[00:00:01]
[CALL TO ORDER]
HALL ANNEX, IT'S THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RIGHT HERE ON HTV.IT IS 2:33 PM ON THURSDAY, MAY 15TH, 2025.
I'M CHAIRING THE HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX 900 BAGBY SPEAKERS IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM, PLEASE FILL OUT THE SPEAKER'S FORM BEFORE THE ITEM IS CALLED AND TURN IT IN TO THE STAFF NEAR THE FRONT DOOR.
CONSENT AND REPEAT SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED ONE MINUTE AND NEW SPEAKERS ARE TIMED FOR TWO MINUTES.
SPEAKER RULES ARE FOUND ON THE TOP PORTION OF THE SPEAKER SIGN IN FORM ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA.
COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WILL BE SPEAKING ON ITEMS ARE NOT TIMED.
APPLICANTS HAVE THEIR ALLOTTED TWO MINUTES TIME AS WELL AS REBUTTALS AND NON APPLICANTS OR GENERAL SPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED.
THERE IS NOT AN OPTION FOR REBUTTAL.
EVEN IF YOU DID NOT COMPLETE YOUR FULL TWO MINUTES, YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AGAIN AND TIME CANNOT BE ALLOTTED TO ANOTHER SPEAKER.
TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM, I'LL CALL THE ROLE.
PRESENT VICE CHAIR GARZA GARZA.
COMMISSIONER POR BURLE POROUS PERLE.
COMMISSIONER ROBBINS IS ABSENT.
COMMISSIONER MONDE, PACO MOND BARCA PRESENT.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE A QUORUM OF 16 TO, TO MEET OUR QUORUM REQUIREMENT OF 11.
BEFORE I START, I KNOW SHE'S GONNA PROBABLY THROW SOMETHING AT ME, BUT I WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT TODAY IS MARTY STEIN'S LAST DAY AS PLANNING COMMISSIONER AND WE ARE GOING TO MISS HER.
SHE HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB FOR THE CITY.
SHE SERVED AS CHAIR BEFORE ME FOR EIGHT YEARS UNTIL SHE EXPIRED.
YOU CAN'T DO ANY MORE THAN EIGHT YEARS.
AND SHE CONTINUED TO SERVE ON PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO WE THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE.
YOU'VE WORKED FOR THIS CITY IN MANY CAPACITIES FOR MANY YEARS.
AND SO I KNOW THAT I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF EVERYONE HERE AND EVERYONE THAT'S LISTENING, THAT WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE AND YOU'LL BE MISSED.
IT'S BEEN A REAL HONOR AND PLEASURE TO TO SERVE ON THE COMMISSION, BUT ALSO TO GET TO KNOW ALL OF YOU AS, AS COLLEAGUES AND FRIENDS.
OKAY, MARTY, YOU CAN PAY ME BACK LATER.
SHE SAID SHE WANTED TO GO OUT VERY QUIETLY.
UM, DID ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANNA SAY ANYTHING? I SHOULD AT LEAST ASK THAT.
I THINK YOU SAID IT IN YOUR APPLAUSE.
ALL RIGHT, SO MOVING ALONG, UM, DIRECTOR'S.
UM, WE HAVE ONE ITEM THAT'S BEEN WITHDRAWN, THAT'S ITEM 50.
WE WILL NOT HEAR THAT ITEM TODAY, NOR TAKE ANY ACTION.
[Director’s Report]
TO THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.CHAIR CLARK COMMISSION MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC.
I AM VON TRAN, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
EARLIER AT ONE O'CLOCK WE HAD OUR FIRST WORKSHOP FOR THE MTFP.
I JUST WANTED TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE WILL HAVE AN OPEN HOUSE ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11TH AT 6:00 PM THAT WILL BE A VIRTUAL MEETING.
UH, FOLLOWING THAT, THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THURSDAY, JULY 24TH AT 1:00 PM THEN THERE WILL BE AN APPLICATION UPDATE MEETING ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 21ST AT 1:00 PM AND THEN FINALLY RECOMMENDATION AND AN ACTION, UH, ACTION MEETING ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER THE 18TH AT 1:00 PM SO OTHER THAN THAT, I HAVE NO OTHER ANNOUNCEMENT.
IN CLOSING, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CAN BE REACHED AT (832) 393-6600.
YOU CAN ALSO CALL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLANNER OF THE DAY AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 6 2 4.
YOU MAY VISIT OUR WEBSITE@PLANHOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
[Consideration of May 1, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes]
THE CONSIDERATION OF[00:05:01]
OUR MAY 1ST, 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS.UH, MINUTES THAT WERE IN YOUR PACKET.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND? SO MOVED.
ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
[Platting Activities a & b]
MOVE ALONG TO ITEM A AND B.UH, I'M SORRY I CAN'T SPEAK TODAY.
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 71 SECTIONS A.
CONSENT ITEMS ARE NUMBERS ONE THROUGH 39.
SECTION B REPL ITEMS ARE NUMBER 40 THROUGH 71.
NO ITEMS NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS MADAM CHAIR, IF THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUALS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS, THE PLAYING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUEST THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSENT AND REPLAY ITEMS NOT REQUIRING NOTIFICATION.
UM, I DO HAVE A SPEAKER FOR ITEM 18 AND 19, BUT SHE'S HERE FOR QUESTIONS ONLY.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON 18 AND 19? OKAY, SO WE WILL PUT THAT ASIDE AND NOT TAKE THAT OUTTA ORDER.
I WILL ABSTAIN FROM ITEMS FOUR THROUGH SEVEN.
I WILL ABSTAIN FROM 37 AND 38.
OKAY, SO I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR ALL ITEMS UNDER A AND B.
SAVE AND ACCEPT FOUR THROUGH SEVEN AND 37 AND 38.
DO I HAVE A MOTION LER? MOTION SIGLER.
NOW WE'LL VOTE ON ITEMS FOUR THROUGH SEVEN AND 37 AND 38.
[c. Replats requiring Public Hearings with Notification (Dorianne Powe-Phlegm, Aracely Rodriguez, and John Cedillo) ]
TO SEE.GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 72 IS ANDERSON LAKE, SECTION THREE PARTIAL REPL NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S ETJ AND SOUTHWEST HARRIS COUNTY, NORTH OF SOUTH BELTWAY EIGHT WEST EAST OF HIRA CLARK ROAD, ALONG THE NORTH SIGN OF SUMMERLAND DRIVE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE TWO LOTS AND ONE RESERVE AND TO ADJUST THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES DUE TO A RELINE RIGHT OF WAY CENTER LINE OF WIND SWELL LANE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES NOT VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'VE OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY.
