[00:00:02]
SO,[Call to Order]
FIRST MISTAKE OF THE DAY.I PAID ATTENTION TO THE CLOCK.
CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION? IT'S 2:31 PM ON THURSDAY, APRIL 18TH, 2024.
THE MEETING OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION IS CALLED TO ORDER.
EXCUSE ME, I'M COMMISSION CHAIR LISA CLARK, AND I'LL BE, I WILL, EXCUSE ME.
GOTTA GET MY GLASSES ON AND I WILL CALL THE ROLE TO VERIFY OUR QUORUM.
COMMISSIONER ALLMAN IS GONNA BE ABSENT TODAY.
COMMISSIONER HEAS IS GONNA BE, UH, ABSENT TODAY.
COMMISSIONER ROBBINS HERE? YES.
COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG ROSENBERG IS HERE.
COMMISSIONER VERA BLAND PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER MANDA PKA AND JENNIFER OLIN.
OUR PLANNING COMMISSIONER, SEC COM PLANNING COMMISSION.
SECRETARY AND MYSELF ARE PRESENT.
WHO WAS THAT? COMMISSIONER VICTOR IS PRESENT VIRTUALLY.
OH, I SKIPPED YOU 'CAUSE I ALREADY SAID THAT.
AND MAN, UH, COMMISSIONER MAN.
PKA JUST WALKED IN AND PO PURTO IS NOW ON LINE TOO, OR NO, SHE WALKED IN THE DOOR.
MADAM CHAIR IS, UH, NEW COMMISSIONER MARTY STEIN PRESENT? NO.
UH, COMMISSIONER STEIN IS NOT PRESENT EITHER.
WELCOME AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY.
IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN A SPECIFIC ITEM, YOU CAN FIND THE, UH, FINAL AGENDA WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE.
ALL ADVANCE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED BY NOON YESTERDAY ARE INCLUDED WITH THE FINAL AGENDA.
IF YOU'RE WITH US HERE AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX AND WISH TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU FILL OUT A FORM, UH, AT THE DESK THERE, UH, AT, AT THE DOOR, AT THE ENTRY DOOR WITH STAFF, PLEASE.
WE ASK THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE CONNECTED BY PHONE OR COMPUTER TO PLEASE KEEP YOUR DEVICE MUTED UNTIL YOU ARE CALLED ON TO SPEAK.
ALSO, OUR VIDEO QUALITY IS MUCH BETTER IF YOU KEEP YOUR CAMERA OFF UNTIL YOU'RE SPEAKING.
[Director’s Report]
MOVING FORWARD NOW WITH THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M INTERIM INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
UM, THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND FREEWAY PLAN AMENDMENT CYCLE IS UNDERWAY.
UH, YOU CAN FIND DETAILS ON OUR WEBSITE.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS MAY 13TH TO JULY 5TH.
UM, I BELIEVE WE'LL BE HAVING OUR, UM, UH, WORKSHOP FOR YOU ON MAY 16TH, UH, BEFORE THE REGULAR, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND YOU'LL HAVE MORE DETAILS ON THAT IF YOU DON'T ALREADY.
UH, JUST A REMINDER THAT WE WILL BE GOING, UH, RETURNING TO ALL IN-PERSON MEETINGS ON MAY 16TH.
UM, THE, UH, IF ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WANTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETINGS SHOULD COME DOWN, THEY CAN SIGN UP TO SPEAK, UM, WHEN THEY ARRIVE.
UH, THERE'S NO ADVANCE, UH, SIGNING UP REQUIRED.
IF YOU DON'T WANNA COME DOWN, YOU'RE WELCOME TO PROVIDE COMMENT AS USUAL BY EMAIL OR BY PHONE, UM, OR SNAIL MAIL, AND WE WILL ENTER THAT INTO THE RECORD.
I THINK THAT CONCLUDES MY, UH, REPORT.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, THE PLANNING 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.
[Consideration of the April 4, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes]
THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 4TH MEETING ARE IN YOUR PACKET.IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? KLI MARS KLIK.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? ALL THOSE OPPOSED.
[00:05:01]
THIS ONE'S GONNA BE BUMPY, BUT I PROMISE IT'LL GET BETTER.[Platting Activities a & b]
ALONG TO PLANNING ACTIVITY.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SECTIONS A AND B ARE PRESENTED AS ONE GROUP, WHICH INCLUDES CONSENT AND REPLAY ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
SECTIONS A AND B ARE ITEMS ONE THROUGH 1 0 9 SECTION A.
CONSENT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS ONE THROUGH 61 AND SECTION B REPL ITEMS ARE NUMBER 62 THROUGH 1 0 9.
NO ITEMS NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSENT AND REPL ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
COMMISSIONERS, DO I HAVE ANYBODY THAT NEEDS TO, UM, CONSIDER, UH, AN ITEM SEPARATELY? OKAY, THEN I SHALL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS IN SECTION A AND B ONE THROUGH 1 0 9, OR DO I NEED TO DO THOSE SEPARATELY? OKAY.
I DID NOT ASK IF ANYONE HAD ANY CONSENT ITEMS THEY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IN THE AUDIENCE.
[c. Replats requiring Public Hearings with Notification (Dorianne Powe-Phlegm and Devin Crittle) ]
PUBLIC HEARINGS.SO BEFORE WE TAKE UP PUBLIC HEARINGS, LET ME QUICKLY GO OVER OUR RULES FOR PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
EVERY, FOR EVERYONE'S REFERENCE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S MEETING POLICIES AND REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ARE POSTED WITH EVERY AGENDA.
OUR RULES HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED WITH THE GOAL OF AFFORDING EVERYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO IN A FAIR AND EFFICIENT MANNER.
FOR THIS REASON, WE DO ENFORCE TIME LIMITS AND OTHER RULES.
PLEASE WAIT TO SPEAK UNTIL YOU'RE CALLED ON AND THEN CLEARLY STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
WHEN THE BELL RINGS, YOUR TIME IS UP AND YOU SHALL WRAP UP QUICKLY AT THAT POINT, UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS FOR COMMISSIONERS, YOUR TIME TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION IS CONCLUDED.
WE DO NOT ALLOW BACK AND FORTH DISCUSSION.
LET IS UNLESS IT IS RESPONSIVE TO A SPECIFIC QUESTION FROM A COMMISSIONER TO A PARTICULAR SPEAKER.
FOR EACH ITEM, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK FIRST AND THEN FOR REBUTTAL AT THE CONCLUSION OF ALL OTHER SPEAKERS.
PLEASE NOTE, DURING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS, THE RAISED HAND TOOL IS TO BE USED ONLY BY COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SHOULD USE THE CHAT TO SEEK RECOGNITION.
PLEASE KEEP YOUR PHONE OR YOUR COMPUTER ON MUTE UNLESS THE CHAIR HAS CALLED ON YOU TO SPEAK OR UNLESS THE CHAIR HAS MADE A GENERAL RULE.
CALL FOR ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS.
IF YOU'RE ON THE PHONE, USE STAR SIX TO UNMUTE AND AGAIN TO REMU WHEN YOU ARE DONE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE PROCEDURES, I INVITE YOU TO CONSULT THE RULES POSTED WITH THE AGENDA OR THE CALL OR CALL THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 8 3 2 3 9 360 600.
WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM ONE 10 IS DSR INVESTMENT AT FOSTER.
THE SITE IS LOCATED EAST ALONG FOSTER STREET, NORTH OF DREFUS STREET AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS THE REASON FOR THE REPLIES TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS THAT NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLA OF THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS.
PLAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT PER THE CC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON VIRTUAL? NO.
COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? IS THERE A MOTION? SIGLER SECOND JONES.
ITEM ONE 11 IS FOSTER VILLAGE.
THE SIGN IS LOCATED EAST ALONG ENGLAND STREET NORTH OF DRA FIFTH STREET AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, UM, OFF OF A SHARED DRIVEWAY.
THERE ARE NO VARIS REQUESTED WITH THIS PLAT.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS PLAT.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT PER THE CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
[00:10:01]
PUBLIC HEARING.IS THERE ANYONE VIRTUALLY THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE VIRTUALLY IF, UM, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, I'LL, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? MADAM CHAIR? YES, MS. FLM? UM, OUR PACKET IS SHOWING TWO LOTS, NOT THREE.
IS THAT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ARE WE SEEING TWO LOTS OR THREE? THREE.
THERE ARE TWO, BUT THAT WAS, I THINK THE ONE BEFORE YOU'RE ON ONE 10.
UM,
ITEM ONE 12 IS LINDA VISTA ESTATES.
THE SITE IS LOCATED SOUTH ALONG LINDA VISTA ROAD, NORTH OF NORTH OF RICHLAND AND, UH, LAY ROAD AND HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS.
THE REASON FOR REPLAY IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
REVIEW BY LEGAL HAS INDICATED THAT THIS PLAT WOULD NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS.
PLAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO PROVE THE PLAT PER THE C BBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I MEAN, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
POURS, UH, MOTION POURS PER SECOND ROBBINS.
ITEM NUMBER ONE 13 IS MAGNOLIA LAKEFRONT.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS ALONG THE SAN JACINTO RIVER SOUTH OF KINGWOOD DRIVE AND WEST OF FM 2100.
THE APPLICANT IS REPL PART OF THREE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS INTO FOUR LOTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS PLAT.
RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES TO THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM ONE 13.
DO I HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? WE DO HAVE A VIRTUAL.
UM, THERE IS A VIRTUAL SPEAKER.
CHRISTIE JONES, ARE YOU WITH US? YES, MA'AM.
YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
UM, OUR AREA, WE ARE EXTREMELY CONCERNED WITH THE FLOODING.
ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES ARE WITHIN THE FLOOD ZONE.
ALL OF THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE BEING REPLANTED LATELY IN THIS AREA ARE BEING BUILT THREE TO FOUR FEET HIGHER THAN THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
AND WE DO NOT HAVE DITCHES IN THIS AREA.
OUR PROPERTIES ARE BEING FLOODED OUT.
IT'S CAUSING SILTING IN THE ACCESS POINTS TO THE WATERWAY CAUSING THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE OUT HERE AND HAVE LIVED OUT HERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
THE, THE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ABILITY TO GET IN AND OUT ACCESS POINTS.
OUR PROPERTIES, LIKE I SAID, ARE BEING FLOODED.
OUR BULKHEADS ARE BEING DAMAGED BECAUSE WE'RE CON CONSTANTLY UNDERWATER.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? YES, MA'AM.
UM, UH, I JUST WANNA EXPLAIN THAT THIS COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE, UH, FLOODING IN OUR PURVIEW.
BUT WHAT I'D ASK FOR YOU TO DO, CAN YOU PUT YOUR INFORMATION IN THE CHAT AND I'LL HAVE STAFF GET SOMEONE, UH, GET SOME INFORMATION TO YOU FOR SOMEONE YOU CAN CONTACT IN PUBLIC WORKS TO FOLLOW THIS THROUGH PERMITTING, AND THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE, UM, TAKEN A LOOK AT.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? OKAY, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION? SEEING NONE, UH, IS THERE A MOTION? GARZA MORRIS GARZA.
[00:15:01]
SECTION ONE, PARTIAL REPL NUMBER SIX.THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS SOUTH OF 43RD STREET IN WEST OF ELLA.
THE APPLICANT IS REPL ONE WHOLE LOT INTO ONE SINGLE FAMILY LOT.
THE REASON FOR THE REPL IS TO REVISE THE SIDE BUILDING LINE FROM 25 FEET TO 15 FEET.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM, AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PLAT WILL NOT VIOLATE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY AS LONG AS THE NEW HOME FACES NORTH TOWARDS ALTHEA DRIVE.
LEGAL HAS DETERMINED THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR OAK FOREST SECTION ONE STATE THAT A CORNER LOT MUST FACE, FACE THE STREET DESIGNATED BY THE OAK FOREST CORPORATION.
PER THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR A CORNER LOT, THERE IS A 25 FOOT FRONT, 15 FOOT STREET SIDE AND FIVE FOOT SIDE PROPERTY BUILDING LINE ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT.
THIS LOT WAS GIVEN A 25 FOOT FRONT AND 25 STREET SIDE BUILDING LINE, AND THIS PLAT SEEKS TO REDUCE THAT SIDE BUILDING LINE TO 15 FEET.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED MORE THAN A DOZEN COMMENTS AGAINST THE RE PLAT ON THE BASIS OF NEIGHBORHOOD AESTHETICS AND SAFETY OF PEDESTRIANS.
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.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM ONE 14.
AND THE FIRST SPEAKER THAT I HAVE ON AGENDA ONE, ITEM ONE 14 IS ANDREW TORRENT.
AND JUST A REMINDER, WE'VE GOT QUITE A FEW SPEAKERS, SO TWO MINUTES.
AND YOU'LL HEAR THE BELL RING.
AND AGAIN, MY NAME IS ANDREW TORRENT, T-O-R-R-A-N-T.
UM, SO MY FAMILY AND I LIVE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM, UH, THIS CORNER LOT.
UH, WE ALSO OWN, UH, TWO NEIGHBORING LOTS, UH, ADJACENT.
AND SO WE'RE HIGHLY AFFECTED, UM, BY THIS POTENTIAL REPL IN A NUMBER OF WAYS.
UH, I AM A HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL LAWYER.
I DEAL WITH, UM, UH, FACILITY SITING AND DEED RESTRICTION, UH, ACTIVITIES AT WORK.
AND SO I'VE DUG IN A LITTLE ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT, UM, AND REACHED OUT TO THE BUILDER AND THE, UH, UH, ENGINEER, UH, THE SURVEYOR AS WELL.
YOU KNOW, THEY'RE DESCRIBING THIS TO ME AS SIMPLY CORRECTING AN ERROR ON THE ORIGINAL, UH, MAP, AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S ACCURATE.
THE ORIGINAL MAP WAS PLOTTED OUT.
UH, THE DEDICATION AND AND MAP WAS IN AUGUST OF 1946.
UH, THEY WERE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THE LINES THAT THEY DREW, UH, ACROSS SECTION ONE.
AND THEN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT DO ALLOW A 15 FOOT SETBACK ON A SIDE OF A CORNER LOT ARE PERMISSIVE.
THEY'RE NOT MANDATORY AS THE BUILDER.
AND, UH, HIS, HIS SURVEYOR, UM, INDICATE MEANING, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT THE ORIGINAL MAP WOULD BE WRONG FOR ALL OF THESE LOTS.
AND I DID SUBMIT, UH, COMMENTS IN, UH, IN ADVANCE, UH, INCLUDING, UH, JUST MY BIRD'S EYE VIEW WITH A HIGHLIGHTER, UH, GOING THROUGH ALL OF SECTION ONE TO IDENTIFY THE LOTS, UH, IN THE SECTION THAT HAVE THIS UNIQUE 25 FOOT SETBACK ON BOTH THE FRONT AND THE SIDE, THERE ARE 23 OF THOSE THAT I'VE IDENTIFIED.
THERE ARE OTHER LOTS, CORNER LOTS THAT DO HAVE AND ALLOW THE 15 FOOT SETBACK ON THAT ORIGINAL MAP.
AND THOSE ARE VERY SPECIFIC TO LOTS THAT ARE, UH, ON ESSENTIALLY STRAIGHT STREETS THAT, UH, TEE INTO ANOTHER ONE OR CONTINUE ON WITH ANOTHER ONE.
AND THAT 15 FOOT BUILDING, UH, SETBACK IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
UNLIKE THE 23 HERE, UH, THAT I'VE IDENTIFIED.
AND THIS IS ONE, I OWN ANOTHER ONE.
UM, THE ACTUAL, THE UNIQUE OH PORTION OF THE LOT IS, UH, GO AHEAD AND WRAP UP.
IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE LARGER, LOTS ON CURVED STREETS AND THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORING BUILDING LINES, SO THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERATION.
QUESTION FOR THE, ANY QUESTIONS? I JUST WANTED TO HAVE LEGAL WEIGH IN BEFORE THERE'S MORE SPEAKERS ON THIS SUBJECT MATTER.
I THOUGHT WE THANK YOU, HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY.
IS THERE A SPECIFIC QUESTION? SURE.
THE SPECIFIC QUESTION IS IF HE'S CORRECT THAT IT'S PERMISSIVE AND NOT MANDATORY.
DOES THE, DID THE DEED RESTRICTIONS INDICATE TO WHOM THE DISCRETION IS GRANTED REGARDING THAT PERMISSION? THE DEED RESTRICTION SAYS OAK FOREST CORPORATION FOR CORNER LOTS WOULD DESIGNATE WHICH WAY, WHICH WAY THE, UH, RESIDENTS WOULD FRONT IT.
NE OAK FOREST NEVER SPECIFICALLY SAID FOR THIS LOT OR ANY CORNER LOTS WHICH WAY THEY WOULD FACE.
AND SO IF, IF IT IS PERMISSIVE TO ALLOW A 15 FOOT SETBACK INSTEAD OF A 25, IS THAT NOT THE HO A'S DISCRETION? IS IT THE LANDOWNER'S DISCRETION? IT'S
[00:20:01]
THE 15 FOOT SIDE BUILDING LINE IS, I WOULDN'T SAY OKAY.IT IS PERMISSIVE IN THAT IT WAS PLATTED 25 FEET, BUT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS SPECIFICALLY, SAY FOR A SIDE STREET BUILDING LINE IS 15 FEET.
SO IF THAT'S WHAT THE OWNER OF THE LOT DECIDES THAT THEY WILL THIS 15 FEET FOOT SIDE BUILDING LINE, THAT'S WHAT'S DESIGNATED IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE THAT.
COULD, COULD I ADD JUST ONE THING? NOT SO MUCH ON THE DEED RESTRICTION SIDE, BUT STATE LAW ALLOWS SPECIFICALLY THE CITY OF HOUSTON BASED ON ITS POPULATION TO ALLOW A, AN AMENDMENT OR REPL TO TAKE OFF A RESTRICTION THAT IS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT.
IN THAT CASE, THIS IS THE 25 FOOT LOT LINE ON THE PRO SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THEY DON'T WANT TO BE THE SIDE.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THAT POST DATED THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT AS, AS NOTED BY MS. WOODS, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS DO ALLOW A SMALLER, UM, SIDE YARD LINE THAN, THAN IS SHOWN ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT.
AND STATE LAW ALLOWS THE REMOVAL OF THAT OR THE AMENDMENT OF THAT.
IT'S NOT TO CORRECT A MISTAKE.
I THINK THAT'S A MISSTATEMENT BY SOMEONE.
UM, BUT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S ALLOWED BY, BY STATE LAW, SO MM-HMM
THANK YOU MS. MICKELSON, FOR CLARITY AND FOR CLARITY.
WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE ABILITY NOT TO APPROVE IT IF IT MEETS THAT CRITERIA.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS GLORIA GARCIA.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
I LIVE AT 1250 ALTHEA, HAVE BEEN THERE GOING ON 60 YEARS THIS YEAR.
AND, UH, MY, UH, ISSUE WITH THIS IS SAFETY.
I LIVE, UH, ON A ALTHEA, WHICH IS A LITTLE STREET.
KINDLEY COMES AROUND AND, AND DEAD ENDS THERE.
AND, UH, IF THEY KEEP, IF THEY DON'T SEE THE STOP SIGN, THEY WILL GO IN MY HOME.
