE FOR YEARS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT, THAT OUR SIDE OF THE STREET, MY SIDE OF THE STREET, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE, I DON'T THINK ANY OF US ARE GOING ANYWHERE. OUR SIDE ISN'T BEING REDEVELOPED WHERE WE ARE ALL STAYING AS LONG AS WE CAN. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. LET ME ASK IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. UM, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS FRANK ORT, OHRT. MR. ORT, GOOD AFTERNOON. I OWN THE PROPERTY, UH, IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE RED OUTLINE. AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR THAT STREET WOULD TAKE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MY PROPERTY ALSO. AND WHILE IT APPARENTLY CAN'T BE DONE UNTIL I MOVE OUT AND SOMEONE BUYS IT AND TRIES TO REPLANT IT FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING OR MULTIPLE LOTS THAT IT CAN'T BE TAKEN, THAT WILL STILL AFFECT THE VALUE OF ANY PROPERTY THAT I MIGHT WANT A PROPERTY IF I WANNA SELL IT. AND I ALSO HAVE TO AGREE THAT AS THINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD STAND NOW, UH, PUTTING IN EL CENTRO FROM JANICE SOUTH TO UH, WELL TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTIES FACING MARTIN WILL BASICALLY BE A ONE BLOCK STREET THAT DEAD ENDS INTO A TRAILER PARK THAT HAS NO ACCESS TO THE WEST ONTO SHEPHERD AND HAS ACCESS TO YALE STREET ON THE EAST BY WAY OF A DRIVEWAY. THIS IS NOT GOING TO CONNECT TO ANY EXISTING STREET. SO AGAIN, IT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY A ROAD TO NOWHERE AND THEREFORE I SUPPORT THE VARIANCE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. ORT? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. UM, AND THEN OUR LAST SPEAKER IS, UH, RICK GROTH, IF YOU WANNA GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS RICK GROTH USE AND I REPRESENT THE DEVELOPER. UH, WE'VE KIND OF ALREADY SHOWN HOW, UH, HOW MANY LOTS WILL BE AFFECTED GOING NORTH AND SOUTH AND, AND THE, THE TROUBLES THAT WOULD BE TO GET ANY TYPE OF NORTH SOUTH, UH, LOCAL COLLECTORS THROUGH THERE. UH, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS USUALLY DONE TO DISPERSE TRAFFIC, BUT ALL WE'RE DOING IS, IS PUSHING A KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. WE'RE, WE'RE TAKING TRAFFIC FROM ONE AREA AND CREATING MORE TRAFFIC IN OTHER INTERSECTIONS ALONG SHEPHERD AND YALE. SO I KIND OF WANNA FOCUS ON THE FIRST TWO QUESTIONS. UH, OR THE FIRST QUESTION, UH, OF THE VARIANCE FORM. AND THAT'S THE IMPOSITION OF THIS ORDINANCE WOULD ACTUALLY DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND. AND IF WE PUT EL CENTRO THROUGH SPLITTING THE LAND INTO TWO PARCELS WOULD DEFINITELY DEPRIVE HIM OF REASONABLE USE. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT, UH, WANTING TO PUT UP AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, APARTMENTS IS SOMETHING THAT IS UNREASONABLE. THE SECOND HALF OF THAT FIRST QUESTION IS THAT IT WOULD MAKE THE PROJECT INFEASIBLE. OBVIOUSLY I'VE JUST SAID IF WE SPLIT THIS INTO TWO, IT WOULD DEFINITELY CAUSE THIS PROJECT TO BE INFEASIBLE. UH, THE WEST HALF WOULD STILL HAVE ACCESS TO JANICE STREET, THUS THE DEVELOPER WOULD NOT HAVE TO PUT IN EL CENTRO IF HE ABANDONS THE EAST SIDE. THE EAST SIDE WOULD THEN BE STRANDED WITHOUT ANY PROPER, UH, STREET RIGHT [01:55:01] OF WAY, UH, BEING BUILT. AND, AND THAT WOULD BE UNDEVELOPABLE. UH, SO IN CONCLUSION, JUST WANNA SAY THAT THAT EL CENTRO WOULD MAKE THIS BOTH INFEASIBLE AND IT WOULD DEPRIVE MY CLIENT OF REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. ? OKAY. COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG. CAN, CAN STAFF REMIND ME AGAIN WHY THEY'RE WANTING EL CENTRO TO GO THROUGH THIS BASICALLY ONE BLOCK SEGMENT? SO IT, THERE'S BEEN A, A FLURRY OF RECENT REPLANTING ACTIVITY IN THIS AREA AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE SEEING THESE LARGER TRACKS SUBDIVIDED INTO A DOZEN, TWO DOZEN, THREE DOZEN NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT'S PUTTING ADDITIONAL CARS ON THE ROAD. AND RIGHT NOW, AND IF YOU ARE ON ONE OF THESE MID-BLOCK SEGMENTS, IF YOU WANT TO GO NORTH, SEE A NEIGHBOR ON ANOTHER BLOCK, YOU HAVE TO GO OUT TO EITHER YALE OR SHEPHERD. WHAT THIS PART OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES IS THAT AS THE DENSITY INCREASES, THAT THERE'S ADDED STREET CAPACITY TO CIRCULATE TRAFFIC SO THAT WAY LOCAL TRAFFIC CAN USE A MIDBLOCK CONNECTION AND THE MORE THROUGH TRAFFIC CAN CAN USE THE THOROUGHFARE SHEPHERD IN YALE. GOT IT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER JONES. THANK YOU. UM, DO WE, WHAT IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN NORTH SHEPHERD AND YALE? ABOUT 2,400 FEET. OKAY. THAT'S, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ALLMAN. THE FIGURE THAT YOU HAD PREVIOUSLY ABOUT THE, THE, UH, NEW PLATS WITHIN THE LAST SIX YEARS AND THE ONES TO THE NORTH, IT LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING'S ALREADY BEEN PLATTED THAT WOULD BE IN THE, IN THE WAY OF EXTENDING EL CENTRO TO THE NORTH IF, IF YOU OR SOME OF THEM. RIGHT. SO THE AREA DOES FEATURE A LOT OF ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL USES. THAT PARTICULAR PLAT IS A SHEET METAL CONTRACT THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE THE SEVENTIES THAT WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED RECENTLY TO REPL WITH A VARIANCE TO NOT EXTEND THE STREET. THE LOGIC BEHIND THAT WAS IT'S A ESTABLISHED BUSINESS THAT WAS STAYING IN AND EXPANDING MM-HMM . SO NO NEED. BUT IF, IF THAT WERE TO REDEVELOP INTO TOWN HOMES, WHICH IS WHAT'S HAPPENING ALL OVER THE, THE BLOCK, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND READDRESS THAT AND EXTEND THE STREET AND THAT AND THE PORTION OF EL CENTRO LOOKS LIKE IT'S PLATTERED RIGHT AWAY JUST TO THE SOUTH RIGHT. OF THE TRACT. CORRECT. AND, BUT IT WASN'T EVER, IT WASN'T REQUIRED TO BE CONSTRUCTED. RIGHT. SO THAT WAS A PLAT THAT WAS APPROVED, I THINK IN 2006, 2007. UM, WHAT IT WAS DEDICATED, AND IT'S AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE, BUT WHAT WHATEVER WAS ENVISIONED FOR THERE WASN'T BUILT. SO IT'S, THERE IS A, A PAPER STREET NOW, BUT THAT CAN BE IMPROVED AS OTHER SEGMENTS ARE EXTENDED. OKAY. YES. COMMISSIONER JONES W WAS THAT RIGHT OF WAY? WAS THAT PLA RECORDED? CORRECT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GARZA, MR. BUTLER, I, I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP HERE AND, UM, I, THE LOTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF JANICE JUST SEEMS SO NARROW AND INDIVIDUALLY OWNED BETWEEN EL CENTRO AND, AND JANICE. I, I JUST HAVE REAL CONCERNS THAT AS ONE OF OUR SPEAKERS SAID THAT WHO'S GONNA BUY THAT PROPERTY WHEN THE, THE WHOLE OF THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BECOME A ROAD. SO, ESPECIALLY JUST NORTH OF JANICE. THAT'S WHERE MY BIG CONCERN IS. RIGHT. UM, AND I I, I REALIZE THERE'S MAJOR CHANGES GOING THROUGH HERE, BUT, UM, I'M JUST TRYING TO PUT MY OWN, UH, YOU KNOW, MY OWN, UH, FOOTPRINT ON IT, WHICH WOULD BE, I, I WOULD NEVER BUY THAT PROPERTY KNOWING THAT THE STREET IS GONNA BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH THERE. SO, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE DEPRIVING THE USE OF THE LAND ON THE PEOPLE JUST IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF, OF JANICE REALLY, I, I PUT THAT LINE THERE, KIND OF BISECTING THE BLOCK ROUGHLY AT THIS ALIGNMENT JUST AS A GUIDE TO SHOW WHERE A, A FUTURE STREET COULD OCCUR. MM-HMM . IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO IN THAT ALIGNMENT. IT'S NOT ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE FREEWAY PLAN THAT WOULD BE ON, DECIDED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS IF THOSE PLATS COME IN TO REDEVELOP. SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE ONE OF THOSE LOTS DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH. IT COULD BE SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE BLOCK FOR WHAT WE'RE BEING REQUESTED OF IS TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ON THE SOUTH OF THE BLOCK. AND THERE THE RIGHT OF WAY ALREADY EXISTS AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY. WE, WE FIND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT THE BLOCK FROM THE SOUTH TO MARTIN. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. HEY, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, I, I, I APPRECIATE THE FOCUS ON MAKING SURE THESE KIND OF STREET CONNECTIONS AND THE GRIDS FOR THESE AREAS THAT, THAT ARE GROWING EXIST. BUT, UM, I THINK WE MIGHT ON THIS CASE BE LOST A LITTLE BIT, UM, IN THE FOREST FOR, FOR SEVERAL REASONS. BY CREATING THIS CONNECTION [02:00:01] AND, AND, AND ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT DOES AFFECT THE USABILITY OF IT. UM, SECONDLY, IT WOULD CONNECT TO A DEDICATED EASEMENT OR ROAD IN THE FUTURE TO THE SOUTH. BUT THEN AS, UH, COMMISSIONER GARZA SAID, YOU GOTTA GET THROUGH IT, UM, YET OTHER PROPERTIES TO MARTIN. AND BASICALLY WHAT YOU'D BE DOING IS CREATING A SINGLE LOOP THAT DOESN'T REALLY CONNECT BEYOND, BECAUSE THEN YOU'D HAVE TO MAKE THE CONNECTION FROM JANICE CENTRO AND THE REALITY OF THIS STREET BEING EVER ABLE TO BE DEVELOPED, UM, WHICH WOULD IN ESSENCE CREATE A LOOP BETWEEN TWO STREETS. IT, IT'S REALLY NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTOR. UM, I REALLY QUESTION A BIG PICTURE, NOT, NOT SO MUCH OF THE POLICY FOR THE, YOU KNOW, MAKING THESE CHOICES AND LOOKING AT PROPERTIES. UM, AND AGAIN, IF THERE WERE LARGER TRACKS, IF THERE WEREN'T SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES AND ALL OF THAT, UM, THE REALITY OF IT HAPPENING. AND, AND THAT'S WHAT I QUESTIONED AT THE END OF THE DAY. SO WITH REGARD TO THE VALUE OF CONNECTING THE BLOCK, JUST THE ONE BLOCK CONNECTION BETWEEN JANICE AND MARTIN, WE'VE BEEN, WE'VE DONE SITE VISITS FOR THIS APPLICATION AS WELL AS OTHERS. AND IT'S A PATTERN THAT YOU SEE TYPICALLY IN THIS PART OF TOWN. THAT'S WHERE YOU SEE LARGER LOTS BEING SUBDIVIDED AND MASS LIKE THIS, WHERE YOU'RE LEFT WITH THESE EAST TO WEST STREETS THAT ARE LONGER THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED IN THEIR NARROWER. SO YOU HAVE THIS CONSTANT PARADE OF, OF TRUCK TRAFFIC AND SINGLE FILE TRAFFIC GOING, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT ANY, ALL HOURS OF THE DAY. THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR AT LEAST SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC TO DIVERT AND CIRCULATE THROUGH OTHER MEANS, RATHER THAN HAVING TO GO ALL THE WAY TO OTHER END OF THE BLOCK. MM-HMM . AND AS FAR AS THE, I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T, YOU WERE ABOUT TO NO, I SAID I WOULD AGREE EXCEPT THE REALITY OF THAT CONNECTION BEING ABLE TO BE MADE IN THE FUTURE RIGHT. DOES NOT SEEM VIABLE. THAT'S MY POINT RIGHT THERE. THERE ARE, I MEAN, WE, THE, THE 42 IS BASED ON INCREMENTAL, UH, EXTENSIONS OF STREETS. SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING WHERE IT, IT, IT'D BE GREAT IF THEY OWNED THE ENTIRE BLOCK AND YOU COULD ASK FOR THE ENTIRE STREET CONNECTION AT ONCE. BUT THE RULES THAT WE HAVE, IT'S AN INCREMENTAL PROCESS. COMMISSIONER MORRIS, UM, SO PROPS EARLIER THIS YEAR, NOT THAT LONG AGO, WE HAD A SIMILAR SITUATION, BUT IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, THERE HAD BEEN A, WAS IT LIKE A MOBILITY STUDY THAT HAD BEEN DONE IN THE AREA? DO WE HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT HERE? SO THAT IS A BIT WEST OF THIS AREA, UH, THE, A ACRES HILL MOBILITY STUDY, BUT IT'S, IT'S A SIMILAR CONDITION, JUST NOT AS SEVERE HERE. AND I KNOW ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT I APPRECIATE, UH, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG'S COMMENT ON BIG PICTURE, BUT I, I THINK THAT IT IS WHAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER HERE. 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT REALLY TALKING ABOUT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 10, 20, 30 YEARS FROM NOW. RIGHT. AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AND IT JUST CONTINUES TO DEVELOP. AND I, I, I KNOW I KIND OF MADE THE SAME COMMENT WHEN THAT PARTICULAR, UH, VARIANCE CAME UP BECAUSE ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SEE SOME OF THE PLATS THAT HAVE COME UP IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS TO SEE HOW MANY HOMES ARE STARTING TO, TO COME IN HERE. AND, UM, NOT TO DIMINISH ANY IMPACT TO ANY PROPERTY OWNER, BUT IT'S, IT'S HAVING TO LOOK AT THE AREA AS A WHOLE, UH, FOR DECADES TO COME. SO I JUST THINK WE SHOULD ALL CONSIDER THAT. CAN, CAN I ASK IF IT TO RESPOND TO THE, UM, APPLICANT'S, UM, STATEMENT THAT THIS DOES MAKE, THE, THE, WITH THAT DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE WOULD MAKE THE PROJECT INFEASIBLE? THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S A, IF THAT'S THE K IF THAT IS TRUE, THAT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, A REASON TO GRANT A VARIANCE. SO WHAT, WHAT IS STAFF'S RESPONSE TO THAT, THAT THAT'S AN ASSERTION THAT THEY'VE MADE IN THEIR FORM? UM, I, I CAN SYMPATHIZE WITH THAT AND, AND IN CASES WHEN IT'S OBVIOUS, IT'S EASY TO, TO CATCH. SO IF, SO, IF THERE'S A STREET THAT'S PARALLEL TO A 60 FOOT LOT, THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY USE FOR THAT LOT WOULD BE DEDICATE 60 FEET OR RIGHT OF AWAY. IN THIS CASE, THIS PROPERTY OCCUPIES A, A GOOD PORTION OF THE MID-BLOCK. YOU'D BE CREATING TWO SECTIONS. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TWO PARTS OF THE, A FAIRLY LARGE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE BY PUBLIC STREET. SO YOU DISAGREE THAT IT WOULD BE INFEASIBLE. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? MADAM CHAIR? YES. UM, COMMISSIONER DALTON HAD HER HAND RAISED. OH, OKAY. UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL ON COMMISSIONER DALTON. YES, I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE, UM, THE DRAWING THAT STAFF HAD PUT TOGETHER REGARDING THE EXISTING PLATTERED RIGHT OF AWAY WITH THE GREEN AND THEN WHAT'S REQUIRED PER CHAPTER 42 WITH THE RED. UM, SO TO THE NORTH, THEY HAD DONE A VARIANCE TO NOT EXTEND EL CENTRO STREET, UM, FOR THE, FOR THE PROPERTY OFF OF DELL STREET, UM, BECAUSE IT WAS AN ESTABLISHED BUSINESS THAT, UM, WAS REDEVELOPING OR, YOU KNOW, GOING THROUGH IMPROVEMENTS. [02:05:02] I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO SOME MORE, UH, CIRCULATION IN THIS AREA, BUT THERE IS A BUSINESS TO THE SOUTH OF EXISTING PLATTED, UH, EL CENTRO STREET THAT RUNS THROUGH THAT, UH, MOBILE HOME PARK. WOULD THAT SAME TYPE OF CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN TO THE BUSINESS TO THE SOUTH IF, UM, THEY WERE WANTING TO REDEVELOP OR BECAUSE OF THIS? WOULD WE BE FORCING THEM TO TAKE OUT THE MAJORITY OF THEIR BUILDINGS? 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU'VE DONE IT FOR ONE PERSON THERE, WHY CAN'T WE DO IT HERE? IT JUST, IT DOESN'T SEEM FEASIBLE, I GUESS IS THE APPROPRIATE TERM TO EXTEND THE STREET ANY FURTHER SOUTH WITHOUT HINDERING SOMEONE THAT MAY WANNA REDEVELOP THEIR PROPERTY. SO THE QUICK ANSWER IS YES, WE WOULD CONSIDER A, A, A REQUEST IF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE SOUTH OF EL CENTRO WERE TO MAKE A SIMILAR ARGUMENT. UM, WE ACTUALLY DID GRANT A SIMILAR VARIANCE REQUEST TO THE PROPERTY, JUST TO THE EAST OF THAT, UM, THAT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. AND IN THERE, SIMILAR TO THE ONE ON DELLS, THEY WERE, UH, THEY HAD PLEDGED TO KEEP THE EXISTING BUILDINGS, WHICH IT HAD BEEN THERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. THAT PLAT EXPIRED WAS NEVER, YOU KNOW, REALIZED. BUT WE'RE, AGAIN, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN THE AR OR THE TRENDS IN THE AREA AND SEEING ALL OF THE NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE PREVAILING, UH, PATTERN OF WHAT, WHAT'S GOING UP THERE. SO IN, IN, WE'RE ANTICIPATING MORE NEW SINGLE FAMILY AND LESS COMMERCIAL. OKAY. MR. CLARK, I WANNA GO BACK TO THE INFEASIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY. AND MR. BUTLER, YOU HAD STATED THAT THEY COULD DO THIS PROJECT IN TWO PHASES. AND THE WAY THAT I'M LOOKING AT THIS, THEY COULDN'T, UNLESS WE'RE GONNA HAVE EVERYBODY ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT, THOSE BUILDINGS CROSSING, PEDESTRIANS, CROSSING OVER TO THESE BUILDINGS. AND WE'RE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT A LOT, BEING DIVIDED BY TWO, CREATING A HAZARD TO PEDESTRIANS. THIS IS A HUGE HAZARD TO PEDESTRIANS. THEY COULDN'T FIT A BUILDING HERE. AND SO WE'RE SAYING, OKAY, AS DESIGNED, IT DOESN'T WORK, GO BACK TO REDESIGN, BUT WE'RE ALSO ASKING FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON. AND SO THIS PROJECT IS ALSO TRYING TO DELIVER THAT AS WELL. SO I, I STILL HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE, UH, FEASIBILITY OF DIVIDING THIS TWO, IT, TO JUST CLARIFY MY EARLIER COMMENT, IT, IT WAS, I, IT, IT COULD BE DIVIDED INTO TRACKS. I DIDN'T WANNA MAKE AN ASSERTION ON HOW IT WOULD BE PHASED IF IT WOULD BE PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT OR SOMETHING ELSE. BUT THERE WOULD BE THE RESULT IF THIS WERE DEDICATED, WOULD BE TWO RESERVES ON, ON EACH SIDE OF A PUBLIC STREET. OKAY. MS. BANDY, DID YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING OR NO? SO IT, IT, ACTUALLY, I'LL SPEAK ON YOUR BEHALF. THAT'S OKAY. 