I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ITEM 73 IS CHERRY OAKS LIFT STATION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMITS IN HARRIS COUNTY SOUTH OF VICTORY DRIVE WEST OF VOGEL ROAD AND NORTHEAST OF VOGEL CREEK.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE A RESERVE RESTRICTED TO WASTEWATER LIFT STATION USE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE RESERVE NOT TO HAVE FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC STREET, BUT INSTEAD TO TAKE ACCESS FROM AN EXISTING 70 FOOT WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT.
THE SITE IS OWNED BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
THERE IS AN EXISTING LIFT STATION ON THE SITE THAT HAS BEEN IN OPERATION SINCE THE 1950S.
THE PROPOSED RESERVE IS A REPL OF AN UNRESTRICTED RESERVE CREATED WITH THE ARBOR OAKS PLAT IN 1964.
AN ADDITIONAL ACREAGE TO THE NORTH.
THE APPLICANT IS RE PLATTING THE RESERVE TO DEVELOP A NEW CONTROL BUILDING TO DETENTION PONDS.
REHABILITATION OF THE EXISTING WET WELL AND THE EXPANSION OF THE ACCESS DRIVEWAY TO MEET CURRENT CODES AND REGULATIONS.
HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL IS IN PROCESS OF DESIGNING AND CONSTRUCTING REGIONAL DETENTION PONDS, WHICH WILL ELIMINATE ACCESS TO THE LIFT STATION FROM THE ARBOR OAK SUBDIVISION TO THE EAST THROUGH THE, THIS EXISTING 70 FOOT ACCESS EASEMENT IS THE ONLY WAY TO THE RESERVE THAT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC STREET.
THE SIZE AND FRONTAGE OF THE EASEMENT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND THE REPL PROVIDES A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY.
HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE REQUEST REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES NOT VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTION.
THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND IMPROVE THE PLAT PER CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
[00:10:01]
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 73.
I HAVE SOMEONE SIGNED TO SPEAK FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, DAVID RIDGEWAY COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? MR. RIDGEWAY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 73? HEARING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMITS IN HARRIS COUNTY EAST OF LOCKWOOD DRIVE AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF SAM WILSON STREET AND DOWNING STREET.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RELA REPL IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT OR BE CPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REVIEWED BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES NOT VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE UH, PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 74 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
VICTOR, DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND HINES.
ITEM 75 IS M NORA LANE LIFT STATION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMITS IN HARRIS COUNTY, EAST OF WEST SAM HOUSTON PARKWAY, NORTH, NORTH AND ALONG.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE ONE RESERVE RESTRICTED TO WASTEWATER LIFT STATION USE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLATS PER CPC 1 0 1 FORM.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES NOT VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 75 IS OPEN.
I HAVE AGAIN, MR. RIDGEWAY FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
MR. RIDGEWAY, I'M ASSUMING YOU DON'T WANNA SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? HEARING NONE.
I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 75 AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
MOTION FOR MOTION FORES PERZA SECOND GARZA.
ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ITEM 76.
ITEM 76 IS THE STATES AT MC ALPINE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMITS IN HARRIS COUNTY, EAST OF SOUTH JENSEN DRIVE, BOUNDED BY MC ALPINE STREET, BAYOU PARK, PARKVIEW DRIVE AND NORTH ST.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE 11 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO PARKING RESERVES.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF RECLAMATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 76 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I WILL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ITEM 77 GARDEN HEIGHT LANDING V PLA NUMBER ONE.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CITY LIMIT EAST OF NORTH DURHAM DRIVE AND SOUTH OF I SIX 10.
THE PURPOSE OF THE WE PLA IS TO CREATE A SHARED DRIVEWAY DEVELOPMENT WITH FOUR LOT NO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT IN ADVANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLOT FOR FURTHER STUDY.
FURTHER DE RESTRICTION REVIEW MADAM CHAIR IS TO PLEASE OF THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'M OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 77.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
VIEW OF BLAND ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES
[00:15:01]
ITEM 78.ITEM 78, HARRIS COUNTY WATER CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER ONE 19 WATER PLANT NUMBER TWO.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON, ETJ IN HARRIS COUNTY, SOUTH OF SPRING, CYPRESS ROAD AND WEST OF CHAMPION FOREST DRIVE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE WE PLANT IS TO CREATE ONE RESERVE FOR WATER PLANT, I MEAN WASTE WATER PLANT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANT FOR ADDRESS SECTION 180 3 TO ALLOW THE WE PLOTTING OF A RESERVE RESTRICTED TO ACCESS LANDSCAPING OPEN SPACE AND UTILITY UTILITY PURPOSES INTO A RESERVE RESTRICTED FOR A WASTE WATER PLAN.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE HAS BEEN USED AS THE WASTEWATER PLANTS ON THE 1970S PREDATING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.
THE WE PLOT IS REQUIRED TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT DID NOT MEET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AS THE REASON FOR RELA WAS NOT STATED CORRECTLY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A WASTEWATER PLANT, BUT THE NOTICES MENTIONED THAT A WATER PLANT WAS BEING CREATED.
THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO DEFERRALS TO ALLOW TIME FOR PROPER NOTIFICATION TO CLEARLY STATE THE INTENDED USE OF THE PROPOSED RESERVE.
PER LEGAL REVIEW, THE PROPOSED PLOT WILL NOT VIOLATE APPLICABLE RESTRICTION.
STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
AND STATE RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT PER THE APPLICANT REQUEST.
MADAM CHAIR, IS IT PLEASE OF THE COMMISSION? YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 78 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO YES.
SO I I I DID HAVE A QUESTION, UH, FOR STAFF AND I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION 'CAUSE I NOTICED THAT TOO.
SO IN IN, IN OUR AGENDA, IT, IT, IT CLEARLY STATES THAT IT'S A WATER PLANT.
AND SO MAYBE FOR MY OWN, JUST PERSONAL EDIFICATION, DOES CHAPTER 42 DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WATER PLANTS AND, AND WASTEWATER PLANTS? BECAUSE CLEARLY THIS WOULD BE, WELL IN, IN MY OPINION, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE MISLEADING TO CALL THIS A WATER PLANT.
I LOOK AT THE AERIAL, IT'S CLEARLY A WASTEWATER PLANT SHOP.
THE FURNITURE HAD THE WATER PLANT USES, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY WASTEWATER PLANT AND THERE'S NO DEFINITION.
SO THERE'S NOT, UM, CLEARLY A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO TERMS. OKAY.
THERE'S NOT, BUT, UM, CORRECTING THE NOTIFICATION.