IT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE THERE WAS A STOP SIGN THERE, BUT THIS IS MAINLY PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, THAT DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'LL BE A STOP SIGN THERE AND, AND, AND TURN, AND I'M JUST AFRAID THEY WILL NOT SEE THE STOP SIGN AND, UH, GO IN MY HOME.
AND I HAVE PICTURES OF, IT'S KIND OF AN UNUSUAL, UH, SITUATION BECAUSE I HAVE PICTURES WHERE MY HOUSE IS AND WHERE THE STOP SIGN IS.
AND IF, UH, CAN WE DO THE DOCU DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE? SURE.
YOU CAN KEEP ON WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR THE CAMERA ALSO.
UH, SO MY ISSUE IS SAFETY FOR MY HOME.
I, WE'RE ELDERLY, WE'RE, UH, NOT ABLE TO MOVE AS FAST AS SOMEBODY THAT'S YOUNGER THAN US.
SO THAT'S MY WHOLE ISSUE IS THE SAFETY, UH, UH, CONCERN FOR, FOR MY HOME AND FOR CARS COMING IN IF, UH, THE HOUSE IS ALLOWED TO BE BUILT CLOSER TO THE STREET AND, AND THEY MISS THAT STOP SIGN THAT IS THERE.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS KATIE CHATTERTON.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
HOPEFULLY IT DOESN'T COUNT TILL MY TWO MINUTES.
NO, UH, I LIVE AT 1251 KINLEY LANE.
AND IMMEDIATELY OPPOSITE THE PLATTERED QUESTION, I WANNA RAISE, UH, SIX QUICK ISSUES FOR YOU.
THE FIRST IS THE STOP SIGN AS MS. GLORIA JUST IDENTIFIED BY MOVING THE PLOT LINE CLOSER TO THE STOP SIGN IN THAT CORNER, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LINE OF SIGHT LOOKING AROUND THAT STOP SIGN WITH A, WITH WHATEVER A BUILDING OR A FENCE LINE.
MUCH CLOSER IS GONNA BE HARDER FOR VEHICLES.
PEOPLE CUT THROUGH TO ELLA ONTO SIX 10.
IF YOU'RE A DRIVER AT THAT STOP SIGN, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE THE CORNER AS WELL.
THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS AT THIS TIME.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM MS. GLORIA'S PICTURE, OF COURSE, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO PLACE A SIDEWALK.
IT'S GONNA BE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE.
[00:25:01]
CHILDREN WHO LIVE ON KINLEY LANE.MANY OF THEM WALK TO SCHOOL, INCLUDING THE OAK FOREST AND THE MIDDLE SCHOOL.
THOSE CHILDREN WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE SIDEWALK THAT'S BUILT.
THEY'RE TAUGHT TO WALK AGAINST TRAFFIC.
I'M CONCERNED THE CHILDREN AREN'T GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE AROUND THE SIDEWALK SIGN EITHER BECAUSE OF THE, THE NATURE OF THE BUILDING BEING CLOSER TO THE KINLEY LANE.
THIRD, AESTHETICS, OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE A NUMBER OF HOUSES ON THIS STREET FOR, FROM A RESIDENT'S POINT OF VIEW, I WOULD IDEALLY LIKE TO MAINTAIN THE AESTHETICS THAT WE HAVE THERE.
IF YOU BUILD A HOUSE CLOSER TO, IT'S GOING TO POTENTIALLY AFFECT THE PROPERTY VALUES.
THERE'S NO REASON FOR THIS BUILDER AT THIS POINT THAT HAS GIVEN US, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD A BIGGER HOUSE FOR MORE PROFIT.
I DON'T THINK THE SAFETY OF THE STREET REGARDING THAT STOP SIGN, THAT INTERSECTION IS ENOUGH REASON TO WANT TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO BUILD JUST FOR BIGGER.
FAIR ENOUGH IF IT WAS A FAMILY ISSUE NEEDING, UM, AN ACCESS OR SOME OTHER POINT.
AND WE'VE SPOKEN TO THE BUILDER AT LENGTH.
THIS BUILDER BOUGHT THIS THOUGHT KNOWING IT WAS A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IN HCAD.
HIS OWN ENGINEER NOW SHOWS IT AS 12,000 SQUARE FEET.
IF YOU'RE JUST BUILDING BIGGER, THEN THAT'S, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT A BUILDER WANTS TO DO.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE BUILDER BUILT KNOWING WHAT THE LOT SIZE WAS HERE.
UH, AND FINALLY, EVERYBODY ELSE ON THAT LOT HAS COMPLIED WITH THE RULES.
AND I JUST THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT UNFAIR.
AND THE POINT OF THE COMMISSION IS TO MAINTAIN ORDER.
AND IF YOU ALLOW PEOPLE TO MAKE A VARIATION, THEN WHAT WAS THE POINT IN THE RULES IN THE FIRST PLACE.
ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS LEONARD SIMON.
I, UH, LIVE AT 1242 KINLEY LANE.
I JOIN IN THE, UH, COMMENTS MADE BY ALL OF THE OTHER HOMEOWNERS ON THAT STREET.
UH, MOST OF THE LOTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ARE 7,500 SQUARE FEET.
HE'S GOT PLENTY OF ROOM TO BUILD A HOUSE, UM, WITH THE SETBACKS THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED, UH, AND SHOULD BE ENFORCED.
THAT CORNER IS ALREADY FLOODING.
UM, THERE'S WATER THAT BUILDS UP, UH, EVERY TIME IT RAINS.
AND IF YOU TAKE AWAY, UM, 15 FEET, UH, OR 10 FEET, UH, OFF THE SIDE OF THAT HOUSE, UH, AND THEN YOU ADD A SIDEWALK ON THERE, YOU'RE ADDING CEMENT.
UM, AS TO WHICH THERE WILL BE NO DRAINAGE IN THAT AREA.
AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE DRAINAGE ISSUES ARE GONNA BE FROM MY PROPERTY, WHICH IS CONTIGUOUS TO THIS, UH, TRACT OF LAND.
UH, I DON'T THINK THIS, THIS, UM, UH, HONORABLE ASSEMBLY SHOULD APPROVE IT.
UH, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU DENY IT.
ANY QUESTIONS? MR. MR? JUST TO COMMENT, SIR, THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IS THE SAME, WHETHER THE SETBACK IS 25 OR 35 OR 10.
THE, THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IS EXACTLY THE SAME.
SO THAT THIS DOESN'T IMPACT THE ABILITY FOR HIM TO BUILD A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SPACE.
THE IMPERVIOUS, LIKE I SAY, THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IS THE SAME.
AND SO WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON THE SIDEWALKS.
HE'S NOT, HE WOULD BE REQUIRED ON BOTH SIDES, BOTH THE SIDE AND THE FRONT.
BUT HE COULD PAY A FEE IN LIEU OF SIDEWALK, WHICH I IMAGINE THAT THEY WILL DO SINCE NO ONE ELSE HAS SIDEWALKS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THERE MAY NOT BE SIDEWALKS THERE.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
I MEAN, WHEN YOU SAY THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THE
IT'S THE SAME WHETHER THE SETBACK IS AT 25 OR 15, IT DOESN'T, OR FIVE, IT WOULDN'T MATTER IF WE GAVE HIM A ZERO SIDE SETBACK.
THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT HE CAN BUILD UPON IS EXACTLY THE SAME BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT.
SO THE SIZE OF THE SETBACK DOESN'T IMPACT THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE THAT HE CAN BUILD THERE.
THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE DETERMINES THAT.
WELL, AGAIN, I'M, I'M NOT FOLLOWING THAT.
UH, UH, I MEAN, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, HE CAN BUILD NOW AT 15 FEET.
HE CAN HAVE A, A, A FOUNDATION THAT, THAT IS 15 FEET FROM THE, UM, UH, FROM THE STREET HE CAN.
BUT ON HIS 12,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, THERE'S A MAXIMUM SIZE THAT HE CAN BUILD ON THE FIRST FLOOR THAT WOULD COVER THE PERCENTAGE OF HIS LOT.
AND THAT DOESN'T CHANGE WHETHER THE SETBACK IS 0, 10, 15 OR 25.
MAYBE IT WOULD HELP IF WE HAD OUR, UH, PUBLIC WORKS REPRESENTATIVE.
HE'S RIGHT BEHIND YOU, MR. SIMON, I'M SORRY.
HE'LL GET WITH YOU AND MAYBE, HOPEFULLY, UH, HELP YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE SAYING UP HERE.
IT WOULD HELP YOU WITH CLARIFICATION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARY JANE SIMON.
MY NAME IS MARY JANE SIMON, S-I-M-O-N.
UM, I LIVE, UH, RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
UM, AND I FEEL THERE ARE MANY ISSUES, UM, MANY OF WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED.
[00:30:01]
THE STOP SIGN, THE, UH, VISIBILITY FOR CHILDREN AND PEDESTRIANS.WE WALK THE AREA ALL THE TIME.
UM, THE AESTHETICS, UH, THIS WOULD DEFINITELY AFFECT THE AESTHETICS OF THE WHOLE STREET.
IT WOULD AFFECT US AND THE TORRANCE IN PARTICULAR.
UH, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE COMING OUT AFFECT ALL THE PEOPLE ON, ON ATHEA CLOSE TO THE HOUSE.
IT WOULD JUST LOOK LIKE AN EYESORE.
UH, THIRDLY, UH, THEY KNEW THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE SETBACKS, AND THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR TO OTHER SETBACKS IN THE AREA FOR CORNER, LOTS OF THIS SIZE.
SO IT'S NOT SOME FLUKE FOR THIS ONE LOT.
UM, ALSO, UM, THIS VARIANCE IS NOT NECESSARY BECAUSE A LOT IS PLENTY LARGE TO BUILD A VERY GOOD SIZE HOUSE.
ALSO, THIS BUILDER, IT HAS QUESTIONABLE, IS HAD QUESTIONABLE DEALINGS IN THE PAST.
UH, THEY, THE HOUSE WASN'T TORN DOWN.
THEN THEY TORE IT DOWN, PUSHED DOWN WITH AN EXCAVATOR, VERY LARGE PINE TREE, PUT OUT THE POWER TO A HUNDRED HOUSES IN THE AREA.
HAD TO HAVE THE ELECTRIC COMPANY COME BACK, REWIRE THE WHOLE AREA.
ALSO DAMAGED OUR ROOF SET, SPARKS OFF ON OUR ROOF, AND, UM, PULLED DOWN OUR FENCE, DAMAGED SOME OF THE BRICK.
SO I, I'VE GOT REAL QUESTIONS AS TO WHY THIS BUILDER IS DOING THIS AND THE KIND OF NONINTEREST HE HAS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER? WELL, YEAH, BUT I'M, I'M SUPPOSED TO BE SPEAKING AT I, SORRY.
CAN YOU, WHAT'S NOT A COMM, UH, QUESTION ON A MINUTE.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S MUTED.
CAN YOU MUTE IT THERESA? THANKS.
I GUESS JUST A, A COMMENT SO THAT WE'RE ALL SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE.
'CAUSE SEVERAL SPEAKERS HAVE MENTIONED A VARIANCE.
THERE IS NO VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THIS CORRECT AT ALL.
SO I JUST WANNA, YOU KNOW, REPL, IT'S A REPL, BUT THERE'S NO VARIANCE REQUEST, WHICH IS WHY IS THE SHELL APPROVED? I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE, EVERYBODY'S CLEAR ON THAT.
'CAUSE IT'S COME UP A COUPLE TIMES ALREADY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MORRIS.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
UH, I'M HERE TO KIND OF ECHO A LOT OF THE SAME CONCERNS THAT YOU'VE KIND OF JUST HEARD.
I DO BELIEVE THAT, UH, IF THE REPL WERE GRANTED THAT THERE IS A BIG RISK, THAT, UM, VISIBILITY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED.
AS KATIE HAD MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE'S A LOT OF CHILDREN ON THE STREET.
MY LITTLE DAUGHTER LIKES TO RUN TO THE PARK.
THIS IS ON THE WAY TO THE PARK.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE TIMES SHE KIND OF RUNS IN THE STREET.
SHE LIKES TO RIDE HER CAR OR BIKE.
BUT THIS IS, UH, YOU KNOW, I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS OF, UM, VISIBILITY BEING REDUCED.
ALTHEA IS, YOU HAD HEARD, UH, MS. GARCIA SAY BEFORE, IT'S A BUSY STREET.
UH, IT'S A THIRST FLOW THROUGH STREET.
UM, PEOPLE COULD BE MAKING TURNS.
THERE'S JUST, WITHOUT THAT VISIBILITY, I DO HAVE CONCERNS OF SAFETY FOR CHILDREN, WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO SCHOOL, THE PARK, WHATEVER.
UM, THE OTHER ALTERNATIVES GO DOWN ELLA, WHICH IS NOT EVEN NOWHERE NEAR SAFETY.
UM, THE OTHER CONCERN IS YOU ALSO MENTIONED, PEOPLE HAVE MENTIONED AESTHETICS.
YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S, MY HOUSE IS RELATIVELY NEW AS BUILT LAST YEAR.
WE HAVE A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND ALSO ARE ON THE 25 FOOT, UH, SETBACK.
THERE'S NO REASON FOR THIS BUILDER TO HAVE TO MOVE TO A 15 FOOT SETBACK.
UM, AND TO CORRECT A POINT THAT WAS MADE EARLIER.
I DO HAVE A SIDEWALK ON THE STREET, SO THERE ARE SOME SIDEWALKS.
UM, AND SO THOSE ARE MY REALLY TWO BIG MAIN CONCERNS.
UM, YOU KNOW, THAT I WANTED TO VOICE RIGHT NOW.
THANK, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, DID YOU HAVE COMMENTS? I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THE AUDIENCE AND THE PEOPLE ON THE TEAMS ARE, ARE HEARING US.
WE UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, BUT THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE SETBACK IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON FOR EVERY LOT IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON IS 15 BY 15.
THIS LOT MORE THAN EXCEEDS THAT WITH A 25 AND 15 FOOT SETBACK.
IF HE HAD A 15 FOOT SETBACK ON BOTH SIDES, IT WOULD MEET THAT CRITERIA.
THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE IS 15 BY 15.
SO THIS FAR EXCEEDS WHAT'S ACCEPTABLE IN THE ENTIRE CITY OF HOUSTON.
JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HEARD YOU, BUT IT FAR EXCEEDS THE CITY ORDINANCE AND THE CITY CODES ALREADY AT A MINIMUM.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT, I, I THINK WHAT THE QUESTION IS, IS WHETHER THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
AND THEN WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
BUT, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE FROM THE LEGAL TEAM THAT THEY'VE REVIEWED IT AND DETERMINED THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE NOT REQUIRING A 25 FOOT SETBACK ON THE SIDE, ON THE SIDE.
AND SO, YEAH, I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE I, I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY ISSUES AS WELL.
I FEEL LIKE MY HANDS ARE TIED.
[00:35:01]
EMPATHIZE.UM, BUT IT, BUT WHEN IT'S, UM, A SHALL APPROVE ITEM, WE MUST APPROVE AS A, AS A BODY BY CITY ORDINANCE WE'RE REQUIRED TO.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER COLVARD.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, OUR NEXT SPEAKER YEAH, IS STACEY VENEMAN.
HI, MS. VENEMAN, COULD YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? SURE.
UM, I, I JUST WANTED TO TAG ALONG WITH SOMETHING THAT LEGAL WAS DISCUSSING ABOUT THE TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS BETWEEN THE SIDE SETBACK, 25 FOOT ON THE PLAT AND 15 FOOT PER THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES THROUGHOUT OAK FOREST AND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WHERE THERE IS THIS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN SECTION SIX, THERE'S A 10 FOOT ON THE PLAT, BUT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS STATE 15.
SO THE CITY OF HOUSTON DOES ENFORCE THE 15 FOOT SIDE SETBACK IN THAT INSTANCE BECAUSE IT IS THE, UM, IT IS THE MORE RESTRICTIVE ONE.
HOW COME THAT DOES NOT APPLY IN THIS INSTANCE WHERE THE 25 FOOT ON THE PLAT IS MORE RESTRICTIVE? THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION.
MS. WOODS WILL ARM WRESTLE FOR THE ANSWER.
WELL, AS FAR AS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE CONCERNED, USUALLY THE PLAT IS FILED FIRST AND THEN THE DEVELOPER COMES IN AND FILES THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
WHAT THEY PUT IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS CONTROL OVER WHAT THEY PUT ON THE PLAT.
SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT THE CITY OF HOUSTON IS ENFORCING THE MORE RESTRICTIVE DEED RESTRICTION.
WHAT THEY'RE ENFORCING IS WHAT'S IN THE WRITTEN DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND IN THE CASE YOU CITED IT, SO HAPPENS TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MS. FINMAN? IT DOES.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M QUITE SATISFIED THAT WITH THAT, BUT
UM, I GUESS IT, IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHICH WAS FILED FIRST.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO, NO, NO.
THE DEED RESTRICTIONS TRUMP WHAT IS ON THE PLA.
SO THAT IS INHERENT OF DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT THEY WILL TRUMP THE PLAT IN, IN, IN ALL CASES OR JUST INSIDE IN TERMS OF SIDE SETBACKS? IT IN ALL CASES, YEAH.
DOES THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CANNOT APPROVE A REPL THAT VIOLATES DEED RESTRICTIONS? WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS AN APPLICANT WHO WANTS TO MEET YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS HAPPEN TO BE LESS STRINGENT THAN WHAT IS SHOWN ON THE PLAT.
AND BY LAW, HE CAN AMEND THAT, UM, PURSUANT TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON RULES.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS WILLIAM MOSS.
UM, I LIVE A COUPLE STREETS OR A COUPLE BLOCKS DOWN FROM, OR HOUSES DOWN FROM THIS LOCATION.
UM, I, I'M NOT GONNA SIT HERE AND REGURGITATE EVERYTHING THAT THEY'VE ALREADY SAID.
UM, AND Y'ALL HAVE KIND OF MADE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS ABOUT THE REPL.
UM, AND, AND I WANNA FOCUS SOMETHING ON WHAT YOU SAID.
UH, MAYBE Y'ALL DON'T CONSIDER SAFETY IN, IN THIS, IN THIS FORUM, BUT JUST ASK YOURSELVES BEFORE YOU VOTE, IF SAFETY'S IMPORTANT TO YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN AT HOME AT WHERE YOU LIVE, BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME.
AND WE WALK THE STREETS UP AND DOWN ALL THE TIME.
AND IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER, EDWARD, ON WHAT THE 15 FEET IS BECAUSE I LIVED IN ANOTHER HOUSE OFF OF PATTERSON AND MARINA, UH, YEARS AGO FOR, FOR 15 YEARS.
AND I HAD THOSE SAME RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND, AND IT WASN'T A BIG DEAL.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T HAVE KIDS AT THE TIME, AND IT WAS, IT WAS FINE.
SO DOES EVERYBODY THAT'S ON THIS CALL.
SO DOES EVERYBODY THAT'S IN THIS BUILDING, UH, AND MANY OTHERS.
AND I'VE WITNESSED SCHOOL BUSES, UH, CEMENT TRUCKS THAT ARE BUILDING HOUSES.
UH, I'VE WITNESSED U-P-S-U-S-P-S, I'VE NEARLY GOTTEN FIGHTS WITH MOST OF THESE PEOPLE FOR SPEEDING DOWN THIS STREET.