'CAUSE IT, THE, THE MS. CLARK JUST BROUGHT UP THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT. THAT THAT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS ASSERTED, UH, IN THE, IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION. THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD, WOULD LOOK AT DURING A DEFERRAL PERIOD. IT, WE, WE PRESENTED THIS, THIS HAS BEEN THROUGH THE SYSTEM ALREADY AND BEEN WITHDRAWN. SO WE PRESENTED IT WITH A RECOMMENDATION TODAY. TYPICALLY, IF THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS WHICH WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT WE HAD AT THAT POINT, UH, WE WOULD DEFER IT, BUT WE CAN DEFER IT TO, TO LOOK AT THAT FURTHER. COMMISSIONER GARZA, ONE MORE QUESTION. I HATE TO BELABOR THIS. SO, MR. BUTLER, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, THE, UM, THE SITE PLAN, BASICALLY BUILDING ONE AND BUILDING TWO, IT'S GOT PARKING BASICALLY ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS FACES THE EAST, LET'S JUST SAY. SO WE WOULD LOSE ALL THAT PARKING, WOULD WE? NOT IF THE STREET WAS TO GO THROUGH NORTH SOUTH, RIGHT. THAT GRAPHIC IS THERE JUST TO SHOW THE ALIGNMENT OF THE STREET. UNDERSTOOD. UNDERSTOOD. BUT, UM, SO IF WE DO DEFER THIS, AND I MIGHT FRANKLY MAKE THAT MOTION, WOULD, WOULD YOU BE SO KIND AS TO LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS FROM A PARKING PERSPECTIVE AND SEE IF WE LOSE THAT, IF WE WERE PUT THE STREET THROUGH, FORGET ABOUT THE PEOPLE HAVING TO CROSS THE STREET, RIGHT? THEY'LL BUILD A MAGIC BRIDGE AND IT WON'T BE AN ISSUE , BUT, UH, IF WE, IF WE LOSE ALL THAT PARKING, THE, THE WHOLE THING HAS TO BE REDESIGNED REGARDLESS IF WE PUT THAT STREET THROUGH. SO, UM, SO I MIGHT LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT SURE. THAT QUESTION MR. CE, SINCE, SINCE HE WAVED AT ME. COULD YOU COME BACK? JUST ONE OTHER THING TO CONSIDER BESIDES JUST THE PARKING WOULD BE NOT ONLY THE RIGHT OF WAY SETBACKS OFF OF THAT, BUT THE BUILDING LINES REQUIRED FOR A COMMERCIAL USE SUCH AS, UH, MULTI-FAMILY, WHICH IS MUCH GREATER THAN THAT OF SINGLE FAMILY. AND SO, UH, TO TRY TO PUT A BUILDING ON WHAT'S REMAINING, IT WOULD BE VERY TIGHT. OKAY. COMMISSIONER SIGLER, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT TOO. UM, CAN YOU, YOU MENTIONED AFFORDABLE, IS IT CITY OF HOUSTON AFFORDABLE? WHAT, WHAT LEVEL OF AFFORDABLE AFFORDABILITY? PROBABLY NOT CITY OF HOUSTON AFFORDABLE, [02:10:01] BUT TO THE POINT WHERE IT, IT IS BELOW MARKET RATES, UM, TO WHERE, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO A CLASS AA APARTMENT HERE. UH, SOMETHING THAT, THAT FITS THE AREA THAT GIVES PEOPLE THE ABILITY TO LIVE CLOSER TO WHERE THEY WORK. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER, WHILE YOU'RE THERE, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, OKAY, I'LL WEIGH IN SOME MORE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN. I MEAN, I'M NOT PASSIONATE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, BUT I THINK THE SHIP SAILED HERE ON THESE CONNECTIONS ON THIS NORTH SOUTH. I MEAN, WE'RE JUST GONNA BE STUCK WITH PEOPLE GOING FROM SHEPHERD TO YALE AND I APPLAUD THE EFFORT TO TRY AND GET IT WHILE WE CAN, BUT, BUT I, I'M GONNA BE INCLINED TO JUST SUPPORT THE VARIANCE REQUEST AND MOVE ON DOWN THE ROAD HERE. I MEAN, I MIGHT ENTERTAIN THE DEFERRAL, BUT I REALLY THINK THE SHIP SO HAS SO SAILED THERE AND WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO JUST FIND ANOTHER WAY TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION WORK. DIRECTOR WALLACE BROWN, THANK YOU FOR THE SAME, UH, I THINK WE'VE GOT A RESPONSIBILITY TO CON CONTINUE TO KEEP TRYING TO FIND THESE CONNECTIONS WHERE WE HAVE, YOU MAY DISAGREE WITH US ON ANY INSTANCE, AND IN FACT YOU, YOU HAVE IN THE PAST. I, I THINK WE CANNOT QUIT LOOKING FOR THESE CONNECTIONS. IT'S JUST THAT JANICE AND MARTIN AND THESE OTHER SIDE STREETS ARE SO NARROW. I MEAN, I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT WE'D EVER FIX THAT PARTICULAR THING EITHER. SO YOU GET SOME CONNECTION FROM JANICE TO MARTIN. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT REALLY IMPROVE THE CONNECTIVITY OF ANYTHING EXCEPT INCREASE MORE TRAFFIC ON THE OTHER STREET. SO COMMISSIONER, BUT I, I RESPECT YOUR OPINION ALSO A WISE MAYOR THAT I KNOW SAYS, DON'T LET THE PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, I, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR, I, I'D BE DISAPPOINTED IF STAFF DIDN'T BRING IT FORWARD AND MAKE THIS RECOMMENDATION. THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION THEY SHOULD MAKE. I THINK THERE'S A, A JUDGMENT THAT PEOPLE ARE COMING TO US AND, AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE I THINK THIS DIFFERENT, I I IT'S NOT ABOUT SHOULD IT BE DONE? YEAH, WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE LOOKING FOR IT. BUT IN THE REALITY OF THINGS, LOOKING AT BOTH SIDES, I WOULD, UH, SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN'S REQUEST, UH, SUGGESTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, WITH, UH, THE APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST. JUST, UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. NO, I WAS JUST, I WAS JUST AGREEING WITH HIM. . SO WHO WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION? I WANT MR. BUTLER TO SAY SOMETHING. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND JUST ON THE LIKELIHOOD OF, OF FUTURE STREET CONNECTIONS HERE AND BEYOND. THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY SEGMENT DEDICATED ON A PLATFORM LAST YEAR OFF OF MARTIN SOUTH. AND THEN OF COURSE THERE'S THE, THE 2006 RIGHT OF WAY FOR EL CENTRO THAT EXISTS JUST TO THE SOUTH, THAT SITE. SO THIS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE SITE WHERE THERE IS SOME INROADS, LITERALLY INROADS BEING MADE TO CREATING A A MEANS FOR TRAFFIC CIRCULATION IN THIS AREA. ALRIGHT, MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION COMMISSIONER DARON TO DEFER, UH, ASKING THAT MR. BUTLER PRESENT MAY, UH, THE MACRO PICTURE, UH, THE, THE THINGS YOU JUST, UH, BECAUSE I, I, I WANT TO VOTE FOR THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT RIGHT NOW I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED. SO IF YOU COULD GIVE ME MORE REASONS, IE THOSE DEDICATIONS THAT YOU TALKED TO ABOUT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH THAT MIGHT MAKE THIS DECISION EASIER FOR ALL OF US. 'CAUSE WE HAVE A, A, A MORE MACRO PICTURE VERSUS THE MICRO. SO, UH, RIGHT NOW, HONESTLY, I'D BE MORE INCLINED TO GO WITH COMMISSIONER BALD AND COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG'S. BUT YOU'VE JUST MENTIONED THAT THAT'S A NEW PIECE OF INFORMATION. I'D LIKE TO GET MORE DATA ON THAT BEFORE I MAKE A DECISION. WE HAVE A MOTION TO DEFER. MADAM CHAIR. OH, SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THE, UM, THE SPEAKERS IN THE CHAT HAVE BEEN CALLED TO SPEAK. OH, I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T REALIZE WE HAD SPEAKERS IN THE CHAT. OKAY, WE'LL RETURN TO, GO AHEAD. YES. UM, NEIL SCHECHTER. OKAY. NEIL SCHECHTER. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION THANK YOU FOR, UH, HOSTING THIS. I THINK, UH, OPENING UP JANICE IS SUCH A TIGHT, NARROW STREET AS WELL AS, UH, MARTIN, ALL OF THOSE SIDE STREETS THAT GO BEHIND THE BIG BARFA AND JUST CREATES MORE PROBLEM FOR PEOPLE WALKING, KIDS PLAYING AND READY CH HILL UP APPEAR IN VERY BUSY STREET. SO I THINK THIS IS GONNA WITHIN A BIGGER PAN OF WORK. OKAY. THANK YOU. DOES THAT CONCLUDES YOUR COMMENTS? YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. WHO'S NEXT? OH, JUST ONE. THAT WAS IT. OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON JANICE ROAD DEVELOPMENT ITEM 1 61. OKAY. IF NOT, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR, LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET A SECOND AND THEN WE'LL HAVE DISCUSSION. WELL, I WAS GONNA ASK IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE GOING TO ENTERTAIN THE MOTION OF DEFERRING IT, CAN WE ALSO GET MORE INFORMATION ON THE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY OF THE ABSOLUTELY. YES. OKAY. DID YOU WANNA SPEAK BEFORE WE GET A SECOND? GO AHEAD. [02:15:01] I WAS GONNA COMMISSIONER CLARK, I WAS GONNA MAKE THE SECOND AND ASK COMMISSIONER GARZA IF HE WOULD, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE STAFF TAKE A LOOK AT THIS, COULD THE APPLICANT ALSO PROVIDE INFORMATION AS TO HOW THIS WOULD OR WOULD NOT MAKE HIS PROPERTY INFEASIBLE FOR HIS PROJECT? OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DEFER. UM, WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION ON AFFORDABILITY. WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR, WELL, I WON'T REPEAT ALL THE REQUESTS. I THINK THEY'RE ON THE RECORD. WELL, FURTHER DISCUSSION. MY, I WILL REPEAT OR EXPAND ON, UH, COMMISSIONER GARETH, COULD WE JUST GET LIKE AN EXHIBIT THAT SHOWED THE EXISTING ROADWAY, WHAT'S BEEN DEDICATED AND, AND JUST SOMETHING THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE AREA THAT KIND OF GIVES US A GOOD OVERVIEW OF THE CONNECTION? I, I MAY, I MADE A GRAPHIC JUST FOR THIS, FOR THE SLIDESHOW, BUT IT'S AN APPROXIMATION. I COULD DO SOMETHING A LITTLE CLEANER THAN THAT. OKAY. ANY, ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE DEFERRAL PERIOD? OKAY. UM, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE HAVE A MOTION TO DEFER. UM, ANY COMMENT FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES AND ITEM 1 61 IS DEFERRED. OKAY, THAT'LL TAKE US TO 1 62 LITTLE YORK LANDING. ITEM 1 62 IS LITTLE YORK LANDING. THE SUBJECT SITE IS A ONE ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CITY LIMIT SOUTH ALONG WEST LITTLE YORK ROAD, WEST OF WHEATLEY AND THE ACRES HOMES AREA. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 14 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THREE RESERVES ALONG A TYPE TWO PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT OR PAE AND IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES. ONE TO EXCEED 1400 FOOT INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG WESTLAW YORK ROAD BY NOT EXTENDING TIPPET STREET NOR TERMINATING IN THE CUL-DE-SAC FROM THE SOUTH. AND TWO, TO ALLOW A PRIVATE STREET TO BE A DIRECT EXTENSION OF A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAIT. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE REQUESTS. THE CURRENT BLOCK FACE, UH, LENGTH OF WEST LITTLE YORK IS 2200 FEET. AND INTERSECTION SPACING IS A GENERAL CONCERN IN THE A ACRES HOMES AREA PLANNING STAFF, PUBLIC WORKS AND THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCES. THE SITE IS LOCATED 1,530 FEET FROM THE EAT LEE STREET TO THE EAST AND 580 FEET FROM THE SEALEY STREET TO THE WEST. AND ITS SOUTHERN BOUNDARY IS STUDDED BY A 30 FOOT WIDE TIPPE STREET REQUIRING AN EXTENSION OF TIPPETT STREET WOULD NOW REMARKABLY IMPROVE CIRCULATION AS SOCIETY IS WITHIN THE SUFFICIENT CIRCULATION GRID OF MAJOR COLLECTOR LITTLE YORK ROAD AND MAJOR THOROUGH FOR WHEATLEY STREET, THE NEW JERUSALEM OF MINISTRY OF, SORRY, NEW JERUSALEM MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH OF ACRES. HOME SUBDIVISION IS A RECORDED PLAT BLOCKING THE WEST 20 FEET OF TIPPETT AND HINDERS POTENTIAL EXTENSION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND IF YOU'RE A FAN OF MOBILITY PLANS, THE ACRES HOMES MOBILITY PLAN DOES NOT REQUIRE THE EXTENSION OF TIPPETT STREET AS AN EXISTING MTFP GRID AND PROVIDE SUFFICIENT CIRCULATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA. THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO AGREED TO PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO TIPPE FROM THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. WE HAVE RECEIVED SOME EVENTS, COMMENTS FOR THE PLAT REQUESTING MORE INFORMATION AND REGARDING CONCERNS OF DRAINAGE AND DETENTION. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE CHOOSE TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCES AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU MR. SAD. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER, UM, VANDY SHEPHERD. VANDY SHEPHERD. I SPOKE WITH MR. SHEPHERD EARLIER TODAY. HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND, BUT HE WAS HAPPY WITH THE DECISION YOU GAVE HIM ANSWER HIS QUESTIONS, CORRECT? HE SAID HE JUST HAD QUESTIONS. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON LITTLE YORK LANDING, IF NOT STAFF'S, RECOMME. OH, SORRY. COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG. HATE TO HAVE THIS ONE RIGHT AFTER THE LAST ONE, BUT, UM, NOT SUGGESTING TIBIT GOES THROUGH OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT, UM, IF IN THE FUTURE THE DEVELOPER ADJACENT TO IT WANTED TO EXTEND TIBIT WHEN THEY DEVELOPED, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO PUT IN THE PLAT THAT, OR FOR THEM TO DEDICATE IN THE FUTURE THE SEGMENT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY WHICH COULD BECOME TIPPET? THAT IT, IT WE COULD DO THAT NOW BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T TAKE IT LATER AFTER THEY BUILD THEIR DRIVEWAY. SO IN THE LAST CYCLE WHEN WE DEFERRED, I ACTUALLY SPOKE WITH THE, UH, THE MINISTER OF THE CHURCH AND THE OWNER AND CONSIDERATION OF THAT AND THEY WERE EXTREMELY RELUCTANT AT THAT POINT TO CONSIDER IT AS PART OF DEDICATING, HOWEVER, IN THE APPROPRIATE, THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY HAD THE PAE ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PLAT AND MOVED IT TO THE WESTERN SIDE. AND A POTENTIAL, POTENTIAL CONSIDERATION OF THE POTENTIALITY OF SHOULD THERE EVER BE A POTEN UH, AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXTEND THERE WILL BE A PAVED RIGHT OF WAY THAT IT CAN EVENTUALLY CONNECT TO. THAT'S MY POINT. I'M JUST SAYING ON THE, ON THE PLAT, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO RESERVE THAT SECTION SO IN THE FUTURE IF WHATEVER HAPPENED 'CAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT DECISION AND ALL OF THAT, IS THERE SOMETHING THAT JUST COULD MAKE THAT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE? 'CAUSE IF IT DOESN'T, YOU'D BE TAKING SOMEONE'S PROPERTY. IT'S JUST A LOGISTICS THING. WELL, LET'S, IT IS A THING AS A PRIVATE STREET, SO IT WOULDN'T BE [02:20:01] A MANDATE ON THAT WESTERN PROPERTY TO HAVE TO DO IT. SO IT'S KIND OF LEAVING MORE OF THE OPEN OF A POTENTIALITY OR THAT OPPORTUNITY, NOT A MANDATE FOR IT. OKAY. BUT BY, BY GETTING THE DEVELOPER TO AGREE TO FLIP IT, YOU'VE CREATED, CREATE A OPPORTUNITY YES. ON THAT, RIGHT, ON THAT SIDE. CORRECT. SO, OKAY. ANY, UM, I GUESS WE HAD NO OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS, NOBODY IN THE, IN THE CHAT. UM, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BY COMMISSION? SORRY, COMMISSIONER VICTOR, I JUST HAD A QUICK COMMENT, UM, AND GENERAL COMMENT, BUT ARE WE DO PLANNING ON DOING ADDITIONAL STUDIES? I KNOW THIS MOBILITY STUDY WAS GREAT, BUT ARE THERE FURTHER PLANS TO DO MORE STUDIES BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THESE AREAS AND THE MOBILITY AROUND THE AREAS, THE DRAINAGE, I KNOW IF DRAINAGE IS NOT COMPLETELY OUT, YOU KNOW, IN OUR PURVIEW, BUT UNDERSTANDING WHAT ONE DEVELOPMENT, HOW THAT WILL IMPACT COMPLETELY THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AREA. ARE WE, ARE THERE PLANS TO DO ADDITIONAL STUDIES? AND THIS IS NOT FOR THIS ONE, I'M JUST ASKING IN GENERAL. UM, I'M NOT UNBE OF ANY STUDIES OUTSIDE OF, OF THE ACRES HOMES. WE DO HAVE A RECENT ONE WHERE THEY'VE STARTED TO GO TOWARDS THE FINAL STAGES OF THE, OF THIS MOBILITY PLAN AND OTHER ASPECTS OF IT, INCLUDING BIKE PLANS AND SIDEWALKS AND, AND OTHER SUCH. AS FAR AS ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT AREA, I'M, I'M FAMILIAR WITH ANY WELL, BUT I'M ASSUMING CITY WILL PLAN ON DOING SOME MORE RIGHT OVER TIME BECAUSE , AS WE COMPLETE THIS PLAN AND REALLY BRING IT TO FRUITION AND LOOK AT, SEE HOW IT LAYS OUT AND HOW YOU ALL RESPOND TO IT, I THINK THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO DO ADDITIONAL PLANS IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS. WE ARE, WE'RE EXPERIENCING THIS 'CAUSE THIS IS GONNA KEEP COMING BACK. ABSOLUTELY. AND I FEEL LIKE IF WE DON'T HAVE AN OVERALL PLAN, LOOKING AT EASE DEVELOPMENT JUST IN A SILO IS NOT YES. BENEFICIAL. AGREE WITH YOU. AGREE. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND WE DO THOSE IN HOUSE, RIGHT? YEAH, CLARK, COMMISSIONER CLARK. AND JUST A CLARIFICATION, THE NEXT STUDY AND THE NEXT STUDY AND THE NEXT STUDY WILL ONLY BE MOBILITY. IT WON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH DRAINAGE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT AT ALL IN OUR PURVIEW. IS THAT CORRECT? THERE WAS A STATE, I GUESS I'M NOT ENTIRELY CERTAIN ABOUT THAT. WELL, THERE WAS A STATEMENT IN, IN HER, IN VICTOR'S STATEMENT, SHE SAID THAT, WOULD WE BE DOING STUDIES ON MOBILITY AND DRAINAGE AND IT'S NOT ALL THE WAY IN OUR PURVIEW. WELL THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT COULD BE DOING STUDIES ON MOBILITY AND DRAINAGE, BUT NOT FOR US. AND YOU COULD LOOK AT A PIECE OF IT, CORRECT. RIGHT. AND I DIDN'T MEAN THAT WE AS A PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD LOOK, BUT AS I SAID, I KNOW YOU DIDN'T, I JUST WANT TO PUBLICLY MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WE'RE NOT GONNA DO SOME BIG DRAINAGE STUDY FOR COMMISSION. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT. THANK YOU. OKAY, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, I'M SORRY TO BRING THIS UP AGAIN, BUT, UM, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT THAT IN THE FUTURE IT COULD BE, BUT IF THESE PEOPLE BUY THESE HOMES WITHOUT A KNOWLEDGE OF A FUTURE IDEA OF THAT COMING THROUGH, THERE'S NO WAY THEY'RE GONNA SUPPORT SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE. I MEAN, JUST, JUST BIG PICTURE. SO I MEAN IF THAT IS THE INTENT REMOTELY IS POSSIBLE INTENT, I THINK IT SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED UPFRONT. WELL, IT'S NOT SORT OF IN INTENT, BUT A A A POSSIBILITY. IT'S A POTENTIALITY. IT'S, AND THAT'S A, A GENERAL CONCERN FOR GO AHEAD. UM, IT'S A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT. WE, WE CAN'T NOTE IT AS ANY OTHER THING. TRIP IS A PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT. NO, THE THIS DRIVEWAY, THE DRIVEWAY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ACCESS BY WHICH THE LOTS ARE, ARE, ARE TAKE VEHICLE ACCESS AS A TYPE TWO PAE. AND WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS HAVING THEM DEDICATE THE NARROW STRIP TO PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. WE WOULDN'T ACCEPT THAT. THERE'S NO WAY TO DO THAT IN THE FUTURE. WE WOULDN'T ACCEPT THAT WE COULDN'T MAINTAIN IT. WE, WE WOULDN'T, WE WOULDN'T ACCEPT IT. IT WOULDN'T MEET OUR STANDARDS. NO. SOMEBODY, YEAH, NO, I GOT THAT. IS RICHARD HERE? RICHARD SMITH? CAN YOU COMMENT ON THIS FOR US? YOU LOOKED TOO COMFORTABLE SITTING THERE. HE THOUGHT HE WAS GONNA MAKE THE WHOLE MEETING. , I'M RICHARD SMITH WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS AND I'M GONNA ASK WHAT AGAIN ARE YOU TRYING TO UNDERSTAND OUT OF ALL OF THIS? AND THAT'S WHERE, SO I CAN HELP. SO I CAN ASK, WE NEED TO SEE THE, UM, THE PLAN, THE SITE PLAN PLEASE THAT. OKAY. DO YOU WANNA, SO THE COMMISSIONER'S QUESTION IS CAN THAT PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT BE IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIALLY A PUBLIC ROAD IN THE FUTURE? COULD THEY DEDICATE A PORTION OF THAT? IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN? YEAH. CAN THEY DEDICATE THE MOST WESTERN PORTION OF THAT ROAD SO THAT IT COULD LINE UP WITH TIPPET AND BECOME A PUBLIC ROAD IN THE FUTURE? WOULD WE ACCEPT THAT? UH, I GUESS MORE CLEARLY. IS THERE A WAY TO INDICATE ON THE PLAT SOME GRAPHIC OR SOMETHING THAT INDICATES IN THE FUTURE FOR THOSE BUYERS THAT [02:25:01] IT'S NOT BEYOND THE REALM OF ADON? DEFINITELY NOT DEDICATED. NOW THERE'S NO OTHER SIDE TO DEDICATE IF IT'S INTENDED TO BE A DRIVEWAY AN AN EASEMENT. I DON'T KNOW OF A WAY MEAN, AGAIN, IT MIGHT BE BEATING A DEAD HORSE THOUGH. I DON'T KNOW A WAY TO GET THE WESTERN PLOT. I MEAN, YOU'RE ASKING THAT THE PIECE ON THE WEST OR THE, OR THE, I'M SORRY, THE WESTERN SECTION OF THIS ROADWAY TO BE LISTED AS DEDICATED RIGHT OF WAY. THE OTHER PROBLEM IS IT'S NOT GONNA BE BUILT TO ROADWAY STANDARDS, RIGHT? YEAH. IT'S GONNA BE A, I MEAN THEY'RE GONNA BUILD AS A DRIVEWAY. SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND REBUILD IT, UM, BECAUSE THERE WOULDN'T BE, THERE PROBABLY WON'T BE A SUFFICIENT DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN IT FOR WHAT WE'D WANT AS A ROADWAY AND THEN HOW IT TIES IN OUT TO LITTLE YORK, ET CETERA. SO THAT'S GONNA BE A REALLY TOUGH ONE. I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN GIVE YOU AN ANSWER ON THAT. I, I WITHDRAW MY QUESTION. OKAY, THANK YOU. OKAY. I ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER ALLMAN? I HAVE A QUESTION. WELL IT SEEMS LIKE, SO I'M LOOKING AT THE AERIAL WHATEVER AND SEA LEE'S RIGHT OVER THERE TO THE WEST AND IT'S NOT THAT FAR AWAY AND IT PROVIDES THE SAME KIND OF CONNECTION THAT TIPPE WOULD. AND WAS IT, WAS THIS A CONSIDERATION OF STAFF? I MEAN AND THEN YOU HAVE PHILLIPS, SO THE BLOCK FACE ITSELF IS 2200 FEET FROM SEALY TO WHEATLEY TO THE EAST. AND WITH LIVE YORK BEING A MINOR COLLECTOR OR A VENTURE COLLECTOR, IT DOESN'T MEET THE INTERSECTION SPACING STANDARD. SO, WELL IT'S THE SPACING FROM WHEATLEY THAT WORK MANDATES THAT IT BE ADDRESSED. RIGHT. BUT I MEAN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE, LIKE IN THE, IN THE PREVIOUS UM, CASE OR IN THE PREVIOUS PROJECT, THERE WASN'T CONTINUATION BETWEEN UM, CORRECT. SO CELIA DOESN'T STAND FOR A COUPLE OF BLOCKS AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE OKAY WITH GRANTING THE VARIANCE BECAUSE THIS IS WITHIN THE MAJOR THOROUGH GRID OF WHEATLEY AND UH, NEW YORK AND THEN YOU DO HAVE CEILING ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY AND THEN PLAN TO THE SOUTH AND YOU GOT FILL UP THERE SO THE GRID THAT'S ACCEPTABLE AND WE'LL CIRCULATE TRAFFIC SUFFICIENTLY DESPITE NOT HAVING THIS EXTENSION OF TBIT. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I MEAN IT, YEAH. OKAY. FURTHER DISCUSSION. UM, OKAY, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST TO VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT. UM, THERE IT IS ON THE SCREEN IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, BUT I THINK COMMISSIONER MODEST. WELL I WAS GONNA SAY, UH, MR. CILLO SPEAKING MY LOVE LANGUAGE WITH THE MOBILITY PLAN. SO I'M GONNA PUT A MOTION TO GO AHEAD . MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? YES, VICTOR. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, 1 63 OAKWOOD TRAILS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER DALTON. I NEED TO LEAVE THE MEETING. OKAY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER DALTON. ALRIGHT, ITEM 1 63 IS OAKWOOD TRAILS. THIS SITE IS LOCATED IN THE ETGF HARRIS COUNTY SOUTH OF ALONG LUTA ROAD AND WEST OF T TC JESTER. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT EXTEND NOR TERMINATE TWO PUBLIC STUB STREETS WITH A CUL-DE-SAC. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A SECOND DEFERRAL AND WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. OKAY, THE PROPOSED RESERVE IS ADJACENT TO A DRAINAGE CHANNEL OWNED BY HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT. HARRIS COUNTY HAS CONFIRMED THE NEED OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN THE PLAT BOUNDARY SEPARATE FROM THE FLOOD EASEMENT CURRENTLY SHOWN ON THE PLAT. ALSO, IT APPEARS THAT HARRIS COUNTY WILL CONTINUE TO USE THE DEAD END OF WILMINGTON DRIVE TO ACCESS THE DRAINAGE CHANNEL FOR MAINTENANCE. STAFF IS REQUESTING A SECOND DEFERRAL TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE APPLICANT APPLICANT TO COORDINATE WITH HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING TO ADD THE TWO EASEMENTS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT BEFORE SUPPORTING THIS REQUEST. MADAM, MADAM CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM. OKAY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. CRIDDLE IF WE HAVE A DEFERRAL? UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? ANYBODY WANNA SPEAK ON OAKWOOD TRAILS 1 63? IF NOT, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION? BALDWIN BALDWIN? SECOND. SECOND MANCA. SECOND MANCA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DEFERRAL, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 64. ITEM 1 64 IS RALSTON LAKES GP. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY ALONG LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY, NORTH OF GARRETT ROAD AND WEST OF SAM HOUSTON TOLLWAY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY AND TO EXCEED MINIMUM INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG THE MAJOR FAIR, FAIR ROSTON ROAD STAFF IN IS IN [02:30:01] SUPPORT OF BOTH REQUESTS. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 96 ACRE GENERAL PLAN LOCATED IN HARRIS COUNTY. THE SITE IS BOUNDED BY LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY TO THE NORTH, A HARRIS COUNTY FEE STRIP TO THE SOUTH AND A MOTOCROSS RACETRACK TO THE WEST. THE GENERAL PLAN EXTENDS PUBLIC STREETS FROM GREEN BOOK SUBDIVISION AND EXTENDS THE MAJOR FAIR FARE THROUGH THE TRACT. THE APPLICANT PLANS TO CENTER LINE TIE WITH AN EXISTING STREET ALONG ROSTON ROAD. THE MINIMUM INTERSECTION SPACING IS REQUIRED BECAUSE THE EXISTING INTERSECTIONS WERE PLATTED CLOSER THAN 600 FEET FROM EACH OTHER ALONG THE MAJOR FAIR FARE. THE SUBDIVISION WAS CREATED IN 1977 PRIOR TO ROSTERING BECOMING A MAJOR FAIR FARE MAKING THIS AN EXISTING CONDITION. STAFF'S STAFF SUPPORTS VARIANCE REQUEST NUMBER TWO DUE TO THE HIGH SPEED MOTOCROSS AND RACE TRACK USES. ALSO, IT IS NOT LIKELY FOR A LOCAL STREET TO CROSS THE COUNTY FEE STRIP BEING SO CLOSE TO LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY. HARRIS COUNTY'S, EXCUSE ME, HARRIS COUNTY'S ENGINEERING OFFICE HAS NOT VOICED ANY OBJECTION TO THIS REQUEST. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. CRILE? UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON RALSTON LAKES GENERAL PLAN 1 64, IF NOT, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN. YES. COMMISSIONER MANKA. UH, QUESTION, UM, ON WHAT'S THE TIMELINE TO CONSTRUCT THOSE, UH, SOUTHERN LANES? UM, UH, THE SOUTHERN LANE OF, UH, RALSTON? UH, SO I PERSONALLY DO NOT HAVE A TIMELINE. UH, THIS WAS SOMETHING DISCUSSED IN OUR, UH, STAFF MEETING. UM, WE WOULD PROBABLY RELY ON HARRIS COUNTY. UM, THE ASSUMPTION WOULD BE WHEN THE, THE PORTION OF THE MAJOR FAIR WITHIN THE GP IS CONSTRUCTED. UH, WE MAY ASSUME THAT THE OTHER PORTION WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE SAME TIME, BUT THAT'LL BE SOMETHING I BELIEVE WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY'S, UM, RESPONSIBILITY TO, TO DETERMINE. OKAY. THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? UM, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT. IS THERE DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? JONES S SIGLER SECOND JONES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 1 65, ITEM 1 65 IS UNION CROSSING NORTHWEST. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ETGF HARRIS COUNTY SOUTH OF US, TWO 90 NORTH OF TUCKERTON AND WEST OF ELDRIDGE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED NORTH, SOUTH, AND EAST WEST INTERSECTION. SPACING THROUGH THE TRACT STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN SECTION OF THE WYMAN GORDON COMPLEX GENERAL PLAN. THE GENERAL PLAN CON, EXCUSE ME, THE GP CONTAINED EXISTING INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX AND WAS GRANTED A VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE ANY NORTH, SOUTH, OR EAST WEST STREETS THROUGH THIS TRACK. SINCE THEN, THE GPA HAS EXPIRED, BUT THE CONDITIONS HAVE REMAINED THE SAME. THE WESTLAND BOUNDARY IS BOUNDED BY A 200 AND FOOT DRAINAGE CHANNEL OWNED BY THE REMINGTON MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, AND THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE GP IS STILL OPERATING AS AN INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. THERE'S AN EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT WITHIN THE NEW RESERVE, APPROXIMATELY 41 FEET AND WIDTH WITH PAVED CONCRETE AND CURB AND GUTTER. THIS WILL ALLOW PERPETUAL PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SITE AND ADJACENT TRACKS. THIS SERVES AS A SIMILAR PURPOSE AS A PUBLIC STREET REQUIRED UNDER STRICT INTERPRETATION OF CHAPTER 42. STAFF FINDS THAT ALLOWING, EXCUSE ME, STAFF FINDS THAT ALLOWING THE APPLICANT TO USE THIS EASEMENT FOR ACCESS IS A PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVE THAN REQUIRING ALL OF THE BUDDING STREETS TO PLAID. SIMULTANEOUSLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING THE VARIANCE AND IMPROVING THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. MADAM CHAIR, UH, MADAM CHAIR STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT, UH, THERE WILL BE TWO CONDITIONS, UH, PUT ON THE APPLICATION PRIOR TO RECORDATION. UH, THE EASEMENT CANNOT BE GATED AT ANY TIME AND STAFF WANTS TO CONFIRM THAT THE EASEMENT WILL MAKE A CONNECTION TO TUCKERTON ROAD AND THESE WILL BE REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE, UH, PRIOR TO RECORDATION. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. K CRIDDLE? NONE. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP? DOES ANYONE WANNA SPEAK ON UNION CROSSING NORTHWEST? IF NOT, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT CONDITIONS ARE NOTED ON THE SCREEN. UM, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION [02:35:01] FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION? AMANDA. AMANDA PACA. IS THERE A SECOND? GARZA? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 66. I'M SORRY, MADAM CHAIR. WHO MADE THE SECOND THE SECOND MOTION? GARZA. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, ITEM 1 66 IS VETERANS MEMORIAL SELF STORAGE. THE SITE IS LOCATED EAST ALONG VETERANS MEMORIAL DRIVE NORTH OF GREENS ROAD AND SOUTH OF ANTOINE DRIVE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG VETERANS MEMORIAL AND A VARIANCE REQUEST TO NOT EXTEND OR TERMINATE A PUBLIC, A PUBLIC STREET WITH A CUL-DE-SAC STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 7.4 ACRE RESERVE INTENDED TO DEVELOP A STORAGE FACILITY ON THE SITE. THE SITE SITS BETWEEN A RECORDED SUBDIVISION TO THE NORTH AND MULTIPLE RECORDED COMMERCIAL RESERVES TO THE SOUTH. THE CURRENT INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG VETERANS MEMORIAL IS ROUGHLY 2,900 FEET AND QUALIFIES AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION WITHIN THE 30% DEVIATION OF THE STANDARD. IF THE STUBB STREET WAS TO BE EXTENDED, IT CAN ONLY MAKE A CONNECTION TO VETERANS ROAD, EXCUSE, EXCUSE ME, VETERANS MEMORIAL DRIVE. DUE TO THE RECORDED ADJACENT PLATS, THERE'S ADEQUATE STREET CONNECTIONS TRAVELING SOUTH TO THE NEXT MAJOR THOROUGHFARE GREENS ROAD. ALSO, THE STUB STREET IS NOT FULLY IMPROVED AND ONLY PROVIDES A DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THE WATER TOWER OWNED BY HARRIS COUNTY MUD NUMBER ONE 50. THE GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO DEVELOP THE TRACK WITHOUT INTRODUCING COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC TO RESIDE TO THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPU CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. CRILE? UM, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO SPEAK? WE, NO ONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON MEMORIAL. UH, VETERANS' MEMORIAL SELF STORAGE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THERE ON THE SCREEN IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION? AMANDA, PA. AMANDA, PA. IS THERE A SECOND? JONES? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 1 67. ITEM 1 67 IS WILLOW RESERVES. THIS SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FORT BEND COUNTY ETJ SOUTH OF GASTON ROAD, NORTH OF SPRING CREEK BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO USE A 60 FOOT PUBLIC ROADWAY EASEMENT FOR ACCESS RATHER THAN A PUBLIC STREET. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST. THE SITE IS LOCATED IN AN UNRECORDED SUBDIVISION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THE SITE IS ACCESSIBLE BY WILLOW LANE, AN ACCESS EASEMENT MAINTAINED BY FORT BEND COUNTY. THIS EASEMENT FEATURES ASPHALT PAVING AND SERVES A SIMILAR PURPOSE AS A PUBLIC STREET. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DIVIDE THE 10 ACRE PROPERTY INTO TWO HOMES AND THAT DEVELOPMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER LARGE ACRES TRACKS OFF WILLOW LANE. IT WILL NOT PLACE A SIGNIFICANT BURDEN ON THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEM. STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF CHAPTER 42. FORT BEND COUNTY HAS EXPRESSED NO OBJECTION TO THIS APPLICATION AND STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANT THE VARIANCE IN APPROVING THE PLAT FOR THE CPC OF ONE ONE FORM CONDITIONS. WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT TO THIS ITEM. THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR MR. BUTLER? UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE CHAT? IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON WILLOW RESERVES? IF NOT, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION? MOTION? I'M SORRY. I HEARD MODEST AND MAN. THANK YOU MORRIS AND POROUS PERLE. THAT TOTALLY WENT THROUGH ME. UM, . ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 1 68. ITEM 1 68 IS WOODLANDS CREEKSIDE PARK WEST SECTION SIX, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER TWO. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE HARRIS COUNTY ETJ ALONG KIRKENDAL ROAD. BETWEEN CREEKSIDE FOREST DRIVE AND NEW HARMONY TRAIL. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A RESERVE FOR AN EXISTING RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO CREATE A 10 FOOT DUAL BUILDING LINE ALONG KIRKENDAL AS OPPOSED TO REQUIRED 25 FEET. STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL TO ALLOW TIME TO REVISE THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION NAME TO MEET NAMING STANDARDS. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT IN THIS ITEM. THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOBODY IN THE CHAT. NO ONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON WOODLANDS. CREEKSIDE PARK WEST. UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION? MANKA CLARK. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. MANKA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THAT CONCLUDES VARIANCES. [02:40:01] WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING UNDER SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING UNDER RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENTS. [Platting Activities g - i] SO WE GO TO GH AND I. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS PEDRO SHAW. IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SECTIONS. GH AND I AS ONE GROUP PLEASE. SECTION G EXTENSIONS OF APPROVAL CONSISTS OF ITEMS 1 69 THROUGH 180 3. SECTION H NAME CHANGES CONSISTS OF ITEMS 180 4 THROUGH 180 6 AND SECTION I CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE CONSISTS OF ITEM 180 7. THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR SECTIONS. GH AND I, THERE ARE NO ITEMS TAKEN OUT OF ORDER PER STAFF AND NO CHANGES IN STAFF RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANYTHING WE HAVE TO ABSTAIN ON? COMMISSIONER SIGLER? ITEM 1 72. OKAY, ITEM 1 72 FOR SIGLER. COMMISSIONER HY 1 72 AND 180 5. 1 72 AND 180 5 FOR COMMISSIONER HY. UM, IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL ON ALL ITEMS IN SECTIONS G AND I? MOTION CLARK SECOND ALLMAN ALLMAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY ITEMS IN SECTION J. ADMINISTRATIVE K [k. Development Plats with Variance Requests (Geoff Butler) ] DEVELOPMENT PLOTS WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS. ITEM 180 8, ITEM 180 8 IS 89 31 BARTON STREET. THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG BARTON BETWEEN GULF, THE GULF FREEWAY AND HOBBY AIRPORT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A A ZERO FOOT BUILDING LINE TO ALLOW FOR A CARPORT OVER AN EXISTING PARKING PAD AT THE FRONT OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME. STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL TO ALLOW TIME FOR A SITE VISIT AND TO COORDINATE WITH THE APPLICANT. STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT IN THIS ITEM. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION. AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS HERE, UH, TO SPEAK AS WELL. HE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND CALL AUGUST MURRAY, JR. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MURRAY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND, UM, STAFF HERE. I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, JUST SAY A FEW WORDS ON MY BEHALF ON THE REASON WHY I WOULD REQUESTING THIS CARPORT. UM, THE IMPOSITION OF THE TERMS AND RULES, CONDITIONS, POLICIES, AND STANDARDS OF THE, UH, OF THE, UM, REQUESTED VARIANCE. IT MEETS THE CRITERIA IN EITHER, UM, IN, IN, IN ALL OF THE, UM, ITEMS HERE, THE IMPOSITION OF THE, I MEAN A A COVERED PARKING AREA WOULD GIVE ME THE SECURITY THAT I WOULD NEED. UM, I'M, I'M JUST PARTIALLY DISABLED. I, UH, I'M A HEART PATIENT AND I HAVE SEVERE ARTHRITIS, SO IT, UH, IT WOULD GIVE ME THE SAFETY AND THE PROTECTION I NEED TO, AND FROM MY CAR AND FROM, UM, UH, UM, AUTOS THAT COME PICK ME UP TO TAKE ME TO MY DOCTOR'S VISITS. UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT AFFECTING ANY, UH, UM, VISIBILITY. UM, UH, FROM, FROM THE TRAFFIC. AND, UH, IT, IT WOULD BE A, A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD, IT WOULD ALLOW THE PROPERTY VALUES TO GO UP IN THE, WITH MY NEIGHBOR'S HOMES. A LOT OF 'EM HAD SOME FLOOD DAMAGE. MY HOME WAS, WAS REBUILT BY THE, UH, TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE DUE TO FLOODING. SO I HAVE A NEW HOME. I GOT MY KEYS TO IT ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO. I'M VERY GRATEFUL, I'M HAPPY WITH IT. THE CONSTRUCTION WAS, WAS IMPECCABLE. IT WAS, IT'S, I I WAS JUST FLABBERGASTED OF HOW IT WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH THE COMPANY. JW TURNER, THEY DID A GREAT JOB. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT DESIGNED THE CARPORT AND IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE VERY WELL BUILT. IT'LL BE, UH, PROTECTED WITH HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE POLICY. THE, THE, UM, UPKEEP WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF WITH THE, UH, WARRANTY THAT'S GIVEN TO ME WITH THE BUILDER AND BE, AND, UM, WITH MY INSURANCE POLICY, THE UPKEEP WILL BE, WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF. I, I THINK THAT TYING, GO AHEAD. I, I THINK THIS WOULD BE A, A, A A A GREAT NEED FOR MYSELF, UM, BEING I LIVE ALONE AND, AND AGAIN, UM, IT, IT WOULD HELP ME, UH, A A GREAT DEAL. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN AND BEING WITH US. UH, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN? SIR, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR PLIGHT AND I'M SO HAPPY THAT YOU GOT A HOME HERE. WHEN I LOOK AT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IF I LOOKED AT THE ARIEL, THEY, EVERYONE HAS A CARPORT [02:45:01] AT THE BACK AND YOU HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM FOR CARPORT IN THE BACK. IF WE GRANTED YOURS, I MEAN, THE WAY I LOOK AT IT, IF THERE WERE CARPORTS IN THE FRONT OF EVERY ONE OF THESE NEIGHBORS, WOULD YOUR NEIGHBOR WOULD BE BENEFITED BY THAT? WELL, THE NEIGHBOR TWO HOUSES FOR ME HAS A DOUBLE CARPORT. I SEE THAT AS THE ONE I WANT. AND, AND ALSO THE, THE HOUSE THAT THEY TORE DOWN TO BUILD MINE HAD A CARPORT IN THE BACK. LIKE YOU MENTIONED, THE DEVELOPER BUILT THIS SUBDIVISION IN THE SEVENTIES. AND YEAH, THE WAY THE PLATS WERE, THEY MADE THEM GO, GO TO THE BACK. WHEN THEY TORE DOWN AND REDEVELOPED MY HOUSE, THEY, THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST TO PUT IT IN THE FRONT. THE PAD IS IN THE FRONT. AND BECAUSE OF THE, THERE WASN'T MUCH ROOM ON THE SIDES FOR A DRIVEWAY TO GO TO THE BACK TO, TO, TO PUT A CARPORT. 'CAUSE THEY HAD TO REDEVELOP THE, THE, THE FLOOR PLAN WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE FLOOR PLAN THAT I HAD BEFORE. UM, AND YOUR QUESTION WAS, WAS, UH, WHY WOULD IT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IF EVERY HOUSE HAD A CARPORT IN THE FRONT? I, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD, FIRST OF ALL, THEY WOULD HAVE TO, TO REDESIGN THEIR HOME IN ORDER TO, AND, AND GET AND GET A, UH, UH, VARIANCES TO REDO THEIR HOMES AS WELL. BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT'S SET UP NOW. THE, THE, UM, AESTHETICALLY IT WOULD LOOK NICE. I MEAN, THERE'S A, THERE'S A BUDDHIST TEMPLE, FOUR HOUSES FROM ME, AND I'M IN A NON-RESTRICTED NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, IT'S IN A NON FLOOD ZONE. UM, UH, THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT SEVEN HOUSES FROM ME HAS CHICKENS RUNNING IN THEIR FRONT YARD. I LOVE CHICKENS. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THIS ISN'T GOING TO DO ANY HARM TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, AND, AND I THINK IF ANYONE WANTED TO BUILD A CARPORT IN THEIR FRONT, THEY SHOULD FOLLOW THE RULES LIKE I AM. AND, AND THEY SHOULD APPLY, YOU KNOW, FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY NEED IT FOR. UM, AND LET, LET, LET THE, UH, COMMITTEE DECIDE, YOU KNOW. SO I ASSUME THAT YOUR HOUSE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW? NO, NO. IT WAS COMPLETELY BUILT. I GOT THE KEY SIX MONTHS AGO. CONGRATULATIONS ON THAT. THAT'S, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAD SOME FLOODING DONE TO MY HOME. WHEN THEY PERMITTED THE HOUSE, DID THEY TRY TO PERMIT THE CARPORT IN THE FRONT OR WAS THERE NO CARPORT PLANNED AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME? UH, NO. I WAS GIVEN THREE FLOOR PLANS TO CHOOSE FROM AND, AND THAT WAS IT. YOU KNOW, AND THE WAY THEY DESIGNED THE, THE FLOOR PLANS, THERE WAS NO ROOM FOR A, A, UM, A HUNDRED FOOT DRIVEWAY TO GO TO THE BACK TO, TO BUILD A TWO CARPORT. AND I GUESS COST-WISE, WISE AND, UM, AND THE WAY THE DESIGN WAS WITH THE SIZE OF MY LOT, IT WAS JUST BETTER TO DO IT IN THE FRONT. THE, THE, THE CEMENT, UM, THE, UH, THE UH, 20 BY 20 PAD IS ALREADY THERE. WHEN THEY POURED THE CONCRETE FOR MY HOME, THEY ALSO POURED THE DRIVEWAY WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, THE PAD. AND SO THEY PERMITTED IT WITH THE PAD AND NOT THE STRUCTURE. IT'S ON THE EXISTING PAD. YEAH, THE STRUCTURE WOULD FLAG. YEAH, IT'S JUST GONNA GO OVER THE EXISTING PAD AND, AND IT'LL, AND THE WAY THEY'RE, THEY'RE GONNA CONSTRUCT IT. IT'S GONNA BE VERY HIGH GRADE. UM, IT'S NOT GONNA BE THESE STILL POSTS. THEY'RE GONNA BE, UM, HEAVY DUTY TREATED WOOD POST. I THINK, UH, I THINK THEY'RE A 12 BY 12, I BELIEVE. UM, AND THEY'RE GONNA HAVE, THE ROOF IS GONNA HAVE A PITCHED ROOF. IT'S GONNA HAVE SHINGLES, IT'S GONNA HAVE, UM, UH, UH, AN