'CAUSE OBVIOUSLY I SAW THE AERIAL TOO AND I'M LIKE, WELL, YOU CAN'T PUT A WATER PLANT THERE
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT IT SAYS.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THE TWO WEEK DEFERRAL TWICE FOR NOTIFICATION, I THINK IS THE WAY TO GO.
SIMPLY, I WAS JUST GOING TO AGREE THAT IT WOULD, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY SO THAT THEY, WE COULD BE TRANSPARENT.
DID I CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ALREADY? I THINK I DID.
DID, UM, SO I NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR A DEFERRAL.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS IN OVER 25,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS WEST ALONG HOSKINS ROAD, NORTH OF LEY BOULEVARD AND EAST OF BLADELOCK ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE 12 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND TWO PARKING RESERVES ON A TYPE TWO PAE PRIVATE STREET, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ON NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS FOR THIS APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT FOR TWO WEEKS PER APPLICANT REQUEST TO ALLOW THEM TO COORDINATE WITH LEGAL REGARDING THE INTERPRETATION AS THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE REPLAYS OF THE SAME NATURE IN THIS SAME SUBDIVISION.
MAD CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'M OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 79.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT.
SO WE'LL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARING AND I NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
MADAM CHAIR, A COMMENT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD.
UM, I, I'VE NOTICED IT'S, THIS IS THE THIRD DEFERRAL FOR DEED RESTRICTIONS AND THERE ARE, ACCORDING TO MY NOTES, THREE MORE.
UM, AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALREADY SHORT STAFFED.
LEGAL IS WORKING OVERTIME AS IS, YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE'RE GONNA ASK IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT IS GONNA ASK FOR A DEFERRAL, I THINK THEY NEED TO BE HERE TO TELL US WHY.
AND IN NONE OF THESE CASES HAVE WE LEARNED
[00:20:01]
OTHER THAN MORE STUDY AND REVIEW.I KIND OF WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING CONCRETE.
IF YOU'RE GONNA COME IN HERE AND SAY, I'VE DONE MY RESEARCH, LEGAL DISAGREES WITH ME AND THIS IS THE ACTION I'M GONNA TAKE MOVING FORWARD.
I KNOW THAT WILL POTENTIALLY TAKE MORE TIME.
BUT TO SIMPLY GIVE DEFERRALS BECAUSE SOMEONE SEEMINGLY IS NOT PREPARED OR THEY HAVEN'T DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE AND, AND MET WITH STAFF AND LEGAL, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT I WOULDN'T WANT TO NECESSARILY GIVE THE DEFERRAL.
SO ANYWAY, THIS IS NOT TO SAY ANYTHING AGAINST STAFF OR LEGAL SIMPLY TO SAY, IF YOU'RE GONNA ASK FOR A DEFERRAL, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY AND WHAT YOU'RE GONNA ACCOMPLISH IN TWO WEEKS BECAUSE STAFF NOW HAS TO REVIEW IT TWICE, IF NOT THREE TIMES.
AND THAT I THINK COULD BE A HUGE WASTE OF, OF STAFF'S TIME.
SO I'M JUST GONNA SAY WHEN, WHEN WE TALK TO APPLICANTS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT THEY HAVE BEFORE WE GIVE THEM A DEFERRAL.
ANYWAY, AGAIN, STAFF AND LEGAL, EVERYTHING IS GOOD.
BUT I WOULD LIKE AN APPLICANT TO COME IN HERE AND TELL US WHY THEY'RE NOT PREPARED TO ASK FOR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL AND JUST MOVE FORWARD.
WELL I'M CURIOUS 'CAUSE THIS WEEK ON THE AGENDA THERE'S SOME THAT ARE DEFER FURTHER DEED RESTRICTION REVIEW AND THEN SOME DEFER APPLICANT REQUEST.
SO IS THIS STAFF TRYING TO, TO TELL US WHICH ONES ARE DEED RESTRICTION AND WHICH ONES YES.
ARE POSSIBLY SOMETHING ELSE? WELL, IF I MAY, IF YEAH, IT COULD.
I HAVE NOTES 'CAUSE IT SAYS HERE, UH, I WON'T SAY THE NUMBERS.
THIS ONE IS DEFERRED APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
THE NEXT ONE IS DEED RESTRICTIONS REVIEW.
THE NEXT ONE IS APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND THE LAST ONE IS APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
IT DOES NOT SAY DEED, BUT THEY'RE ALL DEED.
SO I, AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMEBODY COME IN HERE AND SAY, HERE'S WHAT I FOUND, HERE'S WHAT THEY FOUND AND HERE'S WHY WE'RE WE NEED A DEFERRAL TO MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK WHEN AN APPLICANT'S ASKING FOR A VARIANCE AND IT'S ALWAYS BEST WHEN THEY'RE HERE.
I MEAN IT'S TWO WEEKS I'D THIS THERE IS NO VARIANCE.
AND IF LEGAL HAS ALREADY DEFINED IT AS NOT MEETING DEED RESTRICTIONS.
YEAH, WE DO NEED SOMETHING CONCRETE.
SO IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DIFFER OR FURTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS VERSUS DIFFER ONLY? CORRECT.
SO, UH, A LOT OF 'EM YOU SEE THAT FOR, UH, FOR DE RESTRICTIONS, WHICH MEANS, UH, LEGAL DOES NEED MORE TIME TO THOROUGHLY REVIEW RESTRICTIONS.
SOME HAVE MANY DOCUMENTS AND SUCH.
UH, THIS ONE, UH, LEGAL HAS STATED THERE IS A VIOLATION.
UH, BUT HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A DEFERRAL BECAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE IDENTICAL DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THIS SAME SUBDIVISION, WHICH WOULD TYPICALLY BE UNDER THE SAME.
SO THAT'S WHY THERE'S A QUESTION OF THE INTERPRETATION AND THEY WANT A CHANCE TO KIND OF CONFIRM.
WE DID GET LEGAL INTERPRETATION, UH, ABOUT 24 HOURS AGO, MAYBE 48, WHICH THE APPLICANT DID NOT HAVE TIME TO COORDINATE WITH THEIR OWN LEGAL TO CREATE AN ATTESTATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO I, I'M JUST INTERPRETING THEIR REQUEST FOR A DEFERRAL JUST TO KIND OF GET THAT INFORMATION TOGETHER FOR THEMSELVES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER.
AND JUST COMMENT FOR STAFF, ENSURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THE NOTE FROM CENTER POINT BECAUSE, UH, SHOULD IT BE ALLOWED TO PROCEED AS IS THEY'RE GONNA CREATE A CODE CLEARANCE ISSUE, WHICH THEY'LL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FINANCIALLY, RIGHT? SO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY.