[00:40:01]
COMPLAINED ABOUT HER HOUSE, HAVING A CAR RUN INTO IT, IT'S A LEGITIMATE CONCERN.IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE STOP SIGN, SAFETY HAS TO BE A FACTOR IN THIS.
THERE IS NO PROPERTY TAX ADVANTAGE FOR THE CITY TO GRANT THIS PERMISSION.
YOU CAN BUILD A, A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE ON A SMALLER LOT THAN THIS GUY HAS AVAILABLE TO HIM.
AND YOU'RE STILL GONNA GET THE AMOUNT EIGHT THAT COMES WITH THAT, WITH THAT PROPERTY TAX.
SO SAFETY IS MORE OF THE CONCERN IN THIS THAN IT IS ABOUT A DEED RESTRICTION OF 15 FEET.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I, I WOULD JUST SAY, SIR, WE, WE HEAR YOU.
IT, IT MEETS THE CURRENT CRITERIA.
THERE ARE OTHER MECHANISMS GETTING WITH YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER AND LOOKING INTO SPEED BUMPS OR ADDITIONAL SURVEILLANCE OR THINGS THAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN THERE.
AND, AND LISTEN, I, I'M WITH YOU.
IN FACT, I'M AN ENGINEER, ONE OF MY GOOD FRIENDS THAT'S, THAT I FINISHED ENGINEERING WITH.
I'VE ALREADY DECIDED THAT I'M GONNA PAY 'EM ABOUT FIVE TO 10 GRAND OUTTA MY OWN POCKET, CONTRIBUTING IT TO THE UNIVERSITY TO DESIGN A SPEED BUMP.
THAT WOULD BE STOP CARS FROM SPEEDING RIGHT THERE.
BECAUSE I DON'T, WE'VE ALREADY TRIED THE SPEED BUMPS AND IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE AND NOBODY'S APPROVED ANY OF IT.
IT'S, IT'S A FACTOR AND IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS VIRTUAL STELLA TANG.
MS. TANG, GOOD? YES, I'M HERE.
UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, UH, MY NAME'S STELLA TANG, TANG.
I LIVE ON 1 3 2 7, OTHE SEVERAL HOUSES DOWN FROM THE LOT IN QUESTION.
AND, UM, I WANTED TO FIRST OF ALL ECHO A LOT OF THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS.
UM, YOU KNOW, SENTIMENT WHEN IT COMES TO SAFETY OF THE CHILDREN, THE PEDESTRIANS, UM, JUST KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT PUSHING BACK THE, UH, SETBACK IS GOING TO PUSH OUR KIDS FURTHER INTO THE STREETS.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO SPEED BUMPS.
I HEAR, YOU KNOW, THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION.
UM, THE THING IS, WE DON'T HAVE IT AND THE KIDS ARE USED TO WHAT THE CURRENT SETBACK IS AND, YOU KNOW, JUST INCREASING THE BUILDING LINE WILL PUSH THEM FURTHER ONTO, YOU KNOW, THE STREET AND GIVING THIS THE SPEEDING CARS, WHICH HAPPENS REALLY ALL THE TIME AS RESIDENTS.
AND ONE THING I WANTED TO URGE THE COM, UH, COMMISSION TO CONSIDER IS TO WEIGHING THE PUBLIC THE BENEFITS TO THE PUBLIC, WHICH HERE I DON'T SEE ANY, AND THE LIKELY HARM CAUSED FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, SEVERE, UH, SAFETY CONCERN.
AND WHAT ARE WE REALLY GAINING HERE FROM A PUBLIC POLICY PERSPECTIVE? IS IT JUST FOR THE MERE SAKE OF SOME CONTRACTORS PECUNIARY GAINS HERE? UM, I UNDERSTAND THE RULES OR THE RULES, BUT ALSO THERE'S PUBLIC SAFETY AND PUBLIC POLICY TO BE CONSORT HERE.
AND ALSO, UM, DO WE WANNA SET A RE REPUTABLE PRECEDENT THAT WILL LIKELY CALL OTHER CONTRACTORS TO FOLLOW SUIT? AND IT COULD BE A SLIPPERY SLOPE FROM HERE.
IS THAT THE CONCLUSION OF YOUR COMMENTS, MS. TANG? YES.
UM, COMMISSIONER BLA YES, GO AHEAD.
COMMISSIONER BLAINE, I'M CURIOUS.
I KNOW THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE MORE PERMISSIVE THAN CITY ORDINANCES.
UH, I WOULD THINK THAT IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS INTERESTED IN PREVENTING OTHER PROJECTS LIKE THIS FROM MOVING FORWARD, THEN THEY COULD GET TOGETHER TO AMEND THEIR DEED RESTRICTIONS INTERNALLY.
AND THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO RESTRICT IT MORE FROM OUR LEGAL PURVIEW.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER VERA BLAND.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS? ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? OKAY, THANK YOU.
COULD I ASK YOU STAFF PLEASE TO REPEAT THE RECOMMENDATION? YES.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE FOR CPC 1 0 1 CONDITIONS.
GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER GARZA, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
SO, UH, I REALIZE THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS HERE AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A 15 FOOT SETBACK AT THIS POINT IN TIME AT THAT REQUEST.
UM, WHAT IS THE DISTANCE FROM THE STREET? I'M VERY GLAD YOU ASKED.
UM, IT'S CURRENTLY 15 FEET FROM BACK OF CURB TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON BOTH FACES.
UM, THE PREVIOUS HOME THAT WAS BUILT THERE WAS BUILT SIGNIFICANTLY INTO THE DE RESTRICTED BUILDING LINE.
SO THE COMMUNITY MAY THINK THAT THERE'S MUCH LESS ROOM THAN THERE ACTUALLY IS.
SO THE BUILDING LINE WILL START, OF
[00:45:01]
COURSE, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.AND SO WE WILL HAVE 15 FEET OF CITY OWNED GRASS CURRENTLY, AND THEN THE BUILDING LINES WILL START AFTER THAT.
SO IT ACTUALLY IS GONNA BE 30 FEET FROM THE STREET IF THEY BUILD ON THE BUILDING LINE, THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
ALONG THE SIDE STREET AND 45, OR EXCUSE ME, 40 FROM THE FRONT.
COMMISSIONER ARD, WHAT ABOUT FENCING? WILL THAT, CAN THEY CONSTRUCT A FENCE? UM, I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I, I THINK THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS THAT SOME AREAS HAVE ON TERMS OF FRONT YARD FENCING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
SO I DO NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY, UM, ONLY FENCES TALLER THAN EIGHT FEET REQUIRE A PERMIT.
I'M JUST KIND OF WONDERING IF THERE'S A FENCE THAT'S BILLED THEN THAT WOULD DIMINISH THE SITE.
BUT, UM, I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION IS, UM, ABOUT WHETHER THERE IS A MECHANISM.
I MEAN, IS THERE A TRAFFIC TRAFFIC SAFETY GROUP, SOMEBODY PUBLIC WORKS, SOMEBODY THAT CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE SITUATION? I, YOU KNOW, I THINK MAYBE AT MINIMUM THEY COULD LOOK AT HAVING A STOP SIGN AHEAD, YOU KNOW, SIGN IF THERE'S NOT ALREADY ONE.
AND I, I HEARD, I HEARD THE GENTLEMAN SAYING THAT THE SPEED BUMPS THEY HAD LOOKED AT PREVIOUSLY EITHER WEREN'T EFFECTIVE OR WEREN'T AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WASN'T IN FAVOR OF IT.
BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S SOME OTHER TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE COMMUNITY AND THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE ISSUE.
YEAH, I WOULD DEFINITELY WANTED TO DEFER TO PUBLIC WORKS IF THEY HAD ANY ADDITIONAL THERE.
UH, HE SAID HE WAS OFFERED TO CONDUCT A FIELD CHECK FOR THIS INTERSECTION.
BUT I'LL ALSO RESPOND, UM, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET WITH, AGAIN, THAT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'VE ALREADY MET WITH THE TRAFFIC, UM, AND DRAINAGE DIVISION AND HAD CHECKS AND DO HAVE, UH, MAYBE HAVE SOME SPEED HUMPS ALREADY IN THE AREA.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WERE ANY, THERE'D BE ANY OTHERS BUT SUGGESTIONS OR IDEAS THAT THEY COULD PUT OUT THERE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, WE CAN GO BACK TO TRAFFIC AND DRAINAGE OPERATIONS AND SEE IF THEY CAN COME AND TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AREA.
BUT AGAIN, WHEN WE DO THAT THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE AREA FROM MAJOR STREET TO MAJOR STREET.
WE CAN'T JUST LOOK AT A SINGLE STREET OR SINGLE CORRIDOR ON OF A STREET BECAUSE WHEN YOU PUT UP SPEED HUMPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, IT TENDS TO PUSH 'EM OFF THAT STREET ONTO OTHER STREETS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS HEARING, I THOUGHT I NO MORE SPEAKERS.
RIGHT? I THOUGHT I DID CL I I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, HOW WOULD WE ENSURE THAT THE MAIN ENTRANCE IS ON THE 25 FOOT ALTHEA? UM, I MEAN THE, THE FRONT OF THE HOME IS THERE AND THEN THE, THE SIDE ENTRANCE IS ON KINLEY LANE.
THAT PROB IT'S PROBABLY BETTER ADDRESSED BY PUBLIC WORKS BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE THE ONES THAT ISSUE THE PERMITS IN THIS SITUATION.
SHOULD WE INCLUDE IT ON THE 1 0 1 FORM DRIVEWAY CUT? I MEAN, I MEAN IT IS, IT IS RELEVANT WITH RESPECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WHICH WAY THE HOME IS FACING, CORRECT? RIGHT.
AND I WAS GONNA BRING THAT COMMENT UP.
I SAW THAT IN SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T HAVE A SIDE DRIVEWAY INTO A GARAGE AT THE REAR OF THEIR PROPERTY.
I, THAT'S NOT HOW I RE UNDERSTAND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
BUT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WILL HAVE TO BE WHERE IT IS ADDRESSED, WHICH WILL BE, I'M ASSUMING, GIVEN THE REPL ON, ON ALTHEA YEAH.
AND SO THEY'RE MADAM CHAIR, COULD I, COULD YOU INDULGE ME? MAYBE I CAN JUST EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SHALL PROOF.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND THIS QUESTION COMES UP A LOT OF TIMES IN ESTABLISHED SUBDIVISIONS WITH RE PLATS, BUT STATE LAWS, SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE SUBDIVISION PLATTING ENABLING LEGISLATION BACK IN THE LATE TWENTIES HAS INCLUDED THE LANGUAGE THAT IF IT MEETS THE TECHNICAL STANDARDS, IT MUST BE APPROVED BY THIS BODY.
THERE'S EXTREMELY, MAYBE NONE DIS MAYBE NONE DISCRETION, MAYBE NO DISCRETION, LET ME SAY THAT.
UM, IN, IN LOOKING AT THIS, AND SO WHILE THESE THINGS COME UP, THE, THE MAJOR POINT OF DISCRETION IS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
IF IT VIOLATES THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, YOU KNOW, OUR RECOMMENDATION FROM LEGAL IS ALWAYS THAT YOU DON'T APPROVE IT.
AND TO COMMISSIONER VIRA BLAND'S POINT AMENDING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO INCORPORATE WHAT'S SHOWN ON THE PLAT FOR ALL CORNER LOTS MAY BE THE BEST, BEST LONG-TERM SOLUTION.
COMMISSIONERS, WE'VE HEARD THE DISCUSSION.
WE'VE GOTTEN THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
[00:50:01]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM ONE 15 IS PLAZA ESTATES ALAMEDA GENOA.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS AN OVER 15,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CITY LIMIT AT THE NORTHWEST INTERSECTION OF ALAMEDA, GENOA, AND DONAL WEST OF COLUM BOULEVARD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THERE ARE NO RANGES REQUEST WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
AND WE HAVE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCP C 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
SO I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
MOTION FOR MOTION FORS PER SECOND JONES.
ITEM ONE 16, ITEM ITEM ONE 16 IS BURY SECTION ONE RELA NUMBER ONE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS AN OVER EIGHT ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CITY LIMITS WEST ALONG FANON STREET, SOUTH OF HOLMES ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE 68 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND FIVE RESERVES AS PART OF A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
THIS IS A FULL REPL OF POUNDS BURY SECTION ONE, BUT ONLY THE PORTION SHOWN IN RED HERE IS BEING AFFECTED AS THE EXISTING ALLEY IS BEING SLIGHTLY REALIGNED FOR A BETTER APPROACH ANGLE AND TO ADJUST THE LOT LINES OF THE SURROUNDING LOTS.
REVIEW B LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY AND STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS PLAT.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCP C 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
DO I HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR ITEM ONE 16? THANK YOU.
I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
[d. Subdivision Plats with Variance Requests (Aracely Rodriguez, Petra Hsia, John Cedillo, and Geoff Butler) ]
D VARIANCES.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM ONE 17, BUILD DEVELOPMENT.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CITY LIMIT EAST OF MONTGOMERY ROAD AND NORTH OF SOUTH VICTORY DRIVE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SHARED DRIVER DEVELOPMENT WITH FOUR SINGLE FAMILY LOT AND IN REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE 10.75 FEET RIGHT AWAY, DEDICATION ALONG MOJO STREET.
THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLOT TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER A PARTIAL RIGHT OF AWAY DEDICATION AND TO PROVIDE REVIS INFORMATION BY NOON NEXT WEDNESDAY.
STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN EVENT AND DID CONCLUDE MY PRESENTATION.
UH, WE HAVE A SPEAKER ON ITEM ONE 17.
UH, CARLOS ESPINOZA NO FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ENTERTAIN UH, GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER.
JUST UH, I GET ON THE RECORD BEFORE, DURING THE DEFERRAL ON CENTER POINT'S, COMMENT ON THE FIVE FOOT BUILDING LINE BETWEEN THE TWO SINCE IT'S SUCH A TIGHT SPACE BETWEEN THOSE LOTS, THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA NEED TO HAVE A GOOD LOOK AT THAT.
ITEM ONE 18, ITEM ONE 18 CAMP AT SUNDOWN.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY E FARM MARKET 2100 AND SOUTH OF STROKER VOTE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE SINGLE FAMILY LOT AND IF REQUESTING ADVANCE TO ALLOW THE LOT TO HAVE FRONTAGE AND ASSETS VIA AN ASSET EASEMENT INSTEAD OF A PUBLISHED STREET.
ACCORDING TO THE PROPOSED PLOT, THE SITE IS INTENT TO USE A 17.7 FEET WIDE ASSET EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS.
[00:55:01]
WIDTH IS CONSIDERED INADEQUATE, ESPECIALLY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES RAISING SAFETY CONCERNS.THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A SECOND DEFERRAL TO MODIFY THE PROPOSED PLOT AND IS PLANNING TO WIDEN THE ASSET EASEMENT TO ADDRESS THAT SAFETY CONCERN.
ALSO, THE LOSS SITE IS LESS THAN ONE ACRE IN SIZE AND DOESN'T MEET THE WATER WELL AND SEPTIC TANK REGULATION.
SO THE APPLICANT NEED ADDITIONAL, UM, ADDITIONAL TIME TO PORT OR COORDINATE WITH HARRIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE COMPLIANT WITH THE TCEQ REGULATION.
SO THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO ALLOW A SECOND DEFERRAL PER THE APPLICANT REQUEST, WHICH WILL ALLOW TIME FOR NECESSARY REVISION AND COORDINATION WITH HARRIS COUNTY.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS? I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP IN ITS ADVANCE.
UM, COMMISSIONER MORRIS, I THINK THIS HAS COME UP BEFORE, DID THEY HAVE A UTILITY EASEMENT THAT CAN ACCESS THAT PROPERTY FOR SERVICES? THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE COORDINATED WITH HARRIS COUNTY AND THEY'RE LOOKING TO END? YEAH.
AND UM, THEY MAY, THEY MAY WANT TO I GUESS MAYBE TOUCH BASE WITH CENTER POINT DURING THAT TIME TOO.
'CAUSE IF THEY THAT THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THOSE FACILITIES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ENTERTAIN A MOTION? GARZA GARZA SECOND.
ITEM ONE 19 LICENSED CCY SECTION ONE.
THE SET IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY EAST OF PEAK ROAD, NORTH OF BECKENDORF ROAD AND WEST OF GRAND PARKWAY.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTED TRUE VARIANCES.
ONE IS TO ALLOW A GEO FOOT FUND BUILDER LINE FOR PRIVATE ALLEY SHE LOT, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN PURPLE AND TO ALLOW LOT TO FUND ONTO ON TWO GREEN SPACES INSTEAD OF PUBLIC STREET, WHICH YOU HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE.
THAT IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THIS SUBDIVISION IS PART OF THE ELIJAH GP DESIGNED TO FOSTER A PEDESTRIAN FUNDING ENVIRONMENT.
IT FEATURES INTERCONNECTED GREEN SPACES AND SIDEWALK PROVIDING PEDESTRIAN ASSETS BETWEEN HOME AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK.
SO ACCORDING TO THE PLAZA, SOME LOT WILL EITHER HAVE A JEWEL PUT FUND BUILDER LINE ALONG THE PUBLISHED STREET OR THEY WILL RUN ON THE GREEN SPACES WITH VEHICLE ASSETS ON THE BACK ON THE REAR OF THE LOT VIA PRIVATE ALLEYS.
THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS LOT TO HAVE ZERO FOOT FUND BUILDER LINE WHEN VEHICLE ACCESS IS TAKEN FROM THE BACK OF THE LOT BY PUBLIC ALLEYS.
SO GRANTING OF THESE VARIANCES WILL HELP TO ELIMINATE NUMEROUS DRIVER CURB CUTS ALONG THE PUBLIC STREET AND MINIMIZING THE PEDESTRIAN VEHICLE INTERACTION.
HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEER OFFICE HAS REVIEWED THIS PROPOSAL AND HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST.
THE STATE RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCES AND APPROVE THE PLANS SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITION.
ANY QUESTIONS NOW? SPEAKERS? YES.
ANY QUESTIONS IN A MOTION? MOTION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM ONE 20 IS LA QUINTA LUNA.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE HOUSTON ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY EAST OF AIRLINE DRIVE IN NORTH OF ALDING MALE ROUTE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED 1400 FOOT FEET INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS PLANNING TO MEET HARRIS COUNTY REQUIREMENTS IN 2020 AND 2022.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTED VARIANCES TO NOT EXTEND HOLTMAN STREET THROUGH THE SUBJECT SITE.
THE PLOTS WERE NEVER RECORDED AND THE VARIANCE EXPIRED.
THE APPLICANT IS NOW ADDRESSING RESUBMITTING AND ADDRESSING THE SAME VARIANCE.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO EXTEND HOLMAN STREET THROUGH THE SITE TO ADDRESS EXCESSIVE INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG LEO HILL ROAD.
HOWEVER, EXTENDING HOLMAN STREET THROUGH THE SITE WOULD BISECT THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.
IN ADDITION, EXTENDING HOLMAN STREET WOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE THE OVERALL TRAFFIC CIRCULATION.
AS TRAFFIC CIRCULATION IS ALREADY BEING ADDRESSED BY THE EXISTING STREETS IN THE AREA, HARRIS COUNTY HAS NO OBJECTIONS.
THIS APPLICANT WILL BE COORDINATING WITH HARRIS COUNTY FOR PERMITTING.
UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP IN THE CHAT? NO.