ATTIC. I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT IT'S GONNA HAVE AN ATTIC IN IT, AND IT, AND IT'S GONNA HAVE A UNDER, UH, AN OVERHEAD LIGHTING, WHICH I NEED, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PRETTY DARK. UM, THAT'S ANOTHER SAFETY FEATURE FROM, FROM IN MY BEHALF. UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT, IT, IT'S LIVING ALONE. YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU FEAR, UM, UH, BREAK-INS, HOME BREAK-INS, HOME INVASIONS. AND THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. HAVING THE LIGHTING WOULD BENEFIT ME SECURITY AND MENTALLY. UH, BUT AS WELL AS, UM, UH, THE, THE WAY IT'S GONNA BE BUILT, IT'S GONNA LOOK REALLY NICE. I MEAN, IF YOU SEE THE, THE, THE, THE BLUEPRINT, THE DESIGNER THAT THE ENGINEER TOLD ME, HE SAID THIS, THIS, I, I EXPECT THIS CONSTRUCTION'S GONNA RUN WELL OVER CLOSE TO $30,000 AND IT'S JUST A CARPORT. AND I DIDN'T WANT ANYTHING THAT ELABORATE. I JUST NEEDED SHELTER, YOU KNOW, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE VERY GREAT. THIS, UH, JW TURNER, THEY, UH, REALLY HAVE HELPED ME A LOT. THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. I HAD A QUESTION FOR MR. BUTLER. UM, SO IT DOES NOTICE GO OUT FOR AN ITEM LIKE THIS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, CORRECT? YES. THE, THE AND HAVE WE HEARD FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS EITHER WAY? NO, NOT YET. OKAY. JUST, JUST, OKAY. [02:50:01] CAN I ADD TO THAT? YES, YOU CAN. I'VE HAD COMPLIMENTS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE SIGN THAT THEY PUT IN MY FRONT YARD TO ANNOUNCE THIS MM-HMM . IS, IT'S HUGE. I KNOW. WE KNOW. YEAH, THEY'RE BIG. IT'S BIG. YEAH. AND IN FACT, THE WIND BLEW IT DOWN A COUPLE OF TIMES. THEY HAD TO RE RECONSTRUCT IT, BUT I'VE GOT NOTHING BUT COMPLIMENTS OF THE WAY THE HOME WAS BUILT AND THE WAY IT WAS DESIGNED. OKAY. AND IN FACT, I EVEN GAVE THE INFORMATION TO A COUPLE OF MY NEIGHBORS AND THEY'RE GONNA HELP THEM TOO. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. I ASSUME, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER, FOR JEFF? OKAY, QUESTIONS FOR MR. BUTLER. COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, WHAT IS THE BUILDING SETBACK? IS IT 25 FEET? AND THAT'S WHY THE HOUSE IS SO FAR BACK. SO IT'S REQUIRED TO BE THE SETBACK OF THE HOUSE ITSELF. I, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE, BUT THE REQUIRED, UH, SETBACK IS 20 FEET FOR A CARPORT. AND WHAT WILL IT BE? ZERO. IT'S RIGHT ON THE, THE PROPERTY. IT'S RIGHT ON THE LINE. THE, THE, THE REASON I ASK IS, AND, AND THIS HAS TO BROAD RELEVANCE, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, CARPORTS GARAGES BECOME LIVING STRUCTURES AND OVER TIME, AND IT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE QUESTION IS, IS THIS SOMETHING AS MR. UH, BALDWIN SAID THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD? I MEAN, IS THIS SOMETHING IF, IF YOU DO IT ONCE, EVERYBODY'S GONNA WANT IT AND REGARDLESS OF NEED AND, AND ALL THAT. AND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SYMPATHY. BUT FROM A BIG PICTURE QUESTION, ONCE WE DO THIS, IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR EVERYBODY. AND THAT BASICALLY WILL BE GIVING EVERYBODY A ZERO BUILDING LOT LINE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO THERE'S ALWAYS QUESTION, JUST A, JUST A QUESTION. I'M SORRY. WE GOTTA TALK AMONGST OURSELVES. YEAH. HERE. THAT'S A QUESTION FOR OKAY. COMMISSION. MR. BUTLER, WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE ONE TWO DOORS OVER? DID THEY BUILD IT WITH THE VARIANCE? THERE IS NO RECORD OF PERMITS FOR THAT. UM, IT MAY BE VERY OLD AND PREDATE ILMS, BUT I, I DIDN'T FIND ANY PERMIT RECORD. UH, STAFF IS HAS ASKED TO DEFER THIS AND I THINK IN THIS CASE A SITE VISIT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO DO TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS. SO, UM, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO DEFER ALMAN? IS THERE SECOND ROSENBERG? I'M SORRY, WHAT? ROSE ROSENBERG. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DEFERRAL SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. SO WE'LL BE BACK IN TWO WEEKS, MR. MURRAY. THANK YOU. UM, THE [V. Establish a public hearing date of March 2, 2023 ] NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ROMAN NUMERAL V FIVE FOUR. NO FIVE. YEAH. UM, WHICH IS TO ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF MARCH 2ND, 2023 FOR THE FOLLOWING ARTISANS, WESTHEIMER, BRU, POINT, CAP, ROCK, COTTAGES, DERAH HEIGHTS, REPL NUMBER ONE, FOREST WEST HOMES, HOMES ON AT SCHNEIDER STREET. JACKSON HILL, KIDS OR KIDS? UH, MASA AMINI, PLEX GARDENS, RANDOLPH IN LINCOLN REPL NUMBER ONE ROCK HOMES PLAZA, SUNTER, SECTION 25 PARTIAL REPL. NUMBER ONE, SUNTER SHORES DRIVE STREET, DEDICATION SECTION FOUR AND LIFT STATION NUMBER ONE, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER ONE, TOWN HOMES ON INDIANA AND WEST NOLL PLACE. IS THERE A MOTION TO SET MARCH 2ND FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION? CLARK SECOND JONES. JONES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. [VI. Public Comment ] DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? LONDON DAVIS. SAY THAT AGAIN. LONDON DAVIS. OKAY. LONDON DAVIS. MR. DAVIS? YES, I'M HERE. HI, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. YES. HI, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 1 47 FOSTER PLACE, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER 34. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW THE ESTIMATED IF THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE, WHEN IS THE ESTIMATED BILL START DATE AND ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE? UH, THAT IS INFORMATION WE DO NOT KNOW. IS THAT CORRECT? THIS IS JOHN LIA WITH STAFF. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION AGAIN, SIR? I COULDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU. OUR DATE OF BUILDING? YEAH. UH, YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY WE DO NOT HAVE THAT AT, AT THIS, THAT INFORMATION AT THIS POINT, THIS IS ONLY FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PREPARATION FOR FUTURE CONSTRUCTION. RIGHT? THIS IS VERY EARLY. DO YOU WANNA ANSWER THE QUESTION? THIS? OKAY, THIS IS VERY EARLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, THE PLATTING, IT'S JUST BASICALLY LINES ON A MAP. BUT, UM, IF YOU CAN, UH, ARE YOU ON A PHONE OR A COMPUTER? I'M ON A PHONE. OKAY. UM, CAN WE, UM, GET THE INFORMATION, UM, PERHAPS OF THE APPLICANT TO, UH, MR. DAVIS? OKAY. MR. DAVIS, CAN YOU, UH, MAYBE YOU DON'T WANNA GIMME A PHONE NUMBER HERE, ? YEAH. GIVE HIM UM, [02:55:01] TELEPHONE NUMBER. YEAH. WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE MAIN NUMBER? UH, EIGHT THREE TWO. MRS. YOU CAN CALL AND ME AT (832) 393-6600. HE ASK FOR JOHN CILLO AND I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HELP YOU. YES. ASK FOR JOHN CILLO, C-E-D-I-L-L-O AND AT THAT NUMBER, AND THEN HE CAN CONNECT YOU WITH THE, THE APPLICANT AND YOU CAN ASK THEM THE QUESTION DIRECTLY. WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER. OKAY. AWESOME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CLARK. YEAH, I, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY MY EARLIER COMMENT. I WASN'T, I WASN'T TRYING TO SLAM YOU UP, COMMISSIONER VICTOR . UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I HEARD ONCE OR TWICE SOME OF THE COMMENTS WE MAKE HERE, WHETHER WE TALK ABOUT DRAINAGE OR WE TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC, WE TALK ABOUT ALL THESE ISSUES. THEY COME BACK TO US WHEN PEOPLE WANT US TO DENY OR DEFER OR JUST SMACK SOMETHING DOWN BECAUSE PUBLIC DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THOSE COMMENTS. SO WHEN I, THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE NEW, DON'T KNOW ME. I HAVE, I DO SPEAK UP ALL THE TIME AND YOU'LL ALWAYS HEAR ME SAY, THAT'S NOT IN OUR PURVIEW. THAT'S NOT IN OUR PURVIEW BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO MISDIRECT THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND REALLY WHAT WE DO. IT'S, IT, I ALWAYS FEEL LIKE IT'S OUR JOB TO HELP EDUCATE PEOPLE AND I JUST, I DON'T LIKE TO GIVE PEOPLE A SENSE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO AND WE REALLY CAN'T DO IT. SO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME HAVE THAT MINUTE. THANK YOU. UM, ANY, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD. ROMAN NUMERAL SEVEN IS, UH, WE DO NOT NEED TO ACT ON BECAUSE COMMISSIONER TAHIR IS WITH US, WHICH TAKES US TO ADJOURNMENT. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOTION CLARK VICTOR? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.