SO I'M NOT SURE IF I, UH, CONTINUED THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT IF I DID NOT, I AM NOW.
UH, RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER PER APPLICANT REQUEST.
GARZA MOTION TO HEAR SECOND GARZA.
ITEM 80 IS HYDE PARK, PARK PARTIAL REPL NUMBER 12.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS AN OVER 6,200 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS NORTH ALONG INDIANA AVENUE, WEST OF WALL DRIVE AND SOUTH OF GRAY STREET.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS GRADE THREE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOSS ON A 16 FOOT SHARE DRIVEWAY.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL IS STILL ONGOING AND MORE TIME IS NEEDED FOR REVIEW OF THESE SEPARATELY FILED DEED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION.
SITE RECOMMENDATION IS TO FURTHER APPLY FOR TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW MORE TIME FOR LEGAL TO REVIEW THE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTIONS.
MA'AM, CHAIR, IF IT PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 79 80, I MEAN 80, EXCUSE ME FOR ITEM 80.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I WILL, UH, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON CITY LIMIT EAST OF STATE HIGHWAY 2 88 AND NORTH OF I SIX 10.
THE PURPOSE OF THE WE PLA IS TO CREATE TWO SINGLE FAMILY
[00:25:01]
LOTS.NO VARIANCES ARE BEING REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT AND STAFF DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT IN ADVANCE.
PER LEGAL REVIEW, THE PROPOSED WE PLA WILL VIOLATE THE RESTRICTION.
THE LOT CANNOT BE SMALLER THAN 5,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE IN SIZE AND A 25 FEET FROM BUILDER LINE IS REQUIRED.
STEP RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER PER THE APPLICANT REQUEST TO ALLOW TIME TO COORDINATE WITH LEGAL MADAM CHAIR IS TO PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 81 IS OPEN.
I HAVE A SPEAKER, UM, AND IF I GET YOUR NAME WRONG, PLEASE CORRECT ME.
S THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
UH, I WANT TO TELL YOU, UH, IN THAT SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THERE IS LIKE MUL A LOT OF THEM, LIKE MAYBE 200, 300 YOU CAN, I CAN SHOW YOU THEY REPL AND THEY ALREADY BUILD HOUSES LIKE, UH, FRONT OF THAT, UH, FRONT OF THAT HOUSE.
LIKE IF YOU LOOK, WHEN WE LOOK AT IT ON THE RIGHT SIDE, YOU WILL SEE THEY ALREADY REPLANTED AND THEY ALREADY BUILT THE HOUSE.
AND I SEE THE, UM, THE RESTRICTION THEY HAVE.
CORRECT? AND, UM, I I I REALLY WANNA, UH, KNOW I CAN, CAN I SHOW YOU THAT VIDEO? SO THEY SUBDIVIDED WITH THEM.
UM, CAN YOU LOOK, GO BACK TO THE AERIAL.
RIGHT, I WAS SAYING IS THAT, IS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT? YOU JUST WANNA SHOW US THESE HOMES? IS THAT WHAT YOU WANNA SHOW US? YES MA'AM.
THERE IS A, THERE IS A EXACTLY FRONT OF IT.
RIGHT SIDE YOU WILL SEE THE BRAND NEW HOUSES.
THEY MAKE IT AND THEY SUBDIVIDED ALL OVER THAT, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY ALREADY SUBDIVIDE EVEN WITH THE SMALLER LOT.
MINE IS, UH, IF GET UP ROOF IS 25 AND 25, I SEE SOME OF 'EM THERE ARE LIKE 1900 OR 1800 SQUARE FOOT LOT.
AND UM, I CAN SHOW YOU THE PICTURE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THEY ALREADY, UH, SUBDIVIDED THAT.
YOU CAN GIVE IT TO STAFF AND DOCUMENT CAMERA.
THIS IS THE, IT USED TO BE A HOUSE, BUT I, UH, DEMOLISH IT AND UH, YOU CAN SEE AT AS SOON AS I TURN AROUND RIGHT HERE, OVER THERE.
LOOK THOSE HOUSES, THEY ARE, EACH ONE OF THEM ARE 25 AND 25.
AND IF YOU F IF YOU FOLLOW IN THAT STREET, IN EVEN IN THE SAME SIDE OF THE HOUSE, I HAVE THEY, UH, SUBDIVIDED.
IF YOU A LITTLE BIT GO CLOSER TO THE NAME.
EVERYBODY SUBDIVIDED JUST WRAP UP REAL QUICK FOR ME PLEASE.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU CAN PLEASE, UH, HELP ME OUT AND HOW CAN I, UH, DO THAT? THANK YOU SO MUCH.
SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A DEFERRAL, CORRECT? UH, YES.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
YES, COMMISSIONER FOR, FOR STAFF.
SO DEED RESTRICTIONS SAY 25 FOOT SETBACK? YES.
DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA, NONE OF THESE HOUSES APPEAR TO BE AT THE 25.
UM, SO A AGAIN, NOT TO CAST STONES, BUT IS THIS A PERMITTING ISSUE? I MEAN, IT SEEMS UNFAIR TO ME THAT, THAT WE SHOULD FORCE THIS GENTLEMAN TO BUILD AT THE 25 WHEN NO ONE ELSE DOES AT THE SAME TIME.
IF DE RESTRICTIONS SAY 25, THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT, RIGHT? WE ARE AS, UH, I WANNA MAKE CLEAR THAT IF DEED RESTRICTIONS SAY 25, WE CANNOT VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
BUT I, I THINK IT'S A FAIR QUESTION TO SAY WHY ARE ALL THESE HOUSES BUILT AT THE 20 WHEN THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS? ANY IDEAS? SO IF YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN START UNIT SECTION TWO IS ON THE SOUTH OF MAIN STREET, THE LOT THAT WE'RE SUBDIVIDED FROM A DIFFERENT SUBDIVISION VERSUS SECTION ONE.
SO THERE MIGHT BE A KING CAN HELP ME, BUT WHERE THE RESTRICTION ONLY APPLY TO CERTAIN SECTION AND NOT THE WHOLE OVERALL SUBDIVISION SECTION ONE AND TWO.
SO MS. MICKELSON DID IT, LIKE THAT BLOCK IS A SEPARATE, THAT SECTION IS SEPARATE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
IT, IT APPEARS TO BE A SEPARATE DEED RESTRICTION.
AND THIS IS AN ITEM AND, AND I MISSPOKE TO THE APPLICANT EARLIER, THIS IS NOT THE 1948 DEED RESTRICTIONS, LIKE I GOT THAT FROM ANOTHER APPLICATION.