[01:00:02]
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG MANFIELD STREET NORTH OF KEWELL ROAD AND WEST OF WHEATLEY STREET IN THE CITY LIMIT AND IN THE ACRE HOME AREA.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 15 LOCK WITH THE TYPE TWO PAE AND IN REQUESTING A VARI TO EXIT INTERSECTION BASIN ALONG MANFIELD STREET BY NOT PROVIDING A NORTH, SOUTH STREET CONNECTION THAT IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
MANFIELD STREET IS ABOUT THE DISTANT ALONG.
MANFIELD STREET IS ABOUT 4,200 FEET AND STREET.
APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRE A NORTH SOUTH STREET CONNECTION THROUGH THE SITE TO MEET THE MINIMUM 1400 INTERSECTION FACING REQUIREMENT.
THE NEER STREET CONNECTION IS ALSO ON THE COURT BY THE FINDING OF ACCO HOME MOBILITY STUDY, WHICH IDENTIFIED THE SITE AS THE PRIME LOCATION FOR ESTABLISHING A STREET CONNECTION TO TACKLE THE GROWING CHALLENGES POSTED BY HIGH DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT AND TO IMPROVE MOBILITY IN THE AREA IN 2022.
THIS PROPERTY ALSO REQUESTED A SIMILAR VARIANT TO NOT PROVIDE NORTH SOUTH STREET CONNECTION.
THE VARIANT WAS DENIED FOR THIS PROPERTY AND ALSO FOR THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH DUE TO THE HIGH NEED OF A STREET CONNECTION.
THE APPLICANT RECOGNIZES THIS, THE IMPORTANCE OF ESTABLISHING A STREET CONNECTION AND HAS BEEN COORDINATING WITH STAFF AND PUBLIC WORK TO FULFILL THIS STREET REQUIREMENT.
HOWEVER, ADDITIONAL TIME IS STILL NEEDED FOR FURTHER COORDINATION WITH PUBLIC WORK TO ACCOMMODATE A NARROW STREET LAYOUT ON A CONSTRAINT PROPERTY.
BUT BECAUSE THIS PLA CANNOT BE DEFERRED ANYMORE, THAT RECOMMENDATION IS TO DISAPPROVE.
THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO SUBMITTED A LETTER REQUESTING A 30 DAY EXTENSION UNDER THE STATE LAW, AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO REQUEST THIS ATTENTION.
I I DON'T HAVE THE APPLICANT'S NAME AND THE APPLICANT.
COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE? MY NAME IS RICHARD DELEON, COULD YOU SPELL THAT LAST NAME PLEASE? UH, D-E-L-E-O-N.
UM, WE'RE REQUESTING TO ALLOW A 30 DAY EXTENSION UNDER THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 2 1 2 0 0 9 B TWO.
WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS SO WE CAN COORDINATE WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SO WE CAN TRY TO WORK TOGETHER TO GO AHEAD AND DEDICATE, UH, THE RIGHT OF WAY.
QUESTIONS? NO, NO, I, I'M IN SUPPORT OF GIVING HIM TIME TO WORK OUT THE STREET ISSUE.
MORRIS, COMMISSIONER MORRIS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? JUST, UM, I GUESS THE WAY THAT IT'S SHOWN RIGHT NOW, IT'S SHOWN AT LIKE, AT THE PRIVATE STREET, BUT REALLY WE NEED LIKE A PUBLIC DEDICATION ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM BALDWIN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SECOND RA BLAND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOR A 30 DAY EXTENSION? AYE.
ITEM 1 22 IS RIVIERA PINES SECTION TWO.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS AN OVER 60 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION EAST OF HUFFMAN, CLEVELAND FM 2100 AND NORTH OF SWINGLE ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION WITH RECREATION, COMPENSATING OPEN SPACE AND LARGE DETENTION RESERVES, AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT EXTENDING NOR TERMINATING WITH THE CUL-DE-SAC.
PURPLE PINE STREET STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN FOR VIE RIVER PINES ABUTS FOUR SUB STREETS FROM THE SOUTHERN LOS PINOS PLATTE, AND ALSO INTENDS TO TAKE ACCESS FROM THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE INTERSECTION OF BLUE RIVIERA DRIVE TO THE NORTH AND FM 2100 TO THE WEST, ALLOWING INTERSECTION SPACING OF 2,700 FEET BETWEEN THE PROPOSED CONNECTIONS.
IN LIGHT OF THE OTHER THREE CONNECTIONS AND THE FUTURE CONNECTIONS TO THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE TO THE NORTH MAKE THIS A VIABLE, UH, ACCEPTANCE AND STILL ALLOWS FOR ADEQUATE CONNECTIVITY AND ACCESS.
THE SECTION WILL STILL UTILIZE THREE OF THE FOUR STUBS AND REQUEST THE VARIANCE TO ALLOW UNENCUMBERED DRAINAGE AND DETENTION.
AND HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK NO
[01:05:01]
ONE VIRTUALLY.ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
THE SUBJECT SIDE IS IN 4.8 4.8 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION NORTH ALONG SPRING CYPRESS AND EAST OF FAL VE ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A RESERVE RESTRICTED TO CHURCH PURPOSES AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A RESERVE TO, UH, TO CREATE A RESERVE WITH 29.37 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY FRONTAGE IN LIEU OF THE 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUESTED VARIANCE.
IN 2021, THE CHURCH ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST, SHOWN IN WHITE AND ARE PLATING THE RESERVE TO EXPAND THE CHURCH PER CHAPTER 42 REQUIREMENTS.
UH, THE CHURCH INTENDS TO UTILIZE ITS EXISTING ACCESS AS IT IS UNABLE TO ACQUIRE ANY ADDITIONAL PROPERTY ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY TO WIDEN ITS FRONTAGE.
EXISTING ACCESS IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OF SPRING CYPRESS WITH A TURNING LANE WITH NO MEDIAN, AND HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING HAS NO OBJECTION TO THIS VARIANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
UH, CHAIR, THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
NO ONE VIRTUALLY ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MOTION MANKA, THOSE SECOND GARZA.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
JOHN'S METHODIST CHURCH PARTIAL REPL NUMBER ONE.
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN DEFERRED TWICE AND REQUIRES ACTION TODAY.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN CITY LIMITS IN MIDTOWN ALONG CRAWFORD, GRAY STREET AND JACKSON STREETS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TWO VARIANCES, ONE TO ALLOW FOR REDUCED BUILDING LINE ALONG THE PIERCE ELEVATED HIGHWAY, AND TWO, TO ALLOW FOR REDUCED BUILDING LINE ALONG ON CRAWFORD STREET.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THESE REQUESTS.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN INTENDED TO SUPPORT HOUSING NEEDS FOR THE HOMELESS.
JOHN METHODIST CHURCH CAMPUS, WHICH INCLUDES FACILITIES FOR WORSHIP, YOUTH ACTIVITIES AND HOUSING ALONG THE FREEWAY.
THE STRUCTURAL FEATURE SUPPORT COLUMN SETBACK APPROXIMATELY SEVEN FEET FROM THE BACK, A CURB WITH A 10 FOOT BACK, A CURB SETBACK ON THE GROUND LEVEL, THE STRUCTURAL OVERHANG TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE UPPER LEVELS ALONG CRAWFORD STREET, THE STRUCTURAL FEATURE AND OPEN AREA, INCLUDING A FOUR FOOT SAFETY BUFFER AND AN UNOBSTRUCTED SIX FOOT SIDEWALK.
WITH LANDSCAPING AND TRANSPARENCY AT THE GROUND LEVEL.
THE BACKUP CURB DISTANCE, UM, TO THE BUILDING FACE RANGES FROM 15 FEET TO 33 FEET.
STRICT INTERPRETATION IN CHAPTER 42 REQUIRES A 25 FOOT SETBACK ALONG THE FREEWAY AND 10 ALONG CRAWFORD WITH THE OPTION OF MEETING THE WALKABLE PLACES PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
THIS DEVELOPMENT IS TECHNICALLY INELIGIBLE FOR THE WALKABLE PLAY STANDARDS, UH, DUE TO THE SUPPORT COLUMNS ALONG CRAWFORD.
ASIDE FROM THESE COLUMNS, CRAWFORD'S SIDE OF THE SITE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WALKABLE PLACES REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSPARENCY AND PEDESTRIAN REALM AMENITIES.
IN ADDITION, THE SEGMENT OF THE PIERCE ELEVATED FEATURES NUMEROUS STRUCTURES BUILT TO THE PROPERTY LINE WITHOUT ANY OBVIOUS ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE PUBLIC.
FURTHERMORE, THE SEGMENT OF FREEWAY IS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AS PART OF THE FUTURE HIGHWAY REALIGNMENT PROJECT THROUGH DOWNTOWN HOUSTON.
STAFF FINDS REQUEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE BUILDING LINE, SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
WE'VE RECEIVED SUPPORT FROM THE COALITION OF HOMELESS OF HOMELESSNESS, HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY OBJECTIONS FROM TXDOT.
WE DID RECEIVE SOME OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST RELATED TO THE PEDESTRIAN AREA, ADJACENT TO THE PIERCE ELEVATED.
THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.
WE HAVE, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS SHABAZZ ONLINE WITH US TODAY.
THANK, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
AND TODAY I AM HERE TO EXPRESS MY STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE CRAWFORD, UH, AND APPROXIMATELY 100 UNIT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
THIS VITAL INITIATIVE IS A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE BREAD OF LIFE AND TIMINOS CDC AIMED AT TRANSFORMING AN OPEN GREEN SPACE ADJACENT TO ST.
JOHN'S UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AND TO A COMMUNITY THAT SUPPORTS SOME OF OUR MOST VULNERABLE CITIZENS.
THE COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS OF HOUSTON HARRIS COUNTY, JUST A BLOCK AWAY FROM THIS SITE, HAS RECOGNIZED THE URGENT NEED FOR SUCH DEVELOPMENTS.
AND IN THEIR WORDS, THE COALITION IS GRATEFUL FOR THE EFFORTS UNDERTAKEN TO PROVIDE QUALITY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR THOSE WHO WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED HOMELESSNESS.
AND I SAY THEREBY THE GRACE OF GOD GO I AND SUPPORTS THE CRAWFORD AND OTHER SUCH PROJECTS FOCUSED ON STEMMING THE TIDE OF HOMELESSNESS IN HOUSTON.
THE CRAWFORD IS MORE THAN JUST A BUILDING.
IT'S A COMMITMENT TO OUR CITY'S
[01:10:01]
FUTURE AND A BEACON OF HOPE.IT PROMISES TO PROVIDE RESIDENTS WITH STABLE AND DIGNIFIED LIVING CONDITIONS, THEREBY IMPROVING THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE AND OFFERING PATHWAYS TO BETTER OPPORTUNITIES.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCES FOR REDUCED BUILDING LINES ALONG THE PIERCE ELEVATED AND CRAWFORD STREET ARE CRUCIAL FOR A DESIGN THAT MAXIMIZES THE USE OF SPACE IN A MANNER THAT IS THOUGHTFUL AND COMMUNITY FOCUSED.
THE DEVELOPER HAS PROPOSED THE DESIGN CLOSE TO OUR WALKABLE PLACES REQUIREMENTS, WHICH INCLUDES A FOUR FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND A SIX FOOT UNOBSTRUCTED SIDEWALK DEMONSTRATING A PROACTIVE APPROACH TO MAINTAINING AND ENHANCING THE PEDESTRIAN REALM.
THEREFORE, I URGE THE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO SUPPORT THESE VARIANCES, ALLOWING THE COOPERATE TO MOVE FORWARD.
THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A SIGNIFICANT STEP TOWARD REALIZING OUR SHARED VISION OF A MORE INCLUSIVE, SUPPORTED AND WALKABLE HOUSTON.
AND I THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING THIS TRANSFORMATIVE PROJECT THAT PROMISES TO BRING LASTING BENEFITS TO OUR COMMUNITY.
COUNCIL MEMBER CAROLYN, EVAN SHABAZZ.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCIL MEMBER FOR YOUR ELOQUENT WORDS.
WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT AND THANKS FOR BEING HERE WITH US TODAY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBER? OKAY, THANK YOU.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE VIRTUALLY? OKAY, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
UM, IS IT RA RASMUS RAUS RASMUS.
MADAM CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
UH, 1992, I, UH, STARTED A CHURCH IN DOWNTOWN HOUSTON, UH, ST.
UH, OVER THE LAST 32 YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN SERVING, UH, REALLY THE NEEDS OF, UH, OUR CITIZENS, OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, WHO, UH, ARE AT MOST AT NEED.
UH, WE, UH, THIS PAST YEAR, UH, WE HELPED ABOUT 240,000 INDIVIDUALS, UH, WITH ABOUT 46 MILLION IN PRODUCT AND SERVICES.
UH, THAT'S JUST ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO.
UH, IN 2006, UH, WE STARTED BUILDING HOUSING, UH, FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE PREVIOUSLY UNHOUSED.
UH, THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT FOR US.
UH, OUR GOAL IS TO TO DEVELOP A WORKFORCE HOUSING PROJECT, UH, THAT WILL MEET THE NEEDS OF OUR CITIZENS, OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, OUR WORKFORCE, UH, THAT EARN IN AND AROUND 80%, UH, A MI, UH, AVERAGE MEDIAN INCOME.
UH, THIS PROJECT IS, UH, WELL DESIGNED AND WILL, UH, WILL BE ATTRACTIVE AND COMPATIBLE, UH, WITH DEVELOPMENT IN AND AROUND, UH, THE AREA IN DOWNTOWN HOUSTON.
THIS ALSO IS OUR SIXTH, UH, WILL BE OUR SIXTH HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA, UH, OVER THE LAST, UH, 18 YEARS.
UH, WE DIDN'T JUST START, WE'VE BEEN AT IT FOR A LONG TIME AND OUR GOAL IS ALWAYS TO, UM, UH, TO PROVIDE, UH, SUPPORT, UH, IN OUR TOWN TO THE PEOPLE WHO NEED THE MOST SUPPORT.
JUST GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO SPEAK TODAY AND, AND THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR SUPPORT, UH, OF THIS VERY NEEDED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, UH, IN OUR, UH, IN OUR CITY.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION? WANNA THANK YOU FOR ALL THE GOOD WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING HERE IN THIS CITY.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE? THERE'S MORE COMING UP.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY.
I LIVE ON WEST GRAY STREET, UH, RIGHT BETWEEN MONTROSE AND MIDTOWN.
AND I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE I SAW SOME THINGS IN THE PAPER THAT PEOPLE WERE SPEAKING AGAINST IT.
I REGULARLY USE MIDTOWNS BIKE LANES, SIDEWALKS.
UM, I'M A CUSTOMER IN MIDTOWN.
I SING CONCERTS AT VENUES IN MIDTOWN AND I'M ALSO A TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZER.
AND I WAS UPSET TO SEE THE WALKABLE PLACES ORDINANCE USED, UM, TO OPPOSE THIS PROJECT.
UM, WHEN THIS DEVELOPMENT IS ACTUALLY GOOD FOR PEDESTRIAN GOALS AND THE REQUESTED VARIANCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WALKABLE PLACES.
UM, THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, IS A MEANINGFUL IMPROVEMENT OVER THE CURRENT PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT AND IT MEETS REQUIREMENTS FOR SECONDARY STREETS IN THE MIDTOWN WALKABLE PLACES AREA.
AND THE ONLY REASON THE VARIANCE IS EVEN REQUESTED IS BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO I 45, WHICH WILL BE REMOVED.
SO IF YOU'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION
[01:15:01]
IN THE FUTURE, AS YOU ALL KNOW, IT WOULD BE MOOT.UM, SO FURTHERMORE, UM, I THINK ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS VARIANCE IS EXCLUSIONARY.
AND USING WALKABLE PLACES, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO CONNECT US AS AN EXCUSE TO BE EXCLUSIONARY IS REALLY WRONG.
AND AS SOMEONE WHO WORKS IN MIDTOWN AND LIVES NEARBY, UM, I SUPPORT THIS VARIANCE AND THE HOUSING IT SEEKS TO BUILD.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR, UM, MOTION TO APPROVE IT.
ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, NEXT SPEAKER.
OKAY, LET'S, I'M GONNA MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER WHILE WE WAIT.
MY NAME IS STEPHANIE VALDEZ, AND I'M A NEIGHBOR AND AN ORGANIZER IN MIDTOWN HOUSTON.
I WANT TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF BREAD OF LIVES REQUESTED VARIANCE ITEM, UH, D 1 24, WHICH IS A PIVOTAL STEP TOWARDS FOSTERING A MORE INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN LANDSCAPE.
IT'S IMPERATIVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS VARIANCE UPHOLDS AN UNWAVERING COMMITMENT TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND ACCESSIBILITY, ALIGNING WITH THE GUIDELINES SET FORTH IN WALKABLE PLACES.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT IS AN IMPORTANT EFFORT TO ENHANCE OUR COMMUNITY'S LIV LIVABILITY, WHILE FOSTERING EQUITABLE ACCESS FOR ALL RESIDENTS.
THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE BREAD OF LIFE'S INITIATIVE IS THE NOBLE ENDEAVOR OF PROVIDING SUPPORT, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, A PILLAR OF HOPE FOR THOSE IN NEED, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, A HUMAN RIGHT.
AS AN ORGANIZER, I'VE WITNESSED FIRSTHAND THE TRANSFORMATIVE, TRANSFORMATIVE IMPACTS OF SUCH INITIATIVES, NOT ONLY IN ADDRESSING THE ACUTE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT ALSO IN FOSTERING A SENSE OF BELONGING, DIGNITY AMONG OUR MOST VULNERABLE NEIGHBORS.
OPPOSITION TO THE BREAD OF LIFE IS AN INITIATIVE, UH, THE INITIATIVE UNDER THE PRETEXT OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND REVEALED ATTEMPT TO PERPETUATE THE STATUS QUO, A STATUS QUO THAT PRIORITIZES PROFIT OVER PE-PEOPLE, AND EXCLUSION OVER INCLUSION.
SO TO CONCLUDE, I SUPPORT THE BREAD OF LIFE'S REQUESTED VARIANCE AND SUPPORT EMBRACING A VISION OF OUR CITY THAT IS ROOTED IN COMPASSION, DIGNITY, AND SHARED PROSPERITY.
THANK YOU GABRIELA BARJONA, YOU COULD HAVE BROUGHT MR. BARONA IN
SORRY, THAT I THINK YOU MIGHT HELP MY CASE.
UM, BUT NAME, MY NAME IS GABRIELLA BARONA.
I'M HERE WITH ROMAN AND WE'RE HERE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF BREAD OF LIFE'S COMMON SENSE VARIANCE REQUESTS TO BUILD SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IN MIDTOWN HOUSTON.
FIRST, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSION FOR ALL OF YOUR TIRELESS WORK IN MAKING THE CITY WE ALL LOVE A BETTER, MORE WALKABLE PLACE.
I'M HERE TODAY FOR THE SAME REASONS I'VE ADVOCATED FOR WALKABLE PLACES IN SAFE STREETS IN THE PAST, IN OTHER PLACES, BECAUSE OUR FUTURE CHILDREN DESERVE TO GROW UP IN A CITY WHERE THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE IS CONSIDERED AND INVESTED IN.