BUT THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A DOCUMENT THAT SAYS WE'RE NOT, NO, WE'RE NO LONGER SUBJECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT THAT WAS ALL IT SAID, IT, IT REFERENCED PART OF THE STATE CODE AND DOES NOT PROVIDE THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR THE COMMITTEE.
[00:30:01]
OUT AND CANCELING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.THEIR ATTORNEY DID CALL OUR OFFICE ON MONDAY AND I REFERRED IT TO UH, DAMON CRENSHAW WHO HAD ALSO REVIEWED THIS.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT YOLANDA REVIEWED THEN I REVIEWED AND WE HAD THEM CHECK IT.
SO WE ARE TRIPLE CHECKED ON THAT, BUT I KNOW THAT MR. CRENSHAW KNOWS THE ATTORNEY'S APPLI OR THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY AND WE'LL, WE'LL COORDINATE WITH HIM.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE HAD A CHANCE TO DO THAT AS HE'S ON VACATION TODAY, SO.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER, HE NOW COMMISSIONER GARZA, YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT THE SETBACK, BUT I DID, I MISUNDERSTAND, I THINK YOU ALSO SAID IT WAS A, UH, VIOLATION OF, UH, YEAH, LOT SIZE 'CAUSE IT WAS LESS THAN 50, UH, 50 FEET.
SO THAT, THAT, THAT'S THE OTHER ISSUE AS WELL.
UH, THE RESTRICTION ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE LOT HAS TO BE A MINIMUM 5,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE.
OKAY, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT BOTH OF THOSE.
AND WHETHER OR NOT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS RIGHT, APPLY OR IF THERE ARE PAPERS MISSING IN THE TITLE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
SO I CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
WE'LL, UM, HAVE ACTION ON 5 29 AT OUR MEETING.
ITEM 80, AND I SHOULD SAY, I'M SORRY MR. SIO.
UM, I THINK YOU ALL KNOW, BUT I WANT TO EXPLAIN TO WHAT TO THE PUBLIC WE'RE DOING NO ACTION BECAUSE THIS WAS ONE THAT ASKED FOR A 30 DAY REFERRAL DEFERRAL.
ITEM 83 IS MONTROSE EDITION PARTIAL RELA NUMBER SEVEN.
THE SUBJECT SIDE IS A NEARLY 13,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS SOUTH ALONG LUT BOULEVARD, WEST OF TAFT STREET.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RELA IS TO CREATE ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUEST FOR THIS ITEM.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ON NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REVIEW REVIEW B.
LEGAL INDICATES THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
S HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION.
SEVERAL RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCP C 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'M OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 83.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT.
SO I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ITEM 84.
THE SUBJECT SIDE IS NEARLY 8,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON CORPORATE LIMITS AT THE SOUTHEAST INTERSECTION OF TALTON STREET AND BUR STREET WEST OF MESA DRIVE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO GRADE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET NO NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW B LEGAL INDICATES THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY AND STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCE COMMENTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CBC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'M OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 84.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, COME FORWARD PLEASE.
HELLO? UM, MY QUESTION WOULD BE, 'CAUSE I DIDN'T HEAR YOU.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE? COULD YOU, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME? I'M SORRY.
UM, I DIDN'T HEAR EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID.
THE PURPOSE OF THE, THE REPL WAS FOR, THEY'RE TURNING THIS ONE LOT THAT IS AT THE CORNER INTO TWO LOTS.
SO TO BUILD TWO INDIVIDUAL HOMES, CORRECT? YES MA'AM.
UM, SO I GUESS MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD'VE BEEN ALSO WHEN YOU SAID THAT THEY DID THE PROPER NOTIFICATION, WOULD THAT BE TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY? SO THEY WOULD PUT A SIGN UP AS SHOWN? MM-HMM
AND THEN WE DO SEND OUT LETTERS TO EVERY HOMEOWNER WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROPERTY.
SO NOT, I MEAN, 'CAUSE I'M THE NEIGHBOR.
AND I, I JUST WANT TO KNOW 'CAUSE I, THIS WAS NEW TO ME.
SO THAT, I GUESS THAT'S MY QUESTION.
PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR.
I'M SANDRA LAUDERDALE AND I LIVE, UM, RIGHT NEXT TO THIS PROPOSED PROPERTY.
I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS MYSELF TOO.
UH, I WAS JUST READING IN THAT CHAPTER 42 AND I I, IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME, UH, ABOUT WHAT IT SAYS IN REFERENCE TO BEING RESTRICTED TO A SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL
[00:35:01]
OR RESIDENTIAL USE.IS THAT LIKE IN, UH, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE, UH, WHAT THE APPLICATION IS FOR FOR THE SINGLE, FOR THE TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES? IS THAT, IS THAT, IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING MR. SIO? IS THAT WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO BE ON? UNFAIR? YEAH.
MR. SIO, WOULD YOU MIND EXPLAINING PLEASE? UM, THE APPLICATION HAS TO GO THROUGH PUBLIC HEARING WHEN THERE IS A DEED RESTRICTION ON THE PLAT OR SEPARATELY FILED THAT STATES, THIS IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY USE ONLY.
UH, EVEN IF THE, THAT EX THAT, UH, DE RESTRICTION IS EXPIRED, THIS APPLICATION WILL STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT.
SO IT IS DEPENDENT UPON THE ACTUAL APPLICATION ITSELF, WHETHER OR NOT THIS RESTRICTION WAS ON THE FA PLAT ON WHICH IT CAN BE PLATTED AWAY, OR WHETHER IT WAS ON THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WHERE IT MAY HAVE TO BE UPHELD OR IF THEY'VE EXPIRED, IT CAN CHANGE USE.
HOWEVER, THIS IS GOING FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO SINGLE FAMILY.
IF THAT WERE A DIFFERENT CASE, LIKE GOING FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO COMMERCIAL, THIS WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A VARIANCE FOR 1 93.
UH, THAT, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION ASPECT.
BUT, UH, AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THIS DOES MEET ALL LEGAL REQUIREMENTS AND DID MEET ALL NOTICE ASPECTS.
SO MR. CILLO, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THIS SINGLE LOT IS GOING TO BE DIVIDED INTO TWO.
AND EACH ONE OF THE LOTS CAN HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON IT.
WHICH COUNTS AS A SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT I MEAN, IT CAN HAVE, IT WILL ONLY HAVE ONE BUILDING ON IT BECAUSE IT'S REMAINS SINGLE FAMILY.
IT'S NOT CHANGING ANYTHING IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDING APARTMENTS.
IT'S TWO LOTS INSTEAD OF ONE TWO HOUSES, THE USE OF THE PROPERTY NEVER CHANGES.
SO IT WAS SINGLE FAMILY BEFORE IT'S SINGLE FAMILY NOW? NO, IT'S JUST TWO LOTS VERSUS ONE.
YOU HAVE ONE BUILDING, TWO HOUSES.
BUT THERE COULD BE LIKE A GARAGE.
I, MR. C YOU WOULD BE BETTER TO ANSWER.
THERE COULD BE A GARAGE, A GARAGE APARTMENT.
I'M NOT 100% SURE, BUT ONE, ONE LOT, ONE HOUSE.
THAT'S WHAT YOU WANTED TO KNOW? YES.
AND, AND I ALSO WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT, UH, THIS MAY NOT BE THE FORUM, BUT THE DRAINAGE.
I MEAN, BECAUSE I I DON'T KNOW HOW, YOU KNOW, BUILDING UP SOMETHING NEW CONSTRUCTION AGAINST, UH, AN OLDER PROPERTY.
THAT, THAT WOULD NOT BE, AS YOU SAY, THIS WOULD NOT BE THIS BODY, THIS WOULD BE PERMITTING.
BUT MR. MR. CILLO CAN GET YOU IN TOUCH WITH SOMEONE AT PERMITTING YES.
WELL, WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT SOMEONE FROM PUBLIC WORKS, MR. SU SUHA IS BACK IN THE BACK AND HE WILL, UH, MEET UP WITH YOU AND EXPLAIN HOW THAT PROCESS, OKAY? OKAY.
UH, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T NEED MY CONSENT? NO.
I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM 84? ALL RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE WITH PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMITS IN HARRIS COUNTY, SOUTHWEST OF GALVESTON ROAD AND NORTHWEST AND ALONG PARK PLACE BOULEVARD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REPL IS TO CREATE ONE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE APPLICATION DOES VIOLATE SEPARATELY FILED RESTRICTIONS AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A SECOND DEFERRAL TO CONTINUE TO CONFER WITH LEGAL CONCERNING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ADVANCE.
MADAM CHAIR, IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 85 IS CONTINUED.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY.
IF YOU COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU HAVE NO QUESTIONS, I NEED TO, UH, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ITEM 86 IS PORTER MUD LIFT STATION J THE SUBJECT SIDE IS IN OVER 800 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY, EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION SOUTH OFF OF JANE AVENUE AND SOUTHWEST OF FORD ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RE PLAT IS TO CREATE ONE RESERVE RESTRICTED TO LIFT STATION USE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A LIFT STATION TO TAKE ACCESS VIA A RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT IN LIEU OF PUBLIC STREET FRONTAGE.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE IS AN 800 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY, UH, THAT, UH, CONTAINS AN EXISTING LIFT STATION.
THE LIFT STATION IS OWNED BY THE PORTER MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT AND THE MUD INTENDS TO UPGRADE ITS FACILITY.
[00:40:01]
TAKEN ACCESS FROM THE RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT FOR MANY YEARS.GRANTED, THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE WILL ALLOW THE LIFT STATION TO REMAIN OPERATIONAL AND PROVIDE SERVICE TO THE NEARBY SUBDIVISION REVIEW.
LEGAL INDICATES THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
ALL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCPC 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MA'AM CHAIR, IF YOU PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'LL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 86.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ALL IN FAVOR OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ITEM 87.
ITEM 87 IS STEEPLECHASE SECTION ONE, PARTIAL REPLAT NUMBER THREE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS AN OVER TWO AND A HALF ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION NORTH ALONG STEEPLECHASE WAY WEST OF JONES ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE PLT IS TO CREATE ONE LARGE UNRESTRICTED RESERVE.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUEST OF THIS ITEM.
THE APPLICANT HAS MET ON NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REVIEW BY LEGAL IS STILL ONGOING AND MORE TIME IS NEEDED FOR REVIEW OF THE RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY ADVANCED COMMENTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER THE PLAT FOR TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW MORE TIME FOR LEGAL REVIEW.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 87.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, I WILL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
MOTION POURS SECOND VE SECOND VE OF BLAND.
ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ITEM 88.
ITEM 88 IS SENTARA SECTION 62 PARTIAL REPLANT NUMBER ONE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS A NEARLY FIVE ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION NORTH ALONG BECKENDORF ROAD EAST OF BARLETT ROAD.
THE PURPOSE OF THE RELA IS TO CREATE SEVEN SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND TWO RESERVES ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY NETWORK TO ALTER THE SUM OF THE DISTANCES AND BEARINGS OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH MIGHT NEWLY ALTERS THE BEARINGS OF SAID LOTS AND RESERVES.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES REQUESTS WITH THIS ITEM AND THE APPLICANT HAS MET ON NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
THE PLAT WAS DEFERRED AT THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION FOR CONTINUED LEGAL REVIEW.
REVIEW BY LEGAL INDICATES THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
STAFF HAS NOW RECEIVED ADVANCED COMMENTS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CCPC ONE.
MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE THE COMMISSION.
HE MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
I'LL CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 88.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ALL IN FAVOR OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES ITEM 89.
ITEM 89 IS TOMBALL AUTO AND COMPUTER.
THE SUBJECT SIDE IS A NEARLY TWO ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE HARRIS COUNTY EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION EAST ALONG DALE ROAD, SOUTH OF KIRKENDAL ROAD AND WEST OF CREEKSIDE TIMBERS DRIVE.
THE APPLICA IS PROPOSING ONE LOT AND ONE COMMERCIAL RESERVE AND IS REQUESTING A 1 93 VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WITHIN A PARTIAL RE PLAT TO CHANGE ITS USE TO COMMERCIAL RESERVE.
STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST REVIEW.
BAL LEGAL INDICATES THE PLAT DOES NOT VIOLATE RESTRICTIONS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OR THOSE FILED SEPARATELY.
ANY ADVANCE COMMENTS? UH, THE PLAT IS A FULL REPAT OF THE ONLY LOT WITHIN THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION AND CONVERTING THE NORTHERN HALF OF THE SITE TO COMMERCIAL RESERVE WOULD BE WITHIN THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE OF 42 1 93 AS IT INTENDS TO PROTECT THE VESTED INTEREST OF THE HOMEOWNERS OF THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION.
AND THE VARIANCE IS AT THE REQUEST OF THE SOLE HOMEOWNER OF THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION.
THE CREATED COMMERCIAL RESERVE IS NOW ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL RESERVE OF THE ORIGINAL PLAT STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE PLAT SUBJECT TO CP C 1 0 1 FORM CONDITIONS.
MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU PLEASE THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME.
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM 89 IS OPEN.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO HEARING NONE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEEK A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
WE'LL MOVE ALONG TO D SUBDIVISION
[d. Subdivision Plats with Variance Requests (Geoff Butler)]
PLATS WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS.CHAIRMAN, MR. HOUSTON PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT SOUTH OF WESTHEIMER, WEST OF KIRBY IN NORTH OF ALABAMA.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ALONG A 55 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT PROVIDE FIVE FEET RIGHT OF WAY.
DEDICATION REQUIRED FOR STREETS WITH NON SINGLE FAMILY USES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL TO FURTHER COORDINATE WITH OTHER CITY REVIEW AGENCIES.
WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT IN THIS ITEM.
UH, I HAVE NO ONE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE NO ONE THAT WISHES TO? ALRIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, I NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
[00:45:01]
MOTION TAHIR.THERE IS NOTHING UNDER ITEM E SO WE'LL MOVE ALONG
[f. Reconsiderations of Requirement (Aracely Rodriguez and Geoff Butler)]
TO F RECONSIDERATION OF REQUIREMENTS.ITEM 91 AT M CUTMAN HEIGHT, THE STATE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON CITY LIMIT AT THE INTER INTERSECTION OF HERST STREET AND M STREET NORTH OF I 10 AND EAST OF HIGHWAY SIX 10.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTING A RECONSIDERATION REQUIREMENT WITH A VARIANCE TO PROVIDE A FIVE B RIGHTWAY DEDICATION HOLD ON HER STREET AND M STREET.
INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRE 17.5 FEET ALONG HER STREET AND 10 FEET ALONG WARD STREET.
STEP IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS RELOTTING A PORTION OF WAR NEXT SUBDIVISION, WHICH WAS RECORDED BACK IN 1960 TO DEVELOP A SHARED DRIVEWAY WITH FIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOT.
THIS RECORDED SUBDIVISION ESTABLISHED A 25 FEET RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH CURRENTLY FORMS HERS STREET.
WITH THE PROPOSED RE PLA, THE APPLICANT IS DEDICATING AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET CREATING A 30 FOOT RIGHT AWAY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HERS STREET.
THE REMAINING 30 FEET NEEDED TO MEET THE REQUIRED 60 FOOT RIGHT AWAY IS EXPECTED IN THE FUTURE WHENEVER THE WAY ROAD, THE 30 FEET RIGHT WAY ROAD, WHICH IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HER STREET, IS ABANDONED.
THEREFORE NO VARIANT IS REQUIRED ALONG HER STREET.
ALONG MC, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRE A 10 FEET RIGHT OF AWAY DEDICATION.
THE APPLICANT IS SICK IN A VARIANT TO DEDICATE ONLY FIVE FEET.
THE ADJACENT WARD MUSE SUBDIVISION LOCATED DIRECTLY START OF THE SITE DEDICATED FIVE FEET ALONG THE ENTIRE BLOCK ON MAGWOOD STREET.
SO GRANTING THE VARIANCE WOULD MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT RIGHT OF WAY ALIGNMENT ALONG THE BLOCK AND STILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE REQUIRED SIDEWALK.
SO STEP RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED VARIANT TO ALLOW A FIVE E RIGHTAWAY DEDICATION ALONG MAP STREET AND APPROVE THE PLANS SUBJECT TO THE T PC 1 0 1 FORM.
CONDITION STAFF DID RECEIVE LIKE THREE COMMON PUBLIC COMMENT IN EVENT WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION OF THE VALUING REQUEST.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK MUST.
UM, I HAVE AMANDA, GINA, I'M SURE I I'M SURE I, I MISSPOKE, BUT THAT'S WHAT I SEE ON THE HANDWRITING, SO CORRECT ME PLEASE.
UM, I'M HERE TO SPEAK OF FIVE MAJOR CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE.
UM, SO I LIVE IN MAX MUSE, WHICH IS SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY.
UH, SO OUR MAJOR CONCERNS ARE IS THE INCREASE IN, UH, TRAFFIC FOLLOWING THE TWO EXTREMELY LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON BOTH SIDES OF MAX RIGHT, UH, BELOW 11TH STREET.
NUMBER TWO, THE CONSTRUCTION WILL RESULT IN MORE STREET CLOSURES AND IMPEDIMENTS TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THE EXISTING HOMES ALONG MAXY.
UM, WHICH IS, UM, WE'RE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, THE SIDEWALKS ARE CRUCIAL TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IN THE AREA.
AND GIVEN THE HEAVY VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ON THE NARROW ROADWAY, UH, BUILDING CLOSER TO THE STREET TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL HOUSING WILL RESULT IN SMALLER SIDEWALKS, ASSUMING THE DEVELOPER INSTALLS ANY, WHICH WILL LIKELY RESULT IN PEDESTRIAN DIFFICULTIES.
THE ROAD ITSELF IS NOT BUILT TO SUPPORT THE LEVEL OF PASSENGER AND HEAVY TRUCK TRAFFIC ON IT AND THE ADDITIONS OF MORE HOUSES BEFORE WE EVEN KNOW THE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC COMING FROM THE TWO HUGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES IS PREMATURE AND IRRESPONSIBLE.
AND LASTLY, THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE AREA IS ALREADY MAXED OUT.
EVERY SINGLE STORM WE'RE LOSING POWER AND THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PONDING ON THE ROADWAYS.
I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW IT WOULD BE AFTER ANY MAJOR STORM.
WE DO NOT KNOW THE IMPACT FROM THE TWO MASSIVE APARTMENT COMPLEXES BEING BUILT AS WE SPEAK.
AGAIN, THERE HAS BEEN NO TIME TO PROPERLY ASSESS THE IMPACT OF THE FLOOD PLAIN, THIS PROPOSAL BUILDING ON A, ON A SINGLE HOME THAT MOSTLY HAD GRASS, UM, AS COVERAGE.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FLA FLOOD PLAN WILL BE LIKE.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THIS CONSIDERATION.
UM, SO WE DON'T, WE DON'T LOOK AT, UH, ANY DRAINAGE OR DETENTION OR ANY OF THAT.
BUT AS THEY GO ON TO PERMITTING FOR THIS PROJECT, THAT'S WHERE THEY LOOK AT UH, DRAINAGE IMPACT.
[00:50:01]
AT TRAFFIC IMPACT AND I SEE MR. BROWN STANDING UP BACK THERE SO HE CAN WALK YOU THROUGH THAT PROCESS.'CAUSE THIS IS REALLY JUST STEP ONE.
UM, AND THOSE ITEMS WILL BE ADDRESSED LATER ON BY PUBLIC WORKS.
AND MR. BROWN WILL SPEAK WITH YOU.
I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY, COMMISSIONER GARZA.
SO, UH, MS. RODRIGUEZ, UM, THERE WILL BE SIDEWALKS ON THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE.
SO THE FIVE FEET IS BEING DEDICATED TO THE STREET TO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THEY, THE, THE REQUIREMENT WILL REQUIRE NECESSITATE THE BUILDING SIDEWALKS ON THE NORTH ON HEARST AND ON THE, UM, THE EAST ON MAX, CORRECT? YES.
AND THAT'S GONNA BE A STANDARD FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK? YES.
DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S SIDEWALKS ALREADY SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY? I KNOW THERE'S SIDEWALK ALONG MC AND THAT'S ALL I NEED ALSO HEARD.
THAT'S FOR THE MAJORITY OF THIS IS HAPPENING.
ANOTHER OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
ALRIGHT, SO I NEED A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION GARZA.
ITEM 92 IS SONOMA SECTION FOUR.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY IN THE ETJ ALONG A PROPOSED SEGMENT OF EAST LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SUBDIVISIONS OF OF SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
THERE ARE NO VARIANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF THE PLAT REQUIREMENT TO RECORD THE SOUTHERNMOST SEGMENT OF EAST LAKE HOUSTON PARKWAY.
WITH THIS PLAT STAFF RECOMMENDS TO DEFER FOR FURTHER COORDINATION WITH THE HARRIS COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE AND WE RECEIVE NO ADVANCEMENT IN COMMON ON THIS ITEM.
I HAVE NO, NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? ALRIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DEFERRAL BY STAFF TO HAVE A MOTION.
ALL IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.
I, UH, WILL GO ON TO G EXTENSIONS
[Platting Activities g - j]
OF APPROVAL.AND PLEASE NOTE AS WE GO THROUGH THIS SIT ON ITEM 95.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, MY NAME IS MALCOLM OLIVER.
IF IT PLEASES THE COMMISSION, STAFF WILL LIKE TO TAKE SECTIONS.
EXTENSIONS OF APPROVAL CONSISTS OF ITEMS 93 THROUGH 1 0 8.
NAME CHANGE HAS NO ITEMS. SECTION I CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE CONSISTS OF ITEM 1 0 9 AND SECTION J.
ADMINISTRATIVE HAS NO ITEMS. THE PLANNING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS THE APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SECTIONS G-H-I-N-J.
WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION HINES.
WE'LL MOVE ALONG TO KAY DEVELOPMENT
[k. Development Plats with Variance Requests]
PLATS WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS.UH, MADAM CHAIR FOR ITEM ONE 10, UH, 79 26 JESTER STREET.
OUR MATERIALS SAY THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER, BUT THAT HAS CHANGED TO APPROVAL.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN HOUSTON'S CORPORATE LIMIT SOUTH ALONG OF SOUTH OF HOLMES ROAD AND EAST OF SCOTT STREET.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW DUPLEX FACING JESTER STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A THREE FOOT BUILDING LINE ALONG AN UNIMPROVED SEGMENT OF RED BUD.
INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 10 FEET, STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST.
THE SITE IS LOCATED IN AN UNIMPROVED INTERSECTION OF JESTER AND RED BUD STREETS WITHIN THE SUNNYSIDE COMPLETE COMMUNITY.
THIS INTERSECTION IS DISJOINTED AS THE RESULT OF RECORDING TWO SUBDIVISION PLATS PRIOR TO THE CITYWIDE ORDINANCE FOR PLATTING STANDARDS.
THIS RESULTED IN THE WESTERN SIDE OF RED BUD BEING SEPARATED FROM THE EAST BY APPROXIMATELY A SEVEN FOOT WIDE SEGMENT OF RIGHT OF WAY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO BUILD THIS HOME ALONG THE UNPRO UN UNIMPROVED SIDE OF REDBUD.
THE HOME'S VEHICULAR AXIS WILL COME FROM JESTER AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO IMPROVE THIS STREET WHERE IT INTERSECTS THEIR DRIVEWAY.
THE RED BUD RIGHT OF WAY WILL LIKELY NOT BE IMPROVED IN THE NEAR FUTURE WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST TO BE A PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVE TO STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE AS IT WILL LIKELY REMAIN AS GREEN SPACE FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADVANCE WRITTEN COMMENT.
I'VE GOT A SPEAKER ON ITEM ONE 10.
YOU JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS, JOYCE.
IF WE HAVE NO QUESTIONS, UH, WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS
[00:55:01]
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.THE SITE IS NORTH OF WEST GRAY STREET AND SOUTH OF WEST CLAY STREET AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WA DRIVE AND WEST BELL STREET.
THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING A NEW MULTIFAMILY BUILDING AND IS REQUESTING TO ALLOW UPPER FLOORS CANTILEVER 30 INCHES INTO THE BUILDING LINE TO CONTAIN MORE THAN 50% HABITABLE SPACE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO DEFER AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO? OKAY.
WELL, WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF TO HAVE A MOTION.
[II. Establish a public hearing date of June 12, 2025 ]
NUMERAL TWO, ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF JUNE 12TH, 2025 FOR ELEVATE LIVING.NUMBER THREE, LARKS SPUR LANDING LARKS SPUR PLACE LAVERNE STREET HOMES.
REPL NUMBER ONE, MCGREGOR RESIDENCES.
NUMBER ONE, MEDINA, MAGNOLIA PLACE, MULVEY ESTATES, SIMS, BROOK ESTATES AND SPRINGDALE PLACE.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION GARZA.
[III. Establish a public hearing date of June 12th, 2025, for Reserve at Houston Heights Hotel located at 1311 ½ N. Shepherd Dr. (Devin Crittle)]
TO ROMAN NUMERAL THREE.AND PLEASE NOTE COMMISSIONER, HE IS ABSTAINING.
OH, I GUESS THAT WOULD HELP IF I READ IT.
I HAD A HAND CRAMP IN MY HAND.
SO WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF JUNE 12TH, 2025 FOR RESERVE AT HOUSTON HEIGHTS HOTEL, LOCATED AT 13 AND 11 AND A HALF NORTH SHEPHERD DRIVE.
DO YOU WANNA VOTE ON THE NEXT ONE?
DO I HAVE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT? HEARING NONE.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH EFFORT IT TAKES TO GET THE BOOKMARKS BACK ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE.
I COULD THINK THE LAST THREE MEETINGS WE HAVEN'T HAD 'EM, WE, WE ARE MISSING THEM.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, WE WILL, UH, DID YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING MS. BANDY? NO COMMENT.
I THREW EVERYBODY OFF WHEN I JUST SAID DECIDED NOT TO READ THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO AT 3 31, WE WILL ADJOURN THIS MEETING.