AND BECAUSE I WANNA BE ABLE TO TELL ROMAN WE TRIED OUR BEST TO DO WHAT WAS RIGHT AND BUILDING HOLISTIC SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IS RIGHT, THE VARIANT STILL SUPPORTS PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE, AND I CAN ONLY HOPE THIS COMMISSION NOR THE DEVELOPERS OPPOSING THE REQUEST DON'T LOSE THE PLOT OR THE PLA.
UH, FOR PUNS SAKE, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE PRINCIPLES OF WALKABLE PLACES NOT BE USED AS A TOOL TO STOP PROGRESS, NOR HINDER THE GOOD WORK THIS CITY WITH PARTNERS LIKE BREAD OF LIFE IS DOING TO END HOMELESSNESS AND BUILD DIVERSE, RESILIENT NEIGHBORHOODS IN HOUSTON FOR OUR CHILDREN TO INHERIT.
PLEASE VOTE YES ON THIS VARIANCE, AND THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH.
THE LAST SPEAKER THAT I HAVE SIGNED UP, AUSTIN LEWELLEN.
MY NAME'S AUSTIN LEWELLEN, L-E-W-E-L-L-E.
I AM A MUSICIAN WHO PERFORMS FREQUENTLY IN MIDTOWN AT VENUES LIKE MATCH IN SOUTH MAINE BAPTIST CHURCH.
I LIVE LESS THAN 10 MINUTES AWAY BY BIKE, CAR, AND BUS IN MONTROSE.
I FIRMLY BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IN MIDTOWN AND FOR THAT REASON, AS A NEIGHBOR OF AND FREQUENT VISITOR TO MIDTOWN, I SUPPORT BREAD OF LIFE'S VARIANCE REQUEST AND ADMIRE THEIR CONTINUED WORK TO MAKE THE CITY BETTER FOR ALL WHO LIVE HERE.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS COME ON UP? COULD YOU STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND THEN SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR US FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? YES, IT'S DANIEL EDMONDS, E-D-M-U-N-D-S.
I REPRESENT THE OWNER OF 1500 GRAY STREET, UH, IN OPPOSITION TO THE VARIANCE WE RESPECT AND AND APPRECIATE THE MISSION OF BREAD OF LIFE, UH, THAT HAS BEEN ARTICULATED TODAY.
UH, WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION TO, UH, THE AVAILABILITY OF, OF, UH, THE HOUSING NEEDS THAT ARE, THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
UM, OUR OPPOSITION HAS BEEN AND, AND REMAINS FOCUSED ON PRESERVING
[01:20:01]
THE WALKABILITY STANDARDS THAT WERE UNANIMOUS UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED JUST A COUPLE YEARS AGO.WE FEEL THAT THE JUSTIFICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED ARE INSUFFICIENT TO WARRANT AN A VARIANCE, AND THAT IF THEY ARE APPROVED, IT WOULD APPLY TO ANY DEVELOPER, UH, SEEKING A SIMILAR, UH, VARIANCE IN THE FUTURE.
JUST LAST WEEK WHEN THE ADDITIONAL REQUEST FOR A SETBACK ALONG FOR CRAWFORD STREET WAS ADDED, UM, THE JUSTIFICATIONS APPEAR TO BE INSUFFICIENT.
THE ONE QUESTION THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE ANSWERED IS, IS THE INTENT AND GENERAL PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER PRESERVED AND MAINTAINED.
THE ANSWER WAS, THE INTENT AND GENERAL PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER ARE PRESERVED AND MAINTAINED.
SO THE, THE OTHER QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED IN SIMILAR FASHION.
UH, MERELY COPYING AND PASTING THE QUESTIONS SHOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT ANSWERS TO SU TO SUPPORT A VARIANCE.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT AS LADIES YESTERDAY, THE DEVELOP THE DEVELOPER SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL PLANS AND MAKE CONCESSIONS FOR LANDSCAPING AND REPAVING SIDEWALKS IN EXCHANGE FOR THE STAFF'S POSITIVE ENDORSEMENT.
UH, THE THREE YEARS WENT INTO THE, TO PLANNING, UH, THE CURRENT ORDINANCES AND APPROVING THE CURRENT ORDINANCES.
UH, WHAT WE WOULD ASK IS THAT THE COMMISSION MAKE A DELIBERATE DECISION IN APPROACHING THIS, IN APPROACHING THIS AND NOT, UM, BASE THEIR DECISION ON PLANS THAT HAVE COME TOGETHER IN THE LAST 24 HOURS.
GRANTING THIS REQUEST, WE WOULD BELIEVE WOULD LEAVE THE COMMISSION WITH VERY LITTLE WIGGLE ROOM TO DENY SIMILAR REQUESTS IN THE FUTURE.
THIS PRECEDENT WOULD ERODE HOUSTON'S GOALS FOR A SUSTAINABLE GROWTH AND WALKABILITY, AND SO SEVERELY LIMITED ITS OPTIONS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PIERCE ELEVATED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR, YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL JUST COMMENT, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, BUT WE'RE NOT BOUND BY ANY PRECEDENT.
WE LOOK AT EACH APPLICATION AND EACH VARIANCE REQUEST ON ITS OWN MERITS, AND WE DON'T WANNA EVER BE ACCUSED OF FOLLOWING SOME PRECEDENT FROM SOME PREVIOUS DECISION.
SO I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR TO THE AUDIENCE AND OTHERS.
WE'RE NOT BOUND BY PRESIDENTS.
THIS APPLICATION IS NOT ASKING FOR WALKABLE PLACES VARIANCE, ALTHOUGH I DID CHAIR WALKABLE PLACES AND I APPLAUD THEM FOR THEIR EFFORT TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO MAKE IT AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE WALKABLE PLACES INITIATIVE.
AND THOSE THAT WERE ADOPTED BY THIS BODY AND BY CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY, IT DOES MEET THE INTENT.
AND IF IT WEREN'T FOR I 45 AND ITS ELEVATED STATUS AND LOCATION, IT WOULDN'T EVEN NEED TO BE HERE.
SO I THINK THIS MORE THAN MEETS THE INTENT OF WALKABLE PLACES, ALTHOUGH NOT REQUIRED TO DO SO.
AND, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WE DON'T RELY ON THE PRESIDENT OF WHAT A PREVIOUS COMMISSION DID OR WHAT WE DID TWO WEEKS AGO.
WE LOOK AT EACH APPLICATION ON ITS OWN MERITS.
YES, WE, UH, WE APPRECIATE THAT.
ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, MR. BUTLER, COULD I ASK YOU TO RESTATE THE RECOMMENDATION, PLEASE? SURE.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS GRAIN THE VARIANCE FOR A ZERO FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG THE PIERCE ELEVATED AND CRAWFORD.
QUESTION FOR MR. BUTLER QUESTION.
UH, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, UM, MR. BUTLER AND MAYBE, UM, I KNOW THE ARCHITECTS IN THE AUDIENCE, MR. BRA.
UM, I HAVE A, A QUESTION ABOUT FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT.
MADE MY POINT CLEAR IN THE PAST, OUR ABILITY TO INFLUENCE IS VERY SMALL WITHIN A SMALL REALM.
UM, AND LOOKING AT THE ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING, THE COLUMNS PROTRUDE FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING INTO THE MINIMUM CLEAR PATH THAT THAT EXISTS.
THE SPACE BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE COLUMN WILL BE DIFFICULT TO BUILD.
UM, EXPENSIVE PLACE FOR RODENTS AND DIFFERENT THINGS.
TRASH, LIKE TO MAKE THE REQUEST TO GAIN A VERY VALUABLE ONE FOOT OF SPACE INTO THE PEDESTRIAN REALM IF THOSE COLUMNS COULD BE PULLED BACK AND CONNECTED TO THE BUILDING TO CLEAR UP JUST A VERY MINOR AMOUNT OF CLEAR SPACE ALONG THE PEDESTRIAN REALM, WHICH IS REALLY OUR PURVIEW.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS A REQUEST THAT WE HAD MADE EARLIER ON.
I, I THINK STRUCTURALLY THAT'S HARD TO DO.
UM, IT, MOVING THE COLUMN BACK, UH, THE, THE BUILDING IS FAIRLY TALL AND THIS IS GONNA BE SUPPORTING THE UPPER FLOORS.
WE, NOT TO BE RUDE, BUT I CONTROL THE MEETING, SO LET ME CALL THE PEOPLE FORWARD.
UM, BEFORE YOU ASK HIM THAT QUESTION, I WANTED TO SEE YOU HAVE A QUESTION.
SO, MR. BRAVO, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK, PLEASE DO.
NOT THAT I WANTED TO, IT, IT'S GOOD.
UH, I'M FERNANDO BRAY, UM, TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN, AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS VERY EARLY ON IN DESIGN AND, AND YOUR COMMENTS ARE, UH, ARE WILL BE CONSIDERED.
I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S THAT DIFFICULT TO DO THAT, BUT WE HAVE ENGINEERS, UH, WE'LL HAVE TO CONSULT WITH
[01:25:01]
'EM, BUT I THINK, I THINK IT'S A GOOD COMMENT AND YOU'LL TAKE IT UNDER ADVICE.I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION MOVE THAT I FIND EXPERIENCE ELEMENTS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED ON THIS SIDE.
MOTION BALDWIN, SECOND VERA BLAND.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED DURING THE LAST MEETING TO CHANGE THE SUBDIVISION NAME AND ALSO REVISED THE PLAT.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE HOUSTON ETJ IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, EAST OF HANNAH ROAD IN SOUTHWEST OF ROBINSON ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 228 LOTS AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE REQUIRED SECOND POINT OF ACCESS TO BE PROVIDED BY ACCESS.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
A VARIANCE WAS GRANTED TO THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, UM, SHOWN IN BLUE TO NOT PROVIDE A SUB STREET GOING SOUTH.
IN ADDITION, THE PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH SHOWN IN GREEN ARE, UM, DEDICATED DETENTION OWNED BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT NUMBER SIX.
UM, DUE TO THESE CONSTRAINTS, THE APPLICANT HAS COORDINATED WITH MONTGOMERY COUNTY FOR THE LOCATION OF THE SECOND POINT OF ACCESS TO BE PROVIDED VIA ACCESS EASEMENTS TO BLAIR ROAD INSTEAD OF A SEC, ADDITIONAL POINT OF ACCESS TO ROBINSON ROAD.
DUE TO TRAFFIC CONCERNS, MONTGOMERY COUNTY ENGINEERS AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE REQUEST.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
WE HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL COMMENTS, UM, CITING TRAFFIC AND FLOODING CONCERNS, AND WE ALSO HAVE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE VIRTUALLY FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I HAVE JASON SCHITZ SIGNED UP VIRTUALLY JASON SCHITZ.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
UM, SO I, IT LOOKS ACCORDING TO THE MAP, IT'S, THIS IS REAL, REALLY REFERENCING THE WESTERN SECOND POINT OF ACCESS, AND I THINK A NUMBER OF FOLKS HERE, MAYBE TALKING ABOUT THE EASTERN OR, UM, EASTERN POINT OF ACCESS.
UM, BUT I'LL, I'LL GET TO MY COMMENT.
SO I'M A RESIDENT OF IMPERIAL OAKS ADJACENT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT HERE FOR 19 YEARS.
I'M SPEAKING BASICALLY IN OPPOSITION TO A SECOND ACCESS POINT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, BETWEEN ROBINSON AND HANNAH.
THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND DENSITY IS UNCHARACTERISTIC OF THE CERAMIC NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE RESIDENTS OF IMPERIAL OAKS ARE OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST THIS PROJECT.
THE LAST THING THAT ROBINSON ROAD NEEDS IS MORE TRAFFIC AND THIS DENSELY PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD ON SUCH A SMALL POT OF LAND.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO TAKE SOME TIME AND LOOK AT THE FACEBOOK PAGES FOR IMPERIAL OAKS AND RAYFORD ROAD ROUNDUP.
YOU'LL SEE FOR YOURSELF THAT THE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA ARE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LISTEN TO THE RESIDENTS ON THIS ISSUE AND NOT K TO DR HORTON'S WISHES.
UM, THAT'S BASICALLY THE COMMENTS THAT I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT AT THIS TIME, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE VARIANCE REQUEST SHOULD ALSO BE DENIED.
ANY QUESTIONS? MR. SCHITZ IS THE ONLY ONE I HAD SIGNED UP.
DO WE HAVE OTHER FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE OR ONLINE? OKAY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? THIS IS DAVID LANEY.
CAN YOU HEAR YOU NOW? ALRIGHT.
YEAH, I HAD SIGNED UP ON EMAIL.
I HAD, UH, THROUGH MY LOCAL CHANNELS AND CIVIC LEADERS HAD LEARNED THAT THIS WAS 170 HOME SUBDIVISION.
IT'S INTERESTING TO KNOW IT'S GONNA BE ACTUALLY 220.
JUST TO DOVETAILED INTO THE EARLIER COMMENTS, THE, UH, CITY OF OAK RIDGE NORTH DID A TRAFFIC STUDY AND FOUND THAT UP TO EIGHT, 18,000 VEHICLES USED ROBINSON ROAD, WHICH IS A TWO-LANE ROAD ON, UH, ON A DAILY BASIS.
UH, THEY HAVE TRIED TO ALLEVIATE THE PROBLEM BY A REDESIGN OF THE INTERSECTION OF HANNAH AND ROBINSON TO THE NORTH.
BUT, UH, THE THEORY IS THAT THIS INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUME FROM THESE 220 ADDITIONAL HOMES IS GOING TO BASICALLY PUT US BACK, IF NOT PUT US BACKWARD FROM WHERE WE CURRENTLY ARE.
UH, AT TIMES, THE BACKUP ON ROBINSON AND HANNAH CAN REACH UP TO TWO MILES IN LENGTH.
SO WE CAN IMAGINE WHAT IT'S GONNA BE LIKE WHEN WE ADD A 220 HOME SUBDIVISION TO THE LOAD.
NOW, IN TERMS OF THE INCREASED, UH, DRAINAGE FROM THE, UH, INCREASED IMPERVIOUS, UH, AREA THAT THIS SUBDIVISION WILL ENCOMPASS, UH, THESE ARE DETENTION PONDS.
[01:30:01]
THEY FLOW OVER INTO THE DRAINAGE, UH, DD SIX SYSTEM.AND THE DD SIX DITCH HAS ALREADY FILLED ONCE DURING HURRICANE HARVEY.
AND I KNOW THAT TO BE A FACT BECAUSE I LIVE ABOUT 300 YARDS FROM THE DITCH.
AND MY STREETS STOPPED DRAINING ONCE THE ELEVATION OF THE WATER IN THAT DITCH, UH, REACHED, UH, ITS CAPACITY.
SO I, I JUST, UH, REITERATE THE COMMENTS MADE EARLIER.
I'M ALSO A LITTLE CONCERNED, TRUTHFULLY, THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS, UH, SUBDIVISION, UH, BASED ON AN ARTICLE IN THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE, HAS SHOWN A HISTORY OF BUILDING, UH, BUILDING RENT HOUSES, LEASING THEM OUT, AND THEN SELLING THEM, LEAVING THE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS THE RENTERS ON THEIR OWN TO, UH, FAIR, FAIR FOR THEMSELVES.
I, I, I'M, I'M CONCERNED WITH THAT EFFORT AS WELL, IF THEY WERE BUILDING HOMES.
CAN YOU WRAP UP QUICKLY PLEASE? YEAH.
IF THEY WERE BUILDING THESE HOMES FOR HOMEOWNERS IN THE LONG TERM, I WOULDN'T BE SO OPPOSED TO IT.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIRMAN, AND THANK YOU MEMBERS FOR LISTENING TO ME.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE INTERESTED IN SPEAKING ON 1 26? YES.
COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? YES.
I'VE LIVED HERE, UM, IN IMPERIAL OAKS, RIGHT CLOSE TO THE CURVE RIGHT HERE, WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THE ENTRY, IS IT, IF I UNDERSTAND RIGHT, WHICH IT IS A VERY SHARP TURN RIGHT THERE.
AND THAT'S REALLY, THE SAFETY CONCERN IS VERY HEAVY BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC.
I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 25 YEARS, AS I SAID, AND I KNOW THE, THE, UH, ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPENED BECAUSE OF THIS.
IT'S, THERE'S NO SHOULDERS THERE.
IT'S TWO LANE ROAD, BUT THERE'S NO SHOULDERS AND THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NO CONSTRUCTION GOING ON RIGHT THERE.
AND NONE HAS BEEN PLANNED TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, IF I SEE IT THAT THIS SAYS, UH, CONDITIONS LISTED, BUT I DON'T HEAR ANYTHING.
WE NEED TO KNOW PLANS SO THAT MAYBE WE WON'T BE SO CONCERNED BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AFFECTING US.
WE CAN'T GET TO WORK ON, WE, I MEAN, HOW LONG CAN YOU STAY IN TRAFFIC TO JUST TO GET OUT OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR, I'M TALKING A HALF A MILE THERE.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY, THAT'S REALLY HARD ON US.
AND ALSO, THIS IS, UM, THIS, THIS PART OF THE WOODS.
THIS IS WOODS AND THAT'S OUR WETLAND.
WHAT I'VE ALWAYS, I'VE WALKED THERE AND I'VE SEEN IT, HOW MUCH WATER IT HOLDS.
THERE'S NO OTHER, UH, WETLANDS IN SECTION NINE IN IMPERIAL OAK SECTION NINE.
THERE'S NO OTHER WETLANDS AS THERE IS IN THE OTHER PARTS OF IMPERIAL OAKS.
AND THAT IS A CONCERN AS IT THE ANIMALS THAT LIVE THERE, OF COURSE, IN THOSE WOODS, IT'S GONNA, IT'S, THANK YOU.
UH, PLEASE KNOW THAT WE, WE DON'T HANDLE DETENTION IN THIS FORUM, BUT PUBLIC WORKS WILL REVIEW ALL OF THEIR PLANS MOVING FORWARD.
SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE, UH, MR. BROWN IS BACK IN THE CORNER, HE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, TO SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT THE NEXT STEPS.
ALSO, COMM COMMISSIONER JONES, OUR PREVIOUS SPEAKER, I WOULD SUGGEST YOU APPROACH THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY DRAINAGE DRAINAGE DISTRICT AS WELL AS THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE.
AND OF COURSE, THE, THE FALLBACK WOULD ALSO BE THE, THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY COMMISSIONER, UH, SPEAK IN, IN A GROUP OF THE DESIRE CONCERNS.
UH, REACH OUT FOR INPUT FROM THOSE ENTITIES BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN BE VERY HELPFUL.
COUNTY ENGINEER, COUNTY COMMISSIONER, UH, COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT, AND THAT THAT'S, WE'RE, WE'RE LIMITED TO WHAT WE CAN SAY OR DO, BUT THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO BE HEARD AND, AND MAYBE SEEK SOME, SOME HELP.
MY NEXT SPEAKER IS KARA BURROWS.
I ALSO WANTED TO ADDRESS MY CONCERNS ON THIS ISSUE.
I USED TO LIVE IN THIS AREA AND GO TO THE SCHOOL RIGHT DOWN BLAIR ROAD.
AND THE TRAFFIC, GETTING INTO SCHOOL IN THE MORNINGS WAS ALWAYS VERY, VERY, VERY EXTREME.
AND I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS ON THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION.
IF HE PLANS TO BUILD MORE HOUSES ON HERE, THE STOPLIGHT DOWN THERE ALREADY, IT BUILDS
[01:35:01]
A LOT OF TRAFFIC FOR THE WORK, FOR THE SCHOOL.EVEN WHEN I WAS GOING, LIKE PLAYING IN THE, THE PARKS, LOCAL AREAS AROUND THE TRAFFIC, EVERYONE WAS SPEEDING PAST THE STOP SIGNS.
I JUST FEEL LIKE ADDING MORE TO THAT IS JUST GONNA MAKE THE COMMUNITY WORSE WITH THE TRAFFIC AND FOR THE KIDS BEING ABLE TO WALK AROUND.
UH, THOSE ARE THE ONLY SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM OR LISTENING ON THE VIRTUAL MEETING THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY, I'M GONNA ASK THAT YOU PLEASE KINDLY REPEAT YOUR, UH, RECOMMENDATION.
UM, GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CPC 1 0 1 FORMS CONDITIONS.
QUESTIONS AND COMMISSIONER GARZA.
MICHELLE, HOW MANY, UM, HOW MANY ENTRANCES, EXITS ARE THERE NOW DESIGNED ON THE PROPERTY? I'M COUNTING LIKE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
SO THERE IS A STEP STREET GOING TO THE SOUTH, SOUTH.
UM, THEY HAVE THE, UM, THE EAST MI ACCESS ACCESS EASEMENT GOING UP TO BLAIR ROAD.
UM, THERE IS THE PROPOSED NORTH SOUTH STREET WILD CO.
UM, THAT ONE IS ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN.
IT'S A, UM, UH, IT'S A STREET THAT'S ON THE, UM, MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN COLLECTOR STREET.
UM, AND SO THERE IS AN ENTRANCE GOING OFF OF THAT GOING TOWARDS, UM, ROBINSON ROAD ON THE EASTERN BOUNDARY.
THERE WAS AN, UH, STREET LOOK GOING EAST.
IS IT NOW GOING INTO THAT NORTH? YEAH, IT'S EAST CORNER.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY EXIT FROM THAT PROPERTY.
AND HOW, HOW MANY HOMES ARE ON THAT EASTERN UNIT? DO YOU KNOW? JUST OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD? PROBABLY HALF OF THE, PROBABLY TWO HALF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
[f. Reconsiderations of Requirement (Tammi Williamson and Geoff Butler) ]
F RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENTS.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMITS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST 20TH STREET AND EAST OF NORTH SHEPHERD DRIVE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCED BUILDING LINE OF FIVE FEET ALONG MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
WEST 20TH STREET IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED 25 FEET.
UM, STAFF, UM, REQUEST THAT THIS, UM, STAFF REQUEST TO DEFER THE APPLICATION FOR TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW FOR COORDINATION WITH THE MEMORIAL HEIGHTS TOURS.
NUMBER FIVE FOR THEIR FEEDBACK CONCERNING PEDESTRIAN REALM AND RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR A POTENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT ALONG WEST 20TH.
UM, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AND WE HAVE RECEIVED PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE, MOSTLY CONCERNING TRAFFIC SAFETY, UM, TRASH AND NOISE.
UH, THE FIRST SPEAKER I HAVE SIGNED UP IS MICHAEL HERRERA.
MICHAEL HERRERA AND VIRTUALLY RYAN BUSKEN.
UH, YEAH, SO I LIVE ON, UH, 6 2 6 WEST 21ST STREET, WHICH SHARES AN ALLEY WITH THIS.
AND I BELIEVE PART OF THE VARIANCE IS ALSO TO HAVE A BUILDING LINE THAT EN THAT ENCROACHES REAL CLOSE TO THE, UH, TO THE ALLEY, WHICH I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL OF THE RESIDENTS ON OUR STREET.
WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT.
WHAT WE DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IS, IS ALL THE TRAFFIC THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE STREET FROM THE BURGER JOINT AND TACO STAND PARKING LOTS, WHICH ARE SHARED BY THE SAME OWNERSHIP.
UM, THEY'VE GOT ALL KINDS OF THEFT.
WE'VE HAD PEOPLE RUNNING OVER OUR LANDSCAPING IN THE ALLEY.
WE'VE GOT KIDS PLAYING IN THE ALLEY.
THEY SPEED DOWN AT ALL KINDS OF HOURS OF THE NIGHT.
AND, UH, WHAT WE ALL, WE WOULD REQUEST TO NOT OPPOSE THIS VARIANCE AS FAR AS THE ALLEY SIDE GOES, WAS FOR THEM TO PUT A FENCE ON THE PROPERTY, ON THE PARKING LOT TO THE EAST OF THE, THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE NEXT, ON THEIR NEXT, ON THE RENDERING.
SO THERE'S A PARKING LOT TO THE, THE EAST THAT BACKS UP TO A LOT OF THE, THE FOLKS IN THE ALLEY.
AND, UH, IF THEY COULD JUST PUT A FENCE PAST SPOT NUMBER
[01:40:01]
31 AND 47, WE WOULD, WE WOULD'VE NO PROBLEM WITH THE RESTAURANT ENCROACHING TOWARDS THE ALLEY.WELL, IF THIS IS, UM, RECOMMENDED FOR DEFERRAL BY THE COMMISSION, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF COULD TALK TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT.
WAS THAT ALL FOR YOUR COMMENTS? YEAH.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER GARZA? JUST SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FENCING, WILL, WILL NOT FENCING BE REQUIRED, UM, FROM THE PARKING LOT TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS OR NOT? WELL, ACTUALLY IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ANOTHER ALLEY.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE RESIDENTIAL BUFFERING ORDINANCE? YES.
WELL, THIS IS ALONG A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND SO, SO IT, IT DOESN'T APPLY HERE? CORRECT.
IS THERE A VARIANCE BEING REQUESTED ON THIS ONE? SO THE VARIANCES REQUESTED ALONG WEST 20TH STREET MM-HMM
UM, PER THE ORDINANCE, THERE ARE NO BUILDING LINE REQUIREMENTS ALONG ALLEYS.
THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IDM FOR TURNING MOVEMENTS IS MET, BUT AS PART OF THAT VARIANCE, WE COULD REQUEST FENCING ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL FENCE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
ITEM 1 27 IS JESSICA FARMS GP.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY AND WALLER COUNTY BOUNDED BY FM 5 29 TO THE SOUTH, FUTURE WEST ROAD TO THE NORTH AND FUTURE SLIP SLIP ROAD TO THE WEST.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 611 ACRE GENERAL PLAN FOR PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED MAXIMUM INTERSECTION SPACING ALONG ITS EASTERN BOUNDARY BY PROVIDING ONLY ONE STUBB STREET.
THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO DEFER THE APPLICATION FOR TWO WEEKS TO DISCUSS WITH HER CLIENT A SUGGESTION MADE BY STAFF FOR ANOTHER STUBB STREET ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY, AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
ITEM 1 28 IS RED BUD SECTION FOUR.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S ETJ AND HARRIS COUNTY WEST OF THE GRAND PARKWAY AND NORTH AND ALONG FUTURE BAUER HOCKLEY ROAD.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 108 LOTS AND IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO EXCEED 150 LOTS WITH THE SECOND POINT OF ACCESS.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE IS PART OF A 250 ACRE GENERAL PLAN.
SECTION FOUR IS PROPOSING 108 LOTS, WHICH WILL ACCESS THROUGH SECTION TWO TO BAUER HOCKLEY ROAD.
THE COMBINED LOT COUNT FOR BOTH SECTIONS IS 169 LOTS.
STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES WHEN PROPOSING MORE THAN 150 LOTS THAT A SECOND POINT OF ACCESS BE PROVIDED IN THE FORM OF PUBLIC STREET CONNECTION.
WHEN FUTURE SECTION FIVE IS RECORDED, WHICH IS JUST NORTH, THE SECTIONS NORTH OF BOWER, HAWLEY WILL HAVE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS THROUGH THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEM.
HOWEVER, IN THE INTERIM, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO PROVIDE A TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT THROUGH LOT 39 OF THIS SECTION FOUR, WHICH WILL CONNECT TO LOCAL STREET HOP FEE ROAD.
THIS, THIS MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE OF PROVIDING AT LEAST TWO POINTS OF ACCESS FOR RESIDENTS EMERGENCY SERVICES WHEN THE NUMBER OF LOTS EXCEED 150 IN CASE ONE PATH IS BLOCKED, HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS VOICED NO OBJECTION.
THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE AND THIS CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION.
UH, I DON'T READ IN ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT SECTION THREE, AND I THINK IT'S GONNA BE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT, UH, CONDITION BE MADE, THAT SECTION FIVE BE PLATTED RECORDED BEFORE SECTION THREE, OTHERWISE WE'RE ADDING THAT MANY MORE ROOFTOPS, STREETS, ET CETERA.
SO, I MEAN, THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD BE GRANTED FOR 169 LOTS.
AND SO SECTION THREE CAN'T HAPPEN ON THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
ANYWAY, I, I CONCUR WITH THAT.
IT'S JUST WE'RE MAKING REFERENCE ABOUT SECTION FIVE.
I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT FIVE HAS TO GO BEFORE THREE.
MY NAME'S JACOB GUERRERO WITH META PLANNING DESIGN.
THE DEVELOPER IS FULLY AWARE THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO PLA AND RECORD SECTION FIVE PRIOR TO SECTION THREE BEING, UM, RECORDED.
[01:45:06]
THANK YOU,OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
WELL, I'LL SECOND, BUT I'M, I'M JUST GONNA GO ON THE RECORD AGAIN FOR, FOR SAYING THAT I APPRECIATE THESE LIKE SOLUTIONS THAT ARE, UM, BEEN PRESENTED RECENTLY TO KIND OF, UH, PROVIDE TWO ACCESS POINTS FOR THOSE SLOTS DURING THESE INTERIM PHASES THAT WE SEE.
WE WEREN'T SEEING SOLUTIONS LIKE THAT A COUPLE YEARS AGO, SO, UH, I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT ON THAT.
AND IT WAS, WAS IT PAUL AKA AND MAD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
ITEM 1 29, ITEM 1 29 IS WILBUR FOREST LANDING.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG WILBER FOREST, WEST OF WHEATLEY AND NORTH OF DESOTO.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSED A 17 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ALONG A TYPE TWO PAE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF THE REQUIREMENT TO ADDRESS INTERSECTION SPACING BY NOT PROVIDING A STREET THROUGH THE SITE.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ACRES HOME COMPLETE COMMUNITY.
THE SITE IS SITUATED ON A BLOCK APPROXIMATELY 2,400 FEET WIDE BETWEEN WHEATLEY AND SEALY.
THIS BLOCK FEATURES AN EXISTING SUBSTRATE CALLED TIPT THAT COULD BE EXTENDED FOR A DIRECT CONNECTION BETWEEN BLAND AND WILBERFORCE.
THIS WOULD TIE IN WITH THE PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENT SOUTH OF WILBERFORCE SHOWN ON THE EKER HOME MOBILITY STUDY.
THIS PLAN DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY ADDITIONAL STREETS ON THIS BLOCK DUE TO RELATIVELY SHORT DISTANCE BETWEEN NORTH SOUTH STREETS.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO BE JUSTIFIED CONSIDERING THE ALTERNATIVE STREET CONNECTION OPPORTUNITY AND THE DISTANCE BETWEEN EXISTING STREETS.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS? I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I JUST NO
JUST KEEP TALKING OVER TOP OF YOU.
AND WE'RE MOVING ALONG TO SECTION
[Platting Activities g - i]
G EXTENSIONS OF APPROVAL.GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS ANTOIN SHA JOHNSON.
IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SECTIONS GH AND I AS ONE GROUP PLEASE.
SECTIONS G EXTENSIONS OF APPROVAL CONSIST OF ITEMS ONE 30 TO 1 34 SECTION H NAME CHANGES CONSIST OF ITEMS 1 35 SECTIONS I CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE CONSIST OF ITEMS ONE 30, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUEST THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SECTIONS GH AND I.
OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NOTHING UNDER J ADMINISTRATIVE AND MOVING ALONG TO
[k. Development Plats with Variance Requests (Geoff Butler and Ramon Jaime-Leon) ]
K SEVEN K NUMBER 1 37.ITEM 1 37 IS 1207 BETHLEHEM STREET.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG ELLA BOULEVARD.
AT THE INTERSECTION OF BETHLEHEM.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A RECORDED LOT.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A 10 FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG ELLA AS OPPOSED TO THE REQUIRED 25 SET FOOT SETBACK FOR MAJOR THOROUGHFARES STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG ELLA BOULEVARD WITHIN THE CANDLELIGHT PLACE COMMUNITY.
THIS SEGMENT IS DESIGNATED AS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, THOUGH MUCH OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT BEFORE THE MODERN SETBACK INTERSECTION SPACING AND ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS TYPE OF STREET.
THESE CONDITIONS RESULT IN A SLOWER MOVING TRAFFIC THAN A MORE TRADITIONAL MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
THE APPLICANT HAS DESIGNED THEIR HOME TO UTILIZE BETHLEHEM STREET FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS, ELIMINATING VEHICULAR PEDESTRIAN CONFLICTS ALONG ELLA, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO ENHANCING THE PEDESTRIAN REALM BY ADDING A LANDSCAPE BUFFER IN STREET TREES.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO BE JUSTIFIED CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE CON, EXCUSE ME, THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF ELLA AND THE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN REALM IMPROVEMENTS.
WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT.
THIS ITEM, THIS CONCLUDES STAFF REPRESENTATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE HERE IN THE ROOM SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OR VIRTUALLY.
DO YOU ALL HAVE ANYBODY IN THE CHAT? OKAY, THANKS.
MOTION BALDWIN SECOND TO HEAR.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
[01:50:01]
LEON.ITEM 1 38 2 22 10 SABINE STREET.
THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED AT PREVIOUS MEETING FOR FURTHER STUDY AND REVIEW.
THE SITE IS LOCATED SOUTH OF INTERSTATE 10 AND WEST OF HOUSTON AVENUE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEBER STREET AND SAVINE STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A DEVELOPMENT PLAT VARIANCE TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT, UH, BUILDING LINE FOR A PROPOSED CARPORT ADDITION IN LIEU OF THE ORDINANCE 20 FOOT GARAGE BUILDING LINE ALONG SABINE STREET.
UH, A LOCAL STREET STAFF IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE, UH, STAFF IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS CONSTRUCTING A SECONDARY DOLAN UNIT WITH A DETACHED CARPORT ALONG SABINE STREET.
THE SIDEWALK WAS RED TAG FOR COMPLETING THE CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A PERMIT IN SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2023.
THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE IS FOR A GARAGE SLASH CARPORT TO, UH, ALLOCATE SPACE FOR AN ADDITIONAL VEHICLE AND NOT TO OBSTRUCT A SIDEWALK ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
CHAPTER 42 CURRENTLY CLASSIFIES A GARAGE AND CARPORT THE SAME, REQUIRING A GARAGE BUILDING LINE OF 19 FEET AS PER CHAPTER 42.
THE CURRENT CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE SINCE THE DISTANCE FROM THE PAVED STREET TO THE CARPORT IS 22 FEET AND WILL NOT LEAVE SPACE FOR A FUTURE SIDEWALK.
STAFF RECOMMEND, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO PROVIDE A FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG BOTH RIGHT OF WAYS AND REMOVE THE EXISTING APPROACH SLA UH SLASH SLAB AND KEEP THE STRUCTURE AS IT IS PERCEPTIVE 42.
THIS WOULD NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED A CARPORT.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT AGREED TO THESE CONDITIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO PRESENT THIS CASE.
STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST DOES NOT MEET ANY OF THE VARIANCE CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDS THIS APPROVAL FOR THIS VARIANCE.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
BEFORE I CALL THE APPLICANT UP, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SO WHERE DO YOU WANT, WANT MR. BALDWIN? THANK YOU.
WHERE DO, WHERE DO YOU THINK THEY'RE GONNA PARK IF WE DON'T ALLOW THE PARKING UNDERNEATH THE STRUCTURE PARALLEL TO THE PROPERTY OR GO BACK TO YOUR DRAWING THAT YOU WANT TO PROPOSE THERE.
SO THERE'S A CARPORT IN THE RED? IN THE RED.
AND CARS COULD PARK UNDERNEATH IT? CORRECT.
AND THERE'D BE PLENTY OF CLEARANCE.
I MEAN, YOU SAID THERE WAS 22 FOOT CLEARANCE FROM WHERE THE PROPERTY, UH, IT'S TWO FOOT CLEARANCE FROM THE EXISTING FACADE, WHICH IS THE GREEN LINE UHHUH
AND THAT THAT'S FIVE FEET PLUS THE 17 FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
PLUS THE FIVE EQUALS A 22 FEET.
BUT IF A FUTURE SIDEWALK IS TO BE PROPOSED, IT DOESN'T MEET THE INTENT, I WOULD BLOCK THAT SIDEWALK.
I'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT COME UP.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
I AM THE APPLICANT FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
I AM THE OWNER AND RESIDENT OF THE PROPERTY.
I AM ALSO A LICENSED ENGINEER.
AND AS AN ENGINEER I RECOGNIZE THAT IF YOU ASK TO DEVIATE FROM A CODE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO MEET THE ORIGINAL INTENTION OF THE CODE, WHICH I BELIEVE I'M DOING.
I HAVE PROVIDED SOLUTIONS TO EVERY CONCERN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS GIVEN.
I UNDERSTAND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS RECOMMENDED TO DENY MY REQUEST.
HOWEVER, TWO DAYS AGO THEY CALLED ME AND OFFERED TO SUPPORT MY PROJECT.
IF I BUILD A 100 FOOT SIDEWALK ON THAT RIGHT OF WAY, IT FELT LIKE I WAS BEING EXTORTED FOR A $20,000 SIDEWALK WHEN THE CARPORT ONLY COST ME $2,000.
TO BUILD THIS VARIANCE REQUEST SEEKS TO BUILD A COVERED PAVILION OR CARPORT AT A SIDE SETBACK SETBACK THAT MATCHES THE EXISTING BUILDING.
THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 1910 AT A DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THIS ORIGINAL STRUCTURE CONTINUES TO SERVE AS THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT CREATE ADDITIONAL ENCROACHMENT BUT WOULD SIMPLY MATCH THE EXISTING SETBACK.
IT WOULD NOT IMPEDE THE RIGHT OF WAY ACTIVITY IN ANY WAY, AND IT WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
THIS CORNER LOT WAS CREATED IN 1893 SUBDIVISION, WHICH GAVE ALL LOTS ON THE BLOCK, EQUAL WIDTH DIMENSIONS OF 50 FEET.
THE SUBDIVISION DID NOT HAVE SIDE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AT THE TIME OF ITS CREATION.
THUS, THE NARROW 50 FOOT WIDE LOTS WERE INTENDED TO BE UTILIZED IN THEIR ENTIRETY.
IT IS NOT PRACTICAL TO ENFORCE THE SETBACK ON BOTH SIDES OF A CORNER LOT AS THIS WOULD RESTRICT OVER 30% OF THE PROPERTY.
IT IS NOT FAIR THAT THE INTERMEDIATE LOTS HAVE THREE FEET SIZE SETBACKS AND THAT THE CORNER LOT OF THE SAME DIMENSIONS GETS PENALIZED DUE TO UNFORESEEN BUILDING LINE UPDATES.
THERE SHOULD BE A WAY TO GRANDFATHER PROPERTIES IN THESE OLD HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND IT SEEMS SOMEBODY AT THE CITY HAS ALREADY CONFRONTED THIS TOPIC IN SECTION FIVE OF THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES.
PAGE FIVE DASH 11 PROVISIONS ARE GIVEN TO ALLOW MATCHING ENCROACHMENT OF AN EXISTING HOUSE.
[01:55:01]
ALL I HAVE.ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? WHAT'S THE STATUS OF HIS PERMITS? COMMISSIONER? SORRY.
SO YOU ARE AN ENGINEER? YES MA'AM.
AND YOU BUILT THE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT WITHOUT A PERMIT? NO, THERE WAS AN EXISTING HOUSE THERE.
I REMODELED AN EXISTING HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1950.
I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT'S THE STATUS OF YOUR PERMITS? YOU, YOU REALLY HAVE PERMITS FOR EVERYTHING AND EVERYTHING'S BEEN FINALED OR NO.
SO THE, THE PERMIT IS, UM, JUST WAITING ON THIS, THIS MATTER OF THE CARPORT.
IT'S A CARPORT AND THE REMODEL, BUT THE CARPORT WASN'T PERMITTED.
COMMISSIONER GARZA, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? UM, FOR STAFF? STAFF? MM-HMM.
SO, UM, CURIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF BUILDING ON THIS PROPERTY.
I MEAN, WHAT'S THE PERMEABLE COVER AT THIS POINT? IT LOOKS LIKE IT FAR EXCEEDS 65%.
WELL, I'LL GO ON YOUR WORD, BUT SURE.
DOES LOOK LIKE A LOT INFORMATION.
YEAH, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION RIGHT NOW.
I MEAN, I'M JUST SAYING IT LOOKS LIKE THAT PART OF THE PERMIT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, MR. BALDWIN, I'D LIKE TO FIND A SOLUTION BEFORE JUST DENYING HIM.
I'M, I'M INTERESTED IN MAYBE A DEFERRAL FOR TWO WEEKS TO SEE IF THERE IS SOME SOLUTION THAT COULD HAPPEN HERE.
I MEAN, I, I AGREE A GARAGE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED, BUT I THINK A CARPORT WHERE THE GARAGE DOOR ISN'T THERE, THERE MIGHT BE SOME LEEWAY FOR SOME COMPROMISE.
SO I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST A WELL, NO, NO SIR.
I MEAN, I, I'M OPEN TO THE, THIS DEFERRAL IDEA FOR TWO WEEKS TO SEE IF A COMPROMISE COULD BE MADE.
MEMBERS OF PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE, THE SOLUTION THAT WE OFFERED WERE, WAS TO REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY AS YOU HEARD.
UH, MR. RAMON EXPLAIN THAT TO REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY, THIS ENTIRE SITE DOES HAVE A GARAGE ON THE NORTHERN SIDE.
SO IT DOES HAVE A DRIVEWAY AND A GARAGE TO ALLOW FOR TWO CAR PARKING SPACES.
AND RAMON, PLEASE CORRECT IF I'M, UM, STATING ANYTHING WRONG.
HOWEVER, THE ADDITIONAL A DU THAT HAS BEEN BUILT IN RED WOULD NOT REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL GUEST PARKING SPACE PER THE NEW LIVABLE PLACES RULES.
SO IT DOESN'T NEED THE THIRD PARKING SPACE.
SO IT DOESN'T PER THE RULES OF CHAPTER 42 AND 26, IT DOESN'T REQUIRE THE THIRD PARKING SPACE.
SO THIS CARPORT IS ESSENTIALLY THEY DON'T NEED THAT THIRD PARKING SPACE.
SO IF THE, IF THIS CARPORT OR GAZEBO HAS TO BE APPROVED, WE, OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY.
AND IN THAT CASE, THIS STRUCTURE COULD STAY, UH, AND, AND PLANNING COMMISSION COULD SUPPORT THAT, UH, OR APPROVE THAT VARIANCE FOR A FIVE FEET BUILDING LINE.
BUT THE DRIVEWAY COULD GO AWAY AND A SIDEWALK WOULD PROVIDE FOR MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY IN THIS AREA.
WE, UH, PLANNING STAFF, UH, UH, WOULD, WOULD LIKE TO OFFER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND I THINK YOU OUGHT TO CONSIDER THAT OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND NOT GET YOURSELF INTO TOO MUCH TROUBLE HERE.
BUT
THERE'S NO LAW AGAINST PARKING THERE AT THE MOMENT.
UM, SO, SO I I I'VE BEEN TELLING THEM THAT WE CAN CALL IT A PAVILION.
I JUST WANT TO COVER EVERY RECORD.
WE COULD DENY YOUR DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THAT PAVILION.
AND YOU WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THE BUILDING CODE IF YOU RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE DRIVEWAY.
BUT THAT WASN'T PART OF THE ARGUMENT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT IS THE ARGUMENT THAT YOU WOULD BLOCK THE SIDEWALK.
AND, AND SO IF WE DON'T HAVE A DRIVEWAY, YOU'D HAVE, IF I PARK UNDER THE CARPORT OR IF I PARK IN THAT AREA RIGHT NOW, IT'S, IT, IT WON'T BLOCK THE SIDEWALK.
IT'S THE CAR BEHIND IT THAT WOULD BLOCK THE SIDEWALK THAT'S COMING LATER THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT.
SO WE'RE NOT JUST CONCERNED ABOUT YOU, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS HAVING ACCESS TO A SIDEWALK THAT WOULD GRANT THEM THE ABILITY TO GET THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S THE POINT OF A 17 FOOT SETBACK FOR A GARAGE AND A GARAGE DOOR.
AND ANY NUMBER OF OTHER SETBACKS THAT WE HAVE, THEY'RE OFFERING YOU A SOLUTION.
YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO TAKE IT.
THE SUGGESTION IS, UH, SIR, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IS TO GET WITH STAFF OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND WHEN IT COMES BACK, HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS CAN GET TOGETHER AND FIND A RESOLUTION THAT WORKS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MORRIS? YEAH.
SO IS THAT SECOND CURB CUT ALONG SABINE? IS THAT A PERMITTED CURB CUT OR I, I'M CONFUSED ON THAT ACTUALLY AT ALL.
IT'S NOT EVEN A PERMITTED CURB CUT.
UM, AND, AND I GUESS I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT, ALTHOUGH I KIND OF SEE YOUR CONCERN
[02:00:01]
THAT YOU'VE, YOU'VE, BUT THE REALITY IS YOU'VE PUT YOURSELF IN THIS SITUATION BY NOT FOLLOWING PROPER PROCEDURE AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.UM, SO YOU REALLY GOT AWAY THE TRADE OFFS AT THIS POINT.
SO YOU, YOU MAY NOT LIKE SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS, BUT, UH, YOU'VE CREATED THIS PROBLEM, I GUESS IS LIKE WHAT I'M GONNA SAY.
'CAUSE IT SHOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH PROPER PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
AND THIS ISN'T EVEN YOUR, YOUR ABILITY TO PARK THERE SHOULDN'T ACTUALLY EVEN EXIST AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MORRIS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THIS SHOULD BE DONE.
I'D LIKE TO SECOND THE DEFERRAL RECOMMENDATION.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN HAS A MOTION TO DEFER SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG.
ITEM 1 39 IS 83 0 3 VENUS STREET.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG VENUS, WEST OF MONTGOMERY, WEST OF WEST MONTGOMERY, AND NORTH OF SOUTH VICTORY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON AN EXISTING 25 FOOT LOT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A ONE FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG MCKINLEY AVENUE.
AN UNIMPROVED LOCAL STREET STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT ALONG VENUS AT THE INTERSECTION OF MCKINLEY.
THE SITE CONSISTS OF A 25 FOOT LOT, WHICH WAS PLATTED IN 1913.
MCKINLEY STREET WAS CREATED FROM THE SUBDIVISION BUT WAS NEVER CONSTRUCTED.
THE NARROW LOT COMBINED WITH THE SIDE BUILDING LINE REQUIREMENTS, LIMITS THE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES ON THIS PROPERTY.
THE UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY ALLOWS FOR THE INTENDED RESULT TO BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE ORDINANCE FOR INTERIOR LOTS WHILE RETAINING A 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY FOR A STREET IN THE FUTURE TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH.
STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANT THE VARIANCE IN APPROVING THE SITE PLAN PER THE CONDITIONS LISTED.
WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
THIS INCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
DOES ANYBODY, ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
[II. Establish a public hearing date of May 16, 2024 (Part 1 of 2)]
ALONG TO ROMAN NUMERAL TWO, LOOK FOR A MOTION FOR APPROVAL TO ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF MAY 16TH, 2024.FOR THOSE ITEMS LISTED IN A THROUGH F ON THE AGENDA TO HAVE A MOTION.
[III. Consideration of an Off-Street Parking Variance at 201 Eastwood Street (Geoff Butler)]
OKAY.MOVING ALONG TO ROMAN NUMERAL THREE, CONSIDERATION OF AN OFF STREETT PARKING VARIANCE.
ITEM THREE IS, UH, VARIANCE FOR 2 0 1 EASTWOOD STREET.
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN DEFERRED THREE TIMES AND MAY DEFERRED AGAIN.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT NORTH OF HARRISBURG, SOUTH OF CANAL IN WEST OF LOCKWOOD.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 11 UNITS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW NO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 14.
STAFF IS NOT IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATE THE INTERSECTION OF EASTWOOD AND SHERMAN.
STREETS IN THE SECOND WARD, COMPLETE COMMUNITY.
THE SITE CONSISTS OF A PRIMARY MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE WITH A REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
THE SITE HAS LONG BEEN USED AS A FIVE UNIT MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY WITH THREE ON STREET PARKING SPACES ALONG SHERMAN AND HEAD IN PARKING ALONG EASTWOOD.
THESE SPACES CANNOT BE APPLIED TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENT BECAUSE THE REAR SPACES WERE DISPLACED BY A NEW PORCH AND HEAD IN PARKING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IS NOT ALLOWED.
THE APPLICANT HAS EXPANDED THE NUMBER OF UNITS TO 11, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE 14 OFF STREET SPACES.
THE APPLICANT ASSERTS THAT THE UNITS WERE IN THIS CONFIGURATION WHEN THE STRUCTURES WERE PURCHASED.
STAFF FINDS THAT THE JUSTIFICATION TO REQUESTS TO REPRESENT A SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP AS MANY OF THE REQUIRED SPACES WOULD NOT BE MANDATED IF THE STRUCTURES REMAINED IN THEIR EARLIER CONFIGURATION.
STAFF HAS SUGGESTED THAT THE APPLICANT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS BACK TO FIVE OR TO EIGHT, WHICH WOULD ACHIEVE A SIMILAR RESULT AS INTENDED BY THE CITY'S NEW RULES.
UH, REGARDING MUL, UH, SMALLER MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, THE APPLICANT'S MAINTAIN THEIR DESIRE TO KEEP THE STRUCTURE, AS IN, IN THEIR CURRENT CONDITION.
WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT.
THIS ITEM, THIS CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION? UH, YES.
BLAND, IF YOU WERE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS TO EIGHT, WHAT WOULD THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES BE? IF WE LOOKED AT IT LIKE A, AN MUR, THE, THE, THE NEWER RESTRICTION, YOU'D GET ONE UNIT PER UNIT, SO THEY'D BE REQUIRED EIGHT.
THEY HAVE NO ABILITY TO PROVIDE EIGHT ON THIS SITE AS IT SITS NOW, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT REQUEST THAN WHAT'S BEING ASKED FOR AT THE MOMENT.
[02:05:01]
GARZA.SO, UH, IF WE'RE GOING FROM FIVE TO EIGHT, WHERE ARE THE THREE? ARE THEY IN THAT ATTIC SPACE IN THE SECOND FLOOR? WE DIDN'T SPECIFY WHERE WE JUST TOOK THE EIGHT NUMBER.
'CAUSE THAT'S THE MAXIMUM THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER THE MUR.
SO THAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
THAT'S NOT COMING FROM THE, OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, COMMISSIONERS.
I HAVE A, AH, PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
UM, I HAVE, UH, LUKE FRY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, LADIES AND, UH, GENTLEMEN OF THE COMMISSION.
I TALKED TO YOU GUYS, UH, WHAT, A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
UM, YOU KNOW, HERE, WE, YOU KNOW, I, I, AGAIN, I BOUGHT THIS THING.
UH, I DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THIS WHOLE PROJECT WAS GRANDFATHERED.
UH, UH, OUR INTENTION WHEN WE PURCHASED THIS THING WAS LIKE, ALL RIGHT, WE KNEW THAT IT WAS GOING TO HAVE PARKING ISSUES GOING INTO THIS.
SO WE THOUGHT OF THIS AS LIKE KIND OF A, UH, UM, UH, MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, DEPENDING ON MARKET, MARKET FORCES, THAT SORT OF THING.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT, UH, BUS LINES WITHIN A FOUR MINUTE WALK, UH, TWO DIFFERENT BUS STOPS.
WE'VE GOT A RAIL LINE WITHIN A SEVEN MINUTE WALK.
WE'VE GOT, EVEN WITHOUT ANY PARKING ON SITE, WE STILL HAVE PARALLEL PARKING ON, YOU KNOW, A LONG SHERMAN AND EASTWOOD THAT EQUALS SEVEN DIFFERENT PARKING SPACES.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET, WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE NICE HOMES, NICE CLEAN HOMES FOR AN AFFORDABLE, UH, YOU KNOW, PRICE RANGE.
AND NOW, UM, UH, MRS. BLAND BROUGHT UP THE, THE POINT IN THE LAST MEETING THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THESE PEOPLE ARE SELF-DIRECTED TO, TO RENTING PLACES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, LESS EXPENSIVE, THAT DO NOT HAVE VEHICLE ACCESS.
I MEAN, WHO ARE WE TO DENY 'EM? I WOULD, I, I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU GUYS TO FEEL THE SAME WAY.
UH, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOMES TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T, YOU KNOW, WANT OR NEED VEHICLES, YOU KNOW? NOW THAT SAID, WE DO HAVE SPACE FOR 11, YOU KNOW, PARALLEL STREET SIDE PARKING, UH, I'M SORRY, SEVEN STREET SIDE PARKING.
SO, YOU KNOW, UM, I LOOK AT ALL OF THESE THINGS AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN MY, IN MY MIND, IT, IT MAKES SENSE, BUT I'M NOT THE ONE MAKING THAT CALL.
AND I'M LOOKING TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS IN ORDER TO, YOU KNOW, HOW CAN I MAKE THIS WORK? YOU KNOW, I'M ALREADY INTO THIS THING, YOU KNOW, I'VE ALREADY SPENT A GOOD AMOUNT OF CASH IN TRYING TO BRING ALL OF THESE UNITS, ALL 11 UNITS UP TO CODE.
UH, WE'RE IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
WHEN I LEFT THE MEETING TWO, THREE WEEKS AGO, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE MIGHT BE APPROVED IF WE FOUND A PATH TO LIFE SAFETY FOR ALL OF THESE UNITS.
WE'RE DETERMINING THAT RIGHT NOW WITH OUR, WITH OUR PERMITTING.
AND, YOU KNOW, AND THEN THIS MORNING I RECEIVE AN EMAIL SAYING THAT, LIKE, OKAY, WELL NOW IT'S A SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP.
I DIDN'T IMPOSE THIS HARDSHIP.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I WALKED INTO THIS PROJECT, IT WAS 11 UNITS.
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT THAT I WAS GETTING INTO.
UH, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE THE COMMISSION AND I, I WANNA WORK WITH YOU GUYS.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PATH FORWARD.
I'M LOOKING TO TRY TO GET THIS THING, I'M, I'M LOOKING TO TRY TO MOVE THIS, THIS PROJECT FORWARD.
I'D PREFER NOT TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING BECAUSE OF THE SIMPLE FINANCIALS OF IT, YOU KNOW, ALL THIS.
UH, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, SO I UNDERSTAND, ARE ANY OF THESE UNITS OCCUPIED AT THE MOMENT? NO.
YOU'RE IN PERMITTING FOR ALL OF THEM, RIGHT? YES.
ALL OF THEM BEEN, HAVE BEEN INSPECTED AND YOU'RE TRYING TO MEET THE HABITABILITY RULES ABSOLUTELY.
AND ALL OF THAT SORT OF THING.
AND YOU'RE HUNG UP OVER THE PARKING SITUATION.
AND YOU'RE HUNG UP A LITTLE ON PARKING, I SUPPOSE.
SO WHAT ABOUT THESE FRONT THREE SPOTS THAT WERE ONCE PARALLEL, THAT NOW THERE'S COLUMNS THERE OR SOMETHING COULD THAT THEY WERE, THEY WERE ALWAYS THERE AND IT'S KIND OF, IT'S KIND OF BEEN A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
SO I CAN SEE WHETHER THEY NOT OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW, COULD THOSE COLUMNS BE REMOVED FOR THREE SPOTS THERE? IT'S A RIGHT OF SEND A RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THEY COULDN'T, THEY COULDN'T, UH, YOU KNOW, COMPLY WITH CITY HU HOUSTON PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
MR. FRA, SO HERE'S THE QUESTION.
SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT PERMITTING IS GOING TO, IF THIS GETS PASSED YES.
IN WHATEVER FORM PARKING? YEAH.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT PERMITTING IS GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO HAVE THE 11 UNITS? YES, SIR.
I'VE, I'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH, UH, UH, JEFF CONNOR AND MICHAEL LOCKE AT THE, AT THE CITY OF HOUSTON, PARTIAL STRUCTURAL REVIEWERS.
UH, THEY'VE, THEY AND I HAVE IDENTIFIED A PATH FORWARD TO, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE ALL OF THESE MEET HABITABILITY REQUIREMENTS.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE FULLY SPRINKLING THE BUILDING.
ALL OF THESE UNITS ARE FIREWALLED.
WE'VE GOT ALL OF OUR, YOU KNOW, SMOKE DETECTORS, ALL OF THOSE
[02:10:01]
SORTS OF THINGS.WILL THERE BE, IS THERE, I'M SORRY, IS THERE A FIRE ESCAPE ON THE SECOND FLOOR? IS THAT NOT REQUIRED? IT'S, IT'S ONLY REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE EGRESS IF THE, IF THE TRAVEL DISTANCE IS UNDER 75 FEET.
SO AT, AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE ON THE INSIDE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A CENTRAL HOLLOWAY STAIRCASE.
UH, BUT THERE'S NO OTHER EXIT FROM THAT BUILDING EXCEPT THAT FRONT STAIRCASE.
WELL, THERE'S ALSO THE, THE EMERGENCY EGRESSES OUT KNOWS
LOOK, IF I'M FIVE FIVE AND LIVING IN THE SECOND FLOOR, I'M NOT JUMPING.
YEAH, NO, THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.
THAT'S THE ANSWER THAT I THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, UH, MR. BUTLER, IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD, MA'AM.
IF BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT IS SAYING, UH, THAT THEY HAVE A PATH TO MAKE 11 UNITS, BUT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING EIGHT BASED ON WHAT I, I MISSED THE RATIONALE BEHIND THAT.
'CAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT LIFE SAFETY, WE'RE NOT ANY OF THAT.
RIGHT? SO THE SPECIFIC REQUEST AND JUSTIFICATION TO RECOMMEND EIGHT TO US IS, REMIND ME AGAIN.
SO IT, IT, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES FOR 14 REQUIRES 14 SPACES.
UM, THE APPLICANT CAN MAKE THE CASE THAT THERE ARE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD, UM, ONE, YOU COULD REASONABLY MAKE THE CONCLUSION THAT PEOPLE WOULD USE, UH, OTHER MEANS OF TRAVEL BESIDES AUTOMOBILES TO GET AROUND.
AND THAT'S A STRONG CASE TO MAKE HERE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE A LOT OF BUS SERVICE.
YOU HAVE A LOT OF RAPID TRANSIT, YOU HAVE THE, THE STREET GRIDS INTACT, THERE'S A TRAIL.
UM, WE HAD A HARD TIME, UH, RECONCILING 14 UNITS, UH, FROM THE ORIGINAL.
AND, AND WE LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT 11 WAS, EXCUSE ME, 11 UNITS.
14 IS THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE JUST, WE CONSIDERED A LOT OF THE WORK WE'VE DONE IN THE COMMUNITY WITH ALLOWING FOR MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL AND PARKING FLEXIBILITY.
AND A LOT OF THE, I THINK THE IDEAL THAT IS IN MIND WHEN WE MAKE THOSE PRESENTATIONS IS A LOT OF SMALLER MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS MAYBE INSUFFICIENT PARKING.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF EXAMPLES THAT COME TO MIND OF A UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT THIS SIZE THAT HAS GROWN BY THAT MANY UNITS.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHY WE, WE FELT WE COULD, THIS COULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE CURRENT CODE IF IT WAS BROUGHT DOWN TO MAYBE MATCH WHAT THE MUR REQUIREMENTS WERE.
UM, THAT WAS OUR THOUGHT PROCESS.
AND, AND, AND THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME.
UM, HOWEVER, WHETHER IT WAS 11 UNITS OR NOT BEFORE THIS, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY OUR KNOWLEDGE.
WE GRANT PARKING VARIANCES ALL THE TIME.
AND IF HE CAME AND ASKED TO US UPFRONT, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED DIFFERENT.
UM, I JUST HAVE A HARD TIME PUTTING OUR, YOU KNOW, ONE SITUATION, IE THIS CASE.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, COMMON SENSE WOULD SAY, OR TO ME, IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO, TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS TO FIND A COMPROMISE.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UM, LEGAL, UM, LETTING THEM FINISH
WE'RE DEALING WITH A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
UM, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU ASK THE QUESTION? I WAS QUESTION.
KNOW, I'LL COME OUTTA LEFT FIELD.
UM, AND THEN OUT OF THE PARKING LOT, SOMETIMES, UM,
UM, SO IF IT EVER SOLD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING HOUSING IS SOMETHING THE CITY NEEDS.
UM, WE RESTRICTED A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL.
YOU COULD ARGUE CAR AND AFFORDABILITY.
WE ALL KNOW THE GUESS OF, UM, ANNUAL CAR OWNERSHIP AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
BUT IS THERE KIND OF A BIGGER PUBLIC GOOD QUESTION.
AND I, IT MIGHT MEAN A DEFERRAL OR SOMETHING, AND THAT'S WHY I'M THROWING IT OUT THERE.
BUT WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THREE HOMES IN, IN THIS CITY, THERE MIGHT BE A PATH TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING.
AND, AND AGAIN, AGAIN, THROWING IT OUT THERE.
BUT, UM, ANYWAY, JUST THE IDEA THAT CROSSED MY MIND, YOU KNOW, THE LANDOW, A LANDOWNER MAY ALWAYS IMPOSE RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY.
UM, THAT'S UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD ADVISE THE COMMISSION
[02:15:01]
TO IMPOSE AS A CONDITION OF THE VARIANCE.IF IT WERE DONE BY THE OWNER AND THEY BROUGHT SOMETHING IN THAT SAID X PERCENT OF THE UNITS ARE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, RENTED AT A LOWER RATE AND WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A PARKING SPACE, UM, I, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE OF THAT.
AND WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL WOULD CONSIDER AS, UM, MAKING THE VARIANCE FOR PARKING MORE COMPATIBLE? BECAUSE I ALSO KNOW THAT WOULD HAVE AN EFFECT VALUES AND STUFF LIKE THAT DOWN THE ROAD, SO IT IMPACT HIS INCOME.
BUT ANYWAY, UM, THAT WAS JUST MY THOUGHT.
WE MAKE THAT A CONDITION FROM THE CITY TO THE OWNER.
I, THE PART WHERE I'M STRUGGLING, 'CAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALL AMENABLE TO PARKING VARIANCE WITHIN GENERAL, RIGHT? UM, OR I'M STRUGGLING IS THAT HIS PERMIT'S DEPENDENT ON THIS IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.
AND SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE, WE'RE CATERING TO ANTED, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS INITIALLY AN UN PERMANENT STRUCTURE.
AND I, I RE APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE OPERATING IN GOOD FAITH AND YOU, YOU BOUGHT IT AS IS.
UM, BUT THERE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A LACK OF DUE DILIGENCE IN TERMS, 'CAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT WASN'T PERMITTED FOR THAT, RIGHT? SO NOW YOU'RE ASKING US, UH, TO CONSIDER THIS, UM, TO OVERCOME THAT LACK OF DUE DILIGENCE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT.
AND AGAIN, I, I KNOW YOU'RE OPERATING IN GOOD FAITH, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M, I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT HERE, UM, IS LIKE, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY HAVING TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT, THAT LACK OF DUE DILIGENCE.
UM, AND I THINK DAY ONE, WHEN YOU PURCHASE IT AND GONE DOWN THIS PATH AND THESE CONVERSATIONS THAT REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT AN EIGHT UNIT IN REALITY, STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO I, I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT WE'RE HAVING TO COMPROMISE AS MUCH AS WE ARE ASKED TO COMPROMISE TO GIVE HIM THE PERMIT.
LIKE THAT'S MY, MY STRUGGLE HERE, THE TIMING OF THIS.
IF, IF HE GOT THE PERMIT ON THAT STRUCTURE AND WE WERE SITTING HERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION TO MAKE THAT WORK.
BUT, BUT IT'S AN UNPERMITTED IT'S NONPERMANENT SITUATION RIGHT NOW.
WAIT, DID COMMISSIONER GARZA, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, NO KIDDING.
SO FOR STAFF, ALRIGHT, SO HERE'S THE DEAL.
I, UH, I'VE LEARNED MY LESSON EVERY MANY YEARS THAT OUR JOB IS NOT TO PUNISH, BUT TO BRING THESE ITEMS INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE.
AND SO, UM, ORIGINALLY, YOU KNOW, I WAS LIKE, THIS IS NEVER GOING TO GET MY VOTE.
BUT TO GO BACK TO THE IDEA THAT AGAIN, LIVABLE PLACES AND WE WANT MORE SMALLER HOUSING AND POTENTIALLY THIS, I DON'T LIKE THAT THERE'S 11.
I WOULD BE HAPPIER WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THERE'S EIGHT.
BUT IF THIS IS GOING TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH PERMITTING, THEN REALLY OUR ONLY DISCUSSION HERE IS PARKING.
AND AT FOUR MINUTES AND SEVEN MINUTES AND THE HARRISBURG LINE BEING SO CLOSE, I MEAN, MARKET FORCES ARE GONNA DICTATE WHETHER YOU CAN OR CANNOT RENT THESE SPACES, WHICH IS NONE OF OUR BUSINESS, YOU KNOW? BUT, SO I WILL SAY FROM MY STANDPOINT TODAY, AND THIS IS A 180 FOR ME, IF YOU CAN GET PERMITTING TO APPROVE, YOU KNOW, CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY FOR HIS BUILDING FOR 11 UNITS, THAT'S OUT OF MY PURVIEW.
I'D RATHER HAVE THREE PARKING SPACES, BUT IF HE CAN'T RENT THEM WITH ZERO PARKING, THAT WILL BE A GOOD TEST AND A GOOD LESSON.
ALL FOR MY OPINION, WHICH IS SIM, WHICH IS DIFFERENT, WHICH IS, UM, THOSE, THE, THE VALUE OF THE UNITS WILL BE, THEY'LL DECLINE BECAUSE THERE'S NO PARKING, BUT THEY WILL GET RENTED AT A LOWER NUMBER.
AND THOSE PEOPLE WILL, WHO DO HAVE CARS, WILL UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE RENTING TO PARK ON THE STREET.
AND SO THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS BEARING THAT BURDEN FOR THE LACK OF DUE DILIGENCE.
AND I SYMPATHIZE WITH YOU AND I REALLY FEEL TERRIBLE FOR YOU, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT BURDEN SHOULD BE SPREAD AMONGST ALL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND AS MUCH AS I LIKE THE CONCEPT OF MARKET-BASED PARKING, AND I'M IN FAVOR OF IT UNTIL WE IMPLEMENT IT PROPERLY, I DON'T THINK OUR JOB IS TO EXERCISE BROAD DISCRETION AND SAY, WELL, TO EFFECTIVELY LEGISLATE FROM THIS BODY, WHICH IS WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING, WE WOULD BE SAYING THAT WE THINK MARKET-BASED PARKING IS THE RIGHT ANSWER.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND JUST START GRANTING PARKING VARIANCES ALL THE TIME, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.
AND WE'RE AN ADMINISTRATIVE, IN MY JUDGMENT, WE'RE AN ADMINISTRATIVE BODY, NOT A LEGISLATIVE BODY.
I DO THINK WE, THE CITY NEEDS TO LOOK AT, UH, A LARGER LOOK AT ALL THE PARKING ORDINANCES THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND IMPLEMENT SOME MARKET-BASED PARKING.
AND THIS MAY BE ONE OF THOSE AREAS THAT IT SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED.
BUT UNTIL IT IS, THIS IS SUCH A MASSIVE VARIANCE FROM WHAT THE ORDINANCES REQUIRE.
AND I COMMEND STAFF FOR TRYING TO FIND SOME MIDDLE GROUND.
[02:20:01]
THEY PROPOSED IT, IT WAS DECLINED.AND WHAT'S BEFORE US IS TO ACCEPT A VARIANCE THAT IS A, A A HUNDRED PERCENT VARIANCE FROM WHAT THE ORDINANCE, UH, THE ORDINANCE, UM, PARAMETERS.
AND, AND I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN, AND I'M GOLDILOCKS IN THE MIDDLE HERE, UH,
THAT IS HOW MARKET-BASED PARKING WORKS.
AND YOU DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM, WHICH IT'S REALLY, YOU KNOW, 14 SPOTS OR NOTHING.
MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE ALSO, WHEN THERE IS NO SOLUTION DOWN THE ROAD.
SO I SUGGEST WE GRANT YOU ANOTHER TWO WEEK DEFERRAL AND YOU WORK OVER HERE WITH STAFF.
I MEAN, WE ARE SYMPATHETIC TO YOU.
WE WANT, IF, IF I KNEW THAT NO ONE WITH A CAR WAS GOING TO RENT YOUR THING, I'D BE ALL ON IT ALSO.
BUT I'M WITH COMMISSIONER ROBBINS, 10 PEOPLE COULD HAVE A CAR AND THE, AND THE REST OF US ARE PAYING TO SUBSIDIZE YOUR DEVELOPMENT.
AND IT IS NOT A FAIR COST FOR THE REST OF US TO BEAR WITHOUT SOME SOLUTION IN THE FUTURE.
WHETHER THAT'S YOU RENTING A PARKING SPOT DOWN THE ROAD OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT I SUGGEST YOU TAKE TWO WEEKS, WORK ON A LITTLE BIT MORE AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BODY AND, AND SEE HOW WE'RE FEELING IN TWO WEEKS.
ALL IN FAVOR FOR TWO WEEK DEFERRAL? AYE.
MAY WE CONFIRM THAT YOUR A FORMAL VOTE WAS TO BE OPPOSED TO THE OKAY, THANK YOU.
THE MOTION WAS FOR DEFERRAL, TWO WEEK DEFERRAL.
[IV. Consideration of an Off-Street Parking Variance at 2003 Union Street (Geoff Butler)]
MOVING ALONG TO ROMAN NUER FOUR ROMAN REFOR IS, UH, 2003 UNION STREET.THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG UNION, PARDON ME.
THE STAFF REPORT WILL SAY DEFERRAL ON THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS ITEM, BUT WE'VE CHANGED THAT RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE.
SO DID EVERYBODY HEAR THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS DE FOR DEFERRAL, BUT NOW THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR APPROVAL? THANK YOU.
THE SITE IS LOCATED ALONG UNION AT, UH, WHITE, SOUTH OF WASHINGTON AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A 3,400 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, NEIGHBORHOOD RESTAURANT WITH AN EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE 16 SPACES AS OPPOSED TO THE REQUIRED 18 STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF WHITE IN UNION STREETS WITHIN THE OLD FIRST WARD HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE SITE CONSISTS OF A DESIGNATED HISTORIC COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, WHICH IS PROTECTED FROM DEMOLITION BY THE CITY'S HISTORIC ORDINANCE.
THE SITE FEATURES A PARKING LOT WITH ROOM FOR 16 PARKING SPACES, THOUGH THE CODE REQUIRES 18 AFTER APPLYING THE 40% DISCOUNT FOR HIS HISTORIC PROPERTIES, THE SITE ACROSS THE STREET HAS, UH, 22 PARKING SPACES THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC ON EVENINGS AND WEEKENDS.
WASHINGTON STREET ALSO FEATURES METER PARKING AVAILABLE AT ALL HOURS.
THESE NEARBY PARKING AREAS WOULD DISCOURAGE TRAFFIC GENERATED FROM THIS DEVELOP FROM DESTRUCT, EXCUSE ME, DISRUPTING NEARBY RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST JUSTIFIED CONSIDERING THE SITE CONSTRAINTS IN NEARBY PUBLIC PARKING OPTIONS.
WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCED WRITTEN COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE I GO TO THE SPEAKER? OKAY, GO AHEAD.
COMMISSIONER ROSENBERG, CAN YOU GO BACK TO SITE PLAN REAL QUICK? SURE.
ASSUMING THAT'S THE TRASH DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SITE PLAN.
YEAH, THAT'S KIND OF MY POINT.
UM, ARE THEY COUNTING THAT SPOT WHERE THE ENCLOSURE IS, IS A SPOT AGAIN, I PERSONALLY TWO SPOTS OR THREE SPOT VARIANCES.
I'M NOT, MY, MY BIGGER CONCERN IS, UM, THE TRASH TRUCK HOURS OF SERVICE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS, UM, WAS AT THE BEST PLACE ON SITE FOR IT.
UM, NOT KNOWING THE SURROUNDINGS, UM, THAT'S A BIG ISSUE.
THE BEEPING OF THE TRUCK PULLING UP SOMEONE'S BACKYARD OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS THE BEST LOCATION FOR IT.
UM, AND IF THEY'RE COUNTING IT AS A PARKING SPOT, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS
[02:25:01]
A, A HEADING SPOT THERE.UM, AND THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS A, A SURFACE PARKING LOT.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT IS TO THE SOUTH COMMISSIONER T UM, IS THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING NUMBER ONE PARKING SPOT? NUMBER ONE? IT'S NOT MARKED, SO IT'S NOT MARKED IN THE SITE PLAN, BUT IT IS THE CLOSEST TO THE FRONT DOOR.
SO MY, MY REQUEST WOULD BE THAT THEY MARK IT, MAKE SURE THAT THEY STAY PROPERLY, STRIPE IT, PROPERLY PUT THE SYMBOL AND THE SIGNAGE.
UM, I JUST HAVE SEEN THIS TOO MANY TIMES WHERE IT'S SORT OF THERE, BUT THEN THEY DON'T REALLY PROPERLY MARKET AND THEN EVERYBODY PARKS THERE AND YOU CAN'T TICKET THEM.
YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
SO THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY, YEAH.
AND NO TRASH RIGHT THERE EITHER.
WE HAVE A SPEAKER VIRTUALLY DANNY SABOTA.
UM, I, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
I DID WANNA JUST CORRECT THAT THIS BUILDING IS ACTUALLY IN THE OLD SIXTH WARD, NOT IN THE FIRST WARD.
UM, WHICH IS KIND OF ALSO RELEVANT TO THE COMMENTS.
BUT, UH, MY COMMENTS, UH, I'M DANNY SABOTA AND I LIVE IN THE OLD SIXTH WARD HISTORIC DISTRICT IN A 1912 HOUSE THAT MY HUSBAND AND I RESTORED AT 2203 DECATUR STREET.
UH, I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE OLD SIXTH WARD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT I'M SPEAKING AS A PROPERTY OWNER AND RESIDENT OF NEARLY, UH, 30 YEARS HERE.
UM, THANK FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ABOUT 2003 UNION STREET, UH, WHICH IS TWO BLOCKS AWAY FROM MY HOUSE.
UH, THIS BUILDING, HISTORICALLY KNOWN AS THE 1938 MARINO BROTHERS AUTO SERVICE BUILDING IS AN IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO OUR NATIONAL REGISTER AND CITY HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATIONS.
UH, PRIOR TO NOW, THE BUILDING HAS BEEN A SAFETY ISSUE AND VISUAL BLIGHT FOR YEARS BECAUSE OF ITS LACK OF MAINTENANCE.
SEVERAL YEARS AGO, UH, I, ALONG WITH SEVERAL NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORS, UH, BECAME CONCERNED ABOUT VAGRANTS STAYING INSIDE THE BUILDING HAD BEEN BOARDED UP, BUT VA VAGRANTS, UH, HAD RIPPED OFF THE PLYWOOD COVERINGS AND HAD BROKEN A LARGE PLATE GLASS WINDOW, UH, MOUNTAINS OF DEBRIS AND TRASH HAD AMASSED IN THE PARKING LOT.
AND WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT FIRE POTENTIAL, UH, BECAUSE IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE BUILDING IS, UH, THREE, UH, A ROW OF, UH, COMPLETE HOUSES.
SO THEY'RE RIGHT UP AGAINST THAT.
WE WERE GRATEFUL TO OBTAIN THE ASSISTANCE OF A POLICE OFFICER WHOSE PARENTS LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS HAD SEVERAL TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SON OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN CALIFORNIA.
AND AFTER SEVERAL MIN MONTHS, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNERS FINALLY SECURED THE BUILDING.
ALTHOUGH THE GRAFFITI WAS NOT EVADED, YOUR TIME IS UP.
SO COULD YOU PLEASE WRAP UP QUICKLY? THANK YOU.
UH, BA BASED ON THE INFORMATION FROM THE, THE NEW GROUP THAT, UH, HAS REQUESTED THIS PARKING VARIANCE OF TWO SPACES, UH, I SUPPORT IT.
AND, UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET, UH, THIS BUILDING REHABILITATED AND, UH, BACK, UH, AS A CONTRIBUTING, UH, STRUCTURE IN BUSINESS, UH, IN THE COMMUNITY.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS VIRTUALLY? ALL RIGHT.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
[II. Establish a public hearing date of May 16, 2024 (Part 2 of 2)]
TO GO BACK TO, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WERE LISTED.THE ONES LISTED ON THE, UM, SCREEN WERE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
SO NOW WE'RE, WE'VE GOT THE YES, WE'VE GOT THE CORRECT ONES UP THERE.
AND SO NOW I NEED TO REOPEN, UH, THE MOTION TO ESTABLISH AND GARZA.
SO KLIK AND GARZA, YOU'RE GOOD WITH REDOING YOUR MOTION AND MOVING FORWARD, CORRECT? YES.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST STAFF OUT THERE.
AND I USUALLY ADJOURN, SO WHO'S GONNA TAKE THAT